-
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
Its amusing that the excuse for the failure of Air America in the Boston market
is always blamed on the poor 1430 and 1200 signals. It also seems a bit odd that
during the 1980's enough elderly listeners from NH to the RI border were able
to find that so called awful 1430 to give WXKS with the "Music of your life"
at one time as high as a 2.5 share by itself without WKOX.
My elderly mother in the early stages of Alzheimers seemed to be able to find it
30 miles outside Boston.
I guess there were not enough goverment employees hired to show liberals how where it was on their AM dial, seems sort of like the hanging chads
in WPB or maybe even liberals didn't want to hear it
is always blamed on the poor 1430 and 1200 signals. It also seems a bit odd that
during the 1980's enough elderly listeners from NH to the RI border were able
to find that so called awful 1430 to give WXKS with the "Music of your life"
at one time as high as a 2.5 share by itself without WKOX.
My elderly mother in the early stages of Alzheimers seemed to be able to find it
30 miles outside Boston.
I guess there were not enough goverment employees hired to show liberals how where it was on their AM dial, seems sort of like the hanging chads
in WPB or maybe even liberals didn't want to hear it
raccoonradio said:
I agree with Chomsky about almost all issues but, man, what an AWFUL public speaker he is... so I don't think that would cut it. ;D
Was in the TV station for 8 hours today 2 PM - 10: PM so I didn't hear any radio during that time.
As it is I'm starting to play CDs in the car.
But Raccoon, c'mon man, even Nancy Shack is bored with the DP, it's time to give it a rest.
You keep defending HC no matter how low he goes. You are Casablanca's dopellganger - you love
what Casablanca hates
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppelgänger
me, to quote Lou Reed, "I just don't care at all..."
As it is I'm starting to play CDs in the car.
But Raccoon, c'mon man, even Nancy Shack is bored with the DP, it's time to give it a rest.
You keep defending HC no matter how low he goes. You are Casablanca's dopellganger - you love
what Casablanca hates
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppelgänger
me, to quote Lou Reed, "I just don't care at all..."
>>So now we are preemptively offended?
I haven't seen Michael Moore's new movie but I'm already saying it stinks
I don't always defend Howie but I do like listening to him. As for the DP listeners do seem to
enjoy it. How else is he gonna give away those crappy CDs?
Maybe you should go on there and give away _GOOD_ CDs by local artists. Go on as a music
trivia expert and people who win will get great CDs by the artists you represent.
Meanwhile, one less station out there that could take prog talk, senor (1510)...
I haven't seen Michael Moore's new movie but I'm already saying it stinks
I don't always defend Howie but I do like listening to him. As for the DP listeners do seem to
enjoy it. How else is he gonna give away those crappy CDs?
Maybe you should go on there and give away _GOOD_ CDs by local artists. Go on as a music
trivia expert and people who win will get great CDs by the artists you represent.
Meanwhile, one less station out there that could take prog talk, senor (1510)...
>>but, man, what an AWFUL public speaker he is.
But as I understand it, he's such a cunning linguist (as opposed to a...sorry, bad pun!)
But as I understand it, he's such a cunning linguist (as opposed to a...sorry, bad pun!)
as for 1430 and its signal, note the huge jump WJIB got in the ratings when Franken replaced Frankie (Sinatra) on WXKS...
to be fair and balanced : one big part of AAR Boston's failure was the lack of a local show. National
shows are fine but you need local content.
to be fair and balanced :
one big part of AAR Boston's failure was the lack of a local show. Nationalshows are fine but you need local content.
>>After all, this is the "fix WRKO" board, isn't it?
well, this AND http://www.savewrko.com ...
plus there's a board at the WRKO site itself.
>>radio is a business.
Exactly. As I point out from time to time, this was said in the first episode of
WKRP in Cincinnati when the station's owner, Mrs. Carlson (she let her son
Arthur run the place) visited after hearing that a new program director,
Andy Travis, had changed the format from beautiful music to raucous rock.
(Though they still had to run the Shady Hills Rest Home ads: "Many people
ask this age-old question: What happens when I can no longer feed
myself?")
MRS. CARLSON: Young man, this radio station is a business. It is not here
for your personal listening pleasure.
ANDY TRAVIS: Ma'am, I know it's a business,and that's why I had no choice
but to change the format.
This is what I tell people when their fave station goes away (changed format):
It's a business.
well, this AND http://www.savewrko.com ...
plus there's a board at the WRKO site itself.
>>radio is a business.
Exactly. As I point out from time to time, this was said in the first episode of
WKRP in Cincinnati when the station's owner, Mrs. Carlson (she let her son
Arthur run the place) visited after hearing that a new program director,
Andy Travis, had changed the format from beautiful music to raucous rock.
(Though they still had to run the Shady Hills Rest Home ads: "Many people
ask this age-old question: What happens when I can no longer feed
myself?")
MRS. CARLSON: Young man, this radio station is a business. It is not here
for your personal listening pleasure.
ANDY TRAVIS: Ma'am, I know it's a business,and that's why I had no choice
but to change the format.
This is what I tell people when their fave station goes away (changed format):
It's a business.
M
Mickey37
Guest
Getting back to the start of this thread --
Casablanca, someone else has said it already: you can't stand Howie Carr, you think he staged a coup to get your mentor off the air, you can't stand WRKO, yet you listen and tell us about it ad freakin' naseum.
The death pool could be considered distasteful by some, but those people probably should be listening to something else anyways, something unoffensive like Radio Disney or WCRB.
Change the station, already. Find something you like on the air and tell us about that.
Casablanca, someone else has said it already: you can't stand Howie Carr, you think he staged a coup to get your mentor off the air, you can't stand WRKO, yet you listen and tell us about it ad freakin' naseum.
The death pool could be considered distasteful by some, but those people probably should be listening to something else anyways, something unoffensive like Radio Disney or WCRB.
Change the station, already. Find something you like on the air and tell us about that.
If the only food available to eat was the food that grossed you out, you'd complain too.
Well, you can stand in the line at McDonalds and ask for chicken saltimbocca but, no matter how loudly you shout at the cook, it's still burgers and fries. No commercial business is required to sell, or program, something just because you want it.
But, you can go to a different restaurant. It may be more expensive than Mickey Ds, but that's the way it goes. In real life, you often have to pay extra for 'having it your way.'
Casablanca IS like a dog on a bone about Howie Carr which is obviously personal,
Yeah, it's a little like folks who hate going to the dentist, but insist on scheduling elective root canals. It would seem like a version of insanity.
but the issue about WRKO and WTKK being the only talk stations and the biggest difference between them being the ethnicity of their middle aged balding white guy conservative making fun of everyone not just like them hosts - well, it's like an ice cream shop with two kinds of vanilla ice cream and nothing else.
Time for another shop to open.
Shop? Heck, there is an entire mall dedicated to this.
A long time ago, some folks figured out that there was a media market for 'niche' products; products for which the demand, although there, wasn't large enough to be commercially viable on broadcast outlets, but for which folks would willingly pay. Therefore we have cable television narrow-focus networks. They do audience numbers which would get programs cancelled after the first showing on one of the mainstream over-the-air nets but are money machines on outlets such as Discovery, TLC, Court, ESPN, etc.
It is also why we have satellite radio. If you can't scratch a particular programming itch for free because it hasn't proven financially feasible on broadcast, you probably can off the bird, but you'll pay for it, the same way WW2 nuts pay to satisfy their cravings for non-stop documentaries on cable. Pretty soon, for $300 in equipment, you be able to have just about any programming you want in your home and automobile.
Don't want to shell out the equipment and subscription fees? As my father used to say when we complained about the food mom had set on the table, "Well, I guess your dinner is over."
Regards,
TSB
Well, you can stand in the line at McDonalds and ask for chicken saltimbocca but, no matter how loudly you shout at the cook, it's still burgers and fries. No commercial business is required to sell, or program, something just because you want it.
But, you can go to a different restaurant. It may be more expensive than Mickey Ds, but that's the way it goes. In real life, you often have to pay extra for 'having it your way.'
Casablanca IS like a dog on a bone about Howie Carr which is obviously personal,
Yeah, it's a little like folks who hate going to the dentist, but insist on scheduling elective root canals. It would seem like a version of insanity.
but the issue about WRKO and WTKK being the only talk stations and the biggest difference between them being the ethnicity of their middle aged balding white guy conservative making fun of everyone not just like them hosts - well, it's like an ice cream shop with two kinds of vanilla ice cream and nothing else.
Time for another shop to open.
Shop? Heck, there is an entire mall dedicated to this.
A long time ago, some folks figured out that there was a media market for 'niche' products; products for which the demand, although there, wasn't large enough to be commercially viable on broadcast outlets, but for which folks would willingly pay. Therefore we have cable television narrow-focus networks. They do audience numbers which would get programs cancelled after the first showing on one of the mainstream over-the-air nets but are money machines on outlets such as Discovery, TLC, Court, ESPN, etc.
It is also why we have satellite radio. If you can't scratch a particular programming itch for free because it hasn't proven financially feasible on broadcast, you probably can off the bird, but you'll pay for it, the same way WW2 nuts pay to satisfy their cravings for non-stop documentaries on cable. Pretty soon, for $300 in equipment, you be able to have just about any programming you want in your home and automobile.
Don't want to shell out the equipment and subscription fees? As my father used to say when we complained about the food mom had set on the table, "Well, I guess your dinner is over."
Regards,
TSB
Conservative talk is just as niche as progressive talk, especially in MA.
To me, it's just like back in the day with buying IBM computers - there were better computers out there for less money, but no IT manager got fired for buying IBM, so that's what they bought. It's the safe decision.
Everyone says it's a business. Well, a business opportunity may be staring you in the face - but it takes vision to see it and cojones to do it.
We need real business developers in talk radio instead of people running around in their little box competing for the same little slice of the pie. No one was developing the progressive talk business model on the Clear Channel station - no resources, no business plan, nothing. Jeff Santos didn't even have a board operator - the guy is interviewing candidates for the President of the most powerful country in the world in the 11th largest market and he doesn't even have a friggin' board operator. And Clear Channel owns all the billboards? And all the taxi ads? And NONE of them advertised the product? How lame is that? You're telling me that's a business model that failed? You're telling me this is a niche market? A ten year old could have pushed the ratings higher than what they got. I personally think I could have done better than they did as a volunteer working part time because even that would be more than NOTHING, which is what they did.
IMHO, that's why conservatives (including Baloney Maloney) are in such a lather - because it could so easily work in this state, it isn't niche, liberals do spend money, advertisers do want to reach them and if it was ever given half an effort it would very likely work.
Of course I could be wrong, but doesn't it make sense to even give it a go? Wouldn't it be interesting to find out?
To me, it's just like back in the day with buying IBM computers - there were better computers out there for less money, but no IT manager got fired for buying IBM, so that's what they bought. It's the safe decision.
Everyone says it's a business. Well, a business opportunity may be staring you in the face - but it takes vision to see it and cojones to do it.
We need real business developers in talk radio instead of people running around in their little box competing for the same little slice of the pie. No one was developing the progressive talk business model on the Clear Channel station - no resources, no business plan, nothing. Jeff Santos didn't even have a board operator - the guy is interviewing candidates for the President of the most powerful country in the world in the 11th largest market and he doesn't even have a friggin' board operator. And Clear Channel owns all the billboards? And all the taxi ads? And NONE of them advertised the product? How lame is that? You're telling me that's a business model that failed? You're telling me this is a niche market? A ten year old could have pushed the ratings higher than what they got. I personally think I could have done better than they did as a volunteer working part time because even that would be more than NOTHING, which is what they did.
IMHO, that's why conservatives (including Baloney Maloney) are in such a lather - because it could so easily work in this state, it isn't niche, liberals do spend money, advertisers do want to reach them and if it was ever given half an effort it would very likely work.
Of course I could be wrong, but doesn't it make sense to even give it a go? Wouldn't it be interesting to find out?
CC didn't have a daily local host--that was a huge mistake. Signals not the best but not the worst, either.
I did see some taxi tops and bumper stickers for Boston Prog Talk and I think briefly there was a billboard
or two but that was about it. Thought I remembed a billboard near Salem train station.
Other promotion: articles in Globe and Herald mentioned the two stations. Ch. 4 did a profile of Stephanie
Miller when she came to town and prominently mentioned WKOX/WXKS. Probably could have been more
promotion, yes.
Competition--maybe lib listeners preferred NPR, or music stations--or even conservative hosts, despite
not agreeing with them.
AAR/Jones product: the "molasses dripped voice" of Al Franken (that phrase came from a libtalk
fan!)...Rhodes, Schultz, and Steph Miller were not
newcomers to radio and maybe had some entertainment value.
Could CC have found the liberal version of Howie or Jay and put them on pm drive? Could they have
spared the money? Maybe scoured college radio to find an up and coming talk host? Looked elsewhere?
Daily local hosts can be in a small town AAR station in Vermont, but not in Boston?
>>a business opportunity may be staring you in the face - but it takes vision to see it and cojones to do it.
"Boy, I got vision and the rest of the world needs bifocals."--Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
>>Jeff Santos didn't even have a board operator
Clear Channel cost cutting = C.C. senor...
>>Raccoon - where does your mind go at 3:44 am??
After a long night at the postal service... Hope I was somewhat coherent. Thanks to the Net,
though, I found out about things like the WWZN sale when I got home last night.
Let libtalk succeed by doing it the right way not having the govt. force it down our throats with the
so-called Fairness Doctrine. What's next, govt. forcing vegetarians to eat meat? Oh, but we have to
support the cattle farmers of this country! Govt. forcing atheists to go to church? But it'll save your soul!
They're from the government and they're here to help you. Freedom of speech means no government
stepping in to force a radio station to air something they don't wish to air due to economic reasons or
whatever.
Can I ask the government to force Jam'n 94.5 to play some Hank Williams once in awhile?
I did see some taxi tops and bumper stickers for Boston Prog Talk and I think briefly there was a billboard
or two but that was about it. Thought I remembed a billboard near Salem train station.
Other promotion: articles in Globe and Herald mentioned the two stations. Ch. 4 did a profile of Stephanie
Miller when she came to town and prominently mentioned WKOX/WXKS. Probably could have been more
promotion, yes.
Competition--maybe lib listeners preferred NPR, or music stations--or even conservative hosts, despite
not agreeing with them.
AAR/Jones product: the "molasses dripped voice" of Al Franken (that phrase came from a libtalk
fan!)...Rhodes, Schultz, and Steph Miller were not
newcomers to radio and maybe had some entertainment value.
Could CC have found the liberal version of Howie or Jay and put them on pm drive? Could they have
spared the money? Maybe scoured college radio to find an up and coming talk host? Looked elsewhere?
Daily local hosts can be in a small town AAR station in Vermont, but not in Boston?
>>a business opportunity may be staring you in the face - but it takes vision to see it and cojones to do it.
"Boy, I got vision and the rest of the world needs bifocals."--Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
>>Jeff Santos didn't even have a board operator
Clear Channel cost cutting = C.C. senor...
>>Raccoon - where does your mind go at 3:44 am??
After a long night at the postal service...
Hope I was somewhat coherent. Thanks to the Net,though, I found out about things like the WWZN sale when I got home last night.
Let libtalk succeed by doing it the right way not having the govt. force it down our throats with the
so-called Fairness Doctrine. What's next, govt. forcing vegetarians to eat meat? Oh, but we have to
support the cattle farmers of this country! Govt. forcing atheists to go to church? But it'll save your soul!
They're from the government and they're here to help you. Freedom of speech means no government
stepping in to force a radio station to air something they don't wish to air due to economic reasons or
whatever.
Can I ask the government to force Jam'n 94.5 to play some Hank Williams once in awhile?
SaveWRKO babbles on
>>After all, this is the "fix WRKO" board, isn't it?
well, this AND http://www.savewrko.com ... >>>
Well, I guess so, especially if you're, shall we say, rationally challenged.
After correctly predicting 12 of the last 0 challenges to conservative talk radio in Boston, they're now looking for something else to be paranoid about. It is also a textbook example of how even though you can connect the dots, it doesn't mean there's a picture.
As you may be aware, Henry controls the Red Sox along with other investors, including the New York Times Company, which owns the Boston Globe.
Well, yes. They also own 80% of NESN, a well-known bastion of liberal thought.
Under the terms of their recent mega-rights deal with Entercom, Henry's group ultimately has the right to purchase an interest in WRKO.
Yes. They have a option (but not a requirement) to purchase a minority stake in WRKO.
In addition, it seems logical that team management would already exert some influence over WRKO's programming, given the station's new role as flagship for the Red Sox Radio Network.
Why? Why is it 'logical' that someone who collects millions from WRKO, not the other way around, would have influence over non-Red Sox related programming?
Today's reading hint: Whenever Maloney prefaces anything with the word 'logical' you can bet a non-seguitur is about to make an appearance.
Henry, a major backer of leftist causes including John Kerry, makes no bones about his political leanings. With other hedge funds making mountains of money, however, shouldn't he spend more time cooking up a coherent investment strategy?
Well, he does. Sometimes they work, and sometimes they don't. That's why they are called investments and speculations, and not 'guarantees.'
Henry also owns a big chunk of Fenway Roush Racing. I guess it won't be long before they start playing the Internationale at NASCAR events in place of the Star Spangled Banner.
What is interesting about this is that one of the recurring themes of SaveWRKO is that ultra liberal Dave Field, who owns, for all intents and purposes, 100% of WRKO and his lefty minions Kahn and Wolfe, is out to destroy conservative talk on WRKO. Well, that one hasn't panned out, so the new meme is that someone, Henry, who owns 0% of WRKO, and to whom WRKO is a client, not a partner, is now the threat to conservative talk radio on WRKO. Of course, there isn't any evidence of this anywhere, but isn't that the way it always is with conspiracies; lack of evidence is proof?
Through my rollover IRA, I have an option of buying a minority stake in Ford. I think I'll give them a call and insist they do something about the mileage I get from my Explorer. They better listen, after all I am a potential minority owner.
In the end, a broke John Henry might not be well-positioned for control of either the Red Sox or WRKO. And that could be great news for freedom-loving Bay Staters.
Coming from a site which is dedicated to a monolithic viewpoint on Boston talk stations, this gives new meaning to the word chuzpah.
Regards,
TSB
>>After all, this is the "fix WRKO" board, isn't it?
well, this AND http://www.savewrko.com ... >>>
Well, I guess so, especially if you're, shall we say, rationally challenged.
After correctly predicting 12 of the last 0 challenges to conservative talk radio in Boston, they're now looking for something else to be paranoid about. It is also a textbook example of how even though you can connect the dots, it doesn't mean there's a picture.
As you may be aware, Henry controls the Red Sox along with other investors, including the New York Times Company, which owns the Boston Globe.
Well, yes. They also own 80% of NESN, a well-known bastion of liberal thought.
Under the terms of their recent mega-rights deal with Entercom, Henry's group ultimately has the right to purchase an interest in WRKO.
Yes. They have a option (but not a requirement) to purchase a minority stake in WRKO.
In addition, it seems logical that team management would already exert some influence over WRKO's programming, given the station's new role as flagship for the Red Sox Radio Network.
Why? Why is it 'logical' that someone who collects millions from WRKO, not the other way around, would have influence over non-Red Sox related programming?
Today's reading hint: Whenever Maloney prefaces anything with the word 'logical' you can bet a non-seguitur is about to make an appearance.
Henry, a major backer of leftist causes including John Kerry, makes no bones about his political leanings. With other hedge funds making mountains of money, however, shouldn't he spend more time cooking up a coherent investment strategy?
Well, he does. Sometimes they work, and sometimes they don't. That's why they are called investments and speculations, and not 'guarantees.'
Henry also owns a big chunk of Fenway Roush Racing. I guess it won't be long before they start playing the Internationale at NASCAR events in place of the Star Spangled Banner.
What is interesting about this is that one of the recurring themes of SaveWRKO is that ultra liberal Dave Field, who owns, for all intents and purposes, 100% of WRKO and his lefty minions Kahn and Wolfe, is out to destroy conservative talk on WRKO. Well, that one hasn't panned out, so the new meme is that someone, Henry, who owns 0% of WRKO, and to whom WRKO is a client, not a partner, is now the threat to conservative talk radio on WRKO. Of course, there isn't any evidence of this anywhere, but isn't that the way it always is with conspiracies; lack of evidence is proof?
Through my rollover IRA, I have an option of buying a minority stake in Ford. I think I'll give them a call and insist they do something about the mileage I get from my Explorer. They better listen, after all I am a potential minority owner.
In the end, a broke John Henry might not be well-positioned for control of either the Red Sox or WRKO. And that could be great news for freedom-loving Bay Staters.
Coming from a site which is dedicated to a monolithic viewpoint on Boston talk stations, this gives new meaning to the word chuzpah.
Regards,
TSB
Good points...I guess SaveWRKO has bravely defended 680 from the possible changeover to libtalk, eh? :
I kinda fell for some of his assertions too but you do bring up good points...
I kinda fell for some of his assertions too but you do bring up good points...
Conservative talk is just as niche as progressive talk, especially in MA.
Well, in a word, no. Look at the cumes of the stations programming conservative talk against the 18+ population figures for Massachusetts in general, or Greater Boston in particular, and its about as non-niche as any format. Plus, it been shown to be economically viable, and viable on two major stations and a couple of non-major ones. It is exactly the opposite of niche programming.
To me, it's just like back in the day with buying IBM computers - there were better computers out there for less money, but no IT manager got fired for buying IBM, so that's what they bought. It's the safe decision.
Yep, that's what they used to say, and there was a good reason for it. At the time, IBM was the player, and everyone else was an also ran.
Everyone says it's a business. Well, a business opportunity may be staring you in the face - but it takes vision to see it and cojones to do it.
Well, so far, that 'business opportunity' proved only to be the radio equivalent of yacht racing
(tearing up $1000 bills while somebody sprays you with ice water.)
We need real business developers in talk radio instead of people running around in their little box competing for the same little slice of the pie.
Well, most of the progressive talk was financed by ideologues with deep pockets, since it couldn't pay its own way. The individual shows that could generate listenership and profits survive, but most of them were already surviving as stand alone programs. It seems it only works in small doses.
No one was developing the progressive talk business model on the Clear Channel station - no resources, no business plan, nothing. Jeff Santos didn't even have a board operator - the guy is interviewing candidates for the President of the most powerful country in the world in the 11th largest market and he doesn't even have a friggin' board operator. And Clear Channel owns all the billboards? And all the taxi ads? And NONE of them advertised the product? How lame is that?
AAR got fawning media coverage worth millions nationally, and locally, before it even hit the air. Their MSM buddies wanted them to succeed. And later, as it circled the drain, the coverage of that failure was almost non-existent. AAR got the most kid glove treatment imaginable, out of all proportion to their distribution or audience, right up until the auctioneer's gavel hit the walnut.
Limbaugh on the other hand gets no media coverage whatsoever except the negative kind, but he's so popular that he's bulletproof. Also, I can't remember the last time I saw any local outside promotion for any syndicated program, including Limbaugh, Ingraham, Savage, Doyle, O'Reilly, etc. WBZ doesn't do outside promotion of note for their soft-liberal talk programs, all of which seem to do respectable numbers.
You're telling me that's a business model that failed?
No, it was a business that failed the model. As I understand it, commercial radio is an advertising medium. You program and distribute programming, and if enough people, especially the 'right' people, listen to it, advertisers pay money to reach those listeners, and hopefully the amount they pay will be greater than the cost of producing the programming. Sometimes, if programs are popular enough and are local revenue generators, you can even get stations to pay you for supplying the shows (Stern, Imus, Limbaugh), rather than the other way around (AAR.) I believe that is the usual business model .
You're telling me this is a niche market?
As they say in libel cases, the truth is the absolute defense.
IMHO, that's why conservatives (including Baloney Maloney) are in such a lather
Maloney is in a lather because he is an ideologue conspiracy theorist, I'm an arch-conservative who isn't in a lather because, as a believer in free markets, especially those of ideas, I consider the more the merrier.
- because it could so easily work in this state, it isn't niche, liberals do spend money, advertisers do want to reach them and if it was ever given half an effort it would very likely work.
I'm sure someone will take a shot at it. As is said about second marriages, they're a triumph of hope over experience.
Of course I could be wrong, but doesn't it make sense to even give it a go? Wouldn't it be interesting to find out?
It takes more than sense, it take a lot of money from people who aren't afraid to see it go down the rat hole if things don't work out. Remember, any respectable station in this market is billing millions. Switching to progressive talk means going back to square one in both billing and audience. And, if it doesn't work, it is one area where it is very probable that you will lose more than you actually invested.
And, based on experience so far, the rat hole appears the more likely destination than the bank.
Regards,
TSB
Well, in a word, no. Look at the cumes of the stations programming conservative talk against the 18+ population figures for Massachusetts in general, or Greater Boston in particular, and its about as non-niche as any format. Plus, it been shown to be economically viable, and viable on two major stations and a couple of non-major ones. It is exactly the opposite of niche programming.
To me, it's just like back in the day with buying IBM computers - there were better computers out there for less money, but no IT manager got fired for buying IBM, so that's what they bought. It's the safe decision.
Yep, that's what they used to say, and there was a good reason for it. At the time, IBM was the player, and everyone else was an also ran.
Everyone says it's a business. Well, a business opportunity may be staring you in the face - but it takes vision to see it and cojones to do it.
Well, so far, that 'business opportunity' proved only to be the radio equivalent of yacht racing
(tearing up $1000 bills while somebody sprays you with ice water.)
We need real business developers in talk radio instead of people running around in their little box competing for the same little slice of the pie.
Well, most of the progressive talk was financed by ideologues with deep pockets, since it couldn't pay its own way. The individual shows that could generate listenership and profits survive, but most of them were already surviving as stand alone programs. It seems it only works in small doses.
No one was developing the progressive talk business model on the Clear Channel station - no resources, no business plan, nothing. Jeff Santos didn't even have a board operator - the guy is interviewing candidates for the President of the most powerful country in the world in the 11th largest market and he doesn't even have a friggin' board operator. And Clear Channel owns all the billboards? And all the taxi ads? And NONE of them advertised the product? How lame is that?
AAR got fawning media coverage worth millions nationally, and locally, before it even hit the air. Their MSM buddies wanted them to succeed. And later, as it circled the drain, the coverage of that failure was almost non-existent. AAR got the most kid glove treatment imaginable, out of all proportion to their distribution or audience, right up until the auctioneer's gavel hit the walnut.
Limbaugh on the other hand gets no media coverage whatsoever except the negative kind, but he's so popular that he's bulletproof. Also, I can't remember the last time I saw any local outside promotion for any syndicated program, including Limbaugh, Ingraham, Savage, Doyle, O'Reilly, etc. WBZ doesn't do outside promotion of note for their soft-liberal talk programs, all of which seem to do respectable numbers.
You're telling me that's a business model that failed?
No, it was a business that failed the model. As I understand it, commercial radio is an advertising medium. You program and distribute programming, and if enough people, especially the 'right' people, listen to it, advertisers pay money to reach those listeners, and hopefully the amount they pay will be greater than the cost of producing the programming. Sometimes, if programs are popular enough and are local revenue generators, you can even get stations to pay you for supplying the shows (Stern, Imus, Limbaugh), rather than the other way around (AAR.) I believe that is the usual business model .
You're telling me this is a niche market?
As they say in libel cases, the truth is the absolute defense.
IMHO, that's why conservatives (including Baloney Maloney) are in such a lather
Maloney is in a lather because he is an ideologue conspiracy theorist, I'm an arch-conservative who isn't in a lather because, as a believer in free markets, especially those of ideas, I consider the more the merrier.
- because it could so easily work in this state, it isn't niche, liberals do spend money, advertisers do want to reach them and if it was ever given half an effort it would very likely work.
I'm sure someone will take a shot at it. As is said about second marriages, they're a triumph of hope over experience.
Of course I could be wrong, but doesn't it make sense to even give it a go? Wouldn't it be interesting to find out?
It takes more than sense, it take a lot of money from people who aren't afraid to see it go down the rat hole if things don't work out. Remember, any respectable station in this market is billing millions. Switching to progressive talk means going back to square one in both billing and audience. And, if it doesn't work, it is one area where it is very probable that you will lose more than you actually invested.
And, based on experience so far, the rat hole appears the more likely destination than the bank.
Regards,
TSB
Hey TSB - thanks for taking the time to respond!
AAR got great publicity, but the local station did not. I knew about AAR, I did not know about the local stations.
I do think it is easier to be successful in conservative talk than liberal talk - liberals are more likely to split hairs, are less disciplined, like herding cats. It is harder to keep an audience - I'll grant you that.
"Second marriages - triumph of hope over experience"?
In my experience it's the opposite - the wisdom of experience triumphs over vain hope!
"It takes more than sense, it take a lot of money from people who aren't afraid to see it go down the rat hole if things don't work out."
- that's the cojones part.
"... a believer in free markets, especially those of ideas, I consider the more the merrier."
GLAD to know that. Me too. That's why I don't support a return to the Fairness Doctrine, but I do think we should have smaller limits on the number of media outlets any one company can own in individual markets and nationally, and I want the net to remain 'neutral.'
Okay, back to work. If I respond any more today I am a very bad girl. Don't tempt me.
AAR got great publicity, but the local station did not. I knew about AAR, I did not know about the local stations.
I do think it is easier to be successful in conservative talk than liberal talk - liberals are more likely to split hairs, are less disciplined, like herding cats. It is harder to keep an audience - I'll grant you that.
"Second marriages - triumph of hope over experience"?
In my experience it's the opposite - the wisdom of experience triumphs over vain hope!
"It takes more than sense, it take a lot of money from people who aren't afraid to see it go down the rat hole if things don't work out."
- that's the cojones part.
"... a believer in free markets, especially those of ideas, I consider the more the merrier."
GLAD to know that. Me too. That's why I don't support a return to the Fairness Doctrine, but I do think we should have smaller limits on the number of media outlets any one company can own in individual markets and nationally, and I want the net to remain 'neutral.'
Okay, back to work. If I respond any more today I am a very bad girl. Don't tempt me.
Hey TSB - thanks for taking the time to respond!
De nada. The alternative was mowing the grass.
AAR got great publicity, but the local station did not. I knew about AAR, I did not know about the local stations.
Well, if you were interested after hearing the publicity, you would have gone out of your way to find them. Like millions of others, you weren't that interested.
I do think it is easier to be successful in conservative talk than liberal talk
Maloney would probably disagree (although he is more of a Republican partisan, and conspiracy theorist, than a conservative). But, when you think of it, it's extraordinarily difficut to succeed in any talk format.
pretty difficult - liberals are more likely to split hairs, are less disciplined, like herding cats. It is harder to keep an audience - I'll grant you that.
Also less entertaining, which is where the talk radio rubber really meets the road. That appeared to be the major problem.
"Second marriages - triumph of hope over experience"?
In my experience it's the opposite - the wisdom of experience triumphs over vain hope!
Your experience would seem to be different than Dr. Johnson's :
"It takes more than sense, it take a lot of money from people who aren't afraid to see it go down the rat hole if things don't work out."
- that's the cojones part.
Well, as they say about the tycoon in the Southwest Airlines ad, 'he's rich, not stupid.'
Okay, back to work. If I respond any more today I am a very bad girl. Don't tempt me.
Wouldn't think of it.
Regards,
TSB
De nada. The alternative was mowing the grass.
AAR got great publicity, but the local station did not. I knew about AAR, I did not know about the local stations.
Well, if you were interested after hearing the publicity, you would have gone out of your way to find them. Like millions of others, you weren't that interested.
I do think it is easier to be successful in conservative talk than liberal talk
Maloney would probably disagree (although he is more of a Republican partisan, and conspiracy theorist, than a conservative). But, when you think of it, it's extraordinarily difficut to succeed in any talk format.
pretty difficult - liberals are more likely to split hairs, are less disciplined, like herding cats. It is harder to keep an audience - I'll grant you that.
Also less entertaining, which is where the talk radio rubber really meets the road. That appeared to be the major problem.
"Second marriages - triumph of hope over experience"?
In my experience it's the opposite - the wisdom of experience triumphs over vain hope!
Your experience would seem to be different than Dr. Johnson's :
"It takes more than sense, it take a lot of money from people who aren't afraid to see it go down the rat hole if things don't work out."
- that's the cojones part.
Well, as they say about the tycoon in the Southwest Airlines ad, 'he's rich, not stupid.'
Okay, back to work. If I respond any more today I am a very bad girl. Don't tempt me.
Wouldn't think of it.
Regards,
TSB
- Status