When will WRTM be moving into the Jackson Metro area?
-
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
WRTM
- Thread starter Texasbrave
- Start date
I don't always agree with a station leaving a small town for a larger market but it's probably a case of survival for WRTM. With 30% of the of Port Gibson living below the poverty line I am sure it's not easy keeping the tower lights blinking. I am not sure the Smooth Soul format is going to work covering Canton and Ridgeland. The signal just isn't right where it will need to be strong. It won't be easy only covering the north half of Jackson. The competition for them is strong and will surely eat them for lunch without a format flip. The new stick is much more attractive as a sale to another broadcaster. I know nothing about the owners but they appear to be based in Jackson so they may be in it for the long haul. All the formats that will work in Jackson are being done already on better signals so it will be interesting to see what the do with it. This one is very much a rimshot.
They are keeping coverage over Port Gibson and Vicksburg.
They will stay on the Port Gibson tower and add a tower in Canton both at 100.5.
With they will cover Brookhaven, Natchez and much of Central Mississippi.
With they will cover Brookhaven, Natchez and much of Central Mississippi.
100.5 is allottted to Port Gibson and Sharon with the same owner.
The current WRTM facilities are mutully exclusive with the facilities in Sharon.
You may check RecNetwork.net
You may check RecNetwork.net
Texasbrave said:
Adj. 1. mutually exclusive - unable to be both true at the same time
Look... I'm trying to explain this the best I can. There is absolutely no way both facilities can legally operate at the same time. They have filed a minor change for an EXISTING facility. That means they are making changes to a licensed station. Once the Sharon, MS site is built and a license is issued, the Port Gibson allocation will go away.
If that isn't clear enough, I guess someone else will have to take a shot at explaining this.
And BTW... RecNetwork.net gets their information from the FCC.
RFB
I will try to help.
Taken directly from the application to change the COL from Port Gibson to Sharon, MS. - FCC FILE NO. BMPH - 20110520ABA
"Commander Communications Corporation, Licensee of WRTM-FM, respectfully
requests that the Commission allow WRTM-FM to change its community of license from
Port Gibson, Mississippi to Sharon, Mississippi, which would result in a preferential
arrangement of FM facilities. The community of Port Gibson would not be deprived of
its sole local FM service as a result of the changes contemplated herein. Noncommercial
FM station WATU-FM would remain in Port Gibson to serve that community, allowing
the community of Sharon to receive it first local FM service from WRTM-FM."
Taken directly from the application to change the COL from Port Gibson to Sharon, MS. - FCC FILE NO. BMPH - 20110520ABA
"Commander Communications Corporation, Licensee of WRTM-FM, respectfully
requests that the Commission allow WRTM-FM to change its community of license from
Port Gibson, Mississippi to Sharon, Mississippi, which would result in a preferential
arrangement of FM facilities. The community of Port Gibson would not be deprived of
its sole local FM service as a result of the changes contemplated herein. Noncommercial
FM station WATU-FM would remain in Port Gibson to serve that community, allowing
the community of Sharon to receive it first local FM service from WRTM-FM."
Hey all -
RFB, Michael, et cetera are correct. Besides, even if both stations were to operate simultaneously, they would cause significant interference to each other, particularly in Jackson, thus defeating the point of the move.
As to the issue of the wisdom of such a move (alluded to by JBI), I must say that many advertisers in the Jackson metro that I encounter do wish that Jackson had another urban station (after 105.9 flipped, especially). I believe that, even with a somewhat less-than-full market signal, WRTM-FM could outbill what it is billing now, and its electricity bill will probably go down a bit.
--- Casual Oberver
RFB, Michael, et cetera are correct. Besides, even if both stations were to operate simultaneously, they would cause significant interference to each other, particularly in Jackson, thus defeating the point of the move.
As to the issue of the wisdom of such a move (alluded to by JBI), I must say that many advertisers in the Jackson metro that I encounter do wish that Jackson had another urban station (after 105.9 flipped, especially). I believe that, even with a somewhat less-than-full market signal, WRTM-FM could outbill what it is billing now, and its electricity bill will probably go down a bit.
--- Casual Oberver
Definition of MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE
: being related such that each excludes or precludes the other <mutually exclusive events>; also : incompatible <their outlooks were not mutually exclusive>
WRTM can either be in Port Gibson or Sharon. Sharon will replace the licensed facility at Port Gibson.
: being related such that each excludes or precludes the other <mutually exclusive events>; also : incompatible <their outlooks were not mutually exclusive>
WRTM can either be in Port Gibson or Sharon. Sharon will replace the licensed facility at Port Gibson.
Thanks Michael. So when do think they move?
WRTM has been granted a construction permit by the FCC so they can build the site at any time.
They can start broadcasting from the new site when built with 50% power until they file and are granted a license to cover by the FCC. They can and must do any of this before 04/29/2013.
How soon is this happens is mostly up to the owner Carl Haynes and secondly mother nature.
They can start broadcasting from the new site when built with 50% power until they file and are granted a license to cover by the FCC. They can and must do any of this before 04/29/2013.
How soon is this happens is mostly up to the owner Carl Haynes and secondly mother nature.
It actually wouldn't surprise me if the owner was a small town radio guy who honestly didn't know he couldn't run both at the same time. 
I mention this because of a story that was conveyed to me recently from over in Alabama. A few years ago a station in the town of Opp got a CP to move up to 100,000 watts, which would have affected the only FM in Wilcox County, in the town of Camden because they were co-channel. The owner of THAT station said he didn't understand why he couldn't also go to 100,000 watts, on the same frequency, and they couldn't "share the channel".
Seriously. He had no idea about channel spacing or power requirements or anything. At the time this happened, it was discovered that he was operating from an unlicensed site with a 12-bay antenna, completely out of compliance with his license, and covering a whole heck of a lot more territory than he should have been.
If you were an engineer who came across this, would you flee or try to set him straight? As far as I know, the Camden station is still running too much power into their big antenna from the wrong tower.
Obviously the majority of small operators are versed in the rules and regulations, but if this guy could get away with this mindset for a decade or better, no telling what other owners think they can do!
I mention this because of a story that was conveyed to me recently from over in Alabama. A few years ago a station in the town of Opp got a CP to move up to 100,000 watts, which would have affected the only FM in Wilcox County, in the town of Camden because they were co-channel. The owner of THAT station said he didn't understand why he couldn't also go to 100,000 watts, on the same frequency, and they couldn't "share the channel".
Seriously. He had no idea about channel spacing or power requirements or anything. At the time this happened, it was discovered that he was operating from an unlicensed site with a 12-bay antenna, completely out of compliance with his license, and covering a whole heck of a lot more territory than he should have been.
If you were an engineer who came across this, would you flee or try to set him straight? As far as I know, the Camden station is still running too much power into their big antenna from the wrong tower.
Obviously the majority of small operators are versed in the rules and regulations, but if this guy could get away with this mindset for a decade or better, no telling what other owners think they can do!
- Status