• 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 Rush Limaugh's syndicator taking back more commercial time?

M

MickJ

Someone told me that they were told that they would have one less minute to sell in his show starting in January. True?

The ratings are strong but between the high cash fees and few local avails, it's tough.
 
Thanks. So that means that right now, there is one more minute of local avails in hour 3 than in hours 1 and 2?
 
If you can not sell Rush Limbaugh it is time to find a new job.
 
Dale Jackson said:
If you can not sell Rush Limbaugh it is time to find a new job.
Click to expand...

You catch on fast. He's sold out. If the network takes an avail back, that's less money going to the local affiliate.
 
I believe they are cutting a minute of net spots local avails are the same. Can this also be spun against Rush?

Weekday Clock Changes - Commencing December 31, 2007, network inventory in hour three will be 5 minutes, identical to hours one and two. The amount of local inventory will remain unaffected.
Click to expand...
 
Dale Jackson said:
I believe they are cutting a minute of net spots local avails are the same. Can this also be spun against Rush?
Click to expand...

Somehow, I don't think they have decided to cut their own avails. Why would you want to spin it against Rush?
 
MickJ said:
Somehow, I don't think they have decided to cut their own avails. Why would you want to spin it against Rush?
Click to expand...

Obviously they are, that is from a press release.

I wouldn't but some have implied he is taking money from affiliates, which is not true in this case.
 
Dale Jackson said:
Obviously they are, that is from a press release.
Click to expand...

This gets stranger and stranger. First I hear a second hand report that Rush' syndicator (not Rush himself) is taking back a commercial avail from the local affiliates. So I try to confirm it here and I'm told not only did they not do that, they voluntarily coughed up one of their OWN minutes. And now, you say they sent out a Press Release about it? Boy, Premiere must be going wacko since Kraig Kitchen resigned.

Dale Jackson said:
I wouldn't but some have implied he is taking money from affiliates, which is not true in this case.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you got that. Certainly no one here said it. I merely pointed out that from a business point-of-view, it's hard for a local affiliate to make money on a show that charges as much as Premiere does for Rush Limbaugh and it gets even harder if you have fewer avails to sell.

Now if they AREN'T taking avails from local affiliates, that's good news. But I certainly didn't bash Limbaugh.
 
Dale Jackson said:
I wouldn't but some have implied he is taking money from affiliates, which is not true in this case.
Click to expand...
MickJ:
I don't know where you got that. Certainly no one here said it.
Click to expand...

MickJ said:
If the network takes an avail back, that's less money going to the local affiliate.
Click to expand...
 
Wouldn't surprise me if they did.

Didn't Limbo's goons yank the show from a small suburban affiliate near Rochester or Utica that had been an early affiliate and give it to the big guy?
Shows you the loyalty those at the controls have.

And didn't Slant Head's people yank Hannity from WWBA, Tampa, giving it to the Clear Channel giant that rules that market in wattage and $$?

When said affiliate didn't (rightly) air a promo for a car giveway, said syndicators threw a hissy fit.

I think Limbo's people pulled affiliation from great stations in Denver (710) and St. Louis (550) in favor of Clear Channel monopolists.

Nice way to treat your affiliates.
 
Don,

Seriously seek help. You know this is a business, you just said theu moved for a bigger signal and more money. WHY WHY WHY is that bad? Do you turn down a raise? Of course not. Grow up and drop this nonscence about loyalty.
 
Dale Jackson said:
Don,

Seriously seek help. You know this is a business, you just said theu moved for a bigger signal and more money. WHY WHY WHY is that bad? Do you turn down a raise? Of course not. Grow up and drop this nonscence about loyalty.
Click to expand...
More like a firing than a raise.
Ask the stations that brought the host to the dance. You dance with the ones that brought ya.
Poor analogy.

Still the syndicators screwed the ones that first showed faith in and supported the show.
 
Don62 said:
Dale Jackson said:
Don,

Seriously seek help. You know this is a business, you just said theu moved for a bigger signal and more money. WHY WHY WHY is that bad? Do you turn down a raise? Of course not. Grow up and drop this nonscence about loyalty.
Click to expand...
More like a firing than a raise.
Ask the stations that brought the host to the dance. You dance with the ones that brought ya.
Poor analogy.

Still the syndicators screwed the ones that first showed faith in and supported the show.
Click to expand...

No it is the right analogy. I had a gig in PC and took a better job in Birmingham - did I screw the station in PC?

It is a perfect analogy and you are incapable of making your point because your premise (shows are obligated to stay in less advantageous situations for reason x) is crap.
 
Dale Jackson said:
I don't know where you got that. Certainly no one here said it.
Click to expand...

MickJ said:
If the network takes an avail back, that's less money going to the local affiliate.
Click to expand...

You're in the business right? Certainly you don't think that Limbaugh decides the number of avails in his show?
Even if I were criticizing Premiere, which I wasn't, that's not the same as talking about Rush. In any event to say that it's harder to make money isn't the same as saying they are "taking" money.

It's a business and these are business decisions. Premiere has the right to charge what they want and take as many avails as they want. My pointing out that it makes it harder for an affiliate to make money this way is a business observation. Your defensiveness causes me to doubt the accuracy of your answer.

I came here for a confirmation of what I was told, but I guess I should look elsewhere. You can't even make business observation here without it turning political. I'm an unlikely target considering how much of my success has been tied to Limbaugh's and how much I appreciate what he's accomplished. I didn't realize I was now and forever forbidden to point out facts that partisans might consider unflattering.
 
MickJ said:
Dale Jackson said:
I don't know where you got that. Certainly no one here said it.
Click to expand...

MickJ said:
If the network takes an avail back, that's less money going to the local affiliate.
Click to expand...


You're in the business right? Certainly you don't think that Limbaugh decides the number of avails in his show?
Even if I were criticizing Premiere, which I wasn't, that's not the same as talking about Rush. In any event to say that it's harder to make money isn't the same as saying they are "taking" money.

It's a business and these are business decisions. Premiere has the right to charge what they want and take as many avails as they want. My pointing out that it makes it harder for an affiliate to make money this way is a business observation. Your defensiveness causes me to doubt the accuracy of your answer.

I came here for a confirmation of what I was told, but I guess I should look elsewhere. You can't even make business observation here without it turning political. I'm an unlikely target considering how much of my success has been tied to Limbaugh's and how much I appreciate what he's accomplished. I didn't realize I was now and forever forbidden to point out facts that partisans might consider unflattering.
Click to expand...

Relax pal, a simple "you misunderstood" would suffice.
 
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom