-
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
Bills Moving to WGR
- Thread starter Philip_Airtime
- Start date
SirRoxalot said:
This is what you said:
SirRoxalot said:
You completely made that sales pitch up. Mike has NEVER believed in reducing the role and cost of talent. As I said, he has worked directly with lots of on-air folks to improve their performance and increase their value. I know several people who hired him as a coach, and are now highly paid morning show hosts in major markets.
McVay has never promoted a format like the Alan Burns “Movin’” format or Jack. That’s not what he does. Every job he’s taken has been a custom project designed to fit the market. He’s not a one-size-fits-all kind of guy, and from what I see of his work at Cumulus, he’s not doing that there either.
But you're filled with contradictions. On the one hand, you complain about "overworked" PDs who don't have the time to manage or direct their staff. Then you criticize PDs for leaving "little room for creativity." This isn't college radio. This isn't free form radio from the 60s. This is a professional job. What do you think the job of a PD is?
SirRoxalot said:
Huh? “Hired as a marketer?” There you go again. He’s the CEO. That’s not a marketer. He was never hired as a marketer. This is the guy who created MTV. This is a guy who is a lifelong programmer, who now is telling the bean counters what to do. That should be something you’d celebrate. Finally, a programmer is running a radio company! Instead you make up lies about him and paint him as a marketer. Sure there’s a little bit of marketing in every great programmer. That’s part of the job. Bill Drake was a master marketer.
You seem to have this view of radio that’s stuck in some time warp, where DJs do shows rather than are part of a station, where they say what they want, play what they want, and do what they want for the time they’re on the air, do it for their entire life, and get paid lots of money for it. That’s not a job, that’s fantasyland.
Wow. Still can't admit you made a mistake, huh? Well, here's another one. Show me ONE post where I've EVER advocated that jocks "say what they want, play what they want, and do what they want for the time they’re on the air, do it for their entire life, and get paid lots of money for it." Either you really don't know much about radio programming, or you're purposely using extreme examples that haven't been current for 40 freakin' years.
First, I've never said that radio should be format-free. I've said that the limitations are so severe that there's little room for a talent to be relatable in many modern, ultra-formatted stations. There is a middle ground - which many of us who actually have successfully executed a format understand. There's a format, but that format includes the opportunity to entertain and inform, and is audience-centric, not station-promotion-centric. Some stations still do that. Too many don't.
I've never advocated playlist freedom. I have advocated flexibility so jocks can avoid train-wrecks, actually perform a tasteful segway, and even pick a song or two each hour from the existing playlist because it fits a particular event or feeling prevalent in the market on that day. If it's the first day of sunshine after an extended period of gray days, almost every listener can relate to "Here Comes the Sun" or "Walking On Sunshine" or "Soak Up the Sun". Let 'em play it.
As far as most of the above is concerned, PD's make the call based on what will keep them employed by corporate. Corporate sets the basic rules. Stray too far, and you'll be out of a job in an industry where jobs are not easy to come by. There are a lot of guys who opt to play by corporate's rules, and find somebody else to throw under the bus if ratings don't meet expectations.
Radio is a vocation that most of us understand is not a 9-5 job with a rosy retirement at the end. That being said, good people with great track records are being replaced in record numbers. The result is an industry that can't even keep up with the feeble recovery of the rest of the economy. What's particularly galling is that radio survived previous recessions quite nicely. We're seeing stations gutted, and an industry that's eating is seed corn. It's not even a question of eating it's young. There ain't many young people who'll go near the medium. Certainly, radio's not on the radar of the best and the brightest in the younger generation.
The Mike McVay hired as a coach is being paid to invest in talent. He's capable of developing talent when that's what he's paid to do. Others have posted about their experience with Mike McVay and his three-ring binder approach to radio. That certainly wasn't designed to increase the cost of talent, or even keep it the same. The Mike McVay being paid by Cumuless is the three-ring binder guy, being paid to reduce the cost of talent. The spreadsheet jockies will give him the target numbers. He'll be the guy trying to figure out how to get there while doing the least harm to the product. I wish him luck with that.
Lastly, Pittman's track record is all about promoting new technologies - exactly the job he has at Clear Channel. He wasn't brought on board to promote radio, he was brought on board to promote digital. Radio's being used to promote the "new media", to help create a new landscape for Clear Channel. I suspect that Clear Channel is looking to move listeners to the new media, not support what they perceive as "old media". We'll see how that turns out in the long run. Some of their competitors are betting that radio will be around longer than Clear Channel expects - or may be longer than Clear Channel.
First, I've never said that radio should be format-free. I've said that the limitations are so severe that there's little room for a talent to be relatable in many modern, ultra-formatted stations. There is a middle ground - which many of us who actually have successfully executed a format understand. There's a format, but that format includes the opportunity to entertain and inform, and is audience-centric, not station-promotion-centric. Some stations still do that. Too many don't.
I've never advocated playlist freedom. I have advocated flexibility so jocks can avoid train-wrecks, actually perform a tasteful segway, and even pick a song or two each hour from the existing playlist because it fits a particular event or feeling prevalent in the market on that day. If it's the first day of sunshine after an extended period of gray days, almost every listener can relate to "Here Comes the Sun" or "Walking On Sunshine" or "Soak Up the Sun". Let 'em play it.
As far as most of the above is concerned, PD's make the call based on what will keep them employed by corporate. Corporate sets the basic rules. Stray too far, and you'll be out of a job in an industry where jobs are not easy to come by. There are a lot of guys who opt to play by corporate's rules, and find somebody else to throw under the bus if ratings don't meet expectations.
Radio is a vocation that most of us understand is not a 9-5 job with a rosy retirement at the end. That being said, good people with great track records are being replaced in record numbers. The result is an industry that can't even keep up with the feeble recovery of the rest of the economy. What's particularly galling is that radio survived previous recessions quite nicely. We're seeing stations gutted, and an industry that's eating is seed corn. It's not even a question of eating it's young. There ain't many young people who'll go near the medium. Certainly, radio's not on the radar of the best and the brightest in the younger generation.
The Mike McVay hired as a coach is being paid to invest in talent. He's capable of developing talent when that's what he's paid to do. Others have posted about their experience with Mike McVay and his three-ring binder approach to radio. That certainly wasn't designed to increase the cost of talent, or even keep it the same. The Mike McVay being paid by Cumuless is the three-ring binder guy, being paid to reduce the cost of talent. The spreadsheet jockies will give him the target numbers. He'll be the guy trying to figure out how to get there while doing the least harm to the product. I wish him luck with that.
Lastly, Pittman's track record is all about promoting new technologies - exactly the job he has at Clear Channel. He wasn't brought on board to promote radio, he was brought on board to promote digital. Radio's being used to promote the "new media", to help create a new landscape for Clear Channel. I suspect that Clear Channel is looking to move listeners to the new media, not support what they perceive as "old media". We'll see how that turns out in the long run. Some of their competitors are betting that radio will be around longer than Clear Channel expects - or may be longer than Clear Channel.
SirRoxalot said:
I really haven't seen evidence of that at the Cumulus stations I listen to. Some people have attempted to paint it that way, but I go by what I hear, and I hear a lot of freedom and leeway in what talent says and does, at both the Cumulus and former Citadel stations. Then again, he's only been there a few months.
The "three ring binder" approach worked for Boss Radio. It worked in a lot of markets. The goal is to win, not create art. Some formats work better with scripts and structure than others. Anyone who's worked in multiple formats knows that. If McVay uses it, he will use it where it works. But I see no evidence of him mandating a single style across all of his stations. And I don't see him looking to reduce the cost of talent. He's looking to make talent more effective.
SirRoxalot said:
No that’s not true. Maybe you missed the announcement, but as I said earlier, Bob is now CEO of Clear Channel. And he’s used that role to promote radio. He is a tireless advocate for radio, and represents it far better than Hogan or Mays. He is using IHeartRadio as part of his campaign to promote radio. You really need to keep up with what’s going on.
TheBigA said:
You haven't heard it, and you're everywhere, so everybody else must be wrong. Typical.
TheBigA said:
Surprisingly, not everyone agrees with you. For example:
http://www.tjohnsonmedia.com/2012/01/a-winning-formula/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+TracyJohnsonMedia+(Tracy+Johnson+Media)
Radio is an ENTERTAINMENT medium. Art is part of the picture - or should be. BTW, Boss Radio didn't work everywhere. Gordon McLendon's attempt at it got spanked in Buffalo, and was seriously modified in most Eastern markets. I'm surprised that you don't know that.
TheBigA said:
There are plenty of others who've expressed their opinion that Clear Channel seems to be looking at iHeartRadio as the eventual replacement for OTA music radio, and maybe radio in general. Bob Pittman wasn't brought on board for his radio expertise. He was brought on board for his digital expertise.
SirRoxalot said:
In the past few months I've read a lot of lies about McVay and Pittman. You're one of the people posting those lies. You have no knowledge of who either of them are or what they've done. You just repost things that prove your point. You give no actual examples of what they've done. I can understand your lack of knowledge about Pittman, since there are no CC stations in Buffalo. But you have 3 Cumulus FMs there. Has McVay forced them into a box as you say? Has he fired anyone? You tell me.
To be honest, I've never heard of the consultant whose blog you posted, but he sounds like one of those formula guys you tend to hate. Once again, I'm interested in results. He doesn't have a client list on his blog, so I don't know how successful his ideas are. You want bona fides from me, but you seem happy with this guy, whoever he is.
Regarding Pittman, you're really having trouble understanding who he is and what he does. You'd be better off leaving the subject alone.
I'll agree that one of us is having trouble understanding who Pittman is and what he does. And I'll be happy to leave it at that, but I'm pretty sure that you won't.
Whatever the bona fides of Tracy Johnson, it simply illustrates that your point of view isn't the only one. At least we know who Tracy Johnson is.
As far as the Cumuless FM's in Buffalo are concerned, there have been moves made. Arguably, losing the Bills will likely hurt 97-Rock from a ratings standpoint. How it will ultimately affect revenue has yet to be answered. There are also significant changes at WEDG. Considering that the Fall book was just released, it's a little early to say that "nothing's changed". Oh, and by the way, there has been a net loss in staff in Buffalo since Cumuless took over. But you wouldn't know that, would you? And there have been much larger changes in other markets. It could be that Cumuless simply has bigger fish to fry at the moment, and Buffalo's turn hasn't come yet.
Whatever the bona fides of Tracy Johnson, it simply illustrates that your point of view isn't the only one. At least we know who Tracy Johnson is.
As far as the Cumuless FM's in Buffalo are concerned, there have been moves made. Arguably, losing the Bills will likely hurt 97-Rock from a ratings standpoint. How it will ultimately affect revenue has yet to be answered. There are also significant changes at WEDG. Considering that the Fall book was just released, it's a little early to say that "nothing's changed". Oh, and by the way, there has been a net loss in staff in Buffalo since Cumuless took over. But you wouldn't know that, would you? And there have been much larger changes in other markets. It could be that Cumuless simply has bigger fish to fry at the moment, and Buffalo's turn hasn't come yet.
SirRoxalot said:
I doubt that was McVay's decision. Maybe it was. But the ratings of a station aren't made with a 5 hour block on Sundays. It might have been interesting to see the station flip to FM sports-talk and go after WGR. But that was not to be, so the Bills became extraneous. But I didn't say "nothing's changed," so don't attribute that quote to me. I was asking you. You obviously don't know.
I ask this question only because it hasn't really been brought up since page 3...anymore opinions about the Bills moving back to WGR?
(lol)
(lol)
johnbasalla said:
I noticed the "company line" promos aimed at 97 Rock have disappeared. Guess that was to be expected.
Somewhere in this thread the term "buyer's remorse" was mentioned. It's doubtful that will happen for a long time, if at all. Getting the Bills is a big win for Entercom because it solidifies WGR as the sports station in Buffalo, having both of Buffalo's major league franchises. From here out, it doesn't matter to Entercom that the Bills were 6-10 last year and haven't made the playoffs in twelve years, or that the Sabres can't seem to buy a win this season. It's all good for talk show cume, share and TSL during the week and especially on weekends, a period when even sports talk radio faces problems, except when the station has a major sports franchise that attracts and maintains cume and share. IIRC, the Bills on game day draw a 30+ share of listening from 10 a.m. to 7 p.m., Men 25-54.
The double shot of Bills and Sabres will give Entercom as a cluster, and WGR in particular, huge selling opportunities across all platforms. The ratings from Bills football alone will drive WGR, already doing very well Men 25-54 (I was told WGR is #1 Men 25-54 in AM Drive), to even greater heights. Some have speculated that the Sabres would not be happy about being "a second banana," but I don't see this happening. The Sabres can ride the Bills wave when the Sabres are winning or hide behind it when they're losing, as they are now.
There is an axiom in this market that says, "hockey season doesn't begin until the Bills have been eliminated from the playoffs." For the past twelve years that's come to mean the first week of January. Things could change. Bills fans can only hope, given what happened the last time WGR had the Bills radio rights, that history repeats itself. All things considered, Entercom Buffalo and Rochester are probably too busy (and successful) selling to even think about "buyer's remorse."
The double shot of Bills and Sabres will give Entercom as a cluster, and WGR in particular, huge selling opportunities across all platforms. The ratings from Bills football alone will drive WGR, already doing very well Men 25-54 (I was told WGR is #1 Men 25-54 in AM Drive), to even greater heights. Some have speculated that the Sabres would not be happy about being "a second banana," but I don't see this happening. The Sabres can ride the Bills wave when the Sabres are winning or hide behind it when they're losing, as they are now.
There is an axiom in this market that says, "hockey season doesn't begin until the Bills have been eliminated from the playoffs." For the past twelve years that's come to mean the first week of January. Things could change. Bills fans can only hope, given what happened the last time WGR had the Bills radio rights, that history repeats itself. All things considered, Entercom Buffalo and Rochester are probably too busy (and successful) selling to even think about "buyer's remorse."
A 30 share, Men 25-54? Combine the shares of the 97 + 103 Bills simulcast and it's more like 40! 97 gets 75% of the listening. Fall 2011, WGR is #1 Men 25-54 in morning drive. (Top 10: WGR, WGRF, WBLK, WBEN, WYRK, WKSE, WEDG, WHTT, WBUF, WJYE.) Bad enough WGR beats 97 or 103, but when chick-n-teen WKSE does better than a guy station like the Edge, there's a problem. Could be the reason Shredd & Ragan were moved back to AM drive on the Edge.
Shredd & Ragan moving back to mornings can't be good news for Norton & Co.
TheBigA said:
Remember, in Cleveland, WTAM/1100 is the flagship of the Indians, Browns (co-flagship with hot talk/rock WMMS/100.7) and Cavaliers. And for most of the day, they carry the standard CC news/talk format.
Usually most conflicts enter between the Indians and Cavs; of which WTAM carries one game, while WMMS carries the other (WTAM airs the Indians and WMMS the Cavaliers if the Cavs game is a regular-season one; if it's a Cavs playoff game, WTAM airs the Cavs and WMMS the Indians). Because WMMS is the actual Browns flagship, in a Browns-Indians conflict, WTAM will air the Indians game, then occasionally will JIP the Browns game at end of network coverage.
I am pretty sure in the rare moment that there is a Sabres-Bills conflict, WGR will carry the Bills, while WBEN or WWKB will carry the Sabres.
As for no FM Bills flagship: that actually surprises me to a degree. Usually the NFL takes top priority with finding an FM flagship. But without Cumulus even wanting to re-up, that left the Bills with little other options - unless WKSE or WTSS simulcasts the games on FM.
(And don't laugh; in the early 90s, the Browns didn't even have a flagship station, but simulcast the games on soft AC WDOK/102.1 [!!!] and all-sports WKNR/1220, which were not co-owned at that point. It may not be a massive shock to see Kiss or Star carry the games. Simulcasting on WBEN AM/FM would be overkill.)
One thing that hasn't been discussed here is that there was a difference between the Edge broadcast and the 97-Rock broadcast. 97-Rock delayed the Bills broadcasts to match the TV delay. That way, people who preferred the local announcers could watch the game and listen to Murph & Co. instead of the frequently lame broadcast team provided by the network. People at the game who liked to listen to the radio while watching live, or who weren't watching the game on TV often preferred to listen to WEDGE, in real time.
If WGR is the only outlet for Entercom, they'll have to decide whether they want to go with real time, losing the TV simulcast audience, or delay to match TV, losing the audience at the game. Either way, I suspect their numbers will be lower than the combined 97-Rock/Edge audience.
If WGR is the only outlet for Entercom, they'll have to decide whether they want to go with real time, losing the TV simulcast audience, or delay to match TV, losing the audience at the game. Either way, I suspect their numbers will be lower than the combined 97-Rock/Edge audience.
G
GeorgeKramer
Guest
Who figures to be WGR's halftime host on game days? I'm thinking they'll stick with Howard and Jeremy for pregame and Schopp and Bulldog for postgame, but what about the halftime show?
G
GeorgeKramer
Guest
Brad Riter as sideline reporter and halftime host?
- Status