• 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

The Long Nightmare Is Over (KTHT Sold)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Loverofradio said:
Is that just radio? Just asking out of curiosity? How’s does Nexstar/Mission get away with that (not trying to get off topic)
Click to expand...

Essentially the same way I mentioned above. While I understand not all Nexstar/Mission shared services agreements work exactly the same, the basic formula is Nexstar owns its station plus the non license assets of the Mission property. Mission owns the license and leases the non license property from Nexstar. Nexstar's sales reps get the commission for selling time on the Mission station. Mission keeps the remaining revenue from the sale. Mission also will, in some situations, allow Nexstar to air news on its properties. In those cases, either Nexstar pays Mission to put its news programming on its property and keeps the ad revenue, or Mission pays Nexstar for using its news staff and keeps the ad revenue from the newscast.

Keep in mind, deals like this make more sense from a TV perspective than they do for radio. TV spots typically command higher rates than radio spots, and TV stations also usually get retrans revenue from cable and satellite providers. Nexstar and Mission typically negotiate retrans fees as a team, which will usually command a higher price than if individual stations were negotiating. Those factors tend to make the FCC red tape and the extra record keeping and accounting worth their while. A deal involving one or two radio stations across town usually isn’t worth the trouble.
 
stan said:
Ruining radio one station at a time.
Click to expand...
Money talks. If you had 3.1 million to spend, you too could program KTHT however you’d like! But, EMF was the only one to show up to the table with a bag of cash, so they get the station.

I’m glad it’s going to EMF, at least they will run a good facility with programming that will be well received by the local population. It could have gone to one of the Guel-affiliated clowns, with 7 HD subcarriers and a 2 megawatt transmitter.
 
Last edited:
Do you know when Educational Media Foundation will take the station over?

Not sure why there's all this animosity towards EMF. There are lots of classic country stations in other markets broadcasting online, and even internet only stations with the format.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
tb_ said:
Money talks. If you had 3.1 million to spend, you too could program KTHT however you’d like! But, EMF was the only one to show up to the table with a bag of cash, so they get the station.
Click to expand...

Maybe. Entirely possible, but also possible is that Urban One wasn’t willing to sell KTHT 97.1 to a commercial operator for that price. We'll never know, but commercial broadcasters tend to like the idea of selling properties to people who won’t compete with them.
 
011nerve said:
Not sure why there's all this animosity towards EMF. There are lots of classic country stations in other markets broadcasting online, and even internet only stations with the format.
Click to expand...
Because it’s seemingly constant belly-aching, bemoaning that the Christians are invading the dial one frequency at a time, when really EMF actually provides a well-run service, staffed virtually round-the-clock, and are probably doing other commercial owners a favor in bloated markets (because there are too many signals) to improve the remaining advertising market for the rest of them. (And like Paul’s mentioned before, no one’s held up a gun to the sellers for EMF to buy these stations. My advice: if you personally don’t want to see another Christian station, the first moment you hear of a sale, get some $$$ and investors, and make an offer. But it’s probably easier to just complain behind a keyboard…)
 
ksradiogeek said:
Because it’s seemingly constant belly-aching, bemoaning that the Christians are invading the dial one frequency at a time, when really EMF actually provides a well-run service, staffed virtually round-the-clock, and are probably doing other commercial owners a favor in bloated markets (because there are too many signals) to improve the remaining advertising market for the rest of them. (And like Paul’s mentioned before, no one’s held up a gun to the sellers for EMF to buy these stations. My advice: if you personally don’t want to see another Christian station, the first moment you hear of a sale, get some $$$ and investors, and make an offer. But it’s probably easier to just complain behind a keyboard…)
Click to expand...
As a consequence of what they do and how they've done it, EMF gets to be a symbol of a couple of things.

First, there have been instances when they have bought heritage stations with strong - or once-strong local brands - and have absorbed them into the empire. Let's just say the Borg on Star Trek wouldn't have won any popularity contests, either.

Then, there's the Christian orientation. Even though EMF takes a soft-sell approach that isn't hectoring and that actually seems pretty positive, the growth of the network and its ability to have a nearly-national unified set of programming is enabled by looser regulation on non-commercial entities, including religious ones. To those suspicious of excessive injection of religion into politics and public policy, it's a reminder that Christian entities in this country, or even individuals who claim Christian rationales for otherwise suspect actions, enjoy an enormous number of privileges. At the same, some of those individuals and organizations constantly whine that they're being oppressed - even as more than a few of them try to oppress others of whom they disapprove. It's distasteful and dishonest on their part. EMF is not among those whiners, nor is it oppressing anybody, but the Christian label still makes it a target for criticism. I'm not saying that's right or wrong; I'm just saying that's what happens.
 
Mark Roberts said:
As a consequence of what they do and how they've done it, EMF gets to be a symbol of a couple of things.

First, there have been instances when they have bought heritage stations with strong - or once-strong local brands - and have absorbed them into the empire. Let's just say the Borg on Star Trek wouldn't have won any popularity contests, either.

Then, there's the Christian orientation. Even though EMF takes a soft-sell approach that isn't hectoring and that actually seems pretty positive, the growth of the network and its ability to have a nearly-national unified set of programming is enabled by looser regulation on non-commercial entities, including religious ones. To those suspicious of excessive injection of religion into politics and public policy, it's a reminder that Christian entities in this country, or even individuals who claim Christian rationales for otherwise suspect actions, enjoy an enormous number of privileges. At the same, some of those individuals and organizations constantly whine that they're being oppressed - even as more than a few of them try to oppress others of whom they disapprove. It's distasteful and dishonest on their part. EMF is not among those whiners, nor is it oppressing anybody, but the Christian label still makes it a target for criticism. I'm not saying that's right or wrong; I'm just saying that's what happens.
Click to expand...
Using FCC regulations as an argument for or against Christian oppression is grasping at quite a few straws.
 
stan said:
Ruining radio one station at a time.
Click to expand...
Why is presenting a commercial free and well programmed contemporary Christian format, liked by a significant enough portion of the public, "ruining radio"?

If you don't like it, don't listen. There are many who don't like whatever you like and listen to, but they don't insult your taste in music or radio programming,
 
Nightmare? I'm sorry but that is funny. It's not a nightmare. Dreaming about a head-on car crash would classify as a nightmare. It is what it is; it's business. I agree with David, "if you don't like it, don't listen."
 
MarkW said:
$3.1 million? What a steal for EMF!

I guessed it would sell for closer to $5 million. Perhaps an issue or two came up during due diligence that affected the purchase price?
Click to expand...
Surely you've heard of the 4-word radio creed...
Niches Don't Make Riches

Later....
 
Radio guy said:
Another sign that people can’t sell advertising on Radio.
Click to expand...
Not really. Advertising can be sold if you have the right station or stations for the client, proper creative and something to offer to listeners to make they respond.

A lot of small retail business has been taken by new media where stores, services, restaurants and the like know consumers go now to check out their options. But those small businesses were not radio accounts anyplace but very small markets, even in the past.

Now, the issue is that national and regional services, from franchised or chain veterinarians, dental services and even legal services are placed through agencies and often bypass local radio because it is a lot of work to buy. Big Box stores buy nationally or regionally through agencies, and many, like WalMart or Costco don't buy radio, and if they did, it would be through national agencies, not local direct.

What we have left is local direct that can't be national (For example, car dealers and beer distributors have legal restrictions against being owned by the manufacturer so they do buy locally or regionally) or which are special enough to serve a wide area despite single or few locations.

These are the main reasons why radio revenue, in real dollars, is off about 65% since 2000. It is not about selling, it is about who to sell to. And, with fewer dollars and more difficult sales propositions, good sellers are not attracted to radio sales jobs. It's a classic viscous circle of less dollars and fewer interested sellers.
 
ContinuousWave said:
The tower alone is worth 5-7million
Click to expand...
Good point, although I think your are over by several million. Is the tower part of the deal, or is it owned by a third party and leased?
 
rfburns said:
Tower is owned by American Tower Corp.
Click to expand...
So the vertical real estate is not part of the deal, other than an assumption of the existing lease.
 
DavidEduardo said:
Why is presenting a commercial free and well programmed contemporary Christian format, liked by a significant enough portion of the public, "ruining radio"?

If you don't like it, don't listen. There are many who don't like whatever you like and listen to, but they don't insult your taste in music or radio programming,
Click to expand...
Say what you will, but consider that Houston station. It was owned by a small/medium sized company which should have had the expertise to do local sales…but obviously they couldn’t make it work within the “box” of their expectations for an FM radio station in the #7 market.

Selling the station was inevitable, but to whom? Normally a larger station owner would jump at the chance to have an additional signal, but they’re all having cash flow issues right now. A local owner might be interested, but if the new guy fails the station comes back to them, likely with lower sales projections and depreciated equipment, meaning they can’t ask what they did originally for it.

K-LOVE, with its cash resources, then looks like THE alternative.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Back
Top Bottom