• 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

KUOW staff to unionize

AQH said:
Fair points.

To answer the question on how to comment, I don't have one. That's up to you. When the sample period that bases an opinion, bad or good, is over three years old and the ratings have markedly increased over the past year, doesn't that say, "hmmmm, maybe things have changed"? At the very least, I would want to listen to the station and see if I can hear why the ratings went up.

Anybody can make an assertion or opinion about a station at anytime, yet there's a difference between making an informed and uninformed one.
Click to expand...

You're right. I should have qualified my initial post with the gap in my regular listening and hedged my position a little bit. That would have been more reasonable.
 
What percentage of KUOW revenue comes from advertising (sorry... "underwriting announcements") what percentage comes from grants, and how much comes from governmental sources (taxpayers)? Anyone?
 
Not wanting to rehash my controversial statements about the organizational structure at KUOW from six weeks ago, so I'll just say this.

I feel terrible for Lisa Brooks, Jamala Henderson, and Tami Kosch who are long time market vets, and are great at what they do.

Lisa Brooks is among the best local news anchors on an NPR station... she's been able to finely tune her delivery to combine the listenability of a commercial news anchor with the 'NPR-style' something that is seemingly easier said the done. Hopefully she can slip into one of the new positions at the station (given she was host & anchor at KUOW before the positions were split when Radke came back, it shouldn't be a problem).
 
TheBigA said:
http://kuow.org/about-kuow#fin
Click to expand...

So, as I read the 2016 CPB report, about $4.5 million comes from memberships, $3.7 million from underwriting and related sources, and the rest of the $13.1 million raised came from government, education institution and private sector grants.

And the operating expense is about $1 million a month, about half of which is administrative, fund raising and underwriting costs.
 
DavidEduardo said:
So, as I read the 2016 CPB report, about $4.5 million comes from memberships,
Click to expand...

That's the report they deliver to CPB. You might want to look at the annual report:

"During the past ten years, revenue from individual members has more than doubled, from approximately $4.5 million in 2007 to $9.5 million in 2017. Your generosity makes our work possible —thank you."
 
DavidEduardo said:
$13.1 million raised came from government, education institution and private sector grants
Click to expand...

Under 2017 Financials, it specifically lists $744,153 from CPB. That's the only federal money.

Direct Support from the University: $127,462. Indirect Support from the University: $118,498

Listener Support + Underwriting = $13,265,559
 
The $127,462 from the University. Where does this money come from?
 
Ten seconds of looking at the KUOW financials show that in FY2017, operational expenses were higher than revenue. Whoever led the unionizing effort and told the staff it would be a good idea to jack up the operating expenses of a 501(c)(3) is a fool.

Releasing the staff like KUOW did is a prime example of the law of unintended consequences.

In the end, the only winner will be those who collect the union dues.
 
KXA said:
This seems like retaliation for unionizing. If KUOW was a good employer, there would be no incentive to unionize. Shame on them.
Click to expand...

As someone who daily sees examples of people who do not have even a minimal ability to understand that "ability to pay more" is based on having sufficient income to cover increased expenses, I think that one needs to look at both the work environment and the ability of the staff to understand basic budgeting.
 
DavidEduardo said:


As someone who daily sees examples of people who do not have even a minimal ability to understand that "ability to pay more" is based on having sufficient income to cover increased expenses, I think that one needs to look at both the work environment and the ability of the staff to understand basic budgeting.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding me? These folks don't care about economics 101.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom