The ongoing war of words over GeoBroadcast Solutions’ “ZoneCasting” technology, which relies on the FCC’s approval of the voluntary use of FM boosters for program origination, has taken a new turn with the declaration by an early ZoneCasting supporter.
After a test of the technology at one of its suburban Chicago FMs, Alpha Media declared that “the substantial investment” necessary in ZoneCasting’s deployment may be impossible to swallow for those who could best benefit from it.
Alpha expressed its updated views on ZoneCasting in an ex parte filing submitted on Wednesday to the FCC.
Alpha provided specific data on the significant costs associated with employing the technology, which led the Portland, Ore.-based radio station owner led by Bob Proffitt to conclude that “the substantial investment necessary to deploy ZoneCasting will be out of reach for most broadcasters, and simply out of the question for small and mid-sized broadcasters.”
It amounts to a change of heart on ZoneCasting for Alpha. As first reported by Streamline Publishing’s Radio Ink, Alpha Media Director of Engineering Mike Everhart in April 2020 urged the FCC to expeditiously modify its rules and approve program origination on FM Boosters, giving the green light to GBS for ZoneCasting.
ALPHA: ZONECASTING ‘WIIL’ BE COSTLY
Everhart co-signed the ex parte letter submitted to the FCC, along with Proffitt.
“The company felt it important to recount Alpha’s experience and to provide specific data to help the FCC separate fact from fiction,” they wrote. “Moreover, Alpha felt a responsibility to further educate smaller broadcasters as to the true costs of the ZoneCasting service, so that our industry colleagues may properly evaluate GBS’s generalized claims.”
Proffitt and Everhart noted that when one looks at the data, based on Alpha’s own experience with ZoneCasting at its WIIL-FM 95.1 in Union Grove, Wisc., “GBS’s claims that ZoneCasting will greatly benefit smaller stations or stations in smaller markets simply don’t add up. Moreover, it is highly unlikely the reduced advertising rates that stations will charge for geo-targeted ads will be a boon to the bottom line.”
Rate implosion for Radio is one of the key industry arguments against the implementation of ZoneCasting, despite the belief from ZoneCasting supporters that it would add revenue to struggling FM stations.
For 50kw Class B WIIL, a longtime Rocker with a city-grade signal scraping downtown Milwaukee and reaching Chicago’s north side, ZoneCasting could bring advertising from each market to accompany Lake County, Ill. and Kenosha, Wisc.-focused clients.
But, at what cost? As Alpha sees it, “the substantial investment necessary to deploy ZoneCasting will be out of reach for most broadcasters, and simply out of the question for small and mid-sized broadcasters.”
GeoBroadcast Solutions disagrees, with company spokesperson Robert Udowitz telling Radio Ink, “Alpha Media claims that geotargeting technology is too expensive. This is incorrect, especially because we have creative vendor financing solutions for station owners like Alpha Media. Moreover, geotargeting is purely voluntary, meaning Alpha Media doesn’t have to deploy the technology if it doesn’t want to. So, from the FCC’s perspective, the only question is whether the technology is in the public interest. The record makes clear that it is.”
Alpha’s cost analysis, however, extends beyond the investment needed to work with GBS.
Like “most broadcasters,” Alpha says its FM stations use an automated system to schedule and playout content. These systems are typically designed to provide a single program of audio content. As the ZoneCasting system requires two or more different programs to be
broadcast simultaneously, the automation system of stations deploying ZoneCasting will need to be upgraded or replaced. Thus, Alpha concludes, in addition to the booster hardware costs, an upgrade a station’s automation system to accommodate simultaneous
playout to several boosters would be needed.
Further, Alpha asserts, there is the consideration of costs to refactor technology systems associated with advertising, the training of sales staff, and ongoing expenses for the cost of additional advertising traffic licenses and insurance.
Alpha’s cost analysis for ZoneCasting implementation is rather in-depth. Importantly, it takes into account an important need that GBS has not brought forward in its conversations — the existence of an FM booster. As they have been designed until now as “fill-in” opportunities for FM stations with terrain issues impeding its signal contour, applying for an FM booster and getting the FCC to approve it is one challenge. Then, there are the dollars needed to acquire a booster site, which Alpha notes in its ex parte letter.
Alpha was given a per-booster annual cost of $12,000 by GBS. But, Alpha tells the Commission that renting a site for an FM booster (or an FM translator or similar transmitting facility) is often much higher than this, in part because local zoning regulations restrict the locations of broadcast transmitting facilities and antennas, limiting availability.
Then, there is the cost of the actual booster equipment itself. The WIIL test, conducted in 2016, utilized four booster sites with seven distinct FM transmitters, each with its own antenna array. Because it was conducting a test, WIIL used equipment (transmitters, antennas, audio distribution and synchronization devices, etc.) on loan from a broadcast technology manufacturer. If a radio station were to implement the same system used
for the WIIL test, and purchase the equipment necessary, Alpha claims the cost for a single booster would range from $28,440 for the lowest-power booster used to more than
$32,440 for the highest-power booster used in the test.
“The published information from a major vendor upon which Alpha bases these figures estimates the cost would be at least $118,160 just for the equipment necessary to construct the four sites used in the WIIL test,” Proffitt and Everhart conclude. “Alpha also understands that only a small fraction of the radio stations licensed in this country already have an FM booster, meaning the vast majority of stations that may be interested in deploying ZoneCasting will necessarily have to fund this substantial expense.”
While Alpha states that WIIL used “an earlier version” of ZoneCasting, it stands by its claims that, six years later, costs will keep it out of reach for small-market and independent broadcasting groups.
Is that enough to thwart its voluntary implementation by radio broadcasting companies that wish to use ZoneCasting? That’s up to the FCC to decide.
