I see your point. Take Bossbill (for example), he owns multiple stations and I would be willing to bet that he didn't base any of his stations off of his personal taste.
True. However, there's more than one reason to own a station, and this is what gets lost on this forum.
Take KBRD (AM 680, Olympia...
www.kbrd.org ), for example. Granted, it's unusual, but it shows that if YOUR programming taste is shared by others, there could be a way to build a station around it.
Years ago, the original owner of KBRD took the money he earned from another successful business, and dumped most of it into a couple of small, daytime-only stations. Over a few years, he built the tallest AM broadcast tower in the state, put his two stations on it and rented space to a third. Eventually, he sold one of his stations and used the rental income, along with public donations, to keep his operation afloat.
His main purpose was to be able to listen to the music HE wanted to hear... and that was pretty much his philosophy until he passed away. If you liked what he liked and listened to his station, you'd be asked to donate now and then.
Years later, the station continues to operate, much like the original owner intended. It doesn't make anyone rich, but it pays for a manager and the costs of maintaining the transmitter and tower site. It has a library of over 24,000 songs and more are added every week. A large percentage of the library is recorded from 78 RPM records, though you'd never know it to hear the recordings over the station or its internet stream. Others are cut from LPs, 45s and even an occasional 8-track or two.
While this may be an extreme example of how to make the economy of a station work, it may be a more legitimate path for many here than constantly criticizing the way mainstream broadcasters apply their methods. In a sense, it's a truer barometer of whether your philosophy would cut it, in an environment where the medium supposedly "serves the public".
