• 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

BCA and 1090/1700/105.7.

M

MGDForEver

Guest
I am by no means a radio expert, but wouldn't it make more sense for BCA to drop that financial talk format on 1700 in favor of simulcasting 1090, then use 105.7 for an actual music format? somehow I doubt that BCA will break the bank with Cash 1700 or whatever it's called. they could use that frequency to simulcast 1090 into the East county, then develop a viable music format on 105.7. Any thoughts?
 
> I am by no means a radio expert, but wouldn't it make more
> sense for BCA to drop that financial talk format on 1700 in
> favor of simulcasting 1090, then use 105.7 for an actual
> music format? somehow I doubt that BCA will break the bank
> with Cash 1700 or whatever it's called. they could use that
> frequency to simulcast 1090 into the East county, then
> develop a viable music format on 105.7. Any thoughts?

1700 is legally licenced to only use 1 kw at night. This means it would be pretty useless more than maybe 15 miles from the transmitter site at night.
 
> 1700 is legally licenced to only use 1 kw at night. This
> means it would be pretty useless more than maybe 15 miles
> from the transmitter site at night.
>

Your too gracious David. I was thinking 15 kilometers .... :)<P ID="signature">______________
+--
Chris
SDRadio.net</P>
 
Double X Logo A Go Go - Drink UP!

xx-logo_sm.jpg


Here it is: http://www.mty1090.com/sc/images/stories/1090_logos/xx-logo_sm.jpg
 
I have heard 1700 clear as a bell near Fresno driving at night on I-5.
 
To answer the original question

I doubt you are a Sports Radio P-1. Let me 'splain
You can make more money with spoken word on radio
than music formats. You have much more inventory and
can charge premium rates for live reads in the
various shows.

Sports has the best power-ratio period. There
are also large costs involved also in a live & local
talk format, so monetizing the XX brand on the
two bands makes complete sense. As others have
mentioned 1700 covers very little.
 
> To answer the original question
>
> I doubt you are a Sports Radio P-1. Let me 'splain
> You can make more money with spoken word on radio
> than music formats. You have much more inventory and
> can charge premium rates for live reads in the
> various shows.
>
> Sports has the best power-ratio period. There
> are also large costs involved also in a live & local
> talk format, so monetizing the XX brand on the
> two bands makes complete sense. As others have
> mentioned 1700 covers very little.

Actually ...you can possibly generate more money top line in talk radio formats sports or otherwise but power ratios do not really tell the story. Sports stations historically don't pull great 12+ numbers which is the basis for Power Ratios, and they certainly can pull better revenue shares than their 12+ ratings it does not mean they are more profitable than music stations. With extensive payroll costs for talent, in the case of 1090 large rights fees, lots of host travel to cover events, and many other expenses inherent in talk or sports you need to generate huge top line to make any money. The operating margins for Sports, Talk, News, are nowhere near most music stations which usually are more profitable than talk stations. There certainly are execeptions but the analysis of any business radio included is not based on how much money you bring in the door but how much you keep. I would guess that 1090 is not in the top 15 ranking of profitable stations in San Diego. Pretty definitely not in the top 10.
>
 
> 1700 is legally licenced to only use 1 kw at night. This
> means it would be pretty useless more than maybe 15 miles
> from the transmitter site at night.
>
That's a DAMN good 1kw -- I can hear them post-sunset and pre-sunrise north of Sacramento! X-Band or otherwise, I just wonder if that's running a little hotter than 1kw.
 
> > 1700 is legally licenced to only use 1 kw at night. This
> > means it would be pretty useless more than maybe 15 miles
> > from the transmitter site at night.
> >
> That's a DAMN good 1kw -- I can hear them post-sunset and
> pre-sunrise north of Sacramento! X-Band or otherwise, I
> just wonder if that's running a little hotter than 1kw.
>

People forget, KOGO is only 5kw, and is heard up and down the west coast because there are no other stations on 600. I would presume a similar situation with 1700 since I believe it is relatively unused part of the AM band.

Am I wrong about this?
 
Re: Double X Logo A Go Go - Drink UP!

Broken image URL, Chris.<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
> > 1700 is legally licenced to only use 1 kw at night. This
> > means it would be pretty useless more than maybe 15 miles
> > from the transmitter site at night.
> >
> That's a DAMN good 1kw -- I can hear them post-sunset and
> pre-sunrise north of Sacramento! X-Band or otherwise, I
> just wonder if that's running a little hotter than 1kw.
>

1700 is nearly a short wave frequency. But for local ground wave coverage, it sucks.

I have heard X band stations from Argentina in the US, with good readability, before the US stations went on.
 
> > > 1700 is legally licenced to only use 1 kw at night. This
>
> > > means it would be pretty useless more than maybe 15
> miles
> > > from the transmitter site at night.
> > >
> > That's a DAMN good 1kw -- I can hear them post-sunset and
> > pre-sunrise north of Sacramento! X-Band or otherwise, I
> > just wonder if that's running a little hotter than 1kw.
> >
>
> People forget, KOGO is only 5kw, and is heard up and down
> the west coast because there are no other stations on 600. I
> would presume a similar situation with 1700 since I believe
> it is relatively unused part of the AM band.

There is a 600 in Alturas, CA, and another in Flagstaff, so the dial is congested like all other frequencies. KOGO covers well due to the conductivty of low band stations. 1 kw at 540 covers more than 30 kw at 1600.
 
> I have heard 1700 clear as a bell near Fresno driving at
> night on I-5.
>

For myself, at the bottom of the Grand Canyon, sitting on my boat on a hot summer evening enjoying a cool beer and my favorite baseball team, the San Diego Padres.

Loud and clear.

Rickity
 
More confused than ever.

I do want to thank all of you guys for explaining this, but I must admit that most of the radio jargon zoomed right over my head. Let me know if I've got this right...BCA basically has three stations -- two of which are broadcasting the same format. the sports format is doing well for them, but can't be heard in East county. So, BCA could have either put the simulcasted sports format on either 1700 or 105.7. From what I've read from a couple of posters to this thread, 1700's coverage at night seems to be more than adequate despite its low power output. so, since coverage isn't the issue, it comes down to money. do I understand correctly that the financial format on 1700 is less costly than a music format would be on 105.7? As a side note, 1090 sounds really awkward on FM, almost as if someone plugged an AM radio tuned to 1090 directly into 105.7's board and just let it rip.
 
Re: More confused than ever.

> I do want to thank all of you guys for explaining this, but
> I must admit that most of the radio jargon zoomed right over
> my head. Let me know if I've got this right...BCA basically
> has three stations -- two of which are broadcasting the same
> format. the sports format is doing well for them, but can't
> be heard in East county. So, BCA could have either put the
> simulcasted sports format on either 1700 or 105.7. From
> what I've read from a couple of posters to this thread,
> 1700's coverage at night seems to be more than adequate
> despite its low power output. so, since coverage isn't the
> issue, it comes down to money. do I understand correctly
> that the financial format on 1700 is less costly than a
> music format would be on 105.7? As a side note, 1090 sounds
> really awkward on FM, almost as if someone plugged an AM
> radio tuned to 1090 directly into 105.7's board and just let
> it rip.

Well, I only own two radios (both car stereos) that can get an expanded band AM station. None of my radios in the house could tune in 1700. I'm sure I'm not the only one like that.

So, it seems like a no-brainer. 105.7 fills in the coverage holes, and everyone's FM radio can pick it up... so put it on 105.7.<P ID="signature">______________
...co-moderator of the Satellite Radio, Phoenix, and San Diego boards...</P>
 
Re: More confused than ever.

> > I do want to thank all of you guys for explaining this,
> but
> > I must admit that most of the radio jargon zoomed right
> over
> > my head. Let me know if I've got this right...BCA
> basically
> > has three stations -- two of which are broadcasting the
> same
> > format. the sports format is doing well for them, but
> can't
> > be heard in East county. So, BCA could have either put
> the
> > simulcasted sports format on either 1700 or 105.7. From
> > what I've read from a couple of posters to this thread,
> > 1700's coverage at night seems to be more than adequate
> > despite its low power output. so, since coverage isn't
> the
> > issue, it comes down to money. do I understand correctly
> > that the financial format on 1700 is less costly than a


The guy with the long answer to my post basically reinforced my
point. Because of the expense of live & local radio, rights fees,
board ops, etc. BCA is smart to monetize the format over two
venues as opposed to one. AM will give them essentialy regional
(Northerly) coverage, FM will shore up the holes in make the
format available to a whole new cume. They no longer have to incur the
costs associated with La Pantera,in the short run-its very
expensive. But in the long run BCA could be sitting pretty in
profit as the FM music stations start really feeling the heat,
not only from XM & Sirrius, but I-Pods, and Web Radio-especially
witth Wi-Max technology.






























> > music format would be on 105.7? As a side note, 1090
> sounds
> > really awkward on FM, almost as if someone plugged an AM
> > radio tuned to 1090 directly into 105.7's board and just
> let
> > it rip.
>
> Well, I only own two radios (both car stereos) that can get
> an expanded band AM station. None of my radios in the house
> could tune in 1700. I'm sure I'm not the only one like
> that.
>
> So, it seems like a no-brainer. 105.7 fills in the coverage
> holes, and everyone's FM radio can pick it up... so put it
> on 105.7.
>
 
105.7 Signal?

I haven't been to San Diego in about 4 or 5 years, and the frequency wasn't on then...

How does 105.7 do for SD market coverage? Is it comparable to other Mexican-based FM signals aiming at SD?

-OA<P ID="signature">______________
Ohio Media Watch - <a target="_blank" href=http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com>http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com</a></P>
 
Re: More confused than ever.

> > > I do want to thank all of you guys for explaining this,
> > but
> > > I must admit that most of the radio jargon zoomed right
> > over
> > > my head. Let me know if I've got this right...BCA
> > basically
> > > has three stations -- two of which are broadcasting the
> > same
> > > format. the sports format is doing well for them, but
> > can't
> > > be heard in East county. So, BCA could have either put
> > the
> > > simulcasted sports format on either 1700 or 105.7. From
>
> > > what I've read from a couple of posters to this thread,
> > > 1700's coverage at night seems to be more than adequate
> > > despite its low power output. so, since coverage isn't
> > the
> > > issue, it comes down to money. do I understand



If they could have developed another successful FM station it would have been much more profitable to have two stations than one. The simulcast of two stations running all the same commercials on both frequencies does not allow them to make as much money.
However they have an issue with the Padres that they needed to do a better job covering the Eastern part of the county. They probably had some committments to do that for the Padres and this is the best solution to honor that agreement and hopefully retain the rights going forward. I would expect them to have a battle over rights with Clear Channel for the next renewal period.
> correctly
> > > that the financial format on 1700 is less costly than a
>
>
> The guy with the long answer to my post basically reinforced
> my
> point. Because of the expense of live & local radio, rights
> fees,
> board ops, etc. BCA is smart to monetize the format over two
>
> venues as opposed to one. AM will give them essentialy
> regional
> (Northerly) coverage, FM will shore up the holes in make the
>
> format available to a whole new cume. They no longer have to
> incur the
> costs associated with La Pantera,in the short run-its very
> expensive. But in the long run BCA could be sitting pretty
> in
> profit as the FM music stations start really feeling the
> heat,
> not only from XM & Sirrius, but I-Pods, and Web
> Radio-especially
> witth Wi-Max technology.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > music format would be on 105.7? As a side note, 1090
> > sounds
> > > really awkward on FM, almost as if someone plugged an AM
>
> > > radio tuned to 1090 directly into 105.7's board and just
>
> > let
> > > it rip.
> >
> > Well, I only own two radios (both car stereos) that can
> get
> > an expanded band AM station. None of my radios in the
> house
> > could tune in 1700. I'm sure I'm not the only one like
> > that.
> >
> > So, it seems like a no-brainer. 105.7 fills in the
> coverage
> > holes, and everyone's FM radio can pick it up... so put it
>
> > on 105.7.
> >
>
 
Re: 105.7 Signal?

> I haven't been to San Diego in about 4 or 5 years, and the
> frequency wasn't on then...
>
> How does 105.7 do for SD market coverage? Is it comparable
> to other Mexican-based FM signals aiming at SD?

It is a full C, gets to lower OC, Hemet, Temecula. There is currently an issue as to whether they are running as authorized or at an illegal power and height.
 
Re: 105.7 Signal?

> > I haven't been to San Diego in about 4 or 5 years, and the
>
> > frequency wasn't on then...
> >
> > How does 105.7 do for SD market coverage? Is it
> comparable
> > to other Mexican-based FM signals aiming at SD?
>
> It is a full C, gets to lower OC, Hemet, Temecula. There is
> currently an issue as to whether they are running as
> authorized or at an illegal power and height.
>
If it's getting into Hemet - then KXRS would have a huge issue - since they are licensed to 105.7 for Hemet.... I can't imagine it goes that far.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom