• 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

Re: Springer and WTAM: the first update...

N

nate81

Guest
Re: Springer and WTAM: the first update...

This post, in retrospect, deserves it's own thread. (the previous posts can be seen here and here...)

There's one story in the Cleveland ratings that WTAM doesn't want us to notice.

Jerry Springer's not off to that good a start at WTAM. The guy he replaced, Premiere's Glenn Beck, read off on-air the ratings to a caller from Cleveland that was listening to WHLO. (While also noting WHLO's solid gain - considering the fact it IS an Akron station that isn't geared to the larger market...)


<font color="#000080">[Tony Stark said:]</font>
> Well, I kind of called this below:
>
> http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=494668&Board=cleveland

Not wishing to post the numbers here, let's just say Jerry's getting one-third of what Beck had last in that slot.

> That is not good.

Look at it two ways: either Jerry is tanking in place of Glenn, or it's a decent start for him on his only affil that's a traditional N/T, and not a libtalker. The fall book should be interesting, especally if the Indians continue to tank.

> I'd say your first assumption is true. That's a lot of
> audience to lose. (from what you said) and the mode of
> thinking here was probably that conservatives and fans of
> Beck will still be tuning in to hear what Springer has to
> say anyway. Seems as if this wasn't the case.
>
> How much longer do you all think this Springer-experiment
> will last?

They may want to wait until the next book comes out in the fall before coming to a verdict. But there's no logical way that Methany & Co. can be happy with this. Not one single bit. I'd say that if Jerry flatlines at the current numbers (and it WAS a serious drop, indeed), he can't last the end of the year.

Which brings up an interesting scenario:

Remember that WHLO/640 and WEOL/930, two suburban stations with solid signals, both easily picked up Glenn after the fact. I find it highly doubtful that he would wind up on three (!) stations at the same time. If WTAM were to balk and wants to bring back Glenn, his show could be on both WTAM and WHLO - as is the case with Rush. That would be the safe move.

But here's the *wild* card: Where does that leave WEOL - which isn't a CC station? Even though BOTH WEOL and WHLO had to work to pick up Glenn's show, WEOL, which is closer to Cleveland than WHLO, could very well be the odd N/T out. And they wouldn't be happy at all, nor would I blame them.

The only other option for WTAM is to trot out a local host in the 9-11:30 slot - and that slot hasn't been local on a full-time basis since Rich Micheals got the ax in '97! And who would they insert as a host? Bob Becker? Brad Sussman?

Not all is sunshine and lollipops at 6200 Oaktree...

- nate81<P ID="signature">______________
Nathan Obral
University Partership Representative
Student Senate
Lorain County Community College, Elyria, Ohio

LCCC Radio - The Duck</P>
 
Re: Springer and WTAM: the first update...

> The only other option for WTAM is to trot out a local host
> in the 9-11:30 slot - and that slot hasn't been local on a
> full-time basis since Rich Micheals got the ax in '97! And
> who would they insert as a host? Bob Becker? Brad Sussman?
>

>What about Gilley? ( where is he these days?)
<P ID="signature">______________
Henry Aaron hit 755 career home runs. How many of these were of the "inside the park" variety ?</P>
 
Re: Springer and WTAM: the first update...

If given the opportunity, you know Glenn & co. would go back to 'TAM in a heartbeat and part ways with WEOL by any means necessary.


> This post, in retrospect, deserves it's own thread. (the
> previous posts can be seen here and here...)
>
> There's one story in the Cleveland ratings that WTAM doesn't
> want us to notice.
>
> Jerry Springer's not off to that good a start at WTAM. The
> guy he replaced, Premiere's Glenn Beck, read off on-air the
> ratings to a caller from Cleveland that was listening to
> WHLO. (While also noting WHLO's solid gain - considering the
> fact it IS an Akron station that isn't geared to the larger
> market...)
>
>
> [Tony Stark said:]
> > Well, I kind of called this below:
> >
> >
http> ://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=494668&Board=cleveland
>
>
> Not wishing to post the numbers here, let's just say Jerry's
> getting one-third of what Beck had last in that slot.
>
> > That is not good.
>
> Look at it two ways: either Jerry is tanking in place of
> Glenn, or it's a decent start for him on his only affil
> that's a traditional N/T, and not a libtalker. The fall book
> should be interesting, especally if the Indians continue to
> tank.
>
> > I'd say your first assumption is true. That's a lot of
> > audience to lose. (from what you said) and the mode of
> > thinking here was probably that conservatives and fans of
> > Beck will still be tuning in to hear what Springer has to
> > say anyway. Seems as if this wasn't the case.
> >
> > How much longer do you all think this Springer-experiment
> > will last?
>
> They may want to wait until the next book comes out in the
> fall before coming to a verdict. But there's no logical way
> that Methany & Co. can be happy with this. Not one single
> bit. I'd say that if Jerry flatlines at the current numbers
> (and it WAS a serious drop, indeed), he can't last the end
> of the year.
>
> Which brings up an interesting scenario:
>
> Remember that WHLO/640 and WEOL/930, two suburban stations
> with solid signals, both easily picked up Glenn after the
> fact. I find it highly doubtful that he would wind up on
> three (!) stations at the same time. If WTAM were to balk
> and wants to bring back Glenn, his show could be on both
> WTAM and WHLO - as is the case with Rush. That would be the
> safe move.
>
> But here's the *wild* card: Where does that leave WEOL -
> which isn't a CC station? Even though BOTH WEOL and WHLO had
> to work to pick up Glenn's show, WEOL, which is closer to
> Cleveland than WHLO, could very well be the odd N/T out. And
> they wouldn't be happy at all, nor would I blame them.
>
> The only other option for WTAM is to trot out a local host
> in the 9-11:30 slot - and that slot hasn't been local on a
> full-time basis since Rich Micheals got the ax in '97! And
> who would they insert as a host? Bob Becker? Brad Sussman?
>
> Not all is sunshine and lollipops at 6200 Oaktree...
>
> - nate81
>
 
Re: Springer and WTAM: the first update...

You could have written the same thread about Glenn Beck after his first ratings period in Cleveland...look it up, his ratings were not very good and people were saying the exact same thing. Keep in mind, Beck had done radio before, and still hadn't done well. Jerry is further handicapped that he's leading into a show that would have ZERO followers listening in early. I highly doubt WTAM is that nervous - Springer is doing well in other markets. They'll probably conclude that they aren't doing enough to promote him (although I would argue that's the farthest from the truth).
 
Re: Springer and WTAM: the first update...

> >What about Gilley? ( where is he these days?)
>

Out of radio, for the time being, and taking care of his ailing parents, last I heard.

Don't know if it's common knowledge, but I heard from an Oak Tree source that Rick Gilmour was offered the WHLO/Akron morning drive host position (before Quinn & Rose, or even before Bill Hall maybe).

Offered salary: medium market, morning drive, 5 years experience at WTAM plus his WERE and WCSB years...you'd think, what, maybe 40k.

Gilly was offered $18,000.

If they offer that to experienced local hosts, what do they expect?
 
Re: Springer and WTAM: the first update...

> > The only other option for WTAM is to trot out a local host
>
> > in the 9-11:30 slot - and that slot hasn't been local on a
>
> > full-time basis since Rich Micheals got the ax in '97! And
>
> > who would they insert as a host? Bob Becker? Brad Sussman?
>
> >
>
> >What about Gilley? ( where is he these days?)
>
I love how people in radio (or think they are in radio) are ready to drop a program after one or two surveys of ratings. If that were the case, WHLO would have never made it. It has taken WHLO a few years to start really making some headway into mainstream radio competition in Akron. However, now, WHLO is a player in Akron (and Canton.) Kevin Metheny, regardless of what people say, is a great programming mind. He understands that it takes time to get a show (or station) off the ground. Talk radio takes at least twice as long to build an audience as music because you have to get used to a show.

I applaud Clear Channel for "mixin' it up" a little. The strategy of talk stations the past few years has been to polarize programming like a music format. Does it really need to be that way to succeed? WTAM is trying to mix the different types of listeners to reach out to more people. Some like Rush and not Triv. And vice versa. Some tune in for sports and Tribe, not political talk.

Shadow
 
Re: Springer and WTAM: the first update...

> You could have written the same thread about Glenn Beck
> after his first ratings period in Cleveland...look it up,
> his ratings were not very good and people were saying the
> exact same thing. Keep in mind, Beck had done radio before,
> and still hadn't done well. Jerry is further handicapped
> that he's leading into a show that would have ZERO followers
> listening in early. I highly doubt WTAM is that nervous -
> Springer is doing well in other markets. They'll probably
> conclude that they aren't doing enough to promote him
> (although I would argue that's the farthest from the truth).

I believe you're incorrect. Beck inherited Dr. Laura's 9-noon spot in a shortly post-9/11 era. He more than doubled numbers among men in the first two books. The fact that Springer is a little wet behind the ears in not an excuse; it means he shouldn't be on the radio. Just like buffoons such as Jerry Doyle who have never sat behind a mic yet suddenly are on 200 stations. That's another story...
 
Re: Springer and WTAM: the first update...

I've talked to people who were at WTAM when they went to Beck, and they maintained that TAM was largely disappointed with Beck in the first two ratings periods - and then they got the big promotional machine going.

Also, your logic about Jerry being a new radio host and therefore he has no business in radio...doesn't quite make sense? Were people born as radio hosts?? or did they get a first shot?...please elaborate.
 
Re: Springer and WTAM: the first update...

> I've talked to people who were at WTAM when they went to
> Beck, and they maintained that TAM was largely disappointed
> with Beck in the first two ratings periods - and then they
> got the big promotional machine going.
>
> Also, your logic about Jerry being a new radio host and
> therefore he has no business in radio...doesn't quite make
> sense? Were people born as radio hosts?? or did they get a
> first shot?...please elaborate.

I would have to agree with you here. People AREN'T born to be radio hosts - look at Triv! (Okay, bad example...)

Jerry has some things going for him, most notably his past as a political figure in Cincinnati, and his broadcast experience as a newscaster-turned-commentator-turned-"trash TV" talk show host. Not only that, it would be insane to imply that Jerry doesn't want to reenter politics.

But when 1) the guy he replaced, Glenn Beck, is siphoning away listeners via WHLO and WEOL; 2) there's another lib talker in WARF's Stepanie Miller that may also siphon away listeners who just may prefer HER show over his; and 3) his first book has 1/3 of Glenn's last audience at WTAM, it's not a good sign. IMHO.

OA has hypothesised in his blog that if any station could recoup this slow start, it's WTAM - with the best signal of all the Cleveland stations. Perhaps. But it's also very well likely that the aformentions elements could work to derail the 1100 Springer Express...

- nate81<P ID="signature">______________
Nathan Obral
University Partership Representative
Student Senate
Lorain County Community College, Elyria, Ohio

LCCC Radio - The Duck</P>
 
Re: Springer and WTAM: the first update...

> OA has hypothesised in his blog that if any station could
> recoup this slow start, it's WTAM - with the best signal of
> all the Cleveland stations. Perhaps. But it's also very well
> likely that the aformentions elements could work to derail
> the 1100 Springer Express...

Well, in that little missive of mine, it's basically numbers: No other Cleveland market AM station could survive throwing off roughly 2/3rds of its listeners in any given time slot. Heck, many of the FMs couldn't!

If Springer works at all, it's because WTAM can put its muscle behind him, much like it did when Glenn Beck took over that slot in 2001. But as I also noted in the blog, Springer's just not (IMHO) a very good host. He's not *awful*, but he's mediocre.

-OA<P ID="signature">______________
Ohio Media Watch - <a target="_blank" href=http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com>http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com</a></P>
 
Re: Springer and WTAM: the first update...

> > OA has hypothesised in his blog that if any station could
> > recoup this slow start, it's WTAM - with the best signal
> of
> > all the Cleveland stations. Perhaps. But it's also very
> well
> > likely that the aformentions elements could work to derail
>
> > the 1100 Springer Express...
>
> Well, in that little missive of mine, it's basically
> numbers: No other Cleveland market AM station could survive
> throwing off roughly 2/3rds of its listeners in any given
> time slot. Heck, many of the FMs couldn't!
>
> If Springer works at all, it's because WTAM can put its
> muscle behind him, much like it did when Glenn Beck took
> over that slot in 2001. But as I also noted in the blog,
> Springer's just not (IMHO) a very good host. He's not
> *awful*, but he's mediocre.
>
> -OA
> I heard Springer broadcasting from London this morning on 1100. i was extremely surprised at how logical he sounded, and how he was on top of the breaking story of the seige at the home of one of the London bombing suspects, hearkening back to his news anchor days at channel 12 in Cincy before he was Mayor. Then he started to sound like Jerry the whiner that we have come to know sinc ehe bgan his radio show during the Schaivo fiasco. at 930, I couldn't stomach nay more and switched over to Qunii and Rose on 640--david5258
 
Re: Springer and WTAM: the first update...

> Also, your logic about Jerry being a new radio host and
> therefore he has no business in radio...doesn't quite make
> sense? Were people born as radio hosts?? or did they get a
> first shot?...please elaborate.

Look at guys like Glenn Beck, Tom Leykis, even Rush... guys that started out in small markets and built their way up. To get a syndicated show right out of the bat seems silly.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom