Entercom Changes in Seattle

[TheBigA]

Can anyone clarify the logistics of the "regional" programming?

The memo makes it clear that the station playlists will remain unique to those stations and markets: "In addition, every station will continue to have its own unique playlist driven by a continued commitment to heavy local research."

So they will provide host parts for the stations, and the stations schedule their own music.

This is what Delilah does in her national show. This is what Ryan Seacrest does.

I don't know, but I think that's also what the Brooke show does, because it's carried on stations in different formats.

 

[Bongwater]

Very good point. Either way you look at it, it looks like difficult times are on the horizon for Entercom in Seattle. We all knew that this would happen, though...

It only starts here. Buckle up.

It's not just with Entercom. You'll be seeing a lot more of this in the coming years from everybody as the radio conglomerates further push towards streaming/podcasts. More internal consolidation of positions, more operations from home based studios/offices via a centralized system. (COVID-19 has really opened some doors. And the "data cap" myth has been blown. By the ISPs themselves. So another genie is loose.)

iHeart already has paid premium plans (scroll down their web page.) In a few years, there may not be any local radio cluster buildings at all and everything is off some central server somewhere (with localized inserted content and advertising.)

There will also come a time when ad agencies and consumers will demand more from radio than the terrestrial medium itself can give technically. The internet can expand, local radio broadcast bands cannot. And you can only add so many bells and whistles to an 87 year old, one-way medium like FM radio until it finally makes more sense for hip and trendy and always up and coming national media conglomerates to just quit beating this old pile of horse bones and get with the times (Hint: They already outsourced the towers for a reason.)

And if you don't believe me, count how many pitches an hour you hear for these apps on their stations.

They already have the capacity to run continuous branded streams of all-star talent everybody knows from coast to coast. With localized inserted whatever for each geographic area along with the national content. They can know in real time who is listening, where, when, how long and which income level/demographic/geographically targeted spots they can insert into individual streams and even customize the music to individual listener preference (including those songs with f-bombs) Based on the information they can glean from an individual app like iHeart or radio (dot) com.

That also conveniently inquires about inserting itself into other apps people are using to further snoop for other such choice advertiser information. Like who their friends are and their interests? What activities they share? Their last played song on YouTube? What they ate for breakfast on Instagram? Who they voted for Twitter, etc that can further narrowcast the advertising and even music to specific listener interest for maximum advertiser/artist return and shareholder value?

And the only thing missing is individual terrestrial dial positions and call letters, ridiculous piles of paperwork, expensive broadcast engineers and equipment and any other excess government-mandated whatever and the cost of it all?

The ugly question is how much longer will major radio conglomerates like iHeart and Entercom and ad agencies actually need an unfocusable, limited 87 year old medium like FM radio, only responsive to those on a screened, selected, but fairly homogeneous panel overall by a third party using a secondary technology (PPM) that issue results periodically when everybody can technically get all that data in real time directly (or by seconds) with streaming?

This isn't some far off future, the tech for all of that exists and is being used right now. It's just the fine tuning of it. And one day, the local transmitters will be just another entree for the vultures in Accounting.

But local FM still has a place, even in this landscape and it may be used for many years to come. Hopefully as a second-tier, more localized service (KRIZ/KYIZ and KRKO/KKXA for example could get actual FM signals that finally cover their listening areas, lower end public stations like KEXP can get better signals, etc.) But it will go down the chain as time goes by. But there will always be a need for some kind of local terrestrial radio. So FM will be here long after the major corporate value has vanished.

And AM? Hell, just give it to the low power radio geeks (Yay!....Aw, come on. You already hear lunatics everywhere on it.)

Sad truth though is the religious groups will likely get FMs first as they're being spun off in the coming years. They have the money everybody else doesn't.

So again, buckle up....

 

[fordranger797]

It only starts here. Buckle up.

It's not just with Entercom. You'll be seeing a lot more of this in the coming years from everybody as the radio conglomerates further push towards streaming/podcasts. More internal consolidation of positions, more operations from home based studios/offices via a centralized system. (COVID-19 has really opened some doors. And the "data cap" myth has been blown. By the ISPs themselves. So another genie is loose.)

iHeart already has paid premium plans (scroll down their web page.) In a few years, there may not be any local radio cluster buildings at all and everything is off some central server somewhere (with localized inserted content and advertising.)

There will also come a time when ad agencies and consumers will demand more from radio than the terrestrial medium itself can give technically. The internet can expand, local radio broadcast bands cannot. And you can only add so many bells and whistles to an 87 year old, one-way medium like FM radio until it finally makes more sense for hip and trendy and always up and coming national media conglomerates to just quit beating this old pile of horse bones and get with the times (Hint: They already outsourced the towers for a reason.)

And if you don't believe me, count how many pitches an hour you hear for these apps on their stations.

They already have the capacity to run continuous branded streams of all-star talent everybody knows from coast to coast. With localized inserted whatever for each geographic area along with the national content. They can know in real time who is listening, where, when, how long and which income level/demographic/geographically targeted spots they can insert into individual streams and even customize the music to individual listener preference (including those songs with f-bombs) Based on the information they can glean from an individual app like iHeart or radio (dot) com.

That also conveniently inquires about inserting itself into other apps people are using to further snoop for other such choice advertiser information. Like who their friends are and their interests? What activities they share? Their last played song on YouTube? What they ate for breakfast on Instagram? Who they voted for Twitter, etc that can further narrowcast the advertising and even music to specific listener interest for maximum advertiser/artist return and shareholder value?

And the only thing missing is individual terrestrial dial positions and call letters, ridiculous piles of paperwork, expensive broadcast engineers and equipment and any other excess government-mandated whatever and the cost of it all?

The ugly question is how much longer will major radio conglomerates like iHeart and Entercom and ad agencies actually need an unfocusable, limited 87 year old medium like FM radio, only responsive to those on a screened, selected, but fairly homogeneous panel overall by a third party using a secondary technology (PPM) that issue results periodically when everybody can technically get all that data in real time directly (or by seconds) with streaming?

This isn't some far off future, the tech for all of that exists and is being used right now. It's just the fine tuning of it. And one day, the local transmitters will be just another entree for the vultures in Accounting.

But local FM still has a place, even in this landscape and it may be used for many years to come. Hopefully as a second-tier, more localized service (KRIZ/KYIZ and KRKO/KKXA for example could get actual FM signals that finally cover their listening areas, lower end public stations like KEXP can get better signals, etc.) But it will go down the chain as time goes by. But there will always be a need for some kind of local terrestrial radio. So FM will be here long after the major corporate value has vanished.

And AM? Hell, just give it to the low power radio geeks (Yay!....Aw, come on. You already hear lunatics everywhere on it.)

Sad truth though is the religious groups will likely get FMs first as they're being spun off in the coming years. They have the money everybody else doesn't.

So again, buckle up....

Everything you said in your post is completely spot on. The most unfortunate part is the fact that these industry wide changes have the biggest impact on the talent. What will they do now, especially in the age of COVID? It seemed that most people in radio had "side gigs" that helped supplement their income, but of course all of that is on pause right now. I got into radio when I was only a teenager with the intention of making it my career, but my family wisely warned me of these issues that would eventually come into fruition. I'm thankful that I found other avenues, as we now see just how much this industry is changing. My heart genuinely goes out to those who are impacted by these changes.

 

[Bongwater]

Everything you said in your post is completely spot on. The most unfortunate part is the fact that these industry wide changes have the biggest impact on the talent. What will they do now, especially in the age of COVID? It seemed that most people in radio had "side gigs" that helped supplement their income, but of course all of that is on pause right now. I got into radio when I was only a teenager with the intention of making it my career, but my family wisely warned me of these issues that would eventually come into fruition. My heart genuinely goes out to those who are impacted by these changes.

You have to remember one door may be closing, but another is opening. Radio is not going away. It is changing. And there can be opportunities galore on a lower level on a more localized FM dial that could springboard to the national apps. So it can be like bringing back "rookie markets". And if you're doing everything from a home studio that's technically up to snuff (and there will need to be some standard or it's just going to be a regular sonic funhouse for the listeners), you won't need to move anywhere, just repackage your program for the national app medium. Or do some combination.

 

[fordranger797]

The memo makes it clear that the station playlists will remain unique to those stations and markets: "In addition, every station will continue to have its own unique playlist driven by a continued commitment to heavy local research."

So they will provide host parts for the stations, and the stations schedule their own music.

This is what Delilah does in her national show. This is what Ryan Seacrest does.

I don't know, but I think that's also what the Brooke show does, because it's carried on stations in different formats.

I think this is one area in which we have to give iHeart a lot of credit. Listen to Robin Rock on the 95.7 midday show, and you will surely be impressed. Sure, she is voice tracked from Chicago, but she sounds like she could just as easily be sitting in the studio in Seattle. Not to mention, she makes every effort to localize the show to the Seattle audience. Shows that are entirely "canned" to be shipped off to hoards of radio stations just don't sound nearly as good in many cases. It's not as much of a problem with morning shows, but it sounds a little cheesy at times on other shows.

 

[TheBigA]

Sad truth though is the religious groups will likely get FMs first as they're being spun off in the coming years. They have the money everybody else doesn't.

Great post, but to your last point, it doesn't have to be that way. Seattle is one of the few cities in America that has more than one community-owned radio stations. In 2015, Pacific Lutheran University wanted to sell its FM station, and KUOW was going to buy it. They were going to eliminate the news part of the station. The people of Seattle said no, and formed a group called Pacific Public Radio. The group raised over $7 million to buy the radio station, and run it as an independent news and jazz station. That didn't have to happen, but it did, because the people of Seattle united and spent their own personal money to do it.

Four years ago, KEXP was looking to move into new studios, and they came up with the idea of a huge music performance center. They announced they needed to raise $15 million to build it. Amazingly, the people of Seattle donated the $15 million needed to build it.

You're exactly right. How much longer will radio companies and advertisers need FM radio? To be honest, they don't see it as their future. It's not growing in the way it needs to in order to meet the goals of their investors. The ONLY solution to this is for the PEOPLE to unite, pool their money, and buy those radio stations. Don't wait for religious broadcasters to come in, because when that happens, it's too late. Take a look at Boston. Entercom sold the heritage rock station WAAF to EMF last year. That station is gone and the format will likely never return to Boston. It doesn't have to happen in Seattle.

 

[Bongwater]

Great post, but to your last point, it doesn't have to be that way. Seattle is one of the few cities in America that has more than one community-owned radio stations. In 2015, Pacific Lutheran University wanted to sell its FM station, and KUOW was going to buy it. They were going to eliminate the news part of the station. The people of Seattle said no, and formed a group called Pacific Public Radio. The group raised over $7 million to buy the radio station, and run it as an independent news and jazz station. That didn't have to happen, but it did, because the people of Seattle united and spent their own personal money to do it.

Four years ago, KEXP was looking to move into new studios, and they came up with the idea of a huge music performance center. They announced they needed to raise $15 million to build it. Amazingly, the people of Seattle donated the $15 million needed to build it.

You're exactly right. How much longer will radio companies and advertisers need FM radio? To be honest, they don't see it as their future. It's not growing in the way it needs to in order to meet the goals of their investors. The ONLY solution to this is for the PEOPLE to unite, pool their money, and buy those radio stations. Don't wait for religious broadcasters to come in, because when that happens, it's too late. Take a look at Boston. Entercom sold the heritage rock station WAAF to EMF last year. That station is gone and the format will likely never return to Boston. It doesn't have to happen in Seattle.

Barring a GoFundMe/Kickstarter miracle, that's going to be a rough hill for average people without large savings accounts (especially after this year.)

There'll be rich people buying toy stations (a'la WABC.) QAnon crazed conspiracy theorists (they have money somehow too.) Did I also mention foreign entities can now fully own American stations? So on top of the religious broadcasters, you'll also be competing with Sputnik.

 

[TheBigA]

Barring a GoFundMe/Kickstarter miracle, that's going to be a rough hill for average people without large savings accounts (especially after this year.)

GoFundMe has been tried for radio stations and hasn't worked because you have to DRIVE people there. How did KNKX raise $7 million? They have 300,000 listeners, so do the math. It starts with a core group of passionate people who then reach out to other passionate people. Yes I know that Paul Allen gave a lot of money to KEXP, but how many billionaires donated to KNKX?

Sure the Friends group had access to the air signal, and could raise money that way. Have you ever heard of seller-assisted financing? People buy homes and businesses with the assistance of the sellers. That's how it could be done.

 

[Delete My Account]

A major challenge for radio going forward is that the streaming/podcast economics don't work yet.

An iHeart can absorb the cost, but streaming is a loss for any broadcaster. I'm expected to offer it for the benefit of my listeners, but the more they use it and the more popular my stream is, the more money I lose.

Speech podcasting is more logical - with no rights issues, some of them stand out and make money. But for music curation, not so much.

So we're being pushed into things that smaller broadcasters have neither the expertise nor leverage to make profitable, while being pushed away from the platforms we're traditionally able to profit from.

It may be inevitable, but there's a lot of forces (the music industry and an apathetic to often tech-ignorant government) that do their best to make it difficult for broadcasters, despite our long history of public service.

 

[TheBigA]

Speech podcasting is more logical - with no rights issues, some of them stand out and make money. But for music curation, not so much.

I can't tell you how many out of work DJs I've talked to who want to do podcasts, but see only limited potential because of the music royalty issue. There is no compromising with the music industry over digital royalties. They know they have the law on their side. In the meantime, I just saw a story that Sony Music is launching their own podcasts. We'll see how they handle music in their podcasts. They have to play by the same rules, even though they own a portion of the rights (shared with artists, musicians, and songwriters). If Sony is successful, I'm sure the other labels will follow. At one time record labels were partners, and now they're becoming competitors. Imagine if record labels use their artists in podcasts and take that combination to advertisers for sponsorship.

 

[bobdavcav]

There's a lot here.
First, is Michel Michaels still at KWJJ? I haven't paid attention to that station since I've been down here, but she was doing nights five years ago when I was here, I have an aircheck of her. She would be my pick for afternoons at both KWJJ and KKWF.
As for music, I'm not sure I've eber heard self-selecting music on Delila's show, but I know John Tesh has a fully produced show as well as bits that stations can put into their own logs. The latter is how I sume Entercom is going to do it.
As for iHeart, they seem to be slowly refining how they do things as they move forward, but a lot of their jocks just sound bored. I also think that just giving a station ID and saying "thanks for having us on" isn't an affective use of a break when there are only two in the set.

 

[bobdavcav]

duplicate

 

[TheBigA]

I also think that just giving a station ID and saying "thanks for having us on" isn't an affective use of a break when there are only two in the set.

It depends on the format and the time of day. All music isn't the same, and consequently all radio announcing shouldn't be the same.

Based on the information in the OP, the new country and alternative shows will provide a lot more original content than an ID and a liner. Because if a station is looking for a way to cut costs, the easiest way is to replace voices that aren't providing much in terms of original local content.

 

[fordranger797]

Barring a GoFundMe/Kickstarter miracle, that's going to be a rough hill for average people without large savings accounts (especially after this year.)

There'll be rich people buying toy stations (a'la WABC.) QAnon crazed conspiracy theorists (they have money somehow too.) Did I also mention foreign entities can now fully own American stations? So on top of the religious broadcasters, you'll also be competing with Sputnik.

As I have said before, there is really something wrong with the broadcasting industry when you see multiple K-LOVE stations popping up in (what seems like) every market in the country. It truly is sad when you realize that many legendary radio stations are worth more being sold to a religious broadcaster than to actually fulfill their original purpose.

 

[TheBigA]

It truly is sad when you realize that many legendary radio stations are worth more being sold to a religious broadcaster than to actually fulfill their original purpose.

What is their "original purpose?" Ask yourself that. How is playing rock music more fitting for radio than preaching the gospel? In truth, they're both doing the same thing.

What it really speaks to is our ability as people to come together in positive ways, and religion is one thing that can bring people together. It can also tear people apart. Music can bring people together, or it can tear people apart. I know ten songs that I can play in a crowded room that will cause everyone to leave. Awful songs that people just can't stand. Some of those songs are very popular. What does that tell you?

There is nothing wrong with the broadcasting industry. It's a business, and it's operating like a business. There's something wrong with PEOPLE who rely on profit-making companies to lead and entertain, rather than looking to themselves, and finding that power within. We as a people need to find a way to serve the people, because we've seen that neither business nor the government have the capacity, the ability, or the desire to do it.

Why do religious broadcasters always have the money? Because they offer a product that the people want to buy. People are giving their own money to listen to the radio. Can you imagine how much better radio would be if people did that with non-religious radio stations?

 

[fordranger797]

What is their "original purpose?" Ask yourself that. How is playing rock music more fitting for radio than preaching the gospel? In truth, they're both doing the same thing.

What it really speaks to is our ability as people to come together in positive ways, and religion is one thing that can bring people together. It can also tear people apart. Music can bring people together, or it can tear people apart. I know ten songs that I can play in a crowded room that will cause everyone to leave. Awful songs that people just can't stand. Some of those songs are very popular. What does that tell you?

There is nothing wrong with the broadcasting industry. It's a business, and it's operating like a business. There's something wrong with PEOPLE who rely on profit-making companies to lead and entertain, rather than looking to themselves, and finding that power within. We as a people need to find a way to serve the people, because we've seen that neither business nor the government have the capacity, the ability, or the desire to do it.

Why do religious broadcasters always have the money? Because they offer a product that the people want to buy. People are giving their own money to listen to the radio. Can you imagine how much better radio would be if people did that with non-religious radio stations?

You are correct, radio is a business and broadcasters need to do what makes sense for their bottom line. This is not a fact that I would ever challenge. With that being said, is it not true that the encroachment of these religious broadcasters could theoretically have a negative impact on the amount of choice that we currently enjoy on the dial? I'm not saying that the overall quality of the radio would be better or worse with rock music stations over religious formatted stations, but I do think it signals trouble on the horizon when we see commercial frequencies transitioning to syndicated religious programming. Obviously, the companies that own these stations know that they can't make it profitable with their current programming so they make the decision to turn it over to a group that can. You made a great point about radio serving the people, and on this subject in particular I am torn. On one hand, religious stations do serve a loyal community of listeners, and on the other hand, it seems like one could also make a convincing argument that this was not the intended purpose of the public airwaves.

 

[TheBigA]

On one hand, religious stations do serve a loyal community of listeners, and on the other hand, it seems like one could also make a convincing argument that this was not the intended purpose of the public airwaves.

Once again, I ask what was the intended purpose? There have been religious broadcasters since the beginning of the medium. Just read about Aimee Semple McPherson. In 1924, she was running a religious radio station that exceeded the terms of its license. The FCC threatened to shut her down. She sent a telegram to the FCC: "PLEASE ORDER YOUR MINIONS OF SATAN TO LEAVE MY STATION ALONE. YOU CANNOT EXPECT THE ALMIGHTY TO ABIDE YOUR WAVELENGTH NONSENSE." She was a real character. I can't imagine David Field sending such a letter.

So religious broadcasters have a long history with radio and not all of it good. The fact is that all of the original companies who were there at the inception no longer own radio stations. The electronics companies, such s RCA, Crosley, and GE. The networks: ABC, NBC, CBS, and Mutual. The insurance companies: Nationwide, Jefferson Pilot, National Life. The retail stores: Sears, Bambergers, and all the others. They've all sold radio, and a lot of them are out of business. This current group won't stay in radio forever either. Who will take their place? It won't be profit-making companies, because there is not enough profit in radio. So who is left?

 

[Delete My Account]

It won't be profit-making companies, because there is not enough profit in radio. So who is left?

Caveat: not enough profit for companies of a certain size perhaps. Others have commented that there's too many stations. Maybe a combination of factors will lead to a "right sizing" of some markets and smaller, locally focused operators will make a profit. Less than before, but enough to sustain a smaller business. Especially when integrated with other endeavors.

 

[TheBigA]

Maybe a combination of factors will lead to a "right sizing" of some markets and smaller, locally focused operators will make a profit. Less than before, but enough to sustain a smaller business. Especially when integrated with other endeavors.

You're looking at it from a business point of view. Sure it would be easier if there were fewer stations. But that means a lot less choice for listeners. As it is, there really only six or eight viable formats in radio. So sure, as an industry, we could exist with eight stations per market. But it would mean less choice for listeners. All of a sudden, $15 a month for 100 stations of Sirius doesn't look that expensive.

 

[davideduardo]

You're looking at it from a business point of view. Sure it would be easier if there were fewer stations. But that means a lot less choice for listeners. As it is, there really only six or eight viable formats in radio. So sure, as an industry, we could exist with eight stations per market. But it would mean less choice for listeners. All of a sudden, $15 a month for 100 stations of Sirius doesn't look that expensive.

I count quite a few more. Depending on the market, not all have a big enough base.

CHR
Rhythmic CHR
Hot AC
AC
Classic Hits
Country
Urban
Urban AC
CHUrbann
Classic Rock
Alternative
Adult Hits (Jack and friends)
Regional Mexican
Tropical (Spanish)
Spanish Adult Hits
Spanish CHR (Reggaetón)
All News
Talk
All sports
Christian AC

And there are some more limited formats like Gospel, foreign language (other than Spanish), paid religion/religious teaching & preaching, gold, country gold that may work for owners with limited aspirations or AM / limited FM facilities.