The problem with that concept is nothing stays the same. The expense of running it continues to grow. The new contract they signed with the union is based on current revenues, which are diminishing. The expense of moving the studio, the expense of running the huge transmitter, and anything else connected to it all contribute to new expenses. This kind of thing can be maintained for a while. But at some point, change will have to come, regardless of who owns it. There are lots of examples of AM stations around Boston that were once ratings powerhouses at one time, that are now barely existing, thanks to the passage of time.
-
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
Breaking: iHeart agrees to recognize union, offer BZ jobs (Herald)
- Thread starter raccoonradio
- Start date
The problem with that concept is nothing stays the same. The expense of running it continues to grow. The new contract they signed with the union is based on current revenues, which are diminishing. The expense of moving the studio, the expense of running the huge transmitter, and anything else connected to it all contribute to new expenses. This kind of thing can be maintained for a while. But at some point, change will have to come, regardless of who owns it. There are lots of examples of AM stations around Boston that were once ratings powerhouses at one time, that are now barely existing, thanks to the passage of time.
Steve Green NEPA
Star Participant
Wow -- you're everywhere, Big A. What's that called ? Eponymous? Erroneous? 
None of the those Boston AM stations has that WBZ signal. I merely was contending that the WBZ signal plus the WBZ 20i7 stream should hold fast to what they've been doing in tandem. Financial things no doubt will change, of course. The new owners should be recognizing that success for what it is, though, not for what it 'might' be.
'Ubiquitous'. That's the word I was looking for. Sorry for the typ}pos.
None of the those Boston AM stations has that WBZ signal. I merely was contending that the WBZ signal plus the WBZ 20i7 stream should hold fast to what they've been doing in tandem. Financial things no doubt will change, of course. The new owners should be recognizing that success for what it is, though, not for what it 'might' be.
'Ubiquitous'. That's the word I was looking for. Sorry for the typ}pos.
I think they have. Don't you think that's why they bought it? As I said earlier, I doubt they bought a Top 5 station to blow it up. One report says they spoke of the station during their union negotiations as a Jaguar, rather than a Toyota. So they're well aware of what they've bought.
Ink factory, not propane plant.
Freep getting something wrong?!? Quelle surprise!
Freep getting something wrong?!? Quelle surprise!
If you work in radio, at some point you've either worked or lived everywhere. Remember the theme song to WKRP?
nowradioguy
Star Participant
OK, so now, kindly explain to us why iHeart bought WBZ-AM in the first place, if, in your own words, "The expense of running it continues to grow. The new contract they signed with the union is based on current revenues, which are diminishing. The expense of moving the studio, the expense of running the huge transmitter, and anything else connected to it all contribute to new expenses."
A few posters on this and/or the other site claim iHeart does have the cash; maybe it does, maybe it doesn't.
But given what you wrote above, doesn't iheart have enough to worry about with other blowtorches like WLW, KFI, KOA, WHO, WTAM?
Damn, I know I'm puzzled!
Damn, I know I'm puzzled!
What's the problem? iHeart traded for the stations, with some cash. That's not what I was talking about at all.
My post was in response to another, who wants iHeart to leave the station alone, and for things to stay the same. Nothing stays the same. Get used to it.
Read what I wrote in post #23.
Revenues are diminishing very slowly. In fact, the major reductions in revenue occured during the peak of the recession and following the introduction of the PPM. And those affected the whole market.
Studio moving expenses are a capital expense, amortized over a useful life.
A 50 kw transmitter and all its gear probably use around $12 an hour in electricity. In other words, cheaper than the lowest paid employee by a great deal. In fact, the technical expense (power, maintenance, labor, etc.) for a 5 kw highly directional station is likely more than that for WBZ.
Uncle Kaimbridge
Leading Participant
Well, actually three employees—unless one is working double overtime, 7 days a week—and that is a healthy chunk of change: $12×24hr.s×365.25days = $105,192yr!
Eli Polonsky
Walk of Fame Participant
WBZ is quite directional. They don't send much power eastward into the ocean. Due to the pattern, it doesn't come in as well as you'd expect on outer Cape Cod, I've heard phasing artifacts there.
Well, actually three employees—unless one is working double overtime, 7 days a week—and that is a healthy chunk of change: $12×24hr.s×365.25days = $105,192yr!
I meant "cheaper by the hour".
There is a common misconception that the power bill is a significant part of the budget of even larger market radio stations. In the case of WBZ, we are talking about a station that bills a coupla' million a month, so the $8,000 transmitter power bill is not a significant expense. Only if you are running 50 kw with an old high-level plate modulated transmitter in a market like Bismarck, ND, is the power bill "major"... as demonstrated this year by a 50 kw station dropping power to a more reasonable level for market coverage.
While the signal is pushed on the 270° radial and nulled on 90°, the pattern is very, very simple and uses just two towers. Compare to the costs of maintaining the much more critical and complex WRKO and WEEI systems, or the three pattern, four tower WMEX array and the WBZ system is a breeze.
nowradioguy
Star Participant
David,
Just to clarify: I did not mean to imply I was agreeing with the poster to whom I was responding. All I meant was that IF what said poster wrote was indeed true, then why would iHeart bother to take on this heavy burden of rapidly declining revenues, significant capital expense for moves, and a huge electric bill? Don't they have enough troubles of their own?
Fortunately, at least for WBZ's sake, the dire situation described by the other poster is not all doom-and-gloom.
nowradioguy
Star Participant
You are, once again, correct.
A two-tower array with a cardioid pattern which blows out heavy flames inland, as opposed to seaward, is fairly easy to implement.
In 1964, as a young pup, I wrote to the WBZ CE and asked where their transmitter was and if they were directional. I received a letter back from him - I might still have it in my collection of radio goodies - stating that "(WBZ) AM was directional only to prevent loss of signal over the ocean." Simple enough reason, simple enough pattern.
OTOH, the patterns for WRKO or WEEI-AM or WMEX have to be way more complex.
- Status