Opposition to Univision sale

[Mikey Radio]

Eventually, under the leftist format, it will be as profitable as Air America. It will not matter to the owners because they will push an ideology. That is what it looks like over at Twitter.

..And how it looks like over at Twitter, of course, is heavily dependent on exactly who's posting there. If it's mostly people angry about the sale of the Miami station in specific, or right-wingers who've been told how and what to think about this multi-station sale by their talk hosts of choice and their biased "news" sources, that would make sense, yes.

However, as has been pointed out on this site, much of the stuff you're seeing on Twitter and elsewhere is only BS speculation at this point. The sale hasn't been approved or closed. The new owners haven't formally stated their intentions, nor have they seemingly put together the management team who'll oversee programming and content. The existing formats will remain active at those stations for a year after the sale, so we're probably looking at 18 months before the reality of the situation and the direction of the programming is fully known. Lots of unanswered questions at this point and lots of 'what ifs" still need to play out. Beyond that, most all the speculation on Twitter and elsewhere, can more or less be taken with a grain of salt at this point.

 

[davideduardo]

Univision has wanted to change WAQI’s format for some time.

I never heard that. What they did do was cut back the talent costs and news department costs. It was a very expensive station to run.

However, they were afraid of a boycott of the television station. They have now found their way out. it was reported that the stations will not change for at least a year.

Univision has tried various concepts, including a talk network and a sports network to try to bring life to the AM stations.

The problem was finding a buyer who wanted a bunch of AMs that included a number that are nearly worthless due to signal or expensive technical operations (Houston, Vegas, San Antonio, Chicago) .

In Miami, they have two AMs, which is at least one too many. They made a large profit selling WAQI's old transmitter site while severely degrading the signal. But still, local talk is the only format alternative they have ever had but much of the audience for that is getting older, just like talk in English.

If they worry about the effect on the cluster, they could sell WAQI to a local group and be done with the problem. They may, still, have to do that.

 

[TheBigA]

If they worry about the effect on the cluster, they could sell WAQI to a local group and be done with the problem. They may, still, have to do that.

Which "they" are you talking about? I thought you said they have a signed agreement.

 

[gr8oldies]

Which "they" are you talking about? I thought you said they have a signed agreement.

I will admit this thread has me thoroughly confused.

 

[davideduardo]

Which "they" are you talking about? I thought you said they have a signed agreement.

Univision and the buyer have an agreement. But if both parties choose to amend it, they can make changes. At this moment, the bad publicity for both parties may make it worth excluding WAQI and looking for a local buyer or other solution for it.

I bought a house some time back for a specific price. After the required inspection was done, some issues with the foundation were discovered and we renegotiated the price so that the repairs would be done and paid by the seller prior to the closing.

Anything can be renegotiated. There are even clauses in many contracts where the seller is made responsible for things discovered after the closing. In the case of houses, the seller pays for an extended home warranty, for example. There is no reason why this controversial subject can't take the buyer and seller back to the table to find a better solution.

I presume the lender is contributing financial advice as the two heads of the buyer company seem to have neither radio nor business experience so they will need to get qualified outside advice and counsel.

 

[Rusty Muck]

Eventually, under the leftist format, it will be as profitable as Air America. It will not matter to the owners because they will push an ideology. That is what it looks like over at Twitter.

Let's get the definition of vertical integration correct here first. Air America was merely a program supplier. They never owned a single radio station. Not a single one. (And were they ever profitable to begin with? I highly doubt it.)

By contrast, Salem owns their talk stations and the programs they syndicate. Ratings have never mattered for those stations because they are run on the lean. And yes, there is substantial ideological pushing on behalf of the owners. Always has been.

Owning the content and the means to distribute it is vertical integration.

 

[davideduardo]

Let's get the definition of vertical integration correct here first. Air America was merely a program supplier. They never owned a single radio station. Not a single one. (And were they ever profitable to begin with? I highly doubt it.)

By contrast, Salem owns their talk stations and the programs they syndicate. Ratings have never mattered for those stations because they are run on the lean. And yes, there is substantial ideological pushing on behalf of the owners. Always has been.

Owning the content and the means to distribute it is vertical integration.

Big difference: Salem is a company made up of broadcasters, all of whom have vast experience in the medium.

This new group is a company made up of political operatives, none of whom have any broadcast experience.

The new group can hire experienced people, but they don't even have the needed criteria to interview and select candidates. And assuming they find the right people, they have created a hierarchy that has an added level of management... the top non-radio team... that will be cumbersome and expensive.

And in this case, they know so little about radio that they think that they can influence public opinion among America's largest minority group with AM stations. Hispanics as a group have an average age over 10 years younger than non-Hispanic whites. Listening to AM in most markets, both here and in countries of origin, died two to three decades ago.

