• 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

Low Power Radio Triumphs over Big Broadcasters in Washington: Local Community Ra

pbr said:
ONE WHO KNOWS wrote:

Serving an "alternative" audience that, in all likelihood, amounts to a few hundred (or less) record collectors, "rock snobs", and which plays largely only to the vanity of the license holder and "his" view of what "everyone" wants is not, in my opinion, worthy of an FCC license.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

I tire of your unfounded and thinly-veiled criticism of Ultimate Oldies Radio, the way it is run, as well as the spouting off of a lot of half-truths and rumor. I am thinking of asking the moderator to remove your unprofessional postings, and suggest you ask yourself what you are trying to prove. I look back at at all your ramblings in the "Ultimate Oldies Radio Expands...." thread, and wonder why you went on a crusade after my original post to happily announce an expansion of our format.

Other postings have taken issue with about anything that anyone has to say. If you think your lengthy diatribes are showing your expertise and intelligence, you are quite wrong. If you wish to grow in this business, try showing some respect to others - even those you may feel are competitors.

We are as deserving of our FCC license as anyone in the business, with a proven record of public service and community involvement. Our innovative format is reaching a broad and appreciative audience. If you don't like it, push a button on your radio and listen to another station.

I'd rather you not post anything at all to this forum - unless it starts and ends with an simple one-line apology.
Click to expand...

Sir:

First, you are not getting any apology from me. You are obviously an extremly paranoid, thin-skined person.

For starters: I said nothing and meant nothing about Ultimate Oldies Radio in Dayton with this last post. You and I have a legitmate difference of opinion about programming. That's OK. But, you apparently are unable to handle criticism. I stated nothing that cannot be proven with an Arbitron book...or with verified statements from former volunteers.

I've been in the business almost 40 years, sir. Small markets. Big markets. I participated in helping bring one commercial station out of bankruptcy. I helped program one oldies station successfully when confronted with a better financed competitor. I successfully programmed stations without the benefit of research dollars. And I have programmed stations with the benefit of research dollars. Yes, I do some consultations today to small stations and internet broadcasters. But, I do not make my living as a "consultant". In fact, I charge nothing for these consultations, as most of the people I'm helping are non-profits. I work full time for a very, very, very successful radio group.

I offer my professional opinions here. Nothing more. I respect your station as a broadcaster, but, I too, am entitled to my opinion. Your station makes you enough money to pay the bills, good. And my last post was NOT aimed at your station.

Who are the "rock snobs"? Vain heavy metal fans who complain to rock stations about why they don't play "track 14 from the British bootleg of (group)."

And, why do I say "record collectors"? Because it has been proven...time and time again that record collectors make up but a very small percentage of radio station listeners. It's my opinion (and I am entitled to it), that if one owned a station, that person would want the largest possible audience, especially considering the hassle that goes into getting a radio station license in the first place. That's why most stations in your format take a more reasoned approach. Playing the hits, in any format, has always won the day. These are provable facts. If you can't handle it, that's your problem.

As I said before, I wish you well. But, man...do you need to calm down, and stop being so paranoid.
 
One Who Knows, let's go back to my first post in this thread. I wrote, "By the way, I am a community radio advocate not a consultant looking for a check."

This refers to technical consultant as in filing with the FCC. Not programing consultant. I think
you misunderstood.

I help people get construction permits and licenses from the FCC. After they get their license, I
disappear and let them run their stations as they see fit.

The FCC will not grant CP's, or licenses based on programing.

As for WSWO, it appears they are using community events and high school sports to fund the station.
This is the right way to survive.

Furthermore, the FCC has a rulemaking before it that could radically change radio. These comments
were filed by Mark Lipp former Chief of the FCC's Allocations branch. I know him. He's the man who
taught me how to Allot frequencies for the commercial band.

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/document/view?id=7020143180
 
That would be interesting except that if you move all the LPFMs, NCEs and AMs to the old TV channels it may be years before anyone has a radio that can tune them in (and these days, new radio or new cellphone, hmmm). Take about another 10 years before all the vehicle radios are replaced (unless there is "cash for clunky radios"). The idea of packinfg the FM band even more like sardines is a bit troubling, 2nd adjacent means someone in Dayton or nearby can fire up on 107.5 and 107.9? Should people in say, Piqua or Sidney have a reasonable expectation of being able to fget reliable service from full power Dayton stations, or should they only be able to hear stations specifically licensed to their city?
 
Flying-Dutchman said:
One Who Knows, let's go back to my first post in this thread. I wrote, "By the way, I am a community radio advocate not a consultant looking for a check."

This refers to technical consultant as in filing with the FCC. Not programing consultant. I think
you misunderstood.

I help people get construction permits and licenses from the FCC. After they get their license, I
disappear and let them run their stations as they see fit.

The FCC will not grant CP's, or licenses based on programing.

As for WSWO, it appears they are using community events and high school sports to fund the station.
This is the right way to survive.

Furthermore, the FCC has a rulemaking before it that could radically change radio. These comments
were filed by Mark Lipp former Chief of the FCC's Allocations branch. I know him. He's the man who
taught me how to Allot frequencies for the commercial band.

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/document/view?id=7020143180
Click to expand...

On your first point, I may have misunderstood. Thank you for correcting that.

As for everything else, I know everything you're saying. I dispute nothing you say. And I agree, since you brought it up that it is WSWO's airing of community events which keeps the FCC happy. I think it also brings them, (just my opinion) a great part of their underwriting and good for them. I actually applaud what they do in their community service efforts. I have a legitimate difference of opinion on their musical programming. But it's ok for them to disagree with me as well. (I have years of experience to back up my claims, but if they want to appeal to a "small common denominator" of potential audience, it's their station.)

I have my opinions and I stand by them. That doesn't mean the FCC always agrees, either.
 
I see this new rulemaking has some heavy hitters behind it. If it had been proposed 20 years ago,
it might have been wonderful. But, as gr8oldies points out, it would require everyone to buy new radios.
Internet radio is now being installed in cars. Why would anyone buy a receiver to get 30 stations when
they can get the same 30 plus 100,000 more with internet radio. Placing LPFM on 70 MHz where there
are no radios would kill it.

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/comment_search/paginate?pageNumber=3
 
I guess I wouldn't mind added spectrum for FM. But, I think Dutchman has a point here.

Look at previous attempts to "expand" a band. How many successful AM's are there in the new "expanded" band? And, though the radios are much more common today...how long did it take to get radios that received up to 1705 KHz into the market? And did creating the new frequencies really improve ownership diversity?

The history of FM reveals that when the FCC "moved" FM from 40 megahertz to 88.1-107.9, it curtailed the growth of FM for quite a while.

I think before we all could get "excited" about more spectrum if it were to happen, I'd want to see some legislation requiring manufacturers to make all radios, i-Phones, etc. receive those expanded frequencies right away. And, give LP's presently on the air a couple of years on both frequencies before they have to shut down on the "old" band to give people time to get radios that receive the new spectrum.

And if there was to be new spectrum, why shouldn't LP's ask the FCC to go back to their original plan and allow the stations applying for the new spectrum to go up to 1,000 watts? Or, at least consider 250?
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom