-
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
One Investor's Opinion(s)
- Thread starter MisterNews
- Start date
And they continue to get more wonderful. Sirius/XM traffic channel no longer has continuous reports, and is even less market-specific than before. Perhaps soon it will be a traffic report for "Florida"...
And make sure you "avoid THE FOUR" when they say to. Isn't that what everyone calls it? IN LOS ANGELES!!! :
And make sure you "avoid THE FOUR" when they say to. Isn't that what everyone calls it? IN LOS ANGELES!!! :
This has been Clear Channel's most bone-headed move to date. What a waste of money.
Metro Traffic stinks. Period. Its inefficient, lackadaisical and outmoded systems for gathering, compiling and producing traffic information prove time and again to be a lemon product for clients. No Metro client has been in happy with the product or service in years, yet they often continue to use them because Metro will offer the client's parent corporation cash money to use it. Meaning, Metro keeps less of it's advertising revenue. It hands over some to the client.
This results in less cash on hand for Metro to develop better technology and procedures. It certainly never would dawn on Metro to perhaps pay staffers more than $22,500 a year.
Clear Channel isn't known for investing in product. This product has been so divested, I don't see how CCU could do so any further.
What exactly did Clear Channel buy? Certainly not the technology. It is outdated, cumbersome and often ill developed or in a certain state of disrepair. This goes for studio equipment, computer technology, task-specific software, remote-operated cameras, and their aviation equipment.
Did they buy the talent? No. Metro is the shelter for radio's homeless. The staff population is so transient, corporate doesn't bother issuing anybody company e-mail addresses. It doesn't expect its staff to stay, and those who do are exploited, unthanked and often thrown under busses by management.
Is it the executive-level talent? Regional or national-level managers fly in to make deals with clients and leave quickly as to not have to answer questions from the local office as to how to implement the amount of product promised with existing scant resources. Clients get upset, feel "taken" and the local people are left to cover the company's rear end.
Is it the brand? No. Mention that you work for Metro to anybody working at a client station and they will likely tell you off, or at least tell you how much they hate having to do deal with your company.
Is it the Metro Source news wire? Metro tried to bill it as a competitor product to the Associated Press wires. Unlike AP, Metro never sends reporters out to cover the small local stories that local radio station clients are looking for. Often, Metro is rewriting other sources (TV, newspapers). This results in stories moving way later than other services. Even before Metro gutted their local operations in favor of a handful of regional bureaus, the amount and quality was poor. News staffers were stuck in a hamster wheel of rewriting while anchoring way too many newscasts on small client stations that generated no revenue for the company. Even with Clear Channel's gutted local newsrooms, more news gets produced.
Is it the client list? Well, Clear Channel dumped Metro years ago saying they could do it better, in house. Cox is exclusively using Traffic Pulse. CBS is buying data from Metro but has found better success by employing talent of their own. CBS also gets one of those aforementioned cash deals to stay a client. What's left? A bunch of low-powered AM's to which nobody listens or can even pick up. You don't make much money off those if in the ad barter model. Most of those can't afford to pay enough cash to pay for Metro's cost.
Maybe Clear Channel is so strapped for cash that they think the leftover ad revenue after paying clients out is actually going to to help them make a dent in their $22 billion debt.
Westwood One, however, gets out of a money hole. Rod Sherwood says, "Winning!"
Metro Traffic stinks. Period. Its inefficient, lackadaisical and outmoded systems for gathering, compiling and producing traffic information prove time and again to be a lemon product for clients. No Metro client has been in happy with the product or service in years, yet they often continue to use them because Metro will offer the client's parent corporation cash money to use it. Meaning, Metro keeps less of it's advertising revenue. It hands over some to the client.
This results in less cash on hand for Metro to develop better technology and procedures. It certainly never would dawn on Metro to perhaps pay staffers more than $22,500 a year.
Clear Channel isn't known for investing in product. This product has been so divested, I don't see how CCU could do so any further.
What exactly did Clear Channel buy? Certainly not the technology. It is outdated, cumbersome and often ill developed or in a certain state of disrepair. This goes for studio equipment, computer technology, task-specific software, remote-operated cameras, and their aviation equipment.
Did they buy the talent? No. Metro is the shelter for radio's homeless. The staff population is so transient, corporate doesn't bother issuing anybody company e-mail addresses. It doesn't expect its staff to stay, and those who do are exploited, unthanked and often thrown under busses by management.
Is it the executive-level talent? Regional or national-level managers fly in to make deals with clients and leave quickly as to not have to answer questions from the local office as to how to implement the amount of product promised with existing scant resources. Clients get upset, feel "taken" and the local people are left to cover the company's rear end.
Is it the brand? No. Mention that you work for Metro to anybody working at a client station and they will likely tell you off, or at least tell you how much they hate having to do deal with your company.
Is it the Metro Source news wire? Metro tried to bill it as a competitor product to the Associated Press wires. Unlike AP, Metro never sends reporters out to cover the small local stories that local radio station clients are looking for. Often, Metro is rewriting other sources (TV, newspapers). This results in stories moving way later than other services. Even before Metro gutted their local operations in favor of a handful of regional bureaus, the amount and quality was poor. News staffers were stuck in a hamster wheel of rewriting while anchoring way too many newscasts on small client stations that generated no revenue for the company. Even with Clear Channel's gutted local newsrooms, more news gets produced.
Is it the client list? Well, Clear Channel dumped Metro years ago saying they could do it better, in house. Cox is exclusively using Traffic Pulse. CBS is buying data from Metro but has found better success by employing talent of their own. CBS also gets one of those aforementioned cash deals to stay a client. What's left? A bunch of low-powered AM's to which nobody listens or can even pick up. You don't make much money off those if in the ad barter model. Most of those can't afford to pay enough cash to pay for Metro's cost.
Maybe Clear Channel is so strapped for cash that they think the leftover ad revenue after paying clients out is actually going to to help them make a dent in their $22 billion debt.
Westwood One, however, gets out of a money hole. Rod Sherwood says, "Winning!"
How about thinking outside of Tampa Bay? Maybe there's markets where Clear Channel's Traffic operations are weak. Maybe there's markets that Metro is dominating AND making money where Clear Channel isn't. Sounds to me like Clear Channel wanted to dominate traffic reporting operations in some of the bigger markets.
NewsStud said:
Well, Cox/Jacksonville uses Metro. In fact, Metro moved OUT of their office/studios downtown and moved IN to the Cox building.
Hearst's WCVB-TV/Boston uses Metro/SmartRoute Systems for their traffic as do Saga, Citadel and Nassau in much of New England.
ThatGuyOnTheRadio said:
Metro closed their Jax office a while ago to save money. Since Metro and Cox had a deal going in that market, they arranged to have staffers work from the Cox plant. Placing talent at the client is/was a common thing.
I can't speak about the other examples you mention, but I'd be curious to know how much Metro is paying them to remain clients. That is, unless Metro is only provider there (Not the case for Boston, I'd think) and these companies are chosing to stick with Metro as to avoid hiring a few people to do the work themselves.
Interesting insight.
If true, it would explain the sirius/gps traffic.
The facts:
I have an NTG-4 software defined radio installed in my Chrysler T&C. It has a GPS with a color coded, ever changing, display for various traffic conditions and changes frequently.
This part of the GPS is a service supposedly provided with the sirius subscription.
The observation:
It will frequently show traffic where no vehicles exist.
The conclusion:
The results, on-screen, are part of a sophisticated computer program, either internally or externally, generating randomly color-coded conditions merely to satisfy users in small markets, such as, here, in Sa-ra-so-ta!, for the appearance of a value-added service.
Jeff in Sa-ra-so-ta!
If true, it would explain the sirius/gps traffic.
The facts:
I have an NTG-4 software defined radio installed in my Chrysler T&C. It has a GPS with a color coded, ever changing, display for various traffic conditions and changes frequently.
This part of the GPS is a service supposedly provided with the sirius subscription.
The observation:
It will frequently show traffic where no vehicles exist.
The conclusion:
The results, on-screen, are part of a sophisticated computer program, either internally or externally, generating randomly color-coded conditions merely to satisfy users in small markets, such as, here, in Sa-ra-so-ta!, for the appearance of a value-added service.
Jeff in Sa-ra-so-ta!
- Status