Bertolucci Out at KFI

[TheBigA]

Richard Wagoner interviewed Robin Bertolucci, and she apparently resigned ahead of the layoffs knowing her husband was going to be let go, as a stand of solidarity with him.

The problem with resigning is that one usually misses out on the very valuable severance benefits. Especially in her case, given her longevity.

The Wagoner article is filled with his usual commentary, saying iHeart lacks programming intelligence. Ignoring that the company owns some of the most successful radio stations in town, both in terms of audience and revenue. As I often say: The future won't be like the past. Those who only think of radio in terms of the past will never be able to think in terms of the future.

Having said this, it's too bad she's leaving, but I definitely understand her views that it was mutual, and it was time. Clearly she could see the writing on the wall. If she wasn't going to be part of the decision-making team, then it was best to leave. Otherwise she would just be stuck carrying out policies with which she doesn't agree. There are a lot of people with her background in education and public broadcasting. Unfortunately those areas are being targeted by some people outside of radio right now, so that's not safe either.

There's a real need for experienced people to start looking towards building a fund for journalism, especially as we head into the next four years.

 

[Gregg.]

The problem with resigning is that one usually misses out on the very valuable severance benefits. Especially in her case, given her longevity.

Absolutely. Maybe knowing her husband was going to be ousted, she also negotiated her severance. If iHeart was planning to dismiss most of the staff, I'm sure they'd also allow her to leave with severance and keep somebody else on the team who wanted to stay.

I know of several iHeart employees who have gotten a year's severance and health benefits due to their tenure. If you were at iHeart-Clear Channel for 26 years, multiply that by two and you get 52 weeks of severance. And once your severance is paid out, you can then get unemployment from your state. Not great if you planned to keep working many years to come. But OK if you were planning to retire one of these days anyway.

 

[RayydioLA]

However, he (like other stockholders) lost millions of dollars in stock that he purchased during his time as CEO.

So factually he has suffered some compensation consequences. He now reports to the debt holders, not other stockholders. It's not all fun & games.

Normally these compensation agreements are built around meeting certain financial targets. It's likely these cuts are part of those.

As you know, he didn't create the debt. He inherited it from the Mays family.

Cry me a river. The bigger they are, the harder they fall. They, like most Corporate CEO's, have cut costs and destroyed many careers and livelihoods of rank-and-file $50k salary people, in their pursuit of keeping their $10mil salary plus bonuses, for years. Did they expect to be immune? The company will have to eventually sell off and fold. But with his millions he'll be fine.

 

[RayydioLA]

This quote from Pittman made me throw up in my mouth:

Agreed. Was part of the IHR layoffs in 2017. The next day, they announced Seacrest's new multimillion dollar deal with iHeart. How many jobs does one guy need (that they take away living wages from others)?

 

[MassMusicMan]

Agreed. Was part of the IHR layoffs in 2017. The next day, they announced Seacrest's new multimillion dollar deal with iHeart. How many jobs does one guy need (that they take away living wages from others)?

You're right. They should get somebody with no familiarity to the audience to host morning drive in Los Angeles.

Would you hire someone inferior to do a job for you on purpose, or would you get the best guy?

 

[TheBigA]

Cry me a river. The bigger they are, the harder they fall.

Nobody is asking for sympathy. I was just responding to a question. Did Pittman have financial consequences. The factual answer is yes. Even now, he owns stock in the company. Would YOU own stock in iHeart? I wouldn't. But he does.

Nobody should expect to be immune. Including the CEO. When the company went bankrupt, his contract was canceled. The lenders chose to renew him. They needed someone who knew the company to rebuild it after bankruptcy. Who else could do it? Mark Mays? You guys think Pittman appointed himself and grants himself this money? He doesn't. It comes from the lenders. How would you like to deal with them? They needed someone to cut the expenses of the radio division that was losing money. They basically needed someone to fire people. They chose him.

I said this earlier in this thread. The easy way to cut expenses is fire everybody and run the stations like EMF. That's what everyone thought they were going to do 20 years ago. Fire all local talent, and just run it like Sirius or Apple Music or Spotify or all the other companies that do radio on the cheap. They didn't do it all at once. Instead they spread out the staff firings over 20 years. Which would you prefer?

 

[michael hagerty]

You're right. They should get somebody with no familiarity to the audience to host morning drive in Los Angeles.

To be fair, Seacrest had been hosting morning drive in Los Angeles for 12 years at that point. The multimillion dollar deal RayydioLA is referring to put him in morning drive in dozens of markets, replacing hosts with familiarity to their audiences.

 

[TheBigA]

To be fair, Seacrest had been hosting morning drive in Los Angeles for 12 years at that point. The multimillion dollar deal RayydioLA is referring to put him in morning drive in dozens of markets, replacing hosts with familiarity to their audiences.

It all really began with Limbaugh. He was the first syndicated host I can remember who replaced local talk show hosts in the daytime. Prior to Rush, all syndication was either overnight or after 7PM. Then Rush came, and stations were willing to do something they had previously refused to do, which was replace local hosts in the daytime with syndication. He wasn't forced on stations by corporate. The stations chose to do this. He didn't have a big syndicator. Just EIB. This happened at a time when radio was strong, when listenership was at a peak, when it was still the only option for this kind of content, and when advertising was double what it is now. Lots of local talk show hosts got fired because of Rush. From then on, stations realized they didn't have to be local 24/7 anymore.

 

[ChannelFlipper]

It all really began with Limbaugh. He was the first syndicated host I can remember who replaced local talk show hosts in the daytime. Prior to Rush, all syndication was either overnight or after 7PM. Then Rush came, and stations were willing to do something they had previously refused to do, which was replace local hosts in the daytime with syndication. He wasn't forced on stations by corporate. The stations chose to do this. He didn't have a big syndicator. Just EIB. This happened at a time when radio was strong, when listenership was at a peak, when it was still the only option for this kind of content, and when advertising was double what it is now. Lots of local talk show hosts got fired because of Rush. From then on, stations realized they didn't have to be local 24/7 anymore.

This was because Rush provided a better product than what the stations had at the time. Taking Rush's syndicated program had to be one of the easiest decisions an AM talk programmer could make.

 

[davideduardo]

Agreed. Was part of the IHR layoffs in 2017. The next day, they announced Seacrest's new multimillion dollar deal with iHeart. How many jobs does one guy need (that they take away living wages from others)?

Seacreast produces revenue and garners audience. Just like stars in movies and music and sports.

This is part of the same scenario where the "Late Night" shows on ABC, CBS and NBC are national and there are no local shows of that type at the same time on network affiliates going back to the time of Steve Allen and Johnny Carson.

 

[davideduardo]

It all really began with Limbaugh. He was the first syndicated host I can remember who replaced local talk show hosts in the daytime. Prior to Rush, all syndication was either overnight or after 7PM. Then Rush came, and stations were willing to do something they had previously refused to do, which was replace local hosts in the daytime with syndication. He wasn't forced on stations by corporate. The stations chose to do this. He didn't have a big syndicator. Just EIB. This happened at a time when radio was strong, when listenership was at a peak, when it was still the only option for this kind of content, and when advertising was double what it is now. Lots of local talk show hosts got fired because of Rush. From then on, stations realized they didn't have to be local 24/7 anymore.

There were two factors:

First, the change in the Fairness Doctrine that allowed stations to be more polarized. That opened the door to more controversial polarized talk.

But stations could have just put one "far right" show on and balanced with more centrist or liberal ones.

What really made the difference was cheap and technically superior national distribution, first with satellite and then with the Internet. Prior to that, the cost of a "network" using AT&T leased lines was enormous and local stations could not "tie in" easily and economically. Heck, just look at how a telco line from the studio to the local transmitter in today's dollars might be well over $1000. Think of the cost of bringing in a talk show!

So changes in technology, resulting in cheap interconnection, made up the second factor. Profitable viability had arrived and Rush was there as the shining star. But at that time, a lot of others tried to "syndicate" and did not do as well. Look at Ronn Owens' failure networking to LA!

So there was technology and emerging talent. Today, Seacreast, Charlemagne Tha God and Bobby Bones are very talented hosts who can be in locations where they can get star-level guests and be part of their music and format's culture... something most local stations can not do.

 

[Mediafrog+]

Today, Seacreast, Charlemagne Tha God and Bobby Bones are very talented hosts who can be in locations where they can get star-level guests and be part of their music and format's culture... something most local stations can not do.

We should point out that those people are surrounded and supported by numerous staffers and associates that make them what they are. They don’t accomplish their popularity and success by themselves. You can say the same thing about almost every public figure in the entertainment industry.

 

[TheBigA]

What really made the difference was cheap and technically superior national distribution, first with satellite and then with the Internet.

But what about live & local staff? I thought they were important to radio. Once again, we're talking about before the telecom act. There were no big radio conglomerate forcing their stations to carry Rush. And Rush wasn't being promoted by ABC Radio or iHeart at the time. This thread is all about iHeart firing everybody. Back before companies owned 800 stations, they STILL fired their local hosts and replaced them with Rush. Where was the outrage back then? Why did those local hosts, many of whom were very successful, just roll over and let Rush take their jobs and then go on to make hundreds of millions of dollars? Why didn't people view him the way they view Pittman? Pittman is just cleaning up the mess that was made by lots of people who came before him. Rush got paid a whole lot more than Pittman.

 

[MarkW]

In my opinion, Rush Limbaugh doing a live talk show with diligently produced content, which is the output of intricate show prep, for 3 hours a day, 5 days a week is much different than Seacrest spending 30 minutes to record insipid voice tracks to be placed between songs on a music station.

 

[TheBigA]

In my opinion, Rush Limbaugh doing a live talk show with diligently produced content, which is the output of intricate show prep, for 3 hours a day, 5 days a week is much different than Seacrest spending 30 minutes to record insipid voice tracks to be placed between songs on a music station.

You're also talking about the difference between talk radio and music radio. Rush wasn't doing any more show prep than any of the talk show hosts he replaced. The local hosts weren't getting bad ratings. The radio companies they worked for weren't losing money or going bankrupt. Regardless of that, the local hosts were all fired and replaced with Rush, who made hundreds of millions of dollars. Where's the outrage?

 

[MarkW]

A lot of stations that picked up Rush were airing MOR, adult contemporary or oldies programming in middays until picking up his show. Many of these stations were previously not great performers in the money demo and were increasingly losing listeners to FM music stations.

Rush was destination listening. Many credit him with extending relevance of AM radio.

Seacrest's voice tracks are nothing special.

 

[TheBigA]

This was because Rush provided a better product than what the stations had at the time. Taking Rush's syndicated program had to be one of the easiest decisions an AM talk programmer could make.

But my point is that local talk show hosts got fired and replaced by national syndication. Not because corporate forced them to carry it. Because the stations wanted to do it. Now when that happens, the claim is local is being replaced by syndication, and that somehow is not as good. If that's true, why didn't anyone complain when Rush did the exact same thing? How can national syndication be better than live & local?

A lot of stations that picked up Rush were airing MOR, adult contemporary or oldies programming in middays until picking up his show. Many of these stations were previously not great performers in the money demo and were increasingly losing listeners to FM music stations.

Not completely true. WABC was running a local talk show at the time. He was fired and replaced by Rush. Rush then originated at WABC studios. In fact most of the ABC stations fired their local hosts and replaced them with Rush. The only reason KABC didn't do it was because Michael Jackson was still doing well. But he quickly got killed by Rush on KFI. Rush wasn't forced on KFI. They willingly replaced their local host with him. He was the only syndication they carried.

He BECAME destination listening once all the local hosts got fired, and were replaced by him. But at the time, no one had ever heard of him.

 

[TheBigA]

Seacrest's voice tracks are nothing special.

In your humble opinion. Ryan has access to stars that local hosts don't have. He's not just doing voice tracks. It sounds like you don't listen.

Ryan has credibility that comes from being who he is. Not unlike Dick Clark or Casey Kasem. His listeners know and trust him.

Yes he replaced a lot of local jocks. But that happened 20 years after Rush did the exact same thing.

 

[davideduardo]

But what about live & local staff? I thought they were important to radio.

In much of the world, national or large regional programming is predominant. The idea of local radio is a rather American construct..

 

[TheBigA]

In much of the world, national or large regional programming is predominant. The idea of local radio is a rather American construct..

And apparently also very selective in the way it applies.