Q104 sans Fig - down she goes

[chacha]

Re: Allan Fee vs. Mike Luczak

> The more I think about it, the duo of Allan Fee and Mike
> Luczak are joined at the hip. It's a shame they don't look
> alike, or I'd start the "seperated at birth" gag line.
>
> Both are corporate lapdogs (Fee with Infinity, Luczak with
> Salem), both are unqualified to be PDs in any sense of the
> word, both have overinflated egos (Fee in AMD, Luczak
> imaging WKNR) and both took decent stations (Fee with WQAL,
> Luzack with WKNR) and have taken them to hell.
>
> Both have higher-ups (for Fee - almost a Mike Tyson faux pas
> - it's Chris Maduri; for Luczak, it's Errol Dengler) that
> love and care for the star stations in their respective
> clusters. (For Infinity, it's WDOK, for Salem, it's WFHM-
> The Fish.) Maduri and Dengler obviously care about those
> jewels far more than anything else in the world, so to hell
> with anything else. Therefore, say hello to Allan and Mike,
> kiddies!
>
> One final thing in common: neither will be fired any time
> soon for their atrocities. But they SHOULD have been canned
> yesterday, followed by ticker-tape parades in Public Square!
>
>
> - nate81
>

Great summation Nate.
Fee continues to keep a HOT AC in a major market above water (not an easy task),
and you can make an argument that he does a very good job in developing talent (i.e. Fig). also, he had a strong track record in St. Louis. Q104 is a stronger station today than when Fee arrived. Good book or not.

As for Luczak.....if you're gonna rag on him too, you obviously never heard the Buzzard....and if you've never heard that station.....its probably not a great idea to pontificate on a Cleveland Radio site.

PS: Kid Leo digs both of these guys!!

 

[HHH]

Re: Allan Fee vs. Mike Luczak

> As for Luczak.....if you're gonna rag on him too, you
> obviously never heard the Buzzard....and if you've never
> heard that station.....its probably not a great idea to
> pontificate on a Cleveland Radio site.


But "the Buzzard" (WMMS) under Luzak was terrible. Terrible ratings, terrible talent, terrible music selection. Outside of the pathetic Bob Neumann era, the worst period in WMMS history.

 

[JohnnyMorganWXJX]

Mike Luczak--Second Coming of Christ???

> > The more I think about it, the duo of Allan Fee and Mike
> > Luczak are joined at the hip. It's a shame they don't look
>
> > alike, or I'd start the "seperated at birth" gag line.
> >
> > Both are corporate lapdogs (Fee with Infinity, Luczak with
>
> > Salem), both are unqualified to be PDs in any sense of the
>
> > word, both have overinflated egos (Fee in AMD, Luczak
> > imaging WKNR) and both took decent stations (Fee with
> WQAL,
> > Luzack with WKNR) and have taken them to hell.
> >
> > Both have higher-ups (for Fee - almost a Mike Tyson faux
> pas
> > - it's Chris Maduri; for Luczak, it's Errol Dengler) that
> > love and care for the star stations in their respective
> > clusters. (For Infinity, it's WDOK, for Salem, it's WFHM-
> > The Fish.) Maduri and Dengler obviously care about those
> > jewels far more than anything else in the world, so to
> hell
> > with anything else. Therefore, say hello to Allan and
> Mike,
> > kiddies!
> >
> > One final thing in common: neither will be fired any time
> > soon for their atrocities. But they SHOULD have been
> canned
> > yesterday, followed by ticker-tape parades in Public
> Square!
> >
> >
> > - nate81
> >
>
> Great summation Nate.
> Fee continues to keep a HOT AC in a major market above water
> (not an easy task),
> and you can make an argument that he does a very good job in
> developing talent (i.e. Fig). also, he had a strong track
> record in St. Louis. Q104 is a stronger station today than
> when Fee arrived. Good book or not.

I don't think it's stronger. So be it. I don't care about the books--I care about the radio art that is made (or not made) on Q104.

> As for Luczak.....if you're gonna rag on him too, you
> obviously never heard the Buzzard....and if you've never
> heard that station.....its probably not a great idea to
> pontificate on a Cleveland Radio site.

Are you serious?

Are you talking the Buzzard *now*? Because if you are, you have just shown that you're the one who shouldn't pontificate on a Cleveland radio board. And if you mean *then*--well, that's further proof you shouldn't.

Luczak was at WMMS starting in 1990--the end of the Malrite run. (I don't have Radio Daze in front of me, so I don't know when Luczak left. It may have been when Shamrock sold it to OmniAmerica. I shall supplement when I am near the info.)

UPDATE: Luczak came to WMMS in July 1990, after one year of programming Dayton's WAZU. He was fired at the start of January 1994 (by Shamrock--who by then had sold WMMS/WHK to OmniAmerica, awaiting FCC approval, which came in April 1994).

That was well after Kid Leo left Cleveland (1988), so Luczak didn't even work with him. He fired Matt the Cat. Ratings took a HUGE dump under his stewardship (Conceded point: not Luczak's fault totally. The Buzzard had gone downhill under Jeff McCartney and Rich Piombino too. But the slide continued under Luczak.) The station was weak--good talent like T.R and Rocco, but all over the road musically. They never knew what they wanted to be, rock-wise: classic, hard, alternative. As a result, with the younger set they got their asses handed to them when The End appeared (also when Gorman-consulted WRQK Rock 107 could reach the market); and when WNCX decided to concentrate on classic rock and grab Stern, the Buzzard lost there too. Jeff and Flash went to 6th place--and third in demo (men 18-34); they were even farther behind 25-44. The station itself, under Luczak's tutelage, made modest gains in late 1992, only be beaten mercilessly throughout 1993--at one point, not only down in overalls, but also losing men 18-34 to WNCX and WENZ, as well as being far behind 25-44 (WMJI in the lead).

Plus, 1990 was the year WZAK was #1 (one of a few times that decade), "Jammin'" CHR debuted on 92.3, and WMJI was about to debut under John Gorman--which quickly shot to #1. The Buzzard's decline was one of a couple reasons why Malrite wanted to get out of radio.

If you're trying to graft the Buzzard success under John Gorman (both times) onto Mike Luczak, then either YOU don't know about Cleveland radio--or you have an agenda. Either way, it's nonsense, pure and simple.

And this is not even mentioning Luczak's stellar record outside Cleveland, and his chairmanship of Jammin' Oldies and WKNR and WHK.

> PS: Kid Leo digs both of these guys!!
>

Somehow, I doubt that.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Johnny Morgan on 10/20/05 04:20 PM.</FONT></P>

 

[bigwoody]

Re: Allan Fee vs. Mike Luczak

> As for Luczak.....if you're gonna rag on him too, you
> obviously never heard the Buzzard....and if you've never
> heard that station.....its probably not a great idea to
> pontificate on a Cleveland Radio site.
>
> PS: Kid Leo digs both of these guys!!
>

Disclaimer: I have no axe with Mike Luczak

Luczak's WMMS days were not golden. Time seems to put a glaze on what really happened. Read "Radio Daze" by Mike Olszewski. Quote from page 406 "...Luczak's tenure at WMMS was a stormy one, marked by conflict with staff members...". Of course this is Mike's recollection...along with others who were there. It goes on..."Luczak's bullsh*t had alienated much of the community and after three years he still didn't have a clue as to what the station should sound like.". Luczak departed WMMS January 1994. Luczak is quoted on page 407 about the entrenched politics of WMMS when he arrived and admits he wasn't ready to handle it. Great book. I recommend it to those who want to learn more about Cleveland radio from 1968-1997, especially WMMS.<P ID="signature">______________
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.</P>

 

[bigwoody]

Re: Let Me Correct You, Part ????

This isn't 1997.



Oh how I wish it were....(cue Elvis' "Memories")<P ID="signature">______________
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.</P>

 

[network]

This Is Getting Boring

> Look, you guys can't have it both ways. Who is responsible
> for WQAL's success or failure, and who makes programming
> decisions: Allan Fee or Infinity corporate (either Radio
> Lane or NYC)? It's one or the other. You (collective) say
> Fee is a success, then place EVERY SINGLE FAILURE or
> INCONVENIENT FACT on Infinity's back. That's where I
> respond, "hmmmmm".

Actually, that is NOT what I am saying. That is how YOU are reading it (not surprised). What I am telling you is that you, since this needs to be explained to you, is you and others are quick to immediately point the finger at the PD without knowing the facts. I am not on a radio board blaming anyone, like you and a few others. If Infinity, for example, wanted to rollout that crappy Leeza Gibbons show on WQAL, then Allan wouldn't have had a choice. Infinity has a vested interest in this show. They want to see it succeed. If the show doesn't do well in certain markets, then I am sure the PD in those affected markets will have some say whether it stays or goes. There are certain things out of a PD's hands and THAT IS HOW IT IS! Get it through your hardheads already.

> You admitted above that YOU don't know for sure. Nate and I
> (and others) have been making observations, and tying
> together pieces parts from what we read here, from the likes
> of you and chachie.

Right. BUT unlike you and Nate and some others, I am not jumping on someone's ass for something without knowing the facts. YOU ARE! There IS a difference and you damn well know that, too. Stop making yourself look like an ass.

> Might surprise you to know that when I ran my college radio
> station, I told the college president (and dean) to do
> exactly that. You know what happened? They sought my
> guidance even more because I had the connections with the
> Pittsburgh radio people and they didn't. They wanted the
> bigger station, and I had some important cards. Plus I knew
> radio, and they didn't.

So what if you ran a college station? I programmed one, too. Big freaking deal. It's not a major media company with hundreds of billions of dollars invested in radio stations throughout the US. Nice try, Johnny.

As far as "them" not knowing radio, we all know the answer to that. That is not the topic being discussed here.

> It wasn't that different in 1997, or 1967. Corporate
> politics have been the same since merchantilist days. The
> difference now is that there's less corporations in number,
> and more of the plutocracy controlling the "lakefront"
> properties. Therein lies the problem, one which is easily
> fixed. But I digress...

You missed the point. But, I'll explain it to you -- again. Back in 1997 (since I used that year), there were options where you could simply go "across the street". That was the case in almost every market in this country. In this market, you can only do that so many times. Like two (well 3, but I'll refrain from saying anymore about that LOL).

> Funny, John Gorman (the subject of your attack there) is
> still invited to The Conclave--along with Skippy, and Mike
> McVay, and, oh, Allan Fee. So shut it.

Oooh, are we getting a little testy there, JM? You don't like being challenged by someone who actually knows what the hell he's talking about in regards to this format, don't ya?

> Not really. Still alot of streets left--and more opening up
> on satellite. That's where Johnny Williams went, and now
> he's back in terrestrial radio in Detroit. Unless you mean
> the "streets" are Infinity and Clear Channel. Plus, look at
> your average non-compete nowadays.

Well, if you want to throw sattelite in there, that's fine, but you're stretching now to TRY to make a point. We're talking terrestrial radio and you know it.

> Neener, neener, WQAL...neener, neener.

Well, WQAL can say "neener, neener" to the company's possible idea (if there was one) to bring a "JACK-like" format to this market. The numbers were terrible. But I am sure we'll still see people who insist that a format like that will come here and land on 104.1. Even though that format is not holding it's weight, per se.

> Oh, I wouldn't be so sure of that last statement. Get
> enough outrage in Congress and it will change. Remember,
> that's all that stands in the way of dropping this
> plutocracy like a house of cards. In fact, not even
> Congress--a change of a two seats on the FCC can do it.

Well, hold your breath then.

> Which is one (of a number) plus that Infinity has over CC.
> CC likes to use voicetracking; Infinity likes to use live
> jocks, regardless of talent. I prefer live quality jocks,
> but we can't have everything, can we? What is it you say?
> Oh yeah--economics...and no balls.

Your key word there is "quality". We agree there. But, I have purposely not even touched on talent because I am not perfect.

> No one said otherwise.

You just wait. Someone will.

> Ah, radio elitism again. No one even mentioned 12+ books.
> But you couldn't resist the dig, could you?

Again, just wait. Someone will.

> I last listened to WQAL for any length of time two months
> ago. I don't need constant surveying to crap to form an
> opinion.

If you haven't listened then why are you even commenting? Geez. Maybe I should start stating how much country stations suck -- although I haven't listened to them. This reminds me of the people on the Columbus board who consistently slam WNCI. But, yet haven't listened to it in months/years AND don't know CHR. Anyone and anything related to WNCI gets slammed by several people. It's the same thing on here with WQAL.

You seem pretty knowledgeable on the history of events in this market and when it comes to news/talk. But you really need to stop acting like you know it all when it comes to every format, because you don't -- at least when it comes to CHR and Hot AC.

> That's not saying much for their other stations.

And has I have stated before, Hot AC is a very difficult format to program. But, a market like Cleveland DOES need a HAC programmed like WQAL. The station is doing well in its' demo and its' billing. That's what they are worried about. And I find it funny those who complain about Q104, but then state they wouldn't program it. Oh, really? Then STFU.

 

[chacha]

Re: Let Me Correct You, Part ????

I didn't know that nate & JM were esteemed college radio programmers.
Surely, their insights must be correct. apologies.

Let's lynch Fee and Luczak and if we can entice Johnny Williams
to come back to Q104, and Gorman to WMMS....it'll all be great
just like it used to be.

 

[JohnnyMorganWXJX]

Re: Let Me Correct You, Part ????

> I didn't know that nate & JM were esteemed college radio
> programmers.
> Surely, their insights must be correct. apologies.

Knock off the crap. I have never claimed to be an esteemed radio programmer. And the fact that I programmed college radio (and ran the station) was used as illustrative of my "standing up" to management and for no other purpose.

> Let's lynch Fee and Luczak and if we can entice Johnny
> Williams
> to come back to Q104, and Gorman to WMMS....it'll all be
> great
> just like it used to be.
>

I have never advocated lynching anyone--physically or professionally.

Would I like Luczak and Fee to program differently? Sure. But they believe their program decisions are correct and well-founded. So be it. I disagree and think things can be better.

Does John Gorman deserve a place in this market? Absolutely.

And someone must think highly of Johnny Williams--he's been hired in Detroit, a market he hasn't worked in for almost 20 years. He's still remembered here, by the way.

 

[JohnnyMorganWXJX]

Re: This Is Getting Boring

If it's boring, then let's leave it alone. We have staked out our respective sides. However, there are some personal things I'd like to address here.

> Actually, that is NOT what I am saying. That is how YOU are
> reading it (not surprised). What I am telling you is that
> you, since this needs to be explained to you, is you and
> others are quick to immediately point the finger at the PD
> without knowing the facts.

No, I'm pointing the finger at a PD overseeing a shotty operation. If Leeza's poor show wasn't there, Q104 would still be a poorly-run station, just sans Leesa.

Look, it comes down to this: either Allan Fee is a PD worthy of acclaim and criticism for programming decisions, or he's a corporate PD subject to programming decisions higher up. Either way is fine--just direct the scorn and praise appropriately.

> Get it through your
> hardheads already.

Thanks for the complement. Hardheaded is probably the LEAST offensive of the things I've been called on this board, or possible in your head.

> Right. BUT unlike you and Nate and some others, I am not
> jumping on someone's ass for something without knowing the
> facts. YOU ARE! There IS a difference and you damn well
> know that, too. Stop making yourself look like an ass.

I'm jumping on Fee's ass for running a station poorly. I tend to believe that he's a decent local PD who can operate in relative autonomy. As such, I believe the success, failure, good, bad, and sound of the station rests on his shoulders.

> So what if you ran a college station? I programmed one,
> too. Big freaking deal. It's not a major media company
> with hundreds of billions of dollars invested in radio
> stations throughout the US. Nice try, Johnny.

Not my illustrative point. I was only showing an anecdote that I have, and contend one can, stand up to management if one has talent or skills necessary and needed by the "bosses".

And no, it wasn't a major media company with hundreds of billions of dollars invested; it was a small liberal arts college with about a million dropped into the radio station, and wanting results. But the effect is the same--we had some people we were responsible to (the Board of Trustees).

> You missed the point. But, I'll explain it to you -- again.

I appreciate your taking the time to explain it again.

> > Funny, John Gorman (the subject of your attack there) is
> > still invited to The Conclave--along with Skippy, and Mike
>
> > McVay, and, oh, Allan Fee. So shut it.
>
> Oooh, are we getting a little testy there, JM? You don't
> like being challenged by someone who actually knows what the
> hell he's talking about in regards to this format, don't ya?

I'm not getting testy at all. You and others love to rip on Gorman. I'm just providing some facts that you may not have known or conveniently left out. Facts which undermine your premise that Gorman is old news.

Your knowledge of the format lacks foundation as of now. If you wish to enlighten us, fine. But without further evidence other than your assertions, I can only take your word that you're acquainted with the format.

> Well, if you want to throw sattelite in there, that's fine,
> but you're stretching now to TRY to make a point. We're
> talking terrestrial radio and you know it.

I was making an illustrative point. I know we're talking about terrestrial radio. I mention satellite ONCE (in passing) in this whole thread. You can do better.

> > Neener, neener, WQAL...neener, neener.
>
> Well, WQAL can say "neener, neener" to the company's
> possible idea (if there was one) to bring a "JACK-like"
> format to this market. The numbers were terrible. But I am
> sure we'll still see people who insist that a format like
> that will come here and land on 104.1. Even though that
> format is not holding it's weight, per se.

Agreed. But that still is an outstanding (as in, still available) idea for Infinity. Remember, only Infinity, of all the big companies, has a special separate corporate VP for JACK Programming.

> > Which is one (of a number) plus that Infinity has over CC.
>
> > CC likes to use voicetracking; Infinity likes to use live
> > jocks, regardless of talent. I prefer live quality jocks,
>
> > but we can't have everything, can we? What is it you say?
>
> > Oh yeah--economics...and no balls.
>
> Your key word there is "quality". We agree there. But, I
> have purposely not even touched on talent because I am not
> perfect.

Nor am I. But that's why (and how) we can criticize from the sidelines. Many of us anonymously (like yourself).

> > Ah, radio elitism again. No one even mentioned 12+ books.
>
> > But you couldn't resist the dig, could you?
>
> Again, just wait. Someone will.

Probably. And they have a slight hint of truth to them (the 12+ numbers have *some* redeeming value--not so much for WQAL, however). But we ALL know the demo is important.

> > I last listened to WQAL for any length of time two months
> > ago. I don't need constant surveying to crap to form an
> > opinion.
>
> If you haven't listened then why are you even commenting?

Because I can't stand to listen anymore than that. It doesn't sound good to me. That "not good" bit is what I criticize.

> You seem pretty knowledgeable on the history of events in
> this market and when it comes to news/talk.

Thank you for the complement. And I like to think I'm knowledgeable about oldies too.

And, on the surface, you seem knowledgable about these younger formats (but see above).

> But you really
> need to stop acting like you know it all when it comes to
> every format, because you don't -- at least when it comes to
> CHR and Hot AC.

I'm not basing anything here on knowledge of the format. (I concede your CHR point, in re: a discussion a few months back.) I am basing my criticism on the station's aural experience and what Fee's PD-ship brings or detracts from it.

> > That's not saying much for their other stations.
>
> And has I have stated before, Hot AC is a very difficult
> format to program.

I agree with that, and always have.

> But, a market like Cleveland DOES need a
> HAC programmed like WQAL.

Just clarification for me: do you mean a Hot AC like WQAL (cf. Mix, which you contend is not a Hot AC), or one programmed like WQAL? If the latter, I must disagree. If the former, I tend to agree--assuming, for the moment, your contention about Mix.

> The station is doing well in its'
> demo and its' billing. That's what they are worried about.
> And I find it funny those who complain about Q104, but then
> state they wouldn't program it. Oh, really? Then STFU.

I don't think this last point (STFU--I hate that acronym anyway) is worthwhile, nor productive, nor at all related to what we're talking about here.

But I will take it in stride and make this my last post on the topic.

And thanks for being (somewhat) civil.

 

[NeilParks]

Salty language in a book

> Of course this is Mike's recollection...along with others
> who were there. It goes on..."Luczak's bullsh*t had
> alienated much of the community and after three years he
> still didn't have a clue as to what the station should sound
> like.".

> ... Great book.
> I recommend it to those who want to learn more about
> Cleveland radio from 1968-1997, especially WMMS.

If the book's author cannot express his ideas without resorting to such vulgar language, then I have no desire to read anything he writes.

There's an old saying: "Profanity is the crutch of a conversational cripple."

 

[nate81]

Re: Let Me Correct You, Part ????

> > Let's lynch Fee and Luczak and if we can entice Johnny Williams
> > to come back to Q104, and Gorman to WMMS....it'll all be great
> > just like it used to be.

I second Johnny. Cut the crap now. I MEAN IT.

I only want better programmers at both stations, and if you magically consider a firing as a "lynching," then you have more of a warped view than is deserved. Shut up.

> Would I like Luczak and Fee to program differently? Sure.
> But they believe their program decisions are correct and
> well-founded. So be it. I disagree and think things can be
> better.

As do I. I could program both WQAL and WKNR better than either Fee or Luczak - and with my eyes closed, to boot. Plus, it's not that hard a task. First off, I don't want the AMD slot on WQAL, nor do I want to be WKNR's imaging voice. Both count as instant upgrades.

> Does John Gorman deserve a place in this market?
> Absolutely.

John's still got *it* as a programmer. I'd love to see him at any specific station, and he'd turn it to gold. See past examples in WMMS (twice!), WNCX and WMJI. Only thing is, he'd never work for either Infinity, CC, Radio One or Salem. That whittles it down significantly.

> And someone must think highly of Johnny Williams--he's been
> hired in Detroit, a market he hasn't worked in for almost 20
> years. He's still remembered here, by the way.

Congrats to Johnny. He deserves it.

- nate81<P ID="signature">______________
Nathan Obral
University Partnership Representative: LCCC Student Senate, Elyria, Ohio

Soon-to-be-webmaster - http://www.lcccradio.com</P>

 

[bigwoody]

Re: This Is Getting Boring

Warning...can of worms possibly being opened:

Everyone has opinions about the business of radio, which is what it is. It's not about art...sadly, anymore. Some companies still stress the art of radio, but not many. I digress. Here's a question. Of those commenting how many have worked in commercial radio, are currently in the business and of those who've been in the business, commenting on this board, have programmed a radio station?


<P ID="signature">______________
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.</P><P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by bigwoody on 10/21/05 09:13 PM.</FONT></P>

 

[bigwoody]

Re: Salty language in a book

> > Of course this is Mike's recollection...along with others
> > who were there. It goes on..."Luczak's bullsh*t had
> > alienated much of the community and after three years he
> > still didn't have a clue as to what the station should
> sound
> > like.".
>
> > ... Great book.
> > I recommend it to those who want to learn more about
> > Cleveland radio from 1968-1997, especially WMMS.
>
> If the book's author cannot express his ideas without
> resorting to such vulgar language, then I have no desire to
> read anything he writes.
>
> There's an old saying: "Profanity is the crutch of a
> conversational cripple."
>

What?!? That's bullsh*t! Sorry, but you asked for it. Seriously, the author was quoting the person, that's why the "profanity" was used. <P ID="signature">______________
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.</P>

 

[JohnnyMorganWXJX]

Re: This Is Getting Boring

> Warning...can of worms possibly being opened:
>
> Everyone has opinions about the business of radio, which is
> what it is. It's not about art...sadly, anymore. Some
> companies still stress the art of radio, but not many. I
> digress. Here's a question. Of those commenting how many
> have worked in commercial radio, are currently in the
> business and of those who've been in the business,
> commenting on this board, have programmed a radio station?
>

Was in the business, have programmed (and GM-ed) a radio station. Not commercial.

 

[bigwoody]

Re: Let Me Correct You, Part ????

> And someone must think highly of Johnny Williams--he's been
> hired in Detroit, a market he hasn't worked in for almost 20
> years. He's still remembered here, by the way.
>


Johnny Williams. A face for radio if there ever was one. But what a Voice! Big, warm pipes.<P ID="signature">______________
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.</P>

 

[bigwoody]

Re: Let Me Correct You, Part ????

WHK HAD a great VO for the station in Mike Urben. But I heard Luczak was a bit..."mercurial" to deal with. I know Mike. Salt of the earth. Small world this business. He's not hurting. Salem's NT VP loves him. He's still on about 5 other Salem talk stations including Atlanta. .<P ID="signature">______________
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.</P><P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by bigwoody on 10/21/05 09:27 PM.</FONT></P>

 

[bigwoody]

Re: This Is Getting Boring

> > Warning...can of worms possibly being opened:
> >
> > Everyone has opinions about the business of radio, which
> is
> > what it is. It's not about art...sadly, anymore. Some
> > companies still stress the art of radio, but not many. I
> > digress. Here's a question. Of those commenting how many
> > have worked in commercial radio, are currently in the
> > business and of those who've been in the business,
> > commenting on this board, have programmed a radio station?
>
> >
>
> Was in the business, have programmed (and GM-ed) a radio
> station. Not commercial.
>

It can be quite different when there's $$$ at stake. One thing I've learned is that the only thing that changes from station to station, market to market, is the amount of money at stake. The bigger the market the more dollars at stake, which usually means more conservative homogenized radio. Sad but true. Not always but a good percentage of the time. Smaller markets for the most part have less at stake and can take more chances. Usually results in some great radio. Talent can be open and free to experiment. Same goes for programmers. Toledo is a good example, though it's really a Top 50 (even though rated at 85). Toledo has some good radio, both by Cumulus and CC. WIOT bills about 8 million. That's not small potatoes. That's more than two stations I worked for in Raleigh, mkt 43! <P ID="signature">______________
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.</P>

 

[chacha]

Re: Let Me Correct You, Part ????

>
> As do I. I could program both WQAL and WKNR better than
> either Fee or Luczak - and with my eyes closed, to boot.
> Plus, it's not that hard a task. First off, I don't want the
> AMD slot on WQAL, nor do I want to be WKNR's imaging voice.
> Both count as instant upgrades.


Hahahahaha Okay, I get it! Good luck.
By the way, would you do it with your eyes closed??

 

[chacha]

Re: This Is Getting Boring

>
>
> Was in the business, have programmed (and GM-ed) a radio
> station. Not commercial.
>

JM, I must admit your insights are rational, well thought out, and interesting,
but quite honestly (and sadly), the game changes DRAMATICALLY when it is commercial and billing is the livelihood of the station.

Unfortunately, its not all about big ratings like in the old days.....thats why you see stations with very low numbers (WPLJ/NY, STAR/LA) continue on in a low rated format due to very strong billing. Corporations are not willing to risk it on a programming idea.

You've got to give some credit to these major market programmers (especially those saddled with tougher formats) who continue to fight it out book after book.It's a tough gig when you cant just go with instinct. It used to be much easier.
I think many programmers would like to fight it out like the John Gorman's; Steve Kingston's; Steve Rivers'; and Randy Kabrich's of the world...but that animal simply is extinct. Those guys dont compete in the trenches anymore. They can't. They are the Johnny Unitas' and Joe Namath's the 5'11" 180lb quarterbacks...great in their day....too small now. And the one's from that era who have lasted have learned to turn it down a few notches with management.
Just the state of the union these days.

 

[JohnnyMorganWXJX]

Re: This Is Getting Boring

> >
> >
> > Was in the business, have programmed (and GM-ed) a radio
> > station. Not commercial.
> >
>
> JM, I must admit your insights are rational, well thought
> out, and interesting,
> but quite honestly (and sadly), the game changes
> DRAMATICALLY when it is commercial and billing is the
> livelihood of the station.

I appreciate your kind comments, and I apologize for any negative tone or vitriol I directed your way.

I do understand the difference between commercial and non-comm in the money aspect. And that is truly one thing that we didn't have to encounter. We had our people to answer to (the Trustees wanted SOME return on their investment, but there was only so much we could do in that interim state--10 watts going to 1.9kw).

> You've got to give some credit to these major market
> programmers (especially those saddled with tougher formats)
> who continue to fight it out book after book.It's a tough
> gig when you cant just go with instinct. It used to be much
> easier.

I do give Allan Fee and Mike Luczak and others with whom I may disagree. They have jobs, which is more than can be said for others in the market. But I still think that they could program better, or someone could do it better. But I never begrudge their current employment. It means they are good--but not necessarily great, or very good.

(See Mike, I'm not troubled...)

> I think many programmers would like to fight it out like the
> John Gorman's; Steve Kingston's; Steve Rivers'; and Randy
> Kabrich's of the world...but that animal simply is extinct.
> Those guys dont compete in the trenches anymore. They
> can't. They are the Johnny Unitas' and Joe Namath's the
> 5'11" 180lb quarterbacks...great in their day....too small
> now. And the one's from that era who have lasted have
> learned to turn it down a few notches with management.
> Just the state of the union these days.
>

True, and it's a shame. Though I do think Gorman could fight it out nowadays, with a small ownership group running things. He's probably not a CC/CBS/Salem/Radio One corporate guy. But a Gorman station would still kick ass, and would have great promotions.