Re:
NB> >Is it proper to conclude that the provable shortwave listener base
NB> >(whether as a public to do public service to, or as a viable commercial
NB> >market), isn't big enough to support positive cash flow through station
NB> >operations?
NB> >
NB> >Anybody have any other explanations or theories?
NB>Well, I can't quote facts and figures, but there's hardly an issue of
NB>MONITORING TIMES magazine that comes to my mailbox that doesn't mention
NB>somewhere the budget problems of shortwave stations. And they also mention
NB>quite frequently the lack of growth in the SWL community. Considering  the
NB>fact the there ARE so many stations up for sale, I'd say operating a
NB>shortwave broadcasting station is a money-losing proposition. (I'd still
NB>love to do it, though!) B-)
Well hey, me too!!  But you know what, I don't think it's so much a
problem with the medium itself as it is the prevailing attitude toward
the medium as a necessarily propaganda organ, although that attitude is
deeply rooted in the long-running "Cold War".  Seems to me that the
griping of certain parties about the pre-emption of favorite programs in
favor of some silly ballgames hints of another avid audience out there.
As a matter of fact, I put this question to the forum of commercial
broadcasters and while mostly I got the conclusion that you did, there
was a very interesting suggestion that a shortwave station could turn
profitable by covering international sports...and before you argue about
better coverage by satellite and cable TV, consider that the sports that
originate from the U.S. aren't necessarily of international interest,
e.g. look how long the US broadcasting entities have ignored the very
popular international sport of soccer.  Only in recent years has the NBA
spread basketball across the globe, and they've just started.  Baseball
is about as close as U.S. originating coverage gets to international
interests.  So--I think a sports shortwave station would do well
financially.
NB>I can offer no theories as to why this is happening. It's too easy to 
lame
NB> it on the internet, and quite frankly, I don't think that's the problem.
Hear, hear.  Like shortwave, the internet requires expensive special
equipment to access, ergo not everybody accesses it.  To make money in
broadcasting, you need to  a) cover everybody with sets
                           b) claim a large part of everybody as "market
                              share"
The internet just plain ole doesn't reach everybody, and that argument
could also be used in the cases of satellite broadcasting.  What you CAN
say about both the internet and satellite broadcasting is that they only
reach people with deep pockets.  Ya can't make no money offa broke folk.
NB>Considereing a person needs several hundred dollars to buy a computer, and
NB>then has to pay a monthly acces fee to get on the net, and a good SW
NB>portable can be had for less that 50 bucks, it's a whole lot easier to get
NB>into SWLing than it is net surfing. I think maybe the problem lies with 
he
NB> fact that shortwave just doesn't get enough publicity. I'm 37 years old,
Yup.  When was the last time you heard a shortwave station give the
announcement that the 11th caller would win a grand?  Now, of course
there have been collect-the-series QSL promos and station monitoring
programs, but there's also been a rash of governmental funding cutbacks
which brings to light a few more attitudinal problems with shortwave as
a financially viable medium.
**QSL collectors seem to be the same (relatively) small group of people
  and doesn't really give the station in question a perceptable increase
  in audience (share).
**When operations are dependent on governments, they necessarily have to
  "payoff" in terms of benefits to the government, i.e., propaganda...so
  this further means that station operations are now without a basic
  raison-d'etre.  But this isn't anything that a little privatization
  couldn't cure, were it not for outmoded broadcasting laws which insist
  that shortwave be treated as a politics/national culture-only forum.
I submit that an Attitude Adjustment is in order, and I mean on the
part of the traditional listener as well as the traditional broadcaster.
NB>and  I still meet folks that're a good bit older than me that have never
NB>even  HEARD of shortwave. Or if I mention shortave radio, they
NB>automatically think  "CB." Perhaps if radio manufacturers would start
NB>advertising their wares the  way internet providers do, emphasizing that
NB>you can "...explore the world.."  on less than a hundred bucks, it could
NB>get the hobby jump started again.
...and that, too!  :)
 * SLMR 2.1a *                  G O   J A Z Z ! ! ! ! !
--- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12 
---------------