Status of WFME 1560?

[fybush]

In that case he's right, though. If WFME has no intention on ever returning to a 50kw Class A signal, then why shouldn't those other stations on 1560 have the opportunity to upgrade their nighttime signals and better serve their own communities?

What year is it where you are?

Here in 2024, no broadcaster with a daytimer on 1560 is doing anything but trying to stay alive for another few months. WCNW near Cincinnati was one of the bigger ones, and it just handed in its license and sold off its land. The one near Nashville went away a few years ago. So did the one east of Cleveland. Toledo exists only to feed a translator.

Any kind of upgrade of the sort you're suggesting carries a price tag that starts at about half a million dollars, if you need new towers and phasor.

I don't think you can identify a single station on 1560 in the east other than WFME that's even worth half a million dollars, total, on the open market.

You can't make viable regulations in a fantasy environment. When was the last AM on any channel that invested anything serious in a signal upgrade? I'm thinking of Andy Skotdal in Everett, Washington (KRKO and KKXA), which was well over a decade ago now. The AM channels in St. Louis got no bids at all in the last FCC auction.

The medium is on death's door, at best, right now. If Albert Adam Lotsafirstnames really believes in the fairytale that local broadcasters are clamoring to build out expensive new facilities for night service on 1560 or 1000, he's welcome to make that case - but the appropriate place to do it is in a rulemaking proceeding to modify the AM rules. Good luck with that.

Will Family Radio's response become part of the public record that anyone can read? It would be interesting to see what they say they have attempted so far, and what their plans are.

It certainly will. But be aware that by long FCC precedent, they don't have to say much. The presumption is that an incumbent broadcaster with an STA is making an effort to maintain service. Rebutting that requires a lot more evidence than has been presented so far here

It's possible that he's a DXer and feels that it does directly affect him in that sense. Or perhaps there is a 1560 in his market with poor nighttime coverage and he'd like to see it improve. The reason doesn't really matter, the airwaves belong to the public, not corporations, so honestly the process seems fair.

He's in Chicago. There's no 1560 there, just a 1570 that's in the same near-death straits as any other high dial suburban AM.

"The airwaves belong to the public" means only as much or as little as any given FCC says it does.

Absent any evidence at all that any real-world broadcaster has any interest in doing anything more on 1560, what exactly does the phrase even mean in this context?

If this guy "wins" and WFME is forced down to a class B, 1560 just becomes like 1190 after WLIB was downgraded - a sea of noise, which is basically what it is right now until/unless New York powers back up again. So, again, what's the real-world scenario in which "the public" benefits?

Also, I did a search on his name and it seems he filed at least one other informal objection against another broadcaster for breaking FCC rules which resulted in disciplinary action against that broadcaster. So at least that one had merit and was not a waste of the FCC's time. The public absolutely has the right to do this.

Translator Faces $9,000 Penalty and Consent Decree After Objections - Radio World

An Illinois translator station looking to renew its license now faces a $9,000 civil penalty and a consent decree after questions were raised about the licensee’s candor.

www.radioworld.com

I'm not a fan of vigilante justice. So this guy managed to make some station which he'll never listen to, shell out $9000 for... staying on the air full-time when its primary, literally the last share-time AM in the country, was off the air? How did that serve the public?

Good for him, I guess, if he thinks he's somehow "won" something...but if you look at his record, he's also cost a LOT of small broadcasters legal fees to defend themselves from his unending series of informal objections when he's lost. Forcing broadcasters to spend their very limited funds on DC lawyers instead of programming doesn't serve the public well, either.

He's the radio equivalent of the HOA vice president who spends her days walking around the neighborhood measuring fence heights and holding up paint chips to see whose garage door is one shade too dark.

Sorry, but I reserve my respect for people like Michi who actually understand that the way you wield influence at the FCC isn't through a series of informal objections but rather through rulemakings and lobbying. I don't always agree with what she and REC are pushing, but she's having a lot more impact for the public good than Albert ever will.

 

[Theater of My Mind]

My apologies, Scott. I know you have an interest in this, your frustration is evident and your position is clear.

What year is it where you are?

Where I am the year is 2024 and the FCC rules haven't changed, so he has the right to do this. I feel he makes some valid points, and clearly you feel otherwise. Maybe it will get dismissed, as you say. But I think it's completely fair to ask the broadcaster who took a $50 million payday to sell off their perfectly good towers, to the detriment of the audience that was served by that signal, what they intend to do with that license after this amount of time, though.

If Albert Adam Lotsafirstnames really believes in the fairytale that local broadcasters are clamoring to build out expensive new facilities for night service on 1560 or 1000, he's welcome to make that case - but the appropriate place to do it is in a rulemaking proceeding to modify the AM rules. Good luck with that.

Re-reading the letter, I don't see him trying to change any rules, but to apply the FCC's existing rules to the situation.

I'm not a fan of vigilante justice. So this guy managed to make some station which he'll never listen to, shell out $9000 for... staying on the air full-time when its primary, literally the last share-time AM in the country, was off the air? How did that serve the public?

Are you saying broadcasters should be allowed to break the FCC's rules without any accountability and no one should have anything to say about it?

Good for him, I guess, if he thinks he's somehow "won" something...but if you look at his record, he's also cost a LOT of small broadcasters legal fees to defend themselves from his unending series of informal objections when he's lost.

I don't know him or his record. My search only turned up the article I linked, which had merit. I think this objection brings up some valid points too. And that seems to affect you so I am sorry it's apparently causing so much aggravation. I'll step out of it now because I have no stake in it.

 

[TheBigA]

I think it's completely fair to ask the broadcaster who took a $50 million payday to sell off their perfectly good towers, to the detriment of the audience that was served by that signal, what they intend to do with that license after this amount of time, though.

The purchase price was for the land. As I recall, they removed the towers. The towers in Maspeth were over 60 years old. Not sure that qualifies as "perfectly good." The only obligation of the licensee is to the FCC. Not to someone who lives outside the primary coverage area. Applying for an STA isn't breaking any rules. They've been diligent in meeting all deadlines.

Is there a good argument for taking away service/protection for NYC and giving it to South Boston? Probably not. It's just the only argument I could see where "the public" wins from a WFME downgrade.

It would be a stronger argument if it came from a licensee on that frequency who would be willing to increase power

 

[PTBoardOp93]

If this guy "wins" and WFME is forced down to a class B, 1560 just becomes like 1190 after WLIB was downgraded - a sea of noise, which is basically what it is right now until/unless New York powers back up again. So, again, what's the real-world scenario in which "the public" benefits?

Seems to me that scenario is a bunch of daytimers on 1560 (including but not limited to Renssalaer, Ind.; South Boston, VA; Coshocton, OH) could apply for Non-directional flea power at night.

Is there a good argument for taking away service/protection for NYC and giving it to South Boston? Probably not. It's just the only argument I could see where "the public" wins from a WFME downgrade.

 

[kevtronics]

I'm sure 1560 WWYC in Toledo would like to be able to have more than 3 watts at night.

If AM is on its deathbed, then that's even more reason to give the small guys a chance to upgrade while they're still around, rather than let a major broadcaster who made millions by selling their land coast along on STAs for the indefinite future.

 

[TheBigA]

I'm sure 1560 WWYC in Toledo would like to be able to have more than 3 watts at night.

That would be a noble idea, except that the station isn't owned by "small guys" but rather CSN International, another Christian broadcaster that actually has more stations than Family Radio.

 

[SomeRadioGuy]

I'm sure 1560 WWYC in Toledo would like to be able to have more than 3 watts at night.

If AM is on its deathbed, then that's even more reason to give the small guys a chance to upgrade while they're still around, rather than let a major broadcaster who made millions by selling their land coast along on STAs for the indefinite future.

They won't bother. They have an AM in Hawaii, they downgraded the power and turned it into a daytimer..its all about the FM Translator associated with it

 

[Deleted member 108832]

If WMFE actually were to downgrade, I have a sneaking suspicion that David Gow in Houston would be standing first in line to fix the ongoing issues with his own AM 1560 and send the sounds of Vietnamese programming all the way to the Atlantic.

 

[Mark Roberts]

If AM is on its deathbed, then that's even more reason to give the small guys a chance to upgrade while they're still around,

Saying "while they're still around" is an implicit admission that they're not in such great financial shape; if you're going to make a capital investment, you need to figure out how many years it will take for revenues resulting from the investment to pay it back. For a top-of-band AM in a small market, I suspect the payback period would be measured in decades. At least.

 

[davideduardo]

My apologies, Scott. I know you have an interest in this, your frustration is evident and your position is clear.

This is the point of anyone who is involved with AM or who has recently been involved.

Where I am the year is 2024 and the FCC rules haven't changed, so he has the right to do this. I feel he makes some valid points, and clearly you feel otherwise. Maybe it will get dismissed, as you say. But I think it's completely fair to ask the broadcaster who took a $50 million payday to sell off their perfectly good towers, to the detriment of the audience that was served by that signal, what they intend to do with that license after this amount of time, though.

The real point is that they have hired an excellent consulting engineer and they are at work. Before any filing can be made at the FCC, they have to either make a deal with an existing station with towers that can actually be tuned to the specific pattern of the station on a different frequency.

If no existing antenna system can be diplexed, then they have to go through finding land, getting zoning and permits and building. In highly regulated areas, getting new zoning for a multiple tower array can take years. For example, when WQBA in Miami wanted to move from a residential area to a new site on the edge of the Everglades, it took 6 or 7 years to get all the permits, ranging from EPA to zoning to those from the Native American Reservation and so on.

Re-reading the letter, I don't see him trying to change any rules, but to apply the FCC's existing rules to the situation.

He is asking for a change in procedures. The fact is that if the station shows the Commission that it is making progress and taking action, they can have all the time in the world.

Are you saying broadcasters should be allowed to break the FCC's rules without any accountability and no one should have anything to say about it?

They are not breaking rules. There are reasons beyond the financial gain for getting a 50,000 watt station out of an area being built up with warehouses and "last mile" facilities full of steel and wire and metal that re-radiates and destroys the pattern.

I don't know him or his record. My search only turned up the article I linked, which had merit.

It has no merit because a) the station is taking steps to find a new location that are verifiable and b) there is no reason to believe that there exists any other station on 1560 that might want to build a new or improved night facility. Like Scott, I looked at the 1560 stations and a) those with translators only use the AM to allow the translator and b) none are in markets or areas where a high band, highly directional AM at night would be of any possible need.

I think this objection brings up some valid points too.

As long as the station is taking steps to find a new site, they are fully in compliance with the FCC rules. There are no other points to be made, valid or theoretical.

And that seems to affect you so I am sorry it's apparently causing so much aggravation. I'll step out of it now because I have no stake in it.

It affects all of us in the industry because the guy who filed is out-of-place and asking for what amounts to new rule making for a band that is in its twilight years and where nobody is going to spend $500,000 to $1,000,000 to build a decent night AM facility on a clear channel.

 

[kevtronics]

Saying "while they're still around" is an implicit admission that they're not in such great financial shape; if you're going to make a capital investment, you need to figure out how many years it will take for revenues resulting from the investment to pay it back. For a top-of-band AM in a small market, I suspect the payback period would be measured in decades. At least.

The station I gave as an example is non-directional. If downgrading WFME gives them an opportunity to increase their nighttime power, then the only capital investment would be the engineering study for the FCC application, and the increase in the power bill (but not much; we're talking about a transmitter that uses less power than your kitchen toaster).

 

[davideduardo]

If WMFE actually were to downgrade, I have a sneaking suspicion that David Gow in Houston would be standing first in line to fix the ongoing issues with his own AM 1560 and send the sounds of Vietnamese programming all the way to the Atlantic.

Doubtful. The cost of building a compliant, high-power site in Houston vastly exceed the potential for gain are minimal.

Skywave is not monetizable anywhere now on AM. What Gow would need would be at least 10 kw at night to even cover part of metro Houston on such a high frequency. That is going to be a very expensive proposition.

There are AMs on lower frequencies with better night coverage than Gow could get that could be bought for less.

 

[davideduardo]

The station I gave as an example is non-directional. If downgrading WFME gives them an opportunity to increase their nighttime power, then the only capital investment would be the engineering study for the FCC application, and the increase in the power bill (but not much; we're talking about a transmitter that uses less power than your kitchen toaster).

OK, they get a few more watts on the horrible frequency of 1560, which will get them nothing but thousands of dollars in legal fees and engineering exhibits. And they still have to protect the other primary on 1560, so even in Toledo there is very little useful added power that could be requested.

 

[TheBigA]

On aspect that's being overlooked here is that the station intended to increase power at its current site to 10K. They would have been compliant as a Class A by doing that. The problem came when a nearby school claimed the signal was causing interference. So to be a good neighbor, they cut the power down to 500 watts. The assumption in the objection letter is that the licensee is being cheap and sitting on $50 million rather than spending it on a new tower. The letter completely ignores the technical issues the station is having that can't be solved with money.

 

[davideduardo]

That would be a noble idea, except that the station isn't owned by "small guys" but rather CSN International, another Christian broadcaster that actually has more stations than Family Radio.

And they already have W258BT on FM which I'll bet $100 is the only reason they even keep the AM on the air.

 

[kevtronics]

There are reasons beyond the financial gain for getting a 50,000 watt station out of an area being built up with warehouses and "last mile" facilities full of steel and wire and metal that re-radiates and destroys the pattern.

But is there really any hope of WFME being anywhere close to 50 kW again? I highly doubt it. Until the interference issue arose, the best they ever planned to get out of their existing temporary site was 10 kW. Had that become permanent, that would've been an automatic declassification to Class B and loss of of their protected skywave coverage.

 

[SomeRadioGuy]

Doubtful. The cost of building a compliant, high-power site in Houston vastly exceed the potential for gain are minimal.

Skywave is not monetizable anywhere now on AM. What Gow would need would be at least 10 kw at night to even cover part of metro Houston on such a high frequency. That is going to be a very expensive proposition.

There are AMs on lower frequencies with better night coverage than Gow could get that could be bought for less.

compliant.. that made me chuckle

 

[TheBigA]

But is there really any hope of WFME being anywhere close to 50 kW again?

I referenced a post on page 1 of this thread that said they intended to make a deal with an existing site in the Meadowlands that would have allowed them to go back to 50K. They've obviously encountered some problems there. Possibly with the EPA.

 

[fybush]

It's even worse than that. New York isn't the only protection for Toledo. There's also the Canadian class A in Windsor 60-some miles away on 1550. So any power increase would require a DA.

Here's a challenge for anyone who wants to take it on:

Find me one US AM signal, just one, that has made a cap-ex investment in upgrading its night signal at any point in the last decade.

If the thinning of the AM herd is in fact creating opportunities for other stations to grow as a result, which is what Albert David asserts WFME is somehow hindering by working to hold on to its class A status, surely there's some example out there, right?

Tell you what: come up with an example and I'll send you this year's Tower Site Calendar for free.

 

[Deleted member 108832]

Doubtful. The cost of building a compliant, high-power site in Houston vastly exceed the potential for gain are minimal.

Doubtful, perhaps, but it didn't stop him from taking it from an 800 watt KILE to the current 2 site KGOW that it's supposed to be now. I say "supposed to be" because the day site was subsequently flooded out, leaving KGOW to operate from the nighttime site for a number of years now. It made very little sense to build out this facility to the upgraded 46kW/19kW in 2007, too, but it didn't stop him.

Skywave is not monetizable anywhere now on AM. What Gow would need would be at least 10 kw at night to even cover part of metro Houston on such a high frequency. That is going to be a very expensive proposition.

There are AMs on lower frequencies with better night coverage than Gow could get that could be bought for less.

The "all the way to the Atlantic" comment I made was tongue in cheek. Even after the upgrade I just mentioned, KGOW was unable to cover the Houston metro in full. For that matter, it couldn't (and can't) cover the city of Houston itself. I don't disagree with you that the idea would be a foolish one, if WFME were to downgrade, but stand pat in the belief that Gow would still try.