-
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
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
>>>. I'm more inclined to think that 970 took ESPN so that they would not have to compete against it on WJAS or some other signal in the market.<<<
Renda would only do sports if he were the only one doing it. That's what he does, finds a niche that no one else is serving. When talk ended on WTAE, he instantly dumped sports on 1360 and jumped to pick up Cullen, Hoerth and Dr. Laura because he thought he could grab what was left of the WTAE talk audience.
As tough a sell as WJAS is, he's shown no inclination to abandon that and take on a format that an FM station is already serving.
Renda would only do sports if he were the only one doing it. That's what he does, finds a niche that no one else is serving. When talk ended on WTAE, he instantly dumped sports on 1360 and jumped to pick up Cullen, Hoerth and Dr. Laura because he thought he could grab what was left of the WTAE talk audience.
As tough a sell as WJAS is, he's shown no inclination to abandon that and take on a format that an FM station is already serving.
Raymond said:I know Bendel does an afternoon show, but what does MacAtee do?
Updates during the syndicated shows.
Here's what I don't understand.
Bob Smizik reported on his blog that ESPN 1250 was losing $2.5 million at the end despite taking in $1.4 million.
Uh, expenses for the radio station were FOUR MILLION DOLLARS?!?!?!?!?!?
How much could they possibly be paying their talent? What does it really take to run a transmitter? How much do billboards really cost (RIP Radio Realist)?
Really, I would have thought the $1.4 million would have been enough to make it profitable.
Bob Smizik reported on his blog that ESPN 1250 was losing $2.5 million at the end despite taking in $1.4 million.
Uh, expenses for the radio station were FOUR MILLION DOLLARS?!?!?!?!?!?
How much could they possibly be paying their talent? What does it really take to run a transmitter? How much do billboards really cost (RIP Radio Realist)?
Really, I would have thought the $1.4 million would have been enough to make it profitable.
F
FreddyE1977
Guest
Pratte4Life said:Here's what I don't understand.
Bob Smizik reported on his blog that ESPN 1250 was losing $2.5 million at the end despite taking in $1.4 million.
Uh, expenses for the radio station were FOUR MILLION DOLLARS?!?!?!?!?!?
How much could they possibly be paying their talent? What does it really take to run a transmitter? How much do billboards really cost (RIP Radio Realist)?
Really, I would have thought the $1.4 million would have been enough to make it profitable.
Ask someone who has ever held P&L responsibility what that line on there for
"Miscellaneous Home Office Expenses" means.
It ain't cheap to keep the Mouse in designer watches. Or Erin Andrews in designer jeans.
But $4 MILLION?
Pratte4Life said:Really, I would have thought the $1.4 million would have been enough to make it profitable.
If 970 can bill $1.4 million their profit will be around $1.3 million.
When Joe DiStio and Eartha Jackson were cut loose in May, Smizik wrote that 1250 was on track to lose $1 million this year.
Parttimer said:fromtheinsideout said:I guess my question is just how much pull does Radio Disney have? One would think that if ESPN wanted to stay in the market they wouldn't have to move from 1250 to 970 unless they are close to selling the 1250 signal. Otherwise it makes almost no sense to pay to be on 970 when they have a viable signal already in the market. And I have to assume they are paying, otherwise it makes little sense for 970 to dump Fox Sports, sure the branding is better, but the branding wasn't equating into sales on 1250 and the national programming, with its large devotion to the NBA talk, was losing listeners in this market, not gaining them, so unless 970 is getting some cash from this deal, it would appear to be just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The only way I see this as being a plus for 970 is if they are getting cash, which any cash that signal could generate would be be a plsu at this point.
I highly doubt that they're paying to be on 970. I'm more inclined to think that 970 took ESPN so that they would not have to compete against it on WJAS or some other signal in the market.
It also gave them a better morning than either Stephen A Smith or Greg Linelli could offer.
ESPN experienced the difficulty of selling 1250 as a standalone. Clear Channel will bundle it with all of their various sports content throughout the market. and it wasn't that 1250 had NO billing, but they were paying Stan, Guy, Paulsen, Logan, Chris Mack, a PD and other support staff. 970's overhead is Joe Bendel and Greg MacAtee.
If they move from where they are now to between a 1.0 and 1.5 overall, they make some money with it.
For starters, WJAS will not dump its current format for sports. They may in time be forced to make some changes, after all Cardille and Bogut aren't young, but more likely those changes will simply involve plugging in something off of the dish, not unlike they currently do with the John Tesh stuff on WJAS and WSHH, which they can do for free and doesn't cost them anything. Any sort of head to head competition in which they would be forced to spend money on promotion to gain traction just isn't going to happen.
While I get that ESPN would save some money in cutting the salaries of the local folks, if the national content was generating that much revenue they could have just left it on 1250 until the station was sold, unless they are very close to a sale. As for 970, if they wanted to bundle their sports content, they could do it just as easily with Fox Sports Radio as with ESPN Radio. Agreed Stephen A Smith is not what I would want in a morning show, but if that is all they are shopping for they could have just as easily went after a Steve Czaban or something along those lines, but are they really in the mood to even promote the morning drive that much and risk pulling listeners from DVE in the first place? Maybe I am missing something, but I seem to recall nothing but complaints on this board about how ESPN was all Lebron/NBA, all the time. That isn't going to change and that programming was losing listeners, not gaining them in recent books/trends. For all of the complaints about Fox Sports Radio, they had doubled their CUME in the last two months, and while it isn't much, it is something to build on, so I just don't get the need to switch on 970's part unless they are getting something more out of the deal, such as additional revenue.
A
apostate
Guest
The cume for 970 doubled because of Steelers PBP and related programming. It's not like Linelli or Bendel or any of the FOX Sports Radio programming was gaining traction.
Agreed, and I am not much of a fan of Linelli or Bendel (though of the two I like Linelli a slight bit more) but during the same time frame ESPN was losing listeners, despite this being NFL and Steeler season. ESPN is going to be heavy on NBA content because it serves the mothership in Bristol and what they are airing on TV, but it doesn't play here so I don't get the grabbing of a radio brand that is failing here. After all if it was that successful, ESPN could have just left it on 1250 and lived off of the revenue generated there.
From a strictly programming perspective, other than morning drive, where I agree that Mike and Mike are better than either Stephen A Smith or Greg Linelli, the rest of the available day parts to me are pretty much interchangeable between the two networks. I actually prefer Tony Bruno to Game Night, and I tend to like the overnight programming (JT the Brick/Ben Maller weekends) over the stuff ESPN offers overnight. But still those slots are slots that no one is going to sell anyway so it really doesn't matter what is on during those hours. To be honest, I doubt anyone at the cube is lying awake at night wondering how they are going to sell any spots on 970, it is the ugly kid sister of CC Pittsburgh, no matter how you dress it up. So unless ESPN is throwing some additional coin into the mix (to appease their national advertisers by clearing the programming in this market), I just don't think it makes a lick of difference whether 970 carries Fox Sports, ESPN, Sporting News or any other sports programming outlet. Any sort of bundling could be done with any of them and as long as Clear Channel holds all of the major play by play contracts (Steelers, Penguins, Pirates) I imagine if they wanted to simulcast those on the AM side (they already do for the Steelers) I doubt a whole lot of arm twisting would be involved on the respective teams parts, as long as they maintained their FM affiliations as well.
From a strictly programming perspective, other than morning drive, where I agree that Mike and Mike are better than either Stephen A Smith or Greg Linelli, the rest of the available day parts to me are pretty much interchangeable between the two networks. I actually prefer Tony Bruno to Game Night, and I tend to like the overnight programming (JT the Brick/Ben Maller weekends) over the stuff ESPN offers overnight. But still those slots are slots that no one is going to sell anyway so it really doesn't matter what is on during those hours. To be honest, I doubt anyone at the cube is lying awake at night wondering how they are going to sell any spots on 970, it is the ugly kid sister of CC Pittsburgh, no matter how you dress it up. So unless ESPN is throwing some additional coin into the mix (to appease their national advertisers by clearing the programming in this market), I just don't think it makes a lick of difference whether 970 carries Fox Sports, ESPN, Sporting News or any other sports programming outlet. Any sort of bundling could be done with any of them and as long as Clear Channel holds all of the major play by play contracts (Steelers, Penguins, Pirates) I imagine if they wanted to simulcast those on the AM side (they already do for the Steelers) I doubt a whole lot of arm twisting would be involved on the respective teams parts, as long as they maintained their FM affiliations as well.
I've actually wondered if having the play-by-play contracts won't help gain listenership for the talk shows and vice versa.
Here's why- back in the '90s the Steelers were broadcast both on WTAE and Variety 96. But I would always listen to the game on WTAE because it was where my habit for listening to sports came from.
Granted, there are more choices now. But I doubt I am the only one who felt this way.
Here's why- back in the '90s the Steelers were broadcast both on WTAE and Variety 96. But I would always listen to the game on WTAE because it was where my habit for listening to sports came from.
Granted, there are more choices now. But I doubt I am the only one who felt this way.
fromtheinsideout said:So unless ESPN is throwing some additional coin into the mix (to appease their national advertisers by clearing the programming in this market), I just don't think it makes a lick of difference whether 970 carries Fox Sports, ESPN, Sporting News or any other sports programming outlet.
No way. They'd have an affiliate here no matter what. someone would take them, there's no reason for them to be paying.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.