• 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

Could Audacy be preparing to close down or sell one of it's NY stations?

Remember advertisements are often sold to a package of stations, so any stations Audacy gets rid of potentially makes the package of stations less attractive.
 
If Audacy's stock is facing delisting due to a low share price, wouldn't a reverse split solve the problem? Why would they hesitate to do this?
 
Barry said:
If Audacy's stock is facing delisting due to a low share price, wouldn't a reverse split solve the problem? Why would they hesitate to do this?
Click to expand...
Ans: fear that the market will see right through that as an example of putting makeup on a pig and trade the shares even lower.
 
Barry said:
If Audacy's stock is facing delisting due to a low share price, wouldn't a reverse split solve the problem? Why would they hesitate to do this?
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. The NYSE also has a minimum market cap rule that Audacy is in danger of breaching. The requirement is $50 million, and Audacy is currently around $45 million.

Executing a reverse split costs money, so if it is unlikely to provide the objective of continued NYSE listing) they won't.
 
MVB13 said:
I see 94.7 signal wise as not useful.
Click to expand...
That’s because you’re looking at it from the wrong perspective. The station’s advertiser revenue is what is useful, and the format it’s running is strategic to what Audacy is trying to accomplish with its cluster. Signal limitations aside, they’re not going to discard it.
 
101.9 La Kalle said:
WCBS would probably be purchased by a company like Multicultural Radio and 94.7 would probably move over to WNEW or WFANFM. If not, a HD2 subchannel of one of the Audacy stations.
Click to expand...
And knock out two successful stations? What about the license of 94.7? Not even worth speculating.

As BigA has mentioned, the revenue the stations make, regardless of their 6+ ratings which is ostensibly where this thread is derived from, is more than worth keeping the stations around. If that were to change, then changes will happen, but not nearly as drastic as you seem to think.
 
DavidEduardo said:
They are not going to to sell individual stations in that manner because all are "on the books" at higher values than they could sell for, so the end result of a sale is a write-down of the asset value. And doing any write-down would cause lenders and investors to further devalue the company.
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting the company is not performing annual asset valuation impairment tests properly?

If fixed or intangible assets are purposely being carried at a net book value that exceeds fair market, then investors are being defrauded.

Of course, orderly liquidation value - if that is the "sale price" premise to which you are referring - is a different ball game and does not drive GAAP reporting decisions (unless a purchase and sale agreement or similar instrument has been entered, in which case the affected assets and liabilities get reclassified to held-for-sale on the balance sheet).
 
BJSteigner said:
I can see 92.3 and 101.9 being sold off. But who will be the buyer? People also want to see WPLJ 95.5 and WARW 96.7 sold off and returned to commercial status.
Click to expand...
Wait why 92.3 FM they just been converted into WINS-FM also 101.9 FM they are sports talk in NYC and these are tied to Audacy's Top Revenue stations in New York along with WCBS-AM. Wouldn't smaller market radio stations with low revenue have to be divested most likely?
 
BJSteigner said:
I can see 92.3 and 101.9 being sold off. But who will be the buyer? People also want to see WPLJ 95.5 and WARW 96.7 sold off and returned to commercial status.
Click to expand...
In what situation do you see selling off two stations that bill collectively in the millions being probable? And what people? Radio nerds? The public couldn’t care less that 95.5 and 96.7 aren’t commercial.
 
MarkW said:
Are you suggesting the company is not performing annual asset valuation impairment tests properly?
Click to expand...
No company has "caught up" to the rapid decline in station values. I can't think of one publicly traded one that has a true realistic asset valuation on its balance sheet.

The problem is that there are very few exemplary transactions that can be used to value a station. Since most station sales have been distress situations, the valuation of stations that are profitable is subjective.

Example: EMF bought a very marginal rock FM in LA that had to be sold due to a merger. It was under-performing in revenue, and (while well programmed by a good PD) was limited by the ethnic transformation of Los Angeles and the severe decline in rock listening overall.

So it sold for a "surprisingly low" price but there were all the extenuating circumstances that made the sale a poor example for the valuation of better performing stations in the market, starting with the time restraints of a forced sale.

So how does an independent auditor verify the asset value of a station? The owners will recognize some attrition in the value of all stations, but they will argue the same points I am making: the worth of a profitable station that is part of a cluster that is part of a group owner is different than a distress sale.

And, without "example transactions" of similar stations and groups, the auditor really can't make a drastic impairment charge.
MarkW said:
If fixed or intangible assets are purposely being carried at a net book value that exceeds fair market, then investors are being defrauded.
Click to expand...
And that is my point: there is no way to justify an extreme devaluation.

First, there is the pandemic. So valuation can not be done based on revenue since 2020 because there is a reasonable assumption that things will "return to normal". Second, all ad-supported media is "off" due to being on the cusp of a recession, and that is not a valid devaluation anchor point because, historically, recessions are temporary and economies recover. Third, there have been no sales of stations like KIIS or WHTZ or WTOP to use as examples of ratios and values for highly successful properties.
MarkW said:
Of course, orderly liquidation value - if that is the "sale price" premise to which you are referring - is a different ball game and does not drive GAAP reporting decisions (unless a purchase and sale agreement or similar instrument has been entered, in which case the affected assets and liabilities get reclassified to held-for-sale on the balance sheet).
Click to expand...
And that is the core to this: a station group is not going to be liquidated station by station, transmitter site by transmitter site and so on. The references we have for valuation of functioning groups are, right now, ancient examples of smaller groups selling to bigger ones during consolidation and, roughly, the decade afterwards as groups realigned and smaller ones decided to get out of radio.
 
BJSteigner said:
People also want to see WPLJ 95.5 and WARW 96.7 sold off and returned to commercial status.
Click to expand...
No, they don't. "People" don't spend any time analyzing the ownership and finances of radio stations. If a station provides programming they like, they listen.

Using the EMF operation as an example, we have a format that has significant appeal and is well done. It's well enough liked to self-finance expansion and expanding associated services. So, in that case, the sale of a weakly performing station and its conversion to a better performing one with a significant audience base makes radio, overall, more appealing. Further, in that specific case, a station no longer seeks ad sales support, so the available ad dollars are split between fewer stations.
 
I will say this:

Audacy owns the deed and title to High Island, where the tower and transmitters for WCBS (AM) and WFAN (AM, neé WNBC) have resided for nearly 60 years. Given its location off of City Island and in Long Island Sound, I'm sure it's worth something in the seven-figure range at most.

If selling off transmitter/tower land is their present M.O., it's not out of the realm of possibility that Audacy sells ownership of the island to another entity – a private owner, or possibility back to the City of New York – and then leases the space to maintain the present 660/880 facilities indefinitely.
 
DavidEduardo said:
The Fields have "super voting" shares, but they do not control a majority of the total number of outstanding shares. So, they might lend money to the company but they are not going to put any more in than other shareholders might also do.

If I were them, I'd keep my personal wealth away from an further exposure.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Radio is a terrible investment, even if you're principals in a radio company.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom