• 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

Buckley Broadcasting Sued for Age Discrimination

Re: The Bottom Line

Sorry GLI....As a radio aficionado, you may enjoy hearing something that's eclectic and digs deep into your long lost 45 bin. Maybe back in the early days of FM radio and perhaps on some of these new HD2 channels will experimentation with songs only .0007% of the population knows will continue to do business.

As I've said before, if you enjoy DRC-FM now, better tape it because it won't last. Buckley and company aren't in it to "Oh Wow" you with their song collections; they want to make money. And playing the hits is the way to make money on the current FM band.

Let's say I'm a sports nut. Completely, I know every little bit of trivia about teams all around the country. and I'm in the business. So I'd to hear more discussions about the Birmingham Barons on WFAN. But because FAN is in New York, people want New York team’s ad-nausea. Not variety, not the St Louis farm team; that want the HITS... and in sports radio in New York City, the hits are the Mets, Yankees, etc.

People want variety in their food? Then why are the average hamburgers at McDonalds served billions and billions of times? BTW, I worked in a small town diner and I can't tell you the number of people who came in and ordered the same thing every day over and over and over. We want the choice, but go with the familiar. It's a fact. And I've seen it in my own personal research in radio for over 20 years. Sure, I'd love to hear stuff I haven't heard in years. That's why I own a CD player and hard drive. I'm more into music than the average person. A lot more into radio than the average person. And trust me; the average 40 year old could care less about radio. They like music, but aren't into hearing stuff they don't remember. They want the familiar so they can sing along to "I Can't Help Myself" while taking the kids to soccer.

I totally agree that Kool 96.7 is tighter than they need to be. That's the other end of the spectrum, when you've got people whose instincts are not trusted. When the consultant comes in and needs to justify his/her salary. But if I were the PD at Kool, I wouldn't just go with my gut..and I know oldies better than most. It's actually a detriment. I need to know what the audience wanted, so I wouldn't play a bunch of stiffs in a row. Or an hour. Or during the ride home. Because when the ratings tumble, I'm out of a job.

Someone mentioned in this thread somewhere that Buckley is a small company. It's no smaller than WEAZ, Inc in Philadelphia. Owner Jerry Lee just paid his partner 80 million for his half of the station. WBEB researches everything it plays and does. And it has been consistently kicking the competitions' rear end for years. You see, there is a difference between small companies and small minds.

Buckley has problems because he has never really had the insight into this business his old man had. And he's cheap. He's cheap with talent and he's cheap with his managers. I heard Dick McDonough up in Springfield not too long ago and it's unbelievable that he isn't gracing the airwaves at Big D. Buckley doesn't invest; he only pays bills and salaries. Mike and Beth had a very good rapport on the air, so why replace him with someone who is more interested in music trivia and what people are dancing to at weddings? I'm sure it was for less money because unless Mike Stevens punched someone in the hallway or was found with the wrong things on his hard drive, I can't think of any other reason to replace him. Certainly not because he didn't get along with others. Note Jerry Kristafer here.

The Oldies' format is struggling as it is. Terrestrial radio is looking at some up-hill battles. Buckley Broadcasting is not poised to move forward smoothly. The digital signal will not fix the phasing problems. And if someone has never heard, nor cares to hear "Sugar On Sunday" in analog, HD won't make one iota of a difference.




> > The Big D topic is back yet again. You can tweak imaging,
>
> > shuffle jocks around and even shift back and forth on your
>
> > music era, but what's the point when you don't research
> what
> > you play? MUSIC is what will make it or break it, perhaps
>
> > 80% of your product in this case, but don't take my word
> for
> > it. There are smaller market stations spending money on
> > music testing and seeing results from their investment,
> and
> > isn't that what you want advertisers to do with your
> > product?
>
> Jesus, more bitching
>
> "Radio Is over-consulted and over researched"
>
> Now we get
>
> "what's the point when you don't research what you play"
>
> If you want garbage, Kool 96.7 will shovel it for you
>
>
> > When lots of unknown songs like "Sugar On Sunday" or "Big
> > Man In Town" get more than a Forgotten 45 lunar rotation,
> > you're inviting tuneout. The Four Tops' "Shake Me, Wake Me
>
> > (When It's Over)" is no "I Can't Help Myself" or "Baby I
> > Need Your Lovin'".
>
> Again, "I Can't Help Myself" and "Baby I Need Your Lovin'"
> could be two of the most burned titles in oldies libraries.
>
>
> > A tightly focused playlist may bring
> > complaints from a few station staffers and a couple of
> vinyl
> > junkies who think they know what sounds good, but the
> bottom
> > line is what counts.
>
> Bottom line is a boring station that burns easily. You need
> the popular records but you need something to keep it fresh,
> that's resting titles from time to time, making sure there
> are some underplayed titles in there as well as enough (but
> not OVERDONE) selections that are very popular. I think DRC
> is doing that well NOW and I think the exit of the 80's is
> interesting and a step in the right direction. There are a
> few more years you can stretch out of 60's and 70's music.
> The station sounds better now and I'm glad it's not the
> same-old KOOL 96.7 crap that station has burned into the
> ground since 1990.
>
 
Re: The Bottom Line

The comment about Kool 96.7 being too tight may be Cox corporate thought taken to the other extreme, and it's not that one iffy tune means instant death. However, if you slip in something like that you'd better do it for a good reason and then get right back to the "Good Lovin'", "Maggie May" or "Unchained Melody" stuff... whatever works for your target audience.

During my six-month sidekick stint on the Big D morning show, Jerry Kristafer and I had the chemistry of Harry Reasoner and Barbara Walters. It wasn't easy, but he was probably toughest on himself and was totally sincere about winning. He also expressed a real appreciation for not just playing what I liked as music director. His departure after 15 profitable if occasionally turbulent years left a void, and a plan for a new morning show never really got off the ground for a couple of years. That probably took its toll as soon as late '98, and playing around with "Hot" rhythmic oldies in '99 was just a reaction to a new, specialized competitor. Stuff happens... no regrets!

That's my armchair analysis... nothing I didn't say "back in the day!" Now back to my day job.

> Sorry GLI....As a radio aficionado, you may enjoy hearing
> something that's eclectic and digs deep into your long lost
> 45 bin. Maybe back in the early days of FM radio and
> perhaps on some of these new HD2 channels will
> experimentation with songs only .0007% of the population
> knows will continue to do business.
>
> As I've said before, if you enjoy DRC-FM now, better tape it
> because it won't last. Buckley and company aren't in it to
> "Oh Wow" you with their song collections; they want to make
> money. And playing the hits is the way to make money on the
> current FM band.
>
> Let's say I'm a sports nut. Completely, I know every little
> bit of trivia about teams all around the country. and I'm in
> the business. So I'd to hear more discussions about the
> Birmingham Barons on WFAN. But because FAN is in New York,
> people want New York team’s ad-nausea. Not variety, not the
> St Louis farm team; that want the HITS... and in sports
> radio in New York City, the hits are the Mets, Yankees, etc.
>
>
> People want variety in their food? Then why are the average
> hamburgers at McDonalds served billions and billions of
> times? BTW, I worked in a small town diner and I can't tell
> you the number of people who came in and ordered the same
> thing every day over and over and over. We want the choice,
> but go with the familiar. It's a fact. And I've seen it in
> my own personal research in radio for over 20 years. Sure,
> I'd love to hear stuff I haven't heard in years. That's why
> I own a CD player and hard drive. I'm more into music than
> the average person. A lot more into radio than the average
> person. And trust me; the average 40 year old could care
> less about radio. They like music, but aren't into hearing
> stuff they don't remember. They want the familiar so they
> can sing along to "I Can't Help Myself" while taking the
> kids to soccer.
>
> I totally agree that Kool 96.7 is tighter than they need to
> be. That's the other end of the spectrum, when you've got
> people whose instincts are not trusted. When the consultant
> comes in and needs to justify his/her salary. But if I were
> the PD at Kool, I wouldn't just go with my gut..and I know
> oldies better than most. It's actually a detriment. I need
> to know what the audience wanted, so I wouldn't play a bunch
> of stiffs in a row. Or an hour. Or during the ride home.
> Because when the ratings tumble, I'm out of a job.
>
> Someone mentioned in this thread somewhere that Buckley is a
> small company. It's no smaller than WEAZ, Inc in
> Philadelphia. Owner Jerry Lee just paid his partner 80
> million for his half of the station. WBEB researches
> everything it plays and does. And it has been consistently
> kicking the competitions' rear end for years. You see,
> there is a difference between small companies and small
> minds.
>
> Buckley has problems because he has never really had the
> insight into this business his old man had. And he's cheap.
> He's cheap with talent and he's cheap with his managers. I
> heard Dick McDonough up in Springfield not too long ago and
> it's unbelievable that he isn't gracing the airwaves at Big
> D. Buckley doesn't invest; he only pays bills and salaries.
> Mike and Beth had a very good rapport on the air, so why
> replace him with someone who is more interested in music
> trivia and what people are dancing to at weddings? I'm sure
> it was for less money because unless Mike Stevens punched
> someone in the hallway or was found with the wrong things on
> his hard drive, I can't think of any other reason to replace
> him. Certainly not because he didn't get along with others.
> Note Jerry Kristafer here.
>
> The Oldies' format is struggling as it is. Terrestrial
> radio is looking at some up-hill battles. Buckley
> Broadcasting is not poised to move forward smoothly. The
> digital signal will not fix the phasing problems. And if
> someone has never heard, nor cares to hear "Sugar On Sunday"
> in analog, HD won't make one iota of a difference.
>
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by CT Radio Guy on 02/27/06 07:12 PM.</FONT></P>
 
Re: The Bottom Line

> Sorry GLI....As a radio aficionado, you may enjoy hearing
> something that's eclectic and digs deep into your long lost
> 45 bin. Maybe back in the early days of FM radio and
> perhaps on some of these new HD2 channels will
> experimentation with songs only .0007% of the population
> knows will continue to do business.
>
> As I've said before, if you enjoy DRC-FM now, better tape it
> because it won't last. Buckley and company aren't in it to
> "Oh Wow" you with their song collections; they want to make
> money. And playing the hits is the way to make money on the
> current FM band.

Then why hasn't this station gotten its playlist to conform to the national "oldies standard" since the mid-'90s? Didn't Buckley want to make money with it during its "Oldies 102.9" and "Big Hits" phases?

Not much has changed today except that nearly all the '80s material has been put on hiatus. Here's today's 3 o'clock hour -- plenty of hits, but a head-scratcher in nearly every song set, a head-scratcher being a song I can't recall ever hearing on tight-playlist WODS, Boston:

Neil Diamond -- You Got to Me (Head-scratcher)
Platters -- With This Ring
Buoys -- Timothy (Now THAT'S good-time rock and roll! Kind of like the morbid little Bee Gees tune, "I've Got to Get a Message to You," that I heard yesterday. Head-scratcher.)
Kinks -- Tired of Waiting for You
Reflections -- Romeo and Juliet
Cornelius Bros. -- Treat Her Like a Lady
Sir Douglas Quintet -- She's About a Mover (head-scratcher)
War -- Cisco Kid
Wings -- Band on the Run
Sammy Johns -- Chevy Van
Turtles -- Elenore
Doors -- Love Her Madly (not sure about this one; I think I may have heard it in Boston)
Gaye/Weston -- It Takes Two (Head-scratcher)
Daniel Boone -- Beautiful Sunday (Head-scratcher)
Tommy James/Shondells -- Mirage (Head-scratcher)
Redbone -- Come and Get Your Love
Rolling Stones -- Get Off My Cloud

>
> I totally agree that Kool 96.7 is tighter than they need to
> be. That's the other end of the spectrum, when you've got
> people whose instincts are not trusted. When the consultant
> comes in and needs to justify his/her salary. But if I were
> the PD at Kool, I wouldn't just go with my gut..and I know
> oldies better than most. It's actually a detriment. I need
> to know what the audience wanted, so I wouldn't play a bunch
> of stiffs in a row. Or an hour. Or during the ride home.
> Because when the ratings tumble, I'm out of a job.

So which of the songs I, as a listener, considered "safe" on the list above are being played on Kool 96.7, which I can't receive up here? How many would make the cut at your hypothetical winner of an oldies station? I'd like to know what I can expect DRC-FM to sound like if this latest phase proves fleeting.
 
Re: The Bottom Line

> Then why hasn't this station gotten its playlist to conform
> to the national "oldies standard" since the mid-'90s? Didn't
> Buckley want to make money with it during its "Oldies 102.9"
> and "Big Hits" phases?

He is unwilling to spend money on programming resources. No one person inside that building has all the answers. And most haven't been outside that building in 25 years.
>
> Not much has changed today except that nearly all the '80s
> material has been put on hiatus. Here's today's 3 o'clock
> hour -- plenty of hits, but a head-scratcher in nearly every
> song set, a head-scratcher being a song I can't recall ever
> hearing on tight-playlist WODS, Boston:

Dropping the Eighties was a good move, but not enough.
>
> Neil Diamond -- You Got to Me (Head-scratcher)
> Platters -- With This Ring
> Buoys -- Timothy (Now THAT'S good-time rock and roll! Kind
> of like the morbid little Bee Gees tune, "I've Got to Get a
> Message to You," that I heard yesterday. Head-scratcher.)
> Kinks -- Tired of Waiting for You
> Reflections -- Romeo and Juliet
> Cornelius Bros. -- Treat Her Like a Lady
> Sir Douglas Quintet -- She's About a Mover (head-scratcher)
> War -- Cisco Kid
> Wings -- Band on the Run
> Sammy Johns -- Chevy Van
> Turtles -- Elenore
> Doors -- Love Her Madly (not sure about this one; I think I
> may have heard it in Boston)
> Gaye/Weston -- It Takes Two (Head-scratcher)
> Daniel Boone -- Beautiful Sunday (Head-scratcher)
> Tommy James/Shondells -- Mirage (Head-scratcher)
> Redbone -- Come and Get Your Love
> Rolling Stones -- Get Off My Cloud
>

You know what strikes me about this list? There are no huge testers. Where are songs like "Band Of Gold," "Heard It Through The Grapevine," Brown Eyed Girl" and "More Today Than Yesterday?" Yes, I know they do play them, but you can't go an entire hour without playing something from the A list.

> So which of the songs I, as a listener, considered "safe" on
> the list above are being played on Kool 96.7, which I can't
> receive up here? How many would make the cut at your
> hypothetical winner of an oldies station?

It's not that I think the above songs are wrong...well I doubt "Beautiful Sunday" and "She's About A Mover" would test at all, but the fact is the station is inconsistent thoughout the day. And sometimes they play too many songs that just aren't strong enough in a row. Then they'll drop in a real head scratcher that sends the listener to the Scan button.

> I'd like to know
> what I can expect DRC-FM to sound like if this latest phase
> proves fleeting.

With Buckley, Mulligan and the Crack Programming Committee at the helm, your guess is as good as mine.

A quick note on Jerry Kristapher. There's no doubt he is one of the more driven talents in the market. Just listen to his morning show on WELI. I think he was getting frustrated with the process up in Bloomfield. He probably sensed the lack of direction and leadership and the situation got cranky. All in all, he was probably the biggest and most successful morning show DRC-FM ever had. And I would say the Mike & Beth combination came in a solid second.
From there, you'd have to go back to the days of Mayor George Athanson.
>
 
Re: The Bottom Line

> > Then why hasn't this station gotten its playlist to
> conform
> > to the national "oldies standard" since the mid-'90s?
> Didn't
> > Buckley want to make money with it during its "Oldies
> 102.9"
> > and "Big Hits" phases?
>
> He is unwilling to spend money on programming resources. No
> one person inside that building has all the answers. And
> most haven't been outside that building in 25 years.

Well, if he's spending as little as possible on programming resources and audio quality and DJ salaries and whatever else, doesn't that make for a solidly profitable station? I mean, it's not like they're filling the breaks in drive time with PSAs; they've still got Parsons Chevrolet and Bob's Furniture and all those other advertisers who've been with them for eons and seem to add a few new ones every week or so. Why spend on music research or a consultant when you don't need to?

Wouldn't it figure that, providing all the alienated DRC-FM listeners haven't drifted off to XM or Sirius or their MP3 players yet, ratings will bump upward quite nicely with the return of the "old" DRC-FM, the one that plays oldies? And all will be copasetic in Bloomfield again, whether they're playing "She's About a Mover" or not, right?

Again, I know I'm posting to a board full of radio pros, but I'm just trying to figure out why, if there's upper-management pressure on DRC-FM to perform better, their programming people keep casting about with music that either has no track record of attracting listeners outside of its narrow generation (most of the '80s music, IMO, falls into this category) or has no track record on any station that's run an oldies format anywhere. You'd think someone would tell Nagel, Saville, Mulligan, whoever's calling the shots, "Here's a bus ticket to Philadelphia. Listen to WOGL for a week and write down what you hear. Then eliminate everything you're now playing that WOGL isn't." Make him pay for own hotel room, too. Wouldn't that solve the head-scratcher problem right there?

I can't believe that they've been taking this route for all these years without knowing that other oldies stations wouldn't touch "Too Weak to Fight" or "The Snake" or "San Franciscan Nights." And if it's just one vinyl geek who's been programming songs like that for the past decade, why hasn't he been nudged by the upper management that wants a better-performing station to stop it?
 
Re: The Bottom Line

>Then why hasn't this station gotten its playlist to conform
> > to the national "oldies standard" since the mid-'90s?
> > Didn't Buckley want to make money with it during its "Oldies 102.9"
> > > and "Big Hits" phases?

DRC-FM was indeed very typical of a national "oldies standard" in the mid/late 90s. That is because the Oldies Channel, which provided all the overnight live programming, also lent guidance as to what titles were to be played at other times. They even tested music in Hartford a couple of times, which is no guarded secret at this point. Don't get the impression that they've been limping along since the mid 90s, either. Times were good around '97. DRC did go outside the box occasionally because of requests, theme features and differing spot breaks from overnight. The power testers still got the power exposure. In all fairness, this was also under Wayne Mulligan's watch.
>
> Well, if he's spending as little as possible on programming
> resources and audio quality and DJ salaries and whatever
> else, doesn't that make for a solidly profitable station? I
> mean, it's not like they're filling the breaks in drive time
> with PSAs; they've still got Parsons Chevrolet and Bob's
> Furniture and all those other advertisers who've been with
> them for eons and seem to add a few new ones every week or
> so.

Just because spotload is up doesn't mean revenue follows. Local rates can vary. Parson's Chevy and Bob's Discount Furniture are good local examples of advertisers who know radio and are big enough to negotiate the best rate. When you hear lots of big national advertisers like McDonald's or Coke, then you know they're on agency radars because of rankings in the demos the agency clients want to reach. In market #50, that can be big. There's still substantial overhead at a radio station even if you cut out every frill in the place, and any owner has a right to expect return on investment. You can save the first buck you make, but you've gotta keep making them. If they're happy with the status quo, then great. Judging by the format tweaks and personnel changes, that doesn't appear to be the case.

>>Why spend on music research or a consultant when you
> don't need to?

Because you won't be flying blind or trusting a staffer's gut instinct with so much at stake. That investment can be pennies on the dollar when you get results. Isn't that what radio salespeople tell prospective advertisers?
>
> Wouldn't it figure that, providing all the alienated DRC-FM
> listeners haven't drifted off to XM or Sirius or their MP3
> players yet, ratings will bump upward quite nicely with the
> return of the "old" DRC-FM, the one that plays oldies? And
> all will be copasetic in Bloomfield again, whether they're
> playing "She's About a Mover" or not, right?

Not necessarily.

>
> Again, I know I'm posting to a board full of radio pros, but
> I'm just trying to figure out why, if there's
> upper-management pressure on DRC-FM to perform better, their
> programming people keep casting about with music that either
> has no track record of attracting listeners outside of its
> narrow generation (most of the '80s music, IMO, falls into
> this category) or has no track record on any station that's
> run an oldies format anywhere. You'd think someone would
> tell Nagel, Saville, Mulligan, whoever's calling the shots,
> "Here's a bus ticket to Philadelphia. Listen to WOGL for a
> week and write down what you hear. Then eliminate everything
> you're now playing that WOGL isn't." Make him pay for own
> hotel room, too. Wouldn't that solve the head-scratcher
> problem right there?
>
> I can't believe that they've been taking this route for all
> these years without knowing that other oldies stations
> wouldn't touch "Too Weak to Fight" or "The Snake" or "San
> Franciscan Nights." And if it's just one vinyl geek who's
> been programming songs like that for the past decade, why
> hasn't he been nudged by the upper management that wants a
> better-performing station to stop it?
>
You got me there!
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom