Can 1360 WPTT AM take down the big guys?

[Radio_Realist]

"if the old hosts are tired and worn-out,"

If you're going to quote me, quote what I really said. I didn't say that all old hosts are tired and worn-out. I said that two specific hosts sounded like they were getting bored towards the end of their tenure at KDKA. That could be because they were tired of the same topics and same callers on the same time slot on the same station in the same studio in the same building. Maybe they just needed a little change of scenery, or a little bit of time off, or a new start somewhere else.

But I'd never say that any host ceased being capable just because he was getting older.

"Most people in the industry have a visceral reaction to that sort of thinking....."

The problem with that kind of thinking is that the odds of finding a really good host from such a non-traditional source are against you. If a station manager goes outside the box to find a host, he also has to be prepared to invest time and treasure in getting the outsider a really good screener/assistant, and has to be prepared for the host to some need time to develop. And even at that, it might not work out. That's the down side of looking outside the box -- a lower chance of success and more work.

But there's a big upside to doing that. If such an off-the-wall candidate does work out, there's a good chance that he'll not only be good, he'll be outstanding.

It's like betting on horses at the race track. If you're careful and only bet on sure things, you'll win more often than you'll lose, but you won't win really big money. If you take a fling on a real long shot, chances are you'll lose, but if you do win, you win really big.

Once upon a time, the radio industry had lots of gamblers in it who were willing to bet on the long shots. Those days are long gone.

 

[FreddyE1977]

your exact words were

"passed their sell-by date years ago"

...perhaps a poor job of paraphrasing on my part.

Your point is well-taken though that the people making these decisions are very risk-averse. If the existing hosts are getting a bit stale, then were do you turn for fresh ones? The existing pool of radio pros continues to truncate year-by-year due to clustering, voice-tracking, syndication, etc. So programmers begin to look outside, (which understandably drives may people who already work in the business crazy). But those people will require a learning curve, and for that station owners appear to have zero patience (David Lee Roth being a good case in point). They are not willing to suffer through the several bad ratings books that will inevitably follow while the person they are trying to groom is learning his craft. So you end up with an endless churn of bad shows, that at the end of the day do not even achieve the objective of developing some fresh talent.

 

[Radio_Realist]

"your exact words were

"passed their sell-by date years ago""

That was in reference to Hoerth and Cullen, but I thought you were commenting on what I said about Pintek and Romine. In the case of Hoerth and Cullen, it's not so much that they are old people, it's that their schtick is old. Other talk hosts the same age as those two, with the same amount of time on the air have managed to keep their acts fresh. Those two haven't.

As for Pintek and Romine, I stand by what I said about them sounding like they were getting bored. Maybe they weren't, I don't know them personally. But they came across as getting bored.

"If the existing hosts are getting a bit stale, then were do you turn for fresh ones?"

That's a major conundrum for the entire industry. The stations in small markets where one would think rookies could develop their skills, and some of them could display the abilities needed to move up to larger markets insist on filling their time with syndicated programming. I can understand small companies forced to go all syndication out of economic necessity. I cannot understand why no one at large companies like Clear Channel or Viacom sees the advantages of grooming new talent.

It strikes me as similar to how organized baseball maintains the minor leagues to develop talent for the major leagues. Without the minor leagues, where will the new major leaguers come from?

 

[OKCRadioGuy]

Tony Renda = Cheap

He cannot and will not do what it necessary to make WPTT, or any of his other currently disfunctional properties work properly. Don't look for improvements. They won't happen. Tony's philosophy has and continues to be generally to pinch the pennies and create a profit from the savings. It's the old Clear Channel formula for the most part. Hence on WPTT he'll continue to use as many old wash-ups he can get cheap and have a apathetic lack of creativity driven by his cheapness. In some ways Tony is a Mavrick, but programming isn't one of them. There's too much risk in hiring the right people to put on a lesser signal, so he'll continue to grind out the same tired old crap as he has before. KDKA will continue to be the talk station in town, with Tony trailing the bottom of the bucket at WPTT. It's just the way it is.

 

[Boss Radio]

Tony Renda = Cheap

He cannot and will not do what it necessary to make WPTT, or any of his other currently disfunctional properties work properly. Don't look for improvements. They won't happen. Tony's philosophy has and continues to be generally to pinch the pennies and create a profit from the savings. It's the old Clear Channel formula for the most part. Hence on WPTT he'll continue to use as many old wash-ups he can get cheap and have a apathetic lack of creativity driven by his cheapness. In some ways Tony is a Mavrick, but programming isn't one of them. There's too much risk in hiring the right people to put on a lesser signal, so he'll continue to grind out the same tired old crap as he has before. KDKA will continue to be the talk station in town, with Tony trailing the bottom of the bucket at WPTT. It's just the way it is.

Renda is cheap? Probably. So are Clear Channel and Infinity and every other operator in town. Way of the world these days, unless you can honestly say you foresaw the day when KDKA would have blocks of brokered programming on weekends.

Renda's philosophy is to find a niche audience being ignored by the big guys and to use one of his AM signals to corner that market. So the old folks get the old music on WJAS and the fans of WTAE talk get a slice of that station on WPTT. In the hands of another owner, those signals would likely be relaying satellite programming.

KDKA isn't "the talk station" in town and hasn't been for some time. 104 has been kicking their butts since it signed on. KDKA's audience is the people who haven't moved the dial in the last 30 years. Look at their demos outside of morning drive. It's a disaster and even the 12+ audience that used to be glitzy for them is fading. They're in freefall with no clue about how to reverse things.

Why would Renda hire people for shifts on WPTT that can't be heard by most of the market? When you're talking about "tired crap," couldn't you just as easily be talking about Honsberger, who's the central figure at KDKA?

 

[Radio_Realist]

"Renda is cheap? Probably. So are Clear Channel and Infinity and every other operator in town."

There is cheap, and there is cheap.

"Renda's philosophy is to find a niche audience being ignored by the big guys and to use one of his AM signals to corner that market."

Which is why I suggested that he go after upscale women, the way KQV went after upscale men. KQV has a lock on the rich old guy market, why shouldn't Renda use WPTT to go after the rich old guy's wife market?

"Why would Renda hire people for shifts on WPTT that can't be heard by most of the market?"

Counter question for you. He's obviously playing Cullen and Hoerth something. I doubt if they are working for free. And as long as they have been around, I'd guess they've moved up the salary ladder a bit. So why doesn't he replace those two old has-beens with two people who are cheaper? Are you suggesting that what Renda pays Cullen and Hoerth is so low that he couldn't get the same bad ratings with some young semi-rookie?

"When you're talking about "tired crap," couldn't you just as easily be talking about Honsberger, who's the central figure at KDKA?"

I honestly don't know. I won't ever voluntarily tune Honsberger in. I haven't heard even a moment of his show in over ten years. He was a pompous windbag back then. It's not a question of agreeing or disagreeing with what he said, it's the fact that he's offensive even when he said things I agreed with. So, I see no reason to subject my ears to his program. I'd rather listen to news/talk radio I disagree with that has interesting and entertaining people on it. That's WDUQ.

 

[robbbc]

Um, the line-up is simple:

5-7 simulcast local TV station
7-9 Rachel Maddow
9-12 Stephanie Miller
12-3 Thom Hartmann
3-7 Randi Rhodes
7-10 Majority Report
10-1 Mike Malloy

AP radio news on the hour and the Weather channel for local forcasts.
Cheap. No one is listening after 7 anyways why not cater to the libtalk listeners.

 

[Pratte4Life]

Air America?

Is that network still around?

Truthfully, tell me what the difference is between Air America and Liberty, Genesis, or a thousand other talk networks like that nobody listens to with no affiliates.

 

[Radio_Realist]

"Um, the line-up is simple:"

Here's an even simpler one:

Go to Time-Life and buy one copy of every compilation CD they have, and load them into a large juke-box CD changer. Add one CD with liners and station IDs. Then hit "random play" and walk away.

You'd get about the same ratings, and virtually no expenses at all.

 

[Boss Radio]

"KQV has a lock on the rich old guy market."

KQV has a lock on Richard Scaife's wallet. The station wouldn't exist as an all-news outlet without Scaife covering its losses. The station is not successful and wouldn't be on the air except as a Scaife-Dickey vanity project.

"And as long as they have been around, I'd guess they've moved up the salary ladder a bit."

You'd guess wrong. They're working at Renda's price because they have nowhere else to go in Pittsburgh. Familiar names help a station do business, both with listeners and advertisers.

 

[Johnny Morgan]

KQV has a lock on Richard Scaife's wallet. The station wouldn't exist as an all-news outlet without Scaife covering its losses. The station is not successful and wouldn't be on the air except as a Scaife-Dickey vanity project.

Sure it would, because KQV *IS* successful with its niche--businessmen, bankers, and lawyer-types. Rich, business/finance-oriented types. They could care less about their overall ratings or any "key" demo (i.e., 25-54) other than the super-targeted affluent males. And with their poor signal, that's pretty much to be expected.

The news-talk format has been on 1410 for far longer than Scaife has owned it, and it has historically done the same. It makes money, independently of Scaife. In fact, if he was to pull out, Bob Dickey's guidance of the place for the last 30 or so years could keep it afloat, as that's how it's been. It's never been as "hands-on" for RMS as the Tribune papers. An owner interested in the format could make it work--as Taft was, and as Scaife is.

It's easy to sell to certain buyers, because of the money their listeners have. It's not an agency station by any means, but does get local, affluent advertisers, as well as the spots that can sell during their sports programming (including local HS football, and NFL/College football).

 

[Boss Radio]

Johnny, KQV would not make it without Scaife's money. The station doesn't cover its nut because it's an expensive format to do and the people have all been there long enough to make top scale.

All news KQV used to get much better ratings than the tiny shares it gets now. They aren't selling that many spots and they're not getting that much for some of the ones they have. A lot of those "old money" businesses that used to buy spots have disappeared over the last 15 years. Taft was going to pull the plug on news, which is why Dickey went to Scaife in the first place.

And, no, the Scaife-Dickey ownership group took over in December of 1982, which was six years and one month into the all news format. They've owned it now for 24 and 1/2 years. Scaife doesn't have to be "hands-on." He only has to put money in the bank account.

How does Dickey run it? He has 1977 in a time capsule. The sounders he stole from WINS, the same format clock, the same announcers who were there for the last days of the music format.

You need to talk to someone on the inside at KQV to get the true story on how the business runs.

 

[Radio_Realist]

You'd guess wrong. They're working at Renda's price because they have nowhere else to go in Pittsburgh. Familiar names help a station do business, both with listeners and advertisers.

Cullen could always sell dresses at Muggins.

How "familiar" are the names Cullen and Hoerth to anyone now, in 2006? To most Pittsburghers, Cullen and Hoerth are "whatever happened to?" questions. They're the kind of names people submit to PBRTV's mailbag asking where they're now working.

I don't doubt that familiar names help a station do business, but not nearly as much as putting an entertaining show on the air would. If all it took was a familiar name, no radio personality would ever be replaced until he died.

If you were offered a choice of a station programmed with nothing but old familiar names, all of whom were stone cold boring, or another station with unknown names who were all interesting and entertaining, which would you want to operate?

 

[Johnny Morgan]

no, the Scaife-Dickey ownership group took over in December of 1982

Correct, and I never said otherwise. However, Bob Dickey has been GM since 1976 (he was brought in by Taft).

All-news isn't going to be a revolutionary format, so there really isn't anything wrong with stealing WINS's format ops for Pittsburgh. No one's gonna know, except for transplant New Yawkers, and how many people are moving from there TO Pittsburgh, and listening?

But, the question is: let's say all the anti-Scaife sentiment comes to fruition. His checkbook is closed, someone else comes in--what format would you put on that God-awful 1410 signal?

Bearing in mind that it's mediocre during the day, and unlistenable pretty much anywhere past the near-South Hills after dark. Given the choice between a disparaged all-news station (by the way, essentially the city's only decent field-reporting radio newsroom, now that KDKA has decided that they're going to cover the world from the confines of a Gateway Center inner-core office) or some snake-oil brokered radio, why does it matter if it's a vanity project? It's doing something that otherwise wouldn't be in the market--the whole idea behind a radio format.

 

[Radio_Realist]

"Given the choice between a disparaged all-news station"

From the little sampling I've done of KQV's news lately, it strikes me that any failures they're experiencing aren't because they're broadcasting all news. It's because they are doing a very good job of broadcasting the news. The drive-time news and features format of NPR's programming on WDUQ is quite interesting to listen to. Perhaps if KQV's local news reporting sounding more like NPR's national news and less like a 78 rpm transcription of the 1930's NBC Blue network, they might do better in the ratings.

 

[Boss Radio]

no, the Scaife-Dickey ownership group took over in December of 1982

Correct, and I never said otherwise. However, Bob Dickey has been GM since 1976 (he was brought in by Taft).

All-news isn't going to be a revolutionary format, so there really isn't anything wrong with stealing WINS's format ops for Pittsburgh. No one's gonna know, except for transplant New Yawkers, and how many people are moving from there TO Pittsburgh, and listening?

But, the question is: let's say all the anti-Scaife sentiment comes to fruition. His checkbook is closed, someone else comes in--what format would you put on that God-awful 1410 signal?

Bearing in mind that it's mediocre during the day, and unlistenable pretty much anywhere past the near-South Hills after dark. Given the choice between a disparaged all-news station (by the way, essentially the city's only decent field-reporting radio newsroom, now that KDKA has decided that they're going to cover the world from the confines of a Gateway Center inner-core office) or some snake-oil brokered radio, why does it matter if it's a vanity project? It's doing something that otherwise wouldn't be in the market--the whole idea behind a radio format.

Here's what you said: "The news-talk format has been on 1410 for far longer than Scaife has owned it." Not correct.

The point is not that people are going to recognize the old WINS format, it's that the station has sounded EXACTLY the same since it signed on the format. There's a difference between consistency and a rut. You might try to draw a listener younger than Bob Dickey by modernizing just a bit. KQV could stand some tweaks, unless you think it's great radio to have Steve Lohle being in love with his own voice when he stretches three minutes of news into 11 minutes.

 

[Johnny Morgan]

OK, "far longer" was incorrect. Fine. I apologize for my superlatives.

As for the format--how would you update the WINS format? Dragging out 3 minutes of news to 11 minutes is not necessarily bad newscasting or being in love with your own voice as much as it is not having enough news. That's the editors being lazy and not actually compiling enough, finding enough stories.

Or maybe Pittsburgh doesn't have enough news. I find it hard to believe, however, that the city lost that much important stuff going on in 30 years. The city got smaller, but not any less newsworthy.

And you may well have a point about KQV needing to tweak the format--WINS is the most successful and highest billing station in NYC, though. They're doing something right.

But NYC doesn't always translate into Pittsburgh.

 

[Boss Radio]

WINS doesn't sound the same way it did in 1977. It's not as stagnant as KQV is. It can't be. It runs as a viable competitive radio station, not a rich man's vanity project.

How do you update the format? Quicken the pace. Hire some people who don't sound like old TV booth announcers narrating the "March of Time." Add commentary. Hire a sports commentator instead reading a list of stale scores. Give people a reason to tune in at specific times. Instead of running the same "yes or no, here's the current vote count" phone poll format, set up a voice mail and edit some of the comments into 60-second packages that play a couple of times an hour.

J. Milton Hammond, the late publisher of the Green Sheet, used to own an FM station, WNUF, that played big band music in the '70s. He'd walk into the studio and hand the announcer a stack of records that he wanted to hear on his drive home. KQV operates on almost the same principle. It doesn't compete in a real world environment, it just plods along and sounds like 1977 because that's the exact format Dickey loves and chose to freeze in time. If the people who worked there were any more stale, the cleaning woman would have to dust them.

 

[robbbc]

Air America?

Is that network still around?

Truthfully, tell me what the difference is between Air America and Liberty, Genesis, or a thousand other talk networks like that nobody listens to with no affiliates.

If you will look at what I put forward, during the day you would have 2 hours of local news, 3 hours of Stephanie Miller. Thom Hartmann is syndicated by AAR but is not part of the current "network" and is currently on WPTT- are you even aware? That's 8 hours a day of non-Air America Radio. It could even be more if they put Big Eddie on instead of Randi Rhodes in the afternoon. I thought Randi if you want up-scale women as some posters here were suggesting- Ed might be better for the Union boys. 11 hours of Non AAR a day (before power down I might add). Also I suggested not using their top of the hour news feeds (which they get from AP anyway). If I am their promoter they should fire me.

Air America is still around, as you well know I suspect, but I didn't exactly say put on the satellite feed and let it go.

 

[FreddyE1977]

no, the Scaife-Dickey ownership group took over in December of 1982

Bearing in mind that it's mediocre during the day, and unlistenable pretty much anywhere past the near-South Hills after dark.

The amazing thing is, a) you are absolutely 100% correct in that statement, b) that has always been the case with their signal,
and c) despite those facts, I am old enough to remember a time when they were the A#1 music source for Pittsburghers, bar none!
(granted you did not have the number of people living in Upper St. Clair and Cranberry that you do today). How expectations have changed!
Today if stereo digital sound is a bit off for any reason people are squawking about it.