Davey D: "Clear Channel Is Done"

[BossRadioDJ]

The almighty Davey D has thoughtfully blogged about possible fall of Clear Channel, its aftermath and resurrection:

Radio after Clear Channel will not be radio as if Clear Channel never existed.

Reread that line because you can take it to the bank.

Our fantasy is that once rid of these evil consolidators, radio can return to its former position of prominence.

But it will be hard to simply go back 15 or 20 years before duopoly and consolidation.

The whole thing is at http://tinyurl.com/cc-davey-d

 

[create]

CC was never the disease, just one of many symptoms.

 

[KOOL Listener Lauren]

"Davey D" didn't blog anything. He copied and pasted Jerry Del Colliano's blog from Thurs. June 11.

 

[BossRadioDJ]

"Davey D" didn't blog anything. He copied and pasted Jerry Del Colliano's blog from Thurs. June 11.

Oooooh. Let me try that again...

The almighty Davey D Jerry Del Colliano has thoughtfully blogged about possible fall of Clear Channel, its aftermath and resurrection:

Radio after Clear Channel will not be radio as if Clear Channel never existed.

Reread that line because you can take it to the bank.

Our fantasy is that once rid of these evil consolidators, radio can return to its former position of prominence.

But it will be hard to simply go back 15 or 20 years before duopoly and consolidation.

The whole thing is at http://tinyurl.com/cc-davey-d

 

[weav]

These almost-last two graffs I think give the summation very well:

I would buy a radio station not because it makes money or could make money again, but because it has a brand -- a real strong brand – that could lead into a digital media platform. A digital media platform is not defined as streaming the station on the web or having your morning personality do a podcast.

Without the strong brand, well meaning and good intentioned radio operators may wind up eventually being the victims of radio consolidators one more time – with the Clear Channel, Citadel and Cumulus groups out of harms way and new owners directly in it.

A terrestrial radio station at least has a certain stamp of legitimacy that can be leveraged into the digital era...

Well said, Mr. Del Colliano.

 

[DavidKaye]

The almighty Davey D has thoughtfully blogged about possible fall of Clear Channel, its aftermath and resurrection:

Radio after Clear Channel will not be radio as if Clear Channel never existed.

This is the problem with bloggers: THEY GET IT WRONG AND PERPETUATE ERRORS! The major investor in Clear Channel is NOT Lee Capital Partners as "Davey D" says! Instead of doing actual research, "Davey D" has simply repeated MORE WRONG INFORMATION as if it were the truth. A real newspaper, a real news service would not do such a thing.

Lee Capital Partners is a Santa Monica based builder of green homes. They do not invest in radio stations! The major owner of Clear Channel is a totally different company, Thomas H. Lee Capital, which is also the major stockholder of Warner Music Group, and other entertainment-related companies. Among their partners they have Edgar Bronfman of the liquor fortune. I think that Thomas H. Lee Capital can probably weather the Clear Channel storm quite nicely, thank you.

 

[weav]

A real newspaper, a real news service would not do such a thing.

RIIIIIIIIIiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

 

[SFStatic]

David Kaye is half right. It's not just Thomas H. Lee, Bain Capital is also in the deal, and is actually running things, not Lee. Bain actually had staff on site in San Antonio before the takeover, dictating how the company would be run.

This appears to be a message board, not a media outlet...

 

[BossRadioDJ]

Jeez. Now that I look at the post on Davey D's blogsite, I don't see anything that shows it was somebody else's material (copied and pasted 100%, apparently). Is there something there that says it's somebody else's material? I don't see attribution to Jerry Del Colliano anywhere.

 

[sandwix]

The author's attribution can be found in the way of the URL at the very end of the long article, towards the bottom of the page.

It is indeed, Jerry Del Colliano. It should be noted Davey D puts no quotes around the article pasted on his blog and at first glance, makes it seem as though he is the scribe. He is not.

 

[DavidKaye]

Jeez. Now that I look at the post on Davey D's blogsite, I don't see anything that shows it was somebody else's material (copied and pasted 100%, apparently). Is there something there that says it's somebody else's material? I don't see attribution to Jerry Del Colliano anywhere.

Davey D's title, "Clear Channel is Done In the next 6 Months-But Will Radio Survive"
Inside Media's title, "Clear Channel is done. The next six to nine months will constitute what I believe will be their swan song as a consolidated radio company."

I mistakenly thought that Davey D's second blog post was his own, but he simply cut and pasted the content from Inside Media.

But as to my charge that bloggers simply pick up wrong material without checking it out, just simply do a Google search on "Lee Capital Partners" and "Clear Channel" both in quotes. I came up with 138 results -- all wrong except mine which straightens out the matter. Lee Capital Partners was never involved in Clear Channel. So, every single post (other than my correction) simply repeats wrong info!

Here's the Google result on Lee Capital Partners:
http://www.google.com/search?q="Lee...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

See that it's all blogs and forums?

Here's Google on Thomas H. Lee Capital:
http://www.google.com/search?q="Tho...&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&start=10&sa=N

See that it's mostly reputable publications and sites such as Forbes, Financial Times, Milken Institute, Edgar (a company that tracks corporate reports, corporate bond ratings, etc.)

See what I mean? That's the trouble with bloggers and why I don't put any faith in their "reporting". Any reputable newspaper or news service would have double-checked the names, dates, places, etc., seen the error and corrected it.

 

[DyingMedium]

Who cares who the author of flawed reasoning is???

Truth is, no one really knows what's going to happen. Will it go back to the "glory days" of radio? Probably not...but, these idiots keep writing off terrestrial radio, which is just plain wrong.

Whatever happens, I do think there will be at least a minor shift back towards local radio with increased requirements on public affairs. Massive corporate ownership of radio stations has proven to be a massive failure. There will be some correction in that area, but how much and what kind remains to be seen.

IMO, commercial radio can still be a money maker....Plus, those commercial airwaves - in theory - still belong to the public. It would be nice if they were used at least some of the time to benefit the area they allegedly serve.

 

[DavidKaye]

Who cares who the author of flawed reasoning is???

My point is that blogs are generally not a good source for information, so it is foolish to depend on them for news. So many times I've seen blogs quoted as being Some Great Information Source only to find that they are wrong wrong wrong.

This was a textbook example.

 

[calguy]

Who cares who the author of flawed reasoning is???

Truth is, no one really knows what's going to happen. Will it go back to the "glory days" of radio? Probably not...but, these idiots keep writing off terrestrial radio, which is just plain wrong.

Whatever happens, I do think there will be at least a minor shift back towards local radio with increased requirements on public affairs. Massive corporate ownership of radio stations has proven to be a massive failure. There will be some correction in that area, but how much and what kind remains to be seen.

IMO, commercial radio can still be a money maker....Plus, those commercial airwaves - in theory - still belong to the public. It would be nice if they were used at least some of the time to benefit the area they allegedly serve.

Commercial radio does make money, just not enough to pay down the huge debt that these massive companies are up to their ears in. They paid more than the worth of these properties and in many cases assumed the debt of the company that they merged with or bought and could never pay that debt down. CC is a prime example assuming AM/FM’s debt and thinking that they could pay it off. They couldn’t and in the process fired thousands of people. Pretty sad…

 

[Questor]

CC is a prime example assuming AM/FM’s debt and thinking that they could pay it off.  They couldn’t and in the process fired thousands of people.  Pretty sad…

Sad?  What about the Hamlet line of "Nothing is good or bad, but thinking makes it so."?

Why do some people report that getting fired was in Gladys Knight's words "the best thing that ever happened to me."?  Can it be that some of them saw the light of not depending on their employer as their one and only one stream of income?

I like that line from Bob Seger's "Night Moves" which says, "I used her, she used me, but neither one cared.  We were getting our share."  Yes, as one of those Werewolves of Management, it's quite empowering to know you can get fired and proceed anyway.  It's particularly great when before I am told to lay off any of my employees, they've already learned how to live in an economy and profession where no job is for life any more.  Screw you, screw me, screw us together, naturally!

Younger generations are learning that loyalty is dead.  Prosper from it.  Your best employees are those who don't do the Donna Summer "She Works Hard for the Money" desperation shakes.

 

[DavidKaye]

Younger generations are learning that loyalty is dead. Prosper from it. Your best employees are those who don't do the Donna Summer "She Works Hard for the Money" desperation shakes.

I see employment and economies in general as zero-sum games. There is X amount of work needed to run an economy. As advertising shifts from one medium to another, so, too, the jobs shift. If the jobs aren't in broadcasting or newspapers, maybe some of them are at Craigslist or at those billboard companies that pull ads in public restrooms. Or maybe they're in software, making apps for the iPhone. People still have eyes and ears, so while they may not have them focused on radios or TVs, but they'll have them focused somewhere, and that's where the jobs will be.

 

[ericdxx]

CBS radio division is making money right? So what's the reasoning?