• 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

Rush will move to WOR in NYC. No other changes.

And you can bet that he and Premiere had to take cuts in pay that reflect the losses in advertisers that they have suffered. He dodged this bullet. For now.
 
He's 60+ years old, his demise has been predicted since the beginning of the Internet. Keep predicting he is almost finished and one day you will be right.

The sticking point here was apparently Hannity, yet Rush is doomed... Got. It.
 
He did not mention anything about pay, just stations that he was on. There are more than the wabc to WOR flip as noted by someone above. 3 years is the other side of the 2016 election, so that is a good deal for Cumulus, getting a short term cheap contract with him. I am tired of the same people saying the same things. on the AM talk.
 
Hannity I a bigger problem for CC. His star is fading at Fox as they realize his brand of following the talking points is not working any more. What do they do with him in the former Cumulus markets??
 
Wing nuts are sooo predictable! Say anything they don't want to hear and they start crying for "evidence." When it's something they do want to hear, no evidence is ever necessary.

Despite the right's regard for the "free market," and by implication "let's make a deal" they still want everyone to assume that Premiere did not sweeten the deal for Cumulus. Maybe they've never bought a car.

Since the right does not like CBS and never has, they will be crowing about how CBS backed down to TWC on retransmission consent fees because, of course, "that's different."

Besides, note the operate phrase "you can bet." This is an assertion of probability, not fact. No evidence required, even in wing-nut world.
 
I'm pretty sure that's what everyone does FredLeonard, but nice work singling out "wing nuts."
For example, I doubt that when you thought of "wing nuts" as your term of choice there, you were needing any more "evidence" because it was something you wanted to hear.
You can bet on that, if you wanna. Because it's pretty much fact.
 
Yes, Fred, while I'm sure the ALLEGATION that Limbaugh is making less is what you want to hear, there is nothing to base this on. He may very well be, but until some proof that is the case emerges, I'll take an assertion to that effect with a grain of salt.
 
What Rush says does not count as "evidence." Rush lies.
Both parties have been pretty tight-lipped about the final deal, with is typical. Unless somebody on this board is on the inside of these negotiations, nobody has "evidence." And if somebody on this board were on the inside, they couldn't say so, so we would not know if it were "evidence."
So, what we have is the fact that the two companies haggled and made a deal. The way negotiations work is Cumulus didn't get the price down as much as they wanted; Premiere didn't get as much as before. That's how negotiations work.
Neither side held all the cards. Rush is a better draw than Huckabee or anybody else Cumulus could put in the time slot. Rush's numbers would suffer if he lost long-standing, heritage, blow-torch conservative talk outlets in a number of key markets. Clear Channel's option most places would be to put Rush on some weak-stick "second tier" AM station or flip an FM music station with better demos. Making a deal was in the interest of both.
Dogmatic ditto-heads don't want to deal with the realities of the radio biz but they exist just the same. Anybody demanding "evidence" of how the biz works just shows they don't have a clue here.
 
Gee, is that how negotiations work. Let me give you another potential scenario: Cumulus realizes they will have several stations in a world of hurt without Rush. So they drop Hannity in order to be able to afford Rush, clear someone they have in house and claim they saved money.

Yes, a deal was in the interest of both, but neither of us know what the terms were. The difference is, unlike you, I'm not pretending to know.
 
umfan said:
Gee, is that how negotiations work. Let me give you another potential scenario: Cumulus realizes they will have several stations in a world of hurt without Rush. So they drop Hannity in order to be able to afford Rush, clear someone they have in house and claim they saved money.

Yes, a deal was in the interest of both, but neither of us know what the terms were. The difference is, unlike you, I'm not pretending to know.
Click to expand...

You lie. I never said "I know" (as you often have). Neither do I share your assumption (stated as fact) that Cumulus' stations would be in a "world of hurt" without Rush, or that Cumulus caved.
 
RadioTalker101 said:
Wrong, these stations would suffer without Rush...
Click to expand...

Probably. The question is how much? If the suffering is ratings numbers, up to a point it wouldn't matter. If the suffering is revenue, that does matter. So, take current station sales revenue (minus the fee to carry the show and figure in the loss of avails and projected income if you could sell those). Given the loss of advertisers for Rush, specifically, and for geriatric talk, in general, Premiere is no longer in position to demand high fees from stations for Rush.

But Dittoheads are true believers - Kool-Aid drinkers, members of the choir in the church of El Rushbo. Much as they pay lip service to business, they don't want to hear that principles of dollars and cents, profit and loss, apply to their hero.
 
Simple reality check, if my station loses Rush that is fine. If my station loses Rush to the station across the street, I am going to lose money and having more avails is not going to solve that issue.

Watch what happens to WABC.

And Fred, you are, like most here, obsessing over his views NOT his business impact.

We got it, he isn't your cup of tea and his audience is moronic... Next point please?
 
I just look at the marketplace, whether it Limbaugh, Mr Ed whatever, I look at it from a business perspective. The "no boundaries neckties, the magazine his wife started, the NFL commentator job, the TV show, the NFL team owner bid,..." not everything Rush has done has worked out, big deal, that is true about a lot of people and their careers. His radio show is a success, but times change and there is not that much revenue coming from radio, with the net, sat radio, TV and so on. It stands to reason that Rush had to take a cut, Hannity did in a way that's for sure. Look at the way Hannity spun it and Mr Ed as well. Nascar and Rodeo are a better way of reaching some of Limbaugh's demographic without the negative risks.
 
There's more revenue in radio today then there was in 2002. It's short of the 2004-2005 peak, but still a lot of dough going around and it's projected to grow, albeit slowly, over the next five years.
 
umfan said:
There's more revenue in radio today then there was in 2002. It's short of the 2004-2005 peak, but still a lot of dough going around and it's projected to grow, albeit slowly, over the next five years.
Click to expand...

Evidence?
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom