Realizing of course that the "city of license" is largely fiction I'm only going by how the FCC sees the issue..Englewood OH is covered by every Dayton signal but WLQT is the "first local service" to Englewood (and only one licensed to that suburb). The feds will not want this "service" shut down
-
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
Bob Pittman
- Thread starter SaltyDog
- Start date
The FCC isnt looking at what programming is on the stations, only that the station is there providing the required signal.
Why would the FCC demand that stations go silent? If CC can't sell the stations in the Aloha Trust by a drop-dead date - say the next renewal date - the FCC would simply revoke the license and make it available to other operators with no compensation to Clear Channel. OK, they could auction the stations, and give Clear Channel the proceeds minus expenses (and perhaps a fine).
This whole "nobody wants to buy them" is crap. Nobody wants to buy them because Clear Channel's price is unrealistic in today's market.
This whole "nobody wants to buy them" is crap. Nobody wants to buy them because Clear Channel's price is unrealistic in today's market.
I've got to agree with TheBigA regarding the pricing of stations these days. Much like the housing market...some stations are "upside-down"...they just aren't worth their original purchase price and the debt load is still high.
If you go to: http://www.radiostationsforsale.net/
You can watch as the list grows larger each month...and then there is the occasional station that just turns it's license in and goes silent.
The radio market is getting tougher and tougher to turn a profit in.... :-\
If you go to: http://www.radiostationsforsale.net/
You can watch as the list grows larger each month...and then there is the occasional station that just turns it's license in and goes silent.
The radio market is getting tougher and tougher to turn a profit in.... :-\
Of course there are stations out there that are "under water" financially. Some of the consolidators simply paid too much. Not only that, the value of radio stations is declining for several reasons. First, nobody knows if the technology will survive the assault by on-line media available via cell carriers. Secondly, the programming practices of too many big players have reduced the role of radio as both an entertainment and information medium.
So, how do you determine the value of radio stations these days? It's pretty obvious that buyers aren't sold on the multiples of cash flow used in the past. The "new" method is paying per person in the service area. CBS is paying $8.5-million for a Class B that covers most of DC and Baltimore. If you use the "new" method of paying per person in the service area, they're paying less than $2 per "pop". Is that the new level of the market? Probably not, since Harold "The World Is Ending" Camping's Family Stations HAS to raise money, and ain't getting it from his radio stations.
There's little doubt that most stations aren't worth what they were 5 years ago, or whenever Clear Channel purchased them. But the important thing is that Clear Channel doesn't OWN the frequencies, it LICENSES them. They're over the limit in the number of stations that they're allowed to own, and there should be a limit as to how long they can hold them in the Aloha Trust.
So, how do you determine the value of radio stations these days? It's pretty obvious that buyers aren't sold on the multiples of cash flow used in the past. The "new" method is paying per person in the service area. CBS is paying $8.5-million for a Class B that covers most of DC and Baltimore. If you use the "new" method of paying per person in the service area, they're paying less than $2 per "pop". Is that the new level of the market? Probably not, since Harold "The World Is Ending" Camping's Family Stations HAS to raise money, and ain't getting it from his radio stations.
There's little doubt that most stations aren't worth what they were 5 years ago, or whenever Clear Channel purchased them. But the important thing is that Clear Channel doesn't OWN the frequencies, it LICENSES them. They're over the limit in the number of stations that they're allowed to own, and there should be a limit as to how long they can hold them in the Aloha Trust.
SirRoxalot said:
The most likely scenario is the most simple. Most of the Aloha Trust stations are marginal facilities, such as WALK AM on Long Island or WZZW in Ashland-Huntington, KY. A number of others are over-quotas in really overradioed markets like Panama City.
So, who is going to buy these facilities, many of which have D-O-G written on the license? More than that, who is going to finance a purchase of a station with low or no billing and little chance of making it? Is it CC's fault that banks are not lending and advertisers are spending less?
Only 3 of the stations have ratings. Two have a 0.1, and one, WALK.FM on Long Island, has a nice 5-share rating. But even that one comes with a dog AM, and is a standalone. Nobody finances competitive market standalones, either. Barnstable is pulling out of LI. Cox just sold an FM in suburban NYC and gave away 2 AMs... looks like a market not much wanted by anyone.
Anyway, most of the Aloha stations were sold, given to non-profits or taken permanently silent. There are only 24 left, so no big deal.
I'm most familiar with Dayton, Ohio, and while the two spin off signals are of some value to Clear Channel, they don't seem to be to anyone else. One is in a far northwest suburb, a Class A 80/90 drop in. They just moved their soft A/C to that frequency, swapping the CHR format that used to be there. They have always had signal problems downtown. The other is a 50,000 watt FM about 40 miles away which will never be truly competitive. The only scenario that I could see happening is someone wanting to make it a north-of-Interstate 70 only station, but who knows if that would work today though it has in the past. There are other signals in the city of license. There might have been a possibility of EMF buying them but since they just closed on non-comm WCDR and all its translators, and already own several rimshot signals that's unlikely.
By the way the 50,000 watter was the former WDRK, which lost it's license over fraudulent billing and other issues. Even after the FCC had issued the "lock the door and throw the key away" order WDRK continued to operate for some time. Eventually a new applicant was selected. Which shows me these stations won't be taken silent.
By the way the 50,000 watter was the former WDRK, which lost it's license over fraudulent billing and other issues. Even after the FCC had issued the "lock the door and throw the key away" order WDRK continued to operate for some time. Eventually a new applicant was selected. Which shows me these stations won't be taken silent.
TheBigA said:
Apparently, neither do you, or you'd be spouting them here.
SirRoxalot said:
Or, not unlike eBay, there is a Buy it Now price, revealed to very qualified buyers, and a "make offer" price. Anyone could say "I'll offer you $3,000,000 for the Long Island combo, but only if the offer is not totally whacked will it be accepted.
Most of the time, a station price is not even know... and in many, it is not even known that the station is for sale.
Again, there are only 24 stations left in the trust, many of which are of limited value; they may minimally contribute to a cluster, but could probably not work as stand alones.
But, then again, the conspiracy theory would say that CC is playing dirty tricks to hang on to a daytime AM on 1600 in the Huntington/Ashland market or to a 500 watter (virtual daytimer) on 1370 in the "home of the super-successful AM," Long Island.
While BP has skin in CC he also is major investor in Double O Radio. Double O is a disaster. Look at Panama City where Double O has great signals but group wise it is always (as in ALWAYS) in third place. Their Columbia South Carolina stations are in worse condition. I assume BP is at CC because of his association with MTV and not because of any recent leadership credentials in delivering success to radio properties, especially his own.
Ele said:
Bob is a founder of the Pilot Group LLC, which is an investor in Double O, as well as several other small radio companies. Being an investor doesn't mean you run the stations, as we've seen with other investment companies. Clearly, Pittman didn't like this arrangement and he wanted to get into the game in a big way, which is why he got involved with CC. But I agree completely with your assessment of Double O, and think that reflects more on their management than on Pittman.
I've been impressed with iHeart Radio and Clear Channel's promotion of it. What doesn't impress me is some of what Pittman says when pitching the radio business in general and Clear Channel in particular. I'm reading from the December 8th Taylor on Radio-Info.
He also drew a distinction between Pandora ("a playlist generator") and broadcast radio stations. He says "We should not let people confuse the two."
Really? Is that part of the strategy? To convince people that Pandora is not radio? Okay, even if it's not, it's a radio substitute. I still listen to a lot of terrestrial radio but also to Pandora, iHeart Radio, Tune-In, and ESPN Radio on the ESPN app. As I move from one to another, I'm not thinking "Okay, that's enough radio for now, I think I'll listen to the playlist generator". In my mind, it's all radio.
And then there's this from Future of Radio panelist James Cridland
“Pandora is a brilliant personalized jukebox” – basically weighing in on Pittman’s side. He even thinks that American radio should’ve protested Pandora and others adopting the label of “radio.”
Oh, please, stop it.
Back to Pittman speaking about how radio should be getting a much larger share of advertising revenue.
Pittman's last and most important chart showed revenue as it were adjusted for usage. In his ideal world, newspapers would get much less of the advertising pie, TV stations would get somewhat less, and radio's take would mushroom from about $15 billion to $38.1 billion. Pittman says it's crucial for radio to "make new revenue to the radio sector our priority." And he has this advice, as a former radio programmer and executive now returned to the business - "Don't badmouth your own industry."
Radio "needs to tell its story better" and quit badmouthing one another. I've been hearing and reading pretty much the same thing beginning with the RAB since at least 1980.
One of the goofier things that managers in radio do is to spend incredible amounts of money on radio ratings and then when a book is bad, dismiss selling "by the numbers" (um, those "numbers" represent people) and to discredit not only the results of that particular survey, but of Arbitron entirely. Then they wonder why advertisers question radio as a medium. Would you want to buy advertising on a medium if you didn't believe you could accurately quantify what you were getting for your money?
He also drew a distinction between Pandora ("a playlist generator") and broadcast radio stations. He says "We should not let people confuse the two."
Really? Is that part of the strategy? To convince people that Pandora is not radio? Okay, even if it's not, it's a radio substitute. I still listen to a lot of terrestrial radio but also to Pandora, iHeart Radio, Tune-In, and ESPN Radio on the ESPN app. As I move from one to another, I'm not thinking "Okay, that's enough radio for now, I think I'll listen to the playlist generator". In my mind, it's all radio.
And then there's this from Future of Radio panelist James Cridland
“Pandora is a brilliant personalized jukebox” – basically weighing in on Pittman’s side. He even thinks that American radio should’ve protested Pandora and others adopting the label of “radio.”
Oh, please, stop it.
Back to Pittman speaking about how radio should be getting a much larger share of advertising revenue.
Pittman's last and most important chart showed revenue as it were adjusted for usage. In his ideal world, newspapers would get much less of the advertising pie, TV stations would get somewhat less, and radio's take would mushroom from about $15 billion to $38.1 billion. Pittman says it's crucial for radio to "make new revenue to the radio sector our priority." And he has this advice, as a former radio programmer and executive now returned to the business - "Don't badmouth your own industry."
Radio "needs to tell its story better" and quit badmouthing one another. I've been hearing and reading pretty much the same thing beginning with the RAB since at least 1980.
One of the goofier things that managers in radio do is to spend incredible amounts of money on radio ratings and then when a book is bad, dismiss selling "by the numbers" (um, those "numbers" represent people) and to discredit not only the results of that particular survey, but of Arbitron entirely. Then they wonder why advertisers question radio as a medium. Would you want to buy advertising on a medium if you didn't believe you could accurately quantify what you were getting for your money?
Salty Dog said:
My view is the reason they do it is because they know it sticks in our craw. How do you annoy the big dog? Tease him. Taunt him. "You're not so big!" Confusion can lead to sampling, and they feel they'll win the battle if people will sample them. And truthfully, there's nothing we can do about it. If we try and stop them, we've played into their game. And we don't own the trademark on radio.
TheBigA said:
Some of the biggest opponents of calling it Pandora Radio instead of just Pandora were early proponents of the service. They figured the word "radio" was old-fashioned and un-hip. I believe Tim Westergren insisted on calling it Pandora Radio because he understood marketing and he knew the value of branding a product in the mind of the consumer using an anchor that already existed, in this case, radio.
Arguing that it's not radio will get Pittman nowhere. Early 20th Century carriage makers could have just as easily argued that their new competition should not be called "horseless carriages" because they aren't carriages at all.
- Status