• 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

KFRC: don't believe the hype

S

seaqkumba

Folks... this "new" oldies will be a horrible failure and will continue to destroy the heritage of what was once an amazing station.

This is essentially "Jack" in disguise and will overlap probably 60% AT LEAST with Bonneville's lame "95.7 Max" station. Even if Max fails, leaving KFRC alone, it will have to be the personalities and entertainment value that carry the station... the music sure as hell won't. With top stations like KOIT and KFOG in the market (even the Bone too), we don't need KFRC to play the Eagles, Fleetwood Mac, Huey Lewis, ELO, etc. And the remaining part of the library (pop stuff like Grease, Suzi Quatro, etc.) are too fluffy -- those are "spice" records and if they become to heavily rotated, will burn very quickly. So unless the "rest" of the stations -- i.e. the personalities and entertainers, etc. -- are off the charts, this will be lucky to get a 2-share.

Actually, when you think about it, this really isn't far off from what Chancellor did years ago with "Big 98.1," especially near the end as they added more 80s material. They had Darian O'Toole, Don Sainte-John, etc. and they fought their guts out under Bob Hamilton for 3 years to barely get a 2-share. Not a homerun play and we all know what happened.

Infinity is so BEYOND messed up right now -- I give Doug Harvill 1 or 2 years at most -- his first two moves (and I *do* give him credit for at least taking some kind of action) are horrible -- FM Talk on an amazing new signal and this "new" oldies junk on KFRC.
 
> Folks... this "new" oldies will be a horrible failure and
> will continue to destroy the heritage of what was once an
> amazing station...
>
> Infinity is so BEYOND messed up right now -- I give Doug
> Harvill 1 or 2 years at most -- his first two moves (and I
> *do* give him credit for at least taking some kind of
> action) are horrible -- FM Talk on an amazing new signal and
> this "new" oldies junk on KFRC.
>


I don't know if you'll be right or wrong, but your opinion comes off as sounding like someone who wants his radio a certain way and doesn't like that he's not getting it. There are a couple of other posters on here who sound like that when they cry ad nauseum for their CHR format or appear to be a shill for the Doghouse. Maybe you're right, or maybe we'll just have to wait and see.
 
> Folks... this "new" oldies will be a horrible failure and will continue to destroy the heritage of what was once an amazing station.


...But this music *is* its heritage -- listen to the airchecks from the mid-Seventies, and this is exactly what KFRC was playing at its peak.


> Infinity is so BEYOND messed up right now -- I give Doug Harvill 1 or 2 years at most -- his first two moves (and I *do* give him credit for at least taking some kind of action) are horrible -- FM Talk on an amazing new signal and this "new" oldies junk on KFRC.

...But the shelf life of many radio people (or people in any business, for that matter) at one stop along the way is -- drum roll, please -- one or two years at most. And Harvill's other move was *not* FM talk; it was hiring Ken Kohl to work at a station that only exists on paper right now. Do I guess correctly that you've doomed the Talk 106.9 programming already -- perhaps more than a month before any of us hear it for the first time?

Hate the concept, but don't hate the product before you've had a chance to try it. (And Stephen Page, if you're reading this, please stop yelling at your computer like that!)

DJ
 
> Folks... this "new" oldies will be a horrible failure and
> will continue to destroy the heritage of what was once an
> amazing station.
>
> This is essentially "Jack" in disguise and will overlap
> probably 60% AT LEAST with Bonneville's lame "95.7 Max"
> station. Even if Max fails, leaving KFRC alone, it will
> have to be the personalities and entertainment value that
> carry the station... the music sure as hell won't. With top
> stations like KOIT and KFOG in the market (even the Bone
> too), we don't need KFRC to play the Eagles, Fleetwood Mac,
> Huey Lewis, ELO, etc. And the remaining part of the library
> (pop stuff like Grease, Suzi Quatro, etc.) are too fluffy --
> those are "spice" records and if they become to heavily
> rotated, will burn very quickly. So unless the "rest" of
> the stations -- i.e. the personalities and entertainers,
> etc. -- are off the charts, this will be lucky to get a
> 2-share.
>
> Actually, when you think about it, this really isn't far off
> from what Chancellor did years ago with "Big 98.1,"
> especially near the end as they added more 80s material.
> They had Darian O'Toole, Don Sainte-John, etc. and they
> fought their guts out under Bob Hamilton for 3 years to
> barely get a 2-share. Not a homerun play and we all know
> what happened.
>
> Infinity is so BEYOND messed up right now -- I give Doug
> Harvill 1 or 2 years at most -- his first two moves (and I
> *do* give him credit for at least taking some kind of
> action) are horrible -- FM Talk on an amazing new signal and
> this "new" oldies junk on KFRC.
>
It was tried in Dallas and just recently went under. (KEGL)<P ID="signature">______________

AIM: JeremyA1069</P>
 
PJ et al... good comments... but a few thoughts from me in response:

1. You're right -- I'm assuming 106.9 will be talk-formatted. If that's not correct, then obviously all bets about it's success are off. Of course, I would need to sample the product before totally judging the plan. But if Talk really *is* the plan, it will have to be one hell of a compelling talk station to carve out a share in a market already well-served in the talk arena. So I'm understandably skeptical. Especially since Viacom doesn't have a great history of making good personnel decisions in radio -- in other words, they don't generally put good people in positions to make good decisions, and the few good people there typically don't have the resources or influence to do what they really think is best (or even if they did, this might not be consistent with them keeping their jobs).

2. As far as my comments about KFRC being a response to the way "I like MY radio," I'm speaking as a programmer and owner, and not as a consumer.

Regarding KFRC, programming is a large amount of art and a bit of science. Although KFRC played a lot of these songs in the new format (Fleetwood Mac, Billy Joel, etc.) in the late 70s and early 80s, there were SO many differences. The station was well-imaged, well-programmed, smartly-formatted, and (most importantly) well-staffed with big and entertaining professional personalities. People mention the names John Mack Flanagan, Mark McKay, Jack Armstrong, Dr. Don, Dave Sholin, even Bill Lee. I'm sorry but today's lineup and station sound are just NOT in that league, as others have said. The station has been on the decline for years and is starting in a mediocre position.

Today, KFRC is a shadow of its former self. Dean Goss and Sue Hall are both good air talents... but Dean is saddled with Cammy and Sue is somewhat at the mercy of the overall sound of the station and is really phoning it in -- I'm sure she's well-paid, likes her gig, and she does well with it. If I were her, I'd do the same thing. But Dean and Sue, at this point, I don't think are enough to reinvent KFRC.

The music they are playing is just generic and BLAH. And I'm not programming to myself here... I like all of the artists and songs they are playing. But I can get them in SO many other places. And there isn't enough of a compelling reason for me to get them at KFRC. This is, I'm sure, perceived to be a safe move for Viacom... keep the KFRC call letters and supposed heritage and some of the personalities, play hit music that is generic and non-offensive, and maybe even wait for Bonneville to continue to tank 95.7 Max. (I should also mention that KFRC in its heyday also was a mass appeal station that didn't just play generic AC Rock music -- they played the big pop and rhythmic hits too.)

But what are they uniquely bringing to the table? If you really think about it, successful stations have a clear value proposition -- usually a combination of music, personality, promotions, attitude, etc. that come together to create a clear BRAND. KOIT, KFOG, KGO, KDFC, KBLX, KMEL... these are some examples of stations with CLEAR brands. We can argue about whether we like them (and I'm sure we can come up with other examples here or in other cities) but the reason they have solid numbers in ratings and revenue is that they execute their brand pretty faithfully.

The new KFRC? Come on. It's pathetic. And there is no compelling reason to really listen. Disagree with me if you want, but it's just not the homerun play here and I think they will be lucky to sustain a 2-share 12+ over the next year.
And I obviously take responsibility for that opinion. And I reserve the right to alter it if they fundamentally change their plan of execution -- e.g. better personalities, better music, different image, etc.
 
> PJ et al... good comments... but a few thoughts from me in
> response:
>
> 1. You're right -- I'm assuming 106.9 will be
> talk-formatted. If that's not correct, then obviously all
> bets about it's success are off. Of course, I would need to
> sample the product before totally judging the plan. But if
> Talk really *is* the plan, it will have to be one hell of a
> compelling talk station to carve out a share in a market
> already well-served in the talk arena. So I'm
> understandably skeptical. Especially since Viacom doesn't
> have a great history of making good personnel decisions in
> radio -- in other words, they don't generally put good
> people in positions to make good decisions, and the few good
> people there typically don't have the resources or influence
> to do what they really think is best (or even if they did,
> this might not be consistent with them keeping their jobs).
>
> 2. As far as my comments about KFRC being a response to the
> way "I like MY radio," I'm speaking as a programmer and
> owner, and not as a consumer.
>
> Regarding KFRC, programming is a large amount of art and a
> bit of science. Although KFRC played a lot of these songs
> in the new format (Fleetwood Mac, Billy Joel, etc.) in the
> late 70s and early 80s, there were SO many differences. The
> station was well-imaged, well-programmed, smartly-formatted,
> and (most importantly) well-staffed with big and
> entertaining professional personalities. People mention the
> names John Mack Flanagan, Mark McKay, Jack Armstrong, Dr.
> Don, Dave Sholin, even Bill Lee. I'm sorry but today's
> lineup and station sound are just NOT in that league, as
> others have said. The station has been on the decline for
> years and is starting in a mediocre position.
>
> Today, KFRC is a shadow of its former self. Dean Goss and
> Sue Hall are both good air talents... but Dean is saddled
> with Cammy and Sue is somewhat at the mercy of the overall
> sound of the station and is really phoning it in -- I'm sure
> she's well-paid, likes her gig, and she does well with it.
> If I were her, I'd do the same thing. But Dean and Sue, at
> this point, I don't think are enough to reinvent KFRC.
>
> The music they are playing is just generic and BLAH. And
> I'm not programming to myself here... I like all of the
> artists and songs they are playing. But I can get them in
> SO many other places. And there isn't enough of a
> compelling reason for me to get them at KFRC. This is, I'm
> sure, perceived to be a safe move for Viacom... keep the
> KFRC call letters and supposed heritage and some of the
> personalities, play hit music that is generic and
> non-offensive, and maybe even wait for Bonneville to
> continue to tank 95.7 Max. (I should also mention that KFRC
> in its heyday also was a mass appeal station that didn't
> just play generic AC Rock music -- they played the big pop
> and rhythmic hits too.)
>
> But what are they uniquely bringing to the table? If you
> really think about it, successful stations have a clear
> value proposition -- usually a combination of music,
> personality, promotions, attitude, etc. that come together
> to create a clear BRAND. KOIT, KFOG, KGO, KDFC, KBLX,
> KMEL... these are some examples of stations with CLEAR
> brands. We can argue about whether we like them (and I'm
> sure we can come up with other examples here or in other
> cities) but the reason they have solid numbers in ratings
> and revenue is that they execute their brand pretty
> faithfully.
>
> The new KFRC? Come on. It's pathetic. And there is no
> compelling reason to really listen. Disagree with me if you
> want, but it's just not the homerun play here and I think
> they will be lucky to sustain a 2-share 12+ over the next
> year.
> And I obviously take responsibility for that opinion. And I
> reserve the right to alter it if they fundamentally change
> their plan of execution -- e.g. better personalities, better
> music, different image, etc.
>
Sea is right on the money with the above comments. In addition to BRAND, the other problem with this music is that a lot of it is already being played elsewhere and is associated with those stations.

Having "been there, done that", any good programmer and/or owner will program to catch the widest audience in a market, not play their own favorites. Bad owners...well...many posters here have probably worked for a few that just play what they like. There's no feeling like playing a big hit, and having the owner call and say "I don't like that, get it off the air!"
 
Pretty ridiculous to rip the format 2 hrs into its first day...
 
You hit on something very important, KFRC is now mostly playing music that can be heard on other radio stations. It seems when oldies stations switch to "new" oldies, especially if they add 80s, they have a simplistic "it will lower the demos" attitiude and are totally oblivious to the fact that they are playing music that can be heard elsewhere.

In markets where there is a shortage of 70s and 80s music I think moving to newer oldies is a good move. But in markets where this music is oversaturated, moving in this direction could prove to be a total disaster.



Folks... this "new" oldies will be a horrible failure and
> will continue to destroy the heritage of what was once an
> amazing station.
>
> This is essentially "Jack" in disguise and will overlap
> probably 60% AT LEAST with Bonneville's lame "95.7 Max"
> station. Even if Max fails, leaving KFRC alone, it will
> have to be the personalities and entertainment value that
> carry the station... the music sure as hell won't. With top
> stations like KOIT and KFOG in the market (even the Bone
> too), we don't need KFRC to play the Eagles, Fleetwood Mac,
> Huey Lewis, ELO, etc. And the remaining part of the library
> (pop stuff like Grease, Suzi Quatro, etc.) are too fluffy --
> those are "spice" records and if they become to heavily
> rotated, will burn very quickly. So unless the "rest" of
> the stations -- i.e. the personalities and entertainers,
> etc. -- are off the charts, this will be lucky to get a
> 2-share.
>
> Actually, when you think about it, this really isn't far off
> from what Chancellor did years ago with "Big 98.1,"
> especially near the end as they added more 80s material.
> They had Darian O'Toole, Don Sainte-John, etc. and they
> fought their guts out under Bob Hamilton for 3 years to
> barely get a 2-share. Not a homerun play and we all know
> what happened.
>
> Infinity is so BEYOND messed up right now -- I give Doug
> Harvill 1 or 2 years at most -- his first two moves (and I
> *do* give him credit for at least taking some kind of
> action) are horrible -- FM Talk on an amazing new signal and
> this "new" oldies junk on KFRC.
>
 
DyingMedium proclaimed:

> Pretty ridiculous to rip the format 2 hrs into its first day...


It's who we are, it's what we do...
 
Every dumbass is going for the same demo. However, if programmed properly, it doesn't matter if you play music similar to that of another station.

> You hit on something very important, KFRC is now mostly
> playing music that can be heard on other radio stations. It
> seems when oldies stations switch to "new" oldies,
> especially if they add 80s, they have a simplistic "it will
> lower the demos" attitiude and are totally oblivious to the
> fact that they are playing music that can be heard
> elsewhere.
>
> In markets where there is a shortage of 70s and 80s music I
> think moving to newer oldies is a good move. But in markets
> where this music is oversaturated, moving in this direction
> could prove to be a total disaster.
>
>
>
> Folks... this "new" oldies will be a horrible failure and
> > will continue to destroy the heritage of what was once an
> > amazing station.
> >
> > This is essentially "Jack" in disguise and will overlap
> > probably 60% AT LEAST with Bonneville's lame "95.7 Max"
> > station. Even if Max fails, leaving KFRC alone, it will
> > have to be the personalities and entertainment value that
> > carry the station... the music sure as hell won't. With
> top
> > stations like KOIT and KFOG in the market (even the Bone
> > too), we don't need KFRC to play the Eagles, Fleetwood
> Mac,
> > Huey Lewis, ELO, etc. And the remaining part of the
> library
> > (pop stuff like Grease, Suzi Quatro, etc.) are too fluffy
> --
> > those are "spice" records and if they become to heavily
> > rotated, will burn very quickly. So unless the "rest" of
> > the stations -- i.e. the personalities and entertainers,
> > etc. -- are off the charts, this will be lucky to get a
> > 2-share.
> >
> > Actually, when you think about it, this really isn't far
> off
> > from what Chancellor did years ago with "Big 98.1,"
> > especially near the end as they added more 80s material.
> > They had Darian O'Toole, Don Sainte-John, etc. and they
> > fought their guts out under Bob Hamilton for 3 years to
> > barely get a 2-share. Not a homerun play and we all know
> > what happened.
> >
> > Infinity is so BEYOND messed up right now -- I give Doug
> > Harvill 1 or 2 years at most -- his first two moves (and I
>
> > *do* give him credit for at least taking some kind of
> > action) are horrible -- FM Talk on an amazing new signal
> and
> > this "new" oldies junk on KFRC.
> >
>
 
> PJ et al... good comments... but a few thoughts from me in
> response:
>
> 1. You're right -- I'm assuming 106.9 will be
> talk-formatted. If that's not correct, then obviously all
> bets about it's success are off. Of course, I would need to
> sample the product before totally judging the plan. But if
> Talk really *is* the plan, it will have to be one hell of a
> compelling talk station to carve out a share in a market
> already well-served in the talk arena. So I'm
> understandably skeptical. Especially since Viacom doesn't
> have a great history of making good personnel decisions in
> radio -- in other words, they don't generally put good
> people in positions to make good decisions, and the few good
> people there typically don't have the resources or influence
> to do what they really think is best (or even if they did,
> this might not be consistent with them keeping their jobs).
>
> 2. As far as my comments about KFRC being a response to the
> way "I like MY radio," I'm speaking as a programmer and
> owner, and not as a consumer.
>
> Regarding KFRC, programming is a large amount of art and a
> bit of science. Although KFRC played a lot of these songs
> in the new format (Fleetwood Mac, Billy Joel, etc.) in the
> late 70s and early 80s, there were SO many differences. The
> station was well-imaged, well-programmed, smartly-formatted,
> and (most importantly) well-staffed with big and
> entertaining professional personalities. People mention the
> names John Mack Flanagan, Mark McKay, Jack Armstrong, Dr.
> Don, Dave Sholin, even Bill Lee. I'm sorry but today's
> lineup and station sound are just NOT in that league, as
> others have said. The station has been on the decline for
> years and is starting in a mediocre position.
>
> Today, KFRC is a shadow of its former self. Dean Goss and
> Sue Hall are both good air talents... but Dean is saddled
> with Cammy and Sue is somewhat at the mercy of the overall
> sound of the station and is really phoning it in -- I'm sure
> she's well-paid, likes her gig, and she does well with it.
> If I were her, I'd do the same thing. But Dean and Sue, at
> this point, I don't think are enough to reinvent KFRC.
>
> The music they are playing is just generic and BLAH. And
> I'm not programming to myself here... I like all of the
> artists and songs they are playing. But I can get them in
> SO many other places. And there isn't enough of a
> compelling reason for me to get them at KFRC. This is, I'm
> sure, perceived to be a safe move for Viacom... keep the
> KFRC call letters and supposed heritage and some of the
> personalities, play hit music that is generic and
> non-offensive, and maybe even wait for Bonneville to
> continue to tank 95.7 Max. (I should also mention that KFRC
> in its heyday also was a mass appeal station that didn't
> just play generic AC Rock music -- they played the big pop
> and rhythmic hits too.)
>
> But what are they uniquely bringing to the table? If you
> really think about it, successful stations have a clear
> value proposition -- usually a combination of music,
> personality, promotions, attitude, etc. that come together
> to create a clear BRAND. KOIT, KFOG, KGO, KDFC, KBLX,
> KMEL... these are some examples of stations with CLEAR
> brands. We can argue about whether we like them (and I'm
> sure we can come up with other examples here or in other
> cities) but the reason they have solid numbers in ratings
> and revenue is that they execute their brand pretty
> faithfully.
>
> The new KFRC? Come on. It's pathetic. And there is no
> compelling reason to really listen. Disagree with me if you
> want, but it's just not the homerun play here and I think
> they will be lucky to sustain a 2-share 12+ over the next
> year.
> And I obviously take responsibility for that opinion. And I
> reserve the right to alter it if they fundamentally change
> their plan of execution -- e.g. better personalities, better
> music, different image, etc.
>

THIS should've been the post to start the thread. My apologies.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom