• 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

KSCO(AM), Santa Cruz, CA Whoops

mofocat said:
KYNO 940's 50kw does Bakersfield to Sacramento with no problem. Their4 tower array is on good ground, closer to Visalia than to Fresno.
Click to expand...
well, it "did". I don't think they are back up to full power yet after their recent technical issues. They used to BOOM in to Sacramento and night and the signal has been almost non-existent recently. I hope they're able to get it resolved soon but from what I heard it sounds like an expensive fix. I wish them luck! One of my favs to dx at night.
 
Gregg. said:
It's fairly common these days for AM stations to give up a complicated nighttime directional tower array. That way it can still be on the air at full power in the daytime, when it is authorized to broadcast non-directonally, and run low power at night. Recently WSYB Rutland VT did it. It was authorized to run 5,000 watts days non-directional. But at night it needed a three-tower array to run 1,000 watts. So WSYB got permission to lose two towers. It went to a nighttime power of 25 watts. It has an FM translator, so that's what everyone is probably listening to anyway.

It is puzzling to me why KSCO admitted it did this for the last 30 years! If you want to go to lower power at night and lose your extra towers, the FCC likely will say yes. No need to admit your past sins.

With three FM translators, it has no need to run anything more than a few watts at night. But what Washington-based law firm or engineering firm allowed KSCO to admit it's been doing this without authorization, when the FCC never knew?
Click to expand...
I doubt Michael Zwerdling asked anybody about his response to the FCC.
 
Camron Fry said:
well, it "did". I don't think they are back up to full power yet after their recent technical issues. They used to BOOM in to Sacramento and night and the signal has been almost non-existent recently. I hope they're able to get it resolved soon but from what I heard it sounds like an expensive fix. I wish them luck! One of my favs to dx at night.
Click to expand...
Now most nights they're good into Boise Idaho!
Used to be hard to hear.
 
FCC can't force KSCO to only rebuild the directional.
They are forcing them to become legal, either rebuild it OR change their operation parameters to make it legal.
Cheapest is to use one tower and 28 watts.
 
boiseengineer said:
FCC can't force KSCO to only rebuild the directional.
They are forcing them to become legal, either rebuild it OR change their operation parameters to make it legal.
Cheapest is to use one tower and 28 watts.
Click to expand...
Okay. I was just rooting for some sort of punishment for thirty years of flagrant violation.
 
michael hagerty said:
Okay. I was just rooting for some sort of punishment for thirty years of flagrant violation.
Click to expand...
So, he paid the NAL against him?

(Issued NAL in the amount of $20,000 to Zwerling Broadcasting System, Ltd, for unauthorized operation of KSCO(AM))
 
KSCO has requested a reduction of the fine. FCC doesn't seem to have responded.
License renewal is still "Pending". KSCO probably needs to pay the $20k fine and clean up the legal mess before a renewal (one year) would be granted.
First step has been their filing for the Construction Permit to use one tower at night with 28 watts.
 
boiseengineer said:
KSCO has requested a reduction of the fine. FCC doesn't seem to have responded.
License renewal is still "Pending". KSCO probably needs to pay the $20k fine and clean up the legal mess before a renewal (one year) would be granted.
First step has been their filing for the Construction Permit to use one tower at night with 28 watts.
Click to expand...
I guess that's my point. He needs to pay up for the whopper of a running violation, then if the FCC is okay with 28 watts non-directional, they can address that.

Then, of course, the questions are:

1. Who can hear it?

2. Who'd be listening anyway?

3. Would you buy an AM station (assuming it's still for sale) that could have been a decent directional power at night but the guy who's selling it is a dork and now it can only do 28 watts non-directional?
 
This is a great interview with Rosemary Chalmers, the former morning host at KSCO. The interviewers used to also be on KSCO a few years ago, so they all have a good perspective on what it was like to be part of the station.

Interestingly, Rosemary said only one person at the station ever sold Youngevity vitamins (the station was making sales income based on vitamins instead of spots, I guess?), and that Michael Zwerling never had a business plan for the station. I didn’t listen to the station that much other than mornings and a legal show called Law of the Land on Thursday nights.

Youtube interview with Rosemary by other former KSCO staffers

The new online station mentioned on this show can be found here:

Santa Cruz Voice

Rosemary is on Monday through Friday mornings and there are some other former KSCO hosts, like Charles Freedman and Sleepy John. I’ll be checking it out.
 
michael hagerty said:
<...>
3. Would you buy an AM station (assuming it's still for sale) that could have been a decent directional power at night but the guy who's selling it is a dork and now it can only do 28 watts non-directional?
Click to expand...
Part of why I had asked the question about restoration costs to bring the facility back to licensed operating parameters a few dozen posts ago in this thread.

I'd bet that the costs of ripping apart the directional antenna system *and* felling the two no-longer-useful towers (and remediating the lagoon) probably every bit as much as the costs associated with restoring correct operating parameters.

A station locally went from 5 to 3 towers due to theft of the ground system associated with them about a decade ago, IIRC.

Are those two unused towers going to be allowed to just sit out there in the elements and rust away? :unsure:

Heh - did find this video on Youtube earlier...


...and...

 
kwthom said:
Part of why I had asked the question about restoration costs to bring the facility back to licensed operating parameters a few dozen posts ago in this thread.

I'd bet that the costs of ripping apart the directional antenna system *and* felling the two no-longer-useful towers (and remediating the lagoon) probably every bit as much as the costs associated with restoring correct operating parameters.

A station locally went from 5 to 3 towers due to theft of the ground system associated with them about a decade ago, IIRC.

Are those two unused towers going to be allowed to just sit out there in the elements and rust away? :unsure:

Heh - did find this video on Youtube earlier...


...and...

Click to expand...
Yikes! I was in Santa Cruz for an hour or so on Monday---didn't have the opportunity to drive by. And this week, they're getting pounded with another big storm or three.
 
boiseengineer said:
Cost of dropping the towers depends whether they have to dredge the towers out of the bay or not.
Maybe they can convince State regulators that they'll make great reefs. lol
Click to expand...
Mother Nature seems to bidding for the job as well by the looks of the first video link I posted above.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom