WBEN dropd FM Simulcast

[TheBigA]

What's absurd about it? Read the context.

 

[davideduardo]

Our "corporate champions" acknowledge that radio has lost revenue and TSL, especially over the last 5 years. Yet, you refuse to acknowledge that changes in programming and management may be responsible for those losses.

Any losses in revenue and listening to OTA radio in the last 5 years are due to the recession and the availability of better channels of distribution, and not a rejection of the content itself.

However, since a strong correlation exists between lower radio TSL and greater streaming listening, we do have to assume that the sans-commerical, DJ-less streaming model that dominates that channel is broadly liked and sought out.

And the correlation with revenue and the recession / economy is near-perfect. The money coming in declined, just as the economy did.

 

[davideduardo]

Somehow, at a time when all the buzz is about digital, there are still people who invest in a hundred year old analog technology. They're not doing it for nothing.

I see new purchasers of stations much as I see MLPs in the petroleum industry: you buy a cash flowing asset with a near term depletion, and get a rate of return that makes up for the total loss of asset value at the end.

With prices today in the range of 5 x BCF, a group of stations can be acquired, costs cut, and an ROI of 25% to 30% obtained. If the thing lasts 5 years, the net gain is tidy.

All these new deals by guys in Portland and West Palm and such are based on purchasing distressed assets cheap, making money and not worrying about the residual value. In the meantime, if they can figure out how to transition to new media, they get an ongoing business for free.

 

[davideduardo]

Because the facts say otherwise. Yes radio is losing audience, but the specific stations are low power AM stations that no one listens to any more. Corporate owned stations are doing just fine. When you use the word "radio" it encompasses many things.

Going back 15 years, PUR was in the 20 to 25 range depending on the market. In the Top 10 PPM markets, today PUR is below 10 and declining with each semester that passes.

I looked at San Francisco. The market billed $316 million in 1998, and $276 million last year. Adjusted for inflation, the 1998 billing is $453 million in today's dollars... meaning the 2012 revenue is half of what the market billed 15 years ago.

I looked at the top billing stations and the top ten in 1998, in millions, were

KGO $41
KNBR $35
KCBS $32
KFOG $27
KOIT $27
KIOI $24
KLLC $21
KFRC-FM $21
KYLD $19
KISQ $19

Last year, the figures were

KCBS $25
KNBR $25
KOIT $18
KUFX $14
KMEL $14
KISQ $14
KYLD $13
KIOI $13
KBLX $13
KOSF $12

That's $161 million for the top 10.

In 1998, the top 10 did $266 million. And that $266 million, in today's dollars, would be $381 million.

So the top 10 in 1998 actually took more of the market revenue than it does, collectively, today. And the revenues for the big fish are actually off more than for the bottom feeders, as the ethnic, religious and specialty stations did not lose their revenue base anywhere near as much as the agency dependent big guys.

Buffalo in 1998 was a $52 million dollar market. In 2012, it was a $52 million dollar market. So today's Buffalo, with zero growth (after inflation) should be a $76 million dollar market... a 33% real dollar drop. San Francisco, a more transactional market is off nearly 50% in real inflation adjusted dollars.

 

[TheBigA]

So the top 10 in 1998 actually took more of the market revenue than it does, collectively, today.

I don't think I was saying that radio is making as much or more than it did 15 years ago. Just that that you can't paint the entire industry with one brush. You chose San Francisco, which happens to be a technological hub, and compared it to Buffalo, which is not. No surprise that the home of Google, Apple, Pandora, and Twitter has lower radio usage levels, and lower radio revenues. And also explains why the country's richest companies haven't chosen to invest in OTA radio. It also explains why companies "overpaid" for stations at the time.

My point is it helps to put it in context. Look at it year by year. Then see if there's a relationship between cuts in staffing and drops in revenue, or were those drops happening at a time when staffing remained the same. In terms of KGO, you had a station that was #1 in revenues in 1998, and a very large staff. Even compared to other major market stations of the day. The station was owned by ABC, which was paying TV network wages. High revenues led to consistent salary increases for the on-air staff. Then one day, the bottom fell out. The first thing that happened was the sale to Citadel. The loss of the ability to spread talent costs between radio and TV, which was huge. The aging of the staff and the audience. Then the crash of 2008. These are all factors in why a station that was #1 in revenues in 1998 is not even in the Top 10 15 years later. So this is one of those situations where the problem wasn't investment in talent, and continuing to spend more on staff wasn't going to lead to increased revenues.

It's interesting to me that KNBR was #2 in revenues in 1998, and is still #2, through several ownership changes, including the latest to Cumulus. And that AM may be on its death bed, but not when that AM station has the radio rights to the team that wins the World Series. Meanwhile KCBS moved up from #3 to #1, even though it's a 30% drop in revenues. And I doubt very much that their staffing is less than it was 15 years ago.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Hey, corporate radio and their copycats are doing the right thing. Any loss in ratings, PUR, or revenue are not their fault. Programming is better than ever in spite of major cuts in talent in the programming, production, creative, and sales. Selling off towers, and lack of attention to the physical plant aren't pushing people toward on-line. Constant promotion of on-line listening extended listening to new audiences, it didn't simply move them to a more easily accessible means of listening at work.

Now may I have more Kool-Aid, please?

 

[TheBigA]

Now may I have more Kool-Aid, please?

You can do better? We'd all love to watch you work.

 

[Mike Sheridan]

OTA Radio is still a driving force...it drove me to XM (bada bing!)

 

[Element9]

Don't look now, but Alternative 107.7 sounds better than anything on that frequency in the last ten years. The audio is hyper processed but it sounds pretty good. I've observed at least a half dozen businesses and shops that I routinely visit switched from 92.9, 96.9 or 103.3 to Alternative 107.7 and kept the station on for the last four weeks. Six businesses aren't a definitive indicator, but the people who work in those offices and shops must like what they're hearing on 107.7. Then again, we'll see what happens two and a half years down the road when the 107.7 format switch cycle comes due. But for now, it sounds pretty good.

 

[flybynight]

Don't look now, but Alternative 107.7 sounds better than anything on that frequency in the last ten years. The audio is hyper processed but it sounds pretty good. I've observed at least a half dozen businesses and shops that I routinely visit switched from 92.9, 96.9 or 103.3 to Alternative 107.7 and kept the station on for the last four weeks. Six businesses aren't a definitive indicator, but the people who work in those offices and shops must like what they're hearing on 107.7. Then again, we'll see what happens two and a half years down the road when the 107.7 format switch cycle comes due. But for now, it sounds pretty good.

Even better than anti-Obama stuff in stereo? No way.

 

[Unregistered]

Very odd choice. Most markets have only one Rock station aimed at younger Rock fans. NYC has none. Yet Buffalo will now have TWO, WEDG and WLKK. Yes, WEDG is more of an Active Rock station, and it seems WLKK is aiming more Alternative. Yet the fan base is the same... young men in their 20 - 40.

I also don't believe that statement that 95% of WBEN's listening is on AM. That makes no sense if you're simulcasting on a full-power FM, 20,000 watts at 800 feet. They've got Rush, they've got Hannity. Someone was listening. Maybe as others have speculated, the signal doesn't do well in downtown Buffalo. The tower is in a rural area between Buffalo, Rochester and Dansville. But I don't believe that for every 100 people listening to 930, only five were listening to 107.7.

rochester must've been an exception because at one point around the year 2000 they had four...94.1 the zone was alternative much like 107.7's current playlist, 95.1/95.5 the nerve was more hard rock/metal (similar to 103.3)...then there was 90.5 wber which despite being non-commercial had the reach of a bigger station (hitting far enough west to cover areas west of route 98....rounding up the four was 99.3 the pulse which covered rochester eastward across the finger lakes....
i agree too WEDG is more active rock/metal though they were alternative for a very short time they first signed on in the 90s..i fall into that male 20-40 group and prefer the lost 90s hits from dada, screaming trees, primitive radio gods, better than ezra, the cranberries etc with some from the 2000s afi, my chemical romance etc over metallica, ac/dc, van halen, and staind...