• 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

More thoughts on overnight show on WBZ

First of all the host is a marginal talent. He is from market 20 simulcast to market 10 and market 17. Only Pittsburgh is smaller. Think of past local overnight personalities,Steve,Bob Raleigh,Larry Glick,Norm Nathan,George Fennell. National overnight hosts,Larry King,Art Bell,Jim Bohannon,Phil Hendrie,George Noory. Mr. Grayson no way. He was doing 11p-2a on KMOX. Now 12-5a CST. This means they also put a knife in the back of the 2-5a host in ST.Louis Ralph Grazyk who their website shows a once a week time slot. Tired of pointing out the policys of CBS,Please bring back Steve >
 
I'm having a hard time warming up to the new host; He does seem a bit too serious, or reserved for my tastes. As far as Steve is concerned, I don't believe he wants to come back, judging from the interview that I read from his website.
 
katzradio said:
I'm having a hard time warming up to the new host; He does seem a bit too serious, or reserved for my tastes. As far as Steve is concerned, I don't believe he wants to come back, judging from the interview that I read from his website.
I have to agree and I didn't read what you did. When Steve was running all over town doing snippets on other people's shows I kinda knew he was ready to bust. I think he was loosing heart and the election, Mel, and Max the cat was what got him through. Maybe he was waiting for a severance package. A package would allow him time/money he needs to re-establish himself. He needs a place where he will be allowed to do his type of broadcasting, his way! You get to a point in your life/career where you simply don't want to be another moron just because that is what everyone else is doing ...just for a pay check, but you also have to pay bills.
I e-mailed Jordan Furniture on my own to politely express my opinion. I got a nice response. They are most pleased with WBZ. That realy didn't bother me, but what followed clearly explains why businesses, all bussiness are in so much trouble. The gal who answered my e-mail informed me they don't support over-night programming. Surprise, surprise, surprise, I had the to good fortune to inform her that Jordan's ad did run overnight the first night of the program change ( the last night I listened). Not only that it run back to back with the Bernie & Phyl ad. Now there are more than enough advertisers, so why the hell would anyone do that? Two furniture stores back to back. I hope by summer to hear Steve somewhere cause talent is a terrible thing to waste!
 
That's there decision what hours to run their ads, but I'm no longer listening to WBoZo at any hour so I'm not hearing there shilling at all.
 
Does the overnight show matter anymore or is it all about saving money. Could having a host on at that time that people don't like effect the morning ratings.
 
Experts say that there's a ton of investment money sitting on the sidelines. A group of investors would be wise to make a play for WBZ and wrest it away from CBS.

The situation is not dissimilar from the NYT's ownership of the Boston Globe. When local interest cropped up two or three years ago, the NYT got all haughty (well, they are that all the time) and said 'Nyet' or whatever 'No' is in Cuban or Communist China. The result? The Boston Globe is now worth less than 10% of that offer from a couple years ago. Maybe CBS would be smart to say 'Yes' to a local buy-out offer...if one came along.

The 'CBS-ification' of WBZ is sickening and I haven't listened to their money-grabbing programming for a couple years now. These latest moves are pushing more listeners away, and diminishing the value of the product.
 
jk111 said:
First of all the host is a marginal talent. He is from market 20 simulcast to market 10 and market 17. Only Pittsburgh is smaller. Think of past local overnight personalities,Steve,Bob Raleigh,Larry Glick,Norm Nathan,George Fennell. National overnight hosts,Larry King,Art Bell,Jim Bohannon,Phil Hendrie,George Noory. Mr. Grayson no way. He was doing 11p-2a on KMOX. Now 12-5a CST. This means they also put a knife in the back of the 2-5a host in ST.Louis Ralph Grazyk who their website shows a once a week time slot. Tired of pointing out the policys of CBS,Please bring back Steve >


Chances are you'll warm up to Michael Smerconish...
 
ChrisNH said:
Experts say that there's a ton of investment money sitting on the sidelines. A group of investors would be wise to make a play for WBZ and wrest it away from CBS.

Maybe CBS would be smart to say 'Yes' to a local buy-out offer...if one came along.

CBS is not going to sell one of their premier properties in a down market.
(Heck, they are hesitating selling their lesser properties in this current climate.)

You are crazy if you think some local group is going to buy WBZ and then spend more money than CBS is. Do you think someone buying WBZ would suddenly load up the newsroom and strip away all syndicated shows and swallow all of the additional payroll?

A local group would be expecting the same return on investment as CBS is....if not more.

While none of us like to see people lose their jobs, local origination reduced, or any reduction in programming resources....WBZ made "not the worst" move to reduce expenditures.

The average person never listens to WBZ overnights (or evenings for that matter.)
 
e average person never listens to WBZ overnights (or evenings for that matter.)
That's not the point. The "average person" doesn't do a lot of things. A few stations should be great, or at least attempt to be. Let the other 99% do crap.
 
Blackroc said:
e average person never listens to WBZ overnights (or evenings for that matter.)
That's not the point. The "average person" doesn't do a lot of things. A few stations should be great, or at least attempt to be. Let the other 99% do crap.

This is about broadcasting, not narrowcasting. One thing that most avarage people do is sleep at night. They don't suddenly wake up at 3am and run to turn their AM radio to hear about a breaking, local news story. They normally get to hear about breaking news between 6am and 9am when they're awake and on the way to work/school.
 
Blackroc said:
the average person never listens to WBZ overnights (or evenings for that matter.)

That's not the point.

No, it's precisely the point. WBZ had to make some cutbacks. They did it in the area that affects the least amount of listeners.

Blackroc said:
The "average person" doesn't do a lot of things.

Let's put it this way, 99% of WBZ's listeners have never, and will never be listening overnight. They haven't a clue as to whats on WBZ overnights.

Blackroc said:
A few stations should be great, or at least attempt to be. Let the other 99% do crap.

"Being great" is a nice concept if you don't have to pay the bills.

.
 
Easy to play armchair quarterback/business person when your not paying the bills.

Economy is in the tank, advertising revenue is way down,
but hey lets keep spending money for a few overnighters and radio geeks.

Similar to listening to a caller say, "WE should sign _____player for 20 million."
Yeah, like YOUR writing the check.
 
12 In a Row said:
Easy to play armchair quarterback/business person when your not paying the bills.

Economy is in the tank, advertising revenue is way down,
but hey lets keep spending money for a few overnighters and radio geeks.

Similar to listening to a caller say, "WE should sign _____player for 20 million."
Yeah, like YOUR writing the check.

In a way, I AM writing the check, because Comcast charges me for all those sports channels I have no interest in watching. If the new chairman of the Telecommunications Committee in the House of Representatives (Rick Boucher, D-VA) ever drops by, I'll ask him about possibly allowing viewers to opt out of all the sports channels on cable...it wouldn't be completely a cafeteria approach to cable channel selection, but close enough. It might save subscribers 10-dollars or more a month.
 
Cable won't let subscribers do a la carte selections of channels as much as the viewers would love it.
They're tied up sometimes by agreements where they have to carry certain channels, etc., even
if viewers could care less about them. Would I love to get rid of the channels I don't watch and only keep
those I do? Yes, but they won't let that happen. Would I like to get some channels (like the new MLB
network) that are currently on higher tiers, WITHOUT having to buy a package with a bunch of channels
I _don't_ want, for a much higher price? Sure but... (And some on the left would be able to pick,
for example, MSNBC, which got dropped on my system, and opt out of Fox News..)
 
raccoonradio said:
Cable won't let subscribers do a la carte selections of channels as much as the viewers would love it.
They're tied up sometimes by agreements where they have to carry certain channels, etc., even
if viewers could care less about them. Would I love to get rid of the channels I don't watch and only keep
those I do? Yes, but they won't let that happen. Would I like to get some channels (like the new MLB
network) that are currently on higher tiers, WITHOUT having to buy a package with a bunch of channels
I _don't_ want, for a much higher price? Sure but... (And some on the left would be able to pick,
for example, MSNBC, which got dropped on my system, and opt out of Fox News..)

1. Your local cable company pays enormous programming network fees.
2. Trucks, cable guys and gals just in case your TV goes dark.
3. Lots of fees to lots of cities and towns.

I'm sure they would LOVE to go cable a la carte if they could.

You want Fox News? No problem, 10 bucks
A little CNN on the side? 10 bucks
ESPN and NESN? Oh, they charge us LOTS, so we'll pass it on to you. Another 40 bucks.
TNT, TBS and any other T is on sale this month for an additional 5 bucks.

Quickly adds up! ;D
 
Blackroc said:
e average person never listens to WBZ overnights (or evenings for that matter.)
That's not the point. The "average person" doesn't do a lot of things. A few stations should be great, or at least attempt to be. Let the other 99% do crap.
I agree totally. This average person when she worked she worked days and was nauseatd by morning drive and turned it off. All news was a recycled bore. Evenings I cook my family's supper, so the only radio I have listend to for the past 5 years has been over night and I looked forward to it wheter it was the first half or second half. I miss local talk...no monkey meat for me.
 
WBZ had to make some cutbacks.
BZ is making money. The CBS cutbacks are about profit margin and shareholders. They want small salaries and pension liabilities throughout the network in order to pay dividends comparable to previous years when revenues were higher.
The question is though, will ratings/revenues drop with drastic personnel cuts? Will making a once great station mediocre cause ratings to decline throughout all programming?
 
Blackroc said:
WBZ had to make some cutbacks.
The question is though, will ratings/revenues drop with drastic personnel cuts? Will making a once great station mediocre cause ratings to decline throughout all programming?

Well, I stopped listening to WBZ a few years ago because it became more about the commercials and the incessant 'brought to you by's...' than about relevant content and things that would compel me to listen. Hey, I know they've got salaries to feed and advertising revenue is a way to do it. But don't bludgeon me and then get mad when we decide to tune you out. You can't have it both ways, because annoying programming drives us away. When I tuned you out and switched on my much-more-pleasant-to-listen-to iPod loaded with free and commercial-free Podcasts, it started off as a protest. But you've done nothing but keep me away while driving even more listeners off the same cliff. Every move to cut costs and every move to boost revenue is having negative consequences here. What a moribund business to be in, when cost-cutting and revenue-building chase your customers away. It was the Gil Santos one-minute thesis on Purina Cat Chow that did it for me.

You lament the state of the business and your company while continuing to do more of the things that got you in the pickle. Isn't that what they say about insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result?
 
spt87 said:
That's there decision what hours to run their ads, but I'm no longer listening to WBoZo at any hour so I'm not hearing there shilling at all.

Quite a few clowns in radio these days...
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom