Subscription Scanner Service

Status
Not open for further replies.

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
10,728
Location
PA
To your point, this is exactly why a commercial/subscription based business plan could work - a vast majority people are inherently lazy and the American Dream has always been and always will be based on the idea of taking something complicated and hard and making it easier for these "exact" people - the masses.
And precisely how do you propose to persuade people to "buy the cow" when they can already get the same thing for free on Broadcastify and elsewhere?

You can't control the scanner through the feed. Allowing that presents all sorts of network security issues, and would require a separate scanner for each subscriber--not financially feasible. A house fire of interest to one listener may be preventing another user interested in an auto accident from hearing that traffic.

And for users on the go, having their own scanner makes far more sense than subscribing to a feed and trying to listen over a wireless connection that may well be less reliable than receiving the feed source with a good vehicle antenna.

As a feed provider, how do you handle internet outages or congestion that cause subscribers to miss traffic? Do you offer a partial refund, even though you have zero control over network infrastructure between you and the subscriber? For mobile users, how do you handle dead spots in wireless data coverage?

Then there's privacy issues. Every subscriber listening to an internet feed can be logged and tracked. If the subscriber can control the scanner sourcing the feed, their listening habits can be profiled--what channels are they holding on and when and why, and what traffic are they skipping? Who gets access to that data? Who gets to decide what listening profiles are "suspicious" and what listening profiles should be reported to someone? If you report someone because their listening profile is "suspicious", what recourse do you have if that subscriber sues you for defamation or harassment as a result?

There are a lot more worms in the can than most of you realize.
 

pfd461

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
91
Like I said point well taken and respected as far tv goes I guess I'm assuming everybody is using cable or satellite. Yes if your looking to pull in distant stations then yes an outdoor antenna makes sense. I'm speaking of situations that we're receiving with no problem and then it becomes a problem because of simulcast or LSM That's where I believe these scanners have to made better and they know there is an issue but they don't care probably because they also know you have people that will buy whatever they put out there. I can't believe they don't have the knowledge to fix this major problem. Then the fun would come back
 

ecarvalho

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
757
csgaraglino I respect your point of view, from a business perspective . I can see the commercial use if, as you said, this is done right, which means, the feeds would have to be official and directly from the broadcasting centrals. There would have to be a channel for each talk group of interest and some sort of contract securing clear and unencrypted transmissions etc.

I'm not retired nor a prepper - I just enjoy owning my own methods of gathering data.

I disagree with the cell services still being available when off-grid tho but this is a convo for another day.

I would never discard signing up for a service like this, sounds cool but Im not giving up my hardware hehehe


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Last edited:

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
10,728
Location
PA
Like I said point well taken and respected as far tv goes I guess I'm assuming everybody is using cable or satellite.
And that is where your analogy fails. Scanning with an indoor antenna is more like watching OTA TV with indoor rabbit ears. The ghosting you see on analog broadcasts is caused by exactly the same problem as LSM multicast--variations of the same signal with different strengths and arrival times mixed together when they hit your antenna.

An outdoor antenna will eliminate the reflections and nulls happening as the RF bounces around inside your house--it will pick up more of the direct signal, rather than multiple reflected versions.

A directional outdoor antenna will eliminate or reduce interference from multiple towers broadcasting the same signal.
 

csgaraglino

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 20, 2017
Messages
48
Location
Riverview, FL
And precisely how do you propose to persuade people to "buy the cow" when they can already get the same thing for free on Broadcastify and elsewhere?
Well I remember the day with Radio & TV were also free - no so much anymore.

You can't control the scanner through the feed. Allowing that presents all sorts of network security issues, and would require a separate scanner for each subscriber--not financially feasible. A house fire of interest to one listener may be preventing another user interested in an auto accident from hearing that traffic.
When TV & Radio went to a subscription model all we had was a single stream of different channels - no different here, today's scanners can only do what they do. However - as the subscription $$ started coming in and subscribers asked for more features - those dollars were put into R&D and now we have all kinds of On Demand & DVR Recording features and streams from all over the world!

And for users on the go, having their own scanner makes far more sense than subscribing to a feed and trying to listen over a wireless connection that may well be less reliable than receiving the feed source with a good vehicle antenna.
I dirve all over the US - different states and such and never do I lose my Pandora or Apple Music - this would be no different. Oh WAIT - if I drive form Colorado to Settle I would NOT have to program my scanner for all those Antennas/Talkgroups on my rute - the Geo Locater in my iPhone would pick up the feeds as I drove, way frickn cool![/QUOTE]

As a feed provider, how do you handle internet outages or congestion that cause subscribers to miss traffic? Do you offer a partial refund, even though you have zero control over network infrastructure between you and the subscriber? For mobile users, how do you handle dead spots in wireless data coverage?
Come on - you're trying to poke holes int he proverbial concrete dam - this would be no different and any of the existing subscription steaming providers face today


Then there's privacy issues. Every subscriber listening to an internet feed can be logged and tracked. If the subscriber can control the scanner sourcing the feed, their listening habits can be profiled--what channels are they holding on and when and why, and what traffic are they skipping? Who gets access to that data? Who gets to decide what listening profiles are "suspicious" and what listening profiles should be reported to someone? If you report someone because their listening profile is "suspicious", what recourse do you have if that subscriber sues you for defamation or harassment as a result?
Broadcastify is not having issues (that I am aware of) with privacy and they have been running for almost 5 years now.
 

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
10,728
Location
PA
csgaraglino I respect your point of view, from a business prospective. I can see the commercial use if, as you said, this is done right, which means, the feeds would have to be official and directly from the broadcasting centrals.
You're talking about tapping directly into the agency's radio system. Doing that would require permission and cooperation with the agency, as well as dealing with significant security issues. Such a direct connection could be exploited to vandalize or shut down the agency's system, which would expose you to some major liability issues, especially if someone died as a result of delayed response due to the hack. 3rd parties are not likely to get such access for those reasons.

Also, if you're making money off selling access to the feed, the agency is going to expect to get a cut of the action. That is going to cut into any potential profits.
 

ecarvalho

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
757
Right, Im just saying that, if such service was to be provided, it would not be worth paying for if the feeds were coming from the same equipment I already have at home.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

csgaraglino

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 20, 2017
Messages
48
Location
Riverview, FL
Right, Im just saying that, if such service was to be provided, it would not be worth paying for if the feeds were coming from the same equipment I already have at home.
ecarvalho - your backwards. If you already have the equipment, then you GET paid, if you wanted to participate. If you don't have the equipment (and don't want to buy/learn it) then you PAY a small fee to stream it on your existing mobile device or desktop.
 

ecarvalho

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
757
no no, I wouldn't want to participate unless I have a dedicated hardware to let you use!
What Im saying is: If I was to pay for such service I would want to be hearing a feed that is NOT coming from someone's home. That is unreliable as my own radio!
I would pay for it if those were official agency feeds


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

ecarvalho

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
757
Also keep in mind this is all a fantasy still.
I don't believe agencies would want their systems broadcasting via satellite or not anything other than dispatch, or like on broadcastify...
Also don't think is reliable if we used scanners offered by someone that has one to dedicate to it...

I don't know ... look, if it works I promise I offer myself as a beta tester :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
10,728
Location
PA
I dirve all over the US - different states and such and never do I lose my Pandora or Apple Music - this would be no different. Oh WAIT - if I drive form Colorado to Settle I would NOT have to program my scanner for all those Antennas/Talkgroups on my rute - the Geo Locater in my iPhone would pick up the feeds as I drove, way frickn cool!
I don't either. I have a GPS-tagged database in my scanner, and a GPS to tell the scanner where it is. Same result, no subscription necessary, I hear local traffic as I go, anywhere in the US or Canada, regardless of whether a wireless internet connection is available.

Come on - you're trying to poke holes int he proverbial concrete dam - this would be no different and any of the existing subscription steaming providers face today
Except that I can access the same content directly just as reliably with my scanner in areas where there is wireless data coverage, and can still scan in areas where there isn't.

Broadcastify is not having issues (that I am aware of) with privacy and they have been running for almost 5 years now.
And they don't allow the user to control the feed source, either. You can't pause the scanner on a system or talkgroup, you're at the mercy of the feed provider.

As someone with experience working in the intelligence community, I can guarantee you that subscriber data (who is listening to what and when) is going to be of interest to certain government agencies. If you're a game warden looking for poachers, knowing who is habitually listening to the fish & game channels between 9PM and 3AM in the state forest might possibly give you some leads. If a bank is robbed, knowing who was listening to the police and sheriff in the vicinity of the bank could potentially identify the robbers, or at least an accomplice. If there is a warning that a terror attack is imminent at a particular location, the listening patterns of everyone monitoring the relevant local agencies could be examined to see if one of the terrorists is conducting counter-surveillance--trying to see if the authorities have been tipped off to the plot.

I'm not saying that subscriber data is being systematically exploited in that fashion right now, but at some point it will be. And as the feed provider, you're going to be stuck in the middle of that mess.
 

csgaraglino

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 20, 2017
Messages
48
Location
Riverview, FL
Remember - this is a 10,000 view point of an "idea". Every idea needs to be vetted and analyzed before such an idea can grow.

But at this 10k foot view, one could look at this way (hypothetically).

A 3-5 year business model in US Dollars for our company that we'll call Scanner Streams, Inc. to service world-wide subscribers - using existing technology.

20,000 Commercial Subscribers @ $99.99/mo (CS)
500,000 Personal Subscribers @ $2.99/mo (PS)

With 1,000 Scanner Owners, payout at just $0.25/CS and $0.10/PS could yield that scanner owner $650 per month ($650k total payout); and a gross profit to our company of $2.85 million/month. If we invested 1/2 of that into infrastructure and application programming ($1.43 mil) that would leave us a 12 month net profit of $17.1 million.

I know of MANY business ideas that are multi-million dollar business today that started off on much thinner marginal ideas!

So all you nay-sayers with your own equipment; would an extra $7,800/yr help cover some of your costs in keeping your equipment up to date and the time you invest to make sure the streams are of excellent quality - hmm... I think so!
 

ecarvalho

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
757
If the offer is good I would even buy a dedicated scanner or setup a higher quality OP25 or SDR on DSDplus on a dedicated machine, yes, sign me up.

With a single machine and a few VMs one can actually offer individual channels as desired.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
10,728
Location
PA
As long as Broadcastify exists, your proposal is delusional. You're not offering anything that Broadcastify doesn't, and charging for something that is already free.

The only way you could justify charging the proposed commercial rate is by having a dedicated scanner for every subscriber, and offer the subscriber the ability to control the scanner and hold on particular systems or channels of interest. 20,000 scanners at $500 each (you'll need a 536 to do digital streaming, otherwise you'll need to factor in another $300 minimum for a computer to attach to each scanner to record and stream) is more like $10-15 million just for scanner and streaming hardware costs, and $1.4 million for infrastructure equipment (routers, switches, servers, etc.) for a nationwide service is laughably low. You'd need a central server for subscribers to login to, and then infrastructure to pass the feed from the local site (each of which is going to cost maybe $60/month for a decent internet connection) to the subscriber.

IMO your subscriber base, cost, and profit projections are all off by orders of magnitude.
 

csgaraglino

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 20, 2017
Messages
48
Location
Riverview, FL
As long as Broadcastify exists, your proposal is delusional. You're not offering anything that Broadcastify doesn't, and charging for something that is already free.

The only way you could justify charging the proposed commercial rate is by having a dedicated scanner for every subscriber, and offer the subscriber the ability to control the scanner and hold on particular systems or channels of interest. 20,000 scanners at $500 each (you'll need a 536 to do digital streaming, otherwise you'll need to factor in another $300 minimum for a computer to attach to each scanner to record and stream) is more like $10-15 million just for scanner and streaming hardware costs, and $1.4 million for infrastructure equipment (routers, switches, servers, etc.) for a nationwide service is laughably low. You'd need a central server for subscribers to login to, and then infrastructure to pass the feed from the local site (each of which is going to cost maybe $60/month for a decent internet connection) to the subscriber.

IMO your subscriber base, cost, and profit projections are all off by orders of magnitude.

I disagree - people will always op a pay service even when there are free services available as long as the pay service offers better quality and features that you cannot get int he free service.

I still see today, people that use HD Antennas to pick up local TV Stations - but look at all the Satellite & Cable Subscribers paying upwards of $100 or more per month for TV services.
 

ecarvalho

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
757
good point- its all about the content and its quality and features


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

csgaraglino

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 20, 2017
Messages
48
Location
Riverview, FL
BTW: I don't know if Broadcastify is listening on this thread (maybe they should) but as an entrepreneur myself - they would be the first person i would approach with a business plan, run a Kickstarter Campaign marketed to local news organizations and the, the Shark Tank... Just sayn'
 

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
10,728
Location
PA
I disagree - people will always op a pay service even when there are free services available as long as the pay service offers better quality and features that you cannot get int he free service.

I still see today, people that use HD Antennas to pick up local TV Stations - but look at all the Satellite & Cable Subscribers paying upwards of $100 or more per month for TV services.
Because they get content not available OTA. What you're proposing offers nothing not already available via Broadcastify. If you want to add features not already available for free, your startup cost will increase exponentially.
 

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
10,728
Location
PA
BTW: I don't know if Broadcastify is listening on this thread (maybe they should) but as an entrepreneur myself - they would be the first person i would approach with a business plan, run a Kickstarter Campaign marketed to local news organizations and the, the Shark Tank... Just sayn'
And precisely what would be their motivation be, to assist a competitor to get started? I'm pretty sure that if there was a realistic way to get feed subscribers to pay a monthly fee, they would already be doing it. And that if your plan was workable, they would start implementing it without you, since they already have a lot of the required infrastructure in place.

If you approach them, you're either going to get laughed out the door, or your business plan is going to be co-opted by an entity that already has the infrastructure and subscribers to make it work.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top