So they've declared their independence? I still see no lineup
-
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.
WPTT
- Thread starter ajhenderson
- Start date
K
KeyTimes
Guest
> So they've declared their independence? I still see no
> lineup
>
Be patient. It took a while for Renda to break its link to Sid Mark when WJAS dumped him for "Swingin' with Sinatra."
Besides, is that ABC News stream on the page new?
> lineup
>
Be patient. It took a while for Renda to break its link to Sid Mark when WJAS dumped him for "Swingin' with Sinatra."
Besides, is that ABC News stream on the page new?
M
Matthew
Guest
> So they've declared their independence? I still see no
> lineup
>
5-7 AM Action News this Morning simulcast
7-9 AM Laura Ingraham (from previous day)
9-noon Lynn Cullen (new time)
12-3 Thom Hartmann (new time/ now live)
3-6 Doug Hoerth (new time)
6-10 PM Clark Howard
10 P-1A Alan Colmes
1-5 AM George Noory
> lineup
>
5-7 AM Action News this Morning simulcast
7-9 AM Laura Ingraham (from previous day)
9-noon Lynn Cullen (new time)
12-3 Thom Hartmann (new time/ now live)
3-6 Doug Hoerth (new time)
6-10 PM Clark Howard
10 P-1A Alan Colmes
1-5 AM George Noory
> > So they've declared their independence? I still see no
> > lineup
> >
> 5-7 AM Action News this Morning simulcast
> 7-9 AM Laura Ingraham (from previous day)
> 9-noon Lynn Cullen (new time)
> 12-3 Thom Hartmann (new time/ now live)
> 3-6 Doug Hoerth (new time)
> 6-10 PM Clark Howard
> 10 P-1A Alan Colmes
> 1-5 AM George Noory
>
You'd think they could find something better than a delayed Laura Ingraham for AM drive.
> > lineup
> >
> 5-7 AM Action News this Morning simulcast
> 7-9 AM Laura Ingraham (from previous day)
> 9-noon Lynn Cullen (new time)
> 12-3 Thom Hartmann (new time/ now live)
> 3-6 Doug Hoerth (new time)
> 6-10 PM Clark Howard
> 10 P-1A Alan Colmes
> 1-5 AM George Noory
>
You'd think they could find something better than a delayed Laura Ingraham for AM drive.
M
Matthew
Guest
> > > So they've declared their independence? I still see no
> > > lineup
> > >
> > 5-7 AM Action News this Morning simulcast
> > 7-9 AM Laura Ingraham (from previous day)
> > 9-noon Lynn Cullen (new time)
> > 12-3 Thom Hartmann (new time/ now live)
> > 3-6 Doug Hoerth (new time)
> > 6-10 PM Clark Howard
> > 10 P-1A Alan Colmes
> > 1-5 AM George Noory
> >
>
> You'd think they could find something better than a delayed
> Laura Ingraham for AM drive.
>
I agree! 22 hours old, 3 days old on Mondays. And her hard right views really don't fit the rest of the lineup. Plus Quinn on 104.7 talks the same line live. They need a live morning show, if not local, then a progressive like Bill Press. Too much Clark Howard too. They need to split that shift and go live 6-8. They have Bowyer's salary to work with. Why not try to grow? John MacIntyre would have been great 6-8. All the other talk stations are doing sports at that hour. I don't think Clark Howard is going to get much of a following here.
> > > lineup
> > >
> > 5-7 AM Action News this Morning simulcast
> > 7-9 AM Laura Ingraham (from previous day)
> > 9-noon Lynn Cullen (new time)
> > 12-3 Thom Hartmann (new time/ now live)
> > 3-6 Doug Hoerth (new time)
> > 6-10 PM Clark Howard
> > 10 P-1A Alan Colmes
> > 1-5 AM George Noory
> >
>
> You'd think they could find something better than a delayed
> Laura Ingraham for AM drive.
>
I agree! 22 hours old, 3 days old on Mondays. And her hard right views really don't fit the rest of the lineup. Plus Quinn on 104.7 talks the same line live. They need a live morning show, if not local, then a progressive like Bill Press. Too much Clark Howard too. They need to split that shift and go live 6-8. They have Bowyer's salary to work with. Why not try to grow? John MacIntyre would have been great 6-8. All the other talk stations are doing sports at that hour. I don't think Clark Howard is going to get much of a following here.
What not Mac in the Morning, then?
In fact, that "Light Lounge" might fit better in the morning, especially on that station.
When they originally went after Mac they said he was too pricey. Well . .
They may have waited too long. Then again, I don't think Mac is THAT great of a talent, so if they could develop something new and fresh . . .
In fact, that "Light Lounge" might fit better in the morning, especially on that station.
When they originally went after Mac they said he was too pricey. Well . .
They may have waited too long. Then again, I don't think Mac is THAT great of a talent, so if they could develop something new and fresh . . .
R
Radio_Realist
Guest
> They may have waited too long. Then again, I don't think Mac
> is THAT great of a talent, so if they could develop
> something new and fresh . . .
>
Renda has quite a history of making successful programming decisions that pay off in the ratings and in air time billings. However, those decisions have almost never included anything that might be remotely described as "new" or "fresh". Renda has been one of the most successful broadcasting companies around by sticking to the slogan
Tried and true,
Never new,
Always old,
Never bold.
If they weren't so successful with that philosophy, my poem could be called a pontificating insult. But, since it's an ode to their good results, it should be taken as positive praise.
> is THAT great of a talent, so if they could develop
> something new and fresh . . .
>
Renda has quite a history of making successful programming decisions that pay off in the ratings and in air time billings. However, those decisions have almost never included anything that might be remotely described as "new" or "fresh". Renda has been one of the most successful broadcasting companies around by sticking to the slogan
Tried and true,
Never new,
Always old,
Never bold.
If they weren't so successful with that philosophy, my poem could be called a pontificating insult. But, since it's an ode to their good results, it should be taken as positive praise.
All due respect-
I give Renda credit for WISH and WJAS. These stations aren't my cup of tea but obviously cater to their audiences very well.
But WPTT is a disaster. This is NOT his crowning jewel.
In many ways I think that when you have a bunch of stations like this the way you really look at it is "how well do they program their talk?"
I mean, women anywhere are going to listen to soft-rock (WISH). Senior people are going to listen to the music played on WJAS. Sometimes you have formats that just can't fail. How difficult do you really think it is to draw an audience with country music in Nashville or Latin music in Miami, for instance?
But talk is another animal. You need cutting edge news and personality. Tired old hosts resting on their laurels from 1989 aren't going to work.
Now, I agree with you. He's more likely to ask Jack Bogut to do mornings on WPTT or 20-year old airchecks of O'Brien and Garry than anything remotely cutting edge on that station.
But that's really the reason why I think, move to 910 or no, WPTT is never going to be a player and Renda is destined to bat .667 in Pittsburgh.
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Pratte4Life on 07/10/05 08:05 PM.</FONT></P>
I give Renda credit for WISH and WJAS. These stations aren't my cup of tea but obviously cater to their audiences very well.
But WPTT is a disaster. This is NOT his crowning jewel.
In many ways I think that when you have a bunch of stations like this the way you really look at it is "how well do they program their talk?"
I mean, women anywhere are going to listen to soft-rock (WISH). Senior people are going to listen to the music played on WJAS. Sometimes you have formats that just can't fail. How difficult do you really think it is to draw an audience with country music in Nashville or Latin music in Miami, for instance?
But talk is another animal. You need cutting edge news and personality. Tired old hosts resting on their laurels from 1989 aren't going to work.
Now, I agree with you. He's more likely to ask Jack Bogut to do mornings on WPTT or 20-year old airchecks of O'Brien and Garry than anything remotely cutting edge on that station.
But that's really the reason why I think, move to 910 or no, WPTT is never going to be a player and Renda is destined to bat .667 in Pittsburgh.
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Pratte4Life on 07/10/05 08:05 PM.</FONT></P>
R
Radio_Realist
Guest
Re: All due respect-
I do not think WPTT is the best that it could be. I think there are a lot of things that could have been done better. But I think "disaster" is a bit strong. Perhaps "near miss" is a better description.
I do agree that WPTT comes in third out of the three Renda stations, but any time you have three of anything, one of them has to be third. Hoerth's mindless chatter show does fill a certain niche, as does Cullen's snooze-fest. And, for better or worse, WPTT does seem to have more interaction from local callers on the air. Some folks like that, some don't. I do.
On the other hand, Cullen has gotten really boring. Never mind that I almost always disagree with her. She used to be interesting to listen to, and interesting to phone in and disagree with. But not any more. Lately, she's started talking like her toungue was coated with molasses. I've even wondered if maybe she isn't suffering from some sort of medical condition.
> I give Renda credit for WISH and WJAS. These stations aren't
> my cup of tea but obviously cater to their audiences very
> well.
>
> But WPTT is a disaster. This is NOT his crowning jewel.
>
> In many ways I think that when you have a bunch of stations
> like this the way you really look at it is "how well do they
> program their talk?"
>
> I mean, women anywhere are going to listen to soft-rock
> (WISH). Senior people are going to listen to the music
> played on WJAS. Sometimes you have formats that just can't
> fail. How difficult do you really think it is to draw an
> audience with country music in Nashville or Latin music in
> Miami, for instance?
>
> But talk is another animal. You need cutting edge news and
> personality. Tired old hosts resting on their laurels from
> 1989 aren't going to work.
>
> Now, I agree with you. He's more likely to ask Jack Bogut to
> do mornings on WPTT or 20-year old airchecks of O'Brien and
> Garry than anything remotely cutting edge on that station.
>
> But that's really the reason why I think, move to 910 or no,
> WPTT is never going to be a player and Renda is destined to
> bat .667 in Pittsburgh.
>
I do not think WPTT is the best that it could be. I think there are a lot of things that could have been done better. But I think "disaster" is a bit strong. Perhaps "near miss" is a better description.
I do agree that WPTT comes in third out of the three Renda stations, but any time you have three of anything, one of them has to be third. Hoerth's mindless chatter show does fill a certain niche, as does Cullen's snooze-fest. And, for better or worse, WPTT does seem to have more interaction from local callers on the air. Some folks like that, some don't. I do.
On the other hand, Cullen has gotten really boring. Never mind that I almost always disagree with her. She used to be interesting to listen to, and interesting to phone in and disagree with. But not any more. Lately, she's started talking like her toungue was coated with molasses. I've even wondered if maybe she isn't suffering from some sort of medical condition.
> I give Renda credit for WISH and WJAS. These stations aren't
> my cup of tea but obviously cater to their audiences very
> well.
>
> But WPTT is a disaster. This is NOT his crowning jewel.
>
> In many ways I think that when you have a bunch of stations
> like this the way you really look at it is "how well do they
> program their talk?"
>
> I mean, women anywhere are going to listen to soft-rock
> (WISH). Senior people are going to listen to the music
> played on WJAS. Sometimes you have formats that just can't
> fail. How difficult do you really think it is to draw an
> audience with country music in Nashville or Latin music in
> Miami, for instance?
>
> But talk is another animal. You need cutting edge news and
> personality. Tired old hosts resting on their laurels from
> 1989 aren't going to work.
>
> Now, I agree with you. He's more likely to ask Jack Bogut to
> do mornings on WPTT or 20-year old airchecks of O'Brien and
> Garry than anything remotely cutting edge on that station.
>
> But that's really the reason why I think, move to 910 or no,
> WPTT is never going to be a player and Renda is destined to
> bat .667 in Pittsburgh.
>
Re: All due respect-
No, I think it's a disaster.
When you lose your best host (Bowyer)- it's a disaster
When your ratings go down 40% in a book- it's a disaster
When you promote Neil Bortz on every billboard in town and then take him off the air in a matter of months- it's a disaster
When you build your station around Hoerth and Cullen- who may have a niche following but it's obviously shrinking and are more past their prime than any radio personalities in town- it's a disaster.
When your morning show is on tape delay and doesn't fit in with the rest of the format- it's a disaster.
When you take off the air the ONE THING- the ONE THING that anybody I knew listened to the station on- NASCAR races- thus leaving the city that gets the third highest ratings for NASCAR without a radio outlet- it's a disaster.
Realist- I love your posts. I really do. And who knows- maybe this format change and better frequency will give the station a shot of life.
But right now- I see a complete disaster- DISASTER!
I love talk- and I find the entire station unlistenable.
> I do not think WPTT is the best that it could be. I think
> there are a lot of things that could have been done better.
> But I think "disaster" is a bit strong. Perhaps "near miss"
> is a better description.
>
> I do agree that WPTT comes in third out of the three Renda
> stations, but any time you have three of anything, one of
> them has to be third. Hoerth's mindless chatter show does
> fill a certain niche, as does Cullen's snooze-fest. And, for
> better or worse, WPTT does seem to have more interaction
> from local callers on the air. Some folks like that, some
> don't. I do.
>
> On the other hand, Cullen has gotten really boring. Never
> mind that I almost always disagree with her. She used to be
> interesting to listen to, and interesting to phone in and
> disagree with. But not any more. Lately, she's started
> talking like her toungue was coated with molasses. I've even
> wondered if maybe she isn't suffering from some sort of
> medical condition.
>
> > I give Renda credit for WISH and WJAS. These stations
> aren't
> > my cup of tea but obviously cater to their audiences very
> > well.
> >
> > But WPTT is a disaster. This is NOT his crowning jewel.
> >
> > In many ways I think that when you have a bunch of
> stations
> > like this the way you really look at it is "how well do
> they
> > program their talk?"
> >
> > I mean, women anywhere are going to listen to soft-rock
> > (WISH). Senior people are going to listen to the music
> > played on WJAS. Sometimes you have formats that just can't
>
> > fail. How difficult do you really think it is to draw an
> > audience with country music in Nashville or Latin music in
>
> > Miami, for instance?
> >
> > But talk is another animal. You need cutting edge news and
>
> > personality. Tired old hosts resting on their laurels from
>
> > 1989 aren't going to work.
> >
> > Now, I agree with you. He's more likely to ask Jack Bogut
> to
> > do mornings on WPTT or 20-year old airchecks of O'Brien
> and
> > Garry than anything remotely cutting edge on that station.
>
> >
> > But that's really the reason why I think, move to 910 or
> no,
> > WPTT is never going to be a player and Renda is destined
> to
> > bat .667 in Pittsburgh.
> >
>
No, I think it's a disaster.
When you lose your best host (Bowyer)- it's a disaster
When your ratings go down 40% in a book- it's a disaster
When you promote Neil Bortz on every billboard in town and then take him off the air in a matter of months- it's a disaster
When you build your station around Hoerth and Cullen- who may have a niche following but it's obviously shrinking and are more past their prime than any radio personalities in town- it's a disaster.
When your morning show is on tape delay and doesn't fit in with the rest of the format- it's a disaster.
When you take off the air the ONE THING- the ONE THING that anybody I knew listened to the station on- NASCAR races- thus leaving the city that gets the third highest ratings for NASCAR without a radio outlet- it's a disaster.
Realist- I love your posts. I really do. And who knows- maybe this format change and better frequency will give the station a shot of life.
But right now- I see a complete disaster- DISASTER!
I love talk- and I find the entire station unlistenable.
> I do not think WPTT is the best that it could be. I think
> there are a lot of things that could have been done better.
> But I think "disaster" is a bit strong. Perhaps "near miss"
> is a better description.
>
> I do agree that WPTT comes in third out of the three Renda
> stations, but any time you have three of anything, one of
> them has to be third. Hoerth's mindless chatter show does
> fill a certain niche, as does Cullen's snooze-fest. And, for
> better or worse, WPTT does seem to have more interaction
> from local callers on the air. Some folks like that, some
> don't. I do.
>
> On the other hand, Cullen has gotten really boring. Never
> mind that I almost always disagree with her. She used to be
> interesting to listen to, and interesting to phone in and
> disagree with. But not any more. Lately, she's started
> talking like her toungue was coated with molasses. I've even
> wondered if maybe she isn't suffering from some sort of
> medical condition.
>
> > I give Renda credit for WISH and WJAS. These stations
> aren't
> > my cup of tea but obviously cater to their audiences very
> > well.
> >
> > But WPTT is a disaster. This is NOT his crowning jewel.
> >
> > In many ways I think that when you have a bunch of
> stations
> > like this the way you really look at it is "how well do
> they
> > program their talk?"
> >
> > I mean, women anywhere are going to listen to soft-rock
> > (WISH). Senior people are going to listen to the music
> > played on WJAS. Sometimes you have formats that just can't
>
> > fail. How difficult do you really think it is to draw an
> > audience with country music in Nashville or Latin music in
>
> > Miami, for instance?
> >
> > But talk is another animal. You need cutting edge news and
>
> > personality. Tired old hosts resting on their laurels from
>
> > 1989 aren't going to work.
> >
> > Now, I agree with you. He's more likely to ask Jack Bogut
> to
> > do mornings on WPTT or 20-year old airchecks of O'Brien
> and
> > Garry than anything remotely cutting edge on that station.
>
> >
> > But that's really the reason why I think, move to 910 or
> no,
> > WPTT is never going to be a player and Renda is destined
> to
> > bat .667 in Pittsburgh.
> >
>
R
Radio_Realist
Guest
Re: All due respect-
> But right now- I see a complete disaster- DISASTER!
>
> I love talk- and I find the entire station unlistenable.
Well, maybe you're right. The truth is, it's been a long time since I was able to listen to WPTT for more than a few minutes without being so bored that I had to hit a different station button. I guess I was thinking of how the station used to be, not what it has become.
> But right now- I see a complete disaster- DISASTER!
>
> I love talk- and I find the entire station unlistenable.
Well, maybe you're right. The truth is, it's been a long time since I was able to listen to WPTT for more than a few minutes without being so bored that I had to hit a different station button. I guess I was thinking of how the station used to be, not what it has become.
M
Matthew
Guest
Re: All due respect-
> I give Renda credit for WISH and WJAS. These stations aren't
> my cup of tea but obviously cater to their audiences very
> well.
>
> But WPTT is a disaster. This is NOT his crowning jewel.
>
> In many ways I think that when you have a bunch of stations
> like this the way you really look at it is "how well do they
> program their talk?"
>
> I mean, women anywhere are going to listen to soft-rock
> (WISH). Senior people are going to listen to the music
> played on WJAS. Sometimes you have formats that just can't
> fail. How difficult do you really think it is to draw an
> audience with country music in Nashville or Latin music in
> Miami, for instance?
>
> But talk is another animal. You need cutting edge news and
> personality. Tired old hosts resting on their laurels from
> 1989 aren't going to work.
Agreed that Cullen & Hoerth are past their prime. But the same can be said for Honsberger & Pintek and certainly whatever appeal Pratte ever had has been gone for years. And just how long has Rush been on in Pgh? 17 years singing the same old song. So just what would be cutting edge talk for Pgh? No one seems to want any part of Air America, or Lionel or Stephanie Miller or Ed Schultz. So much for progressive. What about Dimitri and Ruth Ann Dailey. I don't agree with their politics, but at least they are broadcasters, not bored casters. I'd hardly consider GOP hacks like Hannity & Beck cutting edge, and Savage is nothing more than a hate-monger. And let's not even discuss the George Noory/Art Bell nonsense. So just what is cutting edge talk radio for the Pittsburgh Market? Thoughts?
>
> Now, I agree with you. He's more likely to ask Jack Bogut to
> do mornings on WPTT or 20-year old airchecks of O'Brien and
> Garry than anything remotely cutting edge on that station.
>
> But that's really the reason why I think, move to 910 or no,
> WPTT is never going to be a player and Renda is destined to
> bat .667 in Pittsburgh.
>
> I give Renda credit for WISH and WJAS. These stations aren't
> my cup of tea but obviously cater to their audiences very
> well.
>
> But WPTT is a disaster. This is NOT his crowning jewel.
>
> In many ways I think that when you have a bunch of stations
> like this the way you really look at it is "how well do they
> program their talk?"
>
> I mean, women anywhere are going to listen to soft-rock
> (WISH). Senior people are going to listen to the music
> played on WJAS. Sometimes you have formats that just can't
> fail. How difficult do you really think it is to draw an
> audience with country music in Nashville or Latin music in
> Miami, for instance?
>
> But talk is another animal. You need cutting edge news and
> personality. Tired old hosts resting on their laurels from
> 1989 aren't going to work.
Agreed that Cullen & Hoerth are past their prime. But the same can be said for Honsberger & Pintek and certainly whatever appeal Pratte ever had has been gone for years. And just how long has Rush been on in Pgh? 17 years singing the same old song. So just what would be cutting edge talk for Pgh? No one seems to want any part of Air America, or Lionel or Stephanie Miller or Ed Schultz. So much for progressive. What about Dimitri and Ruth Ann Dailey. I don't agree with their politics, but at least they are broadcasters, not bored casters. I'd hardly consider GOP hacks like Hannity & Beck cutting edge, and Savage is nothing more than a hate-monger. And let's not even discuss the George Noory/Art Bell nonsense. So just what is cutting edge talk radio for the Pittsburgh Market? Thoughts?
>
> Now, I agree with you. He's more likely to ask Jack Bogut to
> do mornings on WPTT or 20-year old airchecks of O'Brien and
> Garry than anything remotely cutting edge on that station.
>
> But that's really the reason why I think, move to 910 or no,
> WPTT is never going to be a player and Renda is destined to
> bat .667 in Pittsburgh.
>
Re: All due respect-
Don't know if I will call it a disaster, I will say that it is a work in progress. I would be surprised if this is the final bit of changes before the switch to 910, but I could be mistaken. But let's take the grievances one at a time.
Nascar may have good tv ratings in PGH, but I would question whether those numbers transalte to radio numbers as well, after all if they did and Nascar was a great radio property in this market, someone would pick it up, since Sundays are usually throw away days on most stations, the idea of making money with Sunday programming would seem to be a good thing. Mind you, the Pirates and Penguins have good local tv numbers as well, that doesn't always translate into into people going through the gate. Some things are just a tv phenomenon.
Probably the worst thing about losing Bowyer isn't losing him, so much as it is rearranging your lineup to have him in evening drive and have him leave less than a year later. Now what audience you have built up over the last nine months once again has to go searching for the programs they like.
The Boortz billboards were paid for by Boortz, as sort of an fu to the FM station for cutting him and bringing Rush on board when Boortz's numbers in that time slot were very good for 104.7. Anyone who can go as far back in the wayback machine as Boortz's last show on 104.7 will remember that he went on a rant on the air about how his Pittsburgh station was screwing him over.
I would agree on the complaints about Ingraham, the timeliness of that show is just brutal when doing talk. The show was a full day behind on the London bombings, which you just can't have in doing a talk format. Anything live would be better at this point, even if it is only temporary until the switch. I'll admit, I didn't think I would like Ingraham, but I like the overall sound and production that goes into the show, but you just can't run it a day late.
Don't know if I will call it a disaster, I will say that it is a work in progress. I would be surprised if this is the final bit of changes before the switch to 910, but I could be mistaken. But let's take the grievances one at a time.
Nascar may have good tv ratings in PGH, but I would question whether those numbers transalte to radio numbers as well, after all if they did and Nascar was a great radio property in this market, someone would pick it up, since Sundays are usually throw away days on most stations, the idea of making money with Sunday programming would seem to be a good thing. Mind you, the Pirates and Penguins have good local tv numbers as well, that doesn't always translate into into people going through the gate. Some things are just a tv phenomenon.
Probably the worst thing about losing Bowyer isn't losing him, so much as it is rearranging your lineup to have him in evening drive and have him leave less than a year later. Now what audience you have built up over the last nine months once again has to go searching for the programs they like.
The Boortz billboards were paid for by Boortz, as sort of an fu to the FM station for cutting him and bringing Rush on board when Boortz's numbers in that time slot were very good for 104.7. Anyone who can go as far back in the wayback machine as Boortz's last show on 104.7 will remember that he went on a rant on the air about how his Pittsburgh station was screwing him over.
I would agree on the complaints about Ingraham, the timeliness of that show is just brutal when doing talk. The show was a full day behind on the London bombings, which you just can't have in doing a talk format. Anything live would be better at this point, even if it is only temporary until the switch. I'll admit, I didn't think I would like Ingraham, but I like the overall sound and production that goes into the show, but you just can't run it a day late.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.