KZLA Was Doomed For Failure

[zumahans]

Someone will start country again in L.A. within 12 months... As many have noted on some of the other topics... Get a lot of artist support from the ACM and CMA... Lots of marketing... Don't be record-label whores, and have good personalities...

It will never be a Top 5 station, maybe could be top 10.

We said the SAME thing 4 years ago here in NYC! And it hasn't happened YET.

Looking at other areas like Portland and Las Vegas and Seattle, one can expect 4 to 8 country shares of non-ethnic listeners. A 4 share of the 28% of LA that is non-ethnic would be a 1.0, and an 8 would be a 2 share overall. A 2 share gets you about 16th to 20th or so in the market. It also is toolow to generate revenues.

... yolu mean enough revenues to pay the outrageous debt service run up by the corporate gamblers who have hogged up the public's airwaves.

 

[davideduardo]

... yolu mean enough revenues to pay the outrageous debt service run up by the corporate gamblers who have hogged up the public's airwaves.

You are lying again. With one large exception, Radio One and one small one, SBS, the larger groups were formed through mergers and the payment with equity. Very little debt was incurred, and what debt exists is realtively conservative. For example, the debt to equity ratio of Clear Channel is better than that of General Electric, usually held up as a paragon of American business and of sound fiscal management.

This is really easy to verify, although you seem to be challenged in the ariea of business. Look on Yahoo financial, enter the stock ticker symbol and look for the financial profile which includes the D:E ratio and other key ratios. Then try putting in some companies like Phizer or GE or GM or even Exxon and see how they compare to the average public radio-mostly or radio-only company.

 

[zumahans]

Then try putting in some companies like Phizer or GE or GM or even Exxon and see how they compare to the average public radio-mostly or radio-only company.

Phizer? Do they make whizzers?

 

[davideduardo]

Phizer? Do they make whizzers?

The fact that you have to look for spelling errors and typos would tend to indicate that you have no answer, and that you admit you were lying about the debt of the major radio companies. There is no way of proving yourself right, so you might as well obfuscate.

 

[zumahans]

Phizer? Do they make whizzers?

The fact that you have to look for spelling errors and typos would tend to indicate that you have no answer, and that you admit you were lying about the debt of the major radio companies. There is no way of proving yourself right, so you might as well obfuscate.

No, it indicates that a proper answer to a supercilious twit, who castigates others for misspellings in a foreign language, is to answer the same way.

Still looking for the Phizer stock symbol. Is it an OTC stock?

But since Univision radio is has its underwear up its crack until I come up with a witty answer, allow me a few moments to compose one.

Phizer. Is it a Taiwanese company, maybe?

 

[davideduardo]

The fact that you have to look for spelling errors and typos would tend to indicate that you have no answer, and that you admit you were lying about the debt of the major radio companies. There is no way of proving yourself right, so you might as well obfuscate.

Phizer. Is it a Taiwanese company, maybe?


[/quote]

All this over an "f" and that is amazing.

As I said, you have no response to the fact that the larger broadcasting ocmpanies, as specified, do not have outlandish or even excessive debt, I take it that you are still trying to distract from the fact that you posted something that was untrue.

 

[zumahans]

All this over an "f" and that is amazing.

As I said, you have no response to the fact that the larger broadcasting ocmpanies, as specified, do not have outlandish or even excessive debt, I take it that you are still trying to distract from the fact that you posted something that was untrue.

Give me a second, gabacho, I'm doing my research.

Ah, finished, this is what I was looking for.

From the FCC:

"Debt as a percentage of total capital represents a measure of a firm’s debt load. We use the ratio of long-term debt to total capital as this is the typical measure of a firm’s relative use of debt capital versus equity capital. Publicly-traded radio companies have generally used more debt than the typical S&P 500 company to finance its operations and growth. Therefore, the radio companies’ lower net profit margins result, at least in part, from the greater interest expense of these companies, which is then related to the higher debt loads of the radio companies, compared to the debt loads of the S&P 500 firms. Another effect of the greater debt loads (leverage) is the increase in the volatility of radio-sector earnings compared to the less-leveraged S&P 500 companies. This increase in volatility can be seen by comparing the variability of the radio-sector median EBIT margin and net profit margin values with those of the S&P 500 firms... "

There, from the FCC Report on Radio. Do a Morningstar on Cox or any other pure radio play and you will see the same thing.

 

[zumahans]

As you have said, Dave, you "have no response to the fact that the larger broadcasting ocmpanies, as specified, do in fact have outlandish or even excessive debt, I take it that you are still trying to distract from the fact that you posted something that was untrue."

I hate quoting from questionable sources but in this case Senor Sancho's Restaurant Website was the best I could find.

 

[davideduardo]

From the FCC:

"Debt as a percentage of total capital represents a measure of a firm’s debt load. We use the ratio of long-term debt to total capital as this is the typical measure of a firm’s relative use of debt capital versus equity capital. Publicly-traded radio companies have generally used more debt than the typical S&P 500 company to finance its operations and growth. Therefore, the radio companies’ lower net profit margins result, at least in part, from the greater interest expense of these companies, which is then related to the higher debt loads of the radio companies, compared to the debt loads of the S&P 500 firms. Another effect of the greater debt loads (leverage) is the increase in the volatility of radio-sector earnings compared to the less-leveraged S&P 500 companies. This increase in volatility can be seen by comparing the variability of the radio-sector median EBIT margin and net profit margin values with those of the S&P 500 firms... "

There, from the FCC Report on Radio. Do a Morningstar on Cox or any other pure radio play and you will see the same thing.

The debt to equity ratios of broadcast companies show that there is not that much leverage. In fact, nearly all the broadcast acquisition of Clear were done by merger and equity offerings, not debt.

I looked at the debt to equity ratios of the first 10 or so companies, and they are well within or below the norms for large industrial and service firms.

The odd thing about the FCC report is that it talks about EBITDA, which is earnings before interest, taxes, deprciation and amortization, and then blames interest costs for the low earnings. You can not have EBITDA comparisons with interest, as the former is a pre-ointerest figure. And radio, based on EBITDA, has some of the higest margins of any business in America.

What is see that you apparently did not see is the use of the term "to capital" as opposed to the equity valuation of the enterprise. I am not sure where they get the "Total capital" figure from, but it is apparently a yardstick the FCC created. The equity markets have been inordinately volitile since the dot com meltdown and 9/11. Blaming volatility on a particular business model when the entire market is swinging is a very narrow and self serving view.

Again, I suggest you lok at tdebt to equity ratios on the major radio or mostly radio companies.

 

[zumahans]

----->The debt to equity ratios of broadcast companies show that there is not that much leverage. In fact, nearly all the broadcast acquisition of Clear were done by merger and equity offerings, not debt.

True, but you ignore the major fact that ther companies that merged had ALREADY assumed huge debt to amass the massive portfolios. A merger of debt-laden companies did not eliminate debt.

----->I looked at the debt to equity ratios of the first 10 or so companies, and they are well within or below the norms for large industrial and service firms.

I see, the FCC report is wrong and you are right. Got it.

Dave, you just cannot ever admit that you have been proven wrong.

 

[davideduardo]

I see, the FCC report is wrong and you are right. Got it.

----->>>> Since they give no reference for "capital" I have no idea what they mean. The standard measure is debt to equity, so they are off inventing new yardsticks. Based on standart yardsticks, they seem to be off on a fishing expedition with the wrong metrics.

Dave, you just cannot ever admit that you have been proven wrong.

---->>>> Look at the debt to equity ratios. Radio Broadcasting does not look good. The FCC release sounds like whoever wrote it did not know what they were talking about, since you can not blame interest costs in fluctuations of EBITDA (as they do) since EBITDA _excludes_ interest.

 

[zumahans]

OK, got it, FCC report to Congress wrong.

Dave's World right.

Got it.

 

[davideduardo]

OK, got it, FCC report to Congress wrong.

Dave's World right.

Got it.

Yes, I think it was wrong and distorted conventionally used financial metrics. Particularly revealing was the part where the put blame for performance on insterest payments, while EBITDA excludes interest. How do you explain that, except to say that the FCC had some kind of agenda or bad information?

Or, am I supposed to believe that government agencies always know what they are doing? This is when I do that little bit about offering you a bridge for sale...

 

[zumahans]

Got it Dave: war is peace, repression is freedom, work makes free, the broadcasting industry is debt free.

 

[davideduardo]

Got it Dave: war is peace, repression is freedom, work makes free, the broadcasting industry is debt free.

Most businees follws the truism of using other people's money to expand. If you can not make a business return significantly better than the prevailing interest rate, it is not a business worth being in.

A business that is debt free is likely to be one that is not expanding and falling behind its competiton. I believe both Kodak and Xerox were nearly debt free, too, when they ceased to innovate.

As I said, GE has a higher debt to equity ratio than CCU.

 

[zumahans]

That wasn't the point, Dave.

The point was that you were proved wrong, and cannot face that.

So, we get opinions, conjecture, whining about how you can't understand why the big bad FCC analyzed it contrary to Dave's World.

 

[davideduardo]

That wasn't the point, Dave.

The point was that you were proved wrong, and cannot face that.

So, we get opinions, conjecture, whining about how you can't understand why the big bad FCC analyzed it contrary to Dave's World.

I was not proven wrong. You posted a press release which has at least one glaring error (the one on interest affecting EBITDA earnings... truly laughable) and which refers to some vague definition of "capital" to make conclusions. Not asset value, not market capitalization, but "capital." Would that be "Das Kapital" perhaps? Only a hundred years too late, but perhaps indicative of the FCC's policies on trying to regulate the economy of the broadcast industry.

 

[zumahans]

You posted a press release which has at least one glaring error

It was the FCC Report To Congress on Radio, David. Took me about 12 seconds to find on the web.

There are plenty of other authorities who say the same thing, Morningstar and others. Google "radio station debt load" and you will get 77,300 hits. Here is a typical one:

"Recent deregulation allowed corporations to go on a buying binge in the attempt to create near monopolies in local markets, just as local monopolies were technologically no longer possible. Broadcast corporations are going to have major problems servicing the massive debt load they've taken on once the audience losses start to add up." - http://www.ad-mkt-review.com/public_html/air/ai033.html

So once again you are asking us to believe you and your hand-picked statistics over the FCC and consumer press, as well as industry observors.

You know, I can see how you have gone so far in that industry. You are so damn good at dismissing facts that get in the way.

 

[davideduardo]

You posted a press release which has at least one glaring error

It was the FCC Report To Congress on Radio, David. Took me about 12 seconds to find on the web.

There are plenty of other authorities who say the same thing, Morningstar and others. Google "radio station debt load" and you will get 77,300 hits. Here is a typical one:

"Recent deregulation allowed corporations to go on a buying binge in the attempt to create near monopolies in local markets, just as local monopolies were technologically no longer possible. Broadcast corporations are going to have major problems servicing the massive debt load they've taken on once the audience losses start to add up." - http://www.ad-mkt-review.com/public_html/air/ai033.html

So once again you are asking us to believe you and your hand-picked statistics over the FCC and consumer press, as well as industry observors.

You know, I can see how you have gone so far in that industry. You are so damn good at dismissing facts that get in the way.

Compare today's debt to equity ratios of radio companies with representative companies in other sectors. There is no excessive debt. Nearly all acquisitions were merger or equity based. When companies merged, the joined companies had each used equity to finance acquisitions, too.

Not unlike XM and Sirius which have no overwhelming debt, either, despite never making a penny and lsoning something approaching $300 million in Q2 of this year. They simply sell more stock each time they need money.

 

[zumahans]

Compare today's debt to equity ratios of radio companies with representative companies in other sectors. There is no excessive debt. Nearly all acquisitions were merger or equity based. When companies merged, the joined companies had each used equity to finance acquisitions, too.

Not unlike XM and Sirius which have no overwhelming debt, either, despite never making a penny and lsoning something approaching $300 million in Q2 of this year. They simply sell more stock each time they need money.

So what? I wouldn't invest a nickle in any corporate broadcaster, not with people like you running them.

It is a well established fact that Wall Street, the FCC, and MainStreet investors all considered the radio industry to be overburdened with acquisition debt for the last decade. The big companies are working out of the pile of IOUs, to their business-acumen credit. And they are doing that by firing people, screwing the listeners, cutting costs, programming for th elowest common denomintaor, to their real-world detriment.

For you to argue otherwise just shows what a corporate shill you are.