Where is my HD radio?

[Woochifer]

"Only twenty dollars".
THATS FUNNY.
When THE mts stereo standard was adopted it wasnt much, had poor channel seperation,
And the dbx name on it, but it was better than nothing.
RCA shaved off the name DBX name and changed things around, the savings were
about a dime a tv(or something like that) they didnt care about the worsened sound.
THE CHANGE netted them MILLIONS.

Not true. The MTS standard has always had the dbx processing circuitry in it, whether the name was on the box or not. As more licensees came onto the market, manufacturers had more supplier choices and could obviously go with lower cost vendors if they chose to do so. But, anything conforming to the MTS standard had to license the dbx noise reduction in the process.

Zenith partnered with dbx to jointly develop their stereo TV format. When the competing stereo TV proposals were getting forwarded to the FCC, the Zenith/dbx proposal won out, because the dbx circuitry allowed for greater audio performance than the other proposals, including better S/N ratio and channel separation than FM radio. Both companies have been collecting the licensing revenue since then.

THAT "twenty dollars" is huge, and what I was talking about, sure it wont cost 179 bucks to add an HD tuner, it might be less than 20 bucks, but if its ten bucks the cost would be huge for manufacturers.
Ten bucks (let alone twenty) over a hundred thousand players is a MILLION bucks after all

That $20 is what the cost spread on the list price is right now, and what one company (Dual) chose to pass along to consumers at this juncture. That's not what the actual unit cost differential is -- it's what Dual presumes consumers will pay to get the HD Radio feature.

Recall that the first production stereo TVs all cost substantially more than previous monophonic models, a lot more than $20 even on the successors to those "stereo ready" console models that already used two speakers. As production volumes ramped up, the cost differential reduced over time until the stereo capability became nothing more than just another commodified feature.

Also remember that the first standalone MTS decoders cost $200 ($350 in today's dollars) when they came out in 1984. Not much different than what you see right now with that $179 standalone Sangean tuner.

Price points on midlevel receivers have been inching up over the last three years to begin with. Satellite radio tuners, networking features, and video processing have bumped up the price points on the midlevel models anywhere from $200 to $400. As more of them add HD Radio tuners, I doubt that the price points will get bumped up much further, since those other functions are now more commodified and trickling down into the entry level models.

Plus, it's easier to absorb that kind of cost on an item that sells for more than $1,000 versus something that lists for $170 (and sells for $100). If more and more manufacturers add HD Radio tuners to their receivers, the remaining manufacturers won't exclude the feature just to save a few bucks. Same thing happened when DTS, DD EX, and Pro Logic II came onto the market. The processors incorporating those formats added to the material and licensing costs, but receiver manufacturers absorbed those costs because those costs were nothing compared to the potential loss in market share as consumers went with receivers that did add those features.

[pixelthis]

Not true. The MTS standard has always had the dbx processing circuitry in it, whether the name was on the box or not. As more licensees came onto the market, manufacturers had more supplier choices and could obviously go with lower cost vendors if they chose to do so. But, anything conforming to the MTS standard had to license the dbx noise reduction in the process.
Zenith partnered with dbx to jointly develop their stereo TV format. When the competing stereo TV proposals were getting forwarded to the FCC, the Zenith/dbx proposal won out, because the dbx circuitry allowed for greater audio performance than the other proposals, including better S/N ratio and channel separation than FM radio. Both companies have been collecting the licensing revenue since then.

Were you alive back then, or asleep?
RCA, (and all of its subsideraries) dropped DBX, and adopted a much cheaper alternative
that had even less channel seperation than the DBX version.
DVX and ZENITH had a liscense for "their" solution to mts decoding, but the govt couldnt force anyone to pay liscensing fees to anyone for something they had to have due to govt regulation.
I WAS THERE, SAW THE SETS IN THE FRIGGIN STORES, read the reviews in the magazines, RCA DIDNT use dbx, didnt put the dbx trademark on their sets.
EVER.
And saved a ton of money in the process

That $20 is what the cost spread on the list price is right now, and what one company (Dual) chose to pass along to consumers at this juncture. That's not what the actual unit cost differential is -- it's what Dual presumes consumers will pay to get the HD Radio feature.

And is probably more than the cost of putting HD radio into the sets, otherwise they wouldnt be doing it

Recall that the first production stereo TVs all cost substantially more than previous monophonic models, a lot more than $20 even on the successors to those "stereo ready" console models that already used two speakers. As production volumes ramped up, the cost differential reduced over time until the stereo capability became nothing more than just another commodified feature.

Its been awhile but I dont remember the cost being that much different, really

Also remember that the first standalone MTS decoders cost $200 ($350 in today's dollars) when they came out in 1984. Not much different than what you see right now with that $179 standalone Sangean tuner.

Heres the answer to your confusion, you're from another planet.
The dollar has lost AT LEAST three fourths of its value in the last twenty years,
and that is just the official, doctored stats from the govt.
Anything costing 200 bucks in 1984 bucks would be 800 in todays bucks, at least.
Electronics today are cheaper due to increased efficiencies and improved tech

Price points on midlevel receivers have been inching up over the last three years to begin with. Satellite radio tuners, networking features, and video processing have bumped up the price points on the midlevel models anywhere from $200 to $400. As more of them add HD Radio tuners, I doubt that the price points will get bumped up much further, since those other functions are now more commodified and trickling down into the entry level models.

Prices wont be "bumped" much further because in the future only stripped models will be sold, because thats all that will be able to be sold.
RETAILERS ARE HURTING BADLY NOW, MUCH MORE than has been let on,
with food and gas and other nessesaries soaring through the roof, a car stereo is going to be waaaay down on the list

Plus, it's easier to absorb that kind of cost on an item that sells for more than $1,000 versus something that lists for $170 (and sells for $100). If more and more manufacturers add HD Radio tuners to their receivers, the remaining manufacturers won't exclude the feature just to save a few bucks. Same thing happened when DTS, DD EX, and Pro Logic II came onto the market. The processors incorporating those formats added to the material and licensing costs, but receiver manufacturers absorbed those costs because those costs were nothing compared to the potential loss in market share as consumers went with receivers that did add those features.

This is econ 101, so whats your point?

You are saying that HD will be added to radios, and that others will add them just to keep up.
This presumes that HD will catch on, something that hasnt happened yet.
Thing is, you are limited by the number of stations with HD, with sat radio you have a lot more choices.
And for the home there is internet radio, cable, etc.
I get 40 channels over cable commercial free that beats the pants off of HD, and did I mention they are connercial free?