WAAF - what a mess!!!

[Least]

That is not funny. It is juvenile.



What makes it childish is to think that the current owner has not evaluated the future of the station and opted to cash out now based on declining radio revenue, lack of viable formats... and in this case, a very inferior signal.



No, it is a good business practice to make sure your name is not presented negatively.



A radio station is private property. There is only limited "freedom of speech" there.



EMF does not want their network and their philosophy insulted by a property they are paying to buy. If I purchase a house, and find the owner is breaking all the windows, I'll either cancel the deal or sue for reparations.

In my case, our culture, language, music and talent were being insulted by a bunch of out of control acid rock DJs who were using lies or distorted facts to create insults. We had every right to protect our company, image, culture and staff. In fact, we told the licensee that we were concerned that the license could be lost over the ethnic insults being made.



Our format was not music from Spain. It was Banda from Mexico, and nearly 100% current. You are engaging in the same unfounded conclusions that that the soon-to-be-gone station employees were guilty of.



Businesses protect their reputations. Allowing a station you have bought to tarnish it is going to be a deal breaker, and the things that may be said by the soon-to-be-gone employees could endanger the license. This is a business, not Friday night High School Football.

The fact that you can't take a small joke speaks a lot. That was a PG-Rated joke I might add. So I'm left to observe you as someone who has "smartest person in the room syndrome," as in you're better then me. Relax! It's ok to disagree without calling each other names. If that joke and I are juvenile, then you're beyond an outdated old clogger. The "hahaha" should have been the telling sign that I was being playful.

When did I complain that Entercom cashed out? You assumed that, because you don't like my criticism. And because you assumed that, you now look foolish. My issue was the EMF wanted (AS YOU STATE) th staff silenced because of what happened with WCCC. The fact that they have no ego strength to accept someone criticizing their changes, it what makes them childish. I assume that you are someone who can't accept criticism, based on your replies to me, so I'll tread lightly. I'm trying to have an enlightening debate here, and done want to hurt anyone's ego. But, I never took issue with EMF buying 107.3. I took issue with EMF reportedly (by you) silencing two air staff from being able to have a farewell to the station and listeners, because they don't want to hear "Highway to Hell" on a station that they don't even control or program at this time. Once EMF takes over, WAAF is gone anyway. So why should it matter what WAAF says before it goes? That's right, because corporate bullcrap.

Now, you stated a Spanish language format that took over a rock station. I said I was for and would listen to a Spanish language format. So, I'll leave your reply as evidence of you wanting to make stuff up just so you can sound righteous. Go back and read what I stated. I never took issue with your changed format. I took issue with your owner (as you claim) saying "get the mics out of the studio." Allow the idiots to sound like idiots, once your format took over, they were gone anyway. As for me, I didn't take issue with your culture or format I said to silence a voice of criticism is a whimp move, WHICH IT IS. I'm right here debating your criticism of me. I'm not wanting you silenced. But, again, I have ego strength. Also, many rock listeners might not stay with a Spanish language format (not Spain, as you wrongfully claimed I was stating) nor will they stay with K-Love. So, what air staff from WCCC stated before it became K-Love more than likely didn't impact the listenership of K-Love. That's the point. But, needing to be right, you threw out my real statements and made stuff up to make me sound as if I as bashing you.

 

[b-turner]

You have a valid point. Mistakes do happen in every industry. I'm not saying there haven't been any 'New Coke' disasters. Mistakes have been made in the past and will be in the future. There just lest wiggle room now.

I'm not in Boston. I never worked for corporate radio. One owner early on had about 6 stations but most had a single station, maybe 2. In Houston a single owner.

Am I a boat adrift? I'm not sure what you mean by that. Radio has always been about evolving and reflecting trends, responding to trends. Ironically radio does not start trends but responds to them. I don't know what that will be in 3 years or 5 years but I'll be watching. Radio does not say 'lets play this or that'? Radio responds to trends. If a song is becoming popular among my demographic, then I'll play it. In fact I could acre less if it's new, the same old song or whatever. My job is to get the listening audience that can be monetized through the ale of commercials. If you said to my owner that Florida Georgia Line was good, he'd say "how does that make us money?"...and that's the true end all statement since it all boils down to the almighty dollar. I can not feel too bad about chasing those dollars because the way you catch them is by getting enough of a certain demographic listening to you in order to get those advertising agencies to place those ad buys. The dollars don't come if you screw it up. Yes, I have made some small errors but all were easily recovered. If not I'd have been sent packing.

There's a bunch I could tell you about radio that will forever alter how you listen to it. It has really changed. In my first on air gig I played songs 'out of the box' and most of the time they were hits. It was not that crucial then. Your only competition for ad dollars was the newspaper in that town and you had no other local radio competition. Today there's easily 4 or 5 times as many radio stations and so many places to put those ad dollars, it is a very serious business. You just can't risk it.

There is no ego to bruise here. I am sure your paycheck is not the source of your ego. For me, radio, a career I love, is all about the next paycheck. You can think I suck or are the greatest thing to come along but I'm still heading for the bank. The only gauge of doing things right for my owner is that next paycheck.

Please understand we work for people. I work for my owner. He wants something, I make that happen. If he says play polka music, I figure out how to pull that off. It's really not any different than managing a store or restaurant. Your owners tell you what they want and you do it. Being at the top just means you take the heat first, not that you tell the owner how things are going to be done.

 

[Least]

You have a valid point. Mistakes do happen in every industry. I'm not saying there haven't been any 'New Coke' disasters. Mistakes have been made in the past and will be in the future. There just lest wiggle room now.

I'm not in Boston. I never worked for corporate radio. One owner early on had about 6 stations but most had a single station, maybe 2. In Houston a single owner.

Am I a boat adrift? I'm not sure what you mean by that. Radio has always been about evolving and reflecting trends, responding to trends. Ironically radio does not start trends but responds to them. I don't know what that will be in 3 years or 5 years but I'll be watching. Radio does not say 'lets play this or that'? Radio responds to trends. If a song is becoming popular among my demographic, then I'll play it. In fact I could acre less if it's new, the same old song or whatever. My job is to get the listening audience that can be monetized through the ale of commercials. If you said to my owner that Florida Georgia Line was good, he'd say "how does that make us money?"...and that's the true end all statement since it all boils down to the almighty dollar. I can not feel too bad about chasing those dollars because the way you catch them is by getting enough of a certain demographic listening to you in order to get those advertising agencies to place those ad buys. The dollars don't come if you screw it up. Yes, I have made some small errors but all were easily recovered. If not I'd have been sent packing.

There's a bunch I could tell you about radio that will forever alter how you listen to it. It has really changed. In my first on air gig I played songs 'out of the box' and most of the time they were hits. It was not that crucial then. Your only competition for ad dollars was the newspaper in that town and you had no other local radio competition. Today there's easily 4 or 5 times as many radio stations and so many places to put those ad dollars, it is a very serious business. You just can't risk it.

There is no ego to bruise here. I am sure your paycheck is not the source of your ego. For me, radio, a career I love, is all about the next paycheck. You can think I suck or are the greatest thing to come along but I'm still heading for the bank. The only gauge of doing things right for my owner is that next paycheck.

Please understand we work for people. I work for my owner. He wants something, I make that happen. If he says play polka music, I figure out how to pull that off. It's really not any different than managing a store or restaurant. Your owners tell you what they want and you do it. Being at the top just means you take the heat first, not that you tell the owner how things are going to be done.

Before I go further, thanks for the debate. I enjoy cordial discussions such as this.

I observed your statement as going wherever the trend takes you. In many cases, that is sound. At times, it leads to disappointment. Hence the boat analogy.

Your end statement, I completely understand. I am a public employee. There's a chain of people to whom I answer. Having my doctorate in my field gives me knowledge, but I also have people to whom I must answer. My criticism is simply that an observation of a particular format. But, out of the insiders here, you are the first to simply state "yes, at times mistakes are made, but this is what leads ro our decisions." I respect and honor that. Most others, tend to blame the listener, the format, the recording industry, even the custodian at the station prior to ever accepting that perhaps the decisions of the programmers and station owners might also play a role in the situation. They present as radio being a victim of all these other factors, and not ever accepting some criticism. They load up with statements, such as stating that people don't know what they are talking about.

My suggestion, don't reference the research in some omniscient way. Everyone here is interested in radio. Cite the research. That allows me to then analyze and ask follow-up questions. I observe the tone of the group of insiders as saying "I don't know what I'm talking about. I haven't done the research." The only true way to end criticism is to educate.

 

[TheBigA]

You're mistaken if you think that you're not part of the problem.

First of all, you don't know anything about me, so don't tell me I'm "part of the problem." If you look beyond Boston, you'll see stations playing current rock. In fact if you simply look at WERS, they're playing current rock. In the process, they're getting about the same numbers as WAAF. In some places, current rock isn't the attraction that classic rock is. That's just the reality. Sometimes playing new rock doesn't work, no matter what you do. It's not like we don't try.

The other thing is that this is a music problem, not a radio problem. The people making the music aren't making it for radio any more. We know that. The artists have told us that. They make music for their fans. They have the tools to deliver their music directly to their fans. Some of that music is hit music, some of it isn't. We can see, based on the streaming charts, who is making the hit music and who isn't. So we try to grab the consensus music, the music that appeals to the most people. That wasn't WAAF's problem. Four other rock radio stations met very similar fates as WAAF. So this is a bigger problem than just what you think.

 

[b-turner]

Least: Thank you for the kind response.

I'll be happy anytime to share whatever I know. The funny thing about radio is you learn by asking questions and bugging the heck out of those that have the knowledge you want.

I sparked on your point that owners sometimes are the cause of a misstep or outright mistake when you are dealing with individual owners. One of the hardest things is to set your personal desires and likes aside to create a format you likely don't care for that much. Sometimes an owner can forget that.

 

[Least]

First of all, you don't know anything about me, so don't tell me I'm "part of the problem." If you look beyond Boston, you'll see stations playing current rock. In fact if you simply look at WERS, they're playing current rock. In the process, they're getting about the same numbers as WAAF. In some places, current rock isn't the attraction that classic rock is. That's just the reality. Sometimes playing new rock doesn't work, no matter what you do. It's not like we don't try.

The other thing is that this is a music problem, not a radio problem. The people making the music aren't making it for radio any more. We know that. The artists have told us that. They make music for their fans. They have the tools to deliver their music directly to their fans. Some of that music is hit music, some of it isn't. We can see, based on the streaming charts, who is making the hit music and who isn't. So we try to grab the consensus music, the music that appeals to the most people. That wasn't WAAF's problem. Four other rock radio stations met very similar fates as WAAF. So this is a bigger problem than just what you think.

You, as in your industry. I believe that my posts over the last near two years would support that I am not implying a specific person. However, I apologize that my impression led you to believe that I was speaking of you.

 

[Least]

Least: Thank you for the kind response.

I'll be happy anytime to share whatever I know. The funny thing about radio is you learn by asking questions and bugging the heck out of those that have the knowledge you want.

I sparked on your point that owners sometimes are the cause of a misstep or outright mistake when you are dealing with individual owners. One of the hardest things is to set your personal desires and likes aside to create a format you likely don't care for that much. Sometimes an owner can forget that.

I honestly don't think that every station should be programmed for me. I am speaking of rock formatted stations in this area.

 

[TheBigA]

You, as in your industry. I believe that my posts over the last near two years would support that I am not implying a specific person.

But as I've said, you can't ignore the role of the music. The reason why current country music is thriving is because the labels and artists see country radio as their partner. That is not the case with rock. There are two country stations in Boston and no rock stations. Why? Because country music artists and labels work with country radio in a way that makes money for both radio and music. Not the case with rock.

 

[Least]

But as I've said, you can't ignore the role of the music. The reason why current country music is thriving is because the labels and artists see country radio as their partner. That is not the case with rock. There are two country stations in Boston and no rock stations. Why? Because country music artists and labels work with country radio in a way that makes money for both radio and music. Not the case with rock.

I guess we are destined to be the immovable object and the unatopple force. I've said before that there are multiple factors. I just don't except that radio is innocent in this topic.

 

[Least]

The greater irony is that 1.) They are giving Carrie and Hsu today and tomorrow to send off the station, and 2.) They announced that the plan was to revamp the station with more new music, which was to start on March 2nd, with a music formatted morning show. Funny how many of my points were aimed to be attempted, before Entercom decided to sell. It would have been good to see my ideas attempted in Boston.

 

[TheBigA]

I guess we are destined to be the immovable object and the unatopple force. I've said before that there are multiple factors. I just don't except that radio is innocent in this topic.

Nor is the audience. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink. Radio can play current rock, but that doesn't mean there's an audience for it. Or an audience that's big enough to make money. That's what we've seen time after time in Boston. If it was just one station, you might have a point. But four stations?

 

[Least]

Nor is the audience. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink. Radio can play current rock, but that doesn't mean there's an audience for it. Or an audience that's big enough to make money. That's what we've seen time after time in Boston. If it was just one station, you might have a point. But four stations?

That's the point, with WAAF going, theres now no current rock station in Boston. Also, when did I ever say the audience wasn't part of the problem?

 

[davideduardo]

The fact that you can't take a small joke speaks a lot. That was a PG-Rated joke I might add. So I'm left to observe you as someone who has "smartest person in the room syndrome," as in you're better then me. Relax! It's ok to disagree without calling each other names. If that joke and I are juvenile, then you're beyond an outdated old clogger. The "hahaha" should have been the telling sign that I was being playful.

I did not find the attempt at humor either appropriate for the situation nor particularly funny.

The issue here is that if one party buys something they expect or specifically request certain conditions. In the case of a station purchaser, they have the right to specify what the station can and can not say on the air prior to the closing or start of what is essentially a "lease to buy".

If I were to buy a station (and I have done that quite a few times as both an owner and a manager), I would not want the station damaging my organization's image prior to taking it over.

When did I complain that Entercom cashed out? You assumed that, because you don't like my criticism. And because you assumed that, you now look foolish.

I think you misread that.

My issue was the EMF wanted (AS YOU STATE) th staff silenced because of what happened with WCCC. The fact that they have no ego strength to accept someone criticizing their changes, it what makes them childish.

Again, the buyer has the right to establish conditions that favor them. The seller has the right to accept, negotiate or deny. When the deal is signed, each party has agreed and must fulfill the conditions. If EMF wishes to protect its image by means of conditions in the contract, it is likely that they do that because in past instances they have had bad experiences that they feel might tarnish their image. Making that a condition of the sale is prudent and a good business practice.

I assume that you are someone who can't accept criticism, based on your replies to me, so I'll tread lightly.

To the contrary. I have always believed there are multiple ways to successfully manage or program a station. And I know that some that I don't agree with can be successful under the stewardship of other managers.

I took issue with EMF reportedly (by you) silencing two air staff from being able to have a farewell to the station and listeners, because they don't want to hear "Highway to Hell" on a station that they don't even control or program at this time. Once EMF takes over, WAAF is gone anyway. So why should it matter what WAAF says before it goes? That's right, because corporate bullcrap.

The buyer has the right to ask for a variety of conditions. The seller may or may not accept them. It's part of the deal. In this case, to find a willing buyer, Entercom had to negotiate with EMF. EMF had certain conditions they required, and Entercom, in its desire to sell, accepted them.

Remember, in the opinion of many Entercom is under pressure, or going to be, from the reunited Viacom division under Ms Redstone to maker the company perform. So they took the deal under EMF's conditions, it appears, in an effort to make the company look better.

Now, you stated a Spanish language format that took over a rock station. I said I was for and would listen to a Spanish language format. So, I'll leave your reply as evidence of you wanting to make stuff up just so you can sound righteous.

Obviously, you do not know that there are many more existing formats in Spanish than in English. It is so unlikely that you would "listen" to all of them that your statement seems gratuitous and false.

Go back and read what I stated. I never took issue with your changed format. I took issue with your owner (as you claim) saying "get the mics out of the studio." Allow the idiots to sound like idiots, once your format took over, they were gone anyway.

Our principal concern was that what was being said was dangerous, racist and incendiary language directed against not just the new owner but the ethnic group it would serve. That could have put the transfer and the license in jeopardy; we had already spend over $100 thousand on legal fees, preliminary format research and the like so we wanted the deal protected.

As for me, I didn't take issue with your culture or format I said to silence a voice of criticism is a whimp move, WHICH IT IS.

No, it is a move that protects the deal, the value of the asset and the image of the buyer and the buyer's potential audience. It was also a move against horribly disgusting racist remarks.

So, what air staff from WCCC stated before it became K-Love more than likely didn't impact the listenership of K-Love. That's the point. But, needing to be right, you threw out my real statements and made stuff up to make me sound as if I as bashing you.

However, the image of the purchaser could suffer. However slight that might be, the buyer has the right to establish conditions and the seller can accept them if they want the deal.

My entire point is that a buyer has the right to request conditions surrounding a purchase. If the seller is motivated, they likely will accept or at least further negotiate them. In this case, we have a very marginal signla in a declining format with few options. Most buyers would not want that station today, so likely this was a deal where the buyer could ask for most anything and get most of it.

 

[davideduardo]

T No matter how many focus groups you and Dave hold, you didn't seem to pick up on that. .

Here is the essence of your mistaken impressions:

I have done over a thousand music tests, thousands of one-on-one interviews, hundreds of thousands of call-out music interviews. But I have never done a focus group.

You are making assumptions about an industry you don't work in. Some of us are attempting to explain the business and programming side, but you continue to make assumptions.

For example, your criticism of the radio business for not offering different or modified rock formats does not take into account that the major stations in the major markets and their owners have researched all kinds of options. The suggestions or criticisms you make involve formats that won't work either specifically in Boston or even nationally. This has been proven both via research and through failed formats in the same or similar markets.

Station owners... at least the ones with decent signal FMs... spend money to find out what to do with each station. That may be music tests, perceptual research to find out if the station is on track, perceptuals to find a better format to replace a failing one, and music research to make sure the right songs are being played.

 

[Least]

So I am correct with my impression of you? Smartest person in the room and struggle to accept criticism? I said my part. Your reply stands on it's own merit. I do find anyone with no sense of humor and quick to jump to rash "outrage" over a disagreement/criticism is someone who I have no need to continue further discussion. I'm not wrong, just with a different perspective.

Also, I'm speaking of Boston, which I said in other posts. Again, just make crap up when you want to win an argument, I see.

 

[davideduardo]

So I am correct with my impression of you? Smartest person in the room and struggle to accept criticism? I said my part. Your reply stands on it's own merit. I do find anyone with no sense of humor and quick to jump to rash "outrage" over a disagreement/criticism is someone who I have no need to continue further discussion. I'm not wrong, just with a different perspective.

And this is your response to being told that you made a false assumption and thought I was basing my opinions on "focus groups" which I do not do or believe in.

So here is a question or two:

Do you even know the difference between a perceptual, an AMT and "callout" (some of the terms are antiquated and have migrated their methodology over the decades, but I just named the three most common radio research varieties other than ratings.

Do you understand how much money a good project costs, and how carefully they are done?

(Hint: a music test for a station with a large library can cost $50,000 or more, even if done online)

Also, I'm speaking of Boston, which I said in other posts. Again, just make crap up when you want to win an argument, I see.

Everything I said applies to Boston.

All of it is factual. You obviously do not know what the "facts" of radio are, as you have admitted not working in the business. You might start by asking questions rather than driving a steam roller over people with decades of experience.

Except for a few heritage stations, and conditioned on the ethnic composition of each market, the same rules apply across the US today... and that is a "more than ever" condition because of instant communication ranging from "free" long distance, texting, streaming and all kinds of national and even international platforms that cross city limits, state lines and national borders.

 

[MassMusicMan]

Boy, this Least guy must be fun at parties. I've never seen the corpse of respect for expertise desecrated as badly as I have in this thread. Jesus Christ.

 

[TheBigA]

That's the point, with WAAF going, theres now no current rock station in Boston.

WERS?

 

[Retro]

WERS?

I think that he meant in the literal formating sense, just saying...

 

[louis_p]

Do we know for a fact that EMF added a stipulation that the station must run jockless until the format flip? I can’t imagine EMF would care what was on air before the format flip since the target audiences are polar opposites.

I’m sure there’s a clause in the contract that the station must be in good standing and abide by FCC rules. In the case of WCCC, if the jocks were dropping F-bombs 5 minutes before the flip, then EMF could get pulled into an FCC violation of complaints are received.