Aside from your usual tirade of unnecessary abuse, you claimed to be
making just one point in your last post

>>"I'll just respond to the point you made about the cost of 
>>improving the quality on DAB, which you've continually claimed 
>>would need to be passed onto licence fee payers. "

As I mentioned, this is a bogus point anyway since my original
assertion related, quite obviously, to "all other things being equal"
situations. Higher quality on DAB is more expensive to provide than
lower quality on DAB, just as higher quality on DAB+ will be more
expensive than lower quality on DAB+. It's not even a contentious
issue.

Never mind. It still applies, admittedly to a much lesser extent, to
using the switch to DAB+ to increase quality. Of course the whole
argument becomes completely pointless if you try to add the switch to
DAB+ into the bitrate versus quality equation, but you were so adamant
that you wanted to pursue it that I went along.

So we ended up with you attempting to "prove" the completely abstract
and unimportant "point" that upgrading to DAB+ would be completely
without cost. Presumably, you felt the need to do this since I've
refused to be drawn into any of the other random arguments you've been
constantly trying to start.

Unfortunately, you chose "prove" your "point" by blatantly attempting
to hoodwink people into thinking that £200K would be the total
expenditure to upgrade the network. This clearly is very, very far
from correct and I can't believe you didn't know it. How can we be
expected to trust what you say when you display such duplicity? Shame
on you Mr FM! Then of course, there was the laughable assertion that
rendering large numbers of receivers obsolete doesn't constitute a
cost of any kind.

Moving on from the sordid affair that is the cost of upgrade
non-issue, We have to ask ourselves why you have kept this
interminable thread going for so long. You seem to have me down as
some kind of DAB champion. This isn't the case and never has been.
I've tried time after time to tell you this, but it still doesn't seem
to have sunk in.

I have never suggested, for instance, that switching to DAB+ would be
a bad thing. The closest I ever got to that was in allowing myself to
eventually be prodded into saying (quite correctly, of course, but
pointlessly) that there would be costs involved.

It appears that I disagree with you on what constitutes acceptable
sound quality for a car audio system, but you seem to have taken that
as an indication that I am completely opposed to absolutely everything
you hold dear. Again, this isn't true, no matter how much you wish it
was. Most of my opinions on audio broadcasting probably align fairly
well with your own, though not quite so near the manic end of the
scale of course.

So why, for example, are you still decrying what you see as the
heinous sins of the broadcasters to me when I have never expressed an
opinion on how well they're doing their job? Almost in the same
breath, you berate me for saying nothing worth saying other than
defending myself. Of course that's what I'm doing, and I'll continue
to do it as long as you continue to attack me.

Cheers,

Colin.