• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

770 WABC Number 1 ?

MacjT said:
The vitriol on this board towards him and WABC is quite surprising, but its probably because he leans right and is pro Trump.
Click to expand...
No, it's because we all know that despite being a "tough businessman", buying AM radio stations is not making Cats any money. He's doing it for self-promotion and his nostalgia for the glory days of AM radio... not to recoup his investment.

Just because a smart businessman buys an AM station, doesn't necessarily mean that buying an AM station is smart business.
 
MacjT said:
Well Soros Jr also has purchased a bunch of stations , lets see how they fare.
Click to expand...

Not exactly. And the idea that he'll have much of anything to do with the choices of programming is pretty far-fetched. Hosts on Audacy stations, with the exceptions of some shows on WWL and KMBZ, aren't much more "liberal" than the stuff on 770.

A more interesting question to me is why anyone of any political stripe would be comfortable giving a radio show to someone who was a featured speaker at an "American Renaissance" conference (Anthony Cumia) given that it's an actual white nationalist group. But it's his money.
 
MacjT said:
Lastly , if this were anyone else, we'd be seeing crowing about how someone took a station from #15 to #8 ish.
Click to expand...

If you look around, posters on radio boards find all kinds of reasons to criticize owners. Up in Buffalo, Buddy Shula gets a lot of criticism for the way he runs WECK. People just like to complain. It doesn't matter who you are or how many stations you own.
MacjT said:
Well Soros Jr also has purchased a bunch of stations , lets see how they fare.
Click to expand...

In point of fact, Soros Management hasn't "purchased" ANY stations. The fund invested in some groups, but the fund has no operational control. The fund doesn't hold any licenses. In the case of Audacy, the stations are still owned by Audacy, and no license transfer has been filed. The fund doesn't even have a voting role on the board.
 
TheBigA said:
If you look around, posters on radio boards find all kinds of reasons to criticize owners. Up in Buffalo, Buddy Shula gets a lot of criticism for the way he runs WECK. People just like to complain. It doesn't matter who you are or how many stations you own.


In point of fact, Soros Management hasn't "purchased" ANY stations. The fund invested in some groups, but the fund has no operational control. The fund doesn't hold any licenses. In the case of Audacy, the stations are still owned by Audacy, and no license transfer has been filed. The fund doesn't even have a voting role on the board.
Click to expand...
That's true. But still, now there's someone looking over Audacy's shoulder.

Why do you suppose the Soros' bought so much Audacy stock? Is it because they love conservative talk? 🤔 I kinda don't think so.
 
wadio said:
That's true. But still, now there's someone looking over Audacy's shoulder.
Click to expand...

How do you know? You don't think David Field's father was looking over his shoulder? How did that turn out?

wadio said:
Why do you suppose the Soros' bought so much Audacy stock? Is it because they love conservative talk? 🤔 I kinda don't think so.
Click to expand...

Their investment allowed Audacy to go private, so they're not subject to the whim of Wall Street. That way, their investment doesn't lose money.

The fact of the matter is they haven't forced the company to make any programming changes.
 
MacjT said:
The vitriol on this board towards him (Cats) and WABC is quite surprising, but its probably because he leans right and is pro Trump.
Click to expand...

He has given a voice to some of the most far-right operatives, white supremacists and purveyors of disinformation, so it's understandable. But while his critics have voiced their disapproval, they still understand that the First Amendment and New York's state Constitution have always given Cats the freedom to run that kind of programming.

But then...
MacjT said:
Well Soros Jr also has purchased a bunch of stations , lets see how they fare.
Click to expand...

Well speaking of vitriol, is the anything worse than the absolute meltdown on the right over the Soros fund investment in Audacy, even though it controls nothing? In fact, there is only one political party that has used its government powers to abridge our long-held freedoms by weaponizing the FCC against broadcasters they don't like. Carr "investigating" Audacy over Soros. Revoking CBP funding in an effort to harm NPR. Blocking the Paramount-Skydance merger over its Kamala Harris interview, even as Shari Redstone paid a multimillion dollar ransom to Trump trying bribe him into settling. So it's not a matter of let's see. We're already seeing.
 
TheBigA said:
Their investment allowed Audacy to go private, so they're not subject to the whim of Wall Street. That way, their investment doesn't lose money.

The fact of the matter is they haven't forced the company to make any programming changes.
Click to expand...
But why? Why would they want to support a conservative radio network? It's clearly not a good financial investment. There has to be another motive.
 
wadio said:
But why? Why would they want to support a conservative radio network? It's clearly not a good financial investment. There has to be another motive.
Click to expand...

First, it's not a conservative radio network. Second, the way the investment was structured, it's very safe.

Out of 225 radio stations, maybe 28 air conservative talk shows, mostly using local hosts. They don't syndicate any of them.

Keep in mind they bought debt, not stock. Their investment doesn't drop, but their equity can increase.
 
MacjT said:
Well Soros Jr also has purchased a bunch of stations , lets see how they fare.
Click to expand...
It appears that the more Soros-controlled recent purchase is continuing to focus on profits and the most viable formats and not changing to formats that are more progressive. And neither Soros Sr. or Jr. seem to be even indirectly involved in operations or programming.

On the other hand, the puchase by the same or similar investment groups of some of Univision's less desirable stations caused some turmoil in the local political scene in Miami, but otherwise the stations continue to be as useless as they ever were.
 
wadio said:
But why? Why would they want to support a conservative radio network? It's clearly not a good financial investment.
Click to expand...
There being no successful progressive talk option, ans with the existing system working, why would they change anything.
wadio said:
There has to be another motive.
Click to expand...
For an investment? Most of the Soros group investments were simply motivated by profit opportunities. Otherwise, how would he have accumulated his considerable fortune?
 
TheBigA said:
Too many market conflicts with their other radio investment. With Audacy there was only one, which they handled.

Also, as I said, they bought debt, not stock. Stock values vary by the market. Debt in a private company is different.
Click to expand...
Debt values also change by the market. If low rated, debt is bought and sold at considerable discounts.
 
davideduardo said:
Debt values also change by the market. If low rated, debt is bought and sold at considerable discounts.
Click to expand...

In this case. the debt has retained its value. This is a reason why:

www.insideradio.com

Audacy Scraps Private Stock Sale After Shareholder Support Fails To Materialize.

Audacy is taking a U-turn in its plan for a private stock sale that could have raised as much as $100 million. The company says the plan to sell up
www.insideradio.com www.insideradio.com

Any shareholder that didn’t take part would have seen their ownership interest in the company diluted as a result of the issuance of additional shares, which is likely a factor in why the company was unable to generate the needed support to move forward.
Click to expand...
 
So, as I understand it, Audacy is now privately owned by Soros and one other entity.

It's pretty clear why Cats wants to acquire radio stations -- he's a wannabe broadcaster.

But Soros is a far left political activist. Aside from some potential profit (which he doesn't need) what's in it for him?

Nothing so far, but as he continues to acquire more media ........

It takes patience. Think "inflection point."
 
wadio said:
So, as I understand it, Audacy is now privately owned by Soros and one other entity.
Click to expand...

No. There has been no change in ownership. Audacy is still owned by Audacy. It is a private company.

www.fcc.gov

FCC Approves License Transfer to New Audacy

Federal Communications Commission approves license transfer to new Audacy.
www.fcc.gov www.fcc.gov

wadio said:
It's pretty clear why Cats wants to acquire radio stations -- he's a wannabe broadcaster.
Click to expand...

He's also very active politically and he uses his radio station to promote his political ideology.

Just because he uses radio this way doesn't mean Soros will do the same thing.

wadio said:
But Soros is a far left political activist. Aside from some potential profit (which he doesn't need) what's in it for him?
Click to expand...

It's not always about politics. There are lots of other reasons. He really doesn't have to explain it to anyone.

He believes in solar energy and 8 years ago he invested billions in a solar company run by Elon Musk. Was that a political investment?

Even if he wanted to use radio to promote a political ideology, there's nothing illegal about it. Murdoch uses his media to promote a political ideology. Is there something wrong with that? Should the government do an investigation?

Maybe the reason he invested is because he's tired of seeing great radio stations get sold to K-Love. Wouldn't it be nice if others felt the same way?
 
Last edited:
wadio said:
I never said there is.
Long shot. Radio isn't the only media he's acquiring.
Click to expand...

So he likes media. That's a good thing. Somebody has to invest in radio, or it'll all shut down.

He's 94 years old and grew up with traditional media. He wants to see it survive in a world that's becoming more about digital streaming. In other words, he's just like a lot of other people his age who still sees value in traditional media. I'm reminded of the quote from Hillel: "If not you, then who? If not now, then when?" If not him, then who? There are fewer and fewer investors interested in radio. So he is using his money to keep traditional media alive. There need to be more people like him, regardless of their politics. The political thing is a distraction.

If you go back to my posts from five years ago, I said that David Field needed a white knight. Someone who will come in with billions of dollars and take the company private, because it was getting killed on the stock market. That white knight is SMF.
 
Last edited:
TheBigA said:
He's 94 years old and grew up with traditional media. He wants to see it survive in a world that's becoming more about digital streaming. In other words, he's just like a lot of other people his age who still sees value in traditional media. ... So he is using his money to keep traditional media alive. There need to be more people like him, regardless of their politics. The political thing is a distraction.
Click to expand...
Wow, I think I got a bridge to sell 'ya. 😏
 


Back
Top Bottom