• 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

Unlimited Foreign Ownership

One small sentence in the AllAccess coverage of the FCC Commissioners hearing before the Senate Commerce Committee:

Commissioner AJIT PAI ....repeated his call for ending the 25% cap on foreign investment in media.

If that was approved, it would finally allow a realistic buyer for heavily debted companies like Clear Channel. More than 20 years ago, large American companies like Westinghouse and RCA got out of radio ownership. Same with large insurance companies like Nationwide and American Life. The trend lately has been for American companies to sell their corporate headquarters to foreign companies. One example is the former Sears Tower in Chicago. Broadcasting has been restricted to American companies. Rupert Murdoch had to renounce his Australian citizenship and change the entire structure of his company in order to buy US TV stations. Most foreign companies aren't willing to do that, especially given US tax laws. But allowing foreign investment in radio would change all that.

What could this lead to? Countries like Qatar, who recently bought Current, to buy broadcast radio and TV stations. Companies like Sony and Vivendi, who own major record labels, to buy US radio stations. Before 1988, record labels like Columbia and RCA were owned by US companies that also owned major market radio and TV stations. When those labels were sold to foreign conglomerates, that situation changed.

It's clear that the structure of American business is no longer built around holding and managing large assets like radio and TV stations. Foreign companies seem more interested in that, especially when they're influencial cultural institutions like radio stations. There were no Congressional hearings when the record labels were sold to foreign companies. No one ever discussed the idea that copyrights for such American cultural icons as Bob Dylan, Hank Williams, The Beach Boys, and other music legends were sold to the French and Japanese. But this change in ownership would require some discussion. It would open an interesting door, of American resources, regulated by the government, being owned by foreign companies. I don't know of any other similar resource that allows such ownership.
 
kinphoenix2 said:
Wow! I had no idea concerning this. I bet CHINA will be the biggest buyer. They've already dominated the shortwave spectrum...

... which nearly nobody listens to.
 
DavidEduardo said:
kinphoenix2 said:
Wow! I had no idea concerning this. I bet CHINA will be the biggest buyer. They've already dominated the shortwave spectrum...

... which nearly nobody listens to.

Not anymore, unless you are one of the few remaining DXers, or are in Africa or Asia - and I'm not sure how much listening still goes on there either.

And China hardly "dominates" what's left of shortwave broadcasting. American religious broadcasters and Cuba are omnipresent.
 
"few remaining dxers" wouldn't ANY shortwave listening be considered "dxing"? For a time, I could count Chinese stations on fingers and toes and American religious on one hand that were transmitting at one time. Lately I have noticed, not as many Chinese! They probably figured out they didn't need to blast the ionosphere to pieces every 10khz and can get by with one or two.

But the idea of foreign ownership concerns me a great deal. I thought WE as US citizens owned the airwaves?? What about us, the PEOPLE of the United States (pardon my indignant jingoism)? This isn't right, it's just not right. There's got to be something unconstitutional about it- somehow some way.
 
What I find most laughable about this is the assertion it would lead to more opportunity for smaller US broadcasters.

There's no logical reason that would happen. Those most connected to foreign investors are not the "local stations" or the independents trying to buy their first station.

It would be an opportunity for News Corp and their ilk to further consolidate US media and useless from a consumer standpoint, if not harmful.
 
stevensonair said:
It would be an opportunity for News Corp and their ilk to further consolidate US media and useless from a consumer standpoint, if not harmful.

Depends on what you mean by "useless." The main motivation today for consumers is free. They want content for free. That means someone else pays. If that means getting people in Qatar to pay for Survivor or Kardashians, then it's useful from a consumer standpoint. The fact is that American companies don't want to own these kinds of things any more. Broadcasting has become like real estate. That's perfect for foreign investment.
 
kinphoenix2 said:
"few remaining dxers" wouldn't ANY shortwave listening be considered "dxing"? For a time, I could count Chinese stations on fingers and toes and American religious on one hand that were transmitting at one time. Lately I have noticed, not as many Chinese! They probably figured out they didn't need to blast the ionosphere to pieces every 10khz and can get by with one or two.

China still has a huge Englsh-language presence. Check in the morning - they boom into the western US. But even so, about 1% of the American public owns a shortwave radio, and most of those are hams with HF rigs that have general-coverage receivers.

But the idea of foreign ownership concerns me a great deal. I thought WE as US citizens owned the airwaves?? What about us, the PEOPLE of the United States (pardon my indignant jingoism)? This isn't right, it's just not right. There's got to be something unconstitutional about it- somehow some way.

AFAIK, there is no Constitutional ban on foreigners owning anything in this country. But there is an Federal law against non-citizens owning broadcast stations.
 
kinphoenix2 said:
I thought WE as US citizens owned the airwaves?? What about us, the PEOPLE of the United States (pardon my indignant jingoism)? This isn't right, it's just not right. There's got to be something unconstitutional about it- somehow some way.

The idea of "the people owning the airwaves" is mythology. The spectrum is owned and controlled by the government, regulated by the FCC. None of what's being discussed would change that. It would just allow foreign companies to invest in broadcasting, and become licensees. Foreign companies invest in lots of things, including US government debt. They're able to buy stocks, US Treasury bills, and other financial devices.

The Constitution was written in the 18th Century, before broadcasting, so there's nothing in the Constitution about it. The Constitution is mainly a document about the federal government, and the powers and limits on it.
 
There is a word that was not part of my education or a part of my business experience. Recently I came across some writings that were trying to analyze and explain some of the different attitudes toward investment. There are times in world history when "merchantilist" thinking dominated the economy of the world. The economy of the U.S. is NOT driven by merchantilist philosophy. There is apparently more of a merchantilist mentality among Chinese investors. (I wish I knew how to spell all that out, but I don't. Go to some heavy duty lectures. Go sign up for courses at the university of your choice.)

When topics like this come up, it quickly become obvious that we in the U.S. have not come to terms with understanding China. Writers say: "Chinese Investment" as though the nation, the government of China is driving all of this. We need to understand that there are Chinese INVESTORS... people... individuals... doing much of what we read about. The average American seems to think of "Chinese Free Enterprise Investors" as an impossible description. Go take a class.

Simple explanation: Americans want to manage stuff, run stuff. Chinese and some other Internationals want to OWN things, collect things, possess things. Americans want to LEASE things.
 
One other thing to point out is that the reason this has happened is because of the fundamental change in the American banking system, going back ten years or more, changing them from institutions for investment in business and homeownership to brokerage institutions. They have been phasing themselves out of a place for business owners to go for money. Credit is cheap, so banks can't make enough from lending money, so they're focusing on other enterprises. That means American companies looking for investment money have limited choices: 1) Raise money through stock sales; 2) Sell equity in your business; 3) Cut your operating expenses and use the savings for investment; 4) Deal with investment companies who will want part ownership, who will want input in operations, and who may change your business; or 5) Seek foreign investment. Right now, #5 for broadcasters is limited by federal law.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom