Clear Channel Fogs the Airwaves, it's Deja Vu all over again, 3 1/2 years later!

[SUPERCASTER]

HD Radio is buzzing and failing. The public up in arms over more proposed media consolidation. Now, Clear Channel wants to sell or go private.
Should we have seen this implosion coming?
Everything old is new again.

FCC has already proposed new rules to "deregulate" the dangerous near monopoly of TV and radio ownership. If adopted, the new rules would tighten the already strong hold that the five monster conglomerates have over TV and radio networks

http://www.counterpunch.org/landau05132003.html

Bravo, SirRoxALot:

The house of cards created by the likes of Clear Channel (and others) is quaking. CC is quietly starting to sell off smaller markets, sometimes at a loss. Their fear is the coming of wireless Internet radio. Suddenly, they won't be able to create de facto monopolies by buying up the full-coverage stations in a market. They'll be forced to compete with some smart radio people who don't have - or need - deep pockets to put an Internet radio station on the air. It will be interesting to see how corporate content competes with live and local in the long run.

http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,49624.msg364289.html#msg364289

 

[gr8oldies]

In some ways, teh CC "problem" is fixing itself. I doubt CC will sell intact with all 1200 stations. More than likely, either regional companies will emerge or many of their clusters will be picked up by the likes of Entercom or possibly Cox.

I still would doubt that one in 50 people in my metro area could tell me who owns all the radio stations in town, let alone by "outraged" about it. Wirelessnternet certainly has possibilities, but I don't believe everyone will be listenening exclusively to hyper-nuched content. If so, it wouldn't matter who owned the terrestrial radio stations, because no one could possibly serve the all-oboe and all-death metal listeners at the same time.

 

[OldGringo]

In some ways, teh CC "problem" is fixing itself. I doubt CC will sell intact with all 1200 stations. More than likely, either regional companies will emerge or many of their clusters will be picked up by the likes of Entercom or possibly Cox.

But the whole reason for going private is the fact that the company (and radio) is undervalued. The current management knows this, and feels that a sale to a private equity group or an LBO captures this value for investors.

CCU is making a lot of free cash flow. They have no need to sell other than the fact management believes the total company is undervalued and would be best suited to being private. I really doubt that they will sell anything except the stations that do not make sense in the future... which means a bunch of the small market ones.

 

[OldGringo]

HD Radio is buzzing and failing.

The HD campaign just started in August. This is a 43 to 5 year haul, not 90 days.

The public up in arms over more proposed media consolidation.

Not really. Only a few people care.

[/quote]
Now, Clear Channel wants to sell or go private. [/quote]

Because they feel the company is undervalued, based on assets and EBITDA. It is very profitable, but the market tends to value growth rate (Google, XM, and many other unprofitable companies) over profits. So the investors win by going private or doing an LBO. [/quote]

Should we have seen this implosion coming?

What implosion? HD is off to a good start, many broadcast companies are thinking of going private (Univsion did, CCU may, others are thinking...) and Q3 revenues were up for the good companies. That is not an implosion.

 

[Tom Wells]

Is that all-oboe format available on an intenet stream yet? Can't seem to find a Chicago outlet running that.

 

[vsa]

"All-Oboe" can't be too far off. I just tuned in this all-Chinese classical station online:

MP3 stream at:  http://72.21.49.122:8202/listen.pls

;D

 

[SUPERCASTER]

OldGringo said:

The HD campaign just started in August. This is a 43 to 5 year haul, not 90 days.

Your memory is very short. The HD Radio promotional campaign started when the first HD radios went on sale 4 years ago.

 

[700WLW]

OldGringo: "HD is off to a good start..."

Look at the anemic sales figures for HD radios, indicative of very apathetic public !

 

[OldGringo]

OldGringo said:

The HD campaign just started in August. This is a 43 to 5 year haul, not 90 days.

Your memory is very short. The HD Radio promotional campaign started when the first HD radios went on sale 4 years ago.

The industry committee did not even exist 4 years ago. The official ramp up, with on air promotion based on produced campaigns, started 08/06.

 

[OldGringo]

OldGringo: "HD is off to a good start..."

Look at the anemic sales figures for HD radios, indicative of very apathetic public !

6 months after the introduction of the CD, there was no player on the market that cost less than $500, and very few were sold.

 

[700WLW]

OldGringo: "HD is off to a good start..."

Look at the anemic sales figures for HD radios, indicative of very apathetic public !

6 months after the introduction of the CD, there was no player on the market that cost less than $500, and very few were sold.

A totally different situation - that was totally new technology, and HD Radio is just a repeat of the same old thing !

 

[LeChat]

In some ways, teh CC "problem" is fixing itself. I doubt CC will sell intact with all 1200 stations. More than likely, either regional companies will emerge or many of their clusters will be picked up by the likes of Entercom or possibly Cox.

I still would doubt that one in 50 people in my metro area could tell me who owns all the radio stations in town, let alone by "outraged" about it. Wirelessnternet certainly has possibilities, but I don't believe everyone will be listenening exclusively to hyper-nuched content. If so, it wouldn't matter who owned the terrestrial radio stations, because no one could possibly serve the all-oboe and all-death metal listeners at the same time.

Unlike what happened in 2003, more people are aware of media consolidation and what that means, not only in terms of radio, but also newspapers and television. Certainly, there seems to be no great grassroots movement, but there are large and small efforts to educate the public about who owns what and what consolidation means. The public has attended meetings with FCC commissioners to protest further consolidation, but there has been almost no reporting of these events in the mainstream media. And yet I believe that for every 400 people who do attend these hearings, maybe an equal number have protested further loosening of ownership rules by written comment. People are sending comments to FCC and the situation that existed in 2003, may not exist now. Remember, millions of people wrote to Congress to protest the 2003 FCC attempt to further weaken ownership rules--enough people that Congress took note. That the poster may be aware of the outrage might, perhaps, say more about how the poster views to public and the listener. But I do think that this issue is close to the heart of many more people than the poster believes and I would not be so glib as to say that I knew of 50 people who were educated or uneducated about the issue. Consolidation has devalued radio at a time when I would think that radio would want to present itself as the ideal source for news, information,and, yes, entertainment. But I have seen post after post on this board alone, in which radio professionals advise those who are unhappy with radio turn to other sources such as satellite. Radio listenership has declined, and that is not a sign that radio has done a good job of serving the public in the 10 years since the ownership rules were first relaxed. People get angry and become involved in an issue because their personal ox is gored. It could be that Clear Channel, as the largest owner of radio stations in the United States, has gored more oxen than other large corporation. Dismiss public dissatisfaction at your own risk, but it is there, whether you are aware of it or not.

 

[gr8oldies]

All well and good, but if you're trying to get a grass roots movement, you have to answer the question of what changes you are proposing to my area radio stations, and if I'll like the changes. Does it really make a difference if some of my local stations are stripped from CC and given to Progressive Insurance (assuming they'd buy them)? Vague terms like "more public service" mean nothing, and maybe I don't want my Smooth Jazz format interrupted by a long newscast, interview with the mayor, or whatever.

Can you really promise that my locals will play obscure and unknown artists, and that I will want to hear them if they do? What's the promise in the "solution" (other than the vague hope that DJ jobs will come back, which could in now way be guaranteed).

 

[LeChat]

The grassroots movement is already there and they have articulated the issues far better than I can. I certainly do not expect those committed to further consolidation to acknowledge that a loss of local news coverage on the radio, for example, is a serious loss, or a loss at all. But I do believe there is a dissatisfaction with the way radio has evolved and that is the primary reason people seek whatever it is they want from radio from other sources. The poster claims that there is no guarantee the radio will play more new music if cookie-cutter program is curtailed. And yes, that might be the case--just as that might not be the case.

Big media companies make national decisions about the music we hear on the radio, making it difficult for local artists to gain exposure. While college radio stations and a few other low-power stations remain the local sources of more diverse musical choices, big media companies are trying to buy or block those too.

Did your jazz station interrupt your listening pleasure with long-winded editorials before 1996? Why do you think that will be the case now? In answer to your question, I cannot promise that local artists will be heard if ownership rules stand, but I know for sure that they do not get a hearing now.

In Milwaukee, Clear Channel sold naming rights to two newsrooms to banks. When reporting the news, do these banks get a pass when something untoward happens? Are their competitors assured of fair news coverage?

Finally, it takes a certain amount of hubris to direct people to other sources if they are unhappy with how the public airwaves are being used. If radio is nothing more than a business that exists solely as an advertising venue, how is the advertiser served when listenership declines?

 

[gr8oldies]

Unless there was some big machine like Motown in your back yard, local artists didn't get played on the radio pre-1996 either. I know of very few cases, even in small towns, where the local bar bands got on the radio. And local news started declining after the late 70s because audiences weren't interested (at least on music stations). I don't see any requirement that radio stations carry programming that audiences aren't interested in as increasing listenership.

 

[OldGringo]

Unless there was some big machine like Motown in your back yard, local artists didn't get played on the radio pre-1996 either. I know of very few cases, even in small towns, where the local bar bands got on the radio. And local news started declining after the late 70s because audiences weren't interested (at least on music stations). I don't see any requirement that radio stations carry programming that audiences aren't interested in as increasing listenership.

In the 70's (and 60's as well) stations had to do a couple of things to insure a reasonable chance of license renewal.

1. Certify that they had not exceeded 18 minutes of commercial time on the composite week (a "week" made up of randlom dates given by the FCC from the last license period) and if not, explain why.

2. Have about 8% non-entertainment programming on an AM and about 6% on an FM. This meant news, Public Affairs, Educational, religious, etc. It could be said thsat much of this was of interest to nobody, and highly duplicated between music stations.

3. Run an adequate number of PSA's, too.

Deregulation eliminated quotas, among many other things.

 

[LeChat]

News and information is repetitive, ergo it has no place on the radio and you probably cannot sell ads against it. I see your point. The public airwaves exist solely to serve private interest. I cannot imagine what I was thinking. I stand corrected.

 

[gr8oldies]

News and information has its place, but not everywhere and at all times of day. Since when does every station have to do the same thing? Let me go to the station that specializes in news when I want news and the station that specializes in something else when I want that.

 

[LeChat]

So when Clear Channel says in needs four more major market stations in these dangerous times to communicate news and information, they are
1. Planning all news, all the time formats on four more major market stations
or
2. Lying through their teeth because news has its place and that is not necessarily on those four major market stations

Since when does every station have to do the same thing? Since corporate radio said so and that is predicated solely on what sells ads.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

OldGringo said:

The HD campaign just started in August. This is a 43 to 5 year haul, not 90 days.

Your memory is very short. The HD Radio promotional campaign started when the first HD radios went on sale 4 years ago.

The industry committee did not even exist 4 years ago. The official ramp up, with on air promotion based on produced campaigns, started 08/06.

The first HD promotion started over 4 years ago before the first HD radios went on sale. How long some committee formed is irrelevant to when HD promotion started.
Today I formed a committee to promote the wheel. Does that mean no one ever promoted the wheel before today?
Stop spewing nonsense, and maybe people would take you more seriously. Learn to be a professional.
I agree about the 43 year long haul for HD radio. On second thought, it may take a lot longer.