-
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
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
WCRS-LP/WCRX-LP timeshare
- Thread starter teched
- Start date
Jake,
Where can we find the latest podcasts of WCRS-LP's Danno Thomas "Talk of the Town"? His show last week is on this timeshare controversy.
Also, why aren't you posting your latest podcasts of your shows on the WCRS-LP website?
What is your feelings of the WCRS-LP/WCRX-LP timeshare controversy? You have you to post your feelings on this thread.
Evan Davis in a letter to the FCC said:
"For the reasons stated above I am urging that you reconsider the May 3 ruling."
As far as the FCC reversing itself twice, I don't think that will ever happen. Have both parties thought about going to mediation to resolve the conflict
of sharing the 24 hour time clock?
Where can we find the latest podcasts of WCRS-LP's Danno Thomas "Talk of the Town"? His show last week is on this timeshare controversy.
Also, why aren't you posting your latest podcasts of your shows on the WCRS-LP website?
What is your feelings of the WCRS-LP/WCRX-LP timeshare controversy? You have you to post your feelings on this thread.
Evan Davis in a letter to the FCC said:
"For the reasons stated above I am urging that you reconsider the May 3 ruling."
As far as the FCC reversing itself twice, I don't think that will ever happen. Have both parties thought about going to mediation to resolve the conflict
of sharing the 24 hour time clock?
Danno's archived shows are at http://wcrsfm.org/audio/user/12. Looks like the most recent one listed is his April 28 episode, though -- nuts! I had to work until 4:30 last Wednesday and missed him, so I hope that particular show becomes available soon. I'd love to hear it.
I don't have an internet hook-up at home, and when Robb and I tried to upload one of my shows to the WCRS website through a computer at my favorite library, it couldn't do it. So I have to rely on others to get mine archived, and I'm grateful to those people who have done that for thirty-one of them.
My feelings about the ruling are the same as Evan's. The FCC originally permitted 'CRS to increase its hours, knowing full well all of the details of the timeshare agreement, and WCRX was notified of that decision and did not contest it within the allotted 30-day period -- sounds pretty open and shut to me. I don't know what, if anything, the parties are trying to do now to resolve the conflict. I only know that I hate it that, at least for the time being, my "Secrets Classic" rebroadcasts of previous "Yesterday's Top Secrets" episodes are no longer heard on Monday nights, nor is lots of other very worthwhile programming that had to be removed from WCRS's schedule. As I wrote in my first post under this topic, I always thought that commercial radio was the enemy. If someone had told me a month ago that the FCC was going to be making some kind of ruling against us, I would've assumed that it would have been at the instigation of one of the broadcasting "giants" in this town -- not our own timeshare partner.
I don't have an internet hook-up at home, and when Robb and I tried to upload one of my shows to the WCRS website through a computer at my favorite library, it couldn't do it. So I have to rely on others to get mine archived, and I'm grateful to those people who have done that for thirty-one of them.
My feelings about the ruling are the same as Evan's. The FCC originally permitted 'CRS to increase its hours, knowing full well all of the details of the timeshare agreement, and WCRX was notified of that decision and did not contest it within the allotted 30-day period -- sounds pretty open and shut to me. I don't know what, if anything, the parties are trying to do now to resolve the conflict. I only know that I hate it that, at least for the time being, my "Secrets Classic" rebroadcasts of previous "Yesterday's Top Secrets" episodes are no longer heard on Monday nights, nor is lots of other very worthwhile programming that had to be removed from WCRS's schedule. As I wrote in my first post under this topic, I always thought that commercial radio was the enemy. If someone had told me a month ago that the FCC was going to be making some kind of ruling against us, I would've assumed that it would have been at the instigation of one of the broadcasting "giants" in this town -- not our own timeshare partner.
gabigley1 said:As far as the FCC reversing itself twice, I don't think that will ever happen. Have both parties thought about going to mediation to resolve the conflict
of sharing the 24 hour time clock?
I dont think i have ever seen anything written on what Bexley wants. What is it that they are asking for?
Jakej, in your one of you previous messages, you asked me to comment on Evan's solicitation for comments, I will do so, but I want to give others the opportunity to express an opinion, and I want to have to time to respond properly to those thoughts. But I can comment on your few thoughts
I think I see a lot of anger over at WCRS, and I am personally amazed that they were surprised by the "unexpected" ruling. The FCC staffer(s) who modified the license, and issued the increased hours to Simply Living did so completely ignoring the FCC's Rules and Regulations. In this case, he also warned the persons involved, that the procedure was risky, and not likely to stand if Bexley objected. It is interesting to note that the "The FCC originally permitted 'CRS to increase its hours, knowing full well all of the details of the timeshare agreement". You guys willing to stand by that?
So for point one, the rules ignored were the prohibition on transferring a Construction Permit, ignoring several of the timeshare stipulations, and potential improper notification procedures. Bexley did send an email to the FCC after the original 30 day notification period, it was out of window, since they never received proper notification in the first place. Bexley was not notified Before the filing, they were notified after the permit was issued, and they did protest.
There were meetings immediately after the "expanded hours", between SL and Bexley, it's my belief that those meetings were to delay any potential action to the FCC, which by the way, it did. Bexley has always been a more reserved operation, where SL has always been more reactionary/activist based. Bexley has, for my personal taste, always been slow to react to treats, and I perceive that that "kindness for weakness" attitude, was taken by the activist types at SL as "weak and stupid", which is an incorrect assessment of the situation!
The last meeting between the parties was a week or so before the FCC ruling was made. After a walkout of a third party, there was a semi productive conversation, although not a lot of concrete came from it, although I would even be happy with a little paste. There is a 12/12 timeshare split that is still on the table, another, which would have been the absolute best for SL, has expired, and other topics were discussed.
What you may not know, is that the instant an agreement is signed, 24 hour operation can resume. Bexley also informed SL that they would run Democracy Now, a sticking point, in it's same time slot. So honestly, the reason/fault that the station is not operating 24 hours a day is due to decisions made by Simply Living, not Bexley's. I personally would have signed the agreement after the FCC made their May 3rd Decision, and considering WCRS did continue to operate expander hours into the next week. Nobody would have ever known.
You have to love this "us versus them" mentality. It's easy to blame stupid internal errors on other folks. Bexley is not SL's Problem, and SL is not Bexley problem. They both have internal issues, and they both have external issues. Hell, the FCC has their own internal problems, one of them being the Columbus LPFM's.
The FCC didn't make a ruling against you. The made a decision, correcting an employee's willingness to help a low power broadcaster, based on the information that was presented to them. People do that. Your contacts over at WCRS caused this problems, they long have felt that 102.1, is their property, and they can do with it what they want, it isn't, and they should look to being more co-operative, I told this personally to Evan in a meeting over there oh High street. They believe it is theirs, I don't, nor does Bexley, nor does the FCC. The Best advice, is to stop taking the little battles personally, and lets concentrate on getting the station working right.
I realized that some other people have said "screw the battle, were going to win the war". Okay, Fair enough.
We can also deal with that. I am not Bexley, But you can tell I am close enough to effect change. You asked me a while ago "if I was the enemy", I am not, I am a friend, but that is rapidly changing seeing that I am the only one "talking peace". But you have seen the results of my handiwork, do you really want to see more?
Given the secrecy of the event, and the subsequent knowledge that SL tried hard to hide their actions from Bexley, and just about everything else, you can see it's not as open as shut as you indicate. I suspect what happened that someone associated with WCRS, contacted the FCC, and found a sympathetic ear whining about the WCRX people. The commission, that should have considered the communication exparte,didn't, ans somehow, someone, most likely not in the commission, took a snippet of advice, and tailored it to their needs. This happened again with WA252, the translator.
A final thought on Evan's thoughts, I support his actions, he can do what he thinks is best.
You should note that they commission did not hold CRIS, nor Groveport at fault, they sanitized and simplified some of the facts to basic essence of the needed information. You should note that the entire action was declared "invalid from the outset". It was a simple, clean action. Reconsiderations are not, to overturn a Bureau Chief, is generally a Formal Reconsideration, where everything comes out!
Thanks Evan!
jakej said:My feelings about the ruling are the same as Evan's. The FCC originally permitted 'CRS to increase its hours, knowing full well all of the details of the timeshare agreement, and WCRX was notified of that decision and did not contest it within the allotted 30-day period -- sounds pretty open and shut to me.
I think I see a lot of anger over at WCRS, and I am personally amazed that they were surprised by the "unexpected" ruling. The FCC staffer(s) who modified the license, and issued the increased hours to Simply Living did so completely ignoring the FCC's Rules and Regulations. In this case, he also warned the persons involved, that the procedure was risky, and not likely to stand if Bexley objected. It is interesting to note that the "The FCC originally permitted 'CRS to increase its hours, knowing full well all of the details of the timeshare agreement". You guys willing to stand by that?
So for point one, the rules ignored were the prohibition on transferring a Construction Permit, ignoring several of the timeshare stipulations, and potential improper notification procedures. Bexley did send an email to the FCC after the original 30 day notification period, it was out of window, since they never received proper notification in the first place. Bexley was not notified Before the filing, they were notified after the permit was issued, and they did protest.
There were meetings immediately after the "expanded hours", between SL and Bexley, it's my belief that those meetings were to delay any potential action to the FCC, which by the way, it did. Bexley has always been a more reserved operation, where SL has always been more reactionary/activist based. Bexley has, for my personal taste, always been slow to react to treats, and I perceive that that "kindness for weakness" attitude, was taken by the activist types at SL as "weak and stupid", which is an incorrect assessment of the situation!
don't know what, if anything, the parties are trying to do now to resolve the conflict. I only know that I hate it that, at least for the time being, my "Secrets Classic" rebroadcasts of previous "Yesterday's Top Secrets" episodes are no longer heard on Monday nights, nor is lots of other very worthwhile programming that had to be removed from WCRS's schedule.
The last meeting between the parties was a week or so before the FCC ruling was made. After a walkout of a third party, there was a semi productive conversation, although not a lot of concrete came from it, although I would even be happy with a little paste. There is a 12/12 timeshare split that is still on the table, another, which would have been the absolute best for SL, has expired, and other topics were discussed.
What you may not know, is that the instant an agreement is signed, 24 hour operation can resume. Bexley also informed SL that they would run Democracy Now, a sticking point, in it's same time slot. So honestly, the reason/fault that the station is not operating 24 hours a day is due to decisions made by Simply Living, not Bexley's. I personally would have signed the agreement after the FCC made their May 3rd Decision, and considering WCRS did continue to operate expander hours into the next week. Nobody would have ever known.
I wrote in my first post under this topic, I always thought that commercial radio was the enemy. If someone had told me a month ago that the FCC was going to be making some kind of ruling against us, I would've assumed that it would have been at the instigation of one of the broadcasting "giants" in this town -- not our own timeshare partner.
You have to love this "us versus them" mentality. It's easy to blame stupid internal errors on other folks. Bexley is not SL's Problem, and SL is not Bexley problem. They both have internal issues, and they both have external issues. Hell, the FCC has their own internal problems, one of them being the Columbus LPFM's.
The FCC didn't make a ruling against you. The made a decision, correcting an employee's willingness to help a low power broadcaster, based on the information that was presented to them. People do that. Your contacts over at WCRS caused this problems, they long have felt that 102.1, is their property, and they can do with it what they want, it isn't, and they should look to being more co-operative, I told this personally to Evan in a meeting over there oh High street. They believe it is theirs, I don't, nor does Bexley, nor does the FCC. The Best advice, is to stop taking the little battles personally, and lets concentrate on getting the station working right.
I realized that some other people have said "screw the battle, were going to win the war". Okay, Fair enough.
We can also deal with that. I am not Bexley, But you can tell I am close enough to effect change. You asked me a while ago "if I was the enemy", I am not, I am a friend, but that is rapidly changing seeing that I am the only one "talking peace". But you have seen the results of my handiwork, do you really want to see more?
Given the secrecy of the event, and the subsequent knowledge that SL tried hard to hide their actions from Bexley, and just about everything else, you can see it's not as open as shut as you indicate. I suspect what happened that someone associated with WCRS, contacted the FCC, and found a sympathetic ear whining about the WCRX people. The commission, that should have considered the communication exparte,didn't, ans somehow, someone, most likely not in the commission, took a snippet of advice, and tailored it to their needs. This happened again with WA252, the translator.
A final thought on Evan's thoughts, I support his actions, he can do what he thinks is best.
You should note that they commission did not hold CRIS, nor Groveport at fault, they sanitized and simplified some of the facts to basic essence of the needed information. You should note that the entire action was declared "invalid from the outset". It was a simple, clean action. Reconsiderations are not, to overturn a Bureau Chief, is generally a Formal Reconsideration, where everything comes out!
Thanks Evan!
Two remaining licensees, split the day 12/12 at 3 pm and 3 am, possibly a flip flop of hours on weekend, but most likely a weekend schedule of 6-10 sl, 10-3 bexley, 3 - 8 SL, and 8 to 12 Bexley, since the #-8 hours are already stipulated to SL...Allfirdup said:gabigley1 said:As far as the FCC reversing itself twice, I don't think that will ever happen. Have both parties thought about going to mediation to resolve the conflict
of sharing the 24 hour time clock?
I dont think i have ever seen anything written on what Bexley wants. What is it that they are asking for?
gabigley1 said:Evan Davis in a letter to the FCC said:
"For the reasons stated above I am urging that you reconsider the May 3 ruling."
As far as the FCC reversing itself twice, I don't think that will ever happen. Have both parties thought about going to mediation to resolve the conflict of sharing the 24 hour time clock?
Honestly, all Bexley wants to do is split the clock, and move on. There are some past financial disputes, those will invariably be settled somehow, what is more important are establishing equipment sharing rules in the future, since it's apparent that the past hasn't been that productive!
a mediator, I don't see it's a major problem, as long as the mediator has media experience.
knowbetter said:Two remaining licensees, split the day 12/12 at 3 pm and 3 am, possibly a flip flop of hours on weekend, but most likely a weekend schedule of 6-10 sl, 10-3 bexley, 3 - 8 SL, and 8 to 12 Bexley, since the #-8 hours are already stipulated to SL...Allfirdup said:gabigley1 said:As far as the FCC reversing itself twice, I don't think that will ever happen. Have both parties thought about going to mediation to resolve the conflict
of sharing the 24 hour time clock?
I dont think i have ever seen anything written on what Bexley wants. What is it that they are asking for?
That sounds like a fair solution, also does WCRX use the 98.3 Translator? i am in Blacklick and cant pick it up well out here. and never think to check during the day when i am out and about.
Allfirdup said:knowbetter said:Two remaining licensees, split the day 12/12 at 3 pm and 3 am, possibly a flip flop of hours on weekend, but most likely a weekend schedule of 6-10 sl, 10-3 bexley, 3 - 8 SL, and 8 to 12 Bexley, since the #-8 hours are already stipulated to SL...Allfirdup said:gabigley1 said:As far as the FCC reversing itself twice, I don't think that will ever happen. Have both parties thought about going to mediation to resolve the conflict
of sharing the 24 hour time clock?
I dont think i have ever seen anything written on what Bexley wants. What is it that they are asking for?
That sounds like a fair solution, also does WCRX use the 98.3 Translator? i am in Blacklick and cant pick it up well out here. and never think to check during the day when i am out and about.
Some of the same "fair minded" folks complained to the FCC, that Bexley's use of the 98.3 translator was in violation of some other FCC rule. Bexley doesn't see it that way, they have asked the translator operator for their help in resolving the question.
The interesting here, is that the filing fees for this action could be substantial, and in that case who should pay them, the group that caused the action, or the group that benefits? Regardless, it's not a action Bexley can directly pursue, although a general comment to the FCC may be considered in the near future
knowbetter said:Allfirdup said:knowbetter said:Allfirdup said:gabigley1 said:As far as the FCC reversing itself twice, I don't think that will ever happen. Have both parties thought about going to mediation to resolve the conflict
of sharing the 24 hour time clock?
I dont think i have ever seen anything written on what Bexley wants. What is it that they are asking for?
I had a feeling that was the case, I have always been surprised that a LPFM can have a translator anyway. but it does make the operation more viable in a city the size of Columbus.
Two remaining licensees, split the day 12/12 at 3 pm and 3 am, possibly a flip flop of hours on weekend, but most likely a weekend schedule of 6-10 sl, 10-3 bexley, 3 - 8 SL, and 8 to 12 Bexley, since the #-8 hours are already stipulated to SL...
That sounds like a fair solution, also does WCRX use the 98.3 Translator? i am in Blacklick and cant pick it up well out here. and never think to check during the day when i am out and about.
Some of the same "fair minded" folks complained to the FCC, that Bexley's use of the 98.3 translator was in violation of some other FCC rule. Bexley doesn't see it that way, they have asked the translator operator for their help in resolving the question.
The interesting here, is that the filing fees for this action could be substantial, and in that case who should pay them, the group that caused the action, or the group that benefits? Regardless, it's not a action Bexley can directly pursue, although a general comment to the FCC may be considered in the near future
I can't insert any part of the first post of yours that came right after my latest one, knowbetter (it's apparently too far back and isn't available in the block below where I'm now typing this), but my assertion that the FCC knew the details of the timeshare agreement when it made its original decision granting WCRS additional hours was based on the third sentence in the third paragraph of Evan's letter to the FCC.
I think I'll just stay out of it as far as this topic is concerned, the rest of the way. I don't mean to give anyone the impression that I'm speaking for everyone at 'CRS; I'm just speaking for myself, and given my current perhaps slightly irrational and upset state of mind, I probably shouldn't even be doing that. But I just gotta ask -- what would happen between midnight and 6am on weekends under Bexley's proposal, as I can see that you don't have them allocated to either party? Could we just air six straight hours of "Yesterday's Top Secrets" during those two time slots? Maybe it'd be kind of like "Democracy Now", sort of a situation in which everyone digs the show, so there'd be no problem with just giving all those hours to me? Now THAT'S part of a solution that I can wholeheartedly support!!!
I think I'll just stay out of it as far as this topic is concerned, the rest of the way. I don't mean to give anyone the impression that I'm speaking for everyone at 'CRS; I'm just speaking for myself, and given my current perhaps slightly irrational and upset state of mind, I probably shouldn't even be doing that. But I just gotta ask -- what would happen between midnight and 6am on weekends under Bexley's proposal, as I can see that you don't have them allocated to either party? Could we just air six straight hours of "Yesterday's Top Secrets" during those two time slots? Maybe it'd be kind of like "Democracy Now", sort of a situation in which everyone digs the show, so there'd be no problem with just giving all those hours to me? Now THAT'S part of a solution that I can wholeheartedly support!!!
knowbetter said:Two remaining licensees, split the day 12/12 at 3 pm and 3 am, possibly a flip flop of hours on weekend, but most likely a weekend schedule of 6-10 sl, 10-3 bexley, 3 - 8 SL, and 8 to 12 Bexley, since the #-8 hours are already stipulated to SL...Allfirdup said:gabigley1 said:As far as the FCC reversing itself twice, I don't think that will ever happen. Have both parties thought about going to mediation to resolve the conflict
of sharing the 24 hour time clock?
I dont think i have ever seen anything written on what Bexley wants. What is it that they are asking for?
Bexley Public Radio posted the current Bexley offer to SL for a timeshare split.
Click this link to view the current offer to SL:
http://agentofcurrency.blogspot.com/2010/05/bexley-public-radios-time-share.html
Now, what hours is SL radio interested in?
jakej said:I can't insert any part of the first post of yours that came right after my latest one, knowbetter (it's apparently too far back and isn't available in the block below where I'm now typing this), but my assertion that the FCC knew the details of the timeshare agreement when it made its original decision granting WCRS additional hours was based on the third sentence in the third paragraph of Evan's letter to the FCC.
There is a lot of that going around, people tend to hear what they like to hear, even if it's wrong! I don't begrudge a lot of people over there, I just think they are not correct on some of their assumptions. As much as you might like to believe that the FCC was "totally aware" of what was on the time share, my guess is they probably were not, or at least won't admit it if they were. Trying to base your thought process on what I, Evan, or anyone else says is dangerous, you need to look into it and come up with you own plan.
I think I'll just stay out of it as far as this topic is concerned, the rest of the way. I don't mean to give anyone the impression that I'm speaking for everyone at 'CRS; I'm just speaking for myself, and given my current perhaps slightly irrational and upset state of mind, I probably shouldn't even be doing that.
I wouldn't worry about that, your opinions are welcome, and lets face it, your private numbers are not already in my cell phone, so I know you opinions are your own. <grin>
But I just gotta ask -- what would happen between midnight and 6am on weekends under Bexley's proposal, as I can see that you don't have them allocated to either party? Could we just air six straight hours of "Yesterday's Top Secrets" during those two time slots? Maybe it'd be kind of like "Democracy Now", sort of a situation in which everyone digs the show, so there'd be no problem with just giving all those hours to me? Now THAT'S part of a solution that I can wholeheartedly support!!!
i can't blame a guy for trying...I know on Bexley's clock, the overnights are slated for mostly music shows, so try and get yours in.
Here is an WCRS-LP/WCRX-LP timeshare update:
http://agentofcurrency.blogspot.com/2010/05/bexley-public-radios-time-share.html
WCRS-LP says they will apply for a transfer of the radio station in July of this year. Is Simply Living selling WCRS-LP? ???
When will this dispute ever end?
http://agentofcurrency.blogspot.com/2010/05/bexley-public-radios-time-share.html
WCRS-LP says they will apply for a transfer of the radio station in July of this year. Is Simply Living selling WCRS-LP? ???
When will this dispute ever end?
I am really surprised too that after all the complaining about not having enough on air time, WCRS really doesn't do much with the internet stream, they have a lot of programming that is not getting air time now, at least get it on the stream. If you want to be a community resource then show people what you want them to fight for. and i never really thought carrying alot of network programming from Pacifica and democracy Now was the way to be that community resource.
WVQC in Cincinnati has been trying to get on the air for over a year now with their 95.7 signal similar to what WCRS/WCRX has. But while raising money to get the signal on the air they have a well established website and programming that is on 24/7.
http://www.wvqc.org/
WVQC in Cincinnati has been trying to get on the air for over a year now with their 95.7 signal similar to what WCRS/WCRX has. But while raising money to get the signal on the air they have a well established website and programming that is on 24/7.
http://www.wvqc.org/
If you go to the following link:
http://athen-www2.athensmessenger.com/emag/Comfest2010/Comfest2010.swf
and then go to page 15 of the 2010 Columbus Comfest program, they have a whole page on WCRS-LP and the WCRS/WCRX dispute... They mention the WCRS-LP license will be transferred to the The Neighborhood Network of Columbus, pending FCC approval.
Will The Neighborhood Network make any changes to WCRS-LP programing?
Click this link for a update on WVQC-LP in Cincinnati:
http://ohkyintristatemedia.blogspot.com/2010/06/cunningham-staying-cincys-newest-lpfm.html
http://athen-www2.athensmessenger.com/emag/Comfest2010/Comfest2010.swf
and then go to page 15 of the 2010 Columbus Comfest program, they have a whole page on WCRS-LP and the WCRS/WCRX dispute... They mention the WCRS-LP license will be transferred to the The Neighborhood Network of Columbus, pending FCC approval.
Will The Neighborhood Network make any changes to WCRS-LP programing?
Allfirdup said:WVQC in Cincinnati has been trying to get on the air for over a year now with their 95.7 signal similar to what WCRS/WCRX has. But while raising money to get the signal on the air they have a well established website and programming that is on 24/7.
http://www.wvqc.org/
Click this link for a update on WVQC-LP in Cincinnati:
http://ohkyintristatemedia.blogspot.com/2010/06/cunningham-staying-cincys-newest-lpfm.html
Allfirdup said:WCRS did not sign on today at 3 as scheduled, they just keep repeating the sign off station id saying that they will be back on the air at 3pm tomorrow, followed by good night. the web stream was down all day as well
Interesting WCRS update, if Simply living is transferring WCRS to The Neighborhood network (see link) which looks like it has Eugene Beer on the board as secretary he was the engineer who got the station on the air in the first place. so is thi show they are looking to break the contract for shared time with WCRX? the 50/50 split offer seemed quite fair. WCRS had the prime time hours in the deal. It will be an interesting fight at best
they also mention a full power FM project for their community radio project, in addition to WCRS
Allfirdup said:Interesting WCRS update, if Simply living is transferring WCRS to The Neighborhood network (see link) which looks like it has Eugene Beer on the board as secretary he was the engineer who got the station on the air in the first place. so is thi show they are looking to break the contract for shared time with WCRX? the 50/50 split offer seemed quite fair. WCRS had the prime time hours in the deal. It will be an interesting fight at best
they also mention a full power FM project for their community radio project, in addition to WCRS
I found their website... Mr. Beer is involved...
This is from their site... Apparently they have given up on the "full power FM license" and are going to settle for WCRS-LP FM license, if they can
get it.
Here is their site:
http://theneighborhoodnetwork.info/fpfm
"Full Power FM"
"We applied for a full power FM license in October of 2007.
We are currently coordinating with the FCC and other applicants to try to figure out a way to get on the air.
More details as we can get around to sharing them."
gabigley1 said:Allfirdup said:Interesting WCRS update, if Simply living is transferring WCRS to The Neighborhood network (see link) which looks like it has Eugene Beer on the board as secretary he was the engineer who got the station on the air in the first place. so is thi show they are looking to break the contract for shared time with WCRX? the 50/50 split offer seemed quite fair. WCRS had the prime time hours in the deal. It will be an interesting fight at best
they also mention a full power FM project for their community radio project, in addition to WCRS
I found their website... Mr. Beer is involved...
This is from their site... Apparently they have given up on the "full power FM license" and are going to settle for WCRS-LP FM license, if they can
get it.
Here is their site:
http://theneighborhoodnetwork.info/fpfm
"Full Power FM"
"We applied for a full power FM license in October of 2007.
We are currently coordinating with the FCC and other applicants to try to figure out a way to get on the air.
More details as we can get around to sharing them."
I think these are the same people involved in the station now just under a new name. and i dont read anywhere that they are giving up on the full power FM they are hoping for. but it does sound like its for a new CP no an existing station in the market.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.