• 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

BSMW, BRW: 1510 drops local shows

raccoonradio

raccoonradio

http://www.bostonsportsmedia.com
http://www.bostonradiowatch.com

WWZN 1510 has dropped its local programming (Diehards, Eddie Andleman) in favor of nationwide SNR shows...Diehards were being 'eulogized' according to a post on the forum at BostonSportsMediaWatch. Is the station on the selling block? Will the
Sporting News Network be merged with another company?

Boston Radio Watch said last Feb. that the potential sale of WWZN was being held
up for about nine months (see link below for reasons why)...well, it's almost Nov., so...

http://home.comcast.net/~rockmont/February_18_2005.htm
 
Re: More on WWZN from Globe; Scott's Shots

> More on WWZN from this Globe article (link via
> BostonSportsMediaWatch)
>
http://www.boston.com/sports/other_sports/> articles/2005/10/28/company_pulls_plug_on_wwzns_local_shows/
>
>
> also:
>
> http://www.bostonsportsmedia.com/shots/
>
> ". . . One Boston radio talent down the dial has told Shots
> that the entire operation will be boarded up January 1,
> leaving open the door for some local programming to continue
> for two months."
>
I was hoping AM 1510 would get some listeners, I still have flashbacks to the WITS days.. Here's a thought though.. With practically every article written about WWZN 1510, it always seemed that the words.. "poor signal" were never that far off. Doesn't matter if your good, and you can't be heard due to the technology, no ratings and no revenues..

Anyone want to speculate why there was no effort to improve the signal somewhat?
I'm pointing out to the demise of two nearby 1510 co-channels, one in New London CT, and the other 1510 in Sherbrooke, Quebec ??
 
Re: More on WWZN from Globe; Scott's Shots

The 1510 in New London went dark a long time back.There is, however, a CP for a 1510 in Uncasville, CT. It will be directional, same pattern day and night with 1 kW day and 250 watts at night. CJRS in Sherbrooke Quebec is still on. AMSTNS lists it as 50 kW-D, 10 kW-N, directional to the northeast away from the US. WWZN would have to protect Quebec moreso than CT.Their main protection in the US now is to WLAC Nashville.


Dave Gardiner

WVCH 740/WNWR 1540

Philadelphia
 
Re: More on WWZN from Globe; Scott's Shots

> The 1510 in New London went dark a long time back.There is,
> however, a CP for a 1510 in Uncasville, CT. It will be
> directional, same pattern day and night with 1 kW day and
> 250 watts at night. CJRS in Sherbrooke Quebec is still on.
> AMSTNS lists it as 50 kW-D, 10 kW-N, directional to the
> northeast away from the US. WWZN would have to protect
> Quebec moreso than CT.Their main protection in the US now is
> to WLAC Nashville.
>
>
> Dave Gardiner
>
> WVCH 740/WNWR 1540
>
> Philadelphia
>
CJRS is darker than the night. It hasn't been on the air in at the past 5 to 10 years at least up there.
 
Re: More on WWZN from Globe; Scott's Shots

too bad... well, out of bad comes good--no more Eddie Andelman. I wonder if Ryen Russillo will re-surface on the new ESPN station if they decide to add more local programming... or add him to the Felger show with Winnie.
 
No last show for Eddie/ESPN 102.5 :)

> too bad... well, out of bad comes good--no more Eddie
> Andelman. I wonder if Ryen Russillo will re-surface on the
> new ESPN station if they decide to add more local
> programming... or add him to the Felger show with Winnie.
>
I have my radio tuned to WWZN right now (it's 2:02 pm) wondering if Eddie A.
will get to do a last show or not...Eddie may have been pretty good in the
past but maybe he's past his prime.

Meanwhile on the Boston Sports Media board, someone wondered if the cure for
ESPN's post-sunset signal woes might be for them to buy WCRB! Yes, it's
ESPN 102.5! (Not the first time a sports network aired on an FM. When I
was briefly in Nashville I noticed there was
ESPN 106.7...

Guess what: It's the James Brown show (and with a fill-in host, yet). Buh bye Eddie.

RD_BOS_eddie_andelman_show-tsl.gif


">
 
Re: More on WWZN from Globe; Scott's Shots

> The 1510 in New London went dark a long time back.There is,
> however, a CP for a 1510 in Uncasville, CT. It will be
> directional, same pattern day and night with 1 kW day and
> 250 watts at night. CJRS in Sherbrooke Quebec is still on.
> AMSTNS lists it as 50 kW-D, 10 kW-N, directional to the
> northeast away from the US. WWZN would have to protect
> Quebec moreso than CT.Their main protection in the US now is
> to WLAC Nashville.

What AMSTNS lists is what the FCC carries in its database - and the FCC still carries CJRS in its database because Canada still reports it to the U.S. as an active station, notwithstanding that it's been gone for years. Yes, they can do that, legally, and yes, WWZN has to protect CJRS as though it still existed.

WWZN *did* let out its day pattern a bit a year or two ago to fill some of the gaps from the deletion of New London. Uncasville, if it ever gets on the air, will have to protect WWZN, not the other way around.

That's about all the room WWZN had to expand that signal, though, at least as long as it wants to run 50 kW from Waltham. The protections to WLAC and CJRS at night are killers, and by day the station has to protect the 1490s in Haverhill and Milford, 1500 in Connecticut, 1520 in Greenfield, and the list goes on. The signal is what it is - good in the city, nonexistent in much of the suburbs - and it will only succeed when it ends up with a format that fits that signal. "Mega 1510 y 1400" would have been an ideal combination, and if Costa-Eagle had the money, 1510 would perfectly complement its 800 signal in the Merrimack Valley, too.<P ID="signature">______________
Tower Site Calendar 2006 JUST RELEASED! - <a target="_blank" href=http://www.fybush.com/nerw.html#calendar>www.fybush.com</a></P>
 
Re: No last show for Eddie

If the new owners of the WAMG-890/WLLH-1410 simulcast want to expand their schedule of local sports talk shows, I suspect Eddie Andleman will be the first person approached, now that WWZN-1510 has dropped local programming.

The "Diehards" team (Ryen Rusillo, Jon Anik and Anthony Pepe) might also get an offer, again if WAMG/WLLH decides to expand it's local programming.
 
Other Unanswered Questions Concerning WWZN-1510

There are three other questions concerning WWZN-1510:

(1) How long will Sporting News Radio continue to feed programming to affiliates??

(2) And when Sporting News drops it's network feed, what will eventually happen to WWZN's ownership and format?? My guess is that it will probably be leased-time ethnic, perhaps Spanish, given the large hole for Spanish-language programming that now exists in the market.

(3) What will happen to Harvard Football broadcasts in 2006 and beyond?? The games are produced by an independent packager who likely pays WWZN for the airtime. I do know that WRCA-1330 will broadcast Harvard men's hockey games this season (I believe the games are produced by the same independent packager who produces Harvard football), so Harvard football next year may well be on 1330.

(4) WWZN has been the Boston-area home for radio broadcasts of NASCAR stock-car races for several years. Where will Bostonians be able to hear NASCAR in 2006?? I wouldn't be surprised if NASCAR in 2006 and beyond is heard locally on WKLB-99.5, given that in many other cities, NASCAR races are broadcast on FM stations that program country music.
 
Re: Other Unanswered Questions Concerning WWZN-1510

> (1) How long will Sporting News Radio continue to feed
> programming to affiliates??

I have heard the network could be sold/merged...up to SNR
what will happen now.

> (2) And when Sporting News drops it's network feed, what
> will eventually happen to WWZN's ownership and format??

One "source" told Boston Sports Media's David Scott that
the whole operation )of WWZN, not the entire SNR network) could be shut down by Jan 1

My
> guess is that it will probably be leased-time ethnic,
> perhaps Spanish, given the large hole for Spanish-language
> programming that now exists in the market.

Yes..maybe some of those expanded band pirates now doing
foreign language programming might find a way to fund ethnic
leased programming (sell advertising, if they can)--or they
may just keep hoping the FCC doesn't shut their pirate broadcasts down.

> (3) What will happen to Harvard Football broadcasts in 2006
> and beyond?? The games are produced by an independent
> packager who likely pays WWZN for the airtime.

maybe can work a deal out to put games on WHRB (I know, they already
DO those broadcasts as well)...a _commercial_ college station.
Speaking of which, I have heard some college stations on the AM
dial, running commercials et al (Dartmouth, Yale, Quinnipiac)...
maybe a college would be interested in the station (a tax-free
donation to them? Ernie Boch did that with 1240 on the Cape,
though 1240 stayed non-comm //WBUR-FM)


Where will
> Bostonians be able to hear NASCAR in 2006??

ESPN Boston I would presume, or yes, WKLB, but who knows. From travelling to some other parts of the country, and even other parts of New England, I know
many country stations do run NASCAR
I wouldn't be
> surprised if NASCAR in 2006 and beyond is heard locally on
> WKLB-99.5, given that in many other cities, NASCAR races are
> broadcast on FM stations that program country music.
>
 
Re: Other Unanswered Questions Concerning WWZN-1510

I most definately think it is possible for 1510 to go to ethnic programmign under its current ownership. Just look at 620 AM in New York City. It's owned by the people who own Sporting News Radio (it even has the WSNR calls) and most of their broacast day is leased out to Russian Broadcasters.
 
Re: Other Unanswered Questions Concerning WWZN-1510

> I most definately think it is possible for 1510 to go to
> ethnic programmign under its current ownership. Just look at
> 620 AM in New York City. It's owned by the people who own
> Sporting News Radio (it even has the WSNR calls) and most of
> their broacast day is leased out to Russian Broadcasters.
>
As long as whoever controls WWZN can clear enough to pay the rent on the transmitter site in Waltham--the rent is rumored to be $25,000/month ($300,000/year)--plus the power bill to keep the transmitter on the air, and other insurance and maintenance costs, I think the station will remain on the air. There are 8760 hours in a year (8784 in leap years). Say they need $500,000 per year to meet the rent and power expenses, that means the station burns about $1/minute give or take. If they can broker the time for at least that much (with suitable adjustments for the hours they don't sell and collection expenses for the program producers who try to stiff them), I don't think the ownership will surrender the license. I think there is better than a 99% chance WWZN will continue as a brokered-time operation--largely ethnic, some religious, and probably some infomercials. In other words, anyone who pays and who doesn't try to broadcast things that the FCC will shut down the station for airing.

If business starts to build in one particular programming area, the operator might become adventurous enough to try to cater to that type of brokered programming (WBIX and WBNW are a good examples)--something that would loosely be called a format--but if no type of client appears to predominate in the mix, I think it will just turn into every hour goes to the highest bidder.

Could this start a price war among WWZN, WUNR, WAZN, WLYN, WRCA, WNTN. WEZE, WROL, WBIX, WSRO, and WBNW? (I guess I should add WJDA and WESX because part of their broadcast day is brokered.) Maybe, but I doubt it. I think the operators of these stations know how to make a buck on brokered time without getting into that sort of unpleasantness. For sure, Salem (WEZE, WROL, and WTTT) knows how to do it profitably with mostly religious programs and so does Multicultural (WAZN, WLYN) with ethnic. Alex Langer allegedly quickly figured out how to stop the hemmoraging at WBIX. And in this market, WUNR has been at it longer than anybody and wouldn't be doing it if the business weren't at least breaking even. Of these stations, WWZN has the best signal--arguably the only signal that can be called full-market--which is good because it must also have the highest fixed expenses.
 
Re: Other Unanswered Questions Concerning WWZN-1510

Definitely the best choice for 1510 is to go ethnic-brokered. And I do believe that the 10 or so other brokered stations in the Boston market would moderately-to-severely feel the pinch of such. 1510 would start making money instantly should it decide to do so, as Dan pointed out, it would have the best signal of any of the other lower-powered stations... and just the claim of 50,000 watts would really work well for the people who buy the time. ("Hey, we're TEN TIMES MORE POWERFUL than any of the other stations offering the same laguage" etc etc). Of course, the nighttime 50kw signal would not do them any good outside of the Boston market, as there aren't too many other-language folks up in Yarmouth, Maine, nor Yarmouth Nova Scotia. - If 1510 were to become religious like most of the other religious stations(worshipping the green), then perhaps the gullable people hearing the skywave signal in the way-up northeast might just send in $$$ to the program producers. - Let's just hope that 1510 doesn't go religious, nor infomercials which sell people "stomach-magnets" (which pull the pain out of your abdomen) and/or cream that's put on a part of your body that makes it grow an inch. Oh where o where is the FTC?





> > I most definately think it is possible for 1510 to go to
> > ethnic programmign under its current ownership. Just look
> at
> > 620 AM in New York City. It's owned by the people who own
> > Sporting News Radio (it even has the WSNR calls) and most
> of
> > their broacast day is leased out to Russian Broadcasters.
> >
> As long as whoever controls WWZN can clear enough to pay the
> rent on the transmitter site in Waltham--the rent is rumored
> to be $25,000/month ($300,000/year)--plus the power bill to
> keep the transmitter on the air, and other insurance and
> maintenance costs, I think the station will remain on the
> air. There are 8760 hours in a year (8784 in leap years).
> Say they need $500,000 per year to meet the rent and power
> expenses, that means the station burns about $1/minute give
> or take. If they can broker the time for at least that much
> (with suitable adjustments for the hours they don't sell and
> collection expenses for the program producers who try to
> stiff them), I don't think the ownership will surrender the
> license. I think there is better than a 99% chance WWZN will
> continue as a brokered-time operation--largely ethnic, some
> religious, and probably some infomercials. In other words,
> anyone who pays and who doesn't try to broadcast things that
> the FCC will shut down the station for airing.
>
> If business starts to build in one particular programming
> area, the operator might become adventurous enough to try to
> cater to that type of brokered programming (WBIX and WBNW
> are a good examples)--something that would loosely be called
> a format--but if no type of client appears to predominate in
> the mix, I think it will just turn into every hour goes to
> the highest bidder.
>
> Could this start a price war among WWZN, WUNR, WAZN, WLYN,
> WRCA, WNTN. WEZE, WROL, WBIX, WSRO, and WBNW? (I guess I
> should add WJDA and WESX because part of their broadcast day
> is brokered.) Maybe, but I doubt it. I think the operators
> of these stations know how to make a buck on brokered time
> without getting into that sort of unpleasantness. For sure,
> Salem (WEZE, WROL, and WTTT) knows how to do it profitably
> with mostly religious programs and so does Multicultural
> (WAZN, WLYN) with ethnic. Alex Langer allegedly quickly
> figured out how to stop the hemmoraging at WBIX. And in this
> market, WUNR has been at it longer than anybody and wouldn't
> be doing it if the business weren't at least breaking even.
> Of these stations, WWZN has the best signal--arguably the
> only signal that can be called full-market--which is good
> because it must also have the highest fixed expenses.
>
 
Re: Other Unanswered Questions Concerning WWZN-1510

> As long as whoever controls WWZN can clear enough to pay the
> rent on the transmitter site in Waltham--the rent is rumored
> to be $25,000/month ($300,000/year)--plus the power bill to
> keep the transmitter on the air, and other insurance and
> maintenance costs, I think the station will remain on the
> air.

Actually, in some ways, the 50KW signal from the original Squantum site was a lot better. The problem that they had was the WNLC null to the SW. Since WNLC is deleted, couldn't they diplex on the 1260 site (since the original site is long gone), and end up with the advantage of a salt water shot and some increased coverage to the SW which is now allowed?

Either that or a diplex at the 1060 or 1200 site out west and blow everything east?

Seems to me that 50KW day/night with New London deleted could be set up much better than the Waltham site.
 
Re: Other Unanswered Questions Concerning WWZN-1510

> Actually, in some ways, the 50KW signal from the original
> Squantum site was a lot better. The problem that they had
> was the WNLC null to the SW. Since WNLC is deleted,
> couldn't they diplex on the 1260 site (since the original
> site is long gone), and end up with the advantage of a salt
> water shot and some increased coverage to the SW which is
> now allowed?

The Squantum 1510 site was never allowed 50kw at night, and as someone who grew up in Newton (just seven miles west of downtown Boston), I can tell you that the directional 5kw night signal in the immediate west suburbs even within Route 128 was abysmally horrible until 1510 moved to Waltham.

WNLC wasn't the issue at night. 1510 has to null in all westerly directions at night (especially southwest) due to skywave protection of co-channel WLAC Nashville, the co-channel in Sherbrook, Canada and there are first adjacent skywave issues with WTOP Washington, DC and WWKB Buffalo.

1510 needs a site located in the west suburbs in order to cover the west suburbs (even just the ones within 128) at night, because they can't beam that way.

> Either that or a diplex at the 1060 or 1200 site out west
> and blow everything east?

I'm guessing that even with 50kw, that wouldn't be a strong enough signal in downtown Boston to compete well at night, especially with the strong adjacents. WBIX is 40kw and their signal in town is marginal, and that's daytime without all the adjacent noise. I'm guessing that 50kw on 1510 from Framingham might not even cover Boston well enough (especially at night) to qualify for the Boston COL.
 
Re: Other Unanswered Questions Concerning WWZN-1510

>
> Actually, in some ways, the 50KW signal from the original
> Squantum site was a lot better. The problem that they had
> was the WNLC null to the SW. Since WNLC is deleted,
> couldn't they diplex on the 1260 site (since the original
> site is long gone), and end up with the advantage of a salt
> water shot and some increased coverage to the SW which is
> now allowed?
>
> Either that or a diplex at the 1060 or 1200 site out west
> and blow everything east?
>
> Seems to me that 50KW day/night with New London deleted
> could be set up much better than the Waltham site.
>
New London really was not much of a factor in the coice of the Waltham site back in 1980. The original 5 kW DA-1 pattern from Squantum was designed on the '30s--decades before anyone even thought of putting a second AM on 1510 (then, 1470) in New England. It is true, though, that when WMEX increased to 50 kW-D from Squantum, New London WAS a factor in the design of the day pattern--however, not as much of a factor as you might think. Years before it first applied for 50 kW-D, WMEX (at the time still owned by Northern Corp) had applied to increase to 10 kW ND days from Squantum keeping its exisiting 5 kW DA day facilities unchanged for use at night. The FCC rejected the application because of the daytime-skywave interference that would have been caused to WLAC. (The FCC had not yet come up with the Critical Hours concept, so there was no way a station could use different powers or patterns during different parts of the daylight hours.) Anyhow, at just about the same time that WMEX applied to move from Squantum to Waltham, it also filed to let out its non-CH 50-kW day pattern from Squantum. Even with WNLC only 77 miles away, there was room to do that to improve the signal to the southwest somewhat. However, the deal to lease the Waltham site came through and the application to change the non-CH day pattern became moot and was never acted upon.

HOWEVER, even if that application had been approved, WMEX would have been left with a really useless 5-kW night signal. No night power increase was possible from Squantum--and the then-new State St South office complex, just to the west of the old site, had completely ruined what little nighttime coverage to the west the station had. Blocking an improvement in the night signal to the north (over downtown Boston) was CJRS Sherbrooke QC, 200 miles directly to the north. It was the combination of protection to CJRS and the need to deliver the (then--but no longer--required 25 mV/m to the CoL's "principal business district) that forced a location in the northwest suburbs no more than about nine miles from downtown. In fact, 411 Waverley Oaks Rd was the only possible available site. True, WMEX should have developed the Waltham site for night use only; the Squantum site, which the station owned, with its salt-water path to Boston and the North Shore, provided better daytime coverage even though the towers were shorter and much less efficient than the new ones in Waltham.

But, you are probably saying, CJRS is long gone so it doesn't require protection any longer. WRONG! Like just about all Canadian AMs that have moved to FM, CJRS remains internationally notified and must be protected. So, although WWZN could technically diplex with WMKI during the day, it would have to retain (and continue renting) its Waltham site--unless it was willing to become a daytimer (or a Class D station with tiny night power). Whenever the FCC opens another AM major-change filing window (unlikely for another three years or more), WWZN might apply to change its CoL to Quincy or Milton, allowing Class B operation at a power of maybe 3 kW without the requirement of covering Boston at night. Under current FCC rules WWZN NIF (nighttime interference-free) signal level must be really high because of the huge first-adjacent interfering signals from WTOP and WWKB. Under the old rules, those signals didn't count; under current rules, I'm sure they dwarf any co-channel interfering signal--including WLAC's.

Because the requirement for 25 mV/m in the central business district no longer exists, there are other possible sites for WWZN that might work and that would probably cost less than $25,000/month. One would probably allow coverage of 80% of the City of Boston at night and thus would pass muster with the FCC. (Allston and Brighton would be outside the NIF contour.) This site would not permit nighttime coverage of the majority of other communities in the market, however. The other site could easily cost $10 million or more to develop. Both sites are already in use by AM stations and would require the complete cooperation of the owners and might face NIMBY protests. Clearly, only a well-heeled owner would be in a position to persue such options. So the likelihood of either one getting past the talking stage is nil.
 
Re: Other Unanswered Questions Concerning WWZN-1510

> > Actually, in some ways, the 50KW signal from the original

>
> The Squantum 1510 site was never allowed 50kw at night, and
> as someone who grew up in Newton (just seven miles west of
> downtown Boston), I can tell you that the directional 5kw
> night signal in the immediate west suburbs even within Route
> 128 was abysmally horrible until 1510 moved to Waltham.

Yes, I remember well the classic days of WMEX, when my friends and I would cruise through Natick at night desperately trying to hear Arnie Ginsburg through splash from WTOP and WKBW. The night signal to the west was awful.

>
> WNLC wasn't the issue at night. 1510 has to null in all
> westerly directions at night (especially southwest) due to
> skywave protection of co-channel WLAC Nashville, the
> co-channel in Sherbrook, Canada and there are first adjacent
> skywave issues with WTOP Washington, DC and WWKB Buffalo.
>
> 1510 needs a site located in the west suburbs in order to
> cover the west suburbs (even just the ones within 128) at
> night, because they can't beam that way.
>
> > Either that or a diplex at the 1060 or 1200 site out west
> > and blow everything east?
>
> I'm guessing that even with 50kw, that wouldn't be a strong
> enough signal in downtown Boston to compete well at night,
> especially with the strong adjacents. WBIX is 40kw and their
> signal in town is marginal, and that's daytime without all
> the adjacent noise. I'm guessing that 50kw on 1510 from
> Framingham might not even cover Boston well enough
> (especially at night) to qualify for the Boston COL.

Hmmm. What about a 50KW day/night diplex with WEEI in Needham? Close enough to downtown Boston with Needham / Newton / Brookline / western city of Boston
in front of the pattern, and some Dedham / Westwood / Norwood, too?
With the potential value of a well-proportuned signal over such an important and rich metro as Boston, I can't believe that some chain wouldn't get creative with 1510.

After all, look what some folks are going through trying to build up WKOX-WRCA-WUNR from Newton!


>
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by HHH on 10/30/05 11:26 PM.</FONT></P>
 
Re: Other Unanswered Questions Concerning WWZN-1510

> Hmmm. What about a 50KW day/night diplex with WEEI in
> Needham? Close enough to downtown Boston with Needham /
> Newton / Brookline / western city of Boston
> in front of the pattern, and some Dedham / Westwood /
> Norwood, too?
> With the potential value of a well-proportuned signal over
> such an important and rich metro as Boston, I can't believe
> that some chain wouldn't get creative with 1510.
>
> After all, look what some folks are going through trying to
> build up WKOX-WRCA-WUNR from Newton!

The location would work. BUT at heights of 560, 600, and 640', WEEI's towers are WAY too tall for 1510 and the spacing of WEEI's towers (213 degrees tower-to-tower at 1510) is not appropriate for the design of a usable pattern. The excessive tower height would make the efficiency unacceptably low at 1510 and there would be a wicked skywave that would interfere with the groundwave and make the array completely unsatisfactory.

It might be possible to detune the top part of two towers at 1510 and use them along with one or two new (and shorter) towers in a three or four tower array. OR it might be possible to build three or four new and shorter towers for 1510 at the WEEI site. The WEEI towers would then have to be completely detuned at 1510 and the new 1510 towers would have to be completely detuned at 850. I suspect that the second approach (no shared towers), which is called co-location as opposed to diplexing, might prove to be more easily implemented and hence less costly.

That doesn't mean the project would be cheap--or even reasonably priced--however. If I were Entercom, I would insist that WWZN pay for constructing an auxiliary 50-kW site for WEEI at the WRKO site in Burlington. That way, WEEI could move to Burlington for the duration of the construction and could operate at full power for however long it took to get 1510 up and running from Needham and get 850 re-proofed and back on the air again from Needham. I think that, when you include all of the work, the project would cost at least $10 million and could easily cost $15 million. Unless some very well heeled owner were willing to sink that kind of money--over and above the purchase price--into 1510, the idea looks to me like a non-starter. I doubt that any owner or prospective owner is both that well heeled and that foolish. Also, since new tower construction would be required, there is a strong likelihood of the same sort of opposition that has been taking place with the WKOX/WRCA/WUNR upgrade in Newton. That could delay construction for a decade. WKOX has now been trying to upgrade for longer than 10 years, I believe.
 
Re: Other Unanswered Questions Concerning WWZN-1510

> Definitely the best choice for 1510 is to go
> ethnic-brokered.

I agree

If 1510 were to become religious like most
> of the other religious stations(worshipping the green), then
> perhaps the gullable people hearing the skywave signal in
> the way-up northeast might just send in $$$ to the program
> producers.

I'd hope for something like classic country, smooth jazz, or whatever isn't being heard, etc. but if they want to make a profit, that is ALSO a good solution.

by the way I tuned in to JIB about 9 this morning and heard Bob's voice identify the station, plus a bit of advice: "Cut up your credit cards. Most of them
are evil." Knowing from experience, he does have a point, but I had to laugh...
what OTHER station would dare to have someone (the owner, yet!) say something like that on air! Good to have a _different_ station like them around!
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom