• 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

Call the Asylum...

  • Thread starter JohnnyMorganWXJX
  • Start date

J

JohnnyMorganWXJX

Guest
WKNR's PD/imaging voice must have gone crazy (if he wasn't before).

I just saw this bit of lunacy from a Roger Brown column, Nov. 14:

"Luczak thinks many of Stern's local male listeners who are between 25 and 54 years old -- and don't have satellite radios -- could be swayed to switch to sports radio. 'I absolutely believe WKNR's share of male listeners 25 to 54 is going to improve,' Luczak says."

Ok, so Stern's fans will switch from an uber-successful syndicated FM morning drive sex and whatnot show to a second-rate AM sports talk station to listen to two guys talk sports--badly--and play bad covers of Rolling Stones tunes???

Interesting hypothesis from a man who claimed success at WMMS by quoting 12+ numbers.
 
> WKNR's PD/imaging voice must have gone crazy (if he wasn't
> before).
>
> I just saw this bit of lunacy from a Roger Brown column,
> Nov. 14:
>
> "Luczak thinks many of Stern's local male listeners who are
> between 25 and 54 years old -- and don't have satellite
> radios -- could be swayed to switch to sports radio. 'I
> absolutely believe WKNR's share of male listeners 25 to 54
> is going to improve,' Luczak says."

Congratulations Mr. Luczak. The week has just started, but we're going to name give you the title of "King Of Wishful Thinking". Look for your certificate in the mail sometime within the week.
 
> Interesting hypothesis from a man who claimed success at
> WMMS by quoting 12+ numbers.


Yes, and even those were downtrending under Luczak.

I never met him, but friends tell me that he is one of those unacomplished discount PDs who come cheap, have no original ideas, and is exactly the type of individual that the corporate owners want these days: totally harmless and totally useless.
 
> > WKNR's PD/imaging voice must have gone crazy (if he wasn't
>
> > before).
> >
> > I just saw this bit of lunacy from a Roger Brown column,
> > Nov. 14:
> >
> > "Luczak thinks many of Stern's local male listeners who
> are
> > between 25 and 54 years old -- and don't have satellite
> > radios -- could be swayed to switch to sports radio. 'I
> > absolutely believe WKNR's share of male listeners 25 to 54
>
> > is going to improve,' Luczak says."
>
> Congratulations Mr. Luczak. The week has just started, but
> we're going to name give you the title of "King Of Wishful
> Thinking". Look for your certificate in the mail sometime
> within the week.
>

I mean, it would be one thing if WKNR--even on AM--had a local sports talk show in the mornings (NOT Drennan). Browns-Tribe-Cavs-Buckeyes talk in AM drive could work to pull *some* of Stern's sports-oriented listeners.

But Mike & Mike is a syndicated ESPN show with two dudes talking all sorts of national sports things...and not very well, I might add.

Then add in the issue of drawing die-hard FM listeners to AM...

Sheesh.
 
> WKNR's PD/imaging voice must have gone crazy (if he wasn't
> before).
>
> I just saw this bit of lunacy from a Roger Brown column,
> Nov. 14:
>
> "Luczak thinks many of Stern's local male listeners who are
> between 25 and 54 years old -- and don't have satellite
> radios -- could be swayed to switch to sports radio. 'I
> absolutely believe WKNR's share of male listeners 25 to 54
> is going to improve,' Luczak says."
>
> Ok, so Stern's fans will switch from an uber-successful
> syndicated FM morning drive sex and whatnot show to a
> second-rate AM sports talk station to listen to two guys
> talk sports--badly--and play bad covers of Rolling Stones
> tunes???
>
> Interesting hypothesis from a man who claimed success at
> WMMS by quoting 12+ numbers.
>


LOL!!!!!

It's easy really, extraps aren't even needed. Stern shares with Lanigan, and then the rest. Lanigan will reap the benefits of Stern's departure. The younger demos will go to WMMS and WXTM. The older demos might check out Brian and Joe (WMVX), but Lanigan will get the majority of the Stern listeners left out in the cold. <P ID="signature">______________
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.</P>
 
Giving Luczak some credit...

> > WKNR's PD/imaging voice must have gone crazy (if he wasn't
>
> > before).
> >
> > I just saw this bit of lunacy from a Roger Brown column,
> > Nov. 14:
> >
> > "Luczak thinks many of Stern's local male listeners who
> are
> > between 25 and 54 years old -- and don't have satellite
> > radios -- could be swayed to switch to sports radio. 'I
> > absolutely believe WKNR's share of male listeners 25 to 54
>
> > is going to improve,' Luczak says."
> >
> > Ok, so Stern's fans will switch from an uber-successful
> > syndicated FM morning drive sex and whatnot show to a
> > second-rate AM sports talk station to listen to two guys
> > talk sports--badly--and play bad covers of Rolling Stones
> > tunes???
> >
> > Interesting hypothesis from a man who claimed success at
> > WMMS by quoting 12+ numbers.
> >
>
>
> LOL!!!!!
>
> It's easy really, extraps aren't even needed. Stern shares
> with Lanigan, and then the rest. Lanigan will reap the
> benefits of Stern's departure. The younger demos will go to
> WMMS and WXTM. The older demos might check out Brian and Joe
> (WMVX), but Lanigan will get the majority of the Stern
> listeners left out in the cold.
>

Some credit to Luczak, if applicable: It's entirely possibly Mickey L. dropped this little tidbit on Roger Brown knowing that Roger's a buffoon and would buy it hook-line-and sinker.

Unfortunately, ML's reputation lends itself more to the idea that Luczak actually believes that nonsense.
 
Definition of "Many"

> Ok, so Stern's fans will switch from an uber-successful
> syndicated FM morning drive sex and whatnot show to a
> second-rate AM sports talk station to listen to two guys
> talk sports--badly--and play bad covers of Rolling Stones
> tunes???

Giving Mr. Luczak the benefit of the doubt here...

By "many", maybe he meant "about as many that would fit in my living room, with maybe some over-spill onto the patio"?

:)

Oh, sure, 'KNR will pick up some Stern listeners when he's gone. Any male-oriented format will pick up at least a little. Heck, even WTAM's "Wills and Coleman" will get some stragglers.

But I think the more likely scenario is that Stern's audience will be split between whatever David Lee Roth can keep at 98.5, Lanigan (on the upper demo end) and between Rover and WMMS' morning show (on the lower demo end).

I'm willing to bet that Mr. Luczak basically said "some" listeners, and that Roger expanded it.

-OA<P ID="signature">______________
Ohio Media Watch - <a target="_blank" href=http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com>http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com</a></P>
 
LUCZAK RESPONDS

> WKNR's PD/imaging voice must have gone crazy (if he wasn't
> before).
>
> I just saw this bit of lunacy from a Roger Brown column,
> Nov. 14:
>
> "Luczak thinks many of Stern's local male listeners who are
> between 25 and 54 years old -- and don't have satellite
> radios -- could be swayed to switch to sports radio. 'I
> absolutely believe WKNR's share of male listeners 25 to 54
> is going to improve,' Luczak says."

And indeed it was lunacy--on Roger's end.

ML was kind enough to respond to my post, via email.

I will avoid Mickey's unwarranted speculation as to my motives for posting month-old information (my excuse: I was looking at Roger's old columns for more on Rog's invented "state cable network"), as well as avoid his altogether not-nice comments about Radio-Info board regulars.

*****************
I assume ML would have no problem with me posting some of his email here, to correct the record:

Luczak: "I told Roger our RANK would improve. That's alot different than share. He did not print a retraction.

By the way, if you want to call me I can explain to you what I was trying to explain to Roger.

That 'quote', that you refer to as being attributable to me, is something he wrote, not what I said.

I e-mailed him the day he ran that story."

***

Luczak: "Funny thing is, I am correct in when I said. 'WKNR's RANK in Men 25-54 will improve when Stern goes away.' Roger's MISQUOTE is ridiculous.

Why would I think our share would increase? Duh?

Think about it. WKNR is RANKED 6th in Men 25-54. Take WNCX out of that equation when Stern leaves, and WKNR's RANK in men 25-54 improves.

Simple. No brainer.

I never said 'share would improve'."

**********
JOHNNY MORGAN'S RESPONSE:

No invective was meant towards Luczak. My sentiments were the same as that expressed by every single responder. The quote printed in the PD was asinine, and as it was attributable to Luczak (per Roger), the criticism was appropriate.

And I agree with Luczak. The misquote IS ridiculous. Since Roger is now not just making up facts, but also making up quotes (this man used to be the PD's radio reporter!), the confusion has been resolved, I hope.

However, I must say one thing: I'm not sure Luczak is correct when he says, "WKNR is RANKED 6th in Men 25-54. Take WNCX out of that equation when Stern leaves, and WKNR's RANK in men 25-54 improves." It is not necessarily a foregone conclusion that WNCX is taken out of the equation. WNCX's numbers surely will fall without Howard to pump them up (kind of like WMJI's numbers without Lanigan). But will they fall enough to push WKNR up? Yet to be seen.

Luczak may very well be correct, and WKNR's rank will improve. We'll have to see.

Now, Roger Brown *MUST* issue a correction--IN HIS COLUMN--for his gross misquoting and misapprehension of Luczak's statement. I call for Roger Brown to do so immediately, and the Plain Dealer to require it and/or to sanction Roger for his deed.
 
Re: LUCZAK RESPONDS

> Now, Roger Brown *MUST* issue a correction--IN HIS
> COLUMN--for his gross misquoting and misapprehension of
> Luczak's statement. I call for Roger Brown to do so
> immediately, and the Plain Dealer to require it and/or to
> sanction Roger for his deed.

I wish we could get a giant "grain of salt" to go along with Roger Brown's columns. This wouldn't be the first time there was a disconnect between what was actually said by someone he quoted, and the reality.

-OA<P ID="signature">______________
Ohio Media Watch - <a target="_blank" href=http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com>http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com</a></P>
 
You know what the real embarrassment is about him, I know he reads all this Knr and OCB bashing - yet he doesn't even try to defend himself. If I were a pd getting ripped on everyday, you can bet I would call some people out and at least explain what I was doing. Instead, he runs a college station that wouldn't even get ratings in a college market. Is his station the only sports talk station that doesn't stream live on the net these days? Syracuse sports talk streams live as does Toledo and Dayton!!!

What an absolutely embarrassment to the radio world. What will KNR's legacy be in 10 years?? A joke. People still talk about Les Levine's radio show, and Tony Rizzo's. I've never had anyone EVER come up to me and say, "hey, did you hear Brinda's show this morning, what an entertaining three hours!!"


What a joke.
 
Mr. Luczak and Me (LONG)

> You know what the real embarrassment is about him, I know he
> reads all this Knr and OCB bashing - yet he doesn't even try
> to defend himself. If I were a pd getting ripped on
> everyday, you can bet I would call some people out and at
> least explain what I was doing.

This board is rather unique, in that many actual PDs and air talent in the market not only read it, but contribute to it. I don't have a problem, though, with Mr. Luczak's choice to remain out of the fray in public.

As Johnny Morgan posted above, WKNR/WHK's PD does indeed occasionally feel the need to respond...in E-Mail. He's done it with me.

Look, I really try to be fair to him. But it appears he can't get past the fact that handles are used on this board, and many (including myself) do not identify by name.

Who I am is no secret to many readers of this board, including many actually in the business in this region. As I told Mr. Luczak, if I were to post my name here, the reaction would basically be "huh, who's that?" With only one brief on-air appearance in this market (as an analyst on one station's local election coverage in 2004)...the bulk of my career has been elsewhere. I could say my name was Joe Schmo (no offense to Matt Kennedy Gould) and the reaction would be the same.

When pressed on the issue, I basically outlined my entire resume to Mr. Luczak. The problem is simple...he only brought up the topic so he can have a name to dismiss my comments with. ("Hah, you're nobody! Your comments mean nothing!") So, I declined to provide him with the ammunition so I could become his cannon fodder. PDs who do not feel the need to have one "up" on me already know me and know my name.

He also was a bit confused, because he apparently felt I was in the group bashing him for his performance as WMMS' PD. As I told him back, I didn't listen to WMMS when he was PD, or before, or after...it's not my format. He could have put Lithuanian chants on 100.7 and I'd have no idea how the station did. But we're all one "group" to him.

I told him all this, and he basically performed the E-Mail equivalent of putting his fingers in his ears, telling me he wasn't reading me. Twice.

Yeah, I've taken some potshots at 'KNR before. The station isn't run like I'd expect a major market sports radio station to be run, frankly. But though he's not the Second Coming of Pete Franklin, I like and enjoy listening to Brinda on occasion, and his replacement of Drennan was welcome in these circles.

Again, I try to be fair. As I told him, and repeated in OMW, if he attaches any significance to my words on an Internet message board and in a blog, it's his problem, not mine.

-OA<P ID="signature">______________
Ohio Media Watch - <a target="_blank" href=http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com>http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com</a></P>
 
Re: Mr. Luczak and Me (LONG)

> > You know what the real embarrassment is about him, I know
> he
> > reads all this Knr and OCB bashing - yet he doesn't even
> try
> > to defend himself. If I were a pd getting ripped on
> > everyday, you can bet I would call some people out and at
> > least explain what I was doing.
>
> This board is rather unique, in that many actual PDs and air
> talent in the market not only read it, but contribute to it.
> I don't have a problem, though, with Mr. Luczak's choice to
> remain out of the fray in public.
>
> As Johnny Morgan posted above, WKNR/WHK's PD does indeed
> occasionally feel the need to respond...in E-Mail. He's
> done it with me.
>
> Look, I really try to be fair to him. But it appears he
> can't get past the fact that handles are used on this board,
> and many (including myself) do not identify by name.
>
> Who I am is no secret to many readers of this board,
> including many actually in the business in this region. As
> I told Mr. Luczak, if I were to post my name here, the
> reaction would basically be "huh, who's that?" With only
> one brief on-air appearance in this market (as an analyst on
> one station's local election coverage in 2004)...the bulk of
> my career has been elsewhere. I could say my name was Joe
> Schmo (no offense to Matt Kennedy Gould) and the reaction
> would be the same.
>
> When pressed on the issue, I basically outlined my entire
> resume to Mr. Luczak. The problem is simple...he only
> brought up the topic so he can have a name to dismiss my
> comments with. ("Hah, you're nobody! Your comments mean
> nothing!") So, I declined to provide him with the
> ammunition so I could become his cannon fodder. PDs who do
> not feel the need to have one "up" on me already know me and
> know my name.
>
> He also was a bit confused, because he apparently felt I was
> in the group bashing him for his performance as WMMS' PD.
> As I told him back, I didn't listen to WMMS when he was PD,
> or before, or after...it's not my format. He could have put
> Lithuanian chants on 100.7 and I'd have no idea how the
> station did. But we're all one "group" to him.
>
> I told him all this, and he basically performed the E-Mail
> equivalent of putting his fingers in his ears, telling me he
> wasn't reading me. Twice.
>
> Yeah, I've taken some potshots at 'KNR before. The station
> isn't run like I'd expect a major market sports radio
> station to be run, frankly. But though he's not the Second
> Coming of Pete Franklin, I like and enjoy listening to
> Brinda on occasion, and his replacement of Drennan was
> welcome in these circles.
>
> Again, I try to be fair. As I told him, and repeated in
> OMW, if he attaches any significance to my words on an
> Internet message board and in a blog, it's his problem, not
> mine.
>
> -OA
>

I will also mention one thing in addition.

The information I have provided in relation to Mr. Luczak came directly from the Plain Dealer. WE HERE are not responsible for what's written in that increasingly raggish newspaper. Newspapers have an inherent truth to them (i.e., the law of evidence recognizes it), and it is incumbent upon those who dispute that newspaper truth to state it clearly.

Mike Luczak has done so, but in private, via email. That's fine. But he also takes the opportunity to assail those of us who rely on that Plain Dealer info to form our statements. To him, it's as if WE are the criers of false information, not the Plain Dealer.

In every post I've had here that quotes seemingly factual information (WMMS's demo numbers, to Roger's latest), I have stated where it came from, in most cases the Plain Dealer. It would be ridiculous to place upon readers, citators, and reliers the affirmative duty to check/double check information in the newspaper before relying on it and citing it. Yet, this seems to be what Luczak wants.

I invited him to join Radio-Info. His expertise would be valued and appreciated, and it would give him an opportunity to respond to our concerns re: WKNR, WHK, etc. For reasons of his own, he has not done so yet. That's his prerogative.

But it is disingenuous for him to place the burden of "fact" and "correction" on us lowly Plain Dealer readers. Especially when we are not in possession of the truth.

p.s. The WMMS numbers were demos from the Plain Dealer, back when they printed such things, B.R. (Before Roger). Luczak disputed success through his #1 12+ assertions, which assertions were similarly disputed in this thread by HHH.
 
Definitions...

Roger did call ONN statewide today.
At least he got one thing right.
 
> >
> > > It's easy really, extraps aren't even needed. Stern shares
> with Lanigan, and then the rest. Lanigan will reap the
> benefits of Stern's departure. The younger demos will go to
> WMMS and WXTM. The older demos might check out Brian and Joe
> (WMVX), but Lanigan will get the majority of the Stern
> listeners left out in the cold.


I already have Howard's ''On Demand'' service from InDemand..its hilarious..and no blurry images..

When I can finally raise the cash, I'll get a Sirus home unit..I may listen to DLR for a couple of days, just to hear what a trainwreck really sounds like..

The Hard Core Stern audience is going to go with Howard..period..watch for a huge spike in the first quarter of 2006 of Sirus radios moving, and moving fast..DLR is not, I repeat NOT going to cut it with Howard's audience..Adam Corrolla and Rover might have better luck..

I'll stream Rover when I have the chance..


>
 
RESPONDED TO ME, TOO!

Wow! This dude must really have some insecurity issues. He dropped me an email as well.

ML:(In response to Mr. Morgan's title of the thread) "Is this the purpose of Radio-Info?"

XL SEZ: Umm..yeah, Mr. Luczak -- to talk about radio. If you feel that you were libeled, then prove it. Between Mr. Morgan and myself who DO know what slander and libel are, I will tell you that you have nothing in that department.

He went on to say that Roger Brown misquoted him. Well, then take your misquote issues up with the Plain Dealer's poster child for cluelessness. If he didn't feel the need to correct another one of his mistakes, then maybe you, Mr. Luczak, SHOULD write a "Letter to the Editor" and have it printed in an upcoming PD. That is your right and you can call out Roger Brown there.

ML also showed some "concern" as to why a moderator would chime in. Just because I am a moderator does not exclude me from commenting or criticizing something on the dial. This industry is not exempt from criticism.
You remind me of another PD who frequents this board -- if you can't take the heat, then take off the apron, make sure the burners are off and handle the spatula over to someone else!

And, like you, OA, he wanted to know who I was. It doesn't really matter who I am from the other person. I always find it funny that someone needs to play that card, like it matters.

He even asked me, as a moderator, to "write the truth on Radio-Info about this misquote and lack of a correction by Roger Brown that should have been printed in the PD."

Well, Mr. Luczak, you obviously have email. So, why don't you create an account and correct Roger Brown's misquote on your own. Defend your own butt. I'm not the PD and it's not my job to correct anyone's work. No one's (should be) really surprised that Roger Brown misquoted you. It's Roger Brown, for cryin' out loud.

My suggestion to you, Mr. Luczak: if the tone of your response is similar to the emails you've written to me and I am sure JM and OA, you can almost be guaranteed you'll get ripped apart. And I will let it go. Another PD who has gone that route found out first hand several times (not to mention, it shows your unprofessionalism and how thin your skin is). Just because one has a "title" in this biz doesn't mean you have all the knowledge. It's just that -- a title.

XL
 
Re: RESPONDED TO ME, TOO!

> XL SEZ: Umm..yeah, Mr. Luczak -- to talk about radio. If
> you feel that you were libeled, then prove it. Between Mr.
> Morgan and myself who DO know what slander and libel are, I
> will tell you that you have nothing in that department.

Key to damages in libel: Harm to his (Luczak's) reputation.

I'll just let that dangle there...
 
when was Luczak the pd of WMMS

> He also was a bit confused, because he apparently felt I was
> in the group bashing him for his performance as WMMS' PD.
> As I told him back, I didn't listen to WMMS when he was PD,
> or before, or after...it's not my format. He could have put
> Lithuanian chants on 100.7 and I'd have no idea how the
> station did. But we're all one "group" to him.

When was he the pd of WMMS? I seem to remember it being right after the Gen. X period in '99 but I'm not sure.<P ID="signature">______________
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."
Albert Einstein
</P>
 
Re: when was Luczak the pd of WMMS

> > He also was a bit confused, because he apparently felt I
> was
> > in the group bashing him for his performance as WMMS' PD.
>
> > As I told him back, I didn't listen to WMMS when he was
> PD,
> > or before, or after...it's not my format. He could have
> put
> > Lithuanian chants on 100.7 and I'd have no idea how the
> > station did. But we're all one "group" to him.
>
> When was he the pd of WMMS? I seem to remember it being
> right after the Gen. X period in '99 but I'm not sure.
>

July 1990-Jan. 1994, after Piombino and McCartney. End of Malrite, beginnings of Shamrock. He was no longer employed at WMMS before New Year 1994. OmniAmerica took over the sagging Buzzard not long after (April 15, 1994). The deal was struck in late '93.

UPDATED: Wording has been edited, as Mr. Luczak disputes the use of the term "fired".
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Johnny Morgan on 12/06/05 09:48 PM.</FONT></P>
 
My Final Note About Mr. Luczak And This Board

> He even asked me, as a moderator, to "write the truth on
> Radio-Info about this misquote and lack of a correction by
> Roger Brown that should have been printed in the PD."

Here's the funny part.

He's now got you, me and Johnny Morgan taking him at his word, and believing him when he says Roger Brown misquoted him. We've posted about, what, about four times now?

What else can we do? XL, can you post messages here in large letters? Do you have to put up a sticky correcting a newspaper columnist? We've all but bought space in the PD saying Roger screwed up the quote. Anything else, I think is up to him.

I have a theory. Aside from whatever other issues he has about people talking about him, Mr. Luczak's bothered by this board because most of us can put reasonably coherent sentences together, and we don't praise him as a master programmer or something. If we wrote like 5th graders, he probably wouldn't be as bothered. So, he's GOTTA KNOW WHO WE ARE.

Mr. Luczak, as I've mentioned to you in E-Mail and as I've mentioned here, at least two major local radio clusters are directly aware of who I am. Probably three, but two directly (by my personal presence in their building). None of the clusters has felt the need to play the "WHO ARE YOU AND WHY ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ME" card. They take what they see here at face (Internet) value, and deal with me as a broadcast veteran when I see them in person, or contact them off this board.

And that's all I'll have to say about this. Look, as I said, I'm fair about it. I've said more than once that at least some of what Mr. Luczak does is dictated by the company he works for, and their direction for his sports and talk stations. He's actually managed to do some stuff under that, well, clamp. I don't get on here all the time and gripe about 'KNR, and as mentioned, I don't really give a rip what happened at WMMS...I don't listen.

-OA<P ID="signature">______________
Ohio Media Watch - <a target="_blank" href=http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com>http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com</a></P>
 
Re: when was Luczak the pd of WMMS

> > When was he the pd of WMMS? I seem to remember it being
> > right after the Gen. X period in '99 but I'm not sure.
> >
>
> July 1990-Jan. 1994, after Piombino and McCartney. End of
> Malrite, beginnings of Shamrock. He was no longer employed
> at WMMS before New Year 1994. OmniAmerica took over the
> sagging Buzzard not long after (April 15, 1994). The deal
> was struck in late '93.
>
> UPDATED: Wording has been edited, as Mr. Luczak disputes the
> use of the term "fired".
>
Thanks, WMMS went through so many changes in the 90's it's hard for me to keep track of who (besides the dj's) was there when.<P ID="signature">______________
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."
Albert Einstein
</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom