Anybody want to post something?

[Ward]

I've noticed a distinct lack of postings of any kind on this board. So, one has to wonder a few things. Where have all the posters gone? Is Miami radio so boring (or maybe worse) that nobody gives a darn? Has there been a mass exodus of Miami posters to the greener pastures of another medium? Or, as I'd like to think (because I think this way), everybody's on vacation. Surely there's SOMETHING to discuss here? If not, maybe the Miami board needs to close down...or maybe there isn't much going on here right now. Either way, I'm curious...

IS ANYBODY OUT THERE!?!

 

[954]

Clear Channel has ruined south Florida radio.

> I've noticed a distinct lack of postings of any kind on this
> board. So, one has to wonder a few things. Where have all
> the posters gone? Is Miami radio so boring (or maybe worse)
> that nobody gives a darn? Has there been a mass exodus of
> Miami posters to the greener pastures of another medium?
> Or, as I'd like to think (because I think this way),
> everybody's on vacation. Surely there's SOMETHING to
> discuss here? If not, maybe the Miami board needs to close
> down...or maybe there isn't much going on here right now.
> Either way, I'm curious...
>
> IS ANYBODY OUT THERE!?!
>

Per the national board, CC wants to be able to buy even more stations:

"Clear Channel Chief Executive Mark Mays, citing competition from satellite-delivered subscription radio, proposed that broadcast radio operators be able to own 10 stations instead of eight in markets where there are at least 60 stations and up to 12 stations in markets where at least 75 radio outlets operate. "

(from http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Board=usa&Post=555767 )

Surely someone has something to say about how they've
ruined south Florida radio -- and why ownership limits
should be lowered, not raised.

That should start a long thread.

73s from 954<P ID="signature">______________
<center>South Florida Radio Pages</center></P>

 

[PTWorm]

> IS ANYBODY OUT THERE!?!
>

I'm here, mostly lurking...the fact that I'm not currently employed in the industry means I have fairly little to contribute. I do miss it, though, if anybody needs a part-timer... ;-)

 

[954]

opinionated listeners welcomed

> > IS ANYBODY OUT THERE!?!
> >
> I'm here, mostly lurking...the fact that I'm not currently
> employed in the industry means I have fairly little to
> contribute. I do miss it, though, if anybody needs a
> part-timer... ;-)

If you're an opinionated listener, you probably
have plenty to contribute.

Welcome, PT

73s from 954<P ID="signature">______________
<center>South Florida Radio Pages</center></P>

 

[russhaney]

Re: Clear Channel has ruined south Florida radio.

> > I've noticed a distinct lack of postings of any kind on
> this
> > board. So, one has to wonder a few things. Where have
> all
> > the posters gone? Is Miami radio so boring (or maybe
> worse)
> > that nobody gives a darn? Has there been a mass exodus of
>
> > Miami posters to the greener pastures of another medium?
> > Or, as I'd like to think (because I think this way),
> > everybody's on vacation. Surely there's SOMETHING to
> > discuss here? If not, maybe the Miami board needs to
> close
> > down...or maybe there isn't much going on here right now.
>
> > Either way, I'm curious...
> >
> > IS ANYBODY OUT THERE!?!
> >
>
> Per the national board, CC wants to be able to buy even more
> stations:
>
> "Clear Channel Chief Executive Mark Mays, citing competition
> from satellite-delivered subscription radio, proposed that
> broadcast radio operators be able to own 10 stations instead
> of eight in markets where there are at least 60 stations and
> up to 12 stations in markets where at least 75 radio outlets
> operate. "
>
> (from
> http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Board=usa&Post=555767 )
>
>
> Surely someone has something to say about how they've
> ruined south Florida radio -- and why ownership limits
> should be lowered, not raised.
>
> That should start a long thread.
>
> 73s from 954
>

Ill take 10 CC stations over 10 Cox stations anyday of the week in any market.<P ID="signature">______________
www.1club.fm</P>

 

[Radio-X]

Re: Clear Channel has ruined south Florida radio.

> Ill take 10 CC stations over 10 Cox stations anyday of the
> week in any market.

Might want to watch that...

Cox CAN be a very good operator depending on where you are. It does seem like they have some odd people piloting things in Florida, however...

CC, on the other hand, is consistantly boring and predictable (in about 99% of their markets)

In some of the smaller markets, CC does give the local operators a lot more freedom...<P ID="signature">______________
If a DJ talks into a microphone, and no one's there to listen to him, does he make a noise?</P>

 

[spokesgoddess]

Re: Clear Channel has ruined south Florida radio.

>
> CC, on the other hand, is consistantly boring and
> predictable (in about 99% of their markets)
>

Please cite examples. I'm curious as to what you feel is boring and predictable in Miami radio. Oh, and not just CC. The state of radio today isn't a CC thing, so try to be unbiased.

While you're at it, why not make some suggestions as to how you think radio might be improved in this market. I'm kind of tired of all the bitching. I'm ready for someone to be pro-active (cuz this Miami board is bored).

 

[RatchetUp]

Re: Miami is one tough market

Miami radio - in general - was discussed here in a thread last July. The big bitches were too many urban/hip hop and spanish stations. When you consider that new population estimates (as seen at www.arbitron.com) show the Miami market over 20% black and over 40% spanish, it seems to me, if there is any bitching, it should be why there aren't MORE urban and spanish stations in this market.


<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by RatchetUp on 10/06/05 04:02 PM.</FONT></P>

 

[Ward]

A solution?!?

Look, I could be shot for even suggesting this but, in my opinion I think the FCC should bring back all laws to the standards before deregulation of the industry. Why, you may ask? Simple. There were more mom & pop owned stations, more local connections to the market and, if you ask me, better sounding radio! Yes, the LAST thing any of us want is more government meddling but, to me, radio seemed much happier before all the rules were lifted. If rules and regs are such a bad thing then why did it work so well for so many years and now, with the rules lifted, it seems like NOBODY'S HAPPY! I welcome all points of view.

Ward

 

[radiolover78]

Re: Clear Channel has ruined south Florida radio.

> > I've noticed a distinct lack of postings of any kind on
> this
> > board. So, one has to wonder a few things. Where have
> all
> > the posters gone? Is Miami radio so boring (or maybe
> worse)
> > that nobody gives a darn? Has there been a mass exodus of
>
> > Miami posters to the greener pastures of another medium?
> > Or, as I'd like to think (because I think this way),
> > everybody's on vacation. Surely there's SOMETHING to
> > discuss here? If not, maybe the Miami board needs to
> close
> > down...or maybe there isn't much going on here right now.
>
> > Either way, I'm curious...
> >
> > IS ANYBODY OUT THERE!?!
> >
>
> Per the national board, CC wants to be able to buy even more
> stations:
>
> "Clear Channel Chief Executive Mark Mays, citing competition
> from satellite-delivered subscription radio, proposed that
> broadcast radio operators be able to own 10 stations instead
> of eight in markets where there are at least 60 stations and
> up to 12 stations in markets where at least 75 radio outlets
> operate. "
>
> (from
> http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Board=usa&Post=555767 )
>
>
> Surely someone has something to say about how they've
> ruined south Florida radio -- and why ownership limits
> should be lowered, not raised.
>
> That should start a long thread.
>
> 73s from 954
>

ClearChannel is such a strong corporate empire. They're taking over radio! Maybe I can win the lottery, buy a Miami station, and spice things up. Cox isn't too good either.

Here is something else to discuss:

Should Cox give up on the Coast? Do they own 93 Rock? How is that doing? How do they sound? <P ID="signature">______________
The Place for the Latest Happenings in Radio
www.freewebs.com/radiostuffandnews
This site has been updated! Check it out! Thanks
</P>

 

[gumbo]

Re: A solution?!?

> Look, I could be shot for even suggesting this but, in my
> opinion I think the FCC should bring back all laws to the
> standards before deregulation of the industry. Why, you may
> ask? Simple. There were more mom & pop owned stations,
> more local connections to the market and, if you ask me,
> better sounding radio! Yes, the LAST thing any of us want
> is more government meddling but, to me, radio seemed much
> happier before all the rules were lifted. If rules and regs
> are such a bad thing then why did it work so well for so
> many years and now, with the rules lifted, it seems like
> NOBODY'S HAPPY! I welcome all points of view.
>
> Ward
>
It's natural that we hate the decline of choices. However, it's the average listener who makes the choices that matter, and while they aren't happy about the general state of radio in SoFla, they're not deserting it in enough numbers to make a difference. Long as the cash flows in, nothing will change.

As a listener, I agree that radio used to be better, and I've stopped listening as much as I used to.

As air talent, I was fulltime till dereg in '96, but couldn't stomach the changes or make enough to support the family. I plan to return one day, when money is no longer my big concern. In the meantime, I make due with p/t, voiceovers, and messages boards like this one.

 

[davideduardo]

Re: A solution?!?

>
> As air talent, I was fulltime till dereg in '96, but
> couldn't stomach the changes or make enough to support the
> family. I plan to return one day, when money is no longer my
> big concern. In the meantime, I make due with p/t,
> voiceovers, and messages boards like this one.
>

You would find that pay is generally better today, but in the area of benefits the improvemnts have been dramatic. While most mom and pop staitons and small gorups could not afford to offer insurance, 401-ks or other benefits, today all are common. Most of the crazy owners are gone, and local clusters offer an employee advancement without the U-Haul syndrome radio was made of 20 or 30 years ago. Consolidation has been wornderful for the 120,000 people who work in radio.

 

[954]

ma & pa

> You would find that pay is generally better today, but in
> the area of benefits the improvemnts have been dramatic.
> While most mom and pop staitons and small gorups could not
> afford to offer insurance, 401-ks or other benefits, today
> all are common. Most of the crazy owners are gone, and local
> clusters offer an employee advancement without the U-Haul
> syndrome radio was made of 20 or 30 years ago. Consolidation
> has been wornderful for the 120,000 people who work in
> radio.

If working conditions are improved but the product is worse
with less consumer choices, I wouldn't call it a net gain.

I'm sure McDonalds offers better benefits than your corner
ma & pa steakhouse, but which is a better restaurant?

73s from 954

<P ID="signature">______________
<center>South Florida Radio Pages</center></P>

 

[davideduardo]

Re: ma & pa

>
> If working conditions are improved but the product is worse
>
> with less consumer choices, I wouldn't call it a net gain.

There are far more format choices today than there were 30 years ago.
>
> I'm sure McDonalds offers better benefits than your corner
> ma & pa steakhouse, but which is a better restaurant?

Invalid comparison. A place that sells steaks, which seldom cost less than $20, and a place that has 69 cent cheeseburgurs on Thursday is like comparing WalMart clothes with Chanel originals.

Which would I prefer: local steakhouse or a Ruth's Chris? No contest... I know Ruth's Chris has the buying power to get the best meats and ingredients, and will consistently serve me the way I like my order cooked. I know thier volume insures freshness, and that they have sophisticated health and quality control procedures.

 

[FloridaBear1776]

Re: ma & pa

> >
>> Which would I prefer: local steakhouse or a Ruth's Chris?
> No contest... I know Ruth's Chris has the buying power to
> get the best meats and ingredients, and will consistently
> serve me the way I like my order cooked. I know thier volume
> insures freshness, and that they have sophisticated health
> and quality control procedures.
>
Obviously, you haven't been to Bern's Steak House in Tampa.

 

[davideduardo]

Re: ma & pa

> > >
> >> Which would I prefer: local steakhouse or a Ruth's Chris?
>
> > No contest... I know Ruth's Chris has the buying power to
> > get the best meats and ingredients, and will consistently
> > serve me the way I like my order cooked. I know thier
> volume
> > insures freshness, and that they have sophisticated health
>
> > and quality control procedures.
> >
> Obviously, you haven't been to Bern's Steak House in Tampa.

A person who works with me seriously considered joining thier apprenticeship program at one of the farms.

That is a very big exception, especially since they raise nearly all thier own produce and livestock. Unique in America, maybe.

 

[PTWorm]

Re: ma & pa

>> If working conditions are improved but the product is worse
>>
>> with less consumer choices, I wouldn't call it a net gain.
>
>There are far more format choices today than there were 30 years ago.

More choices is not necessarily conducive to a better quality product across the board. It may force one or two of the competitors, who have the resources to do so, to amp up their product in order to take market share away from the rest. However, once the competition is eliminated, there's no impetus to "rise above".

 

[954]

If four companies own most of the stations in town...

> >> If working conditions are improved but the product is
> worse
> >>
> >> with less consumer choices, I wouldn't call it a net
> gain.
> >
> >There are far more format choices today than there were 30
> years ago.
>
> More choices is not necessarily conducive to a better
> quality product across the board. It may force one or two
> of the competitors, who have the resources to do so, to amp
> up their product in order to take market share away from the
> rest. However, once the competition is eliminated, there's
> no impetus to "rise above".

If four companies own most of the stations in town...

And someone like DE, who says that nobody likes anything
but the biggest hits, is running each one...

There will be no room for anyone who wants to try a
different idea.

And very stale, limited playlists aiming for the
lowest common denominator.

Contrariwise, if 30 stations are run by two dozen
different (unconnected) people or more, there will
be many more points of view, listener choices,
advertiser choices, and employment opportunities.

What could possibly be wrong with that?

<P ID="signature">______________
<center>South Florida Radio Pages</center></P>

 

[davideduardo]

Re: If four companies own most of the stations in town...

>
> If four companies own most of the stations in town...

Actually, the duopoly owners are Cox, Clear, Jefferson Pilot (Lincoln), Beasley, SBS, Univision, Carlos Carreras and Multicultural. All own, at minimum more than one station on a band. You also have Salem, Eldorado, Entravision, and a number of independent owners with single stations.
>
> And someone like DE, who says that nobody likes anything
> but the biggest hits, is running each one...

I did not say "nobody" but did say that the immense majority of listeners go to stations that play their favorite songs, not ones that play unknown or new songs or ultra niche formats.
>
> There will be no room for anyone who wants to try a
> different idea.

Were there a different idea, one of the big companies is more likely to try it since they are not betting the farm. SIngle station owners have low risk tolerance. Innovation comes attached to deep pockets. Cox tried dance... and good for them for trying. Clear is trying reggaetón... and billing is off by 75% this year. Clear can afford to wait. A single owner can not.
>
> And very stale, limited playlists aiming for the
> lowest common denominator.

That is why there is the term "broad" in broadcasting. Radio appeals to mass audiences or fails.
>
> Contrariwise, if 30 stations are run by two dozen
> different (unconnected) people or more, there will
> be many more points of view, listener choices,
> advertiser choices, and employment opportunities.

No, there will be the equivalent of the late 70's.. 5 beautiful music stations and 4 ACs. The individual owners go for safe formats.
>
> What could possibly be wrong with that?
>

That it will not work? What else do you want?

 

[954]

Re: If four companies own most of the stations in town...

> > Contrariwise, if 30 stations are run by two dozen
> > different (unconnected) people or more, there will
> > be many more points of view, listener choices,
> > advertiser choices, and employment opportunities.
>
> No, there will be the equivalent of the late 70's.. 5
> beautiful music stations and 4 ACs. The individual owners go
> for safe formats.

We also had big band, WDBF, owned by Vic Knight.
Now we have no big band.

And classical WTMI, owned by Marlin Broadcasting.
Now we have no classical.

And oldies WAXY-FM, owned by RKO.
Now we have only post-65 oldies.

WFTL and WLOD were among the beautiful music stations.
Now we have none.

We even had jazz on WBUS in Miami Beach.
Now we just have jazz on WDNA, a public
access jazz station deep in the bowels of south
Dade that's not heard in most of Broward.

No, radio is not better today. More profitable
for the fortunate few who own shares, maybe.

But not any better for listeners.

73s from 954<P ID="signature">______________
<center>South Florida Radio Pages</center></P>