And they "covet" stations in any big population area they don't already cover. It's part of their mission statements.
| “You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.” |
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's station?
There is no covet. It's willing buyer, willing seller.
www.instagram.com
Remember, they buy based on a formula of "listeners covered" and not things like "markets" and "revenue". They have a rather precise amount they will pay for listener coverage.
Broker Bob Heymann, managing director of Media Services Group’s Chicago office, says the Milwaukee Radio Alliance sale price equates to a per population (60 dBu contour) price of $1.20 for each of the two stations. He says that is one of the lowest for a big market commercial station in recent memory, pointing out EMF’s recent deal to buy classic rock “98.7 The Shark” WPPB Tampa for $8 million had a $2.70 per population price tag. And from a historical perspective, when he brokered the sale of WNIB-FM Chicago (97.1) in 2001 for $165 million, the price per pop was $23.60.
But if there was no other willing buyer with available funding, then that is the only price there is.According to a broker contacted by Inside Radio, EMF actually underpaid for the stations:
I wonder if Times-Shamrock needed to sell fast to appease creditors?
This sure has the appearance of a "fire sale" to me.
I agree that the percentage of translators is much lower than it was decades ago. But, compared to the other leading station owners, it still has a very significant percentage of translators among its total station count. Of course, your point about moving their lower tier formats to translators is also a good one.Just chiming in here briefly to note that David's comment about the balance between translators and full-power signals for K-Love was true 20 years ago, but not so much these days. While the company still has a bunch of translators on its books, it's on full-power FM signals now just about everywhere that matters. Many of the translators that used to be needed for K-Love service have been repurposed for secondary networks or are used as part of programming swaps with other broadcasters.
Which tells us either no one else was interested in picking up the two stations, MRA wanted a fast sale, or both.
There had been issues with talent playing profane content right near/after the safe harbor time and that the local grumps were monitoring and calling the station with timestamps and such at the time to get revved up for a license challenge. I'm recalling this as a 14 year-old north of Milwaukee where I could only glean the Journal for any radio gossip at the time, so memory can be faulty/embellished of course; I just remember how lame it was to have a station suddenly pull away from one format and veer hard-left into a new one to 'shut up the olds', as it were.Unless there is profanity, the FCC doesn't care what format you run. Their advertisers might have some input into what they run.
I agree that the percentage of translators is much lower than it was decades ago. But, compared to the other leading station owners, it still has a very significant percentage of translators among its total station count. Of course, your point about moving their lower tier formats to translators is also a good one.
I can't answer, as I did not renew my old BIA subscription (in the 5-figure range). Perhaps Scott has a current count.Your response raises an interesting question with me. Is EMF the organization with the most translators nationwide? For some reason, I had thought that that distinction had belonged to CSN or AFA. (For a while, I thought Family Radio was in the running for that as well but that organization, after its founder's death, went on a selling spree so I believe it's no longer in the hunt in that category.)
We’ve said this on these boards before, but it bears repeating:Religious broadcasters have always been opportunists seeking the paths of least resistance to saturate the airwaves with their content. They did it on shortwave, then AM radio, then FM translators, and now they're systematically taking out some of the best and most powerful FM signals.
If you want to know what the future of FM radio sounds like, just listen to what AM radio has become.
Meanwhile, the radio companies already know that the future of radio is streaming.
Unfortunately, for them, that future is not streaming ad-supported radio stations with cookie cutter formats.