• 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

Is BCA buying Kyxy/Sophie?

P

philosofy

I wish I had copied the tweets as people probably won't believe me otherwise. But this morning I saw that Chris Cantore has this in his Twitter feed: http://twitter.com/chriscantore/statuses/15854898102

Someone then replied to that and Cantore responded with something along the lines of "The cluster owner of a heritage station is looking at buying CBS/SD."

Did anyone else see these messages this morning? Does Lynch really have enough left over after taking on the former FCB stations to go out and get a couple US based ones this time around?
 
philosofy said:
Did anyone else see these messages this morning? Does Lynch really have enough left over after taking on the former FCB stations to go out and get a couple US based ones this time around?
Click to expand...

That's a John Lynch question on the $$$; just remember that LMA has two meanings at BCA.
 
The guy drove me nuts when I worked for him, but I learned never to bet against him. If Lynch wants the CBS properties my bet is he'll find a way to get them.
 
This would present a problem for Lynch. He would own 6 FM's and 2 AM's in San Diego. He would have to give up 1 of the FM's. This would also expose him to FCC regulations which he does not have to comply with now, since all of his stations are in Mexico.
 
But would the FCC care that the stations are based in Mexico instead of the US? When CC got in trouble a few years ago they already owned their full allotment of US stations. BCA is almost the complete opposite. Everything they currently run is nothing that they actually own. While Lynch would probably not like the attention it would be very interesting to see what might happen, if anything.
 
Due to Jefferson-Pilot's complaints to the FCC about Jacor/Clear Channel's ownership of so many stations in San Diego, (justified or not), the rules were changed. Any Mexican stations now count against the total allowable number of stations, just as if they were US signals.
 
radiode said:
Due to Jefferson-Pilot's complaints to the FCC about Jacor/Clear Channel's ownership of so many stations in San Diego, (justified or not), the rules were changed. Any Mexican stations now count against the total allowable number of stations, just as if they were US signals.
Click to expand...

Well clearly the complaint was justified. Divestiture was ordered.
 
actually as I recall the commission changed the rules of attribution to reflect Aribitron market definition rather than Engineering contours which effected a number of companies throughout the states including the CC/ San Diego operation. I don't recall this being just about San Diego????
 
mj said:
actually as I recall the commission changed the rules of attribution to reflect Aribitron market definition rather than Engineering contours which effected a number of companies throughout the states including the CC/ San Diego operation. I don't recall this being just about San Diego????
Click to expand...

It was. We pursued it because of the violation of the "spirit" of the law, not the rules, with the intent of getting the rules changed. It may have affected a few other facilities elsewhere, but it was very much about the San Diego/Tijuana situation in particular.
 
engine ear said:
This would present a problem for Lynch. He would own 6 FM's and 2 AM's in San Diego. He would have to give up 1 of the FM's.
Click to expand...

Just so the facts are straight: John Lynch, BCA, and LMA do not own the stations in Mexico. They have the marketing and programming rights. The stations have a set of owners.

If two more FMs would fall into the ownership, just remember John is a very smart businessman and he knows the rules very well. He has to follow FCC rules for cross-border programming; and he has to follow the Mexican rules. It's double the trouble; but he's very skillful. I wouldn't bet against him. His stumbles have been very few.

With that in mind, it's going to be "very interesting". Stay Tuned.
 
With all sincere respect to RadeoEngineer: B. S. as far as "obviously being justified" is concerned. JP, CBS, Midwest, and every other owner/operator in San Diego had exactly the same opportunities as Jacor under the rules AS THEY THEN EXISTED. Jacor did NOTHING wrong, illegal, or, for that matter, anything particularly morally objectionable. There was a business opportunity and they seized it in complete compliance with the law on both sides of the border. That the other owner/operators chose not to add to their station portfolios by investing in Mexican signals was a business decision on their part. In my opinion, crying to the FCC after the fact and asking them to punish Jacor/CC for their business accumin was nothing but sour grapes and an attempt to restore the status quo via administrative fiat. The fact that the FCC chose to CHANGE the rules, AFTER THE FACT, changes the original conditions not one iota. It would have made interesting case law had Jacor and then CC chosen to fight this out. Unfortunately, when one fights the FCC one fights the first rounds in the court of Administrative Law, (whose Judges are on the FCC's payroll), not the usual American legal system, and the rules aren't exactly the same. Under the circumstances, I have to agree that it wouldn't have done to pick a fight of this magnitude considering all the other licenses they hold.

AFAIK, the only other market where this could have been an issue was El Paso, TX. Once again, the operator involved was Jacor/CC...

John- we need to get together for a beer or three one of these days... :>)
 
radiode said:
With all sincere respect to RadeoEngineer: B. S. as far as "obviously being justified" is concerned. JP, CBS, Midwest, and every other owner/operator in San Diego had exactly the same opportunities as Jacor under the rules AS THEY THEN EXISTED. Jacor did NOTHING wrong, illegal, or, for that matter, anything particularly morally objectionable. There was a business opportunity and they seized it in complete compliance with the law on both sides of the border. That the other owner/operators chose not to add to their station portfolios by investing in Mexican signals was a business decision on their part. In my opinion, crying to the FCC after the fact and asking them to punish Jacor/CC for their business accumin was nothing but sour grapes and an attempt to restore the status quo via administrative fiat. The fact that the FCC chose to CHANGE the rules, AFTER THE FACT, changes the original conditions not one iota. It would have made interesting case law had Jacor and then CC chosen to fight this out. Unfortunately, when one fights the FCC one fights the first rounds in the court of Administrative Law, (whose Judges are on the FCC's payroll), not the usual American legal system, and the rules aren't exactly the same. Under the circumstances, I have to agree that it wouldn't have done to pick a fight of this magnitude considering all the other licenses they hold.

AFAIK, the only other market where this could have been an issue was El Paso, TX. Once again, the operator involved was Jacor/CC...

John- we need to get together for a beer or three one of these days... :>)
Click to expand...
You're absolutely correct in that the loophole in the rules was mostly available to any San Diego broadcaster that wanted to exercise the option of aquiring programming rights to a Mexican facility. No argument. JP looked at various scenarios. That doesn't change the fact that it was a loophole in the rules. It violated the spirit of the law, not the letter. It was seen as an unfair advantage in the San Diego case of Clear Channel operations, and the law was changed. JP and I, as the DE for the San Diego market, had a great deal to do with effecting that change. Clearly those that make the rules agreed with JP's position. Had JP been in the CC position of being in violation of the spirit of the rules I don't doubt for a second that Lowry and "Less is More" Hogan would have made the same appeal that we did. We won. End of story.

Now, these same rules will also apply to Lynch and BCA and they should. Otherwise he could get LMA's with every Mexican signal and literally own the market. That's not right and you know it. The limits on ownership were designed to prevent unfair advantage and the San Diego loophole was an obvious and clear abuse of the intent.

Beer makes me pee too much. Come to Melmfus and I'll buy you a merlot.
 
RadeoEngineer said:
...he could get LMA's with every Mexican signal and literally own the market.
Click to expand...

Of course, "owning the market" didn't do CC a lot of good in the end as they found out what a lot of of corporations learned after mega-mergers: "synergies of scale" alone is a bad excuse for growth.
 
radio-darn said:
RadeoEngineer said:
...he could get LMA's with every Mexican signal and literally own the market.
Click to expand...

Of course, "owning the market" didn't do CC a lot of good in the end as they found out what a lot of of corporations learned after mega-mergers: "synergies of scale" alone is a bad excuse for growth.
Click to expand...

Aquisition and execution have some of the same letters, but require completely different skills.
 
As I recall the Jacor/ CC operation was pretty successful with more than a 60% share of market revenues at one time, and some very serious operating cash flow. The rules then changed and CC divested six of their stations. They still have almost a 35% revenue share, with second place being under a 20% share.
 
mj said:
As I recall the Jacor/ CC operation was pretty successful with more than a 60% share of market revenues at one time, and some very serious operating cash flow. The rules then changed and CC divested six of their stations. They still have almost a 35% revenue share, with second place being under a 20% share.
Click to expand...

Six??? Six??? They have seven now! They had 13 before??? Holee SH1T! I never knew.
 
Wasn't so great for them though, becuase stations couldn't compete against each other. Z90 couldn't play a lot of songs because they duplicated what was on Magic's or 933's playlist. 91X couldn't play a lot of songs because they duplicated what was on Rock 105's or 94.1's playlist. Rock 105 couldn't play a lot of songs because of 91X and KGB... Etc, etc. And if you have 4 AM stations, one with talk and one with sports, what do you do with the other 2?

So in a way, the 13 station cluster wasn't that great of a thing, as it turned out.
 
The megacluster Clear Channel had at the time was so bad it drove me to listening to mp3s in my car, which I still do today, only it's as easy as plopping a mp3-CD in the car radio.

Garrett said:
Wasn't so great for them though, becuase stations couldn't compete against each other. Z90 couldn't play a lot of songs because they duplicated what was on Magic's or 933's playlist. 91X couldn't play a lot of songs because they duplicated what was on Rock 105's or 94.1's playlist. Rock 105 couldn't play a lot of songs because of 91X and KGB... Etc, etc. And if you have 4 AM stations, one with talk and one with sports, what do you do with the other 2?

So in a way, the 13 station cluster wasn't that great of a thing, as it turned out.
Click to expand...
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom