KCBX and KCLU battle it out

[aaronread]

Thousand Oaks-based KCLU is buying signals in Santa Maria and San Luis Obispo, territory that has traditionally "belonged" to KCBX in SLO proper. The stations have long been competitors in the lucrative Santa Barbara area, but now it's getting really heated.

Will be interesting to see how the SM/SLO region reacts to programming out of Ventura/1000 Oaks. KCLU, in general, is a very well-run organization but each region along the California coast tends to be very provincial and defines themselves as much by what they are as by not being like the other regions around them.

http://www.pacbiztimes.com/2013/05/17/kclu-kcbx-to-battle-it-out-in-santa-maria/

 

[amfmxm]

The KCBX signal in Santa Maria is okay, but not overwhelming. Not sure what currently dark 89.7 (?) is-or-was, but if it's a real SM signal, it might give the SLO folks some trouble.

I don't know anyone at KCLU, but I can say one thing for certain: this is all about money. Fierce capitalism in Public Radio. Greed is Great! Get out of the way, you local yokels at KCBX, here come the Lutherans! LOL...

 

[aaronread]

I really hope that "this is all about money" line was tongue-in-cheek. KCLU has precious little to do with the fact that they're based at Cal Lutheran University.

Anyways, the old 89.7 - according to the article - was a Harold Camping/Family Life station. They've been slowly selling off a lot of signals in the wake of the world not ending. I didn't drive up to SLO all that often, but IIRC there aren't any true Santa Maria stations that get into SLO all that well because of the terrain. The reverse is not true because most SLO stations are on Cuesta Peak, which is high enough to get a look-angle into Santa Maria.

However, in addition to the former KHFR 89.7, KCLU is also getting a translator on Cuesta Peak, which is just north of...and overlooking...San Luis Obispo. So yes, KCLU now has coverage along the 101 from Ventura/1000 Oaks all the way to SLO, excepting Gaviota and Lompoc. That's impressive coverage; virtually all the population centers are along the 101 (the terrain dictates it).

I have friends at both KCBX and KCLU and this is most definitely a direct challenge by the latter to the former. KCBX has enjoyed largely competition-free operation for years, and that's about to end. Oh sure, they've "competed" in Santa Barbara for years. But KCLU is the NPR news station of record in SB and has been ever since they started broadcasting on 1340AM there a few years ago; that dinky little 600 watt station has amazingly good coverage thanks to saltwater propagation and the terrain forcing all the population (and highways) to be within 1/2mile of the ocean.

For a long time, KCBX has been content to go after the more eclectic connoisseur with their mix of news and music...certainly SB has plenty of those listeners! Although more recently they dropped classical from the afternoons. They had a great fund drive after that, but with KCLU in town they'll probably have to work really hard to distinguish themselves now.

As I said: every community along the coast tends to be very provincial; they distinguish themselves as much by what they are as by how they're not any of the other towns. Santa Barbara especially, but SLO too. (along SLO's too laid-back to admit it ) The fact that KCBX is the "local" station carries a lot of weight, as will their superior signal in the region. But KCLU managed to convince Santa Barbara they were "local" enough (I cannot overestimate how big a deal that is) I'll bet they'll manage to do so in SLO, too.

In the main, I'm sure KCBX would prefer to have SLO to themselves, but in the abstract I think it's better when there's two *competing* pubradio outlets in town. Tends to lead to better experience for the listener...ASSUMING, of course, the market is big enough to really financially support two full-fledged competing pubradio outlets.

 

[ftballfan]

89.7's stick is actually at over 3,000 feet above sea level, on the same tower as KCOY-TV and a couple of other FMs

 

[aaronread]

Yep, but there's two issues:

1. 3000ft AMSL isn't all that high in that region of the country. Most of the mountains top out around 4000 to 4500ft.

2. KCLM (their new call letters) is EAST of Santa Maria. That puts the bulk of the mountain range between the stick and SLO. Check out the contour plot from the FCC FM Query. KCLM is a DA antenna but it's just a small notch to the southeast...no nulls at all to the northwest...and yet the terrain really hits that pattern hard. There's a reason there's a translator on Cuesta Peak (serving SLO) paired with the 89.7 signal in Santa Maria - it's necessary!

 

[amfmxm]

I really hope that "this is all about money" line was tongue-in-cheek. KCLU has precious little to do with the fact that they're based at Cal Lutheran University.

I have friends at both KCBX and KCLU and this is most definitely a direct challenge by the latter to the former.

In the main, I'm sure KCBX would prefer to have SLO to themselves, but in the abstract I think it's better when there's two *competing* pubradio outlets in town. Tends to lead to better experience for the listener...ASSUMING, of course, the market is big enough to really financially support two full-fledged competing pubradio outlets.

No tongue in cheek. California Lutheran University is the licensee, so it has everything to do with this.

Thousand Oaks is a city of 128,000 and Ventura County's population is around 850,000. SLO is a town of 45,000 in a county of 270,000. So KCBX's financial base is a fraction the size of KCLU's--and that's not even counting Santa Barbara or SB County (including Santa Maria). This is undeniably a case of the wealthy big-city organization swooping in to make life hell on the small-town folks.

And it's not in the abstract. It's real life.

If the people at KCLU really wanted to see what it was like to *compete* they'd be looking to get into LA, not SLO.

But they're not.

 

[aaronread]

Camping wasn't selling any signals in LA, he was selling them in the Central Coast. (shrugs) I know Mary Olson well enough to know that she would LOVE to get signals that reach more into LA. Hell, she'd settle just for getting more of the Valley; KCLU doesn't reach eastward well at all; their own studios in 1000 Oaks are almost on the fringe.

Your argument overlooks three crucial data points:

First, population alone doesn't mean much in this region. What matters more is how wealthy the region is. There's some parts of Ventura County that're filthy rich. There's quite a few that are grindingly poor, too. The dynamic is even more extreme in Santa Barbara County. I don't know SLO County as well but from what I do know, that logic is still true...although I suspect the high end of wealth is somewhat lower in SLO County and northern SB County, which - it is true - is more traditionally KCBX's territory.

Second, KCLU has four FT staff, some FTE and a couple of part-timers. KCBX has ten FT staff, plus some part-timers. How exactly is KCLU the "big city" folks making "hell on the small timers" when KCBX is twice their size?

Third, and most important: KCLU has to compete with KCRW (via KCRU) and also KPFK to some degree. Whereas KCBX has had everything north of the Santa Ynez Valley to themselves. (note: I'm intentionally oversimplifying a bit here...both stations have had competition from KUSC's classical music repeaters up and down the coast, but that disproportionately affects KCBX because until recently, KCBX still aired classical music. But on the news/talk side, KCBX had no competition.)

Also, you dismissed Santa Barbara in your analysis. That's a mistake; Santa Barbara (and neighboring Montecito, Goleta, and Summerland) are where the serious money is. I don't know *all* the details, but I've seen enough pledge records to see that donations average much higher dollar totals from there. Not just the big-money donors, I mean the "average listeners" who live there tend to donate noticeably more. Both KCBX and KCLU have broadcast there, on roughly equal footing (KCLU's AM signal (their FM translator is teeny tiny) is better than KSBX, but FM is viewed more favorably by listeners in general.)

I don't think it's very fair to paint KCLU as the bad guy here. Their external appearance is more aggressive because they're an all-news station, whereas KCBX has been mixed-format and thus intentionally puts out a more folksy, down-home look. It's also in keeping with the very "relaxed ethos" of SLO proper. But those are just appearances. Both stations have fought tooth and nail for years for donations from SB, I imagine they'll do the same in SLO.

(BTW, so what if Cal Lutheran is the licensee? What makes you assume they have any real interest in KCLU's operations beyond "does it make the university look good/bad?")

 

[amfmxm]

Also, you dismissed Santa Barbara in your analysis. That's a mistake; Santa Barbara (and neighboring Montecito, Goleta, and Summerland) are where the serious money is. I don't know *all* the details, but I've seen enough pledge records to see that donations average much higher dollar totals from there. Not just the big-money donors, I mean the "average listeners" who live there tend to donate noticeably more. Both KCBX and KCLU have broadcast there, on roughly equal footing (KCLU's AM signal (their FM translator is teeny tiny) is better than KSBX, but FM is viewed more favorably by listeners in general.)

I don't think it's very fair to paint KCLU as the bad guy here. Their external appearance is more aggressive because they're an all-news station, whereas KCBX has been mixed-format and thus intentionally puts out a more folksy, down-home look. It's also in keeping with the very "relaxed ethos" of SLO proper. But those are just appearances. Both stations have fought tooth and nail for years for donations from SB, I imagine they'll do the same in SLO.

(BTW, so what if Cal Lutheran is the licensee? What makes you assume they have any real interest in KCLU's operations beyond "does it make the university look good/bad?")

If CLU has no interest in the radio station it should sell the SOB. Ms. Olson and the other 4 full-timers can come & go, but the licensee remains. The university is the ONLY entity with a long term interest. If not, then this is just a game. And what I'm suggesting is that it's a nasty game.

Much of your posting above focuses on money: the wealth of Ventura County... the wealth of SB County... the wealth of Santa Barbara proper. Pledge records... donations... higher dollar total averages. Big Money Donors.

You chided me earlier in this thread for suggesting that this was all about money. But you've just confirmed it.

And that's the problem with public radio. It's just become commercial radio by another name.

 

[aaronread]

So with what are they supposed to pay the power bill on the transmitter? Hand-braided hemp shawls? Just because they're non-commercial and non-profit doesn't mean they have to be poor, ya know.

Also, don't throw around accusations when you don't know what you're talking about. Mary *started* KCLU back in 1994 and has been GM since 1996. If you'd ever met her, as I have, you'd know she cares 1000 times more about KCLU than any other human or company on the planet. Cal Lutheran thinks KCLU is nice to have (colleges have much higher priorities), Mary would lay down in traffic for that station. Seriously, it's a little scary how much energy and commitment she has! ;D

 

[FredLeonard]

And that's the problem with public radio. It's just become commercial radio by another name.

As a listener - and as a Lutheran - I say: Amen.

What's happened is nothing like what the Carnegie Commission or the authors of the public broadcasting act envisioned.

Just because they're non-commercial and non-profit doesn't mean they have to be poor, ya know.

Doesn't mean they have to be rich and greedy either. Non-profits often get away with stuff that would have corporate shareholders suing and the SEC breaking down doors.

 

[aaronread]

What's happened is nothing like what the Carnegie Commission or the authors of the public broadcasting act envisioned.

Yes, because in 2013, things should stay rooted exactly in the mindset present in 1967. It's important to believe the same thing on Thursday that you did on Tuesday, no matter what happens on Wednesday. :

Non-profits often get away with stuff that would have corporate shareholders suing and the SEC breaking down doors.

Probably true in general, but patently false for any CPB-funded station. They must submit audited financial statements every year. And Cal Lutheran, like any non-profit, submits their IRS 990 forms every year, which are available for all to see. KCLU's numbers are probably buried in the overall aggregate, but you better believe any college worth its salt is gonna demand proper reporting from all its departments when they assemble their IRS filings!

Got any more ignorant statements bordering on libel?

 

[uncamark]

What's happened is nothing like what the Carnegie Commission or the authors of the public broadcasting act envisioned.

Yes, because in 2013, things should stay rooted exactly in the mindset present in 1967. It's important to believe the same thing on Thursday that you did on Tuesday, no matter what happens on Wednesday. :

Here in Chicago, the Reader did an article this week about WBEZ dropping paid contributors to its weekday talk shows because of a downturn in underwriting. Which got on its web site comments the usual complaints about Torey Malatia, especially from the jazz fans who refuse to realize that it's been six years and jazz will never come back to BEZ. One comment said that they wished that the station would go back to the way it sounded in 1980. Which would mean no Garrison Kellior, no "Car Talk," no "Wait, Wait...", no Terry Gross, no "TAL," no sizeable news department--but lots of jazz. And hash mark ratings, severely reduced membership and crappy studio facilities called "Radio Beirut." But lots of jazz and Bob Edwards on "ME" (if it had started back then)!

Are all public radio GMs as hated by certain listeners as Torey (or Laura Walker, or the lady who used to run KCRW, or the guy who runs KUT, or Caryn Mathes, or Bill Kling)? Were you that hated in your GM days, Aaron?

 

[FredLeonard]

Probably true in general... Got any more ignorant statements bordering on libel?

Boy, public radio insiders get really nasty when orthodoxy is questioned or challenged. Generally true but ignorant and bordering on libel? Wow! Boy, it's that attitude that makes me want to give money.

No, they don't have to operate like it's 1967. But they should stay in the same "mindset" - public service and quality programming instead of maximizing revenue. Maybe they do good accounting. But, as one writer put it, public radio stations have become fund raising organizations with a satellite dish on the roof.

And public radio decides to bail out on loyal listeners (for example, dropping jazz in Chicago) and expects them to like it. Sorry. When people feel betrayed by something with which they have had a personal relationship, they don't like it.

 

[uncamark]

And public radio decides to bail out on loyal listeners (for example, dropping jazz in Chicago) and expects them to like it. Sorry. When people feel betrayed by something with which they have had a personal relationship, they don't like it.

But what if the loyal listeners never supported financially the programming with which they've had a personal relationship--and in fact, are proud that they don't financially support it?

 

[FredLeonard]

And public radio decides to bail out on loyal listeners (for example, dropping jazz in Chicago) and expects them to like it. Sorry. When people feel betrayed by something with which they have had a personal relationship, they don't like it.

But what if the loyal listeners never supported financially the programming with which they've had a personal relationship--and in fact, are proud that they don't financially support it?

Mark, I don't disagree with the stations' decision. Heck, I am surprised there are still public radio stations playing music.

You seem to assume that listeners who say they feel betrayed when the station dropped jazz, did not support the station (or felt good about not supporting the station). Fact is, regardless of format, the vast majority of listeners do not pledge. From the figures I've seen, more than 90 per cent do not contribute.

You also seem to assume that those who don't pledge are stiffing the station and feel like they got away with something. Maybe they just resent pledge drives. But public radio insists on having them and on haranguing listeners for ever-longer periods of time. This demonstrates public radio's basic contempt for the audience and that management's primary interest is in fund-raising. Money, money, money. So the suits get high-six figure salaries plus bonuses. So the station gets a fancy new building on prime real estate. So the station has the latest, state of the art equipment. So the station has enough cash left over to start subsidiary for-profit businesses. But that book-keeping is impeccable, so this is all OK.

What seems arrogant to me is public radio's expectation that whatever they do, people will understand, appreciate, go along and even like it. And, of course, keep the money coming.

 

[TheBigA]

This demonstrates public radio's basic contempt for the audience and that management's primary interest is in fund-raising.

If you have a better way for a non-profit radio station to get money from its users, let me know.

It's been my experience that the only people who resent the fundraising process are the people who don't give.

But yes, management's main interest is sustaining the institution. Which is a good thing if you happen to like the institution.

What seems arrogant to me is public radio's expectation that whatever they do, people will understand, appreciate, go along and even like it. And, of course, keep the money coming.

I spent a lot of time in public radio, and at no time did I ever hear anyone feel that way. In fact, I'd suggest most public stations give listeners far more involvement in programming changes than any commercial station.

 

[aaronread]

Are all public radio GMs as hated by certain listeners as Torey (or Laura Walker, or the lady who used to run KCRW, or the guy who runs KUT, or Caryn Mathes, or Bill Kling)? Were you that hated in your GM days, Aaron?

Oh yeah, it comes with the territory. It's proportional, of course...WEOS is a small station in a small market so the haters were a proportionally smaller group. WBEZ is a huge station in a huge market so there's a lot of potential hate. There's a lot of reasons behind the hate, too: some don't like what the station stands for in general so they unload on the GM, some were really invested in a particular idea or show and thus feel betrayed (no matter how justified or unjustified it is), and some are...as Dr. Peter Venkman so aptly put it...just nutballs off the street.

The trick is discovering which haters to listen to and which to ignore. Most you can ignore. Heck, most you HAVE to ignore if you want to both keep your business going and keep your personal sanity. But it's a mistake to ignore all of them, and worse, which ones to ignore can change on a daily basis.

There is a mountain of evidence, a lot circumstantial but a lot confirmed, that many of the biggest haters in the public radio world are the ones who have never donated in the first place. Quite often when someone threatens to "stop donating", they never did to begin with.

Boy, public radio insiders get really nasty when orthodoxy is questioned or challenged. Generally true but ignorant and bordering on libel? Wow! Boy, it's that attitude that makes me want to give money.

Fred, you accused my industry of widespread fraud with no evidence. And I'll bet you've never donated and never will anyways. So bite me.

 

[FredLeonard]

Fred, you accused my industry of widespread fraud with no evidence. And I'll bet you've never donated and never will anyways. So bite me.

How much will you bet? Put your money where your mouth is.

I notice throughout this thread how quick you are to dismiss criticism - any criticism - and how angrily you try to invalidate your critics (critics here or hypothetical critics).

I also notice you twist what people say and then argue against your version of what they said. I didn't say "fraud." I have no reason to suspect the accountants don't keep the books properly. I said "greed" (with all the beans properly counted). Of course, your bubby Big A, keeps telling us "greed is good," even for public radio, which was created to be above that sort of thing.

 

[TheBigA]

Of course, your bubby Big A, keeps telling us "greed is good," even for public radio, which was created to be above that sort of thing.

Using your definition, being "above that sort of thing" would be arrogant. No?

If you read the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, it doesn't say anything about taking an oath of poverty. In fact, most of the Act is about money, funding, and perpetuating the institution. Having said that, most of the people I worked with did so out of love, not greed. The love of radio or the love of a genre of music. They all could have made more money elsewhere. In my case, I can say that as a fact. But the goal was to make sure the INSTITUTION survived. In this world, that means money. If that sounds like greed to you, then so be it. There's nothing in the law that says greed is bad.

 

[FredLeonard]

Using your definition, being "above that sort of thing" would be arrogant. No?

If you read the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, it doesn't say anything about taking an oath of poverty. In fact, most of the Act is about money, funding, and perpetuating the institution. Having said that, most of the people I worked with did so out of love, not greed. The love of radio or the love of a genre of music. They all could have made more money elsewhere. In my case, I can say that as a fact. But the goal was to make sure the INSTITUTION survived. In this world, that means money. If that sounds like greed to you, then so be it. There's nothing in the law that says greed is bad.

Yes, people who work in radio mostly don't get rich. Many stay close to the poverty line until they wake up and find some other line of work. Love of radio is what keeps salaries low.

The greed is lies with management. And it's greed that goes way beyond survival of the institution.

Avarice is one of the seven deadly sins.

And greed is entirely inconsistent with the purpose of public radio. Greed was supposed to be corporate radio's thing.