I was driving through Los Angeles the other day with KTLK on the radio, my mind preoccupied and not paying too much attention to the fluff between shows, and thought I heard someone say that it was time to say goodbye to KTLK. So the question is, is there something in the works regarding KTLK? As I said, I was not paying a great deal of attention at that time but it sure sounded like that. Any info appreciated.
-
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
A KTLK Question
- Thread starter Lopaka
- Start date
X
XBanderRadio
Guest
Can't verify what you heard on KTLK.
But ... Let me guess, KTLK recently tweaked
the format to make it "progressive is the new mainstream"
with toned-down shows like Alan Colmes and Bill Press.
Hired new live-local afternoon host Mr. K who I never listened to
before. Why would I now listen? Have not seen a single
ClearChannel billboard for KTLK since the format was altered. However there
were some KTLK billboards when KTLK went from sports to talk in 2004.
In my opinion, local CC management is feebly trying to
get better ratings for KTLK, but will ultimately fail, and they
don't care. They will eventually switch KTLK back to sports, shrug
their shoulders and claim "we tried everything" but progressive talk
just did not work in LA.
But ... Let me guess, KTLK recently tweaked
the format to make it "progressive is the new mainstream"
with toned-down shows like Alan Colmes and Bill Press.
Hired new live-local afternoon host Mr. K who I never listened to
before. Why would I now listen? Have not seen a single
ClearChannel billboard for KTLK since the format was altered. However there
were some KTLK billboards when KTLK went from sports to talk in 2004.
In my opinion, local CC management is feebly trying to
get better ratings for KTLK, but will ultimately fail, and they
don't care. They will eventually switch KTLK back to sports, shrug
their shoulders and claim "we tried everything" but progressive talk
just did not work in LA.
WRONG!!! Sorry to inform you right wingers but ktlk progressive talk is here to stay!!!
DEAL WITH IT
DEAL WITH IT
hotpatrick2004 said:
With a 0.6 in Winter, I doubt that.
I hope they can make a Go of it; the more opinions people are exposed to the better prepared they are when they vote, and that is the most important process in our democratic republic. KLSD, KPOJ, KPTK are producing satisfactory ratings, and probably other AAR stations as well, so successfully programming a liberal talk station is not impossible.
My favorite station indie one 0 three one gets a .06 to .08 every trend and let me count oh yeah they went on the air december 26th 2003 and they are still going strong so ktlk will be going anywhere.
X
XBanderRadio
Guest
Dear hotpatrick2004, I am not a right-wing anything.
I have listened to our LA progressive talk format on KTLK
since its inception and it is getting homogenized beyond
belief. The San Diego progressive talk station, KLSD-1360 actually does
well and it is owned by the same company. I won't give-up
my 1360AM preset in the car, because the 1150AM preset for
progressive talk won't be needed by early 2008.
To get a look into the future of KTLK, look at the
recent history of format changes at WARF 1350 Akron, OH
and you will see what will occur, something like,
1150AM So Cal's New Sports Authority! Maybe en Espanol, tambien.
I have listened to our LA progressive talk format on KTLK
since its inception and it is getting homogenized beyond
belief. The San Diego progressive talk station, KLSD-1360 actually does
well and it is owned by the same company. I won't give-up
my 1360AM preset in the car, because the 1150AM preset for
progressive talk won't be needed by early 2008.
To get a look into the future of KTLK, look at the
recent history of format changes at WARF 1350 Akron, OH
and you will see what will occur, something like,
1150AM So Cal's New Sports Authority! Maybe en Espanol, tambien.
I suppose they could make a bid for the Dodgers for next season, but other than that, their options for having sports back on 1150 are exteremely limited. As KMPC found out, if you don't have a local sports team to anchor you, your pretty much sunk.
Boy you're right about The Ticket (ownership slowly turned off the oxygen over there) but here's what I think about KTLK (or as I like to call it..."Progressive Sports").
1. It provides CCLA political cover as a contrasting point of view to KFI. And believe it or not (believe it) there is strong sentiment and support for progressive views among the station management and the sellers.
2. It provides a perfect sales packaging partner for KFI (note all the duplicated advertisers). Not only is it a cheap add on to a buy on KFI iit also adds that critical .1 of a rating point in key demos making the overall buy more efficient. Note that most if not all KFI sales people get to sell KTLK but not vice versa.
3. KTLK is the perfect (convenient) home for sports conflicts. KLAC can and does promote and sell all sports inventory even if the games air on KTLK. Remember, all Laker games MUST air on KLAC so that's why you'll hear all sorts of UCLA events (and others) on KTLK. CCLA can also agree to carry the LA Kings, have KLAC promote and sell the heck out of them, get paid by the Kings for clearance, but air all games on KTLK. And don't forget, KTLK gets rating credit for the added cume sports listening brings.
4. KTLK would most likely NOT be a partner for the Dodgers. However, the CCLA Market Manager, Greg Ashlock, is a former Dodger salesman and would like to find a way to land them when the deal with KFWB ends but only if it can be a money maker. And he knows better than anyone how to make money on the Dodgers. The Lakers present too many conflicts with the Dodgers for KLAC to be THE home station. If Greg thinks blowing up progressive talk and turning KTLK into K-Dodger makes sense he'll do it...but again highly unlikely. For a time the rumor buzzing around town was blowing up one of the FM's, flip country and carry the Dodgers. Might not be a bad idea for KBIG..."Go Country" would be road kill under "Big Country!"
All things considered, my bet is KTLK stays progressive talk for the foreseeable future.
1. It provides CCLA political cover as a contrasting point of view to KFI. And believe it or not (believe it) there is strong sentiment and support for progressive views among the station management and the sellers.
2. It provides a perfect sales packaging partner for KFI (note all the duplicated advertisers). Not only is it a cheap add on to a buy on KFI iit also adds that critical .1 of a rating point in key demos making the overall buy more efficient. Note that most if not all KFI sales people get to sell KTLK but not vice versa.
3. KTLK is the perfect (convenient) home for sports conflicts. KLAC can and does promote and sell all sports inventory even if the games air on KTLK. Remember, all Laker games MUST air on KLAC so that's why you'll hear all sorts of UCLA events (and others) on KTLK. CCLA can also agree to carry the LA Kings, have KLAC promote and sell the heck out of them, get paid by the Kings for clearance, but air all games on KTLK. And don't forget, KTLK gets rating credit for the added cume sports listening brings.
4. KTLK would most likely NOT be a partner for the Dodgers. However, the CCLA Market Manager, Greg Ashlock, is a former Dodger salesman and would like to find a way to land them when the deal with KFWB ends but only if it can be a money maker. And he knows better than anyone how to make money on the Dodgers. The Lakers present too many conflicts with the Dodgers for KLAC to be THE home station. If Greg thinks blowing up progressive talk and turning KTLK into K-Dodger makes sense he'll do it...but again highly unlikely. For a time the rumor buzzing around town was blowing up one of the FM's, flip country and carry the Dodgers. Might not be a bad idea for KBIG..."Go Country" would be road kill under "Big Country!"
All things considered, my bet is KTLK stays progressive talk for the foreseeable future.
hotpatrick2004 said:
Indie knows it has a signal that can only cover a small part of the market. 1150 has much nearer full market coverage, and a 0.6 is not adequate to sustain this type of facility.
socalguy said:
Stations pay the team, not the other way around. Rights can be bid for, but they have to bear a relationship with the billing potential.
Radio does not sell cume; cume is a secondary consideration for reach and frequency of a total buy, not one station alone.
The Dodgers have hurt KFWB significantly, and the costs are such that no station may want them badly enough: look at what happened in St Louis with KMOX not "coming to the plate" for the games due to the cost.
There are not even 2 shares for country. Having two stations means that neither can make money.
With all due respect some corrections are in order.
In short DavidEduardo, you're out of your league in this particulay discussion. I've seen the contracts, I've seen the payments, I've posted the billing. The Kings paid Clear Channel, kept most of the in game inventory to sell themselves and KLAC sold the rest. The Ducks paid KLAA and sold most of the inventory themselves. Yes, KFWB paid the Dodgers but gets to sell the inventory. And yes the Dodgers want more for the next contract than most stations are willing to pay. That's why the negotiations are continuing and no new affiliate has been named. I'm not privy to the Angels deal with KSPN but I can get that for you if you'd like. Suffice it to say they will be going in house next year with KLAA and controlling all the sales of air time using the team and radio station sales staff. So I guess one way to think of the rights fee is to consider what Arte paid for his station. For the one time purchase price of what, $40 million, he gets to keep everything in house and control all revenue streams.
The rights holder for UCLA pays Clear Channel to carry the football and basketball games on KLAC. KLAC gets to sell a limited amount of in game and post game inventory plus whatever pre pre and post post they can push. KLAC does contract with the Lakers in the traditional fashion you suggest and pays a significant annual rights fee. But, KLAC controls the sale of all in game, pre and post game inventory. And they've been hugely successful not only selling Lakers but upselling Laker clients into spot buys, and other sports buys.
The Clippers, prior to this season, paid a station to carry their games (good old KTLK in 2005-2006). It's pretty well known that this year they sought to get a station to do a rights deal with them similar to what the Lakers have with KLAC. Most balked at the initial terms until KSPN negotiated some sort of hybrid deal and carried the games this past season.
USC retains their own rights and pays KSPN to air the football and basketball games. Again, the University controls and sells most of the inventory from an hour before the game to typically one hour to one half hour after the game, leaving KSPN with selling about 5 minutes of "in game" some "pre and post" and all the "pre pre" and "post post." But the station gets a set fee on top to clear each game.
My point in mentioning this regarding KTLK was the flexibility this gives CC and KLAC in scheduling conflicts and in picking up lesser franchises willing to pay for clearance. Added revenue and cume...what's not to like?
Radio stations due use all audience figures to "Sell" including cume. Craig Rossi's cume growth analysis for Valentine and Lisa Foxx in yesterdays laradio.com piece is a prime example. We both know radio is bought by either cost per point primarily and occasionally on a cost per thousand basis and that the Average Quarter Hour number along with the accompanying rating point(s) are the primary currency. And come next year and PPM it's all about huge cumes and lower AQH. So whatever cume sports brings to KTLK is then converted to AQH based on the TSL and increases their daypart and total week audience figures.
I'd love to see KFWB's ratings in spring summer and fall without the Dodgers. Yes, the Dodger contract greenlighted by Infinity (now CBS) senior management was seen as a way to build listening for the rest of the station, (and bring in a ton of billing at rates they'd never be able to get just selling their ratings) hoping that the Dodger cume would recycle in AM drive and elsewhere. In the pre ESPN/Fox Sports era that usually happened but as sports fractionalized on tv AND radio it became tougher to keep the Dodger cume around. And that's if KFWB had executed the original plan well, which they clearly did and have not. The station has a lot more issues to deal with than the Dodgers but with Dan Mason running CBS they may be relooking at things. The KMOX decision was made by two of the most incompetent people to run a radio group so I'm not going to get into the lunacy of the Hollander Brothers.
And to think that Emmis and now Old Saul are the best country can do in LA you're really naive. And as you know full well, PPM will change the rules and the AQH shares dramatically.
In short DavidEduardo, you're out of your league in this particulay discussion. I've seen the contracts, I've seen the payments, I've posted the billing. The Kings paid Clear Channel, kept most of the in game inventory to sell themselves and KLAC sold the rest. The Ducks paid KLAA and sold most of the inventory themselves. Yes, KFWB paid the Dodgers but gets to sell the inventory. And yes the Dodgers want more for the next contract than most stations are willing to pay. That's why the negotiations are continuing and no new affiliate has been named. I'm not privy to the Angels deal with KSPN but I can get that for you if you'd like. Suffice it to say they will be going in house next year with KLAA and controlling all the sales of air time using the team and radio station sales staff. So I guess one way to think of the rights fee is to consider what Arte paid for his station. For the one time purchase price of what, $40 million, he gets to keep everything in house and control all revenue streams.
The rights holder for UCLA pays Clear Channel to carry the football and basketball games on KLAC. KLAC gets to sell a limited amount of in game and post game inventory plus whatever pre pre and post post they can push. KLAC does contract with the Lakers in the traditional fashion you suggest and pays a significant annual rights fee. But, KLAC controls the sale of all in game, pre and post game inventory. And they've been hugely successful not only selling Lakers but upselling Laker clients into spot buys, and other sports buys.
The Clippers, prior to this season, paid a station to carry their games (good old KTLK in 2005-2006). It's pretty well known that this year they sought to get a station to do a rights deal with them similar to what the Lakers have with KLAC. Most balked at the initial terms until KSPN negotiated some sort of hybrid deal and carried the games this past season.
USC retains their own rights and pays KSPN to air the football and basketball games. Again, the University controls and sells most of the inventory from an hour before the game to typically one hour to one half hour after the game, leaving KSPN with selling about 5 minutes of "in game" some "pre and post" and all the "pre pre" and "post post." But the station gets a set fee on top to clear each game.
My point in mentioning this regarding KTLK was the flexibility this gives CC and KLAC in scheduling conflicts and in picking up lesser franchises willing to pay for clearance. Added revenue and cume...what's not to like?
Radio stations due use all audience figures to "Sell" including cume. Craig Rossi's cume growth analysis for Valentine and Lisa Foxx in yesterdays laradio.com piece is a prime example. We both know radio is bought by either cost per point primarily and occasionally on a cost per thousand basis and that the Average Quarter Hour number along with the accompanying rating point(s) are the primary currency. And come next year and PPM it's all about huge cumes and lower AQH. So whatever cume sports brings to KTLK is then converted to AQH based on the TSL and increases their daypart and total week audience figures.
I'd love to see KFWB's ratings in spring summer and fall without the Dodgers. Yes, the Dodger contract greenlighted by Infinity (now CBS) senior management was seen as a way to build listening for the rest of the station, (and bring in a ton of billing at rates they'd never be able to get just selling their ratings) hoping that the Dodger cume would recycle in AM drive and elsewhere. In the pre ESPN/Fox Sports era that usually happened but as sports fractionalized on tv AND radio it became tougher to keep the Dodger cume around. And that's if KFWB had executed the original plan well, which they clearly did and have not. The station has a lot more issues to deal with than the Dodgers but with Dan Mason running CBS they may be relooking at things. The KMOX decision was made by two of the most incompetent people to run a radio group so I'm not going to get into the lunacy of the Hollander Brothers.
And to think that Emmis and now Old Saul are the best country can do in LA you're really naive. And as you know full well, PPM will change the rules and the AQH shares dramatically.
socalguy said:
I stand corrected. Sort of. In other words, the deal for the Kings was a barter with a guarantee. Station gives, cash, gets inventory in games. Team pays cash, gets inventory. Station still pays for the rights in inventory, but in trade for a sales opportunity and some cash.
What, of course, that means is that the Kings are about as interesting a radio proposition as the deal I had at KWIZ in '94, where we took money to run the Mighty Ducks... because the Ducks wanted to have explosure to the Hispanic market ("It's soccer with a weapon") and nobody would, in their right mind, pay for the rights.
For one, the audience loss. Of course, if you have no audience to lose, the point is kinda' moot.
CPP and CPM are the same thing, expressed differently... just as AQH persons, Share and Rating are exactly the same thing expressed in three different ways.
The AQH number is a quantity of people that a quantity of ratings points represents. A rating point in LA today represents 102,700 people.
Cume may be a nice embelishment to a sale, but there is no way to quantify the reach of each spot with cume; cume is only useful to determine, along with the rating, the reach and frequency of a bunch of spots. The reach for a single spot is the same as the AQH persons at that time; reach increases withevery additonal weekly spot, but not in a linear fashion.
PPM shows higher cumes but much lower TSL, and the PUR is down 40% in Houston and over 50% in Philly. So what you have is bigger cume, but much less overall listening. The top station in TSL in the top 10 in Houston has a TSL of just 4:15; in the diary survey there were top 10 stations with over 10 hours TSL.
Advertisers will still price spots based on CPP, but they will have to adjust the CPP to the lower "real" listening levels.
AQH is one thing and Share is another: one is the percentage of people who are listening to radio who are listening to a station, and the other is the number of people the share (or rating) represent.
With the PPM, the individual station shares are a little different than in the diary survey... but essentially all stations lose AQH. In one of the PPM markets, the diary #1 had 38 thousand AQH persons... in the PPM, the #1 had 31,000. #2 had 38 thousand AQH persons as well in the diary, but #2 in the PPM has 24,000 (in both cases, the stations were not the same). Oh, and the AQH for country IS up... by all of 4% from the diary.
The fact is, no matter who runs a local country station in LA, there are not more than 2 share points for it today; over 70% of the market is ethnic / immigrant representing groups with practically no heritage or interest in country. So that leaves less than 30% from which to extract country partisans... a 2 share overall would represent over a 6 share of the non-Hispanic white and non-immigrant (Russians, Persians, etc) white group that might like country.
No DavidEduardo, you do stand corrected on the subject of sports, teams, rights fees, etc.
Second, I don't need you to give me an Arbitron terminology lecture, save your fingers (and figures) for the other folks on this site OK?
Now, on a more constructive note, I do appreciate your strong insight into the Hispanic market and Spanish language radio. I would enjoy, seriously, your analysis of how PPM is affecting ethnic, particularly Spanish language, radio TSL. I have to admit I haven't been following this particular issue very closely but have heard some negative rumblings.
Have they seen the same kind of cume growth and tsl drop as English language in Houston and Philadelphia? How do you predict the LA and New York Spanish language leaders will do under PPM measurement? Will they retain enough tsl to stay at the top of the AQH rankers?
(My apologies if you've addressed these topic on other boards. Let me know where I should look.)
Second, I don't need you to give me an Arbitron terminology lecture, save your fingers (and figures) for the other folks on this site OK?
Now, on a more constructive note, I do appreciate your strong insight into the Hispanic market and Spanish language radio. I would enjoy, seriously, your analysis of how PPM is affecting ethnic, particularly Spanish language, radio TSL. I have to admit I haven't been following this particular issue very closely but have heard some negative rumblings.
Have they seen the same kind of cume growth and tsl drop as English language in Houston and Philadelphia? How do you predict the LA and New York Spanish language leaders will do under PPM measurement? Will they retain enough tsl to stay at the top of the AQH rankers?
(My apologies if you've addressed these topic on other boards. Let me know where I should look.)
socalguy said:
That's what I said already. I simply inserted a caveat, because very few teams (one maybe) in the LA area can generate both revenue and ratings... this is not a sports town, by anyone's account. So the other teams come up with deals to make stations carry games, at a sacrifice of audience to the benefit of the bottom line. It's no surprise most of these stations are already low-rated.
I think someone, then, needs to give you a long lesson. You got many of the terms significantly wrong, and your analysis of the PPM is just about 180% out of phase.
The Spanish language stations in Houston do as well in PPM as they did in the diary method; I'm restricted by a non-disclosure (which, of course, runs out in July with the "currency" status of PPM) to go into any detail, but those stations, too go up in cume (the PPM hears, it does not listen) and way down in TSL. The market PUR goes down, about 40% in Houston, 50% in Philly. The average person listens to 11 hours of radio, approximately, not 19.
There are two Spanish station in the top 5, 18+. That's one more than in the diary survey. And another very close to top 5. Everyone has low TSL... the top stations are around 1:45 to 3:45 weekly. 15 minutes can make a significant change in share, in fact.
In NY and LA, the order of the stations may change a little... Regional Mexican stations down a bit, all talk morning shows down too, with music intensive stations like KLVE, KRCD up considerably. NY WPAT up, WSKQ down.
- Status