WFAN to 101.9

[chrocket87]

Which brings up a good point, CBS can keep the alternative rock on 101.9 and air the major games there (or on NOW). They already do this with WCBS 101.1. But they are too vain for that.

Too vain for what? A profit? Giving themselves the best opportunity to succeed?

There are certain posters on this board who think radio is supposed to be a buffet of their personal tastes, rather than the business that it actually is.

[radioguy39nj]

Which brings up a good point, CBS can keep the alternative rock on 101.9 and air the major games there (or on NOW). They already do this with WCBS 101.1. But they are too vain for that.

You're fighting progress, and it's a losing battle.  Frankly, I think it's the best of both worlds.  The music options generally available through Pandora, Spotify, and streaming apps are infinitely customizable, and I can find exactly what I want to entertain me musically.  At the same time, I think radio's pushing forward and making sure that it's financially viable long-term.

Ask newspapers how burying its head in the sand and staying the course worked out.

Very well said!  The spoken word to FM trend evident in markets of all sizes has arrived in New York.  The Merlin disaster cannot be used to justify that spoken word on FM doesn't work in New York.  It works if it's well-programmed, executed and promoted.

There was no way CBS wasn't going to eventually move WFAN to FM.  IMHO, WCBS Newsradio will eventually move to FM, following the simulcasts that have been successful in San Francisco and Chicago.  WINS' future can be debated, but long-term it won't be on directional 1010 AM.

[WNTIRadio]

FM news didn't work because it was on FM, it didn't work because the format was a disaster from day 1.  Add to that the inconsistent focus of the "news" product and it wouldn't have mattered if it were on FM, AM, shortwave or beamed straight into our brains; it was destined to fail.

FM isn't the cure for bad talk programming, but it can augment good talk programming.

[d21ofnj]

As I am sitting back and reading all of the bashful hate, we ALL knew WFAN was going to FM, no question about it.  Would the tone be the same let's say if WFAN was going to 92.3?  Everyone would be all for it.  But since it's going to 101.9, everyone is now against it? 

[radioguy39nj]

FM news didn't work because it was on FM, it didn't work because the format was a disaster from day 1.  Add to that the inconsistent focus of the "news" product and it wouldn't have mattered if it were on FM, AM, shortwave or beamed straight into our brains; it was destined to fail.

FM isn't the cure for bad talk programming, but it can augment good talk programming.

Agreed 100%!  FM News was IMHO an organized disaster.  WFAN, the innovator of sports talk radio, has been a great station on 660 AM and will be likewise on 101.9 FM.

[radioguy39nj]

As I am sitting back and reading all of the bashful hate, we ALL knew WFAN was going to FM, no question about it.  Would the tone be the same let's say if WFAN was going to 92.3?  Everyone would be all for it.  But since it's going to 101.9, everyone is now against it? 

There would've been unhappy campers if WFAN has gone to 92.3, no doubt about it.  Whoever lost their music station to WFAN-FM would've felt betrayed.  It's a business decision, plain and simple.

[ty_kleinle]

As I am sitting back and reading all of the bashful hate, we ALL knew WFAN was going to FM, no question about it.  Would the tone be the same let's say if WFAN was going to 92.3?  Everyone would be all for it.  But since it's going to 101.9, everyone is now against it? 

 Whoever lost their music station to WFAN-FM would've felt betrayed.  It's a business decision, plain and simple.

Yeah, where would the listeners go if NOW was taken over? I mean it's not they'll hear the same "Pay Phone" "Call Me Maybe" or even "Wide Awake" at the same exact times on Z100 or KTU. They'll be played at different times throughout the day, the same exact small playlist! Whatever shall the little kids do?!?!

[Lee Anderson]

As I am sitting back and reading all of the bashful hate, we ALL knew WFAN was going to FM, no question about it.  Would the tone be the same let's say if WFAN was going to 92.3?  Everyone would be all for it.  But since it's going to 101.9, everyone is now against it? 

There would've been unhappy campers if WFAN has gone to 92.3, no doubt about it.  Whoever lost their music station to WFAN-FM would've felt betrayed.  It's a business decision, plain and simple.

 The only difference is if NOW went away, there are other terestrial outlets for listeners to go too. With RXP v2 going away, there is no (fulltime) terestrial option out there. I know that everyone says that with wireless devices and internet, these bases are basically covered. However, it all costs money too maintain that connection. Last I heard, phone companies are tightening the screws on data usage. So, people still lose.

[Zach]

As I am sitting back and reading all of the bashful hate, we ALL knew WFAN was going to FM, no question about it.  Would the tone be the same let's say if WFAN was going to 92.3?  Everyone would be all for it.  But since it's going to 101.9, everyone is now against it? 

This may come across meaner than it should be, but alternative (and to a greater extent, AAA) fans are very vocal and reactionary to changes to their format, in my limited experience.  Couple that with the fact that the majority of listeners have been alienated for, what — the third time? — and it's a bit of a minor mælstrom.  In other parts of the country, the demise of beloved indie-leaning stations has been met with Facebook protest pages and Twitter campaigns that bring out far more "fans" of saving whatever station than ever actually seemed to listen in the first place. 

[reelyreal]

The only difference is if NOW went away, there are other terestrial outlets for listeners to go too. With RXP v2 going away, there is no (fulltime) terestrial option out there. I know that everyone says that with wireless devices and internet, these bases are basically covered. However, it all costs money too maintain that connection. Last I heard, phone companies are tightening the screws on data usage. So, people still lose.

It's true that streaming costs money and it's not an option for everyone.  There are also iPods, and while the devices cost money (radios do, too) and the music should be purchased (but we all know it isn't being purchased) it provides an option between traditional broadcast and streaming.

It all comes back to maximizing revenue options in an exponentially more competitive entertainment environment.  Someone will always lose, and that's too bad.  That's life.