Citadel #1?

[davideduardo]

Apparently you didn't read to the end of the article. But, just to make sure we're on the same page, how about this story:
Your challenges are significant. Meanwhile, all this is simply a diversion from the real question, regarding the health of Citadel. They don't have a TV cable network to back up their radio holdings, and certainly are not seeing growth in their primary audience.

Univision is not a cable network.

 

[SirRoxalot]

The vast majority of Univision's viewers receive the TV network via cable. And, Univision has a radio division, along with other multimedia holdings focused on the Spanish-speaking audience.

But, this is simply more deflection. The topic is CITADEL.

 

[davideduardo]

The vast majority of U'vision's viewers receive the TV network via cable.

Actually, you should look at the percentage of viewers who use satellite tv. In Latin America, cable is very narrowly developed and satellite is traditionally where people look for programming.

And it's not one network, it's two... Telefutura is the other. And there is a cable/satellite channel, but it is called Galavision.

About 25% of Spanish language TV viewers watch over the air TV. So cable is not a "majority" let alone a "vast" majority. The reason for lesser cable penetration is that for the Spanish language viewer, there are really no significant offerings in most US metros that are not also available in free, off the air TV.

 

[SirRoxalot]

C I T A D E L.

 

[gr8oldies]

Re: Citadel#1

You brought up where David works, Rox.

 

[davideduardo]

Re: Citadel#1

You brought up where David works, Rox.

And he got it significantly wrong, right down to his claim about the percentages of cable subscribers.

 

[SirRoxalot]

And none of the Univision discussion has ANYTHING to do with Citadel. It is simply a deflection from the real topic.

I am certainly no expert on Spanish language networks in the United States. Since Univision is a privately-held company, information is a bit harder to come by.

I'm not certain that Univision, or any other network, would advance the idea that the majority of their viewers - unlike the majority of television viewers in the United States - watch their networks over-the-air. It seems that it would make it tougher to sell airtime at premium rates if you tell your advertisers that most of your viewers are incapable of paying for cable or satellite service.

 

[davideduardo]

And none of the Univision discussion has ANYTHING to do with Citadel. It is simply a deflection from the real topic.

You are the one who brought it into the discussion, in attempt to add to the candidates for doom, gloom and disaster. But when the argument is turned against you, you claim it was irrelevant all along.

Or did I miss something?

I am certainly no expert on Spanish language networks in the United States. Since Univision is a privately-held company, information is a bit harder to come by.

Au contraire mon frere. There are publicly held and traded bonds, and full SEC disclosure as part of those securities.

I'm not certain that Univision, or any other network, would advance the idea that the majority of their viewers - unlike the majority of television viewers in the United States - watch their networks over-the-air. It seems that it would make it tougher to sell airtime at premium rates if you tell your advertisers that most of your viewers are incapable of paying for cable or satellite service.

You did not read my post, did you?

Cable does not give Spanish dominant viewers anything of interest that they can not get off the air in the markets where about 80% of US Hispanics live.

So tell me, why would a person pay to get the things they get for free, if paying does not get them, at best, more than one or two additional channels of interest?

Why?

 

[SirRoxalot]

And thus the deflection continues. Let me know when you have something of substance to say about Citadel.

 

[davideduardo]

And thus the deflection continues. Let me know when you have something of substance to say about Citadel.

This statement was made, by you: "Now go back to trying to sell us your version of "how radio's doing" and "corporate is always right". I'm afraid your Kool-Aid stand ain't doin' such good business these days."

I believe that is what one would call "opening the door."

And an ancilary discussion of any broadcast company that carries debt is definitely appropriate as we look at companies that would have done fine were it not for the recession.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Since You Insist..

Well, since you insist on talking about Univision, you must be in an interesting position as an advocate of Arbitron, while the company you work for decides not to encode their broadcasts for PPM in several major Spanish-speaking markets.

http://radio-info.com/sections/2/news_items/6345-univision-pulls-the-plug-on-arbitrons-ppm-in-miami-phoenix-and-san-diego

That should help sales at Univision radio, huh? Especially since you contend that the majority of sales is transactional, not relational.

 

[davideduardo]

Re: Citadel thread branch continues...

...you must be in an interesting position as an advocate of Arbitron, while the company you work for decides not to encode their broadcasts for PPM in several major Spanish-speaking markets.

I'm not an "advocate" of Arbitron. I am an advocate of good audience measurement, and the PPM is not yet good audience measurement... or it would have MRC accreditation. The 18-34 DDI of 51 in Miami in June shure makes one confident of that happening soon...