I am wondering if all this unwanted Miami-caused publicity will bring out some radio-experienced Democrats who will volunteer guidance and suggest that buying a batch of AMs is not the way to go about this.

Were I a vehement Democrat I'd look at how to create a podcast network of commentary, constantly refreshing news segments, celebrity interviews and the like and promote them on all the popular Hispanic media outlets as well as pushing them through the websites and bulletins of labor unions, civil rights organizations and every local Hispanic politician and political group or organizer.

 

[Rusty Muck]

Univision and the buyer have an agreement. But if both parties choose to amend it, they can make changes. At this moment, the bad publicity for both parties may make it worth excluding WAQI and looking for a local buyer or other solution for it.

Has the paperwork been filed with the FCC yet? I really want to know how each station is valued and if WAQI is a disproportionate amount of the $60M purchase price.

I am wondering if all this unwanted Miami-caused publicity will bring out some radio-experienced Democrats who will volunteer guidance and suggest that buying a batch of AMs is not the way to go about this.

Were I a vehement Democrat I'd look at how to create a podcast network of commentary, constantly refreshing news segments, celebrity interviews and the like and promote them on all the popular Hispanic media outlets as well as pushing them through the websites and bulletins of labor unions, civil rights organizations and every local Hispanic politician and political group or organizer.

With the level of outright polarization in this country and the apparent need for each side to "own" the other, I unfortunately expect the opposite, for LMN to double down.

In fact, the apparent need for them to buy an old-line AM like WAQI feels like a "owning the right" move. They're buying the station—along with a bunch of other crappy and less-desirable signals—and grossly overpaying in the process just because they can. Heck, the press release touted how they raised $80M in capital.

It feels like they may not be embarrassed out of the deal, but they probably should because it IS ridiculous coming from a purely disspationate perspective.

Hopefully I’m wrong and my cynical take is way off, but who knows now.

 

[ChannelFlipper]

Has the paperwork been filed with the FCC yet? I really want to know how each station is valued and if WAQI is a disproportionate amount of the $60M purchase price.

With the level of outright polarization in this country and the apparent need for each side to "own" the other, I unfortunately expect the opposite, for LMN to double down.

In fact, the apparent need for them to buy an old-line AM like WAQI feels like a "owning the right" move. They're buying the station—along with a bunch of other crappy and less-desirable signals—and grossly overpaying in the process just because they can. Heck, the press release touted how they raised $80M in capital.

It feels like they may not be embarrassed out of the deal, but they probably should because it IS ridiculous coming from a purely disspationate perspective.

Hopefully I’m wrong and my cynical take is way off, but who knows now.

You are probably right. That is a good thing.

 

[davideduardo]

Has the paperwork been filed with the FCC yet? I really want to know how each station is valued and if WAQI is a disproportionate amount of the $60M purchase price.

The FCC transfer application will not show a valuation of each property.

With the level of outright polarization in this country and the apparent need for each side to "own" the other, I unfortunately expect the opposite, for LMN to double down.

My thought is that someone will ask them why they are buying those stations.

In fact, the apparent need for them to buy an old-line AM like WAQI feels like a "owning the right" move. They're buying the station—along with a bunch of other crappy and less-desirable signals—and grossly overpaying in the process just because they can. Heck, the press release touted how they raised $80M in capital.

They have the extra money for more deals and for operating capital.

I do not think that they are fully aware of the current reality of AM radio and of Hispanic listening patterns.

It feels like they may not be embarrassed out of the deal, but they probably should because it IS ridiculous coming from a purely disspationate perspective.

I think, thought, that the smart thing for them is to exclude WAQI and for the seller to find a local buyer who believes in its "mission".

Hopefully I’m wrong and my cynical take is way off, but who knows now.

You are likely right as to their thinking. However, the publicity the news story has generated may produce some new advisors who will question the sanity of this deal.

 

[TheBigA]

It feels like they may not be embarrassed out of the deal, but they probably should because it IS ridiculous coming from a purely disspationate perspective.

No bank or traditional lender would ever put that kind of money towards AM radio stations. It's the reason why no other minority owners have bought radio stations. Even Byron Allen would walk away from such a deal.

 

[drt]

Today’s front page of the English Edition of the Miami Herald - (Sunday 12June2022)

 

[Mikey Radio]

Today’s front page of the English Edition of the Miami Herald - (Sunday 12June2022)

Makes perfect sense for the Miami Herald to run such a story on the front page, as this is big news (and a real hot button issue) in that city which contains such a large Latin population and in particular, a large Cuban population. They're obviously in the business of selling papers (and online subscriptions) so they will cover this extensively. I'm sure El Nuevo Herald will be doing the same. That said, the Miami Herald also ran an opinion piece earlier this week that offered some brutal honesty as well:

What’s the matter, Florida GOP? Scared of losing radio outlets that repeat your lies? Opinion​

What’s the matter, Florida GOP? Scared of losing radio outlets that repeat your lies? | Opinion

An informed community — one that not only flaunts the word “freedom” but actually practices its most basic component, free speech — shouldn’t be a threat to anyone.

www.yahoo.com

An informed community — one that not only flaunts the word “freedom” but actually practices its most basic component, free speech — shouldn’t be a threat to anyone.

Yet, Florida’s GOP and its Cuban-American supporters are in a tizzy over the prospect that the sale of two iconic Miami news radio stations will open to debate the Republican-monopolized political conversation in the county’s Spanish-language airwaves.

What are they afraid of, losing fake news outlets?

Cuban radio hosts constantly cast Democratic candidates — and anyone with opposing viewpoints — as a socialist and a communist. Their unchecked broadcasters, accountable to no one, also pass on pandemic misinformation, falling down the rabbit hole of right-wing conspiracy theories. They are a danger to their listeners.

As previously mentioned, it must be kept in mind that radio is a business. In this case, it's a business for the seller and a business for the potential buyer. Formats change all the time in this business, staff and management come and go, new hosts arrive to great fanfare and are quietly ushered out when the don't perform as expected and their ratings tank. If all these people who are up in arms about losing "their voice" of misinformation and "their station" that spews forth their brand of propaganda, they are more than welcome to form their own investor group and buy a station(s) of their own to carry on with their programming of choice.

 

[drt]

Makes perfect sense for the Miami Herald to run such a story on the front page, as this is big news (and a real hot button issue) in that city which contains such a large Latin population and in particular, a large Cuban population. They're obviously in the business of selling papers (and online subscriptions) so they will cover this extensively. I'm sure El Nuevo Herald will be doing the same. That said, the Miami Herald also ran an opinion piece earlier this week that offered some brutal honesty as well:

What’s the matter, Florida GOP? Scared of losing radio outlets that repeat your lies? Opinion​

What’s the matter, Florida GOP? Scared of losing radio outlets that repeat your lies? | Opinion

An informed community — one that not only flaunts the word “freedom” but actually practices its most basic component, free speech — shouldn’t be a threat to anyone.

www.yahoo.com

As previously mentioned, it must be kept in mind that radio is a business. In this case, it's a business for the seller and a business for the potential buyer. Formats change all the time in this business, staff and management come and go, new hosts arrive to great fanfare and are quietly ushered out when the don't perform as expected and their ratings tank. If all these people who are up in arms about losing "their voice" of misinformation and "their station" that spews forth their brand of propaganda, they are more than welcome to form their own investor group and buy a station(s) of their own to carry on with their programming of choice.

This wasn't just a front page story; but inside this morning's Section A, there were at least four other lengthy articles about this sale and the history of Radio Mambi and several photos. I had forgotten that back in 2000, Radio Mambi had really excited their devout listeners to a fever pitch as to the Bush vs Gore debate; obviously with the Elan Gonzalez news, it didn't take much to get a massive amount of listeners to demonstrate and block entrances (Along with the "Brooks Brothers" squad) to the Supervisor of Elections office.

 

[TheBigA]

This wasn't just a front page story; but inside this morning's Section A, there were at least four other lengthy articles about this sale and the history of Radio Mambi and several photos.

Interesting articles. The front page of the paper features a picture of Rep. Gimenez with this caption:

U.S. Rep. Carlos Gimenez speaks during a roundtable hosted by the Republican National Committee in Doral, on defending freedom of speech and their position in reference to the sale by TelevisaUnivision of the Radio Mambi and WQAM, La Cubanisima, on Wednesday June 08, 2022. PEDRO PORTAL [email protected]

The problem is that WQAM is owned by Audacy and is not being sold. La Cubanisima is WQBA. Whoops.

The RNC is obviously using this controversy to drum up votes for its candidates, claiming freedom of speech. Which is fine, but the new owners also have that very same freedom of speech, and Republicans are using fear tactics to prevent the new owners from expressing their views. Freedom of speech works both ways. No one is saying they will silence Radio Mambi. But these protesters are attempting to prevent opposition views from being heard. It's more culture wars being fought using fear rather than facts. It's the Spanish version of schools teaching sex ed in kindergarten. Which wasn't happening. But they passed a law to prevent it.

 

[radiocph]

Many folks may remember when George Carlin was talking about his experience in radio in Los Angeles. He made reference to KDAY without "mentioning any names". He said he worked for an LA station with the most bizarre coverage: "a signal about 70 miles long but only mile wide". You could hear it down the coast in Oceanside, but you can't get it in Sherman Oaks.

I also remember an article in the 1979 World Radio TV Handbook about a group of Australian DX-ers. They reported receiving KDAY (and other high-powered US stations near the top of the AM band) somewhat regularly.

 

[Mikey Radio]

Freedom of speech works both ways. No one is saying they will silence Radio Mambi. But these protesters are attempting to prevent opposition views from being heard. It's more culture wars being fought using fear rather than facts.

This is a storyline that's been playing out for a long period of time now. The political right often claims their freedom of speech is being hindered and their voices are being silenced and they play the victim. Meanwhile, the other party in those situations has in many cases clearly stated that they aren't opposed to free speech at all, but they ARE opposed to blatant lies, untruths and long-debunked conspiracy theories being spread or stated as fact.

A good example is the debates regarding social media outlets like Facebook and Twitter. Republicans, especially those in the Trump camp, were claiming they were being silenced and that those social media outlets were violating their rights to free speech. In reality, and in contrast to those republican claims, what Twitter and Facebook were doing was to cancel obvious fake accounts (which, oddly enough, greatly reduced the amount of accounts that were following right-wing republican candidates and political figures in some cases), taking down bots, eliminating posts and memes that had been created by accounts run by foreign governments like China and Russia, and put labels on blatantly false posts and viral videos and other content that had been debunked or ran contrary to proven, indisputable facts.

It's the Spanish version of schools teaching sex ed in kindergarten. Which wasn't happening. But they passed a law to prevent it.

Same with a number of topics like transgender athletes playing on sports teams. It was a non-issue, was never an issue and not likely to become an issue in the future, but yet republican lawmakers were quick to pass laws to prevent a "problem" that never existed. Possibly as a direct result of the hype, claims and dog whistles from republican lawmakers and media, more than 30 right-wing domestic terrorists showed up to an LGBT+ pride parade this weekend. Luckily someone called the cops when they were all spotted piling into a U-Haul vehicle wearing riot gear and they were arrested before they had the chance to make trouble.

 

[Y2kTheNewOldies]

In Miami, Blowback To LMN’s Purchase Of 18 Radio Stations From TelevisaUnivision.

The sale of 18 Spanish-language radio stations by TelevisaUnivision to the newly formed Latino Media Network has caused an uproar in South Florida. The worry is that LMN, whose founders

www.insideradio.com

Here is more

The sale of 18 Spanish-language radio stations by TelevisaUnivision to the newly formed Latino Media Network has caused an uproar in South Florida. The worry is that LMN, whose founders and financiers have ties to the Democratic party, will transform a pair of Miami stations from staunchly conservative outlets that serve Miami’s Cuban exile population into bastions for leftist points of view.

Conservative talk “Radio Mambi” WAQI (710) and “Univision America” WQBA (1140) are key outlets for Cuban Miami due to their strong opposition to the communist regime in Havana.

The exile group Assembly of the Cuban Resistance held a press conference at the Bay of Pigs Museum in Miami where the group’s co-founder, Dr. Orlando Gutierrez Boronat, denounced the sale. Calling it “a very pressing issue,” Gutierrez Boronat said he was “greatly worried” about the sale because of “the ideological content and purpose behind the sale.”

 

[davideduardo]

"Conservative talk “Radio Mambi” WAQI (710) and “Univision America” WQBA (1140) are key outlets for Cuban Miami due to their strong opposition to the communist regime in Havana."

There is a fundamental error here in two parts: WQBA is TUDN. It is all sports.

Further, calling WAQI "conservative talk" is really not correct. The station is principally oriented towards Cubans and other Latin Americans who are in exile from socialist regimes. So it is really "refugee talk".

 

[davideduardo]

AP interviews a dead person...

From open access Media Confidential (Miami Radio: AP Quotes Talk Host Dead For Two Years)

In part it says,

"Miami Radio: AP Quotes Talk Host Dead For Two Years​

The Associated Press issued a correction after it was caught in an embarrassing mistake involving comments attributed to a popular Hispanic radio commentator who died in 2020, reports The Blaze.

The AP cited comments from Martha Flores, a popular radio talk show host in Miami, Florida, in their report documenting Floridians' reactions to a large media company forming to push Democratic talking points among Hispanics.
The mistake was caught by commentator and former Blaze reporter Giancarlo Sopo, who mocked the AP on his Twitter account.
"I'm so confused by this article. The AP says it interviewed Miami Radio host Martha Flores on Wednesday, but she's been dead for two years. How the hell did they pull this off? Séance? An ouija board?" he joked."