As seen on the front page of Radio-Info recently, Clear Channel is trying to make the push for ownership of up to 12 stations in one market. Obviously, Clear Channel has intentions to make this a move in larger markets where a good amount of their radio money is made so the Los Angeles area would obviously be targeted by Clear Channel. What frequencies do you think CC would target to add to their portfolio and what formats would they maintain on them? Do you think that this will successfully push through the FCC? Clear Channel does spend millions on lobbying...
-
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
CLEAR CHANNEL AND THEIR PUSH TO POP THE CAP...
- Thread starter radiojomo
- Start date
I've written about this in comments on LARadio.com and Reelradio.com. The real key is that Clear Channel's proposal removes the 5 FM/3AM cap. If approved, they'd be able to own 12 of any...AM or FM.
I think it's a safe bet that they won't choose more AM...and this paves the way for them to get out of AM entirely.
This week, CC donated some AMs to the Minority Media Telecom Council, which facilitates getting them licensed by minority broadcasters. CC gets a nice tax write-off for the donation.
IF (again, IF) CC wanted to own nothing but FMs in Los Angeles, they could do it. One scenario:
* Donate KLAC, KFI and KTLK to the MMTC, which finds 3 minority owners.
* Buy CBS/LA, adding KCBS, KTWV, KAMP, KRTH and KROQ to the CC/LA cluster. They would now have 10 FMs.
* Donate KNX and KFWB to the MMTC, which finds 2 more minority owners.
* Buy Citadel/LA, adding KLOS to the CC/LA cluster. Now 11 FMs.
* Donate KSPN and KABC to the MMTC, which finds 2 more minority owners.
* Buy Emmis' stand-alone KPWR, and now the CC/LA cluster is 12 FMs.
Clear Channel removes three competitors, but can argue that their move has brought 7 new minority owners into the market...a net gain of four owners and thus a victory for diversity.
What would they do with 7 more FMs? That's pure speculation, but KFI's talk format would have to go on one of them, KLAC and/or KSPN's sports format on one (or two), KNX's all-news might take another, and it's possible that both KTLK's liberal talk and KFWB's syndicated talk could do better on FM than they do on AM. If you make the same argument for KABC's talk format, then there's your 7.
What's left in commercial English-language FMs with a full-market signal? KSWD and KKGO.
Now, that's just one scenario...CC might want to consider (especially in L.A.) being in Spanish-language formats. So the target stations could be different. But the above would give them a stranglehold on English-language FM.
I think it's a safe bet that they won't choose more AM...and this paves the way for them to get out of AM entirely.
This week, CC donated some AMs to the Minority Media Telecom Council, which facilitates getting them licensed by minority broadcasters. CC gets a nice tax write-off for the donation.
IF (again, IF) CC wanted to own nothing but FMs in Los Angeles, they could do it. One scenario:
* Donate KLAC, KFI and KTLK to the MMTC, which finds 3 minority owners.
* Buy CBS/LA, adding KCBS, KTWV, KAMP, KRTH and KROQ to the CC/LA cluster. They would now have 10 FMs.
* Donate KNX and KFWB to the MMTC, which finds 2 more minority owners.
* Buy Citadel/LA, adding KLOS to the CC/LA cluster. Now 11 FMs.
* Donate KSPN and KABC to the MMTC, which finds 2 more minority owners.
* Buy Emmis' stand-alone KPWR, and now the CC/LA cluster is 12 FMs.
Clear Channel removes three competitors, but can argue that their move has brought 7 new minority owners into the market...a net gain of four owners and thus a victory for diversity.
What would they do with 7 more FMs? That's pure speculation, but KFI's talk format would have to go on one of them, KLAC and/or KSPN's sports format on one (or two), KNX's all-news might take another, and it's possible that both KTLK's liberal talk and KFWB's syndicated talk could do better on FM than they do on AM. If you make the same argument for KABC's talk format, then there's your 7.
What's left in commercial English-language FMs with a full-market signal? KSWD and KKGO.
Now, that's just one scenario...CC might want to consider (especially in L.A.) being in Spanish-language formats. So the target stations could be different. But the above would give them a stranglehold on English-language FM.
So if they bought all those stations they would simply be moving the main AMs to FM, gettting rid of Jack, K-Earth, Wave, Amp, KLOS and KPWR in the process, pretty much forever ruining the LA market. Lets just hope that doesn't happen 
travisl5678 said:So if they bought all those stations they would simply be moving the main AMs to FM, gettting rid of Jack, K-Earth, Wave, Amp, KLOS and KPWR in the process, pretty much forever ruining the LA market. Lets just hope that doesn't happen
I think this discussion is going too far into the realm of improbability.
The FCC simly opened a window for comments based on its obligations to periodically review ownership issues and caps.
There have been, apparently, thousands of comments filed opposing expanding the caps and many suggesting a rollback.
Clear is pushing the other way and making an argument that the current internet or cable enabled person has thousands of choices, and ownership caps don't serve the purpose they did decades ago. They are presenting a contrarian argument which shows that perhaps leaving the current status quo is a good idea.
I can't see Clear just sitting by while thousands of informal comments are filed opposing its business model.
In any case, Clear has debts to pay and is living in a difficult economy; it's not going to be buying too many stations. And there are not too many sellers, either.
travisl5678 said:So if they bought all those stations they would simply be moving the main AMs to FM, gettting rid of Jack, K-Earth, Wave, Amp, KLOS and KPWR in the process, pretty much forever ruining the LA market. Lets just hope that doesn't happen
Well, again...they might do those things. I gotta imagine they'd find a home for KFI and KLAC's formats. They could pass on KTLK and KFWB, figuring that even if a competitor picked up the syndication those two carry, they wouldn't have huge impact. And in sports, they might make the same argument about KSPN.
They could choose not to compete against a KFI on FM by blowing up KABC.
They might not pursue finding an FM home for KNX's all news, because of the high costs involved in doing that format.
In that case, only two FMs would have to change to accomodate formats moving over from AM...KFI and KLAC.
I could never see CC handing over a major 50,000 watt AM in a Large Market, I think most of the AMs their donating are 1kwers in small markets that probably don't show much for ratings and are about to go silent.
DavidEduardo said:
David: True. But Clear is asking for 12 to a market and a removal of AM/FM caps. If (big if) the FCC were to say yes, there's nothing in Clear's behavior to this point to suggest that they would operate below the maximum allowed number of stations (remember, this is the group that found clever ways to exceed the 8-to-a-market rule in San Diego until they were forced to divest).
As for the finances, donating the AMs would result in some significant tax breaks.
Again, the point of the scenario was simply to illustrate that IF the FCC approved the 12-to-a-market proposal with no AM/FM caps, it could be done in L.A....and done a certain way, it could put CC in ownership of all but two of the full-signal English-language FMs in market #2.
travisl5678 said:
It's the biggest stretch in the scenario, no question. But as we've seen all over the country, talk formats (and more recently, sports formats) are moving to FM...and if you did that with KFI, what do you put on 640 that gets numbers?
As David Eduardo has pointed out, the audience (and especially the desirable demographics) are on FM. KFI's cume in the latest PPM is about half of KOST's. There are so many people who simply never press the "AM" button on the radio anymore.
Does KFI at least have an HD-2 simulcast yet?
We've been discussing this on the Phoenix board this morning, too (where the scenario would differ from L.A. only in that there would be NO full-signal English-language FMs not owned by CC)...and John Davis came up with a good alternate explanation for CC's 12-to-a-market request:
http://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=172364.msg1487548#msg1487548
http://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=172364.msg1487548#msg1487548
I don't think CBS would sell the stations in their cluster. They have said in the past that they want to remain in the larger markets and want to start selling stations in the smaller markets. I could see CC taking over some of the smaller CBS clusters but not the LA cluster.
If CC was in heavy debt, why would they be proposing this idea?
My idea is that CC would acquire some of the more unsuccessful Class B stations like KXOL, KSWD and KXOS and place KFI on one of the stronger signals. If this measure passes, it will surely start being an interesting time in radio...
If CC was in heavy debt, why would they be proposing this idea?
My idea is that CC would acquire some of the more unsuccessful Class B stations like KXOL, KSWD and KXOS and place KFI on one of the stronger signals. If this measure passes, it will surely start being an interesting time in radio...
What would be the response by the House and Senate if this change were to be allowed by the FCC? Dream on, This is never going to be allowed to happen, but then again this government IS the best that Money can buy! So I wouldn't bet on it not happening nor on it becoming the law of the land. But it would be a disaster for those working in the industry. Do you all want this to happen? Are you all really that crazy?
RadioStarOne said:
The FCC is mandated to reexamine the owenership limits at regular intervals; part of that process... and what makes it considerably more transparent than many government dealings... is that comments are requested in advance of the review.
Thousands have written to suggest a rollback or the status quo, yet one company voices an opinion in the opposite direction and folks think that this is half way to reality.
Even the relaxations that made sense, like allowing newspapres to buy radio and TV properties to avert certain disaster in the print arena have not prospered... that should show what is likely to happen this time since public reaction is such that even logical changes will fail.
For clarity:
No, I don't want it to happen.
The House and Senate voted overwhelmingly in favor of de-reg. Don't count on outrage from them.
Halfway to reality is usually too late to start discussing this kind of stuff.
Public opinion doesn't seem to count for much in Washington these days.
That said, I hope David's right and that it's just CC trying to swim upstream against an insurmountable onrushing tide of opposition.
No, I don't want it to happen.
The House and Senate voted overwhelmingly in favor of de-reg. Don't count on outrage from them.
Halfway to reality is usually too late to start discussing this kind of stuff.
Public opinion doesn't seem to count for much in Washington these days.
That said, I hope David's right and that it's just CC trying to swim upstream against an insurmountable onrushing tide of opposition.
- Status