Bell Media sells some Niagara region stations

[ckg279]

This was part of a much larger announcement today from Bell Media, who laid off 4500 people, sold a bunch of radio stations, and eviscerated the news departments at CTV stations. (If you want more discussion of that, I HIGHLY recommend The Southern Ontario Radio/TV Forum.)

In any case, Bell sold off 4 stations(Hamilton's CKLH(Bounce 102.9)and St. Catharines' CKTB/610, CHTZ(97.7 HTZ FM)and CHRE(Move 105.7)to Whiteoaks-pending CRTC approval.

 

[Theater of My Mind]

Terrible for Canada's news business but probably the best possible development for those radio stations which will finally be free from Bell's clutches.

I don't know much about the buyer, Whiteoaks, but it seems like a safe guess that they will care a lot more about those stations than Bell ever did.

 

[TheBigA]

This is a very interesting announcement, where a company states very directly: "It's not a viable business anymore." I don't think I've heard anyone put it that way. The general view is that big corporations get into debt and hurt themselves. That's not the case here.

"We've effectively sold off half of our radio portfolio. That's a significant divestiture and it's because it's not a viable business anymore," said Bell chief legal and regulatory officer Robert Malcolmson in an interview with The Canadian Press. "We will continue to operate ones that are viable, but this is a business that is going in the wrong direction."

They also blame the government for lack of action on the creation of a fund for journalism:

"We hope they do that but we can't wait two years for that to happen, so then you see actions like this today," he said. Bell has fought other regulatory decisions over the past year that it says makes things harder for its struggling broadcast division.

Bell Media is not owned or run by the Canadian government. This follows years of cuts at the CBC. It's very informative to see that funding for radio and journalism is a problem in other countries, not just the US.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/bce-cuts-1.7108658

 

[RadioGuy1864]

Evidentially Whiteoaks, the Buyer, feels differently. It might not be a viable business for Mega Company like Bell, but a smaller family owner operator can probably still get some profits from the stations.

 

[TheBigA]

Evidentially Whiteoaks, the Buyer, feels differently. It might not be a viable business for Mega Company like Bell, but a smaller family owner operator can probably still get some profits from the stations.

What we've seen in this country is the small owners do it by hiring non-union staff and cutting services. The thing about a mega company is it has mega resources and can attract better benefits for its employees. When I worked for small owners, I didn't get any retirement benefits. They expected me to set up and fund my own IRA.

 

[Theater of My Mind]

Bell is throwing a temper tantrum because the CRTC is forcing them to let MVNOs use its cell phone lines. So they decided to unload a bunch of smaller radio stations they gobbled up during consolidation only to slash and burn them, and are making it a point to blame it on the CRTC in retaliation for threatening its monopolistic cell phone business model.

They never cared about those small/medium market radio stations. They just ruthlessly fired nearly everyone there and, for the most part, ran them all on autopilot. The revenue was surely tiny compared to their core mobile phone, internet and premium/streaming video businesses.

 

[TheBigA]

Bell is throwing a temper tantrum because the CRTC is forcing them to let MVNOs use its cell phone lines.

Are you saying the losses they incurred are fake losses?

Bell Media's advertising revenues declined by $140 million in 2023 compared with the year before, and the company's news division is seeing more than $40 million in annual operating losses, Bibic stated in his letter.

These appear to be hard losses. The new owners of those stations will have to reverse that situation while also paying for them.

As I often say, someone has to own these stations. The hope is that the profits from one division can offset the losses from another. When that ceases to happen, then it's time to sell underperforming assets. That's what CBS did when it sold its radio stations. The ones that subsequently bankrupted Audacy.

 

[Theater of My Mind]

You do realize you are the only one anywhere defending Bell, right?

Take a look through social media, Canadian mainstream media, Toronto Star, CBC, the Canadian radio forums. Find me one person with a positive thing to say about that company. Even the Canadian government is blasting them.

Speaking to reporters on Parliament Hill after Bell said it would slash 4,800 jobs, Heritage Minister Pascale St-Onge said past governments allowed the company to consolidate media and buy up local TV and radio assets in exchange for a commitment to maintain these services.

Hey, if they had listened to more radio maybe they would have heard the old refrain, "Won't get fooled again!"

 

[TheBigA]

You do realize you are the only one anywhere defending Bell, right?

You do realize you brought up a completely irrelevant point? And when I asked you about the facts behind the sale, you changed the subject. As you're doing now.

Neither we nor anyone in Canada can choose who own our media. It's not like reality TV where viewers get to vote potential owners off the island. Companies are allowed to buy these stations and operate them as they see fit. That was the price the government pays for engaging in a public-private partnership.

On the other hand, the Canadian government ALSO owns a bunch of radio & TV stations, something not allowed here. As we all know, the government owned CBC has ALSO been firing staff, cutting back on local production, and has become a rather toxic place to work. So when the government criticizes Bell, it is in the position of the pot calling the kettle black. I didn't see the CBC among the buyers of the former Bell stations. If the government can do a better job, they're welcome to buy more stations.

 

[Theater of My Mind]

You do realize you brought up a completely irrelevant point? And when I asked you about the facts behind the sale, you changed the subject. As you're doing now.

I didn't change the subject, you did. The company pulled this stunt while increasing dividends to shareholders and buying back shares. They reported a whopping C$2.3 billion in profit at the end of last year. But feel free to cherry pick your numbers from Bell's press release.

 

[TheBigA]

I didn't change the subject, you did. The company pulled this stunt while increasing dividends to shareholders and buying back shares. They reported a whopping C$2.3 billion in profit at the end of last year. But feel free to cherry pick your numbers from Bell's press release.

Nowhere in the articles I posted did anyone mention the MVNO situation. You brought that up yourself.

Once again, this is a profit making company. Please explain how paying dividends is in some way wrong or illegal. They are not expected to operate money losing radio stations as a charity.

 

[Theater of My Mind]

Google it. It's not hard to find.

As usual you come into every thread to gaslight everyone with the corporate line. It seems like your views are perfectly aligned with those of the Bell CEO who everyone hates right now.

It's incredible, but not surprising to see you hold such utter contempt for the 4,800 talented people who just lost their jobs so the company can do stock buybacks and the CEO can increase his bonus. What do you see when you look in the mirror anyway?

 

[TheBigA]

Google it. It's not hard to find.

As I said, you changed the subject.

As usual you come into every thread to gaslight everyone with the corporate line. It seems like your views are perfectly aligned with those of the Bell CEO who everyone hates right now.

Is there anything I said that is false? If so, please correct any mistakes. You just don't like the reality, and want to blame it on corporations rather than the changing marketplace.

It's incredible, but not surprising to see you hold such utter contempt for the 4,800 talented people who just lost their jobs so the company can do stock buybacks and the CEO can increase his bonus. What do you see when you look in the mirror anyway?

I didnt say a single word of any kind about the people who lost their jobs other than to report that they did. Meanwhile you continue to ignore my simple questions about where does it say that profit making companies must lose money running radio stations or news operations. And then you equate me with the company you hate, which is uncalled for.

 

[Theater of My Mind]

OK, have fun pretending you won your argument on the internet if it gets you off.

Anyway this isn't even the Canada board but it will be interesting to see what the new owner does with these stations in Niagara. It looks like they only own a couple of ethnic/religious stations in the Toronto market.

I'm out.

 

[TheBigA]

OK, have fun pretending you won your argument

I won because you never stated any facts in opposition. You just engaged in name-calling. Have a nice day.

 

[davideduardo]

Terrible for Canada's news business but probably the best possible development for those radio stations which will finally be free from Bell's clutches.

What is alarming is the statement that they are getting rid of about half of their stations and those ones are non viable. The implication is that such stations are not "future-viable". That is an observation on the very future of radio.

Whether we like Bell as a company, that is an indication of what many now see as the outlook "down the road" for the industry.

 

[TheBigA]

What is alarming is the statement that they are getting rid of about half of their stations and those ones are non viable.

Wasn't the same thing said about the AM stations Univision sold to the Latino Media Network?

 

[davideduardo]

As usual you come into every thread to gaslight everyone with the corporate line.

In this case, it is not merely a "corporate line". It is the"reality". Whether some dislike Bell, they are in business to make money, enhance share value and to distribute earnings as dividends.

They decided that about half of their stations were not viable. That means they can't produce significant earnings and value for the owners.

It seems like your views are perfectly aligned with those of the Bell CEO who everyone hates right now.

I'll bet the shareholders don't hate them. More likely "well, they finally did something to cut the dead weight of losing radio stations.

It's incredible, but not surprising to see you hold such utter contempt for the 4,800 talented people who just lost their jobs so the company can do stock buybacks and the CEO can increase his bonus. What do you see when you look in the mirror anyway?

If you look at the data, that company was actually behind in adapting to the current advertising market. While I am not current on the status of radio and all ad-sponsored media in Canada, I can guess that it mirrors the U.S. situation to a greater extent.

In the US, last year we had TelevisaUnivision sold all of its AMs and a number of marginal FMs because they did not hold any prospect of contributing to the bottom line in the future, while always being a drain on management time and resources.

 

[davideduardo]

Wasn't the same thing said about the AM stations Univision sold to the Latino Media Network?

You beat me to it! I was writing while you were posting.

In TelevisaUnivision's case, they both got rid of all the AMs but also got rid of three markets they considered a waste of management time: LRGV, Fresno and Las Vegas. They actually sold FMs in all three along with one in Dallas.

So in this US case, under-performing stations, markets that are dreadful and AMs in general were disposed of.

 

[davideduardo]

I didn't change the subject, you did. The company pulled this stunt while increasing dividends to shareholders and buying back shares.

So? They had some assets that were not producing and likely would lose money now or in the future. In retail, don't we often see big names closing a location because it was not profitable? Or in oil and mining, the closing of a well or mine because it could no longer produce enough to cover costs?

They reported a whopping C$2.3 billion in profit at the end of last year. But feel free to cherry pick your numbers from Bell's press release.

Good for them! Without the drag of those unprofitable or marginal stations, they will increase their profits!

I think their simplified business plan is, "do something that brings in money, spend less than comes in and then distribute most of the profit to the owners". d