Why didn't Entercom get WZLX and give up WAAF instead? Has to be reasoning behind it. As Entercom didn't pick up the classic rock station in Seattle instead picked up the CBS country station and flipping to soft ac after Christmas.
-
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
Entercom announces what it keeps, what it doesn't
- Thread starter raccoonradio
- Start date
DOJ puts a limit on market share.It's why Ent didn't get to keep Sports Hub as well as WEEI.Maybe getting ZLX would have put them over a revenue limit, though they did spin off Sports Hub to Beasley to get WMJX.Yes, in some ways one could see them getting ZLX and maybe spinning off AAF to a diff company like iHeart but maybe iHR insisted on getting ZLX.
You'd have to ask Entercom's David Field.
You'd have to ask Entercom's David Field.
Speculative question: could Beasley have taken both WBZ-FM and AM? Discuss.
Looking at how Beasley has handled some of the Greater Media news/talkers, I think WBZ was better off being bought by iHeart.
Say what you will about iHeart...they have better & deeper resources for a news/talker.
Last edited:
Part of the DoJ "issue" was controlling the entire sports segment, including 25% of market billings on the two sports FMs.
The FCC has a loose 40% revenue cap; the DoJ gets more specific on market segments when their consent is needed for a deal.
No . I heart DOES NOT HAVE DEEPER RESOURCES FOR NEWS TALKER, AND NOTHING FOR A LOCAL ALL NEWS STATION.
Let's see....they have news networks, news programs, more programmers that understand the format, more news/talk stations to share resources....better links to national sales.
Does Beasley have any of these?
No, Beasley doesn't, but the point is I heart does not.
Their whole modus operandi is to let go of as much talent as they can to save money, remove the local programming,whether they have news services and associates, or not, the listener's experience is they cannot get regular news, or all news on any of their stations, just syndicated crap, and rebroadcasts. I really hope that I'm wrong, and I hope that I heart changes nothing at WBZ 1030, But I expect the station to suck after the move to the Medford gulag
Their whole modus operandi is to let go of as much talent as they can to save money, remove the local programming,whether they have news services and associates, or not, the listener's experience is they cannot get regular news, or all news on any of their stations, just syndicated crap, and rebroadcasts. I really hope that I'm wrong, and I hope that I heart changes nothing at WBZ 1030, But I expect the station to suck after the move to the Medford gulag
No? I just pointed out a bunch of ways that iHeart has more resources.
They haven't changed as much under new ownership as much as you think they have. The mind can talk itself into anything.
The minute they fire all of the local union newscasters and replace them with syndication, let me know. Until then, it's still pretty much status quo.
Once again, if you just listen to their big AMs in LA, Cincinnati, and other big cities, they're still pretty much all local. And they've been under iHeart ownership for over ten years.
Peter Casey was let go while RKO canned Sat night oldies..So far that's about it.
Also HD subchannel losses. No more Radio Mojo, The Lounge on WZLX HD2 and HD3.
I don't want to see WBZ a clone of WLW, and KFI, both have some, not a lot of syndicated talk. Cheap Channel has a history of placing Righty talk on all their AM's. WBZ's news programming makes it an important station, not the mostly crap in the evenings and overnights.
So far before WBZ moving to Medford, Cheap Channel has attempted to make air staff reapply for their jobs, they have removed from the radio, WBZ channel 4's reporters. They have removed reporter's roundup, and have stacked their own inane, inappropriate, I heart promos.
If they become a talk show, and call in wasteland, it's not a station I would listen to.
By the way I heart doesn't need your sycophant like worshipping, and defense of a media company which has become the poster child of what's wrong with the industry
First of all, no one said anything about WBZ becoming a "clone of WLW." You said iHeart fires local talent, and WLW is an example of how that's not true.
But secondly, neither WLW nor KFI have syndicated talk. They are both all live and local talk stations. So once again, that disproves your false statement that iHeart replaces local with syndicated.
iHeart also bought WRKO, which IS a talk station. So why would they change WBZ to compete against WRKO? It makes no sense at all.
No one is defending iHeart. I'm saying you're wrong when you say they replace local with syndicated. They haven't replaced local with syndicated at lots of their stations, and they haven't replaced local news with syndicated talk at WBZ. You're running around like Chicken Little, and you can't accept someone telling you you're wrong.
iHeart really needs to fix this. The "synergy" between WBZ RADIO and TV was a real asset to both operations.
There is limited mention of "(person in news) told WBZ-TV", and there are reports within newscasts from Channel 4 meteorologists as news items, not as actual forecasts "on the threes". But I'm sure iHeart and CBS Local can work out something mutually agreeable between them. A perfectly good familial relationship has been broken here, but it can still be repaired. If they can do this, then I'll know iHeart's heart is in the right place.
They still have the same base call letters, so why not? (Oh, I'm sure I'm going to hear why not shortly!
)Both parties have to WANT to have this kind of relationship. You assume TV wants to share its information with a competing medium. Remember: CBS sold radio. TV got rid of radio, not the other way around. If TV benefited from owning WBZ radio, they wouldn't have sold it. Perhaps the TV people don't want to play ball with radio any more.
Having said that, there are very few TV companies that still own radio. Certainly NBC or ABC could make a deal with WBZ too. You take a look in Philly, where KYW TV no longer owns KYW NewsRadio. They too were in the same building. Because the Entercom contract allows for a couple years of continued co-operation, they can still share material. But after two years, its the same situation as in Boston.
So why not have WBZ-AM make a strategic relationship with WCVB? And have the folks at ABC News Radio assist in that process?
Maybe it's me, but as someone who listens a lot to WBZ radio...I haven't heard much "synergy" between WBZ Raddio & TV in years, so I'm not sure what they'd be losing...
At least not since the days when Schweogler did the weather on radio & TV, Maynard, Maurice Lewis and Gary Lapierre did radio & TV...and an occaisional BZ-TV person filling in on the evening radio talk slot.
But that was all a long time ago. Not sure what synergy they have had recently....
- Status