radioinsight.com
Somehow I don't think his finances will be that adversely impacted. Usually with 'publically traded family-run businesses' the principals end up with some sort of compensation package if they agree to part ways.
radioink.com
Those stations don't appear to be where the problem is. Most of them are among the top billing stations in the country. The problem isn't station operations, but the payment schedule of the debt. Those are two different things.
Starting in 2008, all publicly traded traditional media stocks have taken a beating or stalled due to lack of a future. This situation isn't unique to Audacy.
It's more than that. Declining ad revenue along with crushing debt.
Generally, lower corporate officers/staff size is reduced before founding officers are. They call that hierarchy. It's everywhere and nothing new.
The problem is lenders aren't lending to do traditional media deals because of valuations, or lack thereof. Just like any lending, the Lender wants collateral and revenue projections to cover the loan amount.
Just listen to the SW band for a peek into the future.
I thought you meant 96.1 's morning guy
There are definitely CEO's or companies in general I have little regard for as far as how they treat their people. I have always held Entercom (now Audacy) in high regard. I dealt with fair managers/programmers in several of their markets, which is an indication of consistency in their corporate culture. Good people often hire good people. I have met David Field a number of times and Joe twice. Never met a more affable company head as Joe, and David always came off as genuinely concerned about their product and their people. Yes, many pay lip service, but the Fields followed through and built a great company. The CBS deal was just a bad gamble, especially in these times.
The word is Hubris. They should have known that this deal would go sour. David Field won't face any hardship. That cannot be said for the many long time Entercom employees (Past & Present). The old joke at Entercom was "If you still had your job after Thanksgiving, you were good for another year". I don't think Entercom was all that different from Cumulus or Clear Channel. You're part of the "Family" until you aren't anymore...
This is standard operating procedure across the board. It's always been that way, whether you worked for Westinghouse, CapCities or NBC (way) back in the day. You're part of the team ... until you isn't. The difference being that when people got bounced from those legacy companies, they received a decent severance package. Those days are long gone. Long, long, lonnnng gone. These days, employees are shamed, frog-marched from the building and lucky to get compensation for their unused vacation and/or comp days.
As the story is told, Joe Field built Entercom from a single FM in Florida. He bailed out a friend who owned the station and turned the station into a winner. More gradual acquisitions followed. Entercom under "the Old Man" was profitable and highly respected ... also comparatively debt-stable. David Field, "The Kid," is an M&A (mergers and acquisitions) guy with a Wall Street background, bit off more than he could chew with the CBS deal. In stable financial times, a well-managed company can swim against that current, but the economy, technology and rapidly changing use of media conspired against Entercom/Audacy. It's said, "timing is everything." Entercom's timing in the CBS deal couldn't have been worse ... actually Farid's bone-headed move ("I should have been selling instead of buying" ... yeah, he said that) to buy ABC probably tops Entercom's purchase of CBS radio for poor timing, "boldness" and stupidity. The fact that both the CBS and ABC deals were Reverse Morris Trusts is somewhat ionic. The pandemic was the straw that broke the camel's back. The Old Man probably feels some disappointment, but he'd never admit it. Blood is thicker than water. Another chapter in the MBA "what not to do" handbook.
These are valid points, properly noted. The acquisitions noted compounded by the managerial changes made by Entercom, ostensibly David Field, added to the company's stress. The WBEB acquisition was stressful from the get go. Blowing out the legacy PD was just plain ... dumb. Penny wise and pound foolish. But that, without malice intended, is how some managers think. I sometimes wonder if powerful, moneyed owners/operators (in avariety of businesses) actually learn from their mistakes or simply rely on their mystique. Jack Welch was proven to be a fraud. Chainsaw Al Dunlap, the same. Wall Street loved 'em .. until the curtain was pulled back .. and then they didn't.
Do you mean debt load?
Getting rid of individual staff in a group of 200 stations amounts to a drop of water in an Olympic-sized swimming pool. None of that has anything to do with where Audacy is today. It's the bad timing of the down-trending advertising climate, taking on excessive debt, and being publicly traded when Wall Street has completely disowned traditional media companies due to lack of a future.
Having been a GE stock owner back during the Jack Welch days; there are some parallels between what Audacy is facing and what happened at GE. Wall Street expects growth, so CEOs are always under pressure to grow and keep The Street happy. You grow through acquisitions and increased margins. When The Street falls out of love with your business because you aren't growing fast enough, you're not innovative enough, or profits and expenses flip (including debt), that's when companies start running into trouble. CEOs and corporate officers are paid the big bucks to be right and increase shareholder value. When stormy weather hits and it's found you made the wrong call after all, they allow for legal reorganization in an effort to salvage the company.
This analogy brought back a college bio-chemistry class wherein the professor was adamant about protecting the reagent, and the precision required of all students taking part in the lab assignments. It was an imperative. The prof conducted an experiment wherein he did an A-B comparison of a compound. The "A" was done to protocol; in the "B" the professor added a drop ... one measured drop ... of a substance. It dramatically altered the outcome. A non-science major asked "but how much does that really matter?" Chem majors rightfully snickered. The professor calmly replied, "If it was a matter of drinking water, we just polluted the entire water supply of Lancaster (a Western New York suburb) for the next 24 hours."Kelly A said:
Kelly A said:
