Could you really call KOMO all news anymore?

[KMan]

I really get sick of this point of view. It only involves two companies, neither of which own KOMO. Debt service isn't a problem for Sinclair. They're buying up stations all the time. They're investing in lots of things. But none of that changes the fact that the audience for all news radio is too old for most advertisers. That's what the problem is here. Ask your kids about news radio. Tell me what they say. That has more to do with this discussion than debt service.

You should follow the thread. Rob mentioned that no one that would buy the stations would keep KOMO as all news. One can extrapolate that the potential buyers from Sinclair's Seattle radio cluster would include those two companies with debt service issues.

And while there is the possibility one of the other major radio groups would come in and pick up the cluster, would anything be different with their operating behavior. The industry has an oligopoly structure with a couple of major players dominating the major markets. Those who are doing better financially aren't operating their divisions substantially differently than the biggest players, because they are just following the leader.

Who will be the disruptive innovator?

 

[TheBigA]

One can extrapolate that the potential buyers from Sinclair's Seattle radio cluster would include those two companies with debt service issues.

Except neither of them have any money to buy. Remember? They have lots of debt.

It has nothing to do with ownership. It has to do with the ability to get advertisers to pay for a format where the audience is over 55.

Let me ask you this: The listeners of KPLU spent $7 million to keep NPR news on that station. How much would the listeners of KOMO pay to bring back real news? Maybe this should be a public station rather than ad supported. How much would you pay? $200 a year? Is it worth it to you? You want a disruptive innovator? Sure. Put your money where your mouth is.

 

[KMan]

Except neither of them have any money to buy. Remember? They have lots of debt.

It has nothing to do with ownership. It has to do with the ability to get advertisers to pay for a format where the audience is over 55.

Let me ask you this: The listeners of KPLU spent $7 million to keep NPR news on that station. How much would the listeners of KOMO pay to bring back real news? Maybe this should be a public station rather than ad supported. How much would you pay? $200 a year? Is it worth it to you? You want a disruptive innovator? Sure. Put your money where your mouth is.

So once again you've change the topic.

KPLU is not a parallel situation. It's not as if KOMO needs to bring back "real news." They have real news. They make it work with strong synergies from the TV newsroom. As noted, the billing in strong, again with synergies with KPLZ. Every radio cluster in the country uses synergies with the other stations under ownership in the group to reduce operating costs. The question was whether or not a different owner could be successful with KOMO without the TV newsroom.

As for "put your money where your mouth is" its sure nice to get a rude comment like that in what otherwise has been a very good discussion.

I'd rather get a position in corporate strategy and finance at one of the big radio stations and figure it out myself. There are many successful, profitable companies in this country that are staffed by smart, but unimaginative managers and analysts, who are still somewhat shell-shocked and risk adverse from the last global recession. Just because these radio groups are choosing not to invest in a product like all-news doesn't mean they couldn't. But the risk aversion throughout the organization prevents something like that from getting a real look (and yes, I'm aware of the all-news startup and failures in other markets over the last few years).

I'd love to see one of the big groups go from risk-aversion to a growth orientated strategy on the stations (whatever format) in their existing clusters and see if investment can drive profitability.

 

[TheBigA]

So once again you've change the topic.

You asked for a disruptive innovator. That's what that was. Think outside the box. Sinclair is a family company without any debt. They have the TV synergy. No one else comes into this market with those advantages. Sure there are successful profitable companies, and a lot of them are in Seattle. None of them want to buy old technologies like radio. Ask Jeff Bezos to buy it like he did the Washington Post. Why did Steve Ballmer take his Microsoft money and buy a basketball team instead of a radio station? Smart, imaginative managers aren't buying radio stations. If you know a few, ask them why. Paul Allen lives in Seattle. Maybe he'll buy KOMO. Except he's already an investor in KEXP. That station raised $15 million from its listeners to build new studies.

You want disruptive innovators? I just gave you a list. The future of media ownership isn't big debt filled companies with stockholders. It's rich boomers with personal fortunes who want to make a difference and make the world better. That's what we need. A variation on user-generated content to user owned media. You have several examples already in Seattle. What about KING-FM? Who pays for that? KEXP. KPLU. The people need to take control of their media. Don't be offended by being asked to put your money where your mouth is. Take it as a challenge.

 

[semoochie]

You asked for a disruptive innovator. That's what that was. Think outside the box. Sinclair is a family company without any debt. They have the TV synergy. No one else comes into this market with those advantages. Sure there are successful profitable companies, and a lot of them are in Seattle. None of them want to buy old technologies like radio. Ask Jeff Bezos to buy it like he did the Washington Post. Why did Steve Ballmer take his Microsoft money and buy a basketball team instead of a radio station? Smart, imaginative managers aren't buying radio stations. If you know a few, ask them why. Paul Allen lives in Seattle. Maybe he'll buy KOMO. Except he's already an investor in KEXP. That station raised $15 million from its listeners to build new studies.

You want disruptive innovators? I just gave you a list. The future of media ownership isn't big debt filled companies with stockholders. It's rich boomers with personal fortunes who want to make a difference and make the world better. That's what we need. A variation on user-generated content to user owned media. You have several examples already in Seattle. What about KING-FM? Who pays for that? KEXP. KPLU. The people need to take control of their media. Don't be offended by being asked to put your money where your mouth is. Take it as a challenge.

Not to interrupt your flow or anything but how can boomers be the future of anything, with the exception of "old age"? (I can hear my arteries harden as we speak!)

 

[Rob Piotrowski]

Who will be the disruptive innovator?

Any company who doesn't a) have to answer to Wall Street, and/or b) can stand to operate at a loss for a LONG time (like the owner of KLIV in San Jose did - he ate losses for 3 DECADES before throwing in the towel a few months ago).

So which buyers does THAT leave? Only an outfit out of Salt Lake comes to mind...

 

[Kelly A]

They make it work with strong synergies from the TV newsroom.

KOMO cross promotes with TV and cover the same news stories. Other than being collocated on the same floor, KOMO radio works pretty independently of TV. The TV folks see radio as a separate operation and would rather concentrate on TV stories than servicing radio too. What you're hearing is what's called cross promotion.

As noted, the billing in strong, again with synergies with KPLZ.

Again, other than being in the same building, what you hear is cross promotion and a few opportunities for packaging ads across the different demographics and reach. KPLZ is a music station.

Every radio cluster in the country uses synergies with the other stations under ownership in the group to reduce operating costs. The question was whether or not a different owner could be successful with KOMO without the TV newsroom.

Sure, want an example? WTOP-FM here in the DC area is owned by Hubbard, one of the most profitable stations in the country, and is not associated with a TV operation. Currently though, WTOP does cross promotion with the local NBC affiliate for traffic reports.

As for "put your money where your mouth is" its sure nice to get a rude comment like that in what otherwise has been a very good discussion.

I didn't read that comment as being rude. The fact is, he's forgotten more about radio than you'll ever know. I read the point that if you really want to make some sort of impact to save the purity of radio from 'evil' corporations, there are several recent and current examples right there in the Seattle-Tacoma area where your help actually can. All you have to do is step away from the keyboard and get out your wallet.

I'd rather get a position in corporate strategy and finance at one of the big radio stations and figure it out myself.

Good luck with that.

There are many successful, profitable companies in this country that are staffed by smart, but unimaginative managers and analysts, who are still somewhat shell-shocked and risk adverse from the last global recession. Just because these radio groups are choosing not to invest in a product like all-news doesn't mean they couldn't. But the risk aversion throughout the organization prevents something like that from getting a real look (and yes, I'm aware of the all-news startup and failures in other markets over the last few years).

BigA already explained the aging-out of the all news format. Your argument falls in line with the tired claim that because the 55+ crowd has disposable income, that there is a radio business model waiting for the taking. As has already been mentioned many times; advertisers aren't interested in advertising to the 45+ crowd. Wishing it wasn't true, won't keep the lights on.

I'd love to see one of the big groups go from risk-aversion to a growth orientated strategy on the stations (whatever format) in their existing clusters and see if investment can drive profitability.

You don't think they study these things off line? Trust me, yes they do.

 

[TheBigA]

Not to interrupt your flow or anything but how can boomers be the future of anything, with the exception of "old age"? (I can hear my arteries harden as we speak!)

If boomers want formats that mainly serve them, like news or oldies, they will have to pay for them. Because no one else will. And once again, there are lots of examples in Seattle where this is happening.

 

[seatownmedia]

My biggest problem with KOMO-AM/FM is they simply sound wimpy. No urgency, no headline stories. Too many features, too many "network interviews", (you know where the answers are already recorded and the anchors "stage" the questions...geesh who do they think they are fooling?). The Seattle "polite" comes through on KOMO more than most stations, even within the market. In early June I heard one of the anchors saying "we will warm up to 70 (but spoken like it was so totally hot, he had to say "SEVENTY!", which is just about normal. My gawd.) Come on KOMO, try and atleast sound like a Top15 market. While KIRO-FM is not all-news, they sound more authoritative in 2 minutes than KOMO does in an hour.

 

[KXA]

KOMO has sounded slow for most of the last 30+ years or so. The only time they sounded really good was when they went all news in'02. If they had kept that tempo, they would've beat KIRO, but they dropped the ball. (Must be something in the food over there.)

 

[Grounded Grid]

I think the word you're looking for is "stuffy". In that, I'd suggest they're somewhat less so than they were 30 years ago. Back before traffic and "news" dominated KOMO and KIRO, I used to listen to Jim French, Bill Yeend and Dave Ross all the time. KOMO had that majestic "Big Timber" instrumental staging package (they've never let anyone else near it). I still hear that tune in my head, when thinking back on those days. But.... IMO, the group WAS stuffy, if not a bit pretentious. After all, AM-1000 WAS... "The Voice... of KOMO Country"!

For that matter, there was a bit of that in the presentations of the local TV stations. KIRO, KING and to a lesser extent, KOMO all had their live, union announcers, solemnly intoning the half-hourly station IDs. (... lucky you... you're watching "Kay-Eye-Arr-Ohhh... Channel Sevennnn.... Seattle")

Oh... I was around 30 back then. Listened to them about half as much as I did KJR, KOL and even Country KAYO... all of which had their appeal, if only in short doses.

 

[seatownmedia]

I think the word you're looking for is "stuffy". In that, I'd suggest they're somewhat less so than they were 30 years ago. Back before traffic and "news" dominated KOMO and KIRO, I used to listen to Jim French, Bill Yeend and Dave Ross all the time. KOMO had that majestic "Big Timber" instrumental staging package (they've never let anyone else near it). I still hear that tune in my head, when thinking back on those days. But.... IMO, the group WAS stuffy, if not a bit pretentious. After all, AM-1000 WAS... "The Voice... of KOMO Country"!

For that matter, there was a bit of that in the presentations of the local TV stations. KIRO, KING and to a lesser extent, KOMO all had their live, union announcers, solemnly intoning the half-hourly station IDs. (... lucky you... you're watching "Kay-Eye-Arr-Ohhh... Channel Sevennnn.... Seattle")

Oh... I was around 30 back then. Listened to them about half as much as I did KJR, KOL and even Country KAYO... all of which had their appeal, if only in short doses.

KOMO is stuffy, agreed. They have no urgency. Tom Hutlyr is an excellent voice, but he could offer so much more.

The union announcers. Yes, indeed. I toured KIRO in their new broadcast house, circa 1970, and part of the tour included the "staff announcer", who sat in a small booth, (yes, I actually saw him in there). What a dream job...just announce the ID's every half hour! That job is long gone, but was certainly instrumental in me getting into "announcing"!

When I landed a "union" job in Seattle circa 1981, I was rewarded with union dues for commercial voicing. This, too, has gone by the wayside.

 

[Radio-X]

KOMO is stuffy, agreed. They have no urgency. Tom Hutlyr is an excellent voice, but he could offer so much more.

The union announcers. Yes, indeed. I toured KIRO in their new broadcast house, circa 1970, and part of the tour included the "staff announcer", who sat in a small booth, (yes, I actually saw him in there). What a dream job...just announce the ID's every half hour! That job is long gone, but was certainly instrumental in me getting into "announcing"!

When I landed a "union" job in Seattle circa 1981, I was rewarded with union dues for commercial voicing. This, too, has gone by the wayside.

I'm kinda curious if there are any "union shops" still here in town, or if not, when it ended...given the ads I see for radio positions requiring one to wear many hats, I seriously doubt it. Guessing the last union contract went out the window with consolidation. Hell, I don't even think most of the stations in NYC are union anymore.

I do know that the union positions I saw in NYC in the late 80's were cushy...on-air folks ONLY announced songs. Nothing else. Actually, the announcer studio didn't even have a audio board in it! The "engineer" (board op) did phones, cued music, commercials, and kept an eye on the clock from a windowed studio next door. Also know most of these stations were grossly overstaffed and were often powder kegs in terms of employee relations.

Also know that in my industry of hotels here in Seattle, if its a union shop...I run away...I run very far away. My current position (accounting) has always ended up putting me as a non-union, non-management position, meaning managers hate you like you're in the union, and the working stiffs in the union think you're a management suck-up. Not a great position to be in, and without getting too political for this site, breeding resentment by pitting non-union against union against management is probably one of the primary reasons for the dying breed over America known as the union shop.

Regardless of that, I still wanna figure out how to get a SAG-AFTRA card. Looks 100% impossible unless you work in a union shop. If not for voiceover opportunities, saying I'm a card carrying member of the Screen Actors' Guild might get me a few free beers at a bar someday.

Radio-X

 

[TheBigA]

I still wanna figure out how to get a SAG-AFTRA card.

You're aware that there's an initiation fee? It can be pretty stiff.

 

[Radio-X]

You're aware that there's an initiation fee? It can be pretty stiff.

Yessir. $3000. In my experience with other union shops (with UNITE or SEIU), the initiation fee to join a union is broken up over several paychecks. Still, quite steep!

So its either paying to get my 72 Volvo 1800ES repainted and rust welded out or a SAG-AFTRA card that (knowing my luck) would do me no good in the industry.

Unless I can get 500 people impressed enough to meet a card-carrying 'actor' to buy me a reasonably pricey drink at a bar -- then it pays for itself!

Basically, unless you're in a union shop (of which I'm not aware of any out here) it does you no good is what I'm understanding. Perhaps a bit in getting more gigs from other union members...but I have yet to do my first blockbuster movie VO yet...so, still no practical use I can see.

Radio-X

 

[TheBigA]

still no practical use I can see.

I was a member of AFTRA and NABET at different times (for different jobs) and the practical uses, especially if you're free lance, are health care and a retirement plan.

 

[LITTLEBOYBLUE]

AFTRA never did squat for me. Asked them to support me on a couple issues and they caved with the station (one was getting paid extra for working Christmas at KIRO ... when it was still owned by Mormons --- you would think THAT would be a no-brainer). Had a lot to do with why I voted to de-certify the shop at Fisher (which, at the time, affected KVI, KOMO, KPLZ). Karma.

 

[bobdavcav]

As interesting of a discussion as this thread generated, it didn't really answer my question. I know it's not really a fair comparison, but KXL in Portland and KIRO here are about the only news/talk stations I'm familiar with, as well as, to a significantly lesser extent, KSL. As far as I know, none of those stations have blocks of news on weekends or evenings. Another example is WYAY, but I don't know what they're doing in evenings or weekends. The question really is, in every trade I read, KOMO is listed as all news, which is true in prome dayparts, but not all the time. Is there a certain percentage of talk programming a station has to run to be considered news/talk as opposed to all news?

 

[TheBigA]

Is there a certain percentage of talk programming a station has to run to be considered news/talk as opposed to all news?

Are you looking for some kind of legal definition here? Because I don't think you're going to get one.

What you said in the OP is that KOMO runs a non-news show Sunday mornings, and you're asking if that means they're no longer all news.

First of all, there's no such thing as an "all news" format. There's News and there's News/Talk. News/Talk is basically a talk station where the topics are drawn from the news, and there are regular hourly news casts. From what I can see, that's NOT what KOMO is doing. So the answer to your question is KOMO is a news station, just as WTOP in Washington DC is a news station. Why? Because they also break format for a few hours on Sunday mornings. But for the rest of the time, they are a news station.

 

[PTBoardOp94]

Bob: WYAY is the flagship for the Atlanta Braves, so they air the worst baseball in the National League in the evenings.