And which two would those be?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Spring Ratings 2016
- Thread starter tbolt909
- Start date
And which two would those be?
D
dand5780
Guest
Glenn Wiggle and Mike Lomas.
Most of the other Saturday shows are good, but for a Saturday.
Hank Nevins they could put on for news any day though.
Gotta agree there-considering that Entercorpse only flipped WWKB to ESPN 1520 in order to dent WHLD having a competing sports format. Point of order, though: Per that link, WWKB has NO rating available for WWKB in the spring book; the .5 is from the winter
What surprises me is that neither Cumulus or Townsquare is willing to make a play for WWKB and turn it into a news/talk outlet to challenge WBEN. Yes, I'm fully aware that it would cost a LOT of money to run it and do it right....and if it was done, they'd probably go with satellite-fed talk for most of the day(ESPECIALLY if Cumulus wound up owning it). But you'd have to think someone is up for the challenge to take on 'BEN.
In the last few years they have tried talk for the left and music like the old KB but I guess neither worked. What I don't understand is why Entercom never put WGR or WBEN programming on a 50Kw station instead of leaving them on their 5kw dial positions. Then they could sell 930 or 550 and have better coverage for one of them. Is that crazy?
No way in h-e-double-hockey-sticks will that happen. Take that to the bank. Heck, you can't even get a personality format on a full-power FM - who would want to even put a penny towards doing the same on a dying band?
You know that KB is owned by the company that owns WBEN. So it's probably not for sale. Plus Cumulus is pretty short on cash right now.
The reality is that any new talk station would have to spend a lot on local hosts, because the best syndicated talkers are already taken. So the station would have 3rd tier talent, and would get a 1 share with an aging demographic that advertisers don't want. That's why no one's doing it.
The WGR / WBEN sports and talk package is a powerful sales combo. Entercom would be crazy to sell the only other signal that might be able to compete to a direct competitor.
And a competitor would be crazy trying to do a start-up talk station in a format that is aging and increasingly difficult to sustain. There is not enough money in the market for two old-leaning talk stations to be sustainable. Add in that WWKB is at the wrong end of the dial and has all the problems that high band stations have, starting with lack of traffic at that end of the dial.
Both 550 and 930 have as good as or better daytime coverage than 1520. Keep in mind that the rough equation is that 1 kw at 550 is as good as 50 kw at 1500.
Check the innermost red contours for each station at www.radio-locator.com and you will see that 1520 has no advantage over the lower dial position stations.
To those who reacted to my proposal: Yeah...I don't think that either Cumulus or Townsquare would pick up WWKB if(and that's a VERY big IF)Entercom was to unload it. But they're not stupid, either; getting a N/A or Did Not Rate is a clear sign that something might be amiss-if not now, then definitely somewhere down the road. And call me crazy, but I think with the right owner(not Cumulus)who is willing to invest and have patience with it, KB can make something out of itself instead of being the AM answer to 92.9 or 107.7 .
David: True enough on the talk radio aging angle, but blame that on programmers who are stuck in their ways and won't go for changes in how to do talk radio better.
David: True enough on the talk radio aging angle, but blame that on programmers who are stuck in their ways and won't go for changes in how to do talk radio better.
Lots of people think lots of things. Very few are willing to actually spend the money. Especially when the chances are unlikely that they'll get any return on that investment. The fact that a major company is still willing to pay the tower costs and keep the transmitter on is a major commitment. Very few people could even make those payments.
But if you look around the country, you'll see that most markets can't support more than two AM stations with any kind of useful ratings. In New York City, you have WABC, once a monster Top 40 powerhouse, now getting 1 share. It's not a function of money or commitment. It's the change in the marketplace.
Which is another reason why no one in their right mind will devote their own personal money to reviving this station. All of this expense may have been justified in the 1930s, but not now. It just costs way to much money to crank the engine up.
Last edited:
More than one former engineer has said the ground system and antenna tuning networks on Big Tree Road aren't what they once were. Maintaining multi-tower directional AM antennas is an expensive proposition. Considering the WWKB-WGR site has six co-mingled towers with one 1520 tower shared with the 550 night pattern, and the maintenance issues become even more complex.
I for one would like to hear about your ideas on changes to "do talk radio better". I ask because there are very bright radio minds who've tried to move away from the "traditional" talk radio model but have had limited success.
Programmers aren't the problem here. It's the audience who's stuck in their ways. If there was a big audience for other forms of talk, programmers would jump on it. In fact, there's a big audience for sports talk, and that's also being done.
How would one know if there were a big audience for some other form of talk if that form of talk isn't being programmed?
Here's an idea: There's plenty of celebrity-oriented talk on TV, satellite radio and on numerous websites. Not my cup of tea, but I'm well out of the demo. I do know and work with people who are fascinated by Taylor/Kanye, the Kardashians, The Bachelorette, etc., though, and they consume plenty of internet and TV content related to those interests. I don't think any of them have SiriusXM. Might this work on FM, or is it too much like the failed "hot talk" concept to be given a chance?
Last edited:
I would say go look at Darryl Hicks' articles; he's been in talk radio for DECADES and he's written a lot about the format.
Let me ask you this: Why weren't talk radio programmers making changes and tweaks to their format years, if not decades, ago? As an example, WLW in Cincinnati has evolved over time. Has WBEN?
Would that be Darryl PARKS, not HICKS? The guy who programmed in Buffalo during the 1990s? We're all familiar with him. Now let's hear YOUR ideas. Not someone else's.
Perhaps it would be good to go back in time. John Otto invented talk radio back in the '60s. It wasn't political at all. He'd bring on interesting guests, interviewed them and took calls. Larry King made his mark with his all night show -- again, by interviewing interesting people. It wasn't until the late '80s when Rush came along that talk radio evolved into right-wing politics. Rather than interviewing guests, we began to hear pontificating hosts who drone on and on and then take calls from people who mostly agree with the hosts. I tuned out long ago. Two of the more popular hosts on public radio are Tom Ashbrook and the soon-to-be retired Diane Rehm. Their daily talk shows are interesting and timely. Maybe they're too wonky for commercial radio. But there have to be topics and guests who would attract younger listeners. Look! Shredd and Ragan are already doing that on the Edge every morning. Maybe they're the model for talk radio's future.
Tom Ashbrook is a first class host. Even the people who fill in
for him are professional. The shows are usually compelling.
Commercial talk radio is a cesspool.
As for KB 1520, it's over. Nobody wants to buy it, even if Entercom
wanted to sell it. Mr. Field probably would trade it for a case of
champagne and some cigars at this point...
for him are professional. The shows are usually compelling.
Commercial talk radio is a cesspool.
As for KB 1520, it's over. Nobody wants to buy it, even if Entercom
wanted to sell it. Mr. Field probably would trade it for a case of
champagne and some cigars at this point...
We've walked down this street a few times on this board. Talk radio, present and past, even in the golden years, is essentially call and response. It's pull-pull. This ISN'T the way listeners under 35 respond. Sports talk radio, over the last ten years, recognized the new paradigm and demands of listeners under 35, and responded. Programmers of sports talk radio recognized that sports radio is "guy radio" as much as it's sports radio. To clarify, it's not a matter of talking about T&A. If it were that simple, the CBS talk FM format might have endured. Traditional sports listeners and older sports fans often complain about the direction of sports talk, but the approach brings new and younger listeners into the fold... something issues oriented talk radio, especially on AM, hasn't done and doesn't seem to understand. How many 30-40 year old listeners are enticed to listen to WBEN? They're more inclined to listen to WGR. These listeners are more inclined to listen to Shredd & Ragan, who do an exceptional job or embracing younger (such as it is) listeners and motivating them to respond.
Tom Ashbrook is an outstanding host. But understand that he has a full staff of producers and researchers that help make the on air product what it is, that being one of the best two hours of talk radio in any market, whether it's public or commercial radio. Still, if you broke down the demographics for Ashbrook's show, I'd surmise it would be decidedly 45+ if not 55+ (which is probably the make up of this board and thread). This is what talk radio grapples with every day. "How do we bring in younger listeners." The cold answer is, it's a bitch. Young(er) listeners don't respond to the MO that most talk show hosts know and employ each day. This, in large measure, is because most talk show hosts are old white guys with very parochial views of the world and their communities. This is often verified by listening to the people who call their shows. The exception to the "parochial view" is NPR, whose talk shows have broader, deeper appeal. Years ago NPR also realized that "radio" isn't its sole platform. As a result, it's miles ahead of most local, commercial talk radio heard in most cities, including Buffalo.
Tom Ashbrook is an outstanding host. But understand that he has a full staff of producers and researchers that help make the on air product what it is, that being one of the best two hours of talk radio in any market, whether it's public or commercial radio. Still, if you broke down the demographics for Ashbrook's show, I'd surmise it would be decidedly 45+ if not 55+ (which is probably the make up of this board and thread). This is what talk radio grapples with every day. "How do we bring in younger listeners." The cold answer is, it's a bitch. Young(er) listeners don't respond to the MO that most talk show hosts know and employ each day. This, in large measure, is because most talk show hosts are old white guys with very parochial views of the world and their communities. This is often verified by listening to the people who call their shows. The exception to the "parochial view" is NPR, whose talk shows have broader, deeper appeal. Years ago NPR also realized that "radio" isn't its sole platform. As a result, it's miles ahead of most local, commercial talk radio heard in most cities, including Buffalo.
- Status