Strategy Questions

[doc9464]

Thinking back to a recent thread in the Boston board where painful decisions would have to be made to provide decent signals for the area.....and thinking about the statement AAR management made recently (i paraphrase) they are covering approxmately 70% of the USA made me think about some key strategies...


1) AAR has not gotten the best CC/entercom/other vendor channels...should another push be made to purchase some key stations that may be up for sale that have sufficent wattage to cover areas where the current coverage just isn't enough?
I can think of areas in the south/midwest where AAR isnt currently heard...so is there a chance to get a St. Louis station with big wattage? a New Orleans/Birmingham/Atlanta station with big wattage? a Dallas/Houston station with big wattage? a Florida station with big wattage? Im not sure, but Id like to see AAR create regional giants in key parts of the country? With Al moving to back to Minneapolis...i would like to see Randi broadcasting out of a "Fla giant", Al broadcasting out of Minn for now (no need to create a Minn giant if he is going to run for office)...Mike Malloy already runs out of Atlanta...but if it was AAR home ground it would be great...and attract other hosts (for example..let Bernie Ward broadcast of of a "Northern CA giant"?) Would developing some "core stations" be a good strategy for the future?

2) Is it time to slow expansion for "expansions sake" and convert some capital to improving some of the stations.....or give greater assistance to affiliates to improve signal where possible. Would taking some stations to FM make sense as well if suitable AM is not available? (Boston may be one candidate for FM signal if a suitable solution is not found quickly for the two AM nightmares - WRNI in providence may be an option if BU is willing to sell and it can be upgraded)

3) With all of the programming additions, is it time to carefully evaluate the viability of the current programming model? I know the conservatives/others think AAR programing is bad but its it time to take a true HONEST evaluation of whats being offered? For example, who will become the "core" AAR person when Al leaves? I hope Randi or will it be an existing successful Liberal host...? I feel its time to take a real grade and develop a clear strategy for the next 3-5 years....using the profitability measure (scheduled for 2006) it would be a good time to then assess how to grow further once fiscal viability is established.

More musings, thoughts, and sincere comments (and not programming flames) are welcomed...

 

[jh]

> Thinking back to a recent thread in the Boston board where
> painful decisions would have to be made to provide decent
> signals for the area.....and thinking about the statement
> AAR management made recently (i paraphrase) they are
> covering approxmately 70% of the USA made me think about
> some key strategies...
>
>
> 1) AAR has not gotten the best CC/entercom/other vendor
> channels...should another push be made to purchase some key
> stations that may be up for sale that have sufficent wattage
> to cover areas where the current coverage just isn't enough?

Since AAR is really only syndicating programs to local stations, I don't think it would make a lot of sense at this point to get into station ownership.

If they want to upgrade their stations, they will probably have to do it they way every other syndicator does... by having a proven track record that will make a larger station want to drop what they're doing and replace it with a program from AAR.

An example: Limbaugh years ago was on a little station in the St. Louis market that didn't amount to much. (actually it was across the river in Illinois) KMOX, the 50,000 watt blowtorch wasn't interested. After a couple of years, the little station was actually beating KMOX in a couple of demos during the time Limbaugh was on. That got KMOX interested, and when the contract came up for renewal, KMOX picked up Limbaugh. Same thing happened in a lot of markets, and that's what will need to happen with AAR, too.


> 2) Is it time to slow expansion for "expansions sake" and
> convert some capital to improving some of the
> stations.....or give greater assistance to affiliates to
> improve signal where possible. Would taking some stations to
> FM make sense as well if suitable AM is not available?

Talk (and sports) tend to be on AM because they're formats that will work on AM. There are only a handful of talk stations on FM, although there are more and more all the time. CC has AAR on an FM in Madison WI and liberal (non-AAR) programs in San Antonio.

> (Boston may be one candidate for FM signal if a suitable
> solution is not found quickly for the two AM nightmares -

Only if there's an FM unsuccessful in what they're doing. And only if AAR programming is available... right now, it's still under contract to CC.


> 3) With all of the programming additions, is it time to
> carefully evaluate the viability of the current programming
> model?

Are there any stations taking AAR 24/7? It can't be very many, if any.
They need to concentrate on improving the performance of their top shows, and get them on more and better stations. That might mean give up on 24-hour programming and using some of that time refeeding the top shows (such as a refeed of Randy Rhodes in the evening for stations that don't run her in the afternoon in favor of Ed Schultz.) They've already given up on the three hours Unfiltered was on, and replaced it with Jerry Springer, which is produced by someone else.

 

[Tom_]

Re: Signal Strength and Progressive Talk stations...

In determing coverage area, it is not only the wattage but also:

1 - the dial position...For a given wattage (e.g. 5,000 watts), the groundwave (daytime) decreases as you move up the dial while the skywave (night) increases as you move up the dial...In other words, you're better off with 5,000 watts on 570kHz than 1590kHz...

2 - the city of license...A station may be licensed to a smaller suburb secondary to the major metropolitan area, and therefore may not reach the entire Arbitron survey area (i.e. both the major city and the city of license...)

3 - the nightime power and direction...Some AM stations have to reduce power and/or change the pattern at night...This may or may not signficantly affect reception in a given market and depends on a variety of local circumstances...

FCC:
"Why AM Radio Stations Must Reduce Power, Change Operations, or Cease Operations at Night"

http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/daytime.html

4 - the ground conductivity - Varies tremendously across the US. A 1,000 watt station in the Central California valley (e.g. progressive talk AM 1240 KSAC Sacramento) outperforms a 1,000 watt station on Quaternary glacial sediments in parts of the northern US...

FCC map:
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/m3/

5 - Some channels can't increase their power beyond a certain point due to FCC rules, for example, "Class C" stations can't go above 1,000 watts:
1230,1240,1340,1400,1450,1490

List of all channels and their class and maximal power:

http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/amclasses.html#CLEAR

Final comment: Clear Channel, Entercom, Infinity, Citadel, etc. own many of the Class A and Class B 50,000 watt stations. However, that is not necessarily a problem for progressive talk, since if you're a small town with 5,000 watts day and 1,000 watts night with few nulls over market area and good ground conductivity, you might be OK.

On the other hand, 50,000 watt stations do not necessarily cover the entire area. For example, I've noticed from the FCC web site that 1150 KTLK Los Angeles has several nulls. However, I don't live there so I don't know how much that may be affecting their potential ratings if they didn't have these nulls. And, Air Americal 1090 Seattle 50,000 watts cuts back to the eastern suburbs at night, but again, I don't know if their current ratings would be different if they did not have several nulls NE-SE.

Much more could be said about engineering issues and strategies for increasing power. Clear Channel's Portland's Progressive Talk 620 KPOJ Portland is 25kW day and 10kW night (as of late 2004) and since it is low on the dial covers all the way from Seattle to Eugene, Oregon.

 

[gr8oldies]

Re: Signal Strength and Progressive Talk stations...

There really are o short cuts for AAR. As the above poster said, their individual shows will have to develop enough of a track record for larger stations to be interested. AAR isn't a "missionary outpost" "spreading the good news of liberalism to the great unwashed". It's a business that has to operate the way every other similar business operates.


> In determing coverage area, it is not only the wattage but
> also:
>
> 1 - the dial position...For a given wattage (e.g. 5,000
> watts), the groundwave (daytime) decreases as you move up
> the dial while the skywave (night) increases as you move up
> the dial...In other words, you're better off with 5,000
> watts on 570kHz than 1590kHz...
>
> 2 - the city of license...A station may be licensed to a
> smaller suburb secondary to the major metropolitan area, and
> therefore may not reach the entire Arbitron survey area
> (i.e. both the major city and the city of license...)
>
> 3 - the nightime power and direction...Some AM stations have
> to reduce power and/or change the pattern at night...This
> may or may not signficantly affect reception in a given
> market and depends on a variety of local circumstances...
>
> FCC:
> "Why AM Radio Stations Must Reduce Power, Change Operations,
> or Cease Operations at Night"
>
> http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/daytime.html
>
> 4 - the ground conductivity - Varies tremendously across the
> US. A 1,000 watt station in the Central California valley
> (e.g. progressive talk AM 1240 KSAC Sacramento) outperforms
> a 1,000 watt station on Quaternary glacial sediments in
> parts of the northern US...
>
> FCC map:
> http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/m3/
>
> 5 - Some channels can't increase their power beyond a
> certain point due to FCC rules, for example, "Class C"
> stations can't go above 1,000 watts:
> 1230,1240,1340,1400,1450,1490
>
> List of all channels and their class and maximal power:
>
> http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/amclasses.html#CLEAR
>
> Final comment: Clear Channel, Entercom, Infinity, Citadel,
> etc. own many of the Class A and Class B 50,000 watt
> stations. However, that is not necessarily a problem for
> progressive talk, since if you're a small town with 5,000
> watts day and 1,000 watts night with few nulls over market
> area and good ground conductivity, you might be OK.
>
> On the other hand, 50,000 watt stations do not necessarily
> cover the entire area. For example, I've noticed from the
> FCC web site that 1150 KTLK Los Angeles has several nulls.
> However, I don't live there so I don't know how much that
> may be affecting their potential ratings if they didn't have
> these nulls. And, Air Americal 1090 Seattle 50,000 watts
> cuts back to the eastern suburbs at night, but again, I
> don't know if their current ratings would be different if
> they did not have several nulls NE-SE.
>
> Much more could be said about engineering issues and
> strategies for increasing power. Clear Channel's Portland's
> Progressive Talk 620 KPOJ Portland is 25kW day and 10kW
> night (as of late 2004) and since it is low on the dial
> covers all the way from Seattle to Eugene, Oregon.
>
<P ID="signature">______________
I'll get back to you when I think of a cute quote</P>