Re: Speaking of Hatchet
SirRoxalot said:
Isn't it funny that your examples never have call letters or markets, and, in general, none of your opinions have any "support documents."
Unlike you, who ignores the "support documents" provided because you have your own super secret studies that show different results than information posted by Arbitron.
No, I simply have the subscriber data or have the Arbitron studies for PPM, which now covers all the top 10 markets, where 30% of all of America's radio ad revenue is generated. And I have cited data from PPM, as well as historic data (mostly Arbitron) going back to the 60's that is available to anyone who does a bit of research.
The 7-Midnight guy was Tom Tiberi at WGRZ - 97-Rock in Buffalo. A friend inside - a long-timer whom I trust - tells me that Buffalo, and especially 97-Rock, are cash cows for Citadel, especially since the ABC "merger".
There is no WGRZ. Maybe you mean WGRF? In any case, I do not see how a station with declining or flat billing over the last 5 years in market 52 can really help Citadel overall. Or a market where CDL bills roughly $18 million in a company where the last year's total billing was $892 million? That's about 2% of the company revenues... Or, on an EBITDA basis, let's say Buffalo has a 35% margin, rather typical in that billing range and market size... meaning they made about $6 million in BCF... yet the whole company made $262 million in EBITDA, making Buffalo, again, the contributor of around 2.5% of EBITDA.
Is that specific enough for you?
Obviously, I can't provide the results of anyone's perceptual research or music testing or callout. Like 95% of research done in business, it is proprietary and confidential. The funny thing is that, when i explain how a broad perceptual, such as a format search, is done, you instantly discard the results. You are not a researcher, yet you dispute professional recruits. You are not a programmer, yet you dispute interpretation and implementation. In Spanish we have an expression for such cases... "Eres como el perro de Ortelano, que ni come ni deja comer." Or, "You are like Joe's dog... it neither eats nor lets the others eat either. "
Let's hear your research and programming techniques. Something beyond, "It's wrong" or "we need more DJs."
I'm guessing you are a DJ who was let go, and can not get new employment because you are indisciplined and won't follow the format and your supervisors and talk too much.
And GM is at the lowest point it has been since W.W. II. Microsoft is off something like 86% from it's high, and is around $19 today.
I'm trying to recall ANYBODY touting the genius of American Automotive management - or unions for that matter. At least GM isn't in danger of being delisted.
I could list dozens of companies that have hugely deflated stock prices. GM is not alone.
Better check your math. Microsoft hit $58 during the dot-com boom.
You are correct. I missed the stock split, as it peaked around $119 pre-split, per Morningstar.
It's now at $19. That's about 33% of its highest value, a spike in 1999. It's lowest number was actually around $17 last week... so the drop isn't as drastic as you make it out to be. See what you can do with "statistics"?
No, that is "see what you can do if you make a mistake..." which is what I did. It has nothing to do with statistics.
It's still a perfect example... the market cap of Microsoft far exceeds the peak market cap of all the public radio companies together. Investors lost over $600 billion on Microsoft based on its peak.
See what you can do with statistics?
It would cost me 111 shares of Citadel for one share of Microsoft. Know anybody that wants to make THAT trade?
The high or low value of a share has nothing to do with the value of the company... that is determined by the fundamentals of each company and each share...
There might be a $1 share that is a much better buy than a $75 share. The price of each share is irrelevant in most cases.
