• 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

Limbaugh/Premier Radio smelling of fear?

> KSFO/SF is a weak station. They will always trounce KQKE by
> at least a factor of two in 6a-12a, but it is possible
> Franken could put up a fight there.

What do you mean that it is "possible" that Franken could "put up a fight" in San Francisco? He actually beat Limbaugh in 25-54 there and beat him with an amazing share in Portland in the same demo.

<a href=http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/05/10/ale05157.html>LINK</a>

> If Franken wants to whine about
> Rush's numbers counting against him in markets where he
> doesn't air, he should tell AAR's Affiliate Sales department
> to get off their tails and sell his show to new stations.

Wants to "whine?"

I'm not aware that Franken has said anything about this, much less "whine."
 
Re: Distorting the Facts

> IF YOU KNEW ANYTHING ABOUT RADIO RATINGS, YOU WOULD BE AWARE
> THAT ARBITRON REPORTS THE MIDDAY DAYPART BETWEEN 10 AM AND 3
> PM. PROGRAM BY PROGRAM BREAKDOWNS ARE NOT AVAILABLE.
> FRANKEN'S NUMBERS ARE LUMPED WITH THOSE FOR SPRINGER (IN THE
> EAST) AND SCHULTZ (IN THE WEST).

Despite your effort to make a point by using caps, you are dead wrong on this one. Syndication companies like Premiere have access to special reports generated by Arbritron that show the ratings for individual talk show hosts. <P ID="signature">______________
http://talkingradio.blogspot.com/</P>
 
Re: More Facts

> > No broadcaster is as heavily invested in progressive
> > talk radio as Clear Channel. They own more progressive
> talk
> > stations than anybody else (actually more than everybody
> > else).
>
> Huh? Air America says that 27 of its 70 affiliates are
> Clear Channel stations, but at least two of those CC
> stations also carry Limbaugh and other conservatives. Clear
> Channel has a couple of progressive talk stations that carry
> no Air America programming, but that hardly adds up to
> owning more progressive talk stations than everybody else
> combined.

Those 27 CC stations account for 70% of AAR's ratings (excluding KLIB).
<P ID="signature">______________
http://talkingradio.blogspot.com/</P>
 
At least Rush doesn't beg for support...

Who cares about the ratings? The bottom line is that AAR is a money-losing proposition. The reason they are on weak signals is because their programming is mediocre at best. Why would any owner take a risk for AAR, especially considering their shaky past.

AAR will never present a reasonable threat to Limbaugh and company because it can't generate a sellable audience. Let's face it folks...AAR recently started a beg-a-thon a'la NPR. What does that say about it's long-term viability?
 
> > KSFO/SF is a weak station. They will always trounce KQKE
> by
> > at least a factor of two in 6a-12a, but it is possible
> > Franken could put up a fight there.
>
> What do you mean that it is "possible" that Franken could
> "put up a fight" in San Francisco? He actually beat
> Limbaugh in 25-54 there and beat him with an amazing share
> in Portland in the same demo.
>
> LINK

25-54 is a good audience to reach, although it's not exactly the talk radio demo. I don't know of many 25 year olds listening to Rush, who might be more likely to give Franken a chance - although he has to be entertaining to keep that audience. God bless him, although the older you get, ie 35-64, the better Rush does. While I'm not sure what the difference between the Limbaugh and Franken might be, it should also be noted that talk radio is mostly men, and that Franken might also attract more upscale female listeners tired of "A Bigger Mix and a Greater Variety". Not saying the undermines his performance, but a sidebar to the press release. And while I don't doubt the release, Buzzflash isn't exactly the most unbiased news source, just as many would object to Free Republic being used as a source.
 
Re: At least Rush doesn't beg for support...

> Why would any owner take a risk for AAR, especially
> considering their shaky past.

Then how do you explain KPOJ, which is the top AM station and the top talk station in Portland in the only demo that really matters, 25-54? It's also tied for first among all AM stations and all talk stations in 12+. Clear Channel's success there has led it to pick up AAR programming on 26 other CC stations. Entercom and Infinity have also switched to progressive talk and AAR in several markets.
>
> AAR will never present a reasonable threat to Limbaugh and
> company because it can't generate a sellable audience.

But Franken is actually beating Limbaugh in two top-25 markets in 25-54 and is close in several others. Sounds like a "reasonable threat" to me.

Let's
> face it folks...AAR recently started a beg-a-thon a'la NPR.
> What does that say about it's long-term viability?

AAR hasn't asked for a dime on the air. One e-mail to people who signed up to be on a mailing list is hardly a "beg-a-thon."
>
 
> > He's has so many affiliates already that any station
> picking
> > him up in the lower 48 now would almost certainly overlap
> > with someone else. Also, most stations carrying him are
> > either owned by CC or carry him because the owners agree
> > with his ideology and wouldn't go progressive if Hell
> froze
> > over. If progressive hosts started stomping conservative
> > hosts silly in the ratings, maybe some of his major market
>
> > affiliates that don't fall into those categories would
> flip,
> > but that hasn't happened yet and such a major shift
> doesn't
> > seem likely.
>
> I don't believe that's so in the aggregate. Just as over
> 1,000 stations run Paul Harvey, it's not because the owners
> have a penchant for octagenarian commentators. Like it or
> not, Rush has become a household name and rather mainstream.
> Even top names like Hannity and Savage are very much
> considered a niche phenomenon for right-wing listeners, but
> Limbaugh has become less offensive by default over the
> years. He's a huge name that adds appeal to a station,
> particularly in more conservative rural areas. Al Franken or
> Jerry Springer, conversely, are seen as washed-up comedians
> and smut peddlers and have no instant cache on the radio,
> other than to deliver a niche-format show.
>
> ** And yes, liberals, conservative talk is a niche format as
> well, so please don't get all excited.
>

Good point on Harvey. While Rush doesn't have the same legendary status, he is just as well known. Many of the small-market stations that carry either or both of them aren't exactly known for their willingness to flip formats on a whim. Perhaps it isn't so much ideological as it is a matter of tradition. Either way, those small-town talkers and MORs aren't going to drop him for Franken or Hartmann anytime soon. For that to happen, they would have to be the top names in the business.
 
> Good point on Harvey. While Rush doesn't have the same
> legendary status, he is just as well known. Many of the
> small-market stations that carry either or both of them
> aren't exactly known for their willingness to flip formats
> on a whim. Perhaps it isn't so much ideological as it is a
> matter of tradition. Either way, those small-town talkers
> and MORs aren't going to drop him for Franken or Hartmann
> anytime soon. For that to happen, they would have to be the
> top names in the business.

Yes; add the fact that when there are four stations in the market, there's no competition for clearances. Take your pick. Same reason these markets don't have 80's rock or hurban stations.
 
> And while I don't doubt the release, Buzzflash
> isn't exactly the most unbiased news source,

Buzzflash is just reprinting an AAR press release, and making no bones about it. As such, it's no more nor less valid than PRNewswire, where Premier's press release was posted.

If it had been posted on AAR's own web site at the time of my posting, I would have linked there, but AAR's webmasters haven't put it up yet.<P ID="signature">______________
also known as tombetz.</P>
 
Re: At least Rush doesn't beg for support...

> Then how do you explain KPOJ, which is the top AM station
> and the top talk station in Portland in the only demo that
> really matters, 25-54? It's also tied for first among all AM
> stations and all talk stations in 12+. Clear Channel's
> success there has led it to pick up AAR programming on 26
> other CC stations. Entercom and Infinity have also switched
> to progressive talk and AAR in several markets.

PORTLAND...probably one of the two most-liberal stations in the country. That's like saying Rush is #1 in Houston. Big deal. And, Infinity, CC and Entercom are picking up AAR on frequencies that are bleeders anyway. Like here in Asheville, AAR is on a useless daytimer owned by CC. The station has had four formats in two years. AAR is just there because something has to be. Also, that a station is 'progressive talk' does not dictate that it carries the entire AAR lineup. Many of these new PT stations carry Stephanie Miller, Jerry Springer, and Ed Schultz, neither of which are syndicated by AAR.



> But Franken is actually beating Limbaugh in two top-25
> markets in 25-54 and is close in several others. Sounds
> like a "reasonable threat" to me.

Franken is beating Rush in TWO markets, San Francisco and Portland. The two most liberal markets in the country. How on earth is it a reasonable threat when Rush has close to 600 affiliates? And, incidentally, Rush affiliates PAY for that right. However, a good many AAR affiliates are time-brokered by the network, especially in the largest markets. Of course, it's well-documented that AAR has trouble paying the bills to be on those stations.



> AAR hasn't asked for a dime on the air. One e-mail to
> people who signed up to be on a mailing list is hardly a
> "beg-a-thon."

You obviously haven't been paying attention to reality. In the three minutes I can handle their stupid programming before tuning out, I've heard the begging numerous times. There's even a very obvious link to their beg-a-thon program on their website. And, membership at the top level in their little club entitles the giver to get mentioned on the air:

"FREE with your gift of $250 or more, our hosts and staff will personally thank you at this level of giving on AirAmericaRadio.com and on the air."

If this isn't blatant begging, I don't know what is. Also, two months ago it was revealed that AAR took $870,000 from the Boys and Girls Clubs of New York. They can't keep their heads above water, and you think they'll be a credible threat to Rush, the most successful talk host in America? Frankly, it's almost humorous that we are actually having this discussion.
 
Re: At least Rush doesn't beg for support...

> You obviously haven't been paying attention to reality. In
> the three minutes I can handle their stupid programming
> before tuning out

You revealed your bias here. "Stupid programming" is a very intelligent way to make an evaluation. I guess you think the Pig man and Heil Hannity are "smart programming." Just a guess.

> I've heard the begging numerous times.
> There's even a very obvious link to their beg-a-thon program
> on their website. And, membership at the top level in their
> little club entitles the giver to get mentioned on the air:

I listen to AAR programming a lot more than you do (maybe two or three hours a day) and I have never once heard a mention of that promotional deal which was mentioned on their website.

> If this isn't blatant begging, I don't know what is. Also,
> two months ago it was revealed that AAR took $870,000 from
> the Boys and Girls Clubs of New York. They can't keep their
> heads above water, and you think they'll be a credible
> threat to Rush, the most successful talk host in America?

Sounds like you are reciting more right wing talking points penned by Michelle Malkin and Brian Baloney. That's old news which has been talked about a length on this board and has little relevance to AAR's current operations.

> Frankly, it's almost humorous that we are actually having
> this discussion.

Frankly, its humorous that you post such nonsense on this board.

<P ID="signature">______________
http://talkingradio.blogspot.com/</P>
 
Re: At least Rush doesn't beg for support...

> Who cares about the ratings? The bottom line is that AAR is
> a money-losing proposition. The reason they are on weak
> signals is because their programming is mediocre at best.
> Why would any owner take a risk for AAR, especially
> considering their shaky past.
>
> AAR will never present a reasonable threat to Limbaugh and
> company because it can't generate a sellable audience. Let's
> face it folks...AAR recently started a beg-a-thon a'la NPR.
> What does that say about it's long-term viability?
>

Remember, Rush started out on some pretty weak signals (except for KFBK in Sacramento and WABC in New York). Eventually, he became more popular and moved to bigger stations.<P ID="signature">______________
The Liberal Talk Radio Update</P>
 
> KSFO/SF is a weak station. They will always trounce KQKE by
> at least a factor of two in 6a-12a, but it is possible
> Franken could put up a fight there. Albeit the fact that
> he's on a slightly lesser signal, and that the CC talk
> cluster there basically serves as a witness protection
> program for its hosts.

KSFO's a weak station? They're consistently top 10 in the overalls. And their signal is pretty strong, with just as much power as KQKE, but at a lower frequency. Hence, a little more strength.<P ID="signature">______________
The Liberal Talk Radio Update</P>
 
> > KSFO/SF is a weak station. They will always trounce KQKE
> by
> > at least a factor of two in 6a-12a, but it is possible
> > Franken could put up a fight there. Albeit the fact that
> > he's on a slightly lesser signal, and that the CC talk
> > cluster there basically serves as a witness protection
> > program for its hosts.
>
> KSFO's a weak station? They're consistently top 10 in the
> overalls. And their signal is pretty strong, with just as
> much power as KQKE, but at a lower frequency. Hence, a
> little more strength.

Weaker than they could be. With the talent they have, they could have higher 12+ numbers as compared to other in-cluster talk duopolies. KFBK/KSTE and WLW/WKRC come to mind as situations where second-string talkers (the first being local, second being syndicated) do better with roughly the same lineups.
 
Re: Distorting the Facts

See my original post.

Congratulations. You started another political p*fest, which apparently is what you political groupies live for. This is a radio board. Go find a political blog some place.
 
Re: At least Rush doesn't beg for support...

Rush had done a local show on KFBK before going into syndication.

WABC did not carry Rush's local show at first. As part of the deal, Rush did a local show for New York and then his syndicated show (much as Thom Hartmann does now). WABC management did not think the audience would accept a syndicated show. WABC did run "best of" segments from Rush's national show on the weekends. Early on, many Rush affiliates delayed the show until the evening or overnight hours or only ran "best of" segments on the weekends for the same reason. And in the early days, some stations received incentives to clear Rush (now stations pay for the program).

Some people made a big deal in the mid 90's when WILM in Wilmington, DE dropped Rush (first time it happened)and claimed this was the beginning of the end (supported by statements from the program director that the show had "peaked"). Turns out management was too cheap to pay the recently-instituted fee for the program. On top of that, Rush, who had not been cleared previously in nearby Philly, had been picked up shortly before this by an FM station which covered Wilmington better than the small AM station which dropped him. Several years later, Clear Channel acquires the station in Wilmington, brings back Rush and that program director is history.

>
> Remember, Rush started out on some pretty weak signals
> (except for KFBK in Sacramento and WABC in New York).
 
Re: At least Rush doesn't beg for support...

> Remember, Rush started out on some pretty weak signals
> (except for KFBK in Sacramento and WABC in New York).
> Eventually, he became more popular and moved to bigger
> stations.



Yeah, but I bet he wasn't begging for support and stealing money from the Boys and Girls Club after a year...
 
Re: At least Rush doesn't beg for support...

> You revealed your bias here. "Stupid programming" is a very
> intelligent way to make an evaluation. I guess you think
> the Pig man and Heil Hannity are "smart programming." Just
> a guess.

Certainly I'm biased. Everybody is to a certain extent. However, the fact that I'm a died-in-the-wool Republican who thinks Al Franken is a moron doesn't change the realities of our business. I'm a huge talk radio fan, and I don't listen to Hannity or Rush for much the same reason I don't listen to Franken. However, if I have to choose between Rush and Franken, I'll choose Rush, because he isn't an idiot. Sorry, but I give a lot more credibility to political comentators who don't moonlight as comedians.




> I listen to AAR programming a lot more than you do (maybe
> two or three hours a day) and I have never once heard a
> mention of that promotional deal which was mentioned on
> their website.

The bottom line is real simple: They can't pay their bills. They have a well-documented history of not being able to do so. If AAR was truly offering a product which was as popular as you seem to think it is, the begging wouldn't be necessary. Radio works on a real simple theory...when programming is good, it attracts a large audience, which in turn attracts advertisers. When programming is not so good, or not executed properly, the begging becomes necessary.





> Sounds like you are reciting more right wing talking points
> penned by Michelle Malkin and Brian Baloney. That's old news
> which has been talked about a length on this board and has
> little relevance to AAR's current operations.

I'm certainly entelligent enough to pen my own talking points, thank you. I don't even read Malkin's column, and I don't rely on columnists and talking heads to formulate my opinion. Let's set all rhetoric aside and focus on the very basics of the radio business. If you do a good job with programming, it will succeed. If you have programming which is sub-par, it won't be hugely successful. AAR may eventually succeed. However, to do so will require that they first pay their dues. That, and operate their business as a business instead of a rhetoric machine. My bet is, with the way AAR is headed now, they won't be in business five years from now.





> Frankly, its humorous that you post such nonsense on this
> board.

Last I checked, this was a board where radio professionals engaged in intelligent discourse about our business. I, sir, am a radio professional. Can you say the same about yourself?
 
Re: And since we are talking about ratings...

Since you have cited AAR's gains in Portland and San Francisco, let's talk about another major market where the network is a loser. Washington's WWRC(AM) saw it's ratings drop from bad to nil during the last book, with no measurable audience.



This is even cited in a recent story from the Washington Post...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/19/AR2005101902345.html

Check the last paragraph of the story.
 
Re: And since we are talking about ratings...

> Since you have cited AAR's gains in Portland and San
> Francisco, let's talk about another major market where the
> network is a loser. Washington's WWRC(AM) saw it's ratings
> drop from bad to nil during the last book, with no
> measurable audience.
>
>
>
> This is even cited in a recent story from the Washington
> Post...
>
http://www.washingtonpos> t.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/19/AR2005101902345.html
>
>
> Check the last paragraph of the story.
>


Well, are you familiar at all with WWRC? Hardly anyone can pick the station up! The signal has horrible coverage!

Do us all a favor. Stop trying to learn about radio by reading right-wing blogs.<P ID="signature">______________
The Liberal Talk Radio Update</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom