From joe@attorneyross.com Sun Jun 1 01:03:04 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 01:03:04 -0400 Subject: Fwd: Re: top-40 in 1957 In-Reply-To: <005201cf7cff$65fa9760$31efc620$@comcast.net> References: <53895F03.4010301@attorneyross.com> <538962EF.9020809@attorneyross.com> <538972E1.90000@attorneyross.com> <004901cf7cdd$23dac430$6b904c90$@cssinc.com> <005201cf7cff$65fa9760$31efc620$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <538AB408.7090403@attorneyross.com> On 5/31/2014 2:37 PM, Mark Watson wrote: > WBZ-AM went one step further with Kodachrome. They edited the song to start with the verse "If you took all the girls I knew when I was single". That cut it down to about a 2 minute song. As I just said in another post, the version that I heard on WBZ substituted the "girls I knew when I was single" line for the "crap" line, and then repeated it in its normal place. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From joe@attorneyross.com Sun Jun 1 01:04:17 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 01:04:17 -0400 Subject: top-40 in 1957 In-Reply-To: References: <53895F03.4010301@attorneyross.com> <538962EF.9020809@attorneyross.com> <538972E1.90000@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <538AB451.5090105@attorneyross.com> On 5/31/2014 4:14 PM, Ron Bello wrote: > Just heard this version on WCTK today > > It amazes me how often the works "sucks" is used on both TV and radio That word has become so common in conversation that I think it has become completely separated from its original meaning. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From madprof@fairpoint.net Sun Jun 1 00:56:08 2014 From: madprof@fairpoint.net (Robert Sutherland) Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 00:56:08 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WXRV translator Message-ID: <55619.137.118.58.10.1401598568.squirrel@web-mail.fairpoint.net> >> Garrett Wollman posted on Fri, May 23, 2014 9:28 pm >> "I believe it's on the FM-128 (ex-Sconnix, ex-WHDH-TV 5) tower" Mapper that I am, I checked the NAD27 coords, and discovered its nearest to the Candelabra (former "Stainless Steel Leasing" tower), TV 25/38/56. on Chabot Street, off 1st Ave, off Highland St, Needham Hgts. sorry to contradict you. Bob Sutherland From joe@attorneyross.com Sun Jun 1 00:59:28 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 00:59:28 -0400 Subject: Fwd: Re: top-40 in 1957 In-Reply-To: <004901cf7cdd$23dac430$6b904c90$@cssinc.com> References: <53895F03.4010301@attorneyross.com> <538962EF.9020809@attorneyross.com> <538972E1.90000@attorneyross.com> <004901cf7cdd$23dac430$6b904c90$@cssinc.com> Message-ID: <538AB330.6020608@attorneyross.com> On 5/31/2014 10:32 AM, Brian T. Vita wrote: > Let's not forget WBZ-FM with Paul Simon's "Kodachrome". The line was "when I think back of all the crap I learned in high school". It was abridged to "when I think back of all...I learned in high school". Ah, the power of the razor blade. In the version I heard on WBZ (AM), the later line "When I think back on all the girls I knew when I was single" was substituted, so it appeared twice in the song. I think WMEX played the full version of the song. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From kvahey@gmail.com Sun Jun 1 01:43:23 2014 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 01:43:23 -0400 Subject: top-40 in 1957 In-Reply-To: <538A2142.6090600@donnahalper.com> References: <4BFDED52791F408EA32A89144A9F520C@PC281321418224> <5385E74E.7030609@fybush.com> <21382.23377.61789.376069@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <5386A633.8080305@fybush.com> <21383.38143.19140.610461@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53882075.8030802@donnahalper.com> <538836FF.7060106@chonak.com> <53883B9E.8030908@donnahalper.com> <5388489D.3020705@chonak.com> <5388B528.1030603@donnahalper.com> <538A2142.6090600@donnahalper.com> Message-ID: Growing up WHDH was the station my parents listened to and they also subscribed to the Herald. WCOP was what the older kids listened to in my neighborhood ( but around Porter Sq 1150 was the strongest signal period ) I am 100% positive this is what Bob Clayton's intro to Boston Ballroom was https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7HYVow1kHQ On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Donna Halper wrote: > On 5/31/2014 2:17 PM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > > I remember Bob Clayton from the early 60's when he hosted Boston > Ballroom on WHDH and also did a TV show on Channel 5. > > I would be shocked if Clayton could have played that as again in those > years WHDH was a strict MOR format except overnight when they let Norm > Nathan do as he pleased. > > > Clayton had a lot of freedom in the 1950s-- his show often featured pop > and top-40 hits that he recommended and then reported to the newspapers. In > fact, Newsweek magazine named him one of the five most influential DJs in > the country and I believe he even made a guest appearance on American > Bandstand. I agree that WHDH had a Middle of the Road format, but my > recollection of Clayton and "Boston Ballroom" is that while he personally > did not like top-40, he liked being an influential DJ, so he played certain > top-40 songs he believed in, as long as they weren't too raucous. > From wollman@bimajority.org Sun Jun 1 02:17:16 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 02:17:16 -0400 Subject: WXRV translator In-Reply-To: <55619.137.118.58.10.1401598568.squirrel@web-mail.fairpoint.net> References: <55619.137.118.58.10.1401598568.squirrel@web-mail.fairpoint.net> Message-ID: <21386.50540.794861.144686@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: >>> Garrett Wollman posted on Fri, May 23, 2014 9:28 pm >>> "I believe it's on the FM-128 (ex-Sconnix, ex-WHDH-TV 5) tower" > Mapper that I am, I checked the NAD27 coords, and discovered its nearest > to the Candelabra (former "Stainless Steel Leasing" tower), TV 25/38/56. > on Chabot Street, off 1st Ave, off Highland St, Needham Hgts. > sorry to contradict you. No need to apologize: that is the correct location. Serves me right for failing to look up the application (the license to cover shows the ASRN, which can then be looked up in ASRS to identify the specific tower by street address). -GAWollman From dlh@donnahalper.com Sun Jun 1 01:52:06 2014 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 01:52:06 -0400 Subject: top-40 in 1957 In-Reply-To: References: <4BFDED52791F408EA32A89144A9F520C@PC281321418224> <5385E74E.7030609@fybush.com> <21382.23377.61789.376069@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <5386A633.8080305@fybush.com> <21383.38143.19140.610461@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53882075.8030802@donnahalper.com> <538836FF.7060106@chonak.com> <53883B9E.8030908@donnahalper.com> <5388489D.3020705@chonak.com> <5388B528.1030603@donnahalper.com> <538A2142.6090600@donnahalper.com> Message-ID: <538ABF86.7050805@donnahalper.com> On 6/1/2014 1:43 AM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > Growing up WHDH was the station my parents listened to and they also > subscribed to the Herald. > > WCOP was what the older kids listened to in my neighborhood ( but > around Porter Sq 1150 was the strongest signal period ) > > I am 100% positive this is what Bob Clayton's intro to Boston Ballroom > was > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7HYVow1kHQ Yes, absolutely that was his theme song. I remember it very clearly-- my parents loved WHDH (Fred B. Cole especially, but also Ken & Bill, etc). From kvahey@gmail.com Sun Jun 1 03:12:24 2014 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 03:12:24 -0400 Subject: top-40 in 1957 In-Reply-To: <538ABF86.7050805@donnahalper.com> References: <4BFDED52791F408EA32A89144A9F520C@PC281321418224> <5385E74E.7030609@fybush.com> <21382.23377.61789.376069@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <5386A633.8080305@fybush.com> <21383.38143.19140.610461@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53882075.8030802@donnahalper.com> <538836FF.7060106@chonak.com> <53883B9E.8030908@donnahalper.com> <5388489D.3020705@chonak.com> <5388B528.1030603@donnahalper.com> <538A2142.6090600@donnahalper.com> <538ABF86.7050805@donnahalper.com> Message-ID: Now if memory serves WBZ played this often in 1968 - WMEX and WRKO didn't go there https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8B631OrVSQ On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Donna Halper wrote: > On 6/1/2014 1:43 AM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > > Growing up WHDH was the station my parents listened to and they also > subscribed to the Herald. > > WCOP was what the older kids listened to in my neighborhood ( but around > Porter Sq 1150 was the strongest signal period ) > > I am 100% positive this is what Bob Clayton's intro to Boston Ballroom was > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7HYVow1kHQ > > > > Yes, absolutely that was his theme song. I remember it very clearly-- my > parents loved WHDH (Fred B. Cole especially, but also Ken & Bill, etc). > From brian_vita@cssinc.com Sun Jun 1 13:32:03 2014 From: brian_vita@cssinc.com (Brian Vita) Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 13:32:03 -0400 Subject: top-40 in 1957 Message-ID: I find it more amusing how things have gone 180 degrees. Growing up we said "it blows". Now it sucks. Go figure. Brian T. Vita, President Cinema Service & Supply, Inc. On Jun 1, 2014 1:04 AM, A Joseph Ross wrote: > > On 5/31/2014 4:14 PM, Ron Bello wrote: > > > Just heard this version on WCTK today > > > > It amazes me how often the works "sucks" is used on both TV and radio > > That word has become so common in conversation that I think it has > become completely separated from its original meaning. > > -- > A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 > 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com > From 011010001@interpring.com Sun Jun 1 18:17:46 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 18:17:46 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WXRV translator In-Reply-To: <55619.137.118.58.10.1401598568.squirrel@web-mail.fairpoint.net> References: <55619.137.118.58.10.1401598568.squirrel@web-mail.fairpoint.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 1 Jun 2014, Robert Sutherland wrote: > Mapper that I am, I checked the NAD27 coords, and discovered its nearest > to the Candelabra (former "Stainless Steel Leasing" tower), TV 25/38/56. > on Chabot Street, off 1st Ave, off Highland St, Needham Hgts. > sorry to contradict you. There is an 8-bay FM antenna about 2/3 up the ex-Stainless tower. Is that the translator? If not, who is it? Rob From scott@fybush.com Sun Jun 1 19:07:08 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 19:07:08 -0400 Subject: WXRV translator In-Reply-To: References: <55619.137.118.58.10.1401598568.squirrel@web-mail.fairpoint.net> Message-ID: <538BB21C.4010200@fybush.com> On 6/1/2014 6:17 PM, Rob Landry wrote: > There is an 8-bay FM antenna about 2/3 up the ex-Stainless tower. Is > that the translator? If not, who is it? That's the CBS Radio aux, a fairly new facility they built in some of the space that used to be the WSBK analog plant. I believe the translator is a single-bay Shively. If Mike Fitzpatrick doesn't have a picture yet on NECRAT, I'm sure he will very soon... s From ehennessy@verizon.net Sun Jun 1 19:23:54 2014 From: ehennessy@verizon.net (Ed Hennessy) Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 18:23:54 -0500 (CDT) Subject: censored song lyrics (was top 40 in 1957) Message-ID: <25229938.502247.1401665034619.JavaMail.root@vznit170080> I can recall in the mid-1980s when WELI New Haven (AC by format then, but closer to Full Service really) played a version of Laura Branigan's "Self Control" which had the electronic guitar riff in the intro edited out. The song was then about 10 second shorter, and nothing else differed, so it wasn't done to shorten the song. It was apparently that the guitar riff was not suitable for AC. I don't know if that was done by the station or by the record company, but I can recall hearing the 'full' version on stations like KC-101 (WCKI) or WTIC-FM at that time. What made this a bit odd was that the guitar was not suitable, but they had no issue playing Rod Stewart's "Tonight's the Night." The content in that was OK, but the guitar was 'too noisy,' apparently. Ed Hennessy On 05/31/14, Bob Nelson wrote: Great examples; also the British band XTC had a song called "Life Begins at the Hop". Lyric "...and there's Coca-Cola on draught (draft)" was changed to "c-c-cola". > On 5/31/2014 10:32 AM, Brian T. Vita wrote: > >> Let's not forget WBZ-FM with Paul Simon's "Kodachrome". The line was >> "when I think back of all the crap I learned in high school". It was >> abridged to "when I think back of all...I learned in high school". Ah, the >> power of the razor blade. >> From richard@chonak.com Sun Jun 1 20:53:08 2014 From: richard@chonak.com (Richard Chonak) Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 20:53:08 -0400 Subject: top-40 in 1957 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <538BCAF4.20709@chonak.com> On Jun 1, 2014 1:04 AM, A Joseph Ross wrote: >> That word has become so common in conversation that I think it has >> become completely separated from its original meaning. When I first heard it in the '70s, the meaning was not obscene but merely insulting: something or someone was said to "suck eggs like a weasel". The reference even goes back to Shakespeare, according to the " Dictionary of Phrase and Fable" (1898): >> / >> Weasels suck eggs./ Hence Shakespeare--- / 1/ >> >> "The weazel Scot >> Comes sneaking, and so sucks the princoly egg." >> >> >> /Henry V.,/ i. 2. >> >> "I can suck melancholy out of a song, as a weazel sucks >> eggs."---/As You Like It,/ ii. 5. >> >> >> / 2/ >> >> source: http://www.bartleby.com/81/17333.html --RC From dlh@donnahalper.com Mon Jun 2 00:02:43 2014 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 00:02:43 -0400 Subject: censored song lyrics (was top 40 in 1957) In-Reply-To: <25229938.502247.1401665034619.JavaMail.root@vznit170080> References: <25229938.502247.1401665034619.JavaMail.root@vznit170080> Message-ID: <538BF763.1040400@donnahalper.com> On 6/1/2014 7:23 PM, Ed Hennessy wrote: > I can recall in the mid-1980s when WELI New Haven (AC by format then, but closer to Full Service really) played a version of Laura Branigan's "Self Control" which had the electronic guitar riff in the intro edited out. > When I worked at WHDH in 1979-1980, it was also AC but really full-service; we did the same type of editing with a number of songs where the song itself was fine (lyrics-wise) but there was a harsh guitar riff, that they felt was unsuitable for the format, so they edited just the riff and left the rest of the song alone. From raccoonradio@gmail.com Mon Jun 2 00:57:25 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 00:57:25 -0400 Subject: censored song lyrics (was top 40 in 1957) In-Reply-To: <538BF763.1040400@donnahalper.com> References: <25229938.502247.1401665034619.JavaMail.root@vznit170080> <538BF763.1040400@donnahalper.com> Message-ID: Many stations played a version of the soft hit "Hard to Say I'm Sorry" by Chicago, but the full version gets louder and harder at the end ("when we get back, gonna jump in the air"...)--or actually from what I've read, the 'full version' segues into a song called Get Away. AC stations didn't play that part while some top 40 stations did. Not so much censored, etc, but it's a diff. feel from the 'rest of the song'...I thought it was all part of the same song, and it's treated as such by some stations. On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Donna Halper wrote: > On 6/1/2014 7:23 PM, Ed Hennessy wrote: > >> I can recall in the mid-1980s when WELI New Haven (AC by format then, >> but closer to Full Service really) played a version of Laura Branigan's >> "Self Control" which had the electronic guitar riff in the intro edited out. >> >> > When I worked at WHDH in 1979-1980, it was also AC but really > full-service; we did the same type of editing with a number of songs where > the song itself was fine (lyrics-wise) but there was a harsh guitar riff, > that they felt was unsuitable for the format, so they edited just the riff > and left the rest of the song alone. > From dave@skywaves.net Mon Jun 2 01:06:50 2014 From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 01:06:50 -0400 Subject: censored song lyrics (was top 40 in 1957) In-Reply-To: <538BF763.1040400@donnahalper.com> References: <25229938.502247.1401665034619.JavaMail.root@vznit170080> <538BF763.1040400@donnahalper.com> Message-ID: <005401cf7e20$76d68fe0$6483afa0$@skywaves.net> I (briefly!) was a DJ at a station in upstate NY sometime around 1970 or 71. The only Led Zeppelin song I could play was Stairway to Heaven, only at night, and only if I clipped the climax at the end, which the owner felt might be a little too sexual. (Led Zep - ya think?) -d -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Donna Halper Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:03 AM To: Ed Hennessy Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org Subject: Re: censored song lyrics (was top 40 in 1957) On 6/1/2014 7:23 PM, Ed Hennessy wrote: > I can recall in the mid-1980s when WELI New Haven (AC by format then, but closer to Full Service really) played a version of Laura Branigan's "Self Control" which had the electronic guitar riff in the intro edited out. > When I worked at WHDH in 1979-1980, it was also AC but really full-service; we did the same type of editing with a number of songs where the song itself was fine (lyrics-wise) but there was a harsh guitar riff, that they felt was unsuitable for the format, so they edited just the riff and left the rest of the song alone. From billohno@gmail.com Mon Jun 2 00:36:54 2014 From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 00:36:54 -0400 Subject: censored song lyrics (was top 40 in 1957) In-Reply-To: <538BF763.1040400@donnahalper.com> References: <25229938.502247.1401665034619.JavaMail.root@vznit170080> <538BF763.1040400@donnahalper.com> Message-ID: <564E92A8A9534C119CD6BEEB185F7E34@windhamgroup.com> I recall also that at WHDH where there may have been song that ran over 4:30 or 5:00 that they would also put a shortened version in the rack along with it with the "M" designation after the cart number to denote use with Jess in AM drive. Bill O'Neill -----Original Message----- From: Donna Halper Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 12:02 AM To: Ed Hennessy Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org Subject: Re: censored song lyrics (was top 40 in 1957) On 6/1/2014 7:23 PM, Ed Hennessy wrote: > I can recall in the mid-1980s when WELI New Haven (AC by format then, > but closer to Full Service really) played a version of Laura Branigan's > "Self Control" which had the electronic guitar riff in the intro edited > out. > When I worked at WHDH in 1979-1980, it was also AC but really full-service; we did the same type of editing with a number of songs where the song itself was fine (lyrics-wise) but there was a harsh guitar riff, that they felt was unsuitable for the format, so they edited just the riff and left the rest of the song alone. From Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com Mon Jun 2 13:44:06 2014 From: Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com (Don) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 13:44:06 -0400 Subject: War of the Worlds....in Boston. Message-ID: <8FD6D9409E61461596F81316436645E1@ownerd8aa55a4d> Just finnaly got around to wathcing the PBS American Experience program on Orson Welles War of the World broadcast. In 1938....who would have carried the CBS program in Boston? (Would it have been WEEI?) Has anyone looked back in the papers to see what the response was? From dlh@donnahalper.com Mon Jun 2 14:27:10 2014 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 14:27:10 -0400 Subject: War of the Worlds....in Boston. In-Reply-To: <8FD6D9409E61461596F81316436645E1@ownerd8aa55a4d> References: <8FD6D9409E61461596F81316436645E1@ownerd8aa55a4d> Message-ID: <538CC1FE.6020102@donnahalper.com> On 6/2/2014 1:44 PM, Don wrote: > Just finnaly got around to wathcing the PBS American Experience > program on Orson Welles War of the World broadcast. > > In 1938....who would have carried the CBS program in Boston? (Would it > have been WEEI?) I've done extensive research on this. The program did NOT air in Boston. (Several newspaper columnists expressed their happiness that it hadn't, given what they were told was the problem the program caused in other cities.) Mercury Theater was low-rated, so WEEI (which was the affiliate) aired a sponsored program instead. The "furor" (which later turned out to be quite exaggerated) by-passed Boston completely. From dlh@donnahalper.com Mon Jun 2 14:28:33 2014 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 14:28:33 -0400 Subject: War of the Worlds....in Boston. In-Reply-To: <8FD6D9409E61461596F81316436645E1@ownerd8aa55a4d> References: <8FD6D9409E61461596F81316436645E1@ownerd8aa55a4d> Message-ID: <538CC251.2000109@donnahalper.com> And here is an excellent essay (from two very reputable researchers in American Studies and Popular Culture) about what really happened: http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/history/2013/10/orson_welles_war_of_the_worlds_panic_myth_the_infamous_radio_broadcast_did.html From dlh@donnahalper.com Mon Jun 2 15:22:58 2014 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 15:22:58 -0400 Subject: War of the Worlds....in Boston. In-Reply-To: <87BFF79D47C044F8B96216D975B73830@ownerd8aa55a4d> References: <8FD6D9409E61461596F81316436645E1@ownerd8aa55a4d> <538CC1FE.6020102@donnahalper.com> <87BFF79D47C044F8B96216D975B73830@ownerd8aa55a4d> Message-ID: <538CCF12.7080309@donnahalper.com> On 6/2/2014 2:53 PM, Don wrote: > > Hmmm....then did it run on other New England CBS affiliates? > Worcester, Manchester, New Bedford/RI? From what I can gather, it ran in Providence. In fact, the Boston columnists who heard from listeners surmised they must have heard it from the Providence CBS affiliate, which I believe was WPRO. From Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com Mon Jun 2 14:53:25 2014 From: Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com (Don) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 14:53:25 -0400 Subject: War of the Worlds....in Boston. References: <8FD6D9409E61461596F81316436645E1@ownerd8aa55a4d> <538CC1FE.6020102@donnahalper.com> Message-ID: <87BFF79D47C044F8B96216D975B73830@ownerd8aa55a4d> >> Just finnaly got around to wathcing the PBS American Experience program >> on Orson Welles War of the World broadcast. >> >> In 1938....who would have carried the CBS program in Boston? (Would it >> have been WEEI?) > > I've done extensive research on this. The program did NOT air in Boston. > (Several newspaper columnists expressed their happiness that it hadn't, > given what they were told was the problem the program caused in other > cities.) Hmmm....then did it run on other New England CBS affiliates? Worcester, Manchester, New Bedford/RI? There was a letter/testimonial froma listener in Douglas MA. I would think he would have picked up the the show from Worcester. From raccoonradio@gmail.com Mon Jun 2 16:25:36 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 16:25:36 -0400 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday Message-ID: @bostonradio passes along via a tweet that the new talk format for WUFC 1510 will be launched next Monday, June 9. I asked if there was a press release with further details and he just said, no, only the launch date. A month ago it was mentioned they would run Dr K, Glenn Beck, Jay Mohr, and Alex Jones and we'll see if they (general manager is Bryan Berner) have any further details a bit later. Mark S. says once he knows the lineup he'll pass it along, From scott@fybush.com Mon Jun 2 18:25:41 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 18:25:41 -0400 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <538CF9E5.7060804@fybush.com> On 6/2/2014 4:25 PM, Bob Nelson wrote: > @bostonradio passes along via a tweet that the new talk format for WUFC > 1510 will be launched next Monday, June 9. I asked if there was a press > release with further details and he just said, no, only the launch date. > > A month ago it was mentioned they would run Dr K, Glenn Beck, > Jay Mohr, and Alex Jones and we'll see if they (general manager is Bryan > Berner) have any further details a bit later. Mark S. says once he knows > the lineup he'll pass it along, > Wake me up when they break a 0.3 with that lineup. (I expect to have a nice long nap...) s From tcoco@whav.net Sun Jun 1 12:23:46 2014 From: tcoco@whav.net (Tim Coco) Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 12:23:46 -0400 Subject: Legendary General Managers In-Reply-To: <016a01cf7c1d$43ecc540$cbc64fc0$@com> References: <4BFDED52791F408EA32A89144A9F520C@PC281321418224> <5385E74E.7030609@fybush.com> <21382.23377.61789.376069@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <5386A633.8080305@fybush.com> <21383.38143.19140.610461@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53882075.8030802@donnahalper.com> <015d01cf7c0e$ae2c02e0$0a8408a0$@com> <016a01cf7c1d$43ecc540$cbc64fc0$@com> Message-ID: I worked for Ed Cetlin from 1978-1980 and he was, um, eccentric shall we say. Many years after?and, perhaps, because time does heal all wounds?I came to better respect and understand him. He managed to make what was then a 1,000-watt day/250-watt night MOR station profitable. It was a feat the original owner, the Haverhill Gazette could not accomplish. To this day, Tom Bergeron, who received his start at WHAV, almost perfectly impersonates Cetlin?s voice and mannerisms. Bergeron tells the story of how Cetlin chewed on the end of his glasses and then said, ?Tommy, that was the worst thing I have ever heard in all my years in radio.? On 5/30/14, 11:38 AM, "Linc Reed-Nickerson" wrote: >In the northeast we had some legendary general managers.... I guess that's >both good and bad. > >Three that come to mind are: J. Thomas (Joe) Mathers of WNBP, Newburyport, >Ed Cetlin of WHAV in Haverhill, and James F. O'Grady of WALL in >Middletown, >NY. There were others I'm sure... These guys were "characters, to say the >least. > >On the other hand there were some really good managers like Irv Kaizer, >who >replaced Mathers at WNBP, I knew him there and at WEMJ. Ralph Gottlieb at >WKBR, willing to help those who wanted to get into the business... and so >on. > >I'm sure we all have tales, both good and bad that might be fun to >share.... > >Best Joe Mathers story. I got a call one day about going to the >transmitter >and getting the cows out of the field... what cows. I call Gene Gerry who >was the announcer at the time. He says, yes, listen... he had one of >those >devices that when you tipped over it would moo. When Mathers had called >to >ask why he was hearing cows, Gene told him he had driven by the >transmitter >and seen cows in the field. To the best of my knowledge there were never >any cows grazed there... ever. But I took the call, went to the >transmitter, and got paid for the "emergency call' for disbursing the >imaginary cows. I think it was $20 I was paid for a call in. This >happened >several times in the summer of 1964... damn was that really 50 years ago! > > >There have got to be some other great stories out there, and some, I'm >sure, >have Tom Shovan somehow involved. Then there was the prank we pulled on >WLNH... > >Linc > > From lglavin@mail.com Mon Jun 2 15:01:20 2014 From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 21:01:20 +0200 Subject: WXRV translator In-Reply-To: <538BB21C.4010200@fybush.com> References: <55619.137.118.58.10.1401598568.squirrel@web-mail.fairpoint.net> , <538BB21C.4010200@fybush.com> Message-ID: >Sent:?Sunday, June 01, 2014 at 7:07 PM >From:?"Scott Fybush" >To:?boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org >Subject:?Re: WXRV translator >On 6/1/2014 6:17 PM, Rob Landry wrote: > There is an 8-bay FM antenna about 2/3 up the ex-Stainless tower. Is > that the translator? If not, who is it? >That's the CBS Radio aux, a fairly new facility they built in some of >the space that used to be the WSBK analog plant. >I believe the translator is a single-bay Shively. If Mike Fitzpatrick >doesn't have a picture yet on NECRAT, I'm sure he will very soon... >s ? No waiting: NECRAT has several new pictures AND the 96.5 translator right now. I wonder how soon the WBUH-FM stick will appear. From wollman@bimajority.org Mon Jun 2 22:52:22 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 22:52:22 -0400 Subject: WXRV translator In-Reply-To: References: <55619.137.118.58.10.1401598568.squirrel@web-mail.fairpoint.net> <538BB21C.4010200@fybush.com> Message-ID: <21389.14438.145630.86347@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > No waiting: NECRAT has several new pictures AND the 96.5 translator > right now. I wonder how soon the WBUH-FM stick will appear. However long it takes Mike to get out to Eastham, I suspect. He works full-time for a local TV station as transmitter engineer, so he has good reason to be out at Cabot St. pretty regularly -- not so much some random communications tower on the outer Cape, which would be a pleasure trip for him. -GAWollman From raccoonradio@gmail.com Tue Jun 3 06:47:13 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 06:47:13 -0400 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: <538CF9E5.7060804@fybush.com> References: <538CF9E5.7060804@fybush.com> Message-ID: Indeed--one of many such format changes for 1510 over the years, and don't expect WBZ or WRKO to be quaking in their boots. Wallis Communications operates WILC in Laurel, MD, and four months ago today started "conservative talk with a more libertarian emphasis" (Wikipedia) there. The motto "Where Liberty Has a Voice" will be used on the LMA-ed WUFC as well. Will it get ratings? Probably not much. Make money? Who knows--with a syndie lineup like what I mentioned. Clear Channel tried it with WXKS 1200 but pulled the plug after a couple years. After comedy and the "gaffe 1200" stunt, they went to an LMA of Bloomberg Radio. We know CC is deep in debt, and wanted to cut losses. If a station like WUFC (with a limited signal) can make a very small profit on a very tight budget, well, that's the best they can hope for. It may be more of a political agenda for them; who knows. WUFC can come in half decently in some places by day at least (for me 1200 also wasn't too bad, even at night) but a lot of the signal goes out to the fishes. AM's limitations due to interference and pattern changes/ lowering power, etc. is well known. I have had major interference (electrical) problems listening to WRKO in places like Rt 114 in Middleton and, yesterday, Rt 22 in Wenham, Hamilton, and Essex. The old "simulcast on FM" (like on a translator) has been tried. WGAN was not only simulcasting on a station in Biddeford on 1400, but they also recently added a translator in Portland to get on FM: 105.5. Their site has a logo: "Newsradio WGAN --FM 105.5 & AM 560" Note which one they put first. But will an FM simulcast solve their ratings and earning woes? At work I listen to WRKO on the WEEI-FM HD 2, on a portable HD radio. (Or on a smartphone via tunein, but it eats up data, which is limited). In N Reading WRKO comes in fine in some parts of my workplace, only on the workroom floor, machinery wipes it out. "Ancient Modulation". Anyway, will the new format do much for 1510? Like you said, "wake me if they get a 0.3"... On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 6:25 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: > On 6/2/2014 4:25 PM, Bob Nelson wrote: > >> @bostonradio passes along via a tweet that the new talk format for WUFC >> 1510 will be launched next Monday, June 9. I asked if there was a press >> release with further details and he just said, no, only the launch date. >> >> A month ago it was mentioned they would run Dr K, Glenn Beck, >> Jay Mohr, and Alex Jones and we'll see if they (general manager is Bryan >> Berner) have any further details a bit later. Mark S. says once he knows >> the lineup he'll pass it along, >> >> > Wake me up when they break a 0.3 with that lineup. > > (I expect to have a nice long nap...) > > s > From 011010001@interpring.com Tue Jun 3 06:30:22 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 06:30:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: <538CF9E5.7060804@fybush.com> References: <538CF9E5.7060804@fybush.com> Message-ID: If it didn't work on 1200, it won't work on 1510. If I ever decide to get into radio station ownership -- and I think about it from time to time -- there's a long list of mistakes I've seen made in my career that I know to avoid. One of the first that comes to mind is: if a major broadcasting group spends many years and ten million dollars preparing something that immediately crashes and burns, don't imagine you and your pocket change can try the same thing and do any better. Hey Rocky, watch me pull a top-rated radio station out of my hat! Rob From Jibguy@aol.com Tue Jun 3 07:17:43 2014 From: Jibguy@aol.com (Jibguy@aol.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 07:17:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday Message-ID: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> In a message dated 6/3/2014 6:50:21 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, raccoonradio@gmail.com writes: If a station like WUFC (with a limited signal) can make a very small profit on a very tight budget, well, that's the best they can hope for. ---------------------------- How can they do that with $23,000.00 per MONTH in rent, just for the towers? ---BB From raccoonradio@gmail.com Tue Jun 3 07:36:08 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 07:36:08 -0400 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> Message-ID: Not sure how much money they can make via national or local advertising, or maybe they have deep pockets somehow. Till the next LMA or different format comes around...CC had WXKS from March of 2010 (the effort was announced in Jan of 2010, right around the time of the Scott Brown special election) and it ended in Aug of 2012, I believe. Two and a half years...slightly longer than the period CC had prog talk on both 1200 and 1430 (Oct 04 to Dec of 06). CC is very deep in debt and while they wanted to get their Premiere shows on the air here (Rush, Hannity, Beck, Jason Lewis) and did get two local hosts (Katz, Severin) they had to ultimately pull the plug. I don't know how much Santos paid to rent out WWZN (at the time) for progressive talk including his own local show. Wallis is gambling big bucks on this, and if it's all syndie no local it could be low cost but low return. Someone noted (on a messageboard) that "Mass. libertarians are even more scarce than Mass. Republicans". Well, technically there are more people registered as "Unenrolled" in the state than as Republicans, and some may be conservative or libertarian-leaning. But how many would tune in to 1510, with that signal? Even if it were a 50 kW _FM_ right in town, would it work? And that amount of rent for the towers--whoa. Wallis may have deep pockets, but how deep? And how much money can be made via national or local ads for shows like Glenn Beck? I do know Rush makes $59 million per year or so, with his 600 or so affiliates...not sure how much money Beck's show brings in. As for the other shows, will it work out? I may be curious to see what this "Dr K" show is. I heard of the Alex Jones show when they had Charlie Sheen on, spouting 9/11 conspiracy theories. A year ago according to Politico, Beck was heard calling Alex Jones "a crazy person"... Here's the website for the Laurel, MD station they have. Something similar will probably show up in a week or so when they launch: http://900wilc.com/ On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:17 AM, wrote: > > > In a message dated 6/3/2014 6:50:21 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > raccoonradio@gmail.com writes: > > If a station like WUFC (with a limited signal) > can make a very small profit on a very tight budget, well, that's the best > they can hope for. > > ---------------------------- > How can they do that with $23,000.00 per MONTH in rent, just for the > towers? > > ---BB > From raccoonradio@gmail.com Tue Jun 3 08:28:11 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 08:28:11 -0400 Subject: WCVT Stowe VT to drop classical Message-ID: http://digital.vpr.net/post/vermonts-sole-commercial-classical-station-will-change-formats VPR's website mentions the Green Mountain State's only commercial classical station, WCVT 101.7 in Stowe, will soon change formats, and it's said VPR's Classical network already has the state well covered. The station (owned by Radio Vermont; WCVT is also heard on 102.5 in Montpelier) is claiming the new format will be in line with the local focus they've had over the years. In Boston of course commercial classical station WCRB went non-commercial after being acquired by WGBH. I don't know how many commercial classical stations are left. From bob.bosra@demattia.net Tue Jun 3 09:52:52 2014 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 09:52:52 -0400 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com>, Message-ID: > And how much money can be made via national or local ads for shows like Glenn Beck? I suppose I would add that nationals like Beck and Hannity have an established his audience (what audience there is) on SiriusXM. So in addition to just trying to grab listeners "out of the blue", he'd have to pulllisteners off of satellite radio to listen to the crummy, interference ridden AM signalas well. There's no value added, so that's not going to happen. -Bob From raccoonradio@gmail.com Tue Jun 3 11:57:02 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 11:57:02 -0400 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> Message-ID: @bostonradio said that 1510 needs a better "cash flow" and would like to upgrade their signal (NBC Sports Radio "balked", he said). Whatever improvements to an AM signal like theirs may not be enough. These days people with smartphones, etc. or satellite radio can find what specialty programming they want. on there. For example, the Stanley Cup Finals are coming up and as far as I know they won't be on a Boston station, but I have XM and can hear the hockey finals either on my car stereo or my smartphone... On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Bob DeMattia wrote: > > And how much money can be made via national or local ads for shows like > Glenn Beck? > I suppose I would add that nationals like Beck and Hannity have an > established his audience (what audience there is) on SiriusXM. > So in addition to just trying to grab listeners "out of the blue", he'd > have to pulllisteners off of satellite radio to listen to the crummy, > interference ridden AM signalas well. There's no value added, so that's > not going to happen. > -Bob > From dlh@donnahalper.com Tue Jun 3 12:05:35 2014 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 12:05:35 -0400 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> Message-ID: <538DF24F.5010207@donnahalper.com> On 6/3/2014 7:36 AM, Bob Nelson wrote: > Not sure how much money they can make via national or local advertising, or > maybe they have deep pockets somehow. > Several things hurt national advertising on all political talk formats. One was the boycott of Rush Limbaugh (which emerged after his brutal four day insult-fest when he called then-graduate student Sandra Fluke vile names repeatedly, and made assertions about her sex life that were not only untrue but had nothing to do with what she had actually said during her testimony about the Affordable Care Act). While it is convenient for some to blame "liberals" for Limbaugh's loss of ad dollars, the truth is the format was already shedding money long before the Sandra Fluke incident. Advertisers hate controversy. Even if their corporate parents sincerely agree with the views of the host, controversy is bad for business, and a number of long-time advertisers dumped Limbaugh and never came back. The other factor hurting political talk is its failure to grow a younger audience. Conservatives dominate (95% of all talk show hosts are right-wing conservatives) but the median age of their listeners is close to 70 years old, and overwhelmingly white and male. The only talk format that has gotten anyone under 70 is sports-talk, and Boston has had far too many stations doing that format. I always was upset that Clear Channel didn't give progressive talk a fair shot-- back in 2005/06, they put it on the air here with a local staff of ONE (a very nice guy who was also the music director for Kiss 108 and thus had little if any time to do anything for the progressive talker) and did not promote it at all. Truth be told, since most listeners to political talk tend to be conservative, it probably wasn't going to get big numbers. But individual talkers have done well nationally; both Ed Schultz (who recently gave up his radio show to concentrate more on the web and on his TV show) and Stephanie Miller have turned a profit for nearly a decade. And I've never understood why Thom Hartmann-- a thoughtful progressive and a very good host who has both liberal and conservative guests on his show-- has not been put back on the air in Boston. That said, I can't imagine the new 1510 doing any better than its other recent incarnations. From kvahey@gmail.com Tue Jun 3 12:07:34 2014 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 12:07:34 -0400 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> Message-ID: $23,000 in rent for the transmitter, a hefty power bill from NSTAR and studio space at Marina Bay ( which isn't cheap ) Good luck with that From 011010001@interpring.com Tue Jun 3 12:26:10 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 12:26:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WCVT Stowe VT to drop classical In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: WCVT is a World Classical Network station. There are four others: WBQX Thomaston, Maine; WBQK Williamsburg, VA; WCRI Block Island, RI; and WFCC Cape Cod, MA. Rob On Tue, 3 Jun 2014, Bob Nelson wrote: > http://digital.vpr.net/post/vermonts-sole-commercial-classical-station-will-change-formats > > VPR's website mentions the Green Mountain State's only commercial classical > station, WCVT 101.7 in Stowe, will soon change formats, and it's said VPR's > Classical network already has the state well covered. The station (owned by > Radio Vermont; WCVT is also heard on 102.5 in Montpelier) is claiming the > new format will be in line with the local focus they've had over the years. > > In Boston of course commercial classical station WCRB went non-commercial > after being acquired by WGBH. I don't know how many commercial classical > stations are left. > From raccoonradio@gmail.com Tue Jun 3 13:57:30 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 13:57:30 -0400 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> Message-ID: It may not have been much promotion, but when WXKS and WKOX started the progressive talk, there were some billboards (Clear Channel ones probably) for it, however briefly. and also some newspaper articles in the Globe, etc. As I noted at the time, WKOX/WXKS didn't have a daily local talk host, though Jeff Santos got some hours on Sundays. (When CC tried Rush Radio, by comparison, Jeff Katz and Jay Severin were hired for AM and PM drive. During my trip to New Orleans, I noted WRNO "Rush Radio" on FM had former WRKO host John "Ozone" Osterlind on, afternoons. He's still there.) ------------------------------- http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/articles/2005/03/31/message_received/ "A year after the left launched a major effort to combat Rush Limbaugh and conservative dominance of the airwaves, liberal talk is taking hold here and in scores of other cities", wrote Mark Jurkowitz. On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > $23,000 in rent for the transmitter, a hefty power bill from NSTAR and > studio space at Marina Bay ( which isn't cheap ) > > Good luck with that > From scott@fybush.com Tue Jun 3 14:42:13 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 14:42:13 -0400 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> Message-ID: <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> On 6/3/2014 1:57 PM, Bob Nelson wrote: > It may not have been much promotion, but when WXKS and WKOX started the > progressive talk, there were some billboards (Clear Channel ones probably) > for it, > however briefly. and also some newspaper articles in the Globe, etc. As I > noted at the time, WKOX/WXKS didn't have a daily local talk host, though > Jeff Santos got some hours on Sundays. (When CC tried Rush Radio, by > comparison, Jeff Katz and Jay Severin were hired for AM and PM drive. > During my trip to New Orleans, I noted WRNO "Rush Radio" on FM had former > WRKO host John "Ozone" Osterlind on, afternoons. He's still there.) Unlike Bob, I'm only going to say this once... We have yet to see - and will likely never see - a truly fair fight between a "progressive" talker and a "conservative" talker. The unifying thread that links nearly every successful "conservative" talk station - and that is almost uniformly missing from every unsuccessful talker, on any side of the political spectrum - is "stationality." The class of stations that became initially successful on the back of Rush Limbaugh started with a massive head start: they were stations that enjoyed both the signal and heritage advantages that came from 60 or 70 years of name recognition in their communities. WGAN, WGIR, WTAG, WPRO, WHYN, WELI, WTIC, WGY...and the list goes on from coast to coast. Every last one of those stations does fairly well (even with an aging audience) not just because of the syndicated conservative talkers they carry in middays and evenings, but because of the local news and talk and sports that they wrap around those syndicated shows. With decades of heritage to work from, many of those stations (like my local WHAM here in Rochester) have managed to maintain the illusion of being "THE voice of...wherever" even as they've slashed those local staffs to shreds. (I believe the WHAM newsroom is down to two fulltimers, a handful of part-timers, news audio from former sister WHAM-TV and a bunch of anchors from WSYR and WGY). Nobody in the industry is eager to do the research that would prove it, for obvious reasons, but I'm reasonably convinced at this point that the WHAMs and WOWOs and KFBKs of the world succeed these days as much in spite of Rush and Hannity and Savage, as because of them. Now here's the challenge: name even one "progressive" talk station that's been able to launch with that same advantage. You can't, because nobody has ever tried one, in large part because conservative talk showed up first and took hold at the vast majority of those heritage AMs. Probably the closest we've come in a quarter-century of the modern talk format has been WTDY in Madison, which had some degree of full-service heritage and formatics when it went leftward, and KPOJ in Portland, which revived a long-dead callsign and tried to inject some localism. But those are weak-tea comparisons - WTDY never had the name recognition in town that the heritage AM, WIBA, enjoyed, and it fell victim to in-format competition from WIBA's Clear Channel sister, WXXM. For its part, KPOJ always played second fiddle to the real local heritage AM, KEX, even within the Clear Channel cluster there. It bears noting that it's not just "progressive" talk that has uniformly failed when put on second- and third-tier stations with no heritage or stationality. Look at the failure of Rush Radio/Talk 1200 in Boston, or WWIQ in Philadelphia, or at the sub-1.0 numbers that Salem's talkers pull in most major markets (in some cases despite a fairly robust local effort and a heritage set of calls, such as WIND in Chicago.) We know that even now, conservative talk is a successful, money-making venture...IF it is able to benefit from attaching itself to the "host" of a well-established local heritage radio station. And we know that neither conservative nor progressive talk does well on its own without that "host." Did I just accidentally compare political talk radio to a parasite? From Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com Tue Jun 3 14:52:38 2014 From: Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com (Don) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 14:52:38 -0400 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday References: <538CF9E5.7060804@fybush.com> Message-ID: <86B0B44D80CF43B49A285A812118E985@ownerd8aa55a4d> > > If it didn't work on 1200, it won't work on 1510. > > If I ever decide to get into radio station ownership -- and I think about > it from time to time -- there's a long list of mistakes I've seen made in > my career that I know to avoid. One of them would be to invest in an AM? Seems like that ship has sailed..... From raccoonradio@gmail.com Tue Jun 3 14:53:53 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 14:53:53 -0400 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> Message-ID: WRKO is a good example of a station that had a long news-talk heritage (and decades of music before that), though later cut the _local_ staff to go with a news service from outside... What about prog. talk on 1520 WWKB Buffalo (now sports)? Was that a well known station (a rare example) running prog talk, complete with news/sports etc.? Would WHJJ have qualified; it tried Air America but later went conservative talk. WMPS 680 in Memphis tried prog talk too, but it only lasted a couple years, though I don't know if that station was a well known, longtime outfit there. On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: > On 6/3/2014 1:57 PM, Bob Nelson wrote: > >> It may not have been much promotion, but when WXKS and WKOX started the >> progressive talk, there were some billboards (Clear Channel ones probably) >> for it, >> however briefly. and also some newspaper articles in the Globe, etc. As I >> noted at the time, WKOX/WXKS didn't have a daily local talk host, though >> Jeff Santos got some hours on Sundays. (When CC tried Rush Radio, by >> comparison, Jeff Katz and Jay Severin were hired for AM and PM drive. >> During my trip to New Orleans, I noted WRNO "Rush Radio" on FM had former >> WRKO host John "Ozone" Osterlind on, afternoons. He's still there.) >> > > Unlike Bob, I'm only going to say this once... > > We have yet to see - and will likely never see - a truly fair fight > between a "progressive" talker and a "conservative" talker. > > The unifying thread that links nearly every successful "conservative" talk > station - and that is almost uniformly missing from every unsuccessful > talker, on any side of the political spectrum - is "stationality." > > The class of stations that became initially successful on the back of Rush > Limbaugh started with a massive head start: they were stations that enjoyed > both the signal and heritage advantages that came from 60 or 70 years of > name recognition in their communities. WGAN, WGIR, WTAG, WPRO, WHYN, WELI, > WTIC, WGY...and the list goes on from coast to coast. Every last one of > those stations does fairly well (even with an aging audience) not just > because of the syndicated conservative talkers they carry in middays and > evenings, but because of the local news and talk and sports that they wrap > around those syndicated shows. With decades of heritage to work from, many > of those stations (like my local WHAM here in Rochester) have managed to > maintain the illusion of being "THE voice of...wherever" even as they've > slashed those local staffs to shreds. (I believe the WHAM newsroom is down > to two fulltimers, a handful of part-timers, news audio from former sister > WHAM-TV and a bunch of anchors from WSYR and WGY). > > Nobody in the industry is eager to do the research that would prove it, > for obvious reasons, but I'm reasonably convinced at this point that the > WHAMs and WOWOs and KFBKs of the world succeed these days as much in spite > of Rush and Hannity and Savage, as because of them. > > Now here's the challenge: name even one "progressive" talk station that's > been able to launch with that same advantage. You can't, because nobody has > ever tried one, in large part because conservative talk showed up first and > took hold at the vast majority of those heritage AMs. > > Probably the closest we've come in a quarter-century of the modern talk > format has been WTDY in Madison, which had some degree of full-service > heritage and formatics when it went leftward, and KPOJ in Portland, which > revived a long-dead callsign and tried to inject some localism. But those > are weak-tea comparisons - WTDY never had the name recognition in town that > the heritage AM, WIBA, enjoyed, and it fell victim to in-format competition > from WIBA's Clear Channel sister, WXXM. For its part, KPOJ always played > second fiddle to the real local heritage AM, KEX, even within the Clear > Channel cluster there. > > It bears noting that it's not just "progressive" talk that has uniformly > failed when put on second- and third-tier stations with no heritage or > stationality. Look at the failure of Rush Radio/Talk 1200 in Boston, or > WWIQ in Philadelphia, or at the sub-1.0 numbers that Salem's talkers pull > in most major markets (in some cases despite a fairly robust local effort > and a heritage set of calls, such as WIND in Chicago.) > > We know that even now, conservative talk is a successful, money-making > venture...IF it is able to benefit from attaching itself to the "host" of a > well-established local heritage radio station. And we know that neither > conservative nor progressive talk does well on its own without that "host." > Did I just accidentally compare political talk radio to a parasite? > From bob.bosra@demattia.net Tue Jun 3 15:14:03 2014 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 15:14:03 -0400 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com>, , , , , <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> Message-ID: > We know that even now, conservative talk is a successful, money-making > venture...IF it is able to benefit from attaching itself to the "host" > of a well-established local heritage radio station. I thought ex-WTKK was doing reasonably well (until they blew up their lineup).And WXTK on the Cape isn't doing to badly either. -Bob From scott@fybush.com Tue Jun 3 15:16:22 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 15:16:22 -0400 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> Message-ID: <538E1F06.8040107@fybush.com> On 6/3/2014 2:53 PM, Bob Nelson wrote: > WRKO is a good example of a station that had a long news-talk heritage > (and decades of music before that), though later cut the _local_ staff > to go with a news service from outside... > > What about prog. talk on 1520 WWKB Buffalo (now sports)? Was that a well > known station (a rare example) running prog talk, complete with > news/sports etc.? Not in the slightest - and in fact, quite the opposite. While "KB" of course has plenty of name recognition in Buffalo even now, every bit of actual stationality had been completely scrubbed away from the station once it became part of a cluster with WGR and then WBEN. Every bit of programming, engineering and promotional resources that existed at Entercom in Buffalo was funneled into WBEN's news/talk and WGR's sports. KB was, and is, the saddest of afterthoughts. The technical plant has not been maintained well, rendering the station often unlistenable. As a progressive talker, KB had no local content, not even news headlines from WBEN. When it bothered to run weather, it was often days or weeks old. Nobody cared, and it showed on the air. KB was, and is, a classic flanker. Entercom keeps it running just so that nobody else can use it to compete against the cash cows, WBEN and WGR. After being used as a talk flanker to protect WBEN, it's now an ESPN sports flanker to protect WGR. It's not designed to draw ratings, and it doesn't. From scott@fybush.com Tue Jun 3 15:27:57 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 15:27:57 -0400 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com>, , , , , <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> Message-ID: <538E21BD.1030505@fybush.com> On 6/3/2014 3:14 PM, Bob DeMattia wrote: > I thought ex-WTKK was doing reasonably well (until they blew up their > lineup).And WXTK on the Cape isn't doing to badly either. WTKK was struggling pretty badly in its last few years. In many ways, it was a classic example of what happens when you don't have any "stationality." What did "WTKK" stand for, aside from its individual (and very disparate) talk personalities? WXTK isn't quite "heritage," but by the standards of Cape radio, it's darned close, especially considering that it was built on the foundation of the Cape's first station, WOCB. It's been doing talk long enough that it preceded the move to today's politically-polarized format. It's certainly not lacking "stationality," and it has the distinct advantage of a competitive field in which nobody else has any real full-service heritage, either. The closest competitor for that title in the odd landscape that is Cape FM is probably WQRC. Someone had mentioned WHJJ earlier. It has heritage and maintained some degree of stationality, but it was really starved of oxygen for a few years by Clear Channel, especially compared with the news presence WPRO maintained. You can only abuse even a heritage station for so long before it suffers. Entercom nearly killed WRKO that way, and was saved in the end only by the dual collapses of WXKS and then WTKK. A better-focused WTKK might have done in WRKO, had things played out just a little bit differently. From 011010001@interpring.com Tue Jun 3 16:47:08 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 16:47:08 -0400 (EDT) Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Jun 2014, Scott Fybush wrote: > The class of stations that became initially successful on the back of Rush > Limbaugh started with a massive head start: they were stations that enjoyed > both the signal and heritage advantages that came from 60 or 70 years of name > recognition in their communities. WGAN, WGIR, WTAG, WPRO, WHYN, WELI, WTIC, > WGY...and the list goes on from coast to coast. I can't disagree with that. Heritage stations bring with them heritage audiences, making the programmer's task easier; he or she doesn't need to build a new audience, just keep people tuning into a dial position most of them have known since childhood. It's also significant that Rush Limbaugh is a career radio personality; most of his would-be rivals are actors, comedians, politicians... anything but career radio entertainers. > With decades of heritage to work from, many of those stations (like my > local WHAM here in Rochester) have managed to maintain the illusion of > being "THE voice of...wherever" even as they've slashed those local > staffs to shreds. (I believe the WHAM newsroom is down to two > fulltimers, a handful of part-timers, news audio from former sister > WHAM-TV and a bunch of anchors from WSYR and WGY). Technology allows a smaller staff to be more productive; my NH client, for instance, can reord news, weather, etc. off site on an iPhone and upload them straight into the station's autoomation system. > Nobody in the industry is eager to do the research that would prove it, > for obvious reasons, but I'm reasonably convinced at this point that the > WHAMs and WOWOs and KFBKs of the world succeed these days as much in > spite of Rush and Hannity and Savage, as because of them. I would tend to doubt that (particularly in the case of KFBK, which, if memory serves, was the station that pioneered the Rush Limbaugh show). No sane broadcaster would put something on the air that didn't keep people tuning in. That said, the trend among talk stations these days seems to be toward sports talk and away from politics -- likely because sports appeals to younger listeners, I think. > Now here's the challenge: name even one "progressive" talk station that's > been able to launch with that same advantage. You can't, because nobody has > ever tried one, in large part because conservative talk showed up first and > took hold at the vast majority of those heritage AMs. Rush's talent, rather than his conservatism, drove the talk radio "revolution" of the 1990's, I think. There was no one with comparable talent on the left. > It bears noting that it's not just "progressive" talk that has uniformly > failed when put on second- and third-tier stations with no heritage or > stationality. Look at the failure of Rush Radio/Talk 1200 in Boston, or WWIQ > in Philadelphia, or at the sub-1.0 numbers that Salem's talkers pull in most > major markets (in some cases despite a fairly robust local effort and a > heritage set of calls, such as WIND in Chicago.) Religious talk is a lot like classical music; both formats largely preach to their respective choirs. Salem could drive up ratings considerably if it gave the devil equal time, but its mission won't allow that. Progressive talk might work, but it needs a voice. That voice hasn't yet arisen. Rob From 011010001@interpring.com Tue Jun 3 16:49:40 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 16:49:40 -0400 (EDT) Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Jun 2014, Bob Nelson wrote: > WRKO is a good example of a station that had a long news-talk heritage (and > decades of music before that), though later cut the _local_ staff to go > with a news service from outside... Look at what happened to WHDH, once the number one rated station in town. Now, as a fill-time ESPN affiliate, it fights for last place with WUMB. I find it interesting that ESPN did better on 890 than it does on 850. Rob From Jibguy@aol.com Tue Jun 3 18:00:18 2014 From: Jibguy@aol.com (Jibguy@aol.com) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 18:00:18 -0400 (EDT) Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday Message-ID: <14917.67c8d1e0.40bf9f72@aol.com> This mini-essay below, by Scott Fybush is the best-written example of why the Tel-Com Act of 1996 is a dismal failure for radio diversity. A list should be made up of all markets that have examples like this, and then submitted to the FCC and to Congress. A list with the market location in the left column; one company's 1 or 2 or 3 prosperous AM's in the middle column, and the station the company wants to "keep down" (this case: WWKB) in the right column. -----BB While "KB" of course has plenty of name recognition in Buffalo even now, every bit of actual stationality had been completely scrubbed away from the station once it became part of a cluster with WGR and then WBEN. Every bit of programming, engineering and promotional resources that existed at Entercom in Buffalo was funneled into WBEN's news/talk and WGR's sports. KB was, and is, the saddest of afterthoughts. The technical plant has not been maintained well, rendering the station often unlistenable. As a progressive talker, KB had no local content, not even news headlines from WBEN. When it bothered to run weather, it was often days or weeks old. Nobody cared, and it showed on the air. KB was, and is, a classic flanker. Entercom keeps it running just so that nobody else can use it to compete against the cash cows, WBEN and WGR. After being used as a talk flanker to protect WBEN, it's now an ESPN sports flanker to protect WGR. It's not designed to draw ratings, and it doesn't. From joe@attorneyross.com Tue Jun 3 18:15:17 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 18:15:17 -0400 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> Message-ID: <538E48F5.20005@attorneyross.com> On 6/3/2014 4:49 PM, Rob Landry wrote: > > Look at what happened to WHDH, once the number one rated station in > town. Now, as a fill-time ESPN affiliate, it fights for last place > with WUMB. I thought WBZ was always the number one rated station in town. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. | 92 State Street | Suite 700|Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468| Fx: 617.507.7856 | http://www.attorneyross.com From joe@attorneyross.com Wed Jun 4 00:46:53 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 00:46:53 -0400 Subject: WCVT Stowe VT to drop classical In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <538EA4BD.104@attorneyross.com> On 6/3/2014 12:26 PM, Rob Landry wrote: > > WCVT is a World Classical Network station. There are four others: WBQX > Thomaston, Maine; WBQK Williamsburg, VA; WCRI Block Island, RI; and > WFCC Cape Cod, MA. OK, I guess WFCC is still classical. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From 011010001@interpring.com Wed Jun 4 06:50:36 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 06:50:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: <538E48F5.20005@attorneyross.com> References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> <538E48F5.20005@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Jun 2014, A. Joseph Ross wrote: > I thought WBZ was always the number one rated station in town. Not always; in 1980, I believe you'll find WHDH was ahead of WBZ. I seem to recall that in 1981 there was a book where WCOZ was number one and WHDH second. Rob From billohno@gmail.com Wed Jun 4 12:30:51 2014 From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 12:30:51 -0400 Subject: WCVT Stowe VT to drop classical In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <36369C97200C4C08A28C2C1FD7DAF094@windhamgroup.com> Sad day. I liked the A/B choice as I drive in and around Vermont a lot. The morning program on WCVT is particularly good (6-8 a.m.) Ken Squire's team put out a great product and are the last bastion of commercial full service local radio to the region. Bill O'Neill -----Original Message----- From: Bob Nelson Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 8:28 AM To: Boston Radio Group Subject: WCVT Stowe VT to drop classical http://digital.vpr.net/post/vermonts-sole-commercial-classical-station-will-change-formats VPR's website mentions the Green Mountain State's only commercial classical station, WCVT 101.7 in Stowe, will soon change formats, and it's said VPR's Classical network already has the state well covered. The station (owned by Radio Vermont; WCVT is also heard on 102.5 in Montpelier) is claiming the new format will be in line with the local focus they've had over the years. In Boston of course commercial classical station WCRB went non-commercial after being acquired by WGBH. I don't know how many commercial classical stations are left. From map@mapinternet.com Thu Jun 5 12:48:10 2014 From: map@mapinternet.com (M.Casey) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 12:48:10 -0400 Subject: 1510 talk format & programming AM & FM In-Reply-To: <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> Message-ID: Really well thought out essay by Scott. There's some truth to the "parasite" comment. Political talk radio, while successful when placed on a successful Heritage station, as a format by itself, is mostly a failed venture. So, I doubt any fully talk formatted station whether it be liberal or conservative, will ever be really successful. Maybe 5% of the population is really interested in politics, or listening to political debate on a regular basis. Some of the 95% will listen to political comments for very short periods of time, then back to music or sports, or for short periods of time, to news. Most of the Heritage stations have their own very successful morning and evening drive talent. Talk does OK in the mid-day period, when most folks are at work. So, the heritage stations have a talented talker like Rush or Hannity to pull in some listeners during those non-drive times when most folks are listening to music on the radio, or not listening to radio at all. I'd say there's a case to be made that some of the more Extreme talkers, like Savage, might even hurt a Heritage station in general-even when they only run them in the evening or on the weekend. I'm surprised that more stations don't pick up a program like Clark Howard to run when they don't have a talented local during the day before or after Rush, or to run in the evening instead of a Savage or Beck type. But, there doesn't seem to be many (or any) well done syndicated programs that are not political, like Clark Howard's, or even just less politically acidic, available. So, maybe that's why some stations get stuck with the extreme talkers. WTIC-AM runs Howard 8-10pm when sports aren't on. And they have a talented local conservative-liberatarian, Jim Vicevich, on from 9am to noon. I'd like to see if Jim's number of listeners aren't , maybe, even better than Rush's on WTIC. But, I'll bet that either of those mid-day slots pale, in numbers of listeners to the morning and evening drive periods. WHYN, WHAM or WOWO would probably succeed as much or better with shows like Clark Howard, the local talk guy, Swap Shop, and the Mayor's show, from 10am to 4pm, than with Rush/Hannity/Beck, etc. And they'd probably do just as well with 2 talented liberal talkers as with 2 talented conservative talkers. Thom Hartman, though not too well known, comes to mind as a talented liberal talker comparing with Rush & Hannity. I've always been surprised that radio station programmers pay little attention to weekends. TV has started to learn that folks want their wake-up show on Sat & Sun. also. But radio has gotten much worse--many more pay for play ad shows on than in the past. Until a few years ago WHYN-AM had a live (or even taped) morning show host on Sat & Sun mornings, but they dropped that, so I stopped listening to WHYN-AM at all and switched to the morning host & music that's on 7 days a week on several of the FM stations. WTIC-AM has a live Sat morning show which is great, but Sun morning is Ric Edelman that, while not too bad for a commercial program, causes listeners like me to change the channel after a few minutes. What will radio be like 20 yrs. from now? I think many of the music stations will still be around. And, most of the Heritage stations, large and small, that maintain a degree local programming and news will be around. The rest will be similcasts, or specialty ethnic, religious, or formats that barely sell enough to stay on the air, selling spots that almost no one will hear. The value of radio stations in general will decrease. We may have another round of AM stations going off the air altogether and the $23,000 a month tower site rental comment comes to mind as a real reason for that. But, radio will continue for many years. I can't imagine that the (sort of frail) cell-phone system, tablets and memory cards will completely replace broadcast radio. Mark Casey K1MAP -----Original Message----- From: Scott Fybush Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 2:42 PM To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: Re: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday Unlike Bob, I'm only going to say this once... We have yet to see - and will likely never see - a truly fair fight between a "progressive" talker and a "conservative" talker. The unifying thread that links nearly every successful "conservative" talk station - and that is almost uniformly missing from every unsuccessful talker, on any side of the political spectrum - is "stationality." The class of stations that became initially successful on the back of Rush Limbaugh started with a massive head start: they were stations that enjoyed both the signal and heritage advantages that came from 60 or 70 years of name recognition in their communities. WGAN, WGIR, WTAG, WPRO, WHYN, WELI, WTIC, WGY...and the list goes on from coast to coast. Every last one of those stations does fairly well (even with an aging audience) not just because of the syndicated conservative talkers they carry in middays and evenings, but because of the local news and talk and sports that they wrap around those syndicated shows. With decades of heritage to work from, many of those stations (like my local WHAM here in Rochester) have managed to maintain the illusion of being "THE voice of...wherever" even as they've slashed those local staffs to shreds. (I believe the WHAM newsroom is down to two fulltimers, a handful of part-timers, news audio from former sister WHAM-TV and a bunch of anchors from WSYR and WGY). Nobody in the industry is eager to do the research that would prove it, for obvious reasons, but I'm reasonably convinced at this point that the WHAMs and WOWOs and KFBKs of the world succeed these days as much in spite of Rush and Hannity and Savage, as because of them. Now here's the challenge: name even one "progressive" talk station that's been able to launch with that same advantage. You can't, because nobody has ever tried one, in large part because conservative talk showed up first and took hold at the vast majority of those heritage AMs. Probably the closest we've come in a quarter-century of the modern talk format has been WTDY in Madison, which had some degree of full-service heritage and formatics when it went leftward, and KPOJ in Portland, which revived a long-dead callsign and tried to inject some localism. But those are weak-tea comparisons - WTDY never had the name recognition in town that the heritage AM, WIBA, enjoyed, and it fell victim to in-format competition from WIBA's Clear Channel sister, WXXM. For its part, KPOJ always played second fiddle to the real local heritage AM, KEX, even within the Clear Channel cluster there. It bears noting that it's not just "progressive" talk that has uniformly failed when put on second- and third-tier stations with no heritage or stationality. Look at the failure of Rush Radio/Talk 1200 in Boston, or WWIQ in Philadelphia, or at the sub-1.0 numbers that Salem's talkers pull in most major markets (in some cases despite a fairly robust local effort and a heritage set of calls, such as WIND in Chicago.) We know that even now, conservative talk is a successful, money-making venture...IF it is able to benefit from attaching itself to the "host" of a well-established local heritage radio station. And we know that neither conservative nor progressive talk does well on its own without that "host." Did I just accidentally compare political talk radio to a parasite? ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4570 / Virus Database: 3955/7625 - Release Date: 06/05/14 From raccoonradio@gmail.com Thu Jun 5 15:15:24 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 15:15:24 -0400 Subject: 1510 talk format & programming AM & FM In-Reply-To: References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> Message-ID: It should be a mix of libertarian talk, sports, comedy/lifestyle. 6 pm will have sports with JT the Brick, 9 pm comic/actress/speaker Stacey Prussman; morning Dr K show said to be comedy. On Jun 5, 2014 2:06 PM, "M.Casey" wrote: > Really well thought out essay by Scott. > There's some truth to the "parasite" comment. > > Political talk radio, while successful when placed on a successful > Heritage station, as a format by itself, is mostly a failed venture. So, I > doubt any fully talk formatted station whether it be liberal or > conservative, will ever be really successful. Maybe 5% of the population is > really interested in politics, or listening to political debate on a > regular basis. Some of the 95% will listen to political comments for very > short periods of time, then back to music or sports, or for short periods > of time, to news. > > Most of the Heritage stations have their own very successful morning and > evening drive talent. Talk does OK in the mid-day period, when most folks > are at work. So, the heritage stations have a talented talker like Rush > or Hannity to pull in some listeners during those non-drive times when most > folks are listening to music on the radio, or not listening to radio at > all. I'd say there's a case to be made that some of the more Extreme > talkers, like Savage, might even hurt a Heritage station in general-even > when they only run them in the evening or on the weekend. I'm surprised > that more stations don't pick up a program like Clark Howard to run when > they don't have a talented local during the day before or after Rush, or to > run in the evening instead of a Savage or Beck type. But, there doesn't > seem to be many (or any) well done syndicated programs that are not > political, like Clark Howard's, or even just less politically acidic, > available. So, maybe that's why some stations get stuck with the extreme > talkers. WTIC-AM runs Howard 8-10pm when sports aren't on. And they have a > talented local conservative-liberatarian, Jim Vicevich, on from 9am to > noon. I'd like to see if Jim's number of listeners aren't , maybe, even > better than Rush's on WTIC. But, I'll bet that either of those mid-day > slots pale, in numbers of listeners to the morning and evening drive > periods. > > WHYN, WHAM or WOWO would probably succeed as much or better with shows > like Clark Howard, the local talk guy, Swap Shop, and the Mayor's show, > from 10am to 4pm, than with Rush/Hannity/Beck, etc. And they'd probably do > just as well with 2 talented liberal talkers as with 2 talented > conservative talkers. Thom Hartman, though not too well known, comes to > mind as a talented liberal talker comparing with Rush & Hannity. > > I've always been surprised that radio station programmers pay little > attention to weekends. TV has started to learn that folks want their > wake-up show on Sat & Sun. also. But radio has gotten much worse--many more > pay for play ad shows on than in the past. Until a few years ago WHYN-AM > had a live (or even taped) morning show host on Sat & Sun mornings, but > they dropped that, so I stopped listening to WHYN-AM at all and switched to > the morning host & music that's on 7 days a week on several of the FM > stations. WTIC-AM has a live Sat morning show which is great, but Sun > morning is Ric Edelman that, while not too bad for a commercial program, > causes listeners like me to change the channel after a few minutes. > > What will radio be like 20 yrs. from now? I think many of the music > stations will still be around. And, most of the Heritage stations, large > and small, that maintain a degree local programming and news will be > around. The rest will be similcasts, or specialty ethnic, religious, or > formats that barely sell enough to stay on the air, selling spots that > almost no one will hear. The value of radio stations in general will > decrease. We may have another round of AM stations going off the air > altogether and the $23,000 a month tower site rental comment comes to mind > as a real reason for that. But, radio will continue for many years. I can't > imagine that the (sort of frail) cell-phone system, tablets and memory > cards will completely replace broadcast radio. > > Mark Casey > K1MAP > > -----Original Message----- From: Scott Fybush > Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 2:42 PM > To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > Subject: Re: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday > > > Unlike Bob, I'm only going to say this once... > > We have yet to see - and will likely never see - a truly fair fight > between a "progressive" talker and a "conservative" talker. > > The unifying thread that links nearly every successful "conservative" > talk station - and that is almost uniformly missing from every > unsuccessful talker, on any side of the political spectrum - is > "stationality." > > The class of stations that became initially successful on the back of > Rush Limbaugh started with a massive head start: they were stations that > enjoyed both the signal and heritage advantages that came from 60 or 70 > years of name recognition in their communities. WGAN, WGIR, WTAG, WPRO, > WHYN, WELI, WTIC, WGY...and the list goes on from coast to coast. Every > last one of those stations does fairly well (even with an aging > audience) not just because of the syndicated conservative talkers they > carry in middays and evenings, but because of the local news and talk > and sports that they wrap around those syndicated shows. With decades of > heritage to work from, many of those stations (like my local WHAM here > in Rochester) have managed to maintain the illusion of being "THE voice > of...wherever" even as they've slashed those local staffs to shreds. (I > believe the WHAM newsroom is down to two fulltimers, a handful of > part-timers, news audio from former sister WHAM-TV and a bunch of > anchors from WSYR and WGY). > > Nobody in the industry is eager to do the research that would prove it, > for obvious reasons, but I'm reasonably convinced at this point that the > WHAMs and WOWOs and KFBKs of the world succeed these days as much in > spite of Rush and Hannity and Savage, as because of them. > > Now here's the challenge: name even one "progressive" talk station > that's been able to launch with that same advantage. You can't, because > nobody has ever tried one, in large part because conservative talk > showed up first and took hold at the vast majority of those heritage AMs. > > Probably the closest we've come in a quarter-century of the modern talk > format has been WTDY in Madison, which had some degree of full-service > heritage and formatics when it went leftward, and KPOJ in Portland, > which revived a long-dead callsign and tried to inject some localism. > But those are weak-tea comparisons - WTDY never had the name recognition > in town that the heritage AM, WIBA, enjoyed, and it fell victim to > in-format competition from WIBA's Clear Channel sister, WXXM. For its > part, KPOJ always played second fiddle to the real local heritage AM, > KEX, even within the Clear Channel cluster there. > > It bears noting that it's not just "progressive" talk that has uniformly > failed when put on second- and third-tier stations with no heritage or > stationality. Look at the failure of Rush Radio/Talk 1200 in Boston, or > WWIQ in Philadelphia, or at the sub-1.0 numbers that Salem's talkers > pull in most major markets (in some cases despite a fairly robust local > effort and a heritage set of calls, such as WIND in Chicago.) > > We know that even now, conservative talk is a successful, money-making > venture...IF it is able to benefit from attaching itself to the "host" > of a well-established local heritage radio station. And we know that > neither conservative nor progressive talk does well on its own without > that "host." Did I just accidentally compare political talk radio to a > parasite? > > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2014.0.4570 / Virus Database: 3955/7625 - Release Date: 06/05/14 > > From joe@attorneyross.com Fri Jun 6 00:45:21 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 00:45:21 -0400 Subject: 1510 talk format & programming AM & FM In-Reply-To: References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> Message-ID: <53914761.8090702@attorneyross.com> On 6/5/2014 12:48 PM, M.Casey wrote: > Really well thought out essay by Scott. > There's some truth to the "parasite" comment. > > Political talk radio, while successful when placed on a successful > Heritage station, as a format by itself, is mostly a failed venture. > So, I doubt any fully talk formatted station whether it be liberal or > conservative, will ever be really successful. Maybe 5% of the > population is really interested in politics, or listening to political > debate on a regular basis. Some of the 95% will listen to political > comments for very short periods of time, then back to music or sports, > or for short periods of time, to news. It's surprising that there have been so many attempts, given this failure. We used to hear that Rush Limbaugh had saved AM radio. > I'm surprised that more stations don't pick up a program like Clark > Howard to run when they don't have a talented local during the day > before or after Rush, or to run in the evening instead of a Savage or > Beck type. Interestingly enough, when I was in the Amherst area at the end of April, WHMP seemed to have Clark Howard on whenever I tuned in. > WHYN, WHAM or WOWO would probably succeed as much or better with shows > like Clark Howard, the local talk guy, Swap Shop, and the Mayor's > show, from 10am to 4pm, than with Rush/Hannity/Beck, etc. And they'd > probably do just as well with 2 talented liberal talkers as with 2 > talented conservative talkers. Thom Hartman, though not too well > known, comes to mind as a talented liberal talker comparing with Rush > & Hannity. I haven't heard Thom Hartman very much, but I believe he replaced Al Franken when Franken gave up his Air America show to run for the Senate. When Air America came along, I listened, and I found that with few exceptions, all they were but rants. Franken was an exception. He presented facts, had liberal and conservative guests, and sounded reasonable. We're well rid of a number of the others. I remember listening to Ed Schultz back in those days on radio, and he was just one long rant, like the others. On those occasions when I've been home to catch his TV show, it seemed that he had improved a lot. I also like Rachel Maddow. Other liberal talkers got worse over time. Keith Olberman let the thing go to his head and became more and more noise. I give him credit for pioneering liberal talk on television and essentially pointing the way for a network that had no identity before, but I wasn't sorry when MSNBC canned him. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From mward@iname.com Fri Jun 6 05:47:57 2014 From: mward@iname.com (Mike Ward) Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 05:47:57 -0400 Subject: 1510 talk format & programming AM & FM In-Reply-To: References: <25353.6d36a29.40bf08d7@aol.com> <538E1705.70606@fybush.com> Message-ID: Since Scott mentioned KFBK, and since I'm the only ex-KFBK staffer on the BRI list :) KFBK is a very unique situation. It was languishing as an also-ran news/talk competitor in the Sacramento market in the early 1980s. KFBK was a distant second to KGNR/1320, the leading news/talk station with "Dave and Bob" in the morning. 'Round about 1984, the station fired one Morton Downey, Jr. as its midday talk show host. Yes, that Morton Downey, Jr. He made a comment about an Asian-American city councilman which many considered racist. KFBK took a chance on a not-very-seasoned host to replace him. Rush Limbaugh had been doing evening talk commentaries at a Kansas City radio station, after a stint in the marketing department at the Kansas City Royals. To the best of my memory, he MAY have had an evening show at (I believe) KMBZ. >From 1984 to 1988, Rush fueled KFBK into market dominance. He ended up doing TV stints, and the market was covered with billboards with a picture of an AM car radio, finger at a preset to 1530 AM, and the legend, "Don't you just want to punch Rush?" Rush's amazing performance at KFBK (well into double-digit shares by the time you hit his fourth year) caught the attention of one Edward F. McLaughlin, who was tipped to his Sacramento dominance by a consultant. Rush actually had a clause in his KFBK contract that he could leave if he got an offer from a top 10 market. Since the EFM Media syndication effort was unproven, WABC/770 New York became his flagship station...and at the time, Rush did a local show for WABC in addition to his national show. That lasted about a year or two, and WABC ended up taking the whole national show. And the rest..is history. But though Rush certainly rocketed KFBK to the top of the ratings, his story isn't the only component of AM 1530's success in Sacramento. Remember "Dave and Bob" at KGNR? KFBK hired them away. Eventually, when Bob Nathan left the show, Metro Traffic's Amy Lewis turned it the morning all-news block into "Dave and Amy", with an impressive 15 year run. Amy is still in morning drive at KFBK to this day, co-anchoring with Ed Crane. Dave's at KLIF/570 in Dallas (paired with another Amy, oddly enough). Rush's local show at KFBK (and his first year nationally) was 9-11 AM Pacific. That 11 AM-noon hour, now covered by his national show, was filled locally in the late 1980s by a local stockbroker KFBK hired to do business news updates. The show eventually moved to 1-4 PM PT, now 12-3 PM PT, as a general topic show hosted by...Tom Sullivan, who still airs on KFBK today with his now-national Fox News Radio show. He was a local host until a few years ago and also dominant in the market. Afternoon drive was covered by another local news block, with Gregg Fishman and Kitty O'Neal - later Jeff Bell took over co-hosting with Kitty. Kitty is still solo anchoring KFBK afternoon drive to this day. Jeff's on KCBS/740 San Francisco in the same time slot, Fish is running for a seat on the local utility's board. Evenings were also local, with hosts like Christine Craft, Bob Dunning, Spencer Hughes (later Fox News Radio and now KSFO/560 SF) and Mark Williams. KFBK had a large news reporting staff. At one point in the 1990s, we had 6 full-time field reporters (and it turns into "we" because I was one of them, from 1994 to 2001). Yeah, that's a long history. It is posted solely to point out that yes, though Rush Limbaugh certainly fueled KFBK's success in his 4 years there and then nationally, KFBK built an amazing station around Rush that has lasted to this day. On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 12:48 PM, M.Casey wrote: > Really well thought out essay by Scott. > There's some truth to the "parasite" comment. > > Political talk radio, while successful when placed on a successful > Heritage station, as a format by itself, is mostly a failed venture. So, I > doubt any fully talk formatted station whether it be liberal or > conservative, will ever be really successful. Maybe 5% of the population is > really interested in politics, or listening to political debate on a > regular basis. Some of the 95% will listen to political comments for very > short periods of time, then back to music or sports, or for short periods > of time, to news. > > Most of the Heritage stations have their own very successful morning and > evening drive talent. Talk does OK in the mid-day period, when most folks > are at work. So, the heritage stations have a talented talker like Rush > or Hannity to pull in some listeners during those non-drive times when most > folks are listening to music on the radio, or not listening to radio at > all. I'd say there's a case to be made that some of the more Extreme > talkers, like Savage, might even hurt a Heritage station in general-even > when they only run them in the evening or on the weekend. I'm surprised > that more stations don't pick up a program like Clark Howard to run when > they don't have a talented local during the day before or after Rush, or to > run in the evening instead of a Savage or Beck type. But, there doesn't > seem to be many (or any) well done syndicated programs that are not > political, like Clark Howard's, or even just less politically acidic, > available. So, maybe that's why some stations get stuck with the extreme > talkers. WTIC-AM runs Howard 8-10pm when sports aren't on. And they have a > talented local conservative-liberatarian, Jim Vicevich, on from 9am to > noon. I'd like to see if Jim's number of listeners aren't , maybe, even > better than Rush's on WTIC. But, I'll bet that either of those mid-day > slots pale, in numbers of listeners to the morning and evening drive > periods. > > WHYN, WHAM or WOWO would probably succeed as much or better with shows > like Clark Howard, the local talk guy, Swap Shop, and the Mayor's show, > from 10am to 4pm, than with Rush/Hannity/Beck, etc. And they'd probably do > just as well with 2 talented liberal talkers as with 2 talented > conservative talkers. Thom Hartman, though not too well known, comes to > mind as a talented liberal talker comparing with Rush & Hannity. > > I've always been surprised that radio station programmers pay little > attention to weekends. TV has started to learn that folks want their > wake-up show on Sat & Sun. also. But radio has gotten much worse--many more > pay for play ad shows on than in the past. Until a few years ago WHYN-AM > had a live (or even taped) morning show host on Sat & Sun mornings, but > they dropped that, so I stopped listening to WHYN-AM at all and switched to > the morning host & music that's on 7 days a week on several of the FM > stations. WTIC-AM has a live Sat morning show which is great, but Sun > morning is Ric Edelman that, while not too bad for a commercial program, > causes listeners like me to change the channel after a few minutes. > > What will radio be like 20 yrs. from now? I think many of the music > stations will still be around. And, most of the Heritage stations, large > and small, that maintain a degree local programming and news will be > around. The rest will be similcasts, or specialty ethnic, religious, or > formats that barely sell enough to stay on the air, selling spots that > almost no one will hear. The value of radio stations in general will > decrease. We may have another round of AM stations going off the air > altogether and the $23,000 a month tower site rental comment comes to mind > as a real reason for that. But, radio will continue for many years. I can't > imagine that the (sort of frail) cell-phone system, tablets and memory > cards will completely replace broadcast radio. > > Mark Casey > K1MAP > > -----Original Message----- From: Scott Fybush > Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 2:42 PM > To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > Subject: Re: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday > > > Unlike Bob, I'm only going to say this once... > > We have yet to see - and will likely never see - a truly fair fight > between a "progressive" talker and a "conservative" talker. > > The unifying thread that links nearly every successful "conservative" > talk station - and that is almost uniformly missing from every > unsuccessful talker, on any side of the political spectrum - is > "stationality." > > The class of stations that became initially successful on the back of > Rush Limbaugh started with a massive head start: they were stations that > enjoyed both the signal and heritage advantages that came from 60 or 70 > years of name recognition in their communities. WGAN, WGIR, WTAG, WPRO, > WHYN, WELI, WTIC, WGY...and the list goes on from coast to coast. Every > last one of those stations does fairly well (even with an aging > audience) not just because of the syndicated conservative talkers they > carry in middays and evenings, but because of the local news and talk > and sports that they wrap around those syndicated shows. With decades of > heritage to work from, many of those stations (like my local WHAM here > in Rochester) have managed to maintain the illusion of being "THE voice > of...wherever" even as they've slashed those local staffs to shreds. (I > believe the WHAM newsroom is down to two fulltimers, a handful of > part-timers, news audio from former sister WHAM-TV and a bunch of > anchors from WSYR and WGY). > > Nobody in the industry is eager to do the research that would prove it, > for obvious reasons, but I'm reasonably convinced at this point that the > WHAMs and WOWOs and KFBKs of the world succeed these days as much in > spite of Rush and Hannity and Savage, as because of them. > > Now here's the challenge: name even one "progressive" talk station > that's been able to launch with that same advantage. You can't, because > nobody has ever tried one, in large part because conservative talk > showed up first and took hold at the vast majority of those heritage AMs. > > Probably the closest we've come in a quarter-century of the modern talk > format has been WTDY in Madison, which had some degree of full-service > heritage and formatics when it went leftward, and KPOJ in Portland, > which revived a long-dead callsign and tried to inject some localism. > But those are weak-tea comparisons - WTDY never had the name recognition > in town that the heritage AM, WIBA, enjoyed, and it fell victim to > in-format competition from WIBA's Clear Channel sister, WXXM. For its > part, KPOJ always played second fiddle to the real local heritage AM, > KEX, even within the Clear Channel cluster there. > > It bears noting that it's not just "progressive" talk that has uniformly > failed when put on second- and third-tier stations with no heritage or > stationality. Look at the failure of Rush Radio/Talk 1200 in Boston, or > WWIQ in Philadelphia, or at the sub-1.0 numbers that Salem's talkers > pull in most major markets (in some cases despite a fairly robust local > effort and a heritage set of calls, such as WIND in Chicago.) > > We know that even now, conservative talk is a successful, money-making > venture...IF it is able to benefit from attaching itself to the "host" > of a well-established local heritage radio station. And we know that > neither conservative nor progressive talk does well on its own without > that "host." Did I just accidentally compare political talk radio to a > parasite? > > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2014.0.4570 / Virus Database: 3955/7625 - Release Date: 06/05/14 > > From lglavin@mail.com Tue Jun 3 13:49:58 2014 From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 19:49:58 +0200 Subject: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday In-Reply-To: <538CF9E5.7060804@fybush.com> References: , <538CF9E5.7060804@fybush.com> Message-ID: >Sent:?Monday, June 02, 2014 at 6:25 PM >From:?"Scott Fybush" >To:?boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org >Subject:?Re: New 1510 talk format to launch next Monday >On 6/2/2014 4:25 PM, Bob Nelson wrote: > @bostonradio passes along via a tweet that the new talk format for WUFC > 1510 will be launched next Monday, June 9. I asked if there was a press > release with further details and he just said, no, only the launch date. > > A month ago it was mentioned they would run Dr K, Glenn Beck, > Jay Mohr, and Alex Jones and we'll see if they (general manager is Bryan > Berner) have any further details a bit later. Mark S. says once he knows > the lineup he'll pass it along, > Wake me up when they break a 0.3 with that lineup. (I expect to have a nice long nap...) s That's EXACTLY the raw rating for Clear-Channel-owned WHJJ-AM 920 in Providence in the latest book. Any CCM&E pop record or rock or C&W station doing that poorly would have experienced a total shakeup by now. They probably feel comfortable with the current format in Providence as well as San Fran and LA until after the elections. Maybe later they'll go the time-brokered route a la WKOX-AM 1430 in "Everett" and WXKS-AM in Newton. From lglavin@mail.com Tue Jun 3 17:23:05 2014 From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 23:23:05 +0200 Subject: WHMP-AM 1400/WHMQ-AM 1240/WHNQ-1600/W245BK-FM 96.9 Message-ID: For a good portion of this afternoon (06/03) as the discussion of talk radio has roiled the BRIG, I've been monitoring the online stream of the WHMP group of stations in Springfield, Northampton and Greenfield in the Pioneer Valley of Massachusetts. These stations don't show in the PPMs for Springfield, so I don't know how they're doing at attracting an audience. But the outlets seem to have a mix of local ads and the usual suspects among national advertisers that also pop up on other types of stations. I understand that some messages one hears while listening online do not necessarily duplicate what's heard by listeners to their terrestrial counterparts, but if the WHMP stations do send exactly the same fare over the internet, it strikes me that any listener to it would find the outlet unexceptional vis a vis any other station in the market. The opposite of the WHMP stations would be WGAW-AM 1340 not very far away in Gardner. Like two other radio stations in Massachusetts (the former WVCA-FM in Gloucester and WJIB-AM in Cambridge, WGAW is a one-man operation. Steven Wendell reads all the news items, the weather forecasts (which he call "exclusive" National Weather Service forecasts; the NWS forecasts are available to everybody in the USA, and maybe Canada and Mexico too!) and voices the very few commercials on the station that usually include a few comments by the business owner himself/herself/themselves. I suspect one "selling point" Steve makes is that participants can be heard on the radio, if only to dozens of listeners. Anyway, WGAW has the usual lineup of right-wing shows: Laura Ingraham, Dennis Miller (also heard on Worcester's WCRN-AM 830, which according to v-soft.com comes in quite well in Gardner) and Michael Weiner (Savage). Aside from the content, WGAW-AM's presentation is dull and boring and totally amateurish. It's too bad the owners of WHMP didn't buy the station and add it to their lineup. Then residents of Gardner and vicinity might have enjoyed a more professional-sounding station in its midst regardless of content. (BTW, except for legal IDs, they never refer to WHNP-AM 1600 which is near the BIGGEST city in the area, Springfield. It's now a strictly daytime operation with 2.5KW. I checked americanradiohistory.com (a truly INDISPENSABLE site) and at one time AM 1600 in Springfield (OK, East Longmeadow) ran 5K days and had a CP for nighttime operation. What changed its fate? From radiotest@plymouthcolony.net Fri Jun 6 23:09:46 2014 From: radiotest@plymouthcolony.net (Dale H. Cook) Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 23:09:46 -0400 Subject: WHMP-AM 1400/WHMQ-AM 1240/WHNQ-1600/W245BK-FM 96.9 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20140606225411.03e540e0@plymouthcolony.net> At 05:23 PM 6/3/2014, Laurence Glavin wrote: >... at one time AM 1600 in Springfield (OK, East Longmeadow) ran 5K daysand had a CP for nighttime operation. What changed its fate? That is a question which is proving very hard to answer. From looking at the application list on the Commission's site I would think that the 301 "minor change" granted 14-Aug-1995 would be for the power reduction, but instead of an authorization I see "Authorization not yet created by MB." Grrr... I can flay that feline a different way - the public notice comment for that 301 has: CP TO MAKE CHANGES IN ANTENNA SYS. REDUCE POWER 2.5 KW-DAY CHG TL TO: 45 FISHER AVENUE, EAST LONGMEADOW, MA That, then, is what happened. Why? I cannot say - the only apps on the site are for the two most recent renewals. All I can guess is that Saga had another station on the same or an adjacent frequency for which they wanted to increase power, move the transmitter site, or change frequency, and WHNP had to drop power and go to to daytime-only to make that happen. Can anyone think of a Saga facility that got an upgrade like that after 25-Mar-1996 (the date the 302 was granted for that 301)? If push comes to shove I know someone who works for Saga in Greenfield and has been there since well before 1995. I can always call her and see if she knows - she has been in radio for about 50 years, is very sharp, and very well might know the answer. Dale H. Cook, Contract Engineer, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA http://plymouthcolony.net/starcityeng/index.html From wollman@bimajority.org Sat Jun 7 00:24:47 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 00:24:47 -0400 Subject: WHMP-AM 1400/WHMQ-AM 1240/WHNQ-1600/W245BK-FM 96.9 In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20140606225411.03e540e0@plymouthcolony.net> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20140606225411.03e540e0@plymouthcolony.net> Message-ID: <21394.37903.443504.653360@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > CP TO MAKE CHANGES IN ANTENNA SYS. REDUCE POWER 2.5 KW-DAY > CHG TL TO: 45 FISHER AVENUE, EAST LONGMEADOW, MA > That, then, is what happened. Why? I cannot say The old facility was a four-tower DA, if I recall correctly, and they dropped facilities to the maximum they could run after dropping three of the towers. At that time, it was a simulcast of WAQY-FM with essentially zero audience. Saga bought it in '87, according to my '95 /M Street/. -GAWollman From scott@fybush.com Sat Jun 7 08:13:56 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2014 08:13:56 -0400 Subject: WHMP-AM 1400/WHMQ-AM 1240/WHNQ-1600/W245BK-FM 96.9 In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20140606225411.03e540e0@plymouthcolony.net> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20140606225411.03e540e0@plymouthcolony.net> Message-ID: <53930204.2040201@fybush.com> On 6/6/2014 11:09 PM, Dale H. Cook wrote: > That, then, is what happened. Why? I cannot say - the only apps on > the site are for the two most recent renewals. All I can guess is > that Saga had another station on the same or an adjacent frequency > for which they wanted to increase power, move the transmitter site, > or change frequency, and WHNP had to drop power and go to to > daytime-only to make that happen. The answer is actually even simpler: it wasn't worth the money to keep maintaining a four-tower DA for very limited night service, so they dismantled the DA and dropped down to a single tower, ND. That's all. http://www.fybush.com/sites/2011/site-110729.html "1600 used to be a four-tower array at this site on Fisher Avenue barely a mile from the Connecticut state line, but it gave up its 5000-watt day/2500-watt directional night signal a few years ago to downgrade to daytime-only status with 2500 watts from the one remaining tower next to the studio building here. " s From rickkelly@gmail.com Sat Jun 7 07:36:09 2014 From: rickkelly@gmail.com (Rick Kelly) Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 07:36:09 -0400 Subject: WHMP-AM 1400/WHMQ-AM 1240/WHNQ-1600/W245BK-FM 96.9 In-Reply-To: <21394.37903.443504.653360@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20140606225411.03e540e0@plymouthcolony.net> <21394.37903.443504.653360@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: Saga sold the land for the 4 tower array to real estate developers. The station was 5000 day, 2500 night directional day and night. The tower array was on land about 2/10th of a mile from the 45 Fisher Ave E Longmeadow building. The now single tower is now adjacent to 45 Fisher Ave. The change from the 4 tower to single enabled WWRL to move up to 50,000 watts, I believe. Rick Kelly On Jun 7, 2014 12:26 AM, "Garrett Wollman" wrote: > < radiotest@plymouthcolony.net> said: > > > CP TO MAKE CHANGES IN ANTENNA SYS. REDUCE POWER 2.5 KW-DAY > > CHG TL TO: 45 FISHER AVENUE, EAST LONGMEADOW, MA > > > That, then, is what happened. Why? I cannot say > > The old facility was a four-tower DA, if I recall correctly, and they > dropped facilities to the maximum they could run after dropping three > of the towers. At that time, it was a simulcast of WAQY-FM with > essentially zero audience. Saga bought it in '87, according to my '95 > /M Street/. > > -GAWollman > > From joe@attorneyross.com Sun Jun 8 02:11:30 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2014 02:11:30 -0400 Subject: WPNI? Message-ID: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> WPNI 1430 Amherst was, last I heard, relaying WUMB. But when I was in the area at the end of April, I couldn't find anything on the air at that frequency. Did they go off the air or was there just a malfunction of some sort when I was looking for them? -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From kvahey@gmail.com Sun Jun 8 04:19:28 2014 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2014 04:19:28 -0400 Subject: WPNI? In-Reply-To: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: It appears that WPNI just pulled the plug, Their license expired on April 1 and I can't find anything that indicates they renewed it. On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 2:11 AM, A Joseph Ross wrote: > WPNI 1430 Amherst was, last I heard, relaying WUMB. But when I was in the > area at the end of April, I couldn't find anything on the air at that > frequency. Did they go off the air or was there just a malfunction of some > sort when I was looking for them? > > -- > A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 > 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com > > From scott@fybush.com Sun Jun 8 10:39:06 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2014 10:39:06 -0400 Subject: WPNI? In-Reply-To: References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> On 6/8/2014 4:19 AM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > It appears that WPNI just pulled the plug, Their license expired on April 1 > and I can't find anything that indicates they renewed it. > http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/app_list.pl?Facility_id=25907 shows that renewal application BR-20131126BPD was accepted for filing 11/27/2013. I think it remains in "accepted for filing" status because there's also a pending unconsummated application for assignment of license from Pamal to one of Brian Dodge's front groups, BAL-20130207ABI, but as long as the renewal app is "accepted for filing," the station can continue to operate under the terms of its expired license. There's also a silent STA that was filed in January 2014, indicating that "THIS AM STATION DOES NOT GENERATE REVENUES CLOSE TO WHAT IS REQUIRED TO COVER THE COST OF OPERATIONS. THE LICENSEE HAS SUSPENDED BROADCASTING IN ORDER TO REEVALUATE THE STATION BUSINESS PLAN." But that silent date, 11/30/2013, was more than six months ago, so WPNI should have resumed operations or filed for an extension no later than 5/30/2014. If it's not dead, it's at least hovering on the edge. From joe@attorneyross.com Sun Jun 8 22:51:31 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2014 22:51:31 -0400 Subject: WPNI? In-Reply-To: <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> Message-ID: <53952133.7020105@attorneyross.com> That's too bad, though not really surprising. When I arrived at UMass in 1963, the station was WTTT and was a community station playing MOR music. It was my understanding that it was fairly new. The station lasted for quite some time with that format and call, but changing conditions made that no longer viable. They added an FM station, WRNX, but I think that station may no longer be under the same ownership. On 6/8/2014 10:39 AM, Scott Fybush wrote: > On 6/8/2014 4:19 AM, Kevin Vahey wrote: >> It appears that WPNI just pulled the plug, Their license expired on >> April 1 >> and I can't find anything that indicates they renewed it. >> > > http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/app_list.pl?Facility_id=25907 > > > shows that renewal application BR-20131126BPD was accepted for filing > 11/27/2013. I think it remains in "accepted for filing" status because > there's also a pending unconsummated application for assignment of > license from Pamal to one of Brian Dodge's front groups, > BAL-20130207ABI, but as long as the renewal app is "accepted for > filing," the station can continue to operate under the terms of its > expired license. > > There's also a silent STA that was filed in January 2014, indicating > that "THIS AM STATION DOES NOT GENERATE REVENUES CLOSE TO WHAT IS > REQUIRED TO COVER THE COST OF OPERATIONS. THE LICENSEE HAS SUSPENDED > BROADCASTING IN ORDER TO REEVALUATE THE STATION BUSINESS PLAN." But > that silent date, 11/30/2013, was more than six months ago, so WPNI > should have resumed operations or filed for an extension no later than > 5/30/2014. > > If it's not dead, it's at least hovering on the edge. > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3955/7644 - Release Date: 06/08/14 > > -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From wollman@bimajority.org Mon Jun 9 00:09:12 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 00:09:12 -0400 Subject: WPNI? In-Reply-To: <53952133.7020105@attorneyross.com> References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> <53952133.7020105@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <21397.13160.597031.667343@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > That's too bad, though not really surprising. When I arrived at UMass > in 1963, the station was WTTT and was a community station playing MOR > music. It was my understanding that it was fairly new. The station > lasted for quite some time with that format and call, but changing > conditions made that no longer viable. They added an FM station, WRNX, > but I think that station may no longer be under the same ownership. WRNX was sold to Clear Channel, and the old AAA format was blown up to backfill the country format from "Kix" WPKX (97.9 Enfield) when that station was moved south into the Hartford market (it's now WUCS Windsor Locks). They never changed the callsign. Clear Channel paid Citadel (as then was) to change WMAS-FM's community of license to Enfield to maintain the fiction of "first local service" to that community. -GAWollman From kvahey@gmail.com Mon Jun 9 03:39:43 2014 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 03:39:43 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this Message-ID: Here we are in the year 2014. How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? When you can hear a station clearly online why bother listening to what maybe a challenged signal, I am guilty of this and it bothers me. Discuss please From kc1ih@mac.com Mon Jun 9 03:48:34 2014 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2014 03:48:34 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Jun 9, 2014, at 3:39 AM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > Here we are in the year 2014. > > How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? When > you can hear a station clearly online why bother listening to what maybe a > challenged signal, > > > I am guilty of this and it bothers me. > > > Discuss please I usually listen with a receiver, I still find it easier and usually more reliable than listening online. And it doesn't hurt that I have a good tuner and a rotatable antenna at a bit of height. Also I do I good deal of my listening in the car where online is not an option (I have a limited data plan on my cellphone). Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From dlh@donnahalper.com Mon Jun 9 04:37:07 2014 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2014 04:37:07 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <53957233.3010301@donnahalper.com> On 6/9/2014 3:39 AM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > Here we are in the year 2014. > > How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? When > you can hear a station clearly online why bother listening to what maybe a > challenged signal, > I'm old school in some ways. While I do have satellite in my car, I wake up to my good ol' clock radio, and I still listen to terrestrial stations in my car until there are either too many commercials or the programming is boring, at which point I switch over to satellite. From ssmyth@psualum.com Mon Jun 9 04:33:47 2014 From: ssmyth@psualum.com (Sean Smyth) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 01:33:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1402302827.8496.YahooMailIosMobile@web160505.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> In the car, and that's about it. Otherwise I either watch it on TV or stream.

I also haven't listened to a CD in months.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Jun 9 06:55:19 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 06:55:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, Kevin Vahey wrote: > How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? > When you can hear a station clearly online why bother listening to what > maybe a challenged signal, Almost all of my listening is to an actual radio. The Internet isn't mobile, unless I use my phone, in which case it costs money and suffers from dropouts. Rob From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Jun 9 06:44:04 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 06:44:04 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WPNI? In-Reply-To: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 8 Jun 2014, A Joseph Ross wrote: > WPNI 1430 Amherst was, last I heard, relaying WUMB. But when I was in > the area at the end of April, I couldn't find anything on the air at > that frequency. Did they go off the air or was there just a malfunction > of some sort when I was looking for them? They went off the air in November. Rob From bob.bosra@demattia.net Mon Jun 9 07:30:08 2014 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 07:30:08 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? I still wake up to my GE clock radio that I bought at Lechmere Sales in 1979.It was the floor model so I got a good deal on it too. At home, the only radio that has decent enough reception is the SuperRadioin the garage. When I'm working out there it's on. In the house, I listenthrough my tablet or computer to the same broadcast station. My tabletis 802.11-only, since I've hit my limit on monthly bills and don't feel likegiving Verizon any more of my money. In the car, it's primarily a mix of my USB thumb drive and AM/FM radio, thoughwhen I get bored I may listen to SiriusXM occasionally. When I'm up north,where you have to change the station every five minutes due to reception, Iuse more satellite. -Bob From atolz@comcast.net Mon Jun 9 08:27:14 2014 From: atolz@comcast.net (Alan Tolz) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 08:27:14 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <23EA4CFD-B3D1-4F0D-99A7-CD236FC78ED9@comcast.net> I don't have a receiver/tuner on the first floor of my home. For 'at home' listening, I've switched appliances completely. I have a 'media center' PC connected to speakers on three floors. I listen to either WBZ's stream via radio.com, or Dennis and Callahan via WEEI.com each weekday morning. I don't use my smartphone as a 'transistor radio', but do, from time to time use an I-pad and a small Bose Bluetooth speaker to listen to both traditional and internet only 'radio', both live and time shifted. I don't use Pandora, or Apple radio, or I heart radio. I do enjoy 'reelradio.com' and pay a subscription to listen to it's mobile streams so I-pad and Bluetooth speaker is an option. In the car, my listening pattern is similar to Donna's, though some listening also takes place on an I-pod classic, plugged into the car's entertainment system, dedicated to podcasts of many NPR shows (Marketplace, Wait Wait, This American Life) that I download weekly and 'binge listen' to on longer rides. I work 'in radio', but long ago felt that radio became an audio content business (though it really is the ADVERTISING business) heard across many different delivery systems. Alan Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 9, 2014, at 3:39 AM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > > Here we are in the year 2014. > > How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? When > you can hear a station clearly online why bother listening to what maybe a > challenged signal, > > > I am guilty of this and it bothers me. > > > Discuss please From raccoonradio@gmail.com Mon Jun 9 07:42:13 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 07:42:13 -0400 Subject: "WBZ 700 Greatest Music of All Time" Message-ID: New format for 700 is The Legends "WBZ"... Yes. http://www.700wbz.com "Greatest Music of All Time" As I mentioned before, they wound up with a sly way to get those heritage calls. Orange-Athol, MA. Fybush says the FM 99.9 WFNX format debuts at 9 am From raccoonradio@gmail.com Mon Jun 9 07:34:25 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 07:34:25 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I listen to terr. receivers when I can but also use TuneIn, etc. when there's interference or signal's too far away. My own station, WMWM, is a bit weak at 130 watts so even close to Salem I may wind up listening on "the phone" if WMWM can't come in on a portable radio or an mp3 player w FM radio. Last night when WUFC debuted the new talk/sports/etc format, I had 1510 on the receiver in my living room and clock radio in bedroom but interference led me to change to their webstream instead. (Wolfman Jack airchecks on, incl. the long version of Ain't No Mt. High Enough by Diana Ross) Musician friends of mine were on WMFO the other day and where I was, I had to resort to using the web stream. As for my smart phone I have Virgin Mobile and there is a "cap" at which I may get a slowdown but so far I haven't hit it. Was able to hear some NHL playoffs with it while at work (I have Sirius XM incl. the smartphone app and "internet listening") At work in N Reading due to interference, I can't get WRKO on workroom floor except via TuneIn on the smart phone, or on the HD2 signal of WEEI-FM 93.7. _That_ is OK for awhile but has "drops". So does TuneIn but that is a bit more reliable overall. (The portable HD radio can help keep my data usage down on the phone...) On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 6:55 AM, Rob Landry <011010001@interpring.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, Kevin Vahey wrote: > > How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? >> When you can hear a station clearly online why bother listening to what >> maybe a challenged signal, >> > > Almost all of my listening is to an actual radio. The Internet isn't > mobile, unless I use my phone, in which case it costs money and suffers > from dropouts. > > > Rob > > From aerie.ma@comcast.net Mon Jun 9 10:25:11 2014 From: aerie.ma@comcast.net (Jim Hall) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 10:25:11 -0400 Subject: "WBZ 700 Greatest Music of All Time" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001901cf83ee$9f753ef0$de5fbcd0$@comcast.net> Well the CBS legal department probably needed some exercise anyway ;) -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Bob Nelson Sent: Monday, June 09, 2014 7:42 AM To: Boston Radio Group Subject: "WBZ 700 Greatest Music of All Time" New format for 700 is The Legends "WBZ"... Yes. http://www.700wbz.com "Greatest Music of All Time" As I mentioned before, they wound up with a sly way to get those heritage calls. Orange-Athol, MA. Fybush says the FM 99.9 WFNX format debuts at 9 am From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Jun 9 11:01:26 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:01:26 -0400 (EDT) Subject: "WBZ 700 Greatest Music of All Time" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, Bob Nelson wrote: > New format for 700 is The Legends "WBZ"... Yes. http://www.700wbz.com > "Greatest Music of All Time" As I mentioned > before, they wound up with a sly way to get those heritage calls. I don't understand why CBS is allowing the WBZ brand to be used by this station, nor can I perceive of any advantage to the station in using it. "WBZ" isn't "the greatest music of all time"; it's traffic and weather on the 3's. I never understood why Napoleon invaded Russia, either. Rob From aerie.ma@comcast.net Mon Jun 9 10:28:46 2014 From: aerie.ma@comcast.net (Jim Hall) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 10:28:46 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001a01cf83ef$1fd3a460$5f7aed20$@comcast.net> Thanks to two broadband providers polluting my condo complex with their leaky signals, I can no longer listen to AM radio at home. When I start up my laptop, there are over 50 Wifi nodes with strong signals near my house. Even FM suffers interference. So it's Sirius and internet radio for me at home. > > > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, Kevin Vahey wrote: > > How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? >> When you can hear a station clearly online why bother listening to >> what maybe a challenged signal, >> > > Almost all of my listening is to an actual radio. The Internet isn't > mobile, unless I use my phone, in which case it costs money and > suffers from dropouts. > > > Rob > > From mward@iname.com Mon Jun 9 11:07:36 2014 From: mward@iname.com (Mike Ward) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:07:36 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I have a Kaito KA-1101 (AM/FM/SW) as my primary actual radio. I do most listening on my smartphone via TuneIn Radio, though; On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:39 AM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > Here we are in the year 2014. > > How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? When > you can hear a station clearly online why bother listening to what maybe a > challenged signal, > > > I am guilty of this and it bothers me. > > > Discuss please > From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Jun 9 11:12:31 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:12:31 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <001a01cf83ef$1fd3a460$5f7aed20$@comcast.net> References: <001a01cf83ef$1fd3a460$5f7aed20$@comcast.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, Jim Hall wrote: > Thanks to two broadband providers polluting my condo complex with their > leaky signals, I can no longer listen to AM radio at home. When I start > up my laptop, there are over 50 Wifi nodes with strong signals near my > house. Even FM suffers interference. So it's Sirius and internet radio > for me at home. I bought a shielded preamplified loop antenna last winter and installed it in a tree in my back yard. I no longer have interference problems from anything in my house, even with my laprop next to my radio. Rob From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Jun 9 11:22:44 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:22:44 -0400 (EDT) Subject: "WBZ 700 Greatest Music of All Time" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, Mike Ward wrote: > I'm not sure what you mean by CBS "allowing" this. The station just > started using the "WBZ" branding at 7 this morning. What's CBS going to > do, send the cops over there and stop them? ;) Unless he's got CBS's permission, this licensee will certainly be sued. Why would he risk that? Unlike many AM licensees, he has a lot more to lose than one inconsequential station in the middle of nowhere. Why start World War III over it? As I said in my previous message, I don't understand why Napoleon invaded Russia, either. Rob From raccoonradio@gmail.com Mon Jun 9 09:11:07 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 09:11:07 -0400 Subject: WFNX 99.9 Variety Hits Message-ID: The "we play a little bit of everything" continues at WFNX 99.9 Athol MA. Tears for Fears, Aerosmith, Elvis. They're looking for listeners to think up a nickname. "Computer In A Closet" From radiotest@plymouthcolony.net Mon Jun 9 10:37:28 2014 From: radiotest@plymouthcolony.net (Dale H. Cook) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2014 10:37:28 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20140609102622.03d160c0@plymouthcolony.net> At 03:39 AM 6/9/2014, Kevin Vahey wrote: >How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? I listen to conventional receivers more often than to streams, in part because I do not own the internet equivalent of a Walkman. I also have a horse in that race - I am a contract engineer and I need to listen to the over-the-air signals of my customers. Truth be to tell, I am doing less contract engineering than I once was, in part because I am using my home shop to earn income from other sources. For an example see the second item on this page: http://plymouthcolony.net/starcity/radios/pages/atwork.html Dale H. Cook, Contract Engineer, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA http://plymouthcolony.net/starcityeng/index.html From mward@iname.com Mon Jun 9 11:10:04 2014 From: mward@iname.com (Mike Ward) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 11:10:04 -0400 Subject: "WBZ 700 Greatest Music of All Time" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm not sure what you mean by CBS "allowing" this. The station just started using the "WBZ" branding at 7 this morning. What's CBS going to do, send the cops over there and stop them? ;) More likely, a nice rather legal piece of paper has made its way over. The owner of WWBZ is clearly banking on publicity based on that, and will change the on-air branding of "Legends 700" to something not including "WBZ" at some point. On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Rob Landry <011010001@interpring.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, Bob Nelson wrote: > > New format for 700 is The Legends "WBZ"... Yes. http://www.700wbz.com >> "Greatest Music of All Time" As I mentioned >> before, they wound up with a sly way to get those heritage calls. >> > > I don't understand why CBS is allowing the WBZ brand to be used by this > station, nor can I perceive of any advantage to the station in using it. > "WBZ" isn't "the greatest music of all time"; it's traffic and weather on > the 3's. > > I never understood why Napoleon invaded Russia, either. > > > Rob > From wollman@bimajority.org Mon Jun 9 12:05:20 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 12:05:20 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <21397.56128.394270.997954@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > Here we are in the year 2014. > How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial > receivers? Well, I listen to terrestrial radio when I'm airchecking. Plus WGBH on Saturday evenings, and I'll occasionally put WBZ on if I'm home in the middle of the afternoon and want some background noise. At night, it's usually BBC World Service on my Tivoli NetWorks device. (I also have presets for BBC domestic services Radio 4, Radio 4 Extra, and 6Music, plus mvyradio -- sadly only 5 presets on this device.) In the car (when not airchecking) it's mostly podcasts[1] -- some weeks my regular podcasts generate enough content for an enitre week's worth of commuting time. I try to listen to WXRV but more often than not I manage to hit them right at :25 and :55 when they run five minutes of commercials, so it's over to XM[2] for me. (92.5 also suffers from front-end overload east of the Allston tolls, so I pretty much have to switch over when I get close to work.) I pretty much gave up on WBZ in the car because their traffic reports were never accurate or timely enough to make a difference. -GAWollman [1] NPR/Radiolab, APM/Dinner Party Download, PRX/The Moth, PRI/Studio 360, Maximum Fun/The Memory Palace, BBC Radio 4/Friday Night Comedy, BBC Radio 4/The Kitchen Cabinet, CBC Radio 1/Ideas, CBC Radio 1/Quirks & Quarks [2] 80s on 8, 90s on 90, First Wave, The Pulse, Pop2k, and on very rare occasions the live BBC World Service and CBC Radio 1. From madprof@fairpoint.net Mon Jun 9 12:53:15 2014 From: madprof@fairpoint.net (Robert Sutherland) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 12:53:15 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Looking for honest answers on this] Message-ID: <29471.137.118.58.10.1402332795.squirrel@web-mail.fairpoint.net> I'm still a DX'er, so most of my listening is scanning AM or FM, especially when driving the Pike from NY line to Springfield or Worcester. I also DX from New Lebanon using a standard radio (fairly isolated here, so no huge IBOC buzz) But certain stations I want clean, ie while driving around Pittsfield, WTBR (Taconic voc high school) for good hard rock (car radio), WADT is the only station I have listened to online, but its out of range from home. And, at severe weather events, I will go online for TV news that I couldn't receive at home (what, me spend for cable?). I have to admit your question set me thinking, in signal-sparse areas (out west?), assuming folks have internet (DSL or better) connected, is the use on online thus much higher then in signal-strong areas? Bob Sutherland From mward@iname.com Mon Jun 9 14:08:40 2014 From: mward@iname.com (Mike Ward) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 14:08:40 -0400 Subject: "WBZ 700 Greatest Music of All Time" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This is not World War III. This is a tiny radio station on the far edge of WBZ's signal apparently hoping to get a little publicity. CBS will send the cease and desist letter, then 700 will change to "Legends 700" without "WBZ" in its marketing name. CBS has no interest in taking the station dark. It just has to protect its trademark. On Jun 9, 2014 11:22 AM, "Rob Landry" <011010001@interpring.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, Mike Ward wrote: > > I'm not sure what you mean by CBS "allowing" this. The station just >> started using the "WBZ" branding at 7 this morning. What's CBS going to do, >> send the cops over there and stop them? ;) >> > > Unless he's got CBS's permission, this licensee will certainly be sued. > Why would he risk that? Unlike many AM licensees, he has a lot more to lose > than one inconsequential station in the middle of nowhere. Why start World > War III over it? > > As I said in my previous message, I don't understand why Napoleon invaded > Russia, either. > > > Rob > From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Jun 9 14:45:36 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 14:45:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: "WBZ 700 Greatest Music of All Time" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, Mike Ward wrote: > CBS will send the cease and desist letter, then 700 will change to "Legends > 700" without "WBZ" in its marketing name. Why not call the FM "Magic 99.9", then, and get Greater Media in on the action? Surely lawsuits, like everything else in radio, are better in stereo. Rob, still thinking Napoleon was stupid, stupid, stupid going into Russia, and that other fellow Godwin even more so, since he went into Russia and declared war on the USA five months later. From ecps92@earthlink.net Mon Jun 9 16:17:44 2014 From: ecps92@earthlink.net (~Bill) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 16:17:44 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> AM/FM Clock Radio Bedside stuck on 1030 AM/FM/CD Player in the Car XM Radio at Work On-Line Apps, only when out-side of New England Bill - N1KUG Boston, Mass Cruise Ship Frequencies http://scanmaritime.com/ -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Vahey Sent: Monday, June 09, 2014 3:40 AM To: Boston Radio Group Subject: Looking for honest answers on this Here we are in the year 2014. How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? When you can hear a station clearly online why bother listening to what maybe a challenged signal, I am guilty of this and it bothers me. Discuss please From walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Mon Jun 9 11:03:27 2014 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 08:03:27 -0700 Subject: "WBZ 700 Greatest Music of All Time" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Who said they're allowing it? Anyone can start calling their station anything they want... just because they should ask for permission beforehand, doesnt mean they do.. and doesn't mean what they do will last long. Paul On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Rob Landry <011010001@interpring.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, Bob Nelson wrote: > > New format for 700 is The Legends "WBZ"... Yes. http://www.700wbz.com >> "Greatest Music of All Time" As I mentioned >> before, they wound up with a sly way to get those heritage calls. >> > > I don't understand why CBS is allowing the WBZ brand to be used by this > station, nor can I perceive of any advantage to the station in using it. > "WBZ" isn't "the greatest music of all time"; it's traffic and weather on > the 3's. > > I never understood why Napoleon invaded Russia, either. > > > Rob > From map@mapinternet.com Mon Jun 9 20:49:01 2014 From: map@mapinternet.com (M.Casey) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 20:49:01 -0400 Subject: WHMP-AM 1400/WHMQ-AM 1240/WHNQ-1600/W245BK-FM 96.9 In-Reply-To: <21394.37903.443504.653360@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20140606225411.03e540e0@plymouthcolony.net> <21394.37903.443504.653360@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: Originally (up to about 1965 or so) it was sited right on the CT/MA line and, after a short stint as early rocker WJKO, was successful through the 60's as Beautiful Music WTYM, they moved about 3-4 miles north to the current site within a 1/2 mile of the Springfield city line. When that move happened , and with the DA, they lost the Enfield, Ct audience but greatly gained signal strength in Springfield/Chicopee/Holyoke. They added the night service at some point. Even with 2500w at night, It was a DA tight enough so that listeners near the original tower site (in the same town of East Longmeadow), and many in the next town of Longmeadow had interference! I remember coming home late at night from Holyoke where night signal was super, then down I-91 then turning due East, the signal would get really rough at the point of the pattern null only a little over a mile SSW of the station. Then it would come back up with a not-too-bad night signal here in Hampden. The DA pattern may have been designed to protect WWRL-NYC, the 1590 in Waterbury, CT , the 1600 in Brookline, MA, and maybe WLNG-Sag Harbor, LI. Now here's another big reason for the downsize: There's an adjacent shopping center that needed to expand into the area of the towers. I can't remember if Wacky-AM was 2 tower or 4 towers. Not sure if WAQY owned the tower site or leased it, but it was going down to 1 tower to satisfy the needs of the expanding shopping center. Interestingly enough, when they went back to ND, they probably got a few Enfield, CT listeners back---after waiting 30 years or so-ha! -----Original Message----- From: Garrett Wollman Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2014 12:24 AM To: Dale H. Cook Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: Re: WHMP-AM 1400/WHMQ-AM 1240/WHNQ-1600/W245BK-FM 96.9 > >That, then, is what happened. Why? I cannot say >The old facility was a four-tower DA, if I recall correctly, and they >dropped facilities to the maximum they could run after dropping three >of the towers. At that time, it was a simulcast of WAQY-FM with >essentially zero audience. Yes--almost Zero! But there may have been one or two happy listeners to WAQY-AM. The local radio joke at the time was that there was at least one 16 or 17 year old high school kid driving around in his junky car with the radio in it that the FM side had quit working. So he could still listen to "ROCK 102" on the AM side. And there was probably one old hippie whose old car had an AM-only radio--and he was happy too. Mark Casey K1MAP Hampden, Mass. ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4570 / Virus Database: 3955/7651 - Release Date: 06/09/14 From kvahey@gmail.com Tue Jun 10 01:33:59 2014 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 01:33:59 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> Message-ID: I use tunein now more than I should but it just works in my home office. Here is a prime example on how the internet changed everything. 30 years ago when I was working in Chicago, WBZ was my link to New England. The Globe would show up 3 days later but BZ kept me up to date. Several of you posted that you flee to Sirius/XM when a station loads up on commercials. That really sums up the industry dilemma. On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 4:17 PM, ~Bill wrote: > AM/FM Clock Radio Bedside > stuck on 1030 > > AM/FM/CD Player in the Car > > XM Radio at Work > > On-Line Apps, only when out-side of New England > > Bill - N1KUG > Boston, Mass > Cruise Ship Frequencies > http://scanmaritime.com/ > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto: > boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Kevin > Vahey > Sent: Monday, June 09, 2014 3:40 AM > To: Boston Radio Group > Subject: Looking for honest answers on this > > Here we are in the year 2014. > > How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? > When you can hear a station clearly online why bother listening to what > maybe a challenged signal, > > > I am guilty of this and it bothers me. > > > Discuss please > > From joe@attorneyross.com Tue Jun 10 01:10:40 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 01:10:40 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <53969323.3040800@attorneyross.com> References: <53969323.3040800@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <53969350.6050702@attorneyross.com> On 6/9/2014 3:39 AM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > Here we are in the year 2014. > > How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? When > you can hear a station clearly online why bother listening to what maybe a > challenged signal, Depends on my mood. Right now I'm listening to WJIB. Other times when I'm doing email I'll listen to Pandora or to some other online station. In my car I generally listen to the radio, or occasionally to a CD. In my office, I used to listen to WCRB, now I listen to one or another classical channel online. Earlier this evening, while having dinner, I listened to WCRB. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From raccoonradio@gmail.com Tue Jun 10 07:01:46 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 07:01:46 -0400 Subject: "WBZ 700 Greatest Music of All Time" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: CBS lawyers may have gone after them-- site is now http://www.legends700.com and it says WWBZ not WBZ On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Rob Landry <011010001@interpring.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, Mike Ward wrote: > > CBS will send the cease and desist letter, then 700 will change to >> "Legends >> 700" without "WBZ" in its marketing name. >> > > Why not call the FM "Magic 99.9", then, and get Greater Media in on the > action? Surely lawsuits, like everything else in radio, are better in > stereo. > > > Rob, still thinking Napoleon was stupid, stupid, stupid going into Russia, > and that other fellow Godwin even more so, since he went into Russia and > declared war on the USA five months later. > From dillane@sbcglobal.net Tue Jun 10 08:27:47 2014 From: dillane@sbcglobal.net (Bill Dillane) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 05:27:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: WWBZ legends700.com Message-ID: <1402403267.59678.YahooMailNeo@web184903.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> I like the mix.? Sounds like a music of your life for baby boomers, or WMTR in NJ without jocks. A top 40 station in NJ had the WWBZ calls in the 1960s. Music survey at http://las-solanas.com/arsa/charts_view.php?svid=39078 Jingles at https://soundcloud.com/10th-dimension-1/wwbz-the-sound-is-series-43 From map@mapinternet.com Tue Jun 10 14:19:44 2014 From: map@mapinternet.com (M.Casey) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 14:19:44 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9E428ED7F826466A964E3069880F2EB2@laptop> Terrestrial receivers are still, by far, the most convenient for me. I bought a bunch of Super radios about 12 yrs ago (1 each for upstairs-front porch-basement-work desk-vacation-and a dedicated battery unit for when I'm working outside) and they mostly all still work and sound fine. The only challenged signals are distant ones on AM--ex: WBZ-AM has some fuzz out here near Springfield. And, car radios are better than ever. The new car had free satellite service for 4 months---it was OK, but not worth the price to me because I don't spend enough time in the car. I listen online at work sometimes. But that is not nearly as reliable (with dsl) as the super radios. Many of the streams just shut off after a short period of time. I really do like the FM section of the HD radio in the car. WBZ-AM goes in and out of HD out here, but the FM's have some worthwhile HD2's & 3's that work pretty good. But HD still has a long way to go to get a large amount of acceptance, and use, from the general public. But--no need to feel guilty if online works for you! Mark Casey K1MAP -----Original Message----- From: Kevin Vahey Sent: Monday, June 09, 2014 3:39 AM To: Boston Radio Group Subject: Looking for honest answers on this Here we are in the year 2014. How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? When you can hear a station clearly online why bother listening to what maybe a challenged signal, I am guilty of this and it bothers me. Discuss please ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4570 / Virus Database: 3955/7656 - Release Date: 06/10/14 From dan.strassberg@att.net Tue Jun 10 16:59:04 2014 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (daniel strassberg) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 16:59:04 -0400 Subject: "WBZ 700 Greatest Music of All Time" References: Message-ID: <3D886DFEFAA44D56A44C46F729AC010E@PC281321418224> Is WWVZ available? A chance to incur the wrath of two large companies with one four-letter call sign. ----- Dan Strassberg e-fax 707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: Mike Ward To: Rob Landry Cc: Boston Radio Group Sent: Monday, June 09, 2014 11:10 AM Subject: Re: "WBZ 700 Greatest Music of All Time" I'm not sure what you mean by CBS "allowing" this. The station just started using the "WBZ" branding at 7 this morning. What's CBS going to do, send the cops over there and stop them? ;) More likely, a nice rather legal piece of paper has made its way over. The owner of WWBZ is clearly banking on publicity based on that, and will change the on-air branding of "Legends 700" to something not including "WBZ" at some point. On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Rob Landry <011010001@interpring.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Jun 2014, Bob Nelson wrote: > > New format for 700 is The Legends "WBZ"... Yes. http://www.700wbz.com >> "Greatest Music of All Time" As I mentioned >> before, they wound up with a sly way to get those heritage calls. >> > > I don't understand why CBS is allowing the WBZ brand to be used by this > station, nor can I perceive of any advantage to the station in using it. > "WBZ" isn't "the greatest music of all time"; it's traffic and weather on > the 3's. > > I never understood why Napoleon invaded Russia, either. > > > Rob > From 011010001@interpring.com Tue Jun 10 21:33:21 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 21:33:21 -0400 (EDT) Subject: "WBZ 700 Greatest Music of All Time" In-Reply-To: <3D886DFEFAA44D56A44C46F729AC010E@PC281321418224> References: <3D886DFEFAA44D56A44C46F729AC010E@PC281321418224> Message-ID: I heard a story -- it may be apocryphal -- that there was once a daytimer on 1030 in South Carolina on 1030 that adopted the call letters WBZE. When my Rhode Island client still owned 1180 in Hope Valley, I jokingly suggested they try the call letters WAJM. Rob On Tue, 10 Jun 2014, daniel strassberg wrote: > ?Is WWVZ available? A chance to incur the wrath of two large companies with > one four-letter call sign. From wollman@bimajority.org Tue Jun 10 22:41:03 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 22:41:03 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> Message-ID: <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > Several of you posted that you flee to Sirius/XM when a station loads up on > commercials. That really sums up the industry dilemma. I'd love to see someone do the experiment and stop running the spots in long, predictable stop sets. If you're running 12 units an hour, what would happen if you ran one or two units every five minutes, rather than six in a row twice an hour? (I know there's conventional wisdom about this, but has it been experimentally validated on a music format, now that we have the means to do this in PPM markets? I haven't heard about anyone trying it.) For that matter, why not just rotate the stop sets rather than sticking to a fixed clock, so I don't already know when I get in the car at 10:25 that there's six minutes of commercials waiting for me *every* *single* *day*? Isn't it possible that the clumping of spots that the industry has been doing for the last thirty years has made listeners hyper-aware of the advertising? -GAWollman From kvahey@gmail.com Tue Jun 10 23:47:25 2014 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 23:47:25 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: I know a lot of non-radio people that get frustrated when they start button pushing and hear the same commercials on another station. I also have heard that nothing will drive the average listener to switch stations more than Kar's for Kids. On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:41 PM, Garrett Wollman wrote: > Isn't it > ? ? > possible that the clumping of spots that the industry has been doing > for the last thirty years has made listeners hyper-aware of the > advertising? > > > > From gary@garysicecream.com Tue Jun 10 23:20:54 2014 From: gary@garysicecream.com (Gary's Ice Cream) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 23:20:54 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <0c9c01cf8524$286e2e20$794a8a60$@garysicecream.com> WBZ's format in the 60's was song, spot, song, spot with dj chatter between each. No long spotsets. Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Garrett Wollman Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 10:41 PM To: Kevin Vahey Cc: Boston Radio Group Subject: Re: Looking for honest answers on this < said: > Several of you posted that you flee to Sirius/XM when a station loads > up on commercials. That really sums up the industry dilemma. I'd love to see someone do the experiment and stop running the spots in long, predictable stop sets. If you're running 12 units an hour, what would happen if you ran one or two units every five minutes, rather than six in a row twice an hour? (I know there's conventional wisdom about this, but has it been experimentally validated on a music format, now that we have the means to do this in PPM markets? I haven't heard about anyone trying it.) For that matter, why not just rotate the stop sets rather than sticking to a fixed clock, so I don't already know when I get in the car at 10:25 that there's six minutes of commercials waiting for me *every* *single* *day*? Isn't it possible that the clumping of spots that the industry has been doing for the last thirty years has made listeners hyper-aware of the advertising? -GAWollman From wollman@bimajority.org Wed Jun 11 00:03:52 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 00:03:52 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <0c9c01cf8524$286e2e20$794a8a60$@garysicecream.com> References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <0c9c01cf8524$286e2e20$794a8a60$@garysicecream.com> Message-ID: <21399.54568.857674.565734@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > WBZ's format in the 60's was song, spot, song, spot with dj chatter between > each. No long spotsets. They didn't have PPM in the '60s, or indeed podcasts, streaming, satellite, or even much of an FM band. Not a remotely comparable situation to today. -GAWollman From lglavin@mail.com Sat Jun 7 13:46:06 2014 From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 19:46:06 +0200 Subject: First The Cubs, Now Jeff Santos; Hasn't Chicago Suffered Enough? Message-ID: I've been monitoring some progressive talk stations online: WMMX-FM in Madison, WI and the WHMP group of stations in the Connecticut River Valley of Massachusetts.? Then I logged on to WCPT AM & FM in Chicago. Voila:? who should appear on that outlet?? Jeff Santos of WWZN-AM Boston "fame".?? WCPT apparently just made the adjustment to the retirement of Ed Schultz from terrestrial radio and the move of? Thom Hartmann to Ed's former time slot, noon-till 3:00 pm Eastern.? The other outlets picked up Sam Seder in afternoon drive, but somehow WCPT decided to insert Jeff Santos into the afternoon drive central time slot. And it appears that Jeff was not only doing his show live, but actually taking calls from the Chicago area because WCPT does have listeners, unlike the former WWZN, and Jeff seemed to be so startled by this turn of events that he delayed having a guest on because callers had been waiting for a time. One of the tricks many hosts of shows with no listeners do is load up with guests. When Santos was on WWZN, he had a whole cast of regular guests including Michael Dukakis who was included because Jeff had a thing about rail transportation and Dukakis was very simpatico with this subject. Santos also mentioned that he was broadcasting from a studio at Marina Bay near Boston. That tells me that he is renting space at the WUFC studios and relaying his show via satellite. Anthony Pepe may very well be doing the same thing as long as he has a daily show on Yahoo! Sports radio. I wonder if this is a stopgap move by WCPT because I don't think Santos has the chops to attract listeners in a market like Chicago; he really didn't in Boston either. From bob@demattia.net Tue Jun 10 22:43:42 2014 From: bob@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 22:43:42 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: , <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net>, , <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: My favorite is "We've just completed another 30-minutes of continuous music". Translate "Time to change the dial" -Bob > Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 22:41:03 -0400 > From: wollman@bimajority.org > To: kvahey@gmail.com > Subject: Re: Looking for honest answers on this > CC: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org > > < said: > > > Several of you posted that you flee to Sirius/XM when a station loads up on > > commercials. That really sums up the industry dilemma. > > I'd love to see someone do the experiment and stop running the spots > in long, predictable stop sets. If you're running 12 units an hour, > what would happen if you ran one or two units every five minutes, > rather than six in a row twice an hour? (I know there's conventional > wisdom about this, but has it been experimentally validated on a music > format, now that we have the means to do this in PPM markets? I > haven't heard about anyone trying it.) For that matter, why not just > rotate the stop sets rather than sticking to a fixed clock, so I don't > already know when I get in the car at 10:25 that there's six minutes > of commercials waiting for me *every* *single* *day*? Isn't it > possible that the clumping of spots that the industry has been doing > for the last thirty years has made listeners hyper-aware of the > advertising? > > -GAWollman > > From joe@attorneyross.com Wed Jun 11 00:48:41 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 00:48:41 -0400 Subject: "WBZ 700 Greatest Music of All Time" In-Reply-To: <3D886DFEFAA44D56A44C46F729AC010E@PC281321418224> References: <3D886DFEFAA44D56A44C46F729AC010E@PC281321418224> Message-ID: <5397DFA9.4040705@attorneyross.com> On 6/10/2014 4:59 PM, daniel strassberg wrote: > Is WWVZ available? A chance to incur the wrath of two large companies with one four-letter call sign. Probably just one. CBS won't care as long as you don't say "WVZ." -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com Wed Jun 11 01:44:58 2014 From: Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com (Don) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 01:44:58 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <36BC18A0D1A5463FB929840F52C34838@ownerd8aa55a4d> > > I'd love to see someone do the experiment and stop running the spots > in long, predictable stop sets. If you're running 12 units an hour, > what would happen if you ran one or two units every five minutes, > rather than six in a row twice an hour? Some research has indeed been done...leading to what we hear today: http://www.colemaninsights.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/The-Impact-of-Commercials-on-the-Radio-Audience-September-2006.pdf "What Happens When the Spots Come On" From wollman@bimajority.org Wed Jun 11 02:51:17 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 02:51:17 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <36BC18A0D1A5463FB929840F52C34838@ownerd8aa55a4d> References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <36BC18A0D1A5463FB929840F52C34838@ownerd8aa55a4d> Message-ID: <21399.64613.621219.413381@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: >> >> I'd love to see someone do the experiment and stop running the spots >> in long, predictable stop sets. If you're running 12 units an hour, >> what would happen if you ran one or two units every five minutes, >> rather than six in a row twice an hour? > Some research has indeed been done...leading to what we hear today: > http://www.colemaninsights.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/The-Impact-of-Commercials-on-the-Radio-Audience-September-2006.pdf Eight years ago, and in a single market... It's a different landscape now in so many ways. And in any case, they didn't actually do the experiment, they just measured listening to existing commercial schedules in that one market (Houston). -GAWollman From 011010001@interpring.com Wed Jun 11 06:10:35 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 06:10:35 -0400 (EDT) Subject: First The Cubs, Now Jeff Santos; Hasn't Chicago Suffered Enough? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, 7 Jun 2014, Laurence Glavin wrote: > I've been monitoring some progressive talk stations online: WMMX-FM in > Madison, WI and the WHMP group studio at Marina Bay near Boston. That > tells me that he is renting space at the WUFC studios and relaying his > show via satellite. He should be using the Internet not satellite. It's more cost-effective, as my World Classical Network client discovered seven years ago. Rob From 011010001@interpring.com Wed Jun 11 06:26:40 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 06:26:40 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014, Garrett Wollman wrote: > Isn't it possible that the clumping of spots that the industry has been > doing for the last thirty years has made listeners hyper-aware of the > advertising? That is, after all, the goal of commercial radio: to get people to listen to the ads. At WCRB about a decade ago we commissioned a series of focus groups and telephone surveys; one of the things we needed to find out was how much of a tune-out commercials were. We found out that WCRB listeners did not really have a problem with commercials (public radio-style fundraising pitches, on the other hand, were detested), and at WCRB, we ran three stopsets an hour in most hours. Mind you, this was a decade ago, and these were older folks who had grown up listening to commercials on the radio. But my gut feeling is that even today, long stopsets are not a big deal for most listeners. Rob From 011010001@interpring.com Wed Jun 11 06:36:44 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 06:36:44 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: , <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net>, , <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Tue, 10 Jun 2014, Bob DeMattia wrote: > My favorite is "We've just completed another 30-minutes of continuous > music". Translate "Time to change the dial" That's called "telegraphing stopsets". It's stupid, and my feeling is that the whole "continuous music", "x songs in a row", etc. business is pointless. It may have made sense in the beginning, but stations have been doing it for so many years that it is no longer useful. I'd love to hear a contrary opinion, though, from someone who has actually used it. Here's an idea: make the ads the center of on-air contests, e.g. "when you hear the Verizon Wireless ad, be the fifth caller..." The ads are, afeter all, part of the station's programming, and too many stations sound like they're holding their collective noses through their stopsets. Whatever. I'm only Choo-choo Charlie. Rob From dan.strassberg@att.net Wed Jun 11 14:10:10 2014 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (daniel strassberg) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 14:10:10 -0400 Subject: "WBZ 700 Greatest Music of All Time" References: <3D886DFEFAA44D56A44C46F729AC010E@PC281321418224> Message-ID: <5C481015CD964B7181D3F57D80585D3C@PC281321418224> Mostly true. The station, which runs 50 kW-D DA-D, has different calls now (don't know the current calls) and is licensed to a town in MD about 40 miles south of DC. Never licesned to anyplace else--certainly not SC. The pattern (three towers) has a wide deep minimum to the northeast to protect WBZ (mainly CH, I believe) and a narrow lobe to the north to cover a lot of the DC market. Last format I heard about was Gospel.. ----- Dan Strassberg e-fax 707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: Rob Landry To: daniel strassberg Cc: Mike Ward ; Boston Radio Group Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 9:33 PM Subject: Re: "WBZ 700 Greatest Music of All Time" I heard a story -- it may be apocryphal -- that there was once a daytimer on 1030 in South Carolina on 1030 that adopted the call letters WBZE. When my Rhode Island client still owned 1180 in Hope Valley, I jokingly suggested they try the call letters WAJM. Rob On Tue, 10 Jun 2014, daniel strassberg wrote: > ?Is WWVZ available? A chance to incur the wrath of two large companies with > one four-letter call sign. From map@mapinternet.com Wed Jun 11 17:16:41 2014 From: map@mapinternet.com (M.Casey) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 17:16:41 -0400 Subject: WPNI, 1430, Amherst, MA In-Reply-To: <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> Message-ID: <4D08BF6E97234EAB8B3B277DB8437E29@laptop> In the correspondence file, a letter from the FCC to the WPNI owners states that the license will expire Dec. 1, 2014. Looks like a typo, but the FCC letter references WPNI (FM). Mark Casey -----Original Message----- From: Scott Fybush Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2014 10:39 AM To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: Re: WPNI? On 6/8/2014 4:19 AM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > It appears that WPNI just pulled the plug, Their license expired on April > 1 > and I can't find anything that indicates they renewed it. > http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/app_list.pl?Facility_id=25907 shows that renewal application BR-20131126BPD was accepted for filing 11/27/2013. I think it remains in "accepted for filing" status because there's also a pending unconsummated application for assignment of license from Pamal to one of Brian Dodge's front groups, BAL-20130207ABI, but as long as the renewal app is "accepted for filing," the station can continue to operate under the terms of its expired license. There's also a silent STA that was filed in January 2014, indicating that "THIS AM STATION DOES NOT GENERATE REVENUES CLOSE TO WHAT IS REQUIRED TO COVER THE COST OF OPERATIONS. THE LICENSEE HAS SUSPENDED BROADCASTING IN ORDER TO REEVALUATE THE STATION BUSINESS PLAN." But that silent date, 11/30/2013, was more than six months ago, so WPNI should have resumed operations or filed for an extension no later than 5/30/2014. If it's not dead, it's at least hovering on the edge. ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4570 / Virus Database: 3955/7661 - Release Date: 06/11/14 From wollman@bimajority.org Wed Jun 11 18:30:54 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 18:30:54 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <21400.55454.425479.124664@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > On Tue, 10 Jun 2014, Garrett Wollman wrote: >> Isn't it possible that the clumping of spots that the industry has been >> doing for the last thirty years has made listeners hyper-aware of the >> advertising? > That is, after all, the goal of commercial radio: to get people to listen > to the ads. Making people hyper-aware of the advertising means they're annoyed and more willing to consider an alternative source of entertainment. It doesn't mean they're actually listening to the ads. A non-representative sample of university students suggests that the current crop of twentysomethings will tune out for *any* spoken word, whether jock, news, or advertising. "If I wanted ______, I'd use ______." I'd love to know what the whole population looks like. (And I worry that radio may have to write off an entire generation -- so I'd also like to know what happens as these twentysomethings become fortysomethings with families and full-time jobs.) Other anecdotes I've heard from people with access to actual PPM data suggest that some stations, at least, take a bigger hit from stop sets than that Arb study suggested. -GAWollman From pbencurrier@hotmail.com Wed Jun 11 18:54:38 2014 From: pbencurrier@hotmail.com (Paul Currier) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 18:54:38 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I do - every day for several hours. I just plain like radio. I grew up with it in the days of AM - in the 50's and it has and always be a part of me. Paul Sandwich Cape Cod > Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 03:39:43 -0400 > Subject: Looking for honest answers on this > From: kvahey@gmail.com > To: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org > > Here we are in the year 2014. > > How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? When > you can hear a station clearly online why bother listening to what maybe a > challenged signal, > > > I am guilty of this and it bothers me. > > > Discuss please From donald_astelle@yahoo.com Wed Jun 11 21:13:12 2014 From: donald_astelle@yahoo.com (D. A.) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 18:13:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <21399.64613.621219.413381@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <36BC18A0D1A5463FB929840F52C34838@ownerd8aa55a4d> <21399.64613.621219.413381@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <1402535592.54116.YahooMailNeo@web126205.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> ________________________________ From: Garrett Wollman To: Don Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 2:51 AM Subject: Re: Looking for honest answers on this >> I'd love to see someone do the experiment and stop running the spots >> in long, predictable stop sets.? If you're running 12 units an hour, >> what would happen if you ran one or two units every five minutes, >> rather than six in a row twice an hour? > Some research has indeed been done...leading to what we hear today: > http://www.colemaninsights.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/The-Impact-of-Commercials-on-the-Radio-Audience-September-2006.pdf >>>Eight years ago, It's a different landscape How has it changed? >>and in a single market... Should it be different in any other major market? >>And in any case, they didn't actually do the >>experiment, they just measured listening to existing commercial >>schedules And how people respond to those commercials.? The conclusion being that playing the first commercial is the biggest threat to continued listenership....but there isn't much difference between playing 3, 6 or 8 after that. This led to the thinking that fewer and longer stopsets were more effective. From lglavin@mail.com Wed Jun 11 18:48:51 2014 From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 00:48:51 +0200 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <21400.55454.425479.124664@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> , <21400.55454.425479.124664@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: >Sent:?Wednesday, June 11, 2014 at 6:30 PM >From:?"Garrett Wollman" >To:?"Rob Landry" <011010001@interpring.com> >Cc:?boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org >Subject:?Re: Looking for honest answers on this < said: > On Tue, 10 Jun 2014, Garrett Wollman wrote: >> Isn't it possible that the clumping of spots that the industry has been >> doing for the last thirty years has made listeners hyper-aware of the >> advertising? > That is, after all, the goal of commercial radio: to get people to listen > to the ads. >Making people hyper-aware of the advertising means they're annoyed and >more willing to consider an alternative source of entertainment. It >doesn't mean they're actually listening to the ads. >A non-representative sample of university students suggests that the >current crop of twentysomethings will tune out for *any* spoken word, >whether jock, news, or advertising. "If I wanted ______, I'd use >______." I'd love to know what the whole population looks like. (And >I worry that radio may have to write off an entire generation -- so >I'd also like to know what happens as these twentysomethings become >fortysomethings with families and full-time jobs.) Other anecdotes >I've heard from people with access to actual PPM data suggest that >some stations, at least, take a bigger hit from stop sets than that Arb study suggested. >-GAWollman ? Several years ago, the NY Times reported that "book" musicals (as opposed to revues like "Smokey Joe's Cafe") hoping to attract a younger crowd could never include an overture. The intended audience would balk at sitting in a theater and listening to a piece of strictly orchestral fare before the curtain went up. Presumably it's a symptom of attenuated attention-spans. Could that be the reason Kentucky Fried Chicken became KFC and Dairy Queen became DQ? From lglavin@mail.com Wed Jun 11 18:40:44 2014 From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 00:40:44 +0200 Subject: The WORST English-Language Radio Show Ever? Message-ID: Some people date the beginning of radio as we know it to the 1920 election results on KDKA, Pittsburgh; others believe there were even earlier broadcasts receivable by hobbyists in the 1920s, maybe earlier. Anyhoo, from whatever time and place radio began until now, it's possible that the "Dr. K" show heard on WUFC-AM 1510 in Boston from 6:00 till 9:00 am weekdays may be the WORST English-language show ever! After MILL-YUNS and MILL-YUNS of radio shows spanning almost a century, from conglomerate-owned big-footprint stations in big cities to graveyard stations in rural communities, this may be the nadir of radio! And that takes into account the days of Simon Geller doing the WVCA station ID: W-V-as-in-victor-C-A, Gloucester. From john@pcsupportsolutions.com Wed Jun 11 20:11:35 2014 From: john@pcsupportsolutions.com (John Allen) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 20:11:35 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <037601cf85d2$e1150030$a33f0090$@pcsupportsolutions.com> Hi All - I listen to radio in the car. (No satellite radio). WVBB in RI, WZLX, WROR, BZ FM for sports and WEEI FM for red sox, WBZ AM. At home I listen to my CD's on iTunes. Rarely I listen to internet radio. Once in a while I FM DX - usually during sporadic E season June-July. Regards, John K1AE ex WBOS, WCRB in the 70's ? > Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 03:39:43 -0400 > Subject: Looking for honest answers on this > From: kvahey@gmail.com > To: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org > > Here we are in the year 2014. > > How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? > When you can hear a station clearly online why bother listening to > what maybe a challenged signal, > > > I am guilty of this and it bothers me. > > > Discuss please = From wollman@bimajority.org Wed Jun 11 23:09:58 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 23:09:58 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <1402535592.54116.YahooMailNeo@web126205.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <36BC18A0D1A5463FB929840F52C34838@ownerd8aa55a4d> <21399.64613.621219.413381@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <1402535592.54116.YahooMailNeo@web126205.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <21401.6662.808499.383427@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: >>>> Eight years ago, It's a different landscape > How has it changed? Vastly greater penetration of streaming audio services. Essentially everyone under the age of 40 now has a device capable of streaming audio (or playing back their own prerecorded audio files). Many people have several. >>> and in a single market... > Should it be different in any other major market? I don't know, and neither do you, since the research hasn't been done. I would certainly expect people in San Francisco or New York to behave differently from people in Houston in any number of ways. >>> And in any case, they didn't actually do the >>> experiment, they just measured listening to existing commercial >>> schedules > And how people respond to those commercials. Still didn't actually do an experiment, so there's no way to make any sort of causal claims. -GAWollman From joe@attorneyross.com Thu Jun 12 01:17:47 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 01:17:47 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <539937FB.6030201@attorneyross.com> If they wanted classical music, they didn't have many alternatives. On 6/11/2014 6:26 AM, Rob Landry wrote: > At WCRB about a decade ago we commissioned a series of focus groups > and telephone surveys; one of the things we needed to find out was how > much of a tune-out commercials were. We found out that WCRB listeners > did not really have a problem with commercials (public radio-style > fundraising pitches, on the other hand, were detested), and at WCRB, > we ran three stopsets an hour in most hours. > > Mind you, this was a decade ago, and these were older folks who had > grown up listening to commercials on the radio. But my gut feeling is > that even today, long stopsets are not a big deal for most listeners. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From joe@attorneyross.com Thu Jun 12 01:22:12 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 01:22:12 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> , <21400.55454.425479.124664@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <53993904.6010406@attorneyross.com> On 6/11/2014 6:48 PM, Laurence Glavin wrote: > Several years ago, the NY Times reported that "book" musicals (as opposed to > revues like "Smokey Joe's Cafe") hoping to attract a younger crowd could never > include an overture. The intended audience would balk at sitting in a theater > and listening to a piece of strictly orchestral fare before the curtain went up. > Presumably it's a symptom of attenuated attention-spans. Could that be the > reason Kentucky Fried Chicken became KFC and Dairy Queen became DQ? Or was it because they expanded their fare to the point where they didn't want to give the impression that all they served was fried chicken or dairy items? Or maybe because "queen" has acquired another meaning that they didn't want to be identified with? -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From joe@attorneyross.com Thu Jun 12 01:11:41 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 01:11:41 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <36BC18A0D1A5463FB929840F52C34838@ownerd8aa55a4d> References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <36BC18A0D1A5463FB929840F52C34838@ownerd8aa55a4d> Message-ID: <5399368D.8010606@attorneyross.com> I wonder whether this result is because radios don't have remotes. The only people who can readily change stations are driving in their cars. I don't feel strongly enough about most commercials to waht to change the station, but I generally change the station whenever WGBH or WBUR start pledge nagging. On 6/11/2014 1:44 AM, Don wrote: >> >> I'd love to see someone do the experiment and stop running the spots >> in long, predictable stop sets. If you're running 12 units an hour, >> what would happen if you ran one or two units every five minutes, >> rather than six in a row twice an hour? > > Some research has indeed been done...leading to what we hear today: > > http://www.colemaninsights.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/The-Impact-of-Commercials-on-the-Radio-Audience-September-2006.pdf > > > "What Happens When the Spots Come On" > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3964/7664 - Release Date: 06/12/14 > > -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From joe@attorneyross.com Thu Jun 12 01:14:46 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 01:14:46 -0400 Subject: WPNI, 1430, Amherst, MA In-Reply-To: <4D08BF6E97234EAB8B3B277DB8437E29@laptop> References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> <4D08BF6E97234EAB8B3B277DB8437E29@laptop> Message-ID: <53993746.7020800@attorneyross.com> Last I heard, WPNI was relaying WUMB, which was noncommercial. So I would think they'd be paid by WUMB to do so, or perhaps the station was rented to WUMB. This didn't make enough money to support the station? On 6/11/2014 5:16 PM, M.Casey wrote: > In the correspondence file, a letter from the FCC to the WPNI owners > states that the license will expire Dec. 1, 2014. Looks like a typo, > but the FCC letter references WPNI (FM). > Mark Casey > > -----Original Message----- From: Scott Fybush > Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2014 10:39 AM > To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > Subject: Re: WPNI? > > On 6/8/2014 4:19 AM, Kevin Vahey wrote: >> It appears that WPNI just pulled the plug, Their license expired on >> April 1 >> and I can't find anything that indicates they renewed it. >> > > http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/app_list.pl?Facility_id=25907 > > > shows that renewal application BR-20131126BPD was accepted for filing > 11/27/2013. I think it remains in "accepted for filing" status because > there's also a pending unconsummated application for assignment of > license from Pamal to one of Brian Dodge's front groups, > BAL-20130207ABI, but as long as the renewal app is "accepted for > filing," the station can continue to operate under the terms of its > expired license. > > There's also a silent STA that was filed in January 2014, indicating > that "THIS AM STATION DOES NOT GENERATE REVENUES CLOSE TO WHAT IS > REQUIRED TO COVER THE COST OF OPERATIONS. THE LICENSEE HAS SUSPENDED > BROADCASTING IN ORDER TO REEVALUATE THE STATION BUSINESS PLAN." But that > silent date, 11/30/2013, was more than six months ago, so WPNI should > have resumed operations or filed for an extension no later than > 5/30/2014. > > If it's not dead, it's at least hovering on the edge. > > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2014.0.4570 / Virus Database: 3955/7661 - Release Date: 06/11/14 > > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3964/7664 - Release Date: 06/12/14 > > -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From Kaimbridge@Gmail.com Thu Jun 12 13:44:42 2014 From: Kaimbridge@Gmail.com (Kaimbridge M. GoldChild) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 17:44:42 +0000 Subject: Globe Mag: "Aereo Wants a TV Revolution..." Message-ID: <5399E70A.6090204@Gmail.com> There is an article by Scott Helman in the 8 June 2014 edition of /Globe Magazine/, pp.19-23, ?Air Waves?; Online version: ?Aereo wants a TV revolution, if the Supreme Court will let it? http://www.bostonglobe.com/magazine/2014/06/05/aereo-wants-revolution-supreme-court-will-let/xevtnDRJj9HzbCdVQM22XK/story.html This article seems to give a little more insight into the nature of Aereo?s unique antenna system?perhaps the key sentence of interest for us radio geeks: > The company?s top engineers designed tiny antennas > that they could group by the thousands at so-called > antenna farms, nearly all on leased space on rooftops. > (The Boston farm sits atop an industrial building in > Somerville.) http://c.o0bg.com/rf/image_371w/Boston/2011-2020/2014/05/26/BostonGlobe.com/Magazine/Images/turner052214MAGaereo257.jpg > Aereo collects TV signals at rooftop antenna farms; > this one in Somerville serves all Boston area subscribers. Anyone recognize the location? ~Kaimbridge~ -- -- -- Wiki??Sites Contribution History Pages: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge math.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge wiki.gis.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge rosettacode.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge ***** Void Where Permitted; Limit 0 Per Customer. ***** From scott@fybush.com Thu Jun 12 16:13:51 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 16:13:51 -0400 Subject: WPNI, 1430, Amherst, MA In-Reply-To: <53993746.7020800@attorneyross.com> References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> <4D08BF6E97234EAB8B3B277DB8437E29@laptop> <53993746.7020800@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <539A09FF.1050405@fybush.com> On 6/12/2014 1:14 AM, A Joseph Ross wrote: > Last I heard, WPNI was relaying WUMB, which was noncommercial. So I > would think they'd be paid by WUMB to do so, or perhaps the station was > rented to WUMB. This didn't make enough money to support the station? > It was my understanding that the WUMB rebroadcast was being done without any money changing hands. The WUMB audio kept the needles moving, as it were, while Pamal sought a buyer for WPNI. WUMB never promoted the simulcast in any way, and my recollection is that they didn't even include WPNI in their own lengthy legal ID; instead, an automated system at WPNI dropped the ID in over the WUMB audio. s From 011010001@interpring.com Thu Jun 12 17:16:30 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 17:16:30 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WPNI, 1430, Amherst, MA In-Reply-To: <4D08BF6E97234EAB8B3B277DB8437E29@laptop> References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> <4D08BF6E97234EAB8B3B277DB8437E29@laptop> Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Jun 2014, M.Casey wrote: > In the correspondence file, a letter from the FCC to the WPNI owners states > that the license will expire Dec. 1, 2014. Looks like a typo, but the FCC > letter references WPNI (FM). December 1, 2014 is very close to the anniversary date of WPNI going silent. It was at the end of November, 2013. Rob From kvahey@gmail.com Thu Jun 12 16:13:07 2014 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 16:13:07 -0400 Subject: Globe Mag: "Aereo Wants a TV Revolution..." In-Reply-To: <5399E70A.6090204@Gmail.com> References: <5399E70A.6090204@Gmail.com> Message-ID: It would appear to be somewhere near the McGrath Highway as you can see the old Cambridge courthouse. On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Kaimbridge M. GoldChild < Kaimbridge@gmail.com> wrote: > There is an article by Scott Helman in the 8 June 2014 edition of /Globe > Magazine/, pp.19-23, ?Air Waves?; Online version: > > ?Aereo wants a TV revolution, if > the Supreme Court will let it? > > > http://www.bostonglobe.com/magazine/2014/06/05/aereo- > wants-revolution-supreme-court-will-let/xevtnDRJj9HzbCdVQM22XK/story.html > > This article seems to give a little more insight into the nature of > Aereo?s unique antenna system?perhaps the key sentence of interest for us > radio geeks: > > > The company?s top engineers designed tiny antennas > > that they could group by the thousands at so-called > > antenna farms, nearly all on leased space on rooftops. > > (The Boston farm sits atop an industrial building in > > Somerville.) > > > http://c.o0bg.com/rf/image_371w/Boston/2011-2020/2014/05/ > 26/BostonGlobe.com/Magazine/Images/turner052214MAGaereo257.jpg > > Aereo collects TV signals at rooftop antenna farms; > > this one in Somerville serves all Boston area subscribers. > > Anyone recognize the location? > > ~Kaimbridge~ > > -- -- -- > Wiki??Sites Contribution History Pages: > > en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge > math.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge > wiki.gis.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge > rosettacode.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge > > ***** Void Where Permitted; Limit 0 Per Customer. ***** > > From 011010001@interpring.com Thu Jun 12 17:30:29 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 17:30:29 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <21400.55454.425479.124664@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <21400.55454.425479.124664@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Jun 2014, Garrett Wollman wrote: > A non-representative sample of university students suggests that the > current crop of twentysomethings will tune out for *any* spoken word, > whether jock, news, or advertising. As my Usenet friends used to say, the plural of "anecdote" is not "data". If it's true that this demo does not want any spoken word, then it is effectively unreachable by radio. Rob From 011010001@interpring.com Thu Jun 12 17:43:25 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 17:43:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WPNI, 1430, Amherst, MA In-Reply-To: <53993746.7020800@attorneyross.com> References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> <4D08BF6E97234EAB8B3B277DB8437E29@laptop> <53993746.7020800@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, A Joseph Ross wrote: > Last I heard, WPNI was relaying WUMB, which was noncommercial. So I would > think they'd be paid by WUMB to do so, or perhaps the station was rented to > WUMB. This didn't make enough money to support the station? No; WUMB merely supplied programming and permission to retransmit. As far as I know, no money chanhed hands. Rob From wollman@bimajority.org Thu Jun 12 17:44:38 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 17:44:38 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <21400.55454.425479.124664@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <21402.8006.47450.407440@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > On Wed, 11 Jun 2014, Garrett Wollman wrote: >> A non-representative sample of university students suggests that the >> current crop of twentysomethings will tune out for *any* spoken word, >> whether jock, news, or advertising. > As my Usenet friends used to say, the plural of "anecdote" is not "data". Indeed. They still say that. Perhaps some survey research could be done. I think most national surveys are not done with large enough samples to actually make conclusions about such a small demographic group, however. > If it's true that this demo does not want any spoken word, then it is > effectively unreachable by radio. Surprisingly enough, they do listen to spoken-word programming -- most in my unscientific sample are NPR listeners, if they use radio at all. But they don't want talk interrupting their music, and they don't look to commercial broadcast radio as a medium for musical entertainment. (And of course some listen to "NPR" exclusively through the medium of podcasts and/or streaming.) This may be reflected in the number of college stations where every "show" is just an hour of some student's iPod set to shuffle, until they get to the end and have three minutes of "...and before that was...". (I exaggerate only slightly.) It's a rare college station where the main air studio doesn't have a 1/8" phone jack for a student's music player. -GAWollman From 011010001@interpring.com Thu Jun 12 17:45:01 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 17:45:01 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <539937FB.6030201@attorneyross.com> References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <539937FB.6030201@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, A Joseph Ross wrote: > If they wanted classical music, they didn't have many alternatives. They had WGBH, WHRB, and, in some places, WFCC. WFCC puts a listenable signal into parts of the North Shore as well as most of Plyouth County. Rob From lglavin@mail.com Thu Jun 12 17:34:36 2014 From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 23:34:36 +0200 Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? Message-ID: I was doing a little late-night AM dial twisting yesterday (Wednesday, 06/11) and noticed that I could hear WSRO-AM 650 transmitting from Framingham. They've been running 100 watts nights with a directional pattern favoring the 45-degree radial where I reside 40 or so miles away. They received a CP to boost that to 187 watts; no big deal, but if they're running that now, at least on the cusp of the solstice so there are fewer hours between sunset and midnight, it's doing a fine job of covering WSM-AM in Nashville,. From 011010001@interpring.com Thu Jun 12 17:46:35 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 17:46:35 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <53993904.6010406@attorneyross.com> References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> , <21400.55454.425479.124664@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53993904.6010406@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, A Joseph Ross wrote: > On 6/11/2014 6:48 PM, Laurence Glavin wrote: >> Presumably it's a symptom of attenuated attention-spans. Could that be the >> reason Kentucky Fried Chicken became KFC and Dairy Queen became DQ? > Or was it because they expanded their fare to the point where they didn't > want to give the impression that all they served was fried chicken or dairy > items? Or maybe because "queen" has acquired another meaning that they > didn't want to be identified with? Damn monarchists. Rob From wollman@bimajority.org Thu Jun 12 17:49:54 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 17:49:54 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <21402.8006.47450.407440@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <21400.55454.425479.124664@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <21402.8006.47450.407440@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <21402.8322.779631.260785@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < Indeed. They still say that. Perhaps some survey research could be > done. I think most national surveys are not done with large enough > samples to actually make conclusions about such a small demographic > group, however. I should mention that Pew Research Center has started dribbling out results of a massive (n=10000) national survey, and they have announced that one of the future data releases will be a report on media consumption and preferences. I don't think they'll quite reach the question of radio formatics, but the sample is large enough to show regional, political, and age-based demographic biases in media consumption, if such exist. -GAWollman From 011010001@interpring.com Thu Jun 12 17:57:12 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 17:57:12 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WPNI, 1430, Amherst, MA In-Reply-To: <539A09FF.1050405@fybush.com> References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> <4D08BF6E97234EAB8B3B277DB8437E29@laptop> <53993746.7020800@attorneyross.com> <539A09FF.1050405@fybush.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Scott Fybush wrote: > WUMB never promoted the simulcast in any way, and my recollection is that > they didn't even include WPNI in their own lengthy legal ID; instead, an > automated system at WPNI dropped the ID in over the WUMB audio. That's right, but the automated ID was inserted at WUMB (the voice was that of WUMB's director of engineering). I'm not sure why it was done that way. Rob From 011010001@interpring.com Thu Jun 12 18:09:07 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 18:09:07 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Laurence Glavin wrote: > I was doing a little late-night AM dial twisting yesterday (Wednesday, > 06/11) and noticed that I could hear WSRO-AM 650 transmitting from > Framingham. They've been running 100 watts nights with a directional > pattern favoring the 45-degree radial where I reside 40 or so miles > away. They received a CP to boost that to 187 watts; no big deal, but > if they're running that now, at least on the cusp of the solstice so > there are fewer hours between sunset and midnight, it's doing a fine job > of covering WSM-AM in Nashville,. They're only running 100 watts at night. On occasion, I've heard them at night on I-95 at the Mass/NH line. The signal's not really listenable, but it's there. In the daytime, however, they're quite listenable in Portsmouth. Rob From gary@garysicecream.com Thu Jun 12 18:17:05 2014 From: gary@garysicecream.com (Gary's Ice Cream) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 18:17:05 -0400 Subject: STA question Message-ID: <013e01cf868c$0b8717e0$229547a0$@garysicecream.com> If a radio station is licensed for x,000 watts of power into a directional array (different patterns day and night) do they need to get an STA (special temporary authorization) to drop down to less than 1/5 power omni-directional? How long is an STA good for? If they have been doing it for well over a year without filing for an STA can there be serious ramifications? From sids1045@aol.com Thu Jun 12 19:17:03 2014 From: sids1045@aol.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 19:17:03 -0400 Subject: STA question In-Reply-To: <013e01cf868c$0b8717e0$229547a0$@garysicecream.com> References: <013e01cf868c$0b8717e0$229547a0$@garysicecream.com> Message-ID: <63B873C4-4749-4544-995D-46068B56F7A0@aol.com> "If a radio station is licensed for x,000 watts of power into a directional > array (different patterns day and night) do they need to get an STA (special > temporary authorization) to drop down to less than 1/5 power > omni-directional? How long is an STA good for? If they have been doing > it for well over a year without filing for an STA can there be serious > ramifications?" The applicable rule is 47 CFR Sec. 73.1560(d): (d) Reduced power operation. In the event it becomes technically impossible to operate at authorized power, a broadcast station may operate at reduced power for a period of not more than 30 days without specific authority from the FCC. If operation at reduced power will exceed 10 consecutive days, notification must be made to the FCC in Washington, DC, Attention: Audio Division (radio) or Video Division (television), Media Bureau, not later than the 10th day of the lower power operation. In the event that normal power is restored within the 30 day period, the licensee must notify the FCC of the date that normal operation was restored. If causes beyond the control of the licensee prevent restoration of the authorized power within 30 days, a request for Special Temporary Authority (see ?73.1635) must be made to the FCC in Washington, DC for additional time as may be necessary. From joe@attorneyross.com Fri Jun 13 00:47:22 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 00:47:22 -0400 Subject: WPNI, 1430, Amherst, MA In-Reply-To: <539A09FF.1050405@fybush.com> References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> <4D08BF6E97234EAB8B3B277DB8437E29@laptop> <53993746.7020800@attorneyross.com> <539A09FF.1050405@fybush.com> Message-ID: <539A825A.7050507@attorneyross.com> On 6/12/2014 4:13 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: > It was my understanding that the WUMB rebroadcast was being done > without any money changing hands. The WUMB audio kept the needles > moving, as it were, while Pamal sought a buyer for WPNI. > > WUMB never promoted the simulcast in any way, and my recollection is > that they didn't even include WPNI in their own lengthy legal ID; > instead, an automated system at WPNI dropped the ID in over the WUMB > audio. So it sounds like they never found a buyer. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From joe@attorneyross.com Fri Jun 13 00:48:54 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 00:48:54 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <21400.55454.425479.124664@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <539A82B6.7080001@attorneyross.com> On 6/12/2014 5:30 PM, Rob Landry wrote: > As my Usenet friends used to say, the plural of "anecdote" is not "data". > > If it's true that this demo does not want any spoken word, then it is > effectively unreachable by radio. Which sounds like an increased market for singing commercials. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From 011010001@interpring.com Fri Jun 13 07:22:07 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 07:22:07 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WPNI, 1430, Amherst, MA In-Reply-To: <539A825A.7050507@attorneyross.com> References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> <4D08BF6E97234EAB8B3B277DB8437E29@laptop> <53993746.7020800@attorneyross.com> <539A09FF.1050405@fybush.com> <539A825A.7050507@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 13 Jun 2014, A Joseph Ross wrote: > On 6/12/2014 4:13 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: >> WUMB never promoted the simulcast in any way, and my recollection is that >> they didn't even include WPNI in their own lengthy legal ID; instead, an >> automated system at WPNI dropped the ID in over the WUMB audio. > So it sounds like they never found a buyer. They did find a buyer: Brian Dodge. But the FCC has not approved the sale. They haven't rejected it; they're apparently just going to let it sit in someone's in-box and gather dust. If I were Pamal, and my pending sale were treated that way, I'd consider legal action. This is after all supposed to be a government of laws, and if the FCC has a problem with Brian Dodge's fitness to be a licensee they should make a formal ruling to that effect. I should, after all, be allowed the opportunity to seek another buyer; as things stand, the clock will run out in December and the license will evaporate. Rob From dan.strassberg@att.net Fri Jun 13 09:11:11 2014 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (daniel strassberg) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 09:11:11 -0400 Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? References: Message-ID: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> But WSRO either has a CP for night power higher than 100W or has applied for night power higher than 100W. Can somebody say which it is (CP or app)? I don't remember seeing 187W but I think I saw 162W. ----- Dan Strassberg e-fax 707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: Rob Landry To: Laurence Glavin Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 6:09 PM Subject: Re: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Laurence Glavin wrote: > I was doing a little late-night AM dial twisting yesterday (Wednesday, > 06/11) and noticed that I could hear WSRO-AM 650 transmitting from > Framingham. They've been running 100 watts nights with a directional > pattern favoring the 45-degree radial where I reside 40 or so miles > away. They received a CP to boost that to 187 watts; no big deal, but > if they're running that now, at least on the cusp of the solstice so > there are fewer hours between sunset and midnight, it's doing a fine job > of covering WSM-AM in Nashville,. They're only running 100 watts at night. On occasion, I've heard them at night on I-95 at the Mass/NH line. The signal's not really listenable, but it's there. In the daytime, however, they're quite listenable in Portsmouth. Rob From map@mapinternet.com Fri Jun 13 11:04:31 2014 From: map@mapinternet.com (M.Casey) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 11:04:31 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <21402.8006.47450.407440@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <014501cf841f$e1a45690$a4ed03b0$@net> <21399.49599.308579.595789@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <21400.55454.425479.124664@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <21402.8006.47450.407440@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <42F09E15D4CD46EAAE575F98B36C0EB4@laptop> > On Wed, 11 Jun 2014, Garrett Wollman wrote: >> A non-representative sample of university students suggests that the >> current crop of twentysomethings will tune out for *any* spoken word, >> whether jock, news, or advertising. There's little or no credible evidence that the current generation on twentysomethings is basically any different than past generations. The only recorded difference is the state of technology and technology's influence as it affects age groups at the time. So, historically, I think that it is provable that my generation of 20-29 year olds, back in the 1970's, was little different than todays'. We listened to news and information shows less in our 20's, but did not completely tune out the spoken word. We mostly hated commercials! And when Nixon and Agnew came on the TV, we'd usually turn them off and turn on the music. But we watched 60 minutes, the evening TV news sometimes, and listened to radio news. If the current 20's were tuning out the spoken word then Facebook and You Tube would have a smaller base. Mark Casey K1MAP ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4570 / Virus Database: 3964/7672 - Release Date: 06/13/14 From scott@fybush.com Fri Jun 13 11:14:05 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 11:14:05 -0400 Subject: WPNI, 1430, Amherst, MA In-Reply-To: References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> <4D08BF6E97234EAB8B3B277DB8437E29@laptop> <53993746.7020800@attorneyross.com> <539A09FF.1050405@fybush.com> <539A825A.7050507@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: I would also consider the possibility that the would-be buyer was not able to follow through on the terms of the contract. In the highly unlikely chance that another buyer were to surface (and considering the station sat on the air in zombie mode for years and years with none appearing), I don't think the seller would have any legal difficulties in exiting the existing contract (which I'd bet had a sunset clause if the FCC doesn't approve it) and entering a new one. There is more I would say about this if this weren't a public forum. From scott@fybush.com Fri Jun 13 13:03:21 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 13:03:21 -0400 Subject: 101.7 flipping - anyone rolling? Message-ID: <539B2ED9.4010001@fybush.com> I'm told WEDX 101.7 is stunting with country music right now. Anyone within signal range able to record it? The stream is still Evolution dance music. s From walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Fri Jun 13 11:22:05 2014 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 08:22:05 -0700 Subject: WPNI, 1430, Amherst, MA In-Reply-To: References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> <4D08BF6E97234EAB8B3B277DB8437E29@laptop> <53993746.7020800@attorneyross.com> <539A09FF.1050405@fybush.com> <539A825A.7050507@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: Anything involving Brian Dodge is questionable at best. I worked for the man...... reading about him onlone/in paper is one thing.. dealing with the man on a daily basis.. that's something else. Paul On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Scott Fybush wrote: > I would also consider the possibility that the would-be buyer was not able > to follow through on the terms of the contract. > > In the highly unlikely chance that another buyer were to surface (and > considering the station sat on the air in zombie mode for years and years > with none appearing), I don't think the seller would have any legal > difficulties in exiting the existing contract (which I'd bet had a sunset > clause if the FCC doesn't approve it) and entering a new one. > > There is more I would say about this if this weren't a public forum. > From hmglaz@att.net Fri Jun 13 17:16:23 2014 From: hmglaz@att.net (Howard Glazer) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 14:16:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: WPNI, 1430 AM, Amherst, MA Message-ID: <1402694183.16195.YahooMailNeo@web181106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Scott Fybush wrote: > It was my understanding that the WUMB rebroadcast was being done > without any money changing hands. The WUMB audio kept the needles > moving, as it were, while Pamal sought a buyer for WPNI. > > WUMB never promoted the simulcast in any way, and my recollection is > that they didn't even include WPNI in their own lengthy legal ID; > instead, an automated system at WPNI dropped the ID in over the WUMB > audio. WUMB also popped up, unannounced and unpromoted, on WLYN 1360 in Lynn when that station was between owners some years back. I wonder if the same person at 'UMB who arranged the "PNI deal??was behind that deal as well. Howard From raccoonradio@gmail.com Fri Jun 13 15:50:29 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 15:50:29 -0400 Subject: 101.7 flipping - anyone rolling? Message-ID: <7foom3qa5elyqyvnv7bqqw8d.1402689029734@email.android.com> At work and unable to roll on it but it's apparently new format, not a stunt. The Bull; no ads for rest of summer. Evol 101.7 fans can still get EDM via HD2 of WXKS-FM, and on iHeartRadio Sent from my Virgin Mobile phone -------- Original message -------- From: Scott Fybush Date: 06/13/2014 1:03 PM (GMT-05:00) To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: 101.7 flipping - anyone rolling? I'm told WEDX 101.7 is stunting with country music right now. Anyone within signal range able to record it? The stream is still Evolution dance music. s From wollman@bimajority.org Fri Jun 13 21:38:17 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 21:38:17 -0400 Subject: WPNI, 1430, Amherst, MA In-Reply-To: References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> <4D08BF6E97234EAB8B3B277DB8437E29@laptop> <53993746.7020800@attorneyross.com> <539A09FF.1050405@fybush.com> <539A825A.7050507@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <21403.42889.367610.851398@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > If I were Pamal, and my pending sale were treated that way, I'd consider > legal action. This is after all supposed to be a government of laws, and > if the FCC has a problem with Brian Dodge's fitness to be a licensee they > should make a formal ruling to that effect. I should, after all, be > allowed the opportunity to seek another buyer; as things stand, the clock > will run out in December and the license will evaporate. The license will only evaporate if they keep the station silent. If they want to hang onto the license until the FCC approves the sale, they are free to broadcast something, even if it's just a loop of "Programming on WPNI Amherst is suspended pending sale of the station" over and over again. If the license isn't even worth that much, I hope they got enough of a deposit from Dodge to cover their legal costs. It does appear that everything involving Dodge gets into tossed into the FCC's deep freeze. Even his long-silent WWNH (1340 Madbury) is still technically on program test authority -- the Commission has never acted on the 302 he filed twenty-five years ago! It would have been a fool's errand, but I would have loved to see someone apply for 1340 in Durham or Dover during the last AM window just to get that thing cleared off the books. -GAWollman From scott@fybush.com Fri Jun 13 21:49:26 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 21:49:26 -0400 Subject: WPNI, 1430, Amherst, MA In-Reply-To: <21403.42889.367610.851398@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> <4D08BF6E97234EAB8B3B277DB8437E29@laptop> <53993746.7020800@attorneyross.com> <539A09FF.1050405@fybush.com> <539A825A.7050507@attorneyross.com> <21403.42889.367610.851398@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <539BAA26.5040808@fybush.com> On 6/13/2014 9:38 PM, Garrett Wollman wrote: > The license will only evaporate if they keep the station silent. If > they want to hang onto the license until the FCC approves the sale, > they are free to broadcast something, even if it's just a loop of > "Programming on WPNI Amherst is suspended pending sale of the station" > over and over again. If the license isn't even worth that much, I > hope they got enough of a deposit from Dodge to cover their legal > costs. It is very rare that I get the opportunity to correct Garrett, so I'll take full advantage of the opportunity There is now solid FCC precedent that says that when you return a silent station to the air, you have to do so with something that can be construed as actual programming. The test case was a UHF TV station in northern Alabama that came back for a day with a test pattern. The FCC ruled that WYLE had not, in fact, "returned to the air" and deleted the license. https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-576A1.pdf You might be able to play music interspersed with legal IDs. If I were running WPNI, though, I wouldn't come back with a "programming is suspended" loop. s From 011010001@interpring.com Sat Jun 14 00:07:10 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 00:07:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WPNI, 1430 AM, Amherst, MA In-Reply-To: <1402694183.16195.YahooMailNeo@web181106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1402694183.16195.YahooMailNeo@web181106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 13 Jun 2014, Howard Glazer wrote: > WUMB also popped up, unannounced and unpromoted, on WLYN 1360 in Lynn > when that station was between owners some years back. I wonder if the > same person at 'UMB who arranged the "PNI deal??was behind that deal as > well. Undoubtably; it would have been Patricia Monteith, WUMB's general manager from its earliest days; she retired a couple years ago. Rob From 011010001@interpring.com Sat Jun 14 00:11:28 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 00:11:28 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WPNI, 1430, Amherst, MA In-Reply-To: <539BAA26.5040808@fybush.com> References: <5393FE92.5080604@attorneyross.com> <5394758A.8030200@fybush.com> <4D08BF6E97234EAB8B3B277DB8437E29@laptop> <53993746.7020800@attorneyross.com> <539A09FF.1050405@fybush.com> <539A825A.7050507@attorneyross.com> <21403.42889.367610.851398@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <539BAA26.5040808@fybush.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 13 Jun 2014, Scott Fybush wrote: > There is now solid FCC precedent that says that when you return a silent > station to the air, you have to do so with something that can be construed as > actual programming. No problem; "Real Jazz 1410" is still in my closet. They are welcome to borrow it. Rob From Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com Sat Jun 14 15:20:37 2014 From: Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com (Don) Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 15:20:37 -0400 Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? References: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> Message-ID: <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> When a station gets down to less than 100watts.....doesn't that become a Part 15 issue? ----- Original Message ----- From: "daniel strassberg" To: "Rob Landry" <011010001@interpring.com>; "Laurence Glavin" Cc: Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 9:11 AM Subject: Re: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? But WSRO either has a CP for night power higher than 100W or has applied for night power higher than 100W. Can somebody say which it is (CP or app)? I don't remember seeing 187W but I think I saw 162W. ----- Dan Strassberg e-fax 707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: Rob Landry To: Laurence Glavin Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 6:09 PM Subject: Re: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Laurence Glavin wrote: > I was doing a little late-night AM dial twisting yesterday (Wednesday, > 06/11) and noticed that I could hear WSRO-AM 650 transmitting from > Framingham. They've been running 100 watts nights with a directional > pattern favoring the 45-degree radial where I reside 40 or so miles > away. They received a CP to boost that to 187 watts; no big deal, but > if they're running that now, at least on the cusp of the solstice so > there are fewer hours between sunset and midnight, it's doing a fine job > of covering WSM-AM in Nashville,. They're only running 100 watts at night. On occasion, I've heard them at night on I-95 at the Mass/NH line. The signal's not really listenable, but it's there. In the daytime, however, they're quite listenable in Portsmouth. Rob From Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com Sat Jun 14 15:06:27 2014 From: Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com (Don) Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 15:06:27 -0400 Subject: Looking for honest answers on this References: Message-ID: <2255FB691FDA4E6BA08E22327353D80C@ownerd8aa55a4d> > On Jun 9, 2014, at 3:39 AM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > >> Here we are in the year 2014. >> >> How many of US ( radio geeks) still listen with terrestrial receivers? I am a radio geek...so I like the idea of free broadcasting over the air. No subscription, no internet fee, no data charges. I also like to know and be on top of what is available to listeners for free over the air, and to see if anyone is doing anything interesting....and maybe how a certain station is relating to their community........so I am constantly scanning and sampling. Wake up to it....listen in the shower....in the car, in the kitchen, etc. So, yes, I still do listen to terrestrial radio, although I am becoming more disenchanted. (Also sample the HD channels.) I could listen to these over the internet...but I have hit my monthly data limits a few times and over-the-air broadcasting is so much more convenient. (I used to have unlimited data, don't know what happenned to that!) I always liked talkradio...but really can only find WBUR/WGBH as acceptable talk outlets. And I can't find any oldies or smooth jazz or quiet storm type R&B. I have discovered Pandora because the formats available over-the-air is pretty limited. I use it mainly for Smooth Jazz on the weekends and when I need my fix of older (i.e..70's) tunes....and R&B. I am constantly wondering how radio can compete with Pandora musically (and I use the free version). One of the other things that has changed in my radio listening.....I have also added to my repetoire podcasts...since my iPhone connects to the car dash system seemlessly, I find myself catching some of my favorite podcasts. While most of them are podcasts from terrestrial broadcasts...I suppose I am "time shifting" them to when it is more convenient for me. -On The Media, This American Life, Fresh Air, Radio Boston, America's Test Kitchen, Ham Nation, Leo Laporte and Bob Brinker's Moneytalk areall much more easier to catch now, as I can't be sure to be by a radio when they are actually scheduled to broadcast. Also the BBC_WS, and "World Have Your Say" are also great programs. From stevewest106@hotmail.com Sat Jun 14 15:45:33 2014 From: stevewest106@hotmail.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 15:45:33 -0400 Subject: WWBZ 700, WFNX 99.9 "vote for format" In-Reply-To: <5386B516.2060902@fybush.com> References: <459fb.3b8403e3.40b80c07@aol.com>,<5386B516.2060902@fybush.com> Message-ID: > Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 00:18:30 -0400 I don't know where > you'd tune now to hear the Sox if you're in Athol or Orange. WVEI sure > doesn't get there, and Entercom doesn't seem to care. > WTIC 1080. I think TIC has had the Sox games since Marconi was a boy. Back in the days when I was at WWBZ (CAT) we aired DAY games. I never did figure out how Partridge managed to convince the network to let us broadcast less than 1/3rd of a season schedule, but they did. But most of us tuned in WTIC, since they aired every Red Sox game all season, even back in 1980. Second strongest AM signal in Orange, not counting 700. WBZ is the strongest, TIC the next strongest, and although nobody's listening to it, WIZZ (WGAM/WPOE) 1520 Greenfield. At night, strongest is WWKB Buffalo, hands down. And once again, I go off topic... all by accident! LOL From 011010001@interpring.com Sat Jun 14 17:09:06 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 17:09:06 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Looking for honest answers on this In-Reply-To: <2255FB691FDA4E6BA08E22327353D80C@ownerd8aa55a4d> References: <2255FB691FDA4E6BA08E22327353D80C@ownerd8aa55a4d> Message-ID: On Sat, 14 Jun 2014, Don wrote: > I have discovered Pandora because the formats available over-the-air is > pretty limited. I use it mainly for Smooth Jazz on the weekends and when I > need my fix of older (i.e..70's) tunes....and R&B. I am constantly wondering > how radio can compete with Pandora musically (and I use the free version). The last I heard, Pandora was losing money. But that can change; or else it may end up in the hands of the record companies, who can afford to operate it at a loss in exchange for its promotional value. Radio needs to get back into show business. The entertainment value of a radio station has to be more than just music; otherwise, the Pandoras of the world will eventually eat its lunch. Rob From 011010001@interpring.com Sat Jun 14 17:10:25 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 17:10:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? In-Reply-To: <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> References: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> Message-ID: On Sat, 14 Jun 2014, Don wrote: > When a station gets down to less than 100watts.....doesn't that become a Part > 15 issue? No. There are licensed Class D stations (former daytimers) with nighttime power allocations below 10 watts; WJIB 740 AM is one such. Rob From walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Sat Jun 14 16:27:03 2014 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 13:27:03 -0700 Subject: WWBZ 700 & WFNX 99.9 Message-ID: Has anyone ever figured out WHY Steve Silberberg owns these stations? He can't currently nor can he ever really have made much money from them. What did he gain by them simulcasting 92.5 The River? What exactly is the point in him owning them? This isn't the biggest pile o' junk he owns. Silberberg also owns this: http://radio-locator.com/cgi-bin/finder?call=kvuw&x=0&y=0&sr=Y&s=C As a Class A, it covers 6000 people. As A Class C 100KW FM it might cover 8000 people. It's nothing but 80s music back to back to back with no liners, id's, commercials, promos.. nothing..... I wouldnt be surprised if it's an IPod at the transmitter site on a hill outside of town Paul From Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com Sat Jun 14 18:12:51 2014 From: Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com (Don) Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 18:12:51 -0400 Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? References: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> Message-ID: <665055FC29314407A9EFBE13CD6A6189@ownerd8aa55a4d> > On Sat, 14 Jun 2014, Don wrote: > >> When a station gets down to less than 100watts.....doesn't that become a >> Part 15 issue? > > No. There are licensed Class D stations (former daytimers) with nighttime > power allocations below 10 watts; WJIB 740 AM is one such. What is the power level that you CAN use unlicensed? Remember when RadioFree Allston was broadcasting on AM from Kenmore Square? When they finally got their wattage under a legal limit, I seem to recall as long as RFA was under 100 watts they were considered legal. In Haverhill, web/streaming station WHAV.net is broadcasting on 1640AM (from what I understan unlicensed and legal). > AM Radio 1,640 kHz in selected areas How many watts is that that they can stay on the legal side of the line? From radiotest@plymouthcolony.net Sat Jun 14 19:34:22 2014 From: radiotest@plymouthcolony.net (Dale H. Cook) Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 19:34:22 -0400 Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? In-Reply-To: <665055FC29314407A9EFBE13CD6A6189@ownerd8aa55a4d> References: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> <665055FC29314407A9EFBE13CD6A6189@ownerd8aa55a4d> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20140614192928.03cfb468@plymouthcolony.net> At 06:12 PM 6/14/2014, Don wrote: >What is the power level that you CAN use unlicensed? On AM a maximum of 100 mw (.01 w) DC power input to the final stage, with an antenna and ground system totaling no more than 3 meters. That provides less than 1/10 of a watt radiated power into a very inefficient antenna system. 100 watts without a license is illegal. See CFR47 Part 15. Dale H. Cook, Contract Engineer, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA http://plymouthcolony.net/starcityeng/index.html From kc1ih@mac.com Sat Jun 14 19:38:54 2014 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 19:38:54 -0400 Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? In-Reply-To: <665055FC29314407A9EFBE13CD6A6189@ownerd8aa55a4d> References: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> <665055FC29314407A9EFBE13CD6A6189@ownerd8aa55a4d> Message-ID: <69E1D5E2-917A-4006-B711-F4D7CFC8A5FB@mac.com> I believe the limit for Part 15 is 150 miliwatts, i.e. 0.15 watts. Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH Sent from my iPhone, so please excuse the brevity. Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH Sent from my iPhone, so please excuse the brevity. On Jun 14, 2014, at 6:12 PM, Don wrote: >> On Sat, 14 Jun 2014, Don wrote: >> >>> When a station gets down to less than 100watts.....doesn't that become a >>> Part 15 issue? >> >> No. There are licensed Class D stations (former daytimers) with nighttime >> power allocations below 10 watts; WJIB 740 AM is one such. > > What is the power level that you CAN use unlicensed? > > Remember when RadioFree Allston was broadcasting on AM from Kenmore Square? > > When they finally got their wattage under a legal limit, I seem to recall as > long as RFA was under 100 watts they were considered legal. > > In Haverhill, web/streaming station WHAV.net is broadcasting on 1640AM (from > what I understan unlicensed and legal). >> AM Radio 1,640 kHz in selected areas > > How many watts is that that they can stay on the legal side of the line? > > > From radiotest@plymouthcolony.net Sat Jun 14 22:17:09 2014 From: radiotest@plymouthcolony.net (Dale H. Cook) Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 22:17:09 -0400 Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? In-Reply-To: <69E1D5E2-917A-4006-B711-F4D7CFC8A5FB@mac.com> References: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> <665055FC29314407A9EFBE13CD6A6189@ownerd8aa55a4d> <69E1D5E2-917A-4006-B711-F4D7CFC8A5FB@mac.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20140614221431.03cb9560@plymouthcolony.net> At 07:38 PM 6/14/2014, Larry Weil wrote: >I believe the limit for Part 15 is 150 miliwatts, i.e. 0.15 watts. Nope, 100 mw for intentional radiators 510-1705 kHz - see 47CFR Section 15.219 (a). Dale H. Cook, Contract Engineer, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA http://plymouthcolony.net/starcityeng/index.html From walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Sat Jun 14 16:05:49 2014 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 13:05:49 -0700 Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? In-Reply-To: <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> References: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> Message-ID: Part 15 is 100 MILLIWATTS.. 1/10th of 1 watt. Paul On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Don wrote: > When a station gets down to less than 100watts.....doesn't that become a > Part 15 issue? > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "daniel strassberg" < > dan.strassberg@att.net> > To: "Rob Landry" <011010001@interpring.com>; "Laurence Glavin" < > lglavin@mail.com> > Cc: > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 9:11 AM > > Subject: Re: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? > > > But WSRO either has a CP for night power higher than 100W or has applied > for night power higher than 100W. Can somebody say which it is (CP or app)? > I don't remember seeing 187W but I think I saw 162W. > > ----- > Dan Strassberg > e-fax 707-215-6367 > ----- Original Message ----- From: Rob Landry > To: Laurence Glavin > Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 6:09 PM > Subject: Re: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? > > > > > On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Laurence Glavin wrote: > > > I was doing a little late-night AM dial twisting yesterday (Wednesday, > > 06/11) and noticed that I could hear WSRO-AM 650 transmitting from > > Framingham. They've been running 100 watts nights with a directional > > pattern favoring the 45-degree radial where I reside 40 or so miles > > away. They received a CP to boost that to 187 watts; no big deal, but > > if they're running that now, at least on the cusp of the solstice so > > there are fewer hours between sunset and midnight, it's doing a fine job > > of covering WSM-AM in Nashville,. > > They're only running 100 watts at night. On occasion, I've heard them at > night on I-95 at the Mass/NH line. The signal's not really listenable, but > it's there. > > In the daytime, however, they're quite listenable in Portsmouth. > > > Rob > From raccoonradio@gmail.com Sun Jun 15 06:49:55 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 06:49:55 -0400 Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? In-Reply-To: References: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> Message-ID: After Radio Free Allston was shut down by the FCC, they made an effort to get on legally as Allston-Brighton Free Radio. One day as they made their debut I drove around the area a bit and tuned to 1670 or wherever they were. They reached a few blocks. The founder, Steve Provizer I think, was giving a speech on air and he said he was happy they were on but he was also angry because he could only reach that small area legally, etc. (Some said later that they were probably pushing beyond legal limits). Part 15 is indeed 100 milliwatts. There are stations out there like WJIB and WJTO that can only push out 3 or 4 watts at night, legally. That's still a lot more than what a Part 15 can put out, and the various pirates out there are way above that limit. You can go past a church in Lynnfield that broadcasts for a few blocks or so on 1640 (they have the "Tower School", too). They run a loop of announcements, the school kids singing, etc. But indeed they can only reach a few blocks under Part 15. (after you go past a few houses you probably start picking up the emergency alert station in Peabody on that frequency that runs PSAs at other times) It's much like the "Talking House" stations that run under Part 15. The wikipedia entry for FCC Part 15 mentions the tech. specifications and gives examples of what's permissible under it: Cordless phones; microbroadcasting on a school campus for example, mini FM transmitters for your car (to broadcast an mp3 player, sat. radio etc); "talking houses" or highway construction info, and even walkie talkies or those "Mr Microphone" toys that have been sold. I'd add those few drive in theatres still out there. And as I've mentioned before, I've been at a location in Beverly where you can pick up Howard Stern's Sirius channel for a block or so, no doubt someone in an apartment nearby. A block or so...legally. On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Paul B. Walker, Jr. < walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com> wrote: > Part 15 is 100 MILLIWATTS.. 1/10th of 1 watt. > > Paul > > > On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Don wrote: > > > When a station gets down to less than 100watts.....doesn't that become a > > Part 15 issue? > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "daniel strassberg" < > > dan.strassberg@att.net> > > To: "Rob Landry" <011010001@interpring.com>; "Laurence Glavin" < > > lglavin@mail.com> > > Cc: > > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 9:11 AM > > > > Subject: Re: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? > > > > > > But WSRO either has a CP for night power higher than 100W or has applied > > for night power higher than 100W. Can somebody say which it is (CP or > app)? > > I don't remember seeing 187W but I think I saw 162W. > > > > ----- > > Dan Strassberg > > e-fax 707-215-6367 > > ----- Original Message ----- From: Rob Landry > > To: Laurence Glavin > > Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > > Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 6:09 PM > > Subject: Re: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Laurence Glavin wrote: > > > > > I was doing a little late-night AM dial twisting yesterday (Wednesday, > > > 06/11) and noticed that I could hear WSRO-AM 650 transmitting from > > > Framingham. They've been running 100 watts nights with a directional > > > pattern favoring the 45-degree radial where I reside 40 or so miles > > > away. They received a CP to boost that to 187 watts; no big deal, but > > > if they're running that now, at least on the cusp of the solstice so > > > there are fewer hours between sunset and midnight, it's doing a fine > job > > > of covering WSM-AM in Nashville,. > > > > They're only running 100 watts at night. On occasion, I've heard them at > > night on I-95 at the Mass/NH line. The signal's not really listenable, > but > > it's there. > > > > In the daytime, however, they're quite listenable in Portsmouth. > > > > > > Rob > > > From scott@fybush.com Sun Jun 15 09:17:06 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:17:06 -0400 Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? In-Reply-To: References: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> Message-ID: <539D9CD2.60209@fybush.com> On 6/14/2014 4:05 PM, Paul B. Walker, Jr. wrote: > Part 15 is 100 MILLIWATTS.. 1/10th of 1 watt. > This is a common misconception, and trotted out with certainty by lots of people who like to sound like they know what they're talking about. It's also wrong. Section 15.209 of the FCC rules specifies a maximum field strength (24000 uV/F(kHz)/m at 30 meters). It does not specify the power output level that is to be used to achieve that field strength. 15.221 provides for the possibility of slightly higher power levels in order to cover college campuses, provided field strengths do not exceed a certain very low limit at a specified distance outside the campus. For FM, the limit is 250 uV/m at 3 meters. Nowhere in the FCC rules does the mythical "100 milliwatts" appear, no matter how many times this misinformation makes the rounds on message boards and mailing lists. s From radiotest@plymouthcolony.net Sun Jun 15 13:20:49 2014 From: radiotest@plymouthcolony.net (Dale H. Cook) Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 13:20:49 -0400 Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? In-Reply-To: References: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20140615130439.03d58fe0@plymouthcolony.net> At 06:49 AM 6/15/2014, Bob Nelson wrote: >It's much like the "Talking House" stations that run under Part 15. There is a sizable community of Part 15 broadcasters, and some run Talking House transmitters, which pop up on eBay. >microbroadcasting on a school campus for example Part 15 for a campus can cover a much greater area (the entire campus) than can Part 15 for an individual or a non-campus organization. >or highway construction info That is generally not Part 15 - it is generally Travelers Information Service (TIS) which is a licensed service under Part 90, where they operate with a coverage radius limit of 3 km and a TPO limit of 10 watts. I have never been through a construction site operating Part 15, but have been through many operating Part 90, whose transportable transmitters are generally distinctive because of their antenna length, which can be up to 15 meters. I almost always dial in a Part 15 or Part 90 operation when I come across one. >And as I've mentioned before, I've been at a location in Beverly where you can pick up Howard Stern's Sirius channel for a block or so, no doubt someone in an apartment nearby. A block or so...legally. Not necessarily strictly legally. Some of the early satellite-to-FM converters were cited by the Commission as violating Part 15. Dale H. Cook, Contract Engineer, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA http://plymouthcolony.net/starcityeng/index.html From radiotest@plymouthcolony.net Sun Jun 15 13:36:33 2014 From: radiotest@plymouthcolony.net (Dale H. Cook) Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 13:36:33 -0400 Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? In-Reply-To: <539D9CD2.60209@fybush.com> References: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> <539D9CD2.60209@fybush.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20140615132114.03eecf40@plymouthcolony.net> At 09:17 AM 6/15/2014, Scott Fybush wrote: >This is a common misconception, and trotted out with certainty by lots of people who like to sound like they know what they're talking about. > >It's also wrong. > >Section 15.209 of the FCC rules specifies a maximum field strength (24000 uV/F(kHz)/m at 30 meters). It does not specify the power output level that is to be used to achieve that field strength. Scott - We were speaking about the limits under which RadioFree Allston would be able to operate under Part 15 in the Standard Broadcast Band, and specific services have requirements in other sections of Subpart C that are stricter than, and supersede, the general Part 15 emission limits in Section 15.209, which begins "(a) Except as provided elsewhere in this subpart, the emissions from an intentional radiator shall no exceed ..." The section governing the RadioFree Allston operation under discussion is 15.219 >Nowhere in the FCC rules does the mythical "100 milliwatts" appear, no matter how many times this misinformation makes the rounds on message boards and mailing lists. See section 15.219 - for the type of service that spurred this discussion it limits input power to the final RF amplifier to 100 milliwatts. Dale H. Cook, Contract Engineer, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA http://plymouthcolony.net/starcityeng/index.html From joe@attorneyross.com Mon Jun 16 01:07:59 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 01:07:59 -0400 Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20140615130439.03d58fe0@plymouthcolony.net> References: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> <7.0.1.0.2.20140615130439.03d58fe0@plymouthcolony.net> Message-ID: <539E7BAF.8040700@attorneyross.com> On 6/15/2014 1:20 PM, Dale H. Cook wrote: > > or highway construction info > That is generally not Part 15 - it is generally Travelers Information Service (TIS) which is a licensed service under Part 90, where they operate with a coverage radius limit of 3 km and a TPO limit of 10 watts. I have never been through a construction site operating Part 15, but have been through many operating Part 90, whose transportable transmitters are generally distinctive because of their antenna length, which can be up to 15 meters. I almost always dial in a Part 15 or Part 90 operation when I come across one. Is that also "Tunnel Radio," which operates in certain long tunnels? -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Jun 16 07:22:44 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:22:44 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? In-Reply-To: References: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> Message-ID: On Sun, 15 Jun 2014, Bob Nelson wrote: > After Radio Free Allston was shut down by the FCC, they made an effort > to get on legally as Allston-Brighton Free Radio. One day as they made > their debut I drove around the area a bit and tuned to 1670 or wherever > they were. They reached a few blocks. The founder, Steve Provizer I > think, was giving a speech on air and he said he was happy they were on > but he was also angry because he could only reach that small area > legally, etc. (Some said later that they were probably pushing beyond > legal limits). The only way to make this work would be to create a network of synchronous Part 15 transmitters and feed them all from a common source. It might be doable, but would probably not be cheap. To cover a market the size of Boston you'd need hundreds of the things, and they'd all have to be linked by wi-fi devices like those sold by Ubiquiti. Rob From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Jun 16 07:36:16 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:36:16 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? In-Reply-To: <539D9CD2.60209@fybush.com> References: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> <539D9CD2.60209@fybush.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 15 Jun 2014, Scott Fybush wrote: > On 6/14/2014 4:05 PM, Paul B. Walker, Jr. wrote: >> Part 15 is 100 MILLIWATTS.. 1/10th of 1 watt. > This is a common misconception, and trotted out with certainty by lots of > people who like to sound like they know what they're talking about. > It's also wrong. That depends on which frequency band we're discussing. From 160 to 190 KHz, for instance, one may use up to 1 watt and an antenna as long as 15 meters (CFR 15.217); and in the band 510 - 1705 KHz, which includes the AM broadcast band, the limit is indeed 100 milliwatts (CFR 15.219), but the combination of antenna, transmission line, and ground lead are limited to 3 meters. Amateurs have tried CW in the 160 - 190 Khz band with some success, but I suspect AM wouldn't do very well down there. I wonder if anyone's tried Digital Radio Mondiale in that band. Designing a short antenna with sufficient bandwidth would be a challenge, I suspect. Rob From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Jun 16 07:48:37 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:48:37 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WWBZ Message-ID: Coming home from upstate NY yesterday, I decided to take Route 2 instead of the Pike, and therefore had an opportunity to sample WWBZ at 700 AM. What demographic is the station targeting? Of the several songs I heard, all but one were songs I've never heard before, and I'm almost 60. Rob From radiotest@plymouthcolony.net Mon Jun 16 08:16:36 2014 From: radiotest@plymouthcolony.net (Dale H. Cook) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:16:36 -0400 Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? In-Reply-To: <539E7BAF.8040700@attorneyross.com> References: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> <7.0.1.0.2.20140615130439.03d58fe0@plymouthcolony.net> <539E7BAF.8040700@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20140616081438.03d47d00@plymouthcolony.net> At 01:07 AM 6/16/2014, A Joseph Ross wrote: >Is that also "Tunnel Radio," which operates in certain long tunnels? It is - TIS can be used by government agencies for a variety of information services for motorists, and can also be used in parks. Dale H. Cook, Contract Engineer, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA http://plymouthcolony.net/starcityeng/index.html From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Jun 16 08:55:06 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:55:06 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Is WSRO-AM 650 Testing Its Modest Power Increase? In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20140616081438.03d47d00@plymouthcolony.net> References: <222D6BC2B55E4E1CA51959AA1436EAED@PC281321418224> <266FA16C9A9E4EDE93F60B6FDE204E10@ownerd8aa55a4d> <7.0.1.0.2.20140615130439.03d58fe0@plymouthcolony.net> <539E7BAF.8040700@attorneyross.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20140616081438.03d47d00@plymouthcolony.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 16 Jun 2014, Dale H. Cook wrote: > At 01:07 AM 6/16/2014, A Joseph Ross wrote: >> Is that also "Tunnel Radio," which operates in certain long tunnels? > It is - TIS can be used by government agencies for a variety of > information services for motorists, and can also be used in parks. If memory serves, radio stations in the Ted Williams and Tip O-Neill tunnels are retransmitted individually, with provisions for program interruption in the event of an emergency. The choice of stations to retransmit seems arbitrary; for instance, WHRB is included but not WUMB. Rob From Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com Mon Jun 16 14:53:09 2014 From: Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com (Don) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 14:53:09 -0400 Subject: Hot 97 pritate....gave up the ghost? Message-ID: <3C287D876059418A822E309A30F8A22E@ownerd8aa55a4d> I know they've been raided a couple of times...but is the pirate Hot 97 (87.7) off the air and out of business? Their web page looks pretty empty: http://hot97boston.com/onairnow/ Didn't they have quite the roster with Chubby Cubb, etc? From lglavin@mail.com Sun Jun 15 13:49:08 2014 From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 19:49:08 +0200 Subject: WWBZ 700, WFNX 99.9 "vote for format" In-Reply-To: References: <459fb.3b8403e3.40b80c07@aol.com>,<5386B516.2060902@fybush.com>, Message-ID: >Sent:?Saturday, June 14, 2014 at 3:45 PM >From:?Steve >To:?"scott@fybush.com" , "Jibguy@aol.com" , "boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org" >Subject:?RE: WWBZ 700, WFNX 99.9 "vote for format" > Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 00:18:30 -0400 >I don't know where > you'd tune now to hear the Sox if you're in Athol or Orange. WVEI sure > doesn't get there, and Entercom doesn't seem to care. > >WTIC 1080. I think TIC has had the Sox games since Marconi was a boy. Back in the days when I was at WWBZ (CAT) we aired DAY games. I never did figure out how Partridge >managed to convince the network to let us broadcast less than 1/3rd of a season schedule, but they did. But most of us tuned in WTIC, since they aired every Red Sox game all >season, even back in 1980. Second strongest AM signal in Orange, not counting 700. WBZ is the strongest, TIC the next strongest, and although nobody's listening to it, WIZZ >(WGAM/WPOE) 1520 Greenfield. At night, strongest is WWKB Buffalo, hands down. >And once again, I go off topic... all by accident! LOL Of course, with the call letters WIZZ, you'd expect the station to have streaming audio, and it does. So does WHIZ-FM in Ohio, but apparently WHIZ-AM doesn't. From scott@fybush.com Mon Jun 16 17:43:41 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:43:41 -0400 Subject: 101.7 flipping - anyone rolling? In-Reply-To: <7972F3143BEE46A48567A7C92C5B5EA1@windhamgroup.com> References: <7foom3qa5elyqyvnv7bqqw8d.1402689029734@email.android.com> <7972F3143BEE46A48567A7C92C5B5EA1@windhamgroup.com> Message-ID: <539F650D.8030007@fybush.com> On 6/16/2014 4:05 PM, Bill O'Neill wrote: > The Bull? Really? What I'd pay for secret audio of that decision meeting > that gave birth to that bon mot. > > Bill O'Neill The name itself seems pretty unremarkable to me. There's certainly plenty of association between bulls and country music - rodeos, cowboys, mechanical bulls at country and western bars, and so on. It's a brand Clear Channel has used with considerable success on long-running country stations in other markets: KSD (93.7) in St. Louis and WBUL (98.1) in Lexington, Kentucky come immediately to mind as Clear Channel "Bull" FM stations that have thrived with the brand for a decade or longer. Other more recent Clear Channel Bulls include Atlanta, Birmingham, Las Vegas, Wichita and Defiance, Ohio. Like "Kiss," it's a brand that has been around long enough that its use with country radio predated Clear Channel in other markets. I'm not sure if there's still a Bull in Reno, for instance, but there was a KBUL doing country there as far back as the early 1990s under a different owner. (A quick check shows KBUL is still doing country there on 98.1, and is in fact now owned by Clear Channel.) There's a CBS Bull in Houston (KILT-FM 100.3), a prominent Bull in Portland, Oregon (KUPL 98.7), and so on. I know of at least one Canadian "Bull," too, in Wingham, Ontario (I think it's flipped to something else since.) It is, in any event, a brand that's well established in Clear Channel's stable, so there probably wasn't much of a meeting or decision process that led to it appearing on 101.7, any more than there would be if CC launched a new top-40 somewhere and named it "Kiss" or "Now," or a new talker as "The Patriot." From markwats@comcast.net Mon Jun 16 19:58:59 2014 From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:58:59 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" Message-ID: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> WKLB has cancelled "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" effective immediately, after just over 20 years on the air. The last show aired yesterday, hosts Michael Burns and Stu Fink were told this afternoon that the show is over. The reasons given was the flip of 101.7 to country as "The Bull" and Greater Media's tweaking their on-air presentation to counter their new competition. Having 4 hours of Oldies/Classic Country doesn't fit well with the rest of the station. It's not known what will fill the 8AM-12Noon slot on Sundays. Michael Burns remains the voice tracked overnight host on WMJX, while Stu Fink has been let go. Disclaimer: Michael Burns is a close friend of mine, he is the one who gave me this news just a while ago. Mark Watson From jjlehmann@comcast.net Mon Jun 16 21:01:30 2014 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 21:01:30 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <48710345-28E7-4D9E-B350-D8CAB7227A82@comcast.net> Here's an idea... Clear Channel fires back and flips 1430 to classic country! I know they won't, but they did recently put it on 1380 in Portsmouth. Jeff Lehmann > On Jun 16, 2014, at 7:58 PM, "Mark Watson" wrote: > > WKLB has cancelled "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" effective immediately, > after just over 20 years on the air. The last show aired yesterday, hosts > Michael Burns and Stu Fink were told this afternoon that the show is over. > The reasons given was the flip of 101.7 to country as "The Bull" and Greater > Media's tweaking their on-air presentation to counter their new competition. > Having 4 hours of Oldies/Classic Country doesn't fit well with the rest of > the station. It's not known what will fill the 8AM-12Noon slot on Sundays. > Michael Burns remains the voice tracked overnight host on WMJX, while Stu > Fink has been let go. > > Disclaimer: Michael Burns is a close friend of mine, he is the one who gave > me this news just a while ago. > > > > Mark Watson > From billohno@gmail.com Mon Jun 16 16:05:28 2014 From: billohno@gmail.com (Bill O'Neill) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 16:05:28 -0400 Subject: 101.7 flipping - anyone rolling? In-Reply-To: <7foom3qa5elyqyvnv7bqqw8d.1402689029734@email.android.com> References: <7foom3qa5elyqyvnv7bqqw8d.1402689029734@email.android.com> Message-ID: <7972F3143BEE46A48567A7C92C5B5EA1@windhamgroup.com> The Bull? Really? What I'd pay for secret audio of that decision meeting that gave birth to that bon mot. Bill O'Neill Bob Nelson writes: At work and unable to roll on it but it's apparently new format, not a stunt. The Bull; no ads for rest of summer. From m_carney@yahoo.com Mon Jun 16 20:44:32 2014 From: m_carney@yahoo.com (Maureen Carney) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:44:32 -0700 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <1402965872.46456.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> I was just contemplating what WKLB would do in the face of competition. Now we know. I wasn't thinking this would be the first thing. On Monday, June 16, 2014 7:58 PM, Mark Watson wrote: WKLB has cancelled "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" effective immediately, after just over 20 years on the air. The last show aired yesterday, hosts Michael Burns and Stu Fink were told this afternoon that the show is over. The reasons given was the flip of 101.7 to country as "The Bull" and Greater Media's tweaking their on-air presentation to counter their new competition. Having 4 hours of Oldies/Classic Country doesn't fit well with the rest of the station. It's not known what will fill the 8AM-12Noon slot on Sundays. Michael Burns remains the voice tracked overnight host on WMJX, while Stu Fink has been let go. Disclaimer: Michael Burns is a close friend of mine, he is the one who gave me this news just a while ago. Mark Watson From kc1ih@mac.com Mon Jun 16 22:02:58 2014 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 22:02:58 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: <48710345-28E7-4D9E-B350-D8CAB7227A82@comcast.net> References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> <48710345-28E7-4D9E-B350-D8CAB7227A82@comcast.net> Message-ID: <2F886674-755A-4372-9CAC-C87D554A52EB@mac.com> On Jun 16, 2014, at 9:01 PM, Jeff Lehmann wrote: > Here's an idea... Clear Channel fires back and flips 1430 to classic country! I know they won't, but they did recently put it on 1380 in Portsmouth. > I don't think that would matter at all. The feeling I have is that the audience for classic country is a completely different audience from that for modern country or whatever it's called. Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From raccoonradio@gmail.com Mon Jun 16 21:50:00 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 21:50:00 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: <48710345-28E7-4D9E-B350-D8CAB7227A82@comcast.net> References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> <48710345-28E7-4D9E-B350-D8CAB7227A82@comcast.net> Message-ID: Interesting but maybe they do well with Mia, as it is. So what's next...after a year and a half of country, we hear: "Coming Up Next, Sean Hannity on 101.7 The Patriot" :) (Yeah, unlikely, but what if I told you before last week that 101.7 would be going country...would ya believe me? :) On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Jeff Lehmann wrote: > Here's an idea... Clear Channel fires back and flips 1430 to classic > country! I know they won't, but they did recently put it on 1380 in > Portsmouth. > > Jeff Lehmann > > > On Jun 16, 2014, at 7:58 PM, "Mark Watson" wrote: > > > > WKLB has cancelled "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" effective immediately, > > after just over 20 years on the air. The last show aired yesterday, hosts > > Michael Burns and Stu Fink were told this afternoon that the show is > over. > > The reasons given was the flip of 101.7 to country as "The Bull" and > Greater > > Media's tweaking their on-air presentation to counter their new > competition. > > Having 4 hours of Oldies/Classic Country doesn't fit well with the rest > of > > the station. It's not known what will fill the 8AM-12Noon slot on > Sundays. > > Michael Burns remains the voice tracked overnight host on WMJX, while Stu > > Fink has been let go. > > > > Disclaimer: Michael Burns is a close friend of mine, he is the one who > gave > > me this news just a while ago. > > > > > > > > Mark Watson > > > > From raccoonradio@gmail.com Mon Jun 16 21:31:45 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 21:31:45 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> Message-ID: Interesting news, and Greater is taking them seriously. Admittedly the 101.7 signal is spotty in many areas--have noticed in Peabody, Danvers, Lowell/Chelmsford etc. it's very "shaky". It may do very well in Boston proper (stick on top of a Bos. building, right?) On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Mark Watson wrote: > WKLB has cancelled "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" effective immediately, > after just over 20 years on the air. The last show aired yesterday, hosts > Michael Burns and Stu Fink were told this afternoon that the show is over. > The reasons given was the flip of 101.7 to country as "The Bull" and > Greater > Media's tweaking their on-air presentation to counter their new > competition. > Having 4 hours of Oldies/Classic Country doesn't fit well with the rest of > the station. It's not known what will fill the 8AM-12Noon slot on Sundays. > Michael Burns remains the voice tracked overnight host on WMJX, while Stu > Fink has been let go. > > Disclaimer: Michael Burns is a close friend of mine, he is the one who gave > me this news just a while ago. > > > > Mark Watson > > From dan.strassberg@att.net Tue Jun 17 09:00:02 2014 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (daniel strassberg) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:00:02 -0400 Subject: 101.7 flipping - anyone rolling? References: <7foom3qa5elyqyvnv7bqqw8d.1402689029734@email.android.com> <7972F3143BEE46A48567A7C92C5B5EA1@windhamgroup.com> <539F650D.8030007@fybush.com> Message-ID: Stable? Don't you mean barn? Didn't think they kept bulls in stables, but what do know? ----- Dan Strassberg e-fax 707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: Scott Fybush To: Bill O'Neill Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 5:43 PM Subject: Re: 101.7 flipping - anyone rolling? On 6/16/2014 4:05 PM, Bill O'Neill wrote: > The Bull? Really? What I'd pay for secret audio of that decision meeting > that gave birth to that bon mot. > > Bill O'Neill It is, in any event, a brand that's well established in Clear Channel's stable, so there probably wasn't much of a meeting or decision process that led to it appearing on 101.7, any more than there would be if CC launched a new top-40 somewhere and named it "Kiss" or "Now," or a new talker as "The Patriot." From mward@iname.com Tue Jun 17 10:05:50 2014 From: mward@iname.com (Mike Ward) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 10:05:50 -0400 Subject: 101.7 flipping - anyone rolling? In-Reply-To: <539F650D.8030007@fybush.com> References: <7foom3qa5elyqyvnv7bqqw8d.1402689029734@email.android.com> <7972F3143BEE46A48567A7C92C5B5EA1@windhamgroup.com> <539F650D.8030007@fybush.com> Message-ID: Here in Northeast Ohio, Clear Channel started 98.1 The Bull in Ashtabula, which is now owned by Media One. And before Clear Channel AC WHOF/101.7 "My 101.7" started life, after moving up to the Canton market from Dover/New Philadelphia. they put up a fake "101.7 The Bull" site trying to misdirect pre-launch guessers. All of this was many years ago. On Jun 16, 2014 5:45 PM, "Scott Fybush" wrote: > On 6/16/2014 4:05 PM, Bill O'Neill wrote: > >> The Bull? Really? What I'd pay for secret audio of that decision meeting >> that gave birth to that bon mot. >> >> Bill O'Neill >> > > The name itself seems pretty unremarkable to me. There's certainly plenty > of association between bulls and country music - rodeos, cowboys, > mechanical bulls at country and western bars, and so on. It's a brand Clear > Channel has used with considerable success on long-running country stations > in other markets: KSD (93.7) in St. Louis and WBUL (98.1) in Lexington, > Kentucky come immediately to mind as Clear Channel "Bull" FM stations that > have thrived with the brand for a decade or longer. Other more recent Clear > Channel Bulls include Atlanta, Birmingham, Las Vegas, Wichita and Defiance, > Ohio. > > Like "Kiss," it's a brand that has been around long enough that its use > with country radio predated Clear Channel in other markets. I'm not sure if > there's still a Bull in Reno, for instance, but there was a KBUL doing > country there as far back as the early 1990s under a different owner. (A > quick check shows KBUL is still doing country there on 98.1, and is in fact > now owned by Clear Channel.) > > There's a CBS Bull in Houston (KILT-FM 100.3), a prominent Bull in > Portland, Oregon (KUPL 98.7), and so on. > > I know of at least one Canadian "Bull," too, in Wingham, Ontario (I think > it's flipped to something else since.) > > It is, in any event, a brand that's well established in Clear Channel's > stable, so there probably wasn't much of a meeting or decision process that > led to it appearing on 101.7, any more than there would be if CC launched a > new top-40 somewhere and named it "Kiss" or "Now," or a new talker as "The > Patriot." > From elipolo@earthlink.net Tue Jun 17 10:15:33 2014 From: elipolo@earthlink.net (Eli Polonsky) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 10:15:33 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: Hot 97 pritate....gave up the ghost? Message-ID: <13728109.1403014533366.JavaMail.root@wamui-junio.atl.sa.earthlink.net> >Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 14:53:09 -0400 >From: "Don" >To: >Subject: Hot 97 pritate....gave up the ghost? > >I know they've been raided a couple of times...but >is the pirate Hot 97 87.7) off the air and out of >business? > >Their web page looks pretty empty: Regardless of their web page, "Hot 97" (87.7) is still on the air, loud and clear all over metro Boston, and well beyond Route 128 in many areas. Strong signal from them right now here in Somerville, at least a half-dozen miles from their transmitter. EP From Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com Tue Jun 17 12:26:07 2014 From: Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com (Don) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 12:26:07 -0400 Subject: Hot 97 pritate....gave up the ghost? References: <13728109.1403014533366.JavaMail.root@wamui-junio.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: >> >>I know they've been raided a couple of times...but >>is the pirate Hot 97 87.7) off the air and out of >>business? >> >>Their web page looks pretty empty: > > Regardless of their web page, "Hot 97" (87.7) is still > on the air, loud and clear all over metro Boston, and > well beyond Route 128 in many areas. Strong signal from > them right now here in Somerville, at least a half-dozen > miles from their transmitter. Is that the Hot 97 (Urban Hip Hop) people you hear? ...or is it B87fm (Caribbean) https://www.facebook.com/b87fm Different people? Same frequency? > > EP > > > From jjlehmann@comcast.net Tue Jun 17 12:56:13 2014 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 12:56:13 -0400 Subject: Hot 97 pritate....gave up the ghost? In-Reply-To: <13728109.1403014533366.JavaMail.root@wamui-junio.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <13728109.1403014533366.JavaMail.root@wamui-junio.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <47C5D5DA-9917-48A4-B7C4-2EFC2C78F2D3@comcast.net> Since coming back on the air, it hasn't been Hot 97, it's now "B87." Jeff Lehmann On Jun 17, 2014, at 10:15 AM, Eli Polonsky wrote: >> Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 14:53:09 -0400 >> From: "Don" >> To: >> Subject: Hot 97 pritate....gave up the ghost? >> >> I know they've been raided a couple of times...but >> is the pirate Hot 97 87.7) off the air and out of >> business? >> >> Their web page looks pretty empty: > > Regardless of their web page, "Hot 97" (87.7) is still > on the air, loud and clear all over metro Boston, and > well beyond Route 128 in many areas. Strong signal from > them right now here in Somerville, at least a half-dozen > miles from their transmitter. > > EP > > > From donald_astelle@yahoo.com Tue Jun 17 14:26:15 2014 From: donald_astelle@yahoo.com (D. A.) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 11:26:15 -0700 Subject: Hot 97 pritate....gave up the ghost? In-Reply-To: <47C5D5DA-9917-48A4-B7C4-2EFC2C78F2D3@comcast.net> Message-ID: <1403029575.60318.YahooMailMobile@web126204.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Yeah but I don't think it's the same people or the same group. From 011010001@interpring.com Tue Jun 17 15:49:17 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 15:49:17 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> Message-ID: 101.7 is essentially an inside-Route-128 signal. Are there any country listeners in that part of the world? It seems to me the dance format was well suited for this signal and was doing at least as well as the old WFNX was. The country move seems awkward to me. CC might do better to sell the station. Rob On Mon, 16 Jun 2014, Bob Nelson wrote: > Interesting news, and Greater is taking them seriously. Admittedly the > 101.7 signal is spotty in many areas--have noticed in Peabody, Danvers, > Lowell/Chelmsford etc. it's very "shaky". It may do very well in Boston > proper (stick on top of a Bos. building, right?) > > > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Mark Watson wrote: > >> WKLB has cancelled "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" effective immediately, >> after just over 20 years on the air. The last show aired yesterday, hosts >> Michael Burns and Stu Fink were told this afternoon that the show is over. >> The reasons given was the flip of 101.7 to country as "The Bull" and >> Greater >> Media's tweaking their on-air presentation to counter their new >> competition. >> Having 4 hours of Oldies/Classic Country doesn't fit well with the rest of >> the station. It's not known what will fill the 8AM-12Noon slot on Sundays. >> Michael Burns remains the voice tracked overnight host on WMJX, while Stu >> Fink has been let go. >> >> Disclaimer: Michael Burns is a close friend of mine, he is the one who gave >> me this news just a while ago. >> >> >> >> Mark Watson >> >> > From scott@fybush.com Tue Jun 17 16:13:10 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:13:10 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> On 6/17/2014 3:49 PM, Rob Landry wrote: > 101.7 is essentially an inside-Route-128 signal. Are there any country > listeners in that part of the world? There sure are. The country of 2014 isn't the country WDLW or WBOS played. In many ways, it's become the new AC - songs that have hummable melodies and tell stories. There's very little twang to today's country. If you plucked a WMJX or WROR listener out of 1988, they'd find what they hear on WKLB pretty familiar, I suspect. Country stations such as WCTK and WWYZ do quite well in the "inside-128" equivalent zip codes of the Providence and Hartford markets. > It seems to me the dance format was well suited for this signal and was > doing at least as well as the old WFNX was. The country move seems > awkward to me. CC might do better to sell the station. They're unlikely to get back the $14 million they paid for it, unless EMF/K-Love wants a Boston outlet, a market they've so far avoided. The math for Clear Channel and 101.7 is actually fairly simple: add up the combination of whatever minimal revenue they can get from 101.7 itself, plus the additional national sales they can derive from a top-10-market clearance for syndicated shows such as Bobby Bones on 101.7, plus whatever additional revenue they can generate from 107.9 if it can stay at #1 in the market by holding off WKLB's rise. If that number is big enough to balance out the debt from acquiring 101.7, plus whatever very minimal operational costs attach to 101.7 itself (rent and power at One Financial Center, music licensing), then the deal was probably worth it. It's not the way you or I learned to do broadcast accounting, but it has a certain twisted sense to it. s From bob.bosra@demattia.net Tue Jun 17 16:49:32 2014 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:49:32 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net>, , , <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> Message-ID: > ................................................................................ Country stations such as > WCTK and WWYZ do quite well in the "inside-128" equivalent zip codes of > the Providence and Hartford markets. The only thing I'd say about comparing 101.7 to WWYZ or WCTK is that the lattertwo are class B stations. Plus these two stations don't have any real competitionfor their genre in their primary coverage areas. 101.7 (I hear soon to be WBWL) is a class A and doesn't have nearly the coverage -plus it's got to compete with WKLB which has been #2 or #3 in the market for along time. Back when WBCS was in competition with WKLB, the two stations werebattling it out, each getting about half of the country audience - but that was withtwo class B's (also when 105.7 was still transmitting from Framingham). On the other hand, at least they aren't trying for the same age group/demographic that MIX, JAMN, HOT, AMP, and maybe KISS are going for.... 101.7 might make some headway while they are running commercial free, but Idon't seem them ever getting half of KLB's audience. -Bob Now I'm waiting for the WKLB promotion: "Country 102.5 WKLB: Great country music -- without the bull" :) From jjlehmann@comcast.net Tue Jun 17 17:33:21 2014 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:33:21 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net>, , , <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> Message-ID: <006a01cf8a73$c3453ac0$49cfb040$@net> > WKLB, the two stations werebattling it out, each getting about half of > the country audience - but that was withtwo class B's (also when 105.7 > was still transmitting from Framingham). I'm pretty sure 105.7 was already on the Pru in the early 90s. If not, it would've been on FM128. Did it ever actually transmit from Framingham? Jeff Lehmann From Kaimbridge@Gmail.com Tue Jun 17 17:59:26 2014 From: Kaimbridge@Gmail.com (Kaimbridge M. GoldChild) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:59:26 +0000 Subject: [B-R-I] Re: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies"e Message-ID: <53A0BA3E.3000105@Gmail.com> The Radio Bandit, Bob Nelson, wrote, > Interesting news, and Greater is taking them seriously. Admittedly the > 101.7 signal is spotty in many areas--have noticed in Peabody, Danvers, > Lowell/Chelmsford etc. it's very "shaky". It may do very well in Boston > proper (stick on top of a Bos. building, right?) Yup, right across the street from South Station, on top of One Financial Center (along with 95.3?WHRB?s)?signal(s) penetrate through the deepest recesses of the facility...ya know, strong enough out in the open to hear through doorbells and electric can openers! http://www.bostonradio.org/stations/40824 http://www.mmra.org/repeaters/BOS/MMRA-BOS-roof_300.jpg I?m happy! P=) ~Kaimbridge~ -- -- -- Wiki?Sites Contribution History Pages: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge math.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge wiki.gis.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge rosettacode.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge ***** Void Where Permitted; Limit 0 Per Customer. ***** From scott@fybush.com Tue Jun 17 18:37:00 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 18:37:00 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net>, , , <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> Message-ID: <53A0C30C.5020102@fybush.com> On 6/17/2014 4:49 PM, Bob DeMattia wrote: >> Country stations such as WCTK and WWYZ do quite well in the >> "inside-128" equivalent zip codes of the Providence and Hartford >> markets. > > The only thing I'd say about comparing 101.7 to WWYZ or WCTK is that > the lattertwo are class B stations. You're taking my response out of context. I was responding to Rob's larger question about whether the country format can find an audience inside 128. My point was regarding the appeal of the format itself, not the very real and very significant signal limitations of 101.7. > 101.7 might make some headway while they are running > commercial free, but Idon't seem them ever getting half of KLB's > audience. Please reread my original post. The point of 101.7 isn't to get anything even close to half of WKLB's audience. The point of 101.7 is to take away just enough of WKLB's audience to keep it from threatening Kiss 108's position at the top of the ratings. Even with its limited signal, the math probably still works. s From sids1045@aol.com Tue Jun 17 19:00:27 2014 From: sids1045@aol.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 19:00:27 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: <006a01cf8a73$c3453ac0$49cfb040$@net> References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> <006a01cf8a73$c3453ac0$49cfb040$@net> Message-ID: <7CEE61DF-22C3-4571-8961-5FF466E03188@aol.com> "I'm pretty sure 105.7 was already on the Pru in the early 90s. If not, it would've been on FM128. Did it ever actually transmit from Framingham?" I believe it was moved to the Pru (from the candelabra, not FM128) around 1995. AFAIK it never transmitted from Framingham, not even when it was WKOX-FM. From bob.bosra@demattia.net Tue Jun 17 18:35:42 2014 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 18:35:42 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: <006a01cf8a73$c3453ac0$49cfb040$@net> References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net>, , , <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> , <006a01cf8a73$c3453ac0$49cfb040$@net> Message-ID: WVBF was certainly transmitting from Framingham in 1985 when hurricaneGloria took out one of their newly constructed towers. Fairbanks flipped it to country in 1993 as WCLB. They had a great opening event at the General Cinemas in Braintree where they showed the George Straitmovie "Pure Country". I got to talk to Loren and Wally, who were dressed in cowboy garb. But I digress. Anyways, I believe it was GM that moved it to Boston. I don't recall an intermediatemove to FM128, so I believe there was country music emanating from the Framinghamtowers when it all began. -Bob > From: jjlehmann@comcast.net > To: bob.bosra@demattia.net; boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org > Subject: RE: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" > Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:33:21 -0400 > > > WKLB, the two stations werebattling it out, each getting about half of > > the country audience - but that was withtwo class B's (also when 105.7 > > was still transmitting from Framingham). > > I'm pretty sure 105.7 was already on the Pru in the early 90s. If not, it > would've been on FM128. Did it ever actually transmit from Framingham? > > Jeff Lehmann > > From sids1045@aol.com Tue Jun 17 20:04:26 2014 From: sids1045@aol.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 20:04:26 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> <006a01cf8a73$c3453ac0$49cfb040$@net> Message-ID: "WVBF was certainly transmitting from Framingham in 1985 when hurricaneGloria took out one of their newly constructed towers." No it wasn't. I was working there at the time. The new towers were for WKOX. WVBF was transmitting from the candelabra at the time. From jjlehmann@comcast.net Tue Jun 17 20:46:01 2014 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 20:46:01 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net>, , , <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> , <006a01cf8a73$c3453ac0$49cfb040$@net> Message-ID: <008001cf8a8e$adf13910$09d3ab30$@net> > Anyways, I believe it was GM that moved it to Boston. I don't recall an > intermediatemove to FM128, so I believe there was country music > emanating from the Framinghamtowers when it all began. Don't forget that 105.7 was once owned by one of the predecessors to Clear Channel (Evergreen?) between Fairbanks and GM. I'll almost guarantee that it was transmitting from FM128 or the Pru during most of the 80s, as WVBF was definitely a full market signal. Hopefully someone like Scott can clear this up for certain. Jeff Lehmann Hanson, MA From rbello@belloassoc.com Tue Jun 17 20:53:04 2014 From: rbello@belloassoc.com (Ron Bello) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 20:53:04 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> <006a01cf8a73$c3453ac0$49cfb040$@net> Message-ID: I believe that 105.7 moved from Framingham to the Needham candelabra when built in the 1970s. Might have been the same time as change from WKOX- FM to WVBF. Transmitter was not in Framingham when I was there in 1976. On Tuesday, June 17, 2014, Bob DeMattia wrote: > WVBF was certainly transmitting from Framingham in 1985 when > hurricaneGloria took out one of their newly constructed towers. > Fairbanks flipped it to country in 1993 as WCLB. They had a great > opening event at the General Cinemas in Braintree where they showed the > George Straitmovie "Pure Country". I got to talk to Loren and Wally, who > were dressed in cowboy garb. But I digress. > Anyways, I believe it was GM that moved it to Boston. I don't recall an > intermediatemove to FM128, so I believe there was country music emanating > from the Framinghamtowers when it all began. > > -Bob > > > > From: jjlehmann@comcast.net > > To: bob.bosra@demattia.net ; > boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org > > Subject: RE: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" > > Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:33:21 -0400 > > > > > WKLB, the two stations werebattling it out, each getting about half of > > > the country audience - but that was withtwo class B's (also when 105.7 > > > was still transmitting from Framingham). > > > > I'm pretty sure 105.7 was already on the Pru in the early 90s. If not, it > > would've been on FM128. Did it ever actually transmit from Framingham? > > > > Jeff Lehmann > > > > > -- Ron Bello 160 Speen St - Suite 303 Framingham, MA. 01701 508.820.1100 From jjlehmann@comcast.net Tue Jun 17 20:26:00 2014 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 20:26:00 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> <006a01cf8a73$c3453ac0$49cfb040$@net> Message-ID: <62454DAF-61BF-4C6B-8AC2-F8A05595AAB5@comcast.net> I believe those were just co-owned 1190 (or 1200) WKOX's towers that fell in Gloria. The 105.7 studios may have been there still. Jeff Lehmann > On Jun 17, 2014, at 6:35 PM, Bob DeMattia wrote: > > WVBF was certainly transmitting from Framingham in 1985 when hurricaneGloria took out one of their newly constructed towers. > Fairbanks flipped it to country in 1993 as WCLB. They had a great opening event at the General Cinemas in Braintree where they showed the George Straitmovie "Pure Country". I got to talk to Loren and Wally, who were dressed in cowboy garb. But I digress. > Anyways, I believe it was GM that moved it to Boston. I don't recall an intermediatemove to FM128, so I believe there was country music emanating from the Framinghamtowers when it all began. > > -Bob > > >> From: jjlehmann@comcast.net >> To: bob.bosra@demattia.net; boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org >> Subject: RE: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" >> Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:33:21 -0400 >> >>> WKLB, the two stations werebattling it out, each getting about half of >>> the country audience - but that was withtwo class B's (also when 105.7 >>> was still transmitting from Framingham). >> >> I'm pretty sure 105.7 was already on the Pru in the early 90s. If not, it >> would've been on FM128. Did it ever actually transmit from Framingham? >> >> Jeff Lehmann > From bob.bosra@demattia.net Tue Jun 17 21:20:55 2014 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:20:55 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: <9CE8CE9F-4250-45D3-8895-9C284880B095@aol.com> References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> <006a01cf8a73$c3453ac0$49cfb040$@net> <008001cf8a8e$adf13910$09d3ab30$@net>, <9CE8CE9F-4250-45D3-8895-9C284880B095@aol.com> Message-ID: I just found this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=278u4Zal72U The video seems to imply only WKOX was affected. Another post I found (on this board, in 1997) indicatesthat had lost their STL in previous tower problems.So maybe that's why the FM went off in '85 too. So I stand corrected about the location of the transmitter.But at least I wasn't imagining the tower failure! -Bob > CC: bob.bosra@demattia.net; boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org > From: sids1045@aol.com > Subject: Re: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" > Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 20:57:41 -0400 > To: jjlehmann@comcast.net > > No. I was working there in the 80's. WVBF transmitted from the candelabra, not FM128. They moved to the Pru in 1995. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jun 17, 2014, at 8:46 PM, "Jeff Lehmann" wrote: > > >> Anyways, I believe it was GM that moved it to Boston. I don't recall an > >> intermediatemove to FM128, so I believe there was country music > >> emanating from the Framinghamtowers when it all began. > > > > Don't forget that 105.7 was once owned by one of the predecessors to Clear > > Channel (Evergreen?) between Fairbanks and GM. I'll almost guarantee that it > > was transmitting from FM128 or the Pru during most of the 80s, as WVBF was > > definitely a full market signal. > > > > Hopefully someone like Scott can clear this up for certain. > > > > Jeff Lehmann > > Hanson, MA > > > > From scott@fybush.com Tue Jun 17 21:27:11 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 21:27:11 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: <008001cf8a8e$adf13910$09d3ab30$@net> References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net>, , , <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> , <006a01cf8a73$c3453ac0$49cfb040$@net> <008001cf8a8e$adf13910$09d3ab30$@net> Message-ID: <53A0EAEF.9070905@fybush.com> On 6/17/2014 8:46 PM, Jeff Lehmann wrote: >> Anyways, I believe it was GM that moved it to Boston. I don't recall an >> intermediatemove to FM128, so I believe there was country music >> emanating from the Framinghamtowers when it all began. > > Don't forget that 105.7 was once owned by one of the predecessors to Clear > Channel (Evergreen?) between Fairbanks and GM. I'll almost guarantee that it > was transmitting from FM128 or the Pru during most of the 80s, as WVBF was > definitely a full market signal. > > Hopefully someone like Scott can clear this up for certain. The 1985 Broadcasting Yearbook lists WVBF with 50 kW at 954 feet. That's not entirely plausible, because that would far have exceeded the height restriction on a class B station without derating the power. There is an archived license record on the FCC database from 1986, showing 14 kW/954' from the candelabra tower in Needham. There is a 1990 license record showing 8.5 kW/1145' from the FM128 tower in Newton. The transmitter move to the Pru was licensed in 2000. I am quite certain the FM transmitter was gone from Framingham by the early 1970s. (Something in the back of my head says 1971, but I haven't researched an exact date.) Even with a full 50 kW, the 1190 tower in Framingham wasn't very tall, and an FM there wouldn't have done much. The main studio was gone from Framingham by the time I got to WKOX as an intern in 1990. There was a production studio still there, and I think there was at least the ability to go live from Mount Wayte Ave. over 105.7, but the main studio was on the 13th floor of the Pru by the 1980s. So: no, by the time the storm took down the WKOX tower, the WVBF transmitter was at the candelabra, then at FM128 (1990-2000), then at the Pru (2000-present). s From sids1045@aol.com Tue Jun 17 20:57:41 2014 From: sids1045@aol.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 20:57:41 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: <008001cf8a8e$adf13910$09d3ab30$@net> References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> <006a01cf8a73$c3453ac0$49cfb040$@net> <008001cf8a8e$adf13910$09d3ab30$@net> Message-ID: <9CE8CE9F-4250-45D3-8895-9C284880B095@aol.com> No. I was working there in the 80's. WVBF transmitted from the candelabra, not FM128. They moved to the Pru in 1995. Sent from my iPhone On Jun 17, 2014, at 8:46 PM, "Jeff Lehmann" wrote: >> Anyways, I believe it was GM that moved it to Boston. I don't recall an >> intermediatemove to FM128, so I believe there was country music >> emanating from the Framinghamtowers when it all began. > > Don't forget that 105.7 was once owned by one of the predecessors to Clear > Channel (Evergreen?) between Fairbanks and GM. I'll almost guarantee that it > was transmitting from FM128 or the Pru during most of the 80s, as WVBF was > definitely a full market signal. > > Hopefully someone like Scott can clear this up for certain. > > Jeff Lehmann > Hanson, MA > > From scott@fybush.com Tue Jun 17 22:46:52 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 22:46:52 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net>, , , <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> Message-ID: <53A0FD9C.9070706@fybush.com> On 6/17/2014 4:49 PM, Bob DeMattia wrote: >> Country stations such as WCTK and WWYZ do quite well in the >> "inside-128" equivalent zip codes of the Providence and Hartford >> markets. > > The only thing I'd say about comparing 101.7 to WWYZ or WCTK is that > the lattertwo are class B stations. You're taking my response out of context. I was responding to Rob's larger question about whether the country format can find an audience inside 128. My point was regarding the appeal of the format itself, not the very real and very significant signal limitations of 101.7. > 101.7 might make some headway while they are running > commercial free, but Idon't seem them ever getting half of KLB's > audience. Please reread my original post. The point of 101.7 isn't to get anything even close to half of WKLB's audience. The point of 101.7 is to take away just enough of WKLB's audience to keep it from threatening Kiss 108's position at the top of the ratings. Even with its limited signal, the math probably still works. s From elipolo@earthlink.net Wed Jun 18 01:20:09 2014 From: elipolo@earthlink.net (Eli Polonsky) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 01:20:09 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" Message-ID: <12876818.1403068809232.JavaMail.root@wamui-haziran.atl.sa.earthlink.net> 105.7 did transmit from Framingham as WKOX-FM through the 1960s and 1970, I listened to it in the late '60s. I recall that with (or right around) their call letter change in 1971 to WVBF and the format from a straight Top 40 to a "hipper" Top 40 and popular AOR tracks mix, the transmitter was moved from Framingham to one of the 128 towers, and their signal suddenly went from mediocre to blasting in where I grew up in Newton. I don't recall precisely when the transmitter was moved from 128 to the Pru although the studios had been moved there a few years before the transmitter under previous owners, the transmitter wasn't moved to the Pru until after Greater Media bought the station sometime in the '90s, then the studios were moved to Morrissey Blvd. EP From joe@attorneyross.com Wed Jun 18 02:57:07 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 02:57:07 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net>, , , <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> , <006a01cf8a73$c3453ac0$49cfb040$@net> Message-ID: <53A13843.9010107@attorneyross.com> And WVBF was originally WKOX-FM, which started sometime circa 1960 or thereabouts. On 6/17/2014 6:35 PM, Bob DeMattia wrote: > WVBF was certainly transmitting from Framingham in 1985 when hurricaneGloria took out one of their newly constructed towers. > Fairbanks flipped it to country in 1993 as WCLB. They had a great opening event at the General Cinemas in Braintree where they showed the George Straitmovie "Pure Country". I got to talk to Loren and Wally, who were dressed in cowboy garb. But I digress. > Anyways, I believe it was GM that moved it to Boston. I don't recall an intermediatemove to FM128, so I believe there was country music emanating from the Framinghamtowers when it all began. > > -Bob > > >> From: jjlehmann@comcast.net >> To: bob.bosra@demattia.net; boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org >> Subject: RE: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" >> Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:33:21 -0400 >> >>> WKLB, the two stations werebattling it out, each getting about half of >>> the country audience - but that was withtwo class B's (also when 105.7 >>> was still transmitting from Framingham). >> I'm pretty sure 105.7 was already on the Pru in the early 90s. If not, it >> would've been on FM128. Did it ever actually transmit from Framingham? >> >> Jeff Lehmann >> >> > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3972/7696 - Release Date: 06/17/14 > > > -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From 011010001@interpring.com Wed Jun 18 07:33:45 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 07:33:45 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [B-R-I] Re: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies"e In-Reply-To: <53A0BA3E.3000105@Gmail.com> References: <53A0BA3E.3000105@Gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Jun 2014, Kaimbridge M. GoldChild wrote: > Yup, right across the street from South Station, on top of One Financial > Center (along with 95.3?WHRB?s)?signal(s) penetrate through the deepest > recesses of the facility...ya know, strong enough out in the open to hear > through doorbells and electric can openers! Don't forget WERS. Rob From raccoonradio@gmail.com Wed Jun 18 07:30:37 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 07:30:37 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: <53A13843.9010107@attorneyross.com> References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> <006a01cf8a73$c3453ac0$49cfb040$@net> <53A13843.9010107@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: WKLB reacts again: the new slogan prominently on its site and on the air is Boston's (or Today's, on the site) New Hit Country. They can legitimately say that because of the ratings they get, and will get. Given their longtime status and signal strength it would be shocking if WEDX (to be WBWL?) were to trump them in the ratings. As has been said the idea is for CC to shave off some ratings points from them to help Kiss 108, etc. The ditching of the oldies show and the new slogan shows that the competition is now there. Depending on where you live, etc. technically they weren?t the only country station around, because you might be able to get 98.1 from New Bedford, 103.9 from the Cape, 97.5 from Dover NH etc. (Some Evolution fans went on facebook to complain, ?why do we need another country station? We already have 4? or something) They didn?t have a strict monopoly but for the Boston area in some ways they did. Now they have a direct competitor, though who knows if in a year or so they might suddenly become Patriot 101.7 for talk (doubtful, but what if Howie wanted to work for CC? ?for peanuts!!) or La Mega 101.7?though some have also said country could indeed be longterm for them. That seems to make sense. As far as the 101.7 signal goes it can cover a half decent amount of people and is Boston proper instead of Waltham. Yet while you might get it fine on I-93 to the N.H. state line etc., it was shaky on Rt 3 in Chelmsford and Lowell; shaky on Rt 128 in Peabody (Centennial Dr. and Lowell St. exits) and when I was on Rt 114 in Danvers/Peabody area with all the stores and car dealers, it was even more shaky. I don't know if somehow the presence of 93.7's tower in Peabody, 8 MHz down, is a factor due to some kind of signal math. On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 2:57 AM, A Joseph Ross wrote: > And WVBF was originally WKOX-FM, which started sometime circa 1960 or > thereabouts. > > > On 6/17/2014 6:35 PM, Bob DeMattia wrote: > >> WVBF was certainly transmitting from Framingham in 1985 when >> hurricaneGloria took out one of their newly constructed towers. >> Fairbanks flipped it to country in 1993 as WCLB. They had a great >> opening event at the General Cinemas in Braintree where they showed the >> George Straitmovie "Pure Country". I got to talk to Loren and Wally, who >> were dressed in cowboy garb. But I digress. >> Anyways, I believe it was GM that moved it to Boston. I don't recall an >> intermediatemove to FM128, so I believe there was country music emanating >> from the Framinghamtowers when it all began. >> >> -Bob >> >> >> From: jjlehmann@comcast.net >>> To: bob.bosra@demattia.net; boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org >>> Subject: RE: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" >>> Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:33:21 -0400 >>> >>> WKLB, the two stations werebattling it out, each getting about half of >>>> the country audience - but that was withtwo class B's (also when 105.7 >>>> was still transmitting from Framingham). >>>> >>> I'm pretty sure 105.7 was already on the Pru in the early 90s. If not, it >>> would've been on FM128. Did it ever actually transmit from Framingham? >>> >>> Jeff Lehmann >>> >>> >> >> >> ----- >> No virus found in this message. >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >> Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3972/7696 - Release Date: 06/17/14 >> >> >> >> > -- > A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 > 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com > > From 011010001@interpring.com Wed Jun 18 08:20:10 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 08:20:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net>, , , <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> , <006a01cf8a73$c3453ac0$49cfb040$@net> Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Jun 2014, Bob DeMattia wrote: > WVBF was certainly transmitting from Framingham in 1985 when > hurricaneGloria took out one of their newly constructed towers. No, they were on the Stainless (candelabra) tower in Needham. I remember one day in 1982, when I was working for WBOS, arriving at the site to find Art Bump of Beacon Tower Service there doing some work for WVBF. They were paying him to adjust the antenna position for best reception at the general manager's home! At some point, Fairbanks decided that even though they owned a perfectly good studio facility in Framingham, WVBF could never truly be a Boston station unless it had studios in the city, so they moved their studios to the Prudential Center (keeping the Framingham building for WKOX). God knows how much money they must have spent on that project; and how do you justify paying rent at the Pru when you own your own building? It boggles the mind. No one cares where your studios are; what matters is where the signal goes and who listens. Rob From map@mapinternet.com Wed Jun 18 10:29:02 2014 From: map@mapinternet.com (M.Casey) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 10:29:02 -0400 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: <2F886674-755A-4372-9CAC-C87D554A52EB@mac.com> References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> <48710345-28E7-4D9E-B350-D8CAB7227A82@comcast.net> <2F886674-755A-4372-9CAC-C87D554A52EB@mac.com> Message-ID: <76A56551122E4AC6AB4BD2F7BF123460@laptop> The Modern Country format really started taking hold in the 1980's. I don't know what the current--I'll call it "Top20 Country"--format is called. But there are several country formats. The current "Top 20 Country" format that 92.5 WWYZ Hartford plays is a mix that's heavy on Rap & Whine. It's almost a Country version, repeat of the 60's AM Top 20 Pop format, but YZ seems to still get the ratings despite the repetetivity. I like country, but there's not enough upbeat songs-too much slow whining and country rap--nothing against either, but just way too much of it--so, I just can't listen to it. A mix of 1980's+ classic, recurrent and current songs might be a sustainable country format here in the northeast. There's a whole list of good listenable, in a current sense, country songs from the last 25 years that could be inserted into what I would call a "Modern Country Mix" format. Hey- when WWYZ first went to country in the 80's , they'd even slip in an Elvis song once in a while. That might not work now but some of those big country hits of about 1987-2010 that made country what it is now would work very well. There may be a reasonable, sustainable and profitable, amount of listeners in the 35-65 age group to a "Modern Country Mix" on FM (like 101.7) or even an AM with a decent signal. The generic Classic Country description is hard to define. A format of 1940's to 1980's ( which is very much alive in other parts of this country) could be called classic, but would likely have few listeners in this region. But that could be a format for a station like 1430 to try. WWYZ-HD-2 has a pretty good format which may be called a version of classic country. It's 1970's through 2000's and not so heavy on the whining. It's unfortunate for the guys that had the show, but I understand why WKLB axed the oldies show. The average WKLB listener expects to hear the same basic format whether it's Monday morning, Thursday night, or Sunday morning. WKLB does not want to give their every day listener another reason (besides commercials-as in the recent discussion-ha!) to tune out. Mark Casey K1MAP -----Original Message----- From: Larry Weil Sent: Monday, June 16, 2014 10:02 PM To: Boston Radio Group Subject: Re: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" On Jun 16, 2014, at 9:01 PM, Jeff Lehmann wrote: > Here's an idea... Clear Channel fires back and flips 1430 to classic > country! I know they won't, but they did recently put it on 1380 in > Portsmouth. > I don't think that would matter at all. The feeling I have is that the audience for classic country is a completely different audience from that for modern country or whatever it's called. Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4570 / Virus Database: 3964/7689 - Release Date: 06/16/14 From lglavin@mail.com Tue Jun 17 19:07:04 2014 From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 01:07:04 +0200 Subject: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" In-Reply-To: <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> References: <00e601cf89be$f3cb1d00$db615700$@comcast.net> , <53A0A156.1000005@fybush.com> Message-ID: >Sent:?Tuesday, June 17, 2014 at 4:13 PM >From:?"Scott Fybush" >To:?boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org >Subject:?Re: WKLB Axes "Sunday Morning Country Oldies" >On 6/17/2014 3:49 PM, Rob Landry wrote: > 101.7 is essentially an inside-Route-128 signal. Are there any country > listeners in that part of the world? >There sure are. The country of 2014 isn't the country WDLW or WBOS >played. In many ways, it's become the new AC - songs that have hummable >melodies and tell stories. >s ? Whoa, whoa, stop right there! "Melodies"? Any time I'm exposed to a C&W recording, the most noticeable thing about most of them is the limited intervalic span and reduced time values of the notes. They may be "hummable" but not easily distinguished one from another. Here's an example of what a MELODY SHOULD BE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtBPD95zBYE It may seem unfair to cite a world-famous and beloved show-stopper of a vocal number but so many people toss around the word "melody" that I thought that maybe for about 9 minutes, it would be useful to be exposed to the real thing. BTW, Kristine is married to Andris Nelsons, the new conductor of the Boston Symphony Orchestra. I suspect she'll grace the stage of Symphony Hall many times in years to come. I can't wait. I may even listen to the music. From Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com Wed Jun 18 12:33:57 2014 From: Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com (Don) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:33:57 -0400 Subject: Hot 97 pritate....gave up the ghost? References: <13728109.1403014533366.JavaMail.root@wamui-junio.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <47C5D5DA-9917-48A4-B7C4-2EFC2C78F2D3@comcast.net> Message-ID: <2FBD446018CE49628AC45BEF3EFAACDC@ownerd8aa55a4d> > Since coming back on the air, it hasn't been Hot 97, it's now "B87." But it is a different organization now right? Hot 97 was Urban Hip Hop (w/ CHubby Chubb, etc.) ......and B87 seems to be more "Caribbean". We all know Touch 106 was being run by Mr. Clemons....Who was the force behind Hot 97 (87.7) (I know they came into existence when RadioOne sold 97.7 to Entercom) But this appears to be a different group now, right? From Cdsull502@aol.com Wed Jun 18 17:30:54 2014 From: Cdsull502@aol.com (Cdsull502@aol.com) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 17:30:54 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WGGB Sale Message-ID: <7c891.e467f3.40d35f0e@aol.com> The ownership of WGGB, channel 40 in Springfield announced to today that they plan to sell the station to Meredith Corp., owners of WFSB-TV in Hartford. I realize that technically, Hartford is a separate market from Springfield, but in a practical sense, channel 3 has been the default CBS affiliate for the Springfield market for the last 55 or so years. I know that the rules have been significantly relaxed over the years, but, will the FCC allow one owner for the ABC, Fox (WGGB runs Fox on LP channel 6 in Springfield) and CBS stations in the market? (not to mention that Meredith also owns LP channel 69 in Springfield.) If this allowed, the only commercial competitor Meredith will have in the market is WWLP. Comments? Chris Sullivan CdSull502@aol.com From mrschuyler@aol.com Wed Jun 18 19:14:39 2014 From: mrschuyler@aol.com (J.E.Schuyler) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 19:14:39 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WGGB Sale Message-ID: <8D15962369F6775-1E74-151F6@webmail-m259.sysops.aol.com> Meredith's WFSB Hartford was the CBS channel for Springfield until the DTV switch. Now it's Meredith's WSHM Springfield, which also IDs as CBS3. CBS3 Springfield's scrappy news department will perhaps be scrapped for news product from Channel 40, which also provides the "FOX6" news on 40.2. How does this work out at 11 pm? This virtual "big network triopoly" doesn't seem right for that market to me, and can't be welcome news at WWLP. ~~ Schuyler From kvahey@gmail.com Thu Jun 19 21:22:16 2014 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 21:22:16 -0400 Subject: Dumb question Message-ID: When did the FCC repeal the rule that a station could not simulcast 24 hours a day on AM and FM? I am guessing 1996 but that is a guess. From dlh@donnahalper.com Sat Jun 21 22:28:51 2014 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 22:28:51 -0400 Subject: War of the Worlds....in Boston, PS In-Reply-To: <87BFF79D47C044F8B96216D975B73830@ownerd8aa55a4d> References: <8FD6D9409E61461596F81316436645E1@ownerd8aa55a4d> <538CC1FE.6020102@donnahalper.com> <87BFF79D47C044F8B96216D975B73830@ownerd8aa55a4d> Message-ID: <53A63F63.2030000@donnahalper.com> On 6/2/2014 2:53 PM, Don wrote: >>> Just finnaly got around to wathcing the PBS American Experience >>> program on Orson Welles War of the World broadcast. >>> >>> In 1938....who would have carried the CBS program in Boston? (Would >>> it have been WEEI?) I finally had a chance to check my files-- WORC in Worcester did carry "War of the Worlds," and according to the local newspapers in Worcester (the Telegram and the Gazette, which were two separate papers back then), about a hundred people called the offices of WORC and/or the two newspapers during the broadcast, to ask if it was for real, but most seemed to know it was just a play. There was one man who ran over to WTAG (which was not carrying the program) to see if war had been declared, but he seemed to be the exception. Local police reported no panic, and no people running through the streets. From raccoonradio@gmail.com Sun Jun 22 17:05:58 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 17:05:58 -0400 Subject: Donna Halper interview Message-ID: http://jukejoint.freehostia.com/Interviews/Halper2014.mp3 >From today's Juke Joint on WMWM Salem MA From dlh@donnahalper.com Sun Jun 22 23:33:43 2014 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:33:43 -0400 Subject: Al Tanger In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <53A7A017.4060206@donnahalper.com> Just got the word that Al Tanger has passed away, at age 94. For those who knew him or worked with him, I am told that his funeral will take place at 10:30 AM on Tuesday at Temple Beth Elohim,10 Bethel Road in Wellesley. More information as I receive it. From kvahey@gmail.com Mon Jun 23 01:25:27 2014 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 01:25:27 -0400 Subject: Al Tanger In-Reply-To: <53A7A017.4060206@donnahalper.com> References: <53A7A017.4060206@donnahalper.com> Message-ID: Al certainly insured a nice retirement when he unloaded WHUE-AM-FM 30 years ago, On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 11:33 PM, Donna Halper wrote: > Just got the word that Al Tanger has passed away, at age 94. For those > who knew him or worked with him, I am told that his funeral will take place > at 10:30 AM on Tuesday at Temple Beth Elohim,10 Bethel Road in Wellesley. > More information as I receive it. > From kvahey@gmail.com Tue Jun 24 19:01:45 2014 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 19:01:45 -0400 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 Message-ID: Fox Broadcasting and Cox have swapped 4 stations including WFXT. http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20140624006745/en/FOX-Television-Stations-COX-Media-Group-Announce#.U6oDKvldWSo COX has a history of not using the FOX graphics package. From ssmyth@psualum.com Tue Jun 24 19:04:52 2014 From: ssmyth@psualum.com (Sean Smyth) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 16:04:52 -0700 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1403651092.11020.YahooMailNeo@web160502.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Does Rupert reacquire the Herald? On Tuesday, June 24, 2014 7:03 PM, Kevin Vahey wrote: Fox Broadcasting and Cox have swapped 4 stations including WFXT. http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20140624006745/en/FOX-Television-Stations-COX-Media-Group-Announce#.U6oDKvldWSo COX has a history of not using the FOX graphics package. From wollman@bimajority.org Tue Jun 24 20:55:25 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 20:55:25 -0400 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > Fox Broadcasting and Cox have swapped 4 stations including WFXT. > http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20140624006745/en/FOX-Television-Stations-COX-Media-Group-Announce#.U6oDKvldWSo Whoa! Cox has owned KTVU for *ever*, and they give it up in exchange for Boston and Memphis? -GAWollman From kvahey@gmail.com Tue Jun 24 21:07:47 2014 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 21:07:47 -0400 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: Ed Ansin now has a way to stick it to NBC. On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 8:55 PM, Garrett Wollman wrote: > < said: > > > Fox Broadcasting and Cox have swapped 4 stations including WFXT. > > > http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20140624006745/en/FOX-Television-Stations-COX-Media-Group-Announce#.U6oDKvldWSo > > Whoa! Cox has owned KTVU for *ever*, and they give it up in exchange > for Boston and Memphis? > > -GAWollman > From scott@fybush.com Tue Jun 24 21:35:40 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 21:35:40 -0400 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> On 6/24/2014 9:07 PM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > Ed Ansin now has a way to stick it to NBC. How so? Cox already has a good relationship with Fox in markets such as Jacksonville and Tulsa. I would assume the Cox-Fox swap includes a commitment to keep WFXT and WHBQ as Fox affiliates, and it's probably more lucrative for Cox to keep it that way, given that they get to do more hours of local news and retain AFC football as a Fox affiliate. All of which leaves NBC and Ansin to remain in bed with each other, however uncomfortable it might be. As for Garrett's question - the Cox MO these days is to combine radio and TV clusters. There's already a lot of speculation that Cox could have its eye on Entercom, which has radio clusters in both Boston and Memphis. Of course, Entercom is in San Francisco, too...but perhaps Cox's math was that two potential radio/TV clusters offer more potential than just one. s From kc1ih@mac.com Tue Jun 24 20:41:13 2014 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 20:41:13 -0400 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Jun 24, 2014, at 7:01 PM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > Fox Broadcasting and Cox have swapped 4 stations including WFXT. > > COX has a history of not using the FOX graphics package. The much bigger question in my mind is if WFXT will remain a Fox affiliate? And I care much more about the content of the newscasts than the graphics package. Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From scott@fybush.com Tue Jun 24 21:50:30 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 21:50:30 -0400 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <53AA2AE6.3070905@fybush.com> On 6/24/2014 9:41 PM, Maureen Carney wrote: > I see it as the opposite - there's now one more established channel NBC > could shop the affiliation to if they want to be rid of WHDH. Not saying > it will happen, but 25 is a more acceptable choice than trying to > retrain the public to watch a station they currently don't think about > (WTMU for example). It's possible, I suppose - and Cox does have established relations with NBC, too, most notably at WPXI in Pittsburgh. But I'd be a little surprised, once we see the full terms of this deal, if it doesn't include an extended contract to keep WFXT with Fox. From m_carney@yahoo.com Tue Jun 24 21:41:41 2014 From: m_carney@yahoo.com (Maureen Carney) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 18:41:41 -0700 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> Message-ID: <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> I see it as the opposite - there's now one more established channel NBC could shop the affiliation to if they want to be rid of WHDH. Not saying it will happen, but 25 is a more acceptable choice than trying to retrain the public to watch a station they currently don't think about (WTMU for example). On Tuesday, June 24, 2014 9:35 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: On 6/24/2014 9:07 PM, Kevin Vahey wrote: > Ed Ansin now has a way to stick it to NBC. How so? Cox already has a good relationship with Fox in markets such as Jacksonville and Tulsa. I would assume the Cox-Fox swap includes a commitment to keep WFXT and WHBQ as Fox affiliates, and it's probably more lucrative for Cox to keep it that way, given that they get to do more hours of local news and retain AFC football as a Fox affiliate. All of which leaves NBC and Ansin to remain in bed with each other, however uncomfortable it might be. As for Garrett's question - the Cox MO these days is to combine radio and TV clusters. There's already a lot of speculation that Cox could have its eye on Entercom, which has radio clusters in both Boston and Memphis. Of course, Entercom is in San Francisco, too...but perhaps Cox's math was that two potential radio/TV clusters offer more potential than just one. s From joe@attorneyross.com Tue Jun 24 23:30:37 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 23:30:37 -0400 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> On 6/24/2014 9:41 PM, Maureen Carney wrote: > I see it as the opposite - there's now one more established channel NBC could shop the affiliation to if they want to be rid of WHDH. Not saying it will happen, but 25 is a more acceptable choice than trying to retrain the public to watch a station they currently don't think about (WTMU for example). Why couldn't NBC make a deal with one of the other VHF stations? Probably not CBS-owned WBC, but maybe WCVB? Or why couldn't Ansin make a deal with ABC? Something like that actually happened between CBS and ABC circa 1961 or so.' -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From kvahey@gmail.com Wed Jun 25 03:15:28 2014 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 03:15:28 -0400 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: Hearst has a solid relationship with ABC and they are also a 20% owner of ESPN. On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 11:30 PM, A Joseph Ross wrote: > On 6/24/2014 9:41 PM, Maureen Carney wrote: > > I see it as the opposite - there's now one more established channel NBC >> could shop the affiliation to if they want to be rid of WHDH. Not saying it >> will happen, but 25 is a more acceptable choice than trying to retrain the >> public to watch a station they currently don't think about (WTMU for >> example). >> > > Why couldn't NBC make a deal with one of the other VHF stations? Probably > not CBS-owned WBC, but maybe WCVB? Or why couldn't Ansin make a deal with > ABC? Something like that actually happened between CBS and ABC circa > 1961 or so.' > > -- > A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 > 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com > > From kenwvt@gmail.com Tue Jun 24 22:55:58 2014 From: kenwvt@gmail.com (Ken VanTassell) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 22:55:58 -0400 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: <53AA2AE6.3070905@fybush.com> References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53AA2AE6.3070905@fybush.com> Message-ID: According to the article "After the deal closes, the Memphis and Boston stations will remain FOX affiliates." -Ken On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 9:50 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: > On 6/24/2014 9:41 PM, Maureen Carney wrote: > >> I see it as the opposite - there's now one more established channel NBC >> could shop the affiliation to if they want to be rid of WHDH. Not saying >> it will happen, but 25 is a more acceptable choice than trying to >> retrain the public to watch a station they currently don't think about >> (WTMU for example). >> > > It's possible, I suppose - and Cox does have established relations with > NBC, too, most notably at WPXI in Pittsburgh. But I'd be a little > surprised, once we see the full terms of this deal, if it doesn't include > an extended contract to keep WFXT with Fox. > > From mward@iname.com Wed Jun 25 10:09:44 2014 From: mward@iname.com (Mike Ward) Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 10:09:44 -0400 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53AA2AE6.3070905@fybush.com> Message-ID: I think I read somewhere that WFXT will certainly remain a Fox affiliate, as if there was any question. The same thing happened here, when Fox sold off the Local TV stations (now Tribune). WJW "Fox 8" and its Local TV Fox affiliate sisters signed a long-term deal (reportedly 10 years) to stay with Fox. That was many years ago, and "Fox 8" hasn't changed networks since. Unless there was some other linked deal to move the affiliation, which would be somewhat unlikely in Boston as already pointed out here, I can't see Fox selling off WFXT without a long-term affiliation deal. On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:55 PM, Ken VanTassell wrote: > According to the article "After the deal closes, the Memphis and Boston > stations will remain FOX affiliates." > > -Ken > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 9:50 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: > > > On 6/24/2014 9:41 PM, Maureen Carney wrote: > > > >> I see it as the opposite - there's now one more established channel NBC > >> could shop the affiliation to if they want to be rid of WHDH. Not saying > >> it will happen, but 25 is a more acceptable choice than trying to > >> retrain the public to watch a station they currently don't think about > >> (WTMU for example). > >> > > > > It's possible, I suppose - and Cox does have established relations with > > NBC, too, most notably at WPXI in Pittsburgh. But I'd be a little > > surprised, once we see the full terms of this deal, if it doesn't include > > an extended contract to keep WFXT with Fox. > > > > > From kenwvt@gmail.com Wed Jun 25 10:28:38 2014 From: kenwvt@gmail.com (Ken VanTassell) Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 10:28:38 -0400 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53AA2AE6.3070905@fybush.com> Message-ID: "WFXT will remain a Fox affiliate, so don?t expect any changes to your prime time viewing (aside from Fox canceling quality efforts like ?I Wanna Marry Harry ?). The deal must meet regulatory muster before it can be completed, according to Fox." http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2014/06/24/boston-wfxt-traded-fox-cox-media/3yXT0LmZoSEpAseXKueWFN/story.html On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:09 AM, Mike Ward wrote: > I think I read somewhere that WFXT will certainly remain a Fox affiliate, > as if there was any question. > > The same thing happened here, when Fox sold off the Local TV stations (now > Tribune). WJW "Fox 8" and its Local TV Fox affiliate sisters signed a > long-term deal (reportedly 10 years) to stay with Fox. That was many years > ago, and "Fox 8" hasn't changed networks since. > > Unless there was some other linked deal to move the affiliation, which > would be somewhat unlikely in Boston as already pointed out here, I can't > see Fox selling off WFXT without a long-term affiliation deal. > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:55 PM, Ken VanTassell wrote: > >> According to the article "After the deal closes, the Memphis and Boston >> stations will remain FOX affiliates." >> >> -Ken >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 9:50 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: >> >> > On 6/24/2014 9:41 PM, Maureen Carney wrote: >> > >> >> I see it as the opposite - there's now one more established channel NBC >> >> could shop the affiliation to if they want to be rid of WHDH. Not >> saying >> >> it will happen, but 25 is a more acceptable choice than trying to >> >> retrain the public to watch a station they currently don't think about >> >> (WTMU for example). >> >> >> > >> > It's possible, I suppose - and Cox does have established relations with >> > NBC, too, most notably at WPXI in Pittsburgh. But I'd be a little >> > surprised, once we see the full terms of this deal, if it doesn't >> include >> > an extended contract to keep WFXT with Fox. >> > >> > >> > > From gary@garysicecream.com Wed Jun 25 09:55:09 2014 From: gary@garysicecream.com (Gary's Ice Cream) Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:55:09 -0400 Subject: David Muir gets promotion Message-ID: <008901cf907d$14eb4b30$3ec1e190$@garysicecream.com> ABC News has released a statement saying that former WCVB Reporter David Muir will replace Diane Sawyer as host and managing editor of "World News Tonight" starting on Sept 2. Sawyer will handle extraordinary interviews and other stories. The release further announces that George Stefenopolis will become chief reporter for ABC News. Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com From lglavin@mail.com Wed Jun 25 14:33:43 2014 From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 20:33:43 +0200 Subject: David Muir gets promotion In-Reply-To: <008901cf907d$14eb4b30$3ec1e190$@garysicecream.com> References: <008901cf907d$14eb4b30$3ec1e190$@garysicecream.com> Message-ID: >Sent:?Wednesday, June 25, 2014 at 9:55 AM >From:?"Gary's Ice Cream" >To:?"Boston Radio Group" >Subject:?David Muir gets promotion >ABC News has released a statement saying that former WCVB Reporter David >Muir will replace Diane Sawyer as host and managing editor of "World News >Tonight" starting on Sept 2. Speaking of ABC-TV broadcast news, does anybody out there know why during "World News Tonight" (I don't know about "Nightline"), they insert a "whooosh-wheeesh" sounder every time they go from the anchor to the reporter in the field? ? From lglavin@mail.com Wed Jun 25 14:26:24 2014 From: lglavin@mail.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 20:26:24 +0200 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>, <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: >Sent:?Tuesday, June 24, 2014 at 11:30 PM >From:?"A Joseph Ross" >To:?boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org >Subject:?Re: It will soon be COX 25 >On 6/24/2014 9:41 PM, Maureen Carney wrote: > I see it as the opposite - there's now one more established channel NBC could shop the affiliation to if they want to be rid of WHDH. Not saying it will happen, but 25 is a >more acceptable choice than trying to retrain the public to watch a station they currently don't think about (WTMU for example). >Why couldn't NBC make a deal with one of the other VHF stations? >Probably not CBS-owned WBC, but maybe WCVB? Or why couldn't Ansin make >a deal with ABC? Something like that actually happened between CBS >and ABC circa 1961 or so.' >-- >A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 >617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com ? Remember: no Boston "VHF" station is really a VHF station. Regarding WFXT, which is promoted as channel 25 but transmits on channel 31, it is viewed (literally and figuratively) as a UHF station from the get-go. Fox is probably going to stay on WFXT, but if NBC were to tire of dealing with WHDH-TV and the Ansin family for any reason, they COULD move to virtual 62 or 68 through a purchase or heavy promotion, including making the population AWARE that channel "7" is channel 42 and the "new" affiliate would be comparable. From gspatola@q.com Wed Jun 25 15:12:11 2014 From: gspatola@q.com (Glenn Spatola) Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 12:12:11 -0700 Subject: David Muir gets promotion In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I have no doubt that Diane will do well in her new role, but she will be missed as the ABC World News anchor!! > Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 09:55:09 -0400 > From: "Gary's Ice Cream" > To: "Boston Radio Group" > Subject: David Muir gets promotion > Message-ID: <008901cf907d$14eb4b30$3ec1e190$@garysicecream.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > ABC News has released a statement saying that former WCVB Reporter David > Muir will replace Diane Sawyer as host and managing editor of "World News > Tonight" starting on Sept 2. Sawyer will handle extraordinary interviews > and other stories. The release further announces that George Stefenopolis > will become chief reporter for ABC News. > > Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA > > www.garysicecream.com > www.icecreamcollege.com From Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com Wed Jun 25 17:28:19 2014 From: Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com (Don) Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 17:28:19 -0400 Subject: David Muir gets promotion References: Message-ID: David Muir has been on the anchor "fast-track" ever since he showed up at chnnel 5 for, what?, 3 weeks? Nice voice, nice hair....but he appears a little errr..."young" for my taste in anchors. >> ABC News has released a statement saying that former WCVB Reporter David >> Muir will replace Diane Sawyer as host and managing editor of "World News >> Tonight" starting on Sept 2. Sawyer will handle extraordinary interviews >> and other stories. The release further announces that George >> Stefenopolis >> will become chief reporter for ABC News. >> >> Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA >> >> www.garysicecream.com >> www.icecreamcollege.com > From rbello@belloassoc.com Wed Jun 25 18:12:54 2014 From: rbello@belloassoc.com (Ron Bello) Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 18:12:54 -0400 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: Don't think many under the age of 40 or 45 know the difference between VHF or UHF nor do they care. All they know is where to find the program to watch. The advantage of VHF over UHF has long passed. What does differentiate stations is news infrastructure. Fox requires a credible news department especially in a top 10 market something neither 62 or 68 has. On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Laurence Glavin wrote: > >Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 at 11:30 PM > >From: "A Joseph Ross" > >To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > >Subject: Re: It will soon be COX 25 > >On 6/24/2014 9:41 PM, Maureen Carney wrote: > > > I see it as the opposite - there's now one more established channel NBC > could shop the affiliation to if they want to be rid of WHDH. Not saying it > will happen, but 25 is a >more acceptable choice than trying to retrain the > public to watch a station they currently don't think about (WTMU for > example). > > >Why couldn't NBC make a deal with one of the other VHF stations? > >Probably not CBS-owned WBC, but maybe WCVB? Or why couldn't Ansin make > >a deal with ABC? Something like that actually happened between CBS > >and ABC circa 1961 or so.' > > >-- > >A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 > >617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com > > > Remember: no Boston "VHF" station is really a VHF station. Regarding > WFXT, which is promoted as channel 25 but > transmits on channel 31, it is viewed (literally and figuratively) as a > UHF station from the get-go. > Fox is probably going to stay on WFXT, but if NBC were to tire of dealing > with WHDH-TV and the Ansin family for any > reason, they COULD move to virtual 62 or 68 through a purchase or heavy > promotion, including making > the population AWARE that channel "7" is channel 42 and the "new" > affiliate would be comparable. > > From joe@attorneyross.com Thu Jun 26 01:10:01 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 01:10:01 -0400 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <53ABAB29.60407@attorneyross.com> On 6/25/2014 6:12 PM, Ron Bello wrote: > Don't think many under the age of 40 or 45 know the difference between > VHF or UHF > nor do they care. All they know is where to find the program to > watch. The > advantage of VHF over UHF has long passed. > > What does differentiate stations is news infrastructure. Fox requires > a credible news > department especially in a top 10 market something neither 62 or 68 has. Is there anything to stop the owner of channel 7 from putting Fox on 56? I'm not sure why they would want to, but do the rules allow it? -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From rbello@belloassoc.com Thu Jun 26 11:07:50 2014 From: rbello@belloassoc.com (Ron Bello) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 11:07:50 -0400 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: <53ABAB29.60407@attorneyross.com> References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> <53ABAB29.60407@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: Almost certainly an exclusive clause in their contract for both parties Is there anything to stop the owner of channel 7 from putting Fox on 56? I'm not sure why they would want to, but do the rules allow it? > > > > -- > A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com > > From map@mapinternet.com Thu Jun 26 12:47:55 2014 From: map@mapinternet.com (M.Casey) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 12:47:55 -0400 Subject: Channel Brands & VHF-UHF In-Reply-To: References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <388B66C1C8A644E19D3DE5DC3BB42C2E@laptop> I agree--VHF and UHF are not a consideration and are not understood by most viewers, now. And, in many cases even the channel number designations are disappearing in favor of a brand name or callsign. FOXCT (WTIC-TV) in Hartford was once WTIC-TV, Channel 61. But even though "61" is still the "virtual" channel , (transmits on 31) I don't think you will see "61" anywhere on their programming or on the website. They are branded "FOX CT". Even the small ID print on the bottom of the screen says WTIC-TV Hartford, Digital 31.1. It's a similar situation with WVIT-30. Now, it's "NBC Connecticut" with nary a 30 anywhere. Ch's 3 & 8 still use their old numbers, but that's about it in the Hartford market. To contrast in Springfield, the numbers are hanging in there with channels 22-40-57, and low power CBS3. For many folks, the only time a channel number comes into play is when searching for what you want in the list of cable channels, or if you watch off-air broadcast tv. Mark Casey K1MAP -----Original Message----- From: Ron Bello Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 6:12 PM To: Laurence Glavin Cc: Boston Group Radio Subject: Re: It will soon be COX 25 Don't think many under the age of 40 or 45 know the difference between VHF or UHF nor do they care. All they know is where to find the program to watch. The advantage of VHF over UHF has long passed. What does differentiate stations is news infrastructure. Fox requires a credible news department especially in a top 10 market something neither 62 or 68 has. ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3986/7747 - Release Date: 06/26/14 From mward@iname.com Thu Jun 26 15:10:48 2014 From: mward@iname.com (Mike Ward) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 15:10:48 -0400 Subject: Channel Brands & VHF-UHF In-Reply-To: <388B66C1C8A644E19D3DE5DC3BB42C2E@laptop> References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> <388B66C1C8A644E19D3DE5DC3BB42C2E@laptop> Message-ID: Here, WOIO/19's main signal is on VHF 10. But down here in Akron, WOIO has a digital low-power fill-in translator on UHF 24. It's on the same tower as WVPX/23 (the former WAKR-TV/WAKC, Akron's former ABC affiliate) and our own WONE-FM/97.5... On Jun 26, 2014 2:05 PM, "M.Casey" wrote: > I agree--VHF and UHF are not a consideration and are not understood by > most viewers, now. > And, in many cases even the channel number designations are disappearing > in favor of a brand name or callsign. FOXCT (WTIC-TV) in Hartford was once > WTIC-TV, Channel 61. But even though "61" is still the "virtual" channel , > (transmits on 31) I don't think you will see "61" anywhere on their > programming or on the website. They are branded "FOX CT". Even the small ID > print on the bottom of the screen says WTIC-TV Hartford, Digital 31.1. > It's a similar situation with WVIT-30. Now, it's "NBC Connecticut" with > nary a 30 anywhere. Ch's 3 & 8 still use their old numbers, but that's > about it in the Hartford market. To contrast in Springfield, the numbers > are hanging in there with channels 22-40-57, and low power CBS3. > > For many folks, the only time a channel number comes into play is when > searching for what you want in the list of cable channels, or if you watch > off-air broadcast tv. > > Mark Casey > K1MAP > > -----Original Message----- From: Ron Bello > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 6:12 PM > To: Laurence Glavin > Cc: Boston Group Radio > Subject: Re: It will soon be COX 25 > > Don't think many under the age of 40 or 45 know the difference between VHF > or UHF > nor do they care. All they know is where to find the program to watch. > The > advantage of VHF over UHF has long passed. > > What does differentiate stations is news infrastructure. Fox requires a > credible news > department especially in a top 10 market something neither 62 or 68 has. > > > > > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3986/7747 - Release Date: 06/26/14 > > From raccoonradio@gmail.com Thu Jun 26 15:29:52 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 15:29:52 -0400 Subject: Channel Brands & VHF-UHF In-Reply-To: References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> <388B66C1C8A644E19D3DE5DC3BB42C2E@laptop> Message-ID: I'd see things like "Fox Pittsburgh" instead of a channel number. (WPGH-TV '53') And years ago I knew of a TV station that would mention its (usual) cable channel number as part of its branding etc: "WVNY-TV 22, Cable 4" On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Mike Ward wrote: > Here, WOIO/19's main signal is on VHF 10. > > But down here in Akron, WOIO has a digital low-power fill-in translator on > UHF 24. > > It's on the same tower as WVPX/23 (the former WAKR-TV/WAKC, Akron's former > ABC affiliate) and our own WONE-FM/97.5... > On Jun 26, 2014 2:05 PM, "M.Casey" wrote: > > > I agree--VHF and UHF are not a consideration and are not understood by > > most viewers, now. > > And, in many cases even the channel number designations are disappearing > > in favor of a brand name or callsign. FOXCT (WTIC-TV) in Hartford was > once > > WTIC-TV, Channel 61. But even though "61" is still the "virtual" channel > , > > (transmits on 31) I don't think you will see "61" anywhere on their > > programming or on the website. They are branded "FOX CT". Even the small > ID > > print on the bottom of the screen says WTIC-TV Hartford, Digital 31.1. > > It's a similar situation with WVIT-30. Now, it's "NBC Connecticut" with > > nary a 30 anywhere. Ch's 3 & 8 still use their old numbers, but that's > > about it in the Hartford market. To contrast in Springfield, the numbers > > are hanging in there with channels 22-40-57, and low power CBS3. > > > > For many folks, the only time a channel number comes into play is when > > searching for what you want in the list of cable channels, or if you > watch > > off-air broadcast tv. > > > > Mark Casey > > K1MAP > > > > -----Original Message----- From: Ron Bello > > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 6:12 PM > > To: Laurence Glavin > > Cc: Boston Group Radio > > Subject: Re: It will soon be COX 25 > > > > Don't think many under the age of 40 or 45 know the difference between > VHF > > or UHF > > nor do they care. All they know is where to find the program to watch. > > The > > advantage of VHF over UHF has long passed. > > > > What does differentiate stations is news infrastructure. Fox requires a > > credible news > > department especially in a top 10 market something neither 62 or 68 has. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- > > No virus found in this message. > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3986/7747 - Release Date: 06/26/14 > > > > > From wollman@bimajority.org Thu Jun 26 20:25:40 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 20:25:40 -0400 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: <53ABAB29.60407@attorneyross.com> References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> <53ABAB29.60407@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <21420.47620.458613.176550@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > Is there anything to stop the owner of channel 7 from putting Fox on > 56? I'm not sure why they would want to, but do the rules allow it? Other than the fact that Cox has a contract that says it will stay on 25 for the next decade (assuming the swap is approved by the FCC and consummated), no. -GAWollman From wollman@bimajority.org Thu Jun 26 20:29:39 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 20:29:39 -0400 Subject: Channel Brands & VHF-UHF In-Reply-To: References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> <388B66C1C8A644E19D3DE5DC3BB42C2E@laptop> Message-ID: <21420.47859.739423.341858@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > I'd see things like "Fox Pittsburgh" instead of a channel number. (WPGH-TV > '53') And years ago I knew of a TV station that would mention its (usual) > cable channel number as part of its branding etc: "WVNY-TV 22, Cable 4" In many markets, at least one station brands with its cable channel exclusively. -GAWollman From donald_astelle@yahoo.com Thu Jun 26 22:00:51 2014 From: donald_astelle@yahoo.com (D. A.) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 19:00:51 -0700 Subject: It will soon be COX 25 In-Reply-To: <21420.47620.458613.176550@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> <53ABAB29.60407@attorneyross.com> <21420.47620.458613.176550@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <1403834451.54788.YahooMailNeo@web126205.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> < said: > Is there anything to stop the owner of channel 7 from putting Fox on > 56?? I'm not sure why they would want to, but do the rules allow it? >>Other than the fact that Cox has a contract that says it will stay >> on? 25 for the next decade.. And they don't utilize any of the "outs" that are included in all such contracts.? From wollman@bimajority.org Thu Jun 26 23:36:16 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 23:36:16 -0400 Subject: Administrivia: no more posting from yahoo.com Message-ID: <21420.59056.122267.915818@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> This is a public-service announcement. Recently, Yahoo! Mail made changes to its configuration that are designed to break Internet mailing-lists like this one. One consequence of these changes is that whenever the list relays any post from a yahoo.com address, many innocent list members (who do not use Yahoo! Mail) will not receive the message, and in fact stand a good chance of being bounced off the list entirely after too many Yahoo! users' messages are rejected.[1] Recently this issue affected a large fraction this list's membership, and I was forced to manually re-enable list subscriptions for many people. Therefore, I am announcing a policy change: it will no longer be possible to post to the list from a yahoo.com address. Users who which to retain the ability to post will need to find a better mail provider. The list will continue to deliver list messages to yahoo.com subscribers, so long as they are not rejected by Yahoo!'s mail servers. So far as I am aware, Yahoo! is the only mail provider which has broken things in this way -- but other providers may well follow suit if Yahoo! succeeds in destroying mailing-lists. -GAWollman [1] This would not be an issue if the list were only available as a digest, but many list members prefer the conversation-friendliness and convenience of immediate message delivery. From raccoonradio@gmail.com Thu Jun 26 23:06:03 2014 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 23:06:03 -0400 Subject: Channel Brands & VHF-UHF In-Reply-To: <21420.47859.739423.341858@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> <388B66C1C8A644E19D3DE5DC3BB42C2E@laptop> <21420.47859.739423.341858@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: For a time I think what is now WBIN-TV 50 Derry NH (formerly WNDS) may have used "Cable 18" which is the channel often used on cable On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 8:29 PM, Garrett Wollman wrote: > < > said: > > > I'd see things like "Fox Pittsburgh" instead of a channel number. > (WPGH-TV > > '53') And years ago I knew of a TV station that would mention its (usual) > > cable channel number as part of its branding etc: "WVNY-TV 22, Cable 4" > > In many markets, at least one station brands with its cable channel > exclusively. > > -GAWollman > > From bob.bosra@demattia.net Fri Jun 27 07:47:49 2014 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 07:47:49 -0400 Subject: Channel Brands & VHF-UHF In-Reply-To: References: , <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>, , <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com>, <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>, <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com>, , , <388B66C1C8A644E19D3DE5DC3BB42C2E@laptop>, , , <21420.47859.739423.341858@hergotha.csail.mit.edu>, Message-ID: WBIN's current brand is "WBIN 18". Which is neither their over-the-air virtual or physical channel number.They are on cable channel 18 on Comcast in NH. They are also 6/506 on FIOS and 14 in Comcast Vermont. -Bob From map@mapinternet.com Fri Jun 27 20:02:00 2014 From: map@mapinternet.com (M.Casey) Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 20:02:00 -0400 Subject: Channel Brands & VHF-UHF In-Reply-To: <21420.47859.739423.341858@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> <388B66C1C8A644E19D3DE5DC3BB42C2E@laptop> <21420.47859.739423.341858@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: Springfield's Fox affiliate (40.2) brands as "Fox 6", likely due to cable channel position in some towns, and also due to the fact that 6 is the lowest channel number without any signal in the Ct River Valley of Western Mass.. so with 6, there is no identification with another station. --Mark Casey -----Original Message----- From: Garrett Wollman In many markets, at least one station brands with its cable channel exclusively. -GAWollman ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3986/7756 - Release Date: 06/27/14 From gary@garysicecream.com Fri Jun 27 20:09:24 2014 From: gary@garysicecream.com (Gary's Ice Cream) Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 20:09:24 -0400 Subject: Channel Brands & VHF-UHF In-Reply-To: References: <21418.7677.167626.368844@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <53AA276C.3060806@fybush.com> <1403660501.96484.YahooMailNeo@web120503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53AA425D.8010205@attorneyross.com> <388B66C1C8A644E19D3DE5DC3BB42C2E@laptop> <21420.47859.739423.341858@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <002001cf9265$390058f0$ab010ad0$@garysicecream.com> I don't understand why TV stations bother with "channel numbers" in their logos anymore at all.....time to come up with clever names instead. Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of M.Casey Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 8:02 PM To: Garrett Wollman; Bob Nelson Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org Subject: Re: Channel Brands & VHF-UHF Springfield's Fox affiliate (40.2) brands as "Fox 6", likely due to cable channel position in some towns, and also due to the fact that 6 is the lowest channel number without any signal in the Ct River Valley of Western Mass.. so with 6, there is no identification with another station. --Mark Casey -----Original Message----- From: Garrett Wollman In many markets, at least one station brands with its cable channel exclusively. -GAWollman ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3986/7756 - Release Date: 06/27/14 From wollman@bimajority.org Fri Jun 27 21:30:13 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 21:30:13 -0400 Subject: Yahoo! subscribers can post to the list again, hopefully Message-ID: <21422.6821.698449.997595@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> I've applied a mitigation from the latest Mailman release that should allow Yahoo! users to post to the list -- at a cost, however, as all of their messages will now be "wrapped" by the list to prevent the Yahoo! mail breakage from triggering. You can think of it like a forwarded message, or like a digest that contains only one message. This should happen automatically for all mail senders whose domains have requested the broken behavior. (However, I don't have a Yahoo! account so I have no way of verifying this until someone posts.) All current yahoo.com subscribers are set to be moderated, but I will restore direct posting when I approve your list submissions, once I'm sure that the workaround is in fact working. -GAWollman From donald_astelle@yahoo.com Fri Jun 27 21:32:07 2014 From: donald_astelle@yahoo.com (D. A.) Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 18:32:07 -0700 Subject: Yahoo! subscribers can post to the list again, hopefully In-Reply-To: <21422.6821.698449.997595@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <21422.6821.698449.997595@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <1403919127.2632.YahooMailNeo@web126203.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Thanks good news! Thanks Garrett! D ________________________________ From: Garrett Wollman To: bri@bostonradio.org Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 9:30 PM Subject: Yahoo! subscribers can post to the list again, hopefully I've applied a mitigation from the latest Mailman release that should allow Yahoo! users to post to the list -- at a cost, however, as all of their messages will now be "wrapped" by the list to prevent the Yahoo! mail breakage from triggering.? You can think of it like a forwarded message, or like a digest that contains only one message. This should happen automatically for all mail senders whose domains have requested the broken behavior.? (However, I don't have a Yahoo! account so I have no way of verifying this until someone posts.) All current yahoo.com subscribers are set to be moderated, but I will restore direct posting when I approve your list submissions, once I'm sure that the workaround is in fact working. -GAWollman From brian_vita@cssinc.com Sat Jun 28 09:45:21 2014 From: brian_vita@cssinc.com (Brian T. Vita) Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2014 09:45:21 -0400 Subject: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today Message-ID: <00b101cf92d7$39273b10$ab75b130$@cssinc.com> Based on the decision of the Supreme Court, Aereo is suspending operations as of 11:30 today. As a former subscriber to the service, I received the email (and web link) below in this morning's email. When I was an active subscriber I found the service to be very good but limited. I was disappointed to find that it tried to block me when I was trying to watch Boston TV via the internet from elsewhere in the country. I was able to convince it to let me watch a Patriot's game while flying to Las Vegas, though. Well, the flight DID originate in Boston. I really think that this is a case where big money, ie. the cable companies, wiped out the smaller startup. Here's the link to the press release: http://view.email.aereo.com/?j=fec7157774640d7b&m=fe8a127171630d7f7d&ls=fe29 1072706d067e741078&l=fef91675716201&s=fe9310797465037f71&jb=ffcf14&ju=fe9210 787561017877&r=0 Pro Cinema - Pro Audio - Pro & Consumer AV Equipment & Supplies Brian Vita President Cinema Service & Supply, Inc. 77 Walnut St - Ste 4 Peabody, MA 01960-5691 brian_vita@cssinc.com Direct: (978)548-4112 tel: fax: (800)231-8849 X200 978-538-7550 ? From map@mapinternet.com Sat Jun 28 13:13:03 2014 From: map@mapinternet.com (M.Casey) Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2014 13:13:03 -0400 Subject: Yahoo! subscribers can post to the list again, hopefully In-Reply-To: <21422.6821.698449.997595@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <21422.6821.698449.997595@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <25450E2FD3BC4EB3A65E62D76DEE38C6@laptop> Thank-You for your hard work and for keeping this remailer going strong. Too bad mail providers like Yahoo resort to this type of behavior as Mailing lists like this one are generally and mostly one of the pleasures of using the internet. Thank-You Mark Casey K1MAP -----Original Message----- From: Garrett Wollman Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 9:30 PM To: bri@bostonradio.org Subject: Yahoo! subscribers can post to the list again, hopefully I've applied a mitigation from the latest Mailman release that should allow Yahoo! users to post to the list -- at a cost, however, as all of their messages will now be "wrapped" by the list to prevent the Yahoo! mail breakage from triggering. You can think of it like a forwarded message, or like a digest that contains only one message. This should happen automatically for all mail senders whose domains have requested the broken behavior. (However, I don't have a Yahoo! account so I have no way of verifying this until someone posts.) All current yahoo.com subscribers are set to be moderated, but I will restore direct posting when I approve your list submissions, once I'm sure that the workaround is in fact working. -GAWollman ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3986/7759 - Release Date: 06/28/14 From walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Sat Jun 28 15:09:32 2014 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2014 12:09:32 -0700 Subject: Country on 740 Message-ID: Bob Bittner will be featuring country music form the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s on Sunday mornings 830am to 12noon on WJIB 740 in Boston and WJTO 730/W252BT 98.3 along Coastal Main. Here's the announcement: https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xaf1/t1.0-9/q71/s720x720/10462482_10202899745149475_942787677815992875_n.jpg From mamros@MIT.EDU Sun Jun 29 11:50:15 2014 From: mamros@MIT.EDU (Shawn Mamros) Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 15:50:15 +0000 Subject: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today In-Reply-To: <00b101cf92d7$39273b10$ab75b130$@cssinc.com> References: <00b101cf92d7$39273b10$ab75b130$@cssinc.com> Message-ID: <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200692@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> >I really think that this is a case where big money, ie. the cable companies, >wiped out the smaller startup. Actually, it was mostly the broadcasters who were fighting this one. The issue in question is the provision in the Copyright Act of 1976 requiring cable companies to pay broadcasters for the right to retransmit their content. The broadcasters argued that the same provision should apply to Aereo, and the Court agreed with that assessment. Honestly, I have a hard time seeing a logical counterargument to that. It's probably long past time for the Copyright Act of 1976 to be reevaluated in light of all of the technology changes in the past four decades. Good luck getting today's politicians to do that, though. -Shawn From gary@garysicecream.com Sun Jun 29 15:02:51 2014 From: gary@garysicecream.com (Gary's Ice Cream) Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 15:02:51 -0400 Subject: Country on 740 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <01b901cf93cc$babe7850$303b68f0$@garysicecream.com> Is Michael Burns the host? Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Paul B. Walker, Jr. Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2014 3:10 PM To: Boston Radio Group Subject: Country on 740 Bob Bittner will be featuring country music form the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s on Sunday mornings 830am to 12noon on WJIB 740 in Boston and WJTO 730/W252BT 98.3 along Coastal Main. Here's the announcement: https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xaf1/t1.0-9/q71/s720x720/10462482_10202899745149475_942787677815992875_n.jpg From markwats@comcast.net Sun Jun 29 16:15:11 2014 From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson) Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 16:15:11 -0400 Subject: Country on 740 In-Reply-To: <01b901cf93cc$babe7850$303b68f0$@garysicecream.com> References: <01b901cf93cc$babe7850$303b68f0$@garysicecream.com> Message-ID: <005d01cf93d6$d49babd0$7dd30370$@comcast.net> Gary's Ice Cream said: >Is Michael Burns the host? No, Bob Bittner is the host. I listened for a few minutes this morning, Bob was talking between songs. Mark Watson From gary@garysicecream.com Sun Jun 29 21:34:22 2014 From: gary@garysicecream.com (Gary's Ice Cream) Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 21:34:22 -0400 Subject: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today In-Reply-To: <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200EC7@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> References: <00b101cf92d7$39273b10$ab75b130$@cssinc.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200692@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu>, <01b801cf93cc$914ce1a0$b3e6a4e0$@garysicecream.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200EC7@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> Message-ID: <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> Not really......according to the way an engineer explained Aereo to me.....each customer has their own slingbox connected to a tv receiver at the data center. The customer has the channel changing capability of their own tuner at the data center so basically it is a remote tuner for your tv. According to the tech who worked there they don't have one feed per tv station coming in and it isn't being distributed through a distribution amplifier to a bunch of boxes. Each customer has his or her own slingbox (I am using that as a generic term not as a brand name), their own tuner and their own antenna. From the box it goes out to a combined internet connection onto the web and each customer has their own unique IP address. Correct me if I am wrong someone. Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com -----Original Message----- From: Shawn Mamros [mailto:mamros@MIT.EDU] Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 9:24 PM To: Gary's Ice Cream Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today But how is that different from what cable TV did when it first started? They pulled in the broadcast signal where the reception was good and sent it down the cable to their subscribers. Replace the cable with the Internet, and it's the same thing. All the cable companies were doing was renting a cable connection and a box. At least that's how I see it. It's just that Congress back then decided the broadcasters should get a cut from the pie. I'm not sure that was the right decision then (or now), but that's the law that was made. If Aereo shouldn't have to pay broadcasters for retransmission, the cable companies shouldn't either. -Shawn ________________________________________ From: Gary's Ice Cream [gary@garysicecream.com] Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 3:01 PM To: Shawn Mamros Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today The way I saw Aereo was that it was no different than someone having a "SlingBox" at their home and sending the signal to themselves somewhere else - except that instead of the SLingBox being in their own house it was located somewhere else where the reception was better....so basically all Aereo was doing was renting you a box and a location for the box to be housed with an internet connection for your convienence....they weren't in the program distribution business, they were in the equipment rental business. Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Shawn Mamros Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 11:50 AM To: Brian T. Vita; Boston Radio Group Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today >I really think that this is a case where big money, ie. the cable >companies, wiped out the smaller startup. Actually, it was mostly the broadcasters who were fighting this one. The issue in question is the provision in the Copyright Act of 1976 requiring cable companies to pay broadcasters for the right to retransmit their content. The broadcasters argued that the same provision should apply to Aereo, and the Court agreed with that assessment. Honestly, I have a hard time seeing a logical counterargument to that. It's probably long past time for the Copyright Act of 1976 to be reevaluated in light of all of the technology changes in the past four decades. Good luck getting today's politicians to do that, though. -Shawn From brian_vita@cssinc.com Sun Jun 29 22:42:02 2014 From: brian_vita@cssinc.com (Brian Vita) Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 22:42:02 -0400 Subject: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today In-Reply-To: <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> References: <00b101cf92d7$39273b10$ab75b130$@cssinc.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200692@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu>, <01b801cf93cc$914ce1a0$b3e6a4e0$@garysicecream.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200EC7@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> Message-ID: <53B0CE7A.5030606@cssinc.com> That's pretty much the way that they explain it on their web site. On 6/29/2014 9:34 PM, Gary's Ice Cream wrote: > Not really......according to the way an engineer explained Aereo to > me.....each customer has their own slingbox connected to a tv receiver at > the data center. The customer has the channel changing capability of their > own tuner at the data center so basically it is a remote tuner for your tv. > According to the tech who worked there they don't have one feed per tv > station coming in and it isn't being distributed through a distribution > amplifier to a bunch of boxes. Each customer has his or her own slingbox (I > am using that as a generic term not as a brand name), their own tuner and > their own antenna. From the box it goes out to a combined internet > connection onto the web and each customer has their own unique IP address. > Correct me if I am wrong someone. > > Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA > www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com > > > From kvahey@gmail.com Sun Jun 29 22:54:37 2014 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 22:54:37 -0400 Subject: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today In-Reply-To: <53B0CE7A.5030606@cssinc.com> References: <00b101cf92d7$39273b10$ab75b130$@cssinc.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200692@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> <01b801cf93cc$914ce1a0$b3e6a4e0$@garysicecream.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200EC7@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> <53B0CE7A.5030606@cssinc.com> Message-ID: The headscratcher is how the judges voted. Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the decision. Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented ? and those are the ones I would have thought would go the other way. ? On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 10:42 PM, Brian Vita wrote: > That's pretty much the way that they explain it on their web site. > > > On 6/29/2014 9:34 PM, Gary's Ice Cream wrote: > >> Not really......according to the way an engineer explained Aereo to >> me.....each customer has their own slingbox connected to a tv receiver at >> the data center. The customer has the channel changing capability of >> their >> own tuner at the data center so basically it is a remote tuner for your >> tv. >> According to the tech who worked there they don't have one feed per tv >> station coming in and it isn't being distributed through a distribution >> amplifier to a bunch of boxes. Each customer has his or her own slingbox >> (I >> am using that as a generic term not as a brand name), their own tuner and >> their own antenna. From the box it goes out to a combined internet >> connection onto the web and each customer has their own unique IP address. >> Correct me if I am wrong someone. >> >> Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA >> www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com >> >> >> >> > From joe@attorneyross.com Sun Jun 29 22:00:46 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 22:00:46 -0400 Subject: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today In-Reply-To: <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200692@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> References: <00b101cf92d7$39273b10$ab75b130$@cssinc.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200692@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> Message-ID: <53B0C4CE.9050803@attorneyross.com> On 6/29/2014 11:50 AM, Shawn Mamros wrote: > It's probably long past time for the Copyright Act of 1976 to be > reevaluated in light of all of the technology changes in the past four > decades. Good luck getting today's politicians to do that, though. -Shawn As I recall, it took close to a decade to get the 1976 Act through because of a number of issues that were difficult to resolve (computer software, I believe, was one), but in those days it was possible to get a lot done across party lines until all the issues were sufficiently resolved to get the thing passed. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From joe@attorneyross.com Sun Jun 29 22:02:38 2014 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 22:02:38 -0400 Subject: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today In-Reply-To: <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> References: <00b101cf92d7$39273b10$ab75b130$@cssinc.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200692@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu>, <01b801cf93cc$914ce1a0$b3e6a4e0$@garysicecream.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200EC7@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> Message-ID: <53B0C53E.8010004@attorneyross.com> Whether they've got one antenna or a warehouse full of them, they're still retransmitting the air signals of TV stations. They're doing the same thing that cable companies do, they compete with cable companies, so why shouldn't they pay for what they transmit? On 6/29/2014 9:34 PM, Gary's Ice Cream wrote: > Not really......according to the way an engineer explained Aereo to > me.....each customer has their own slingbox connected to a tv receiver at > the data center. The customer has the channel changing capability of their > own tuner at the data center so basically it is a remote tuner for your tv. > According to the tech who worked there they don't have one feed per tv > station coming in and it isn't being distributed through a distribution > amplifier to a bunch of boxes. Each customer has his or her own slingbox (I > am using that as a generic term not as a brand name), their own tuner and > their own antenna. From the box it goes out to a combined internet > connection onto the web and each customer has their own unique IP address. > Correct me if I am wrong someone. > > Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA > www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Shawn Mamros [mailto:mamros@MIT.EDU] > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 9:24 PM > To: Gary's Ice Cream > Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today > > But how is that different from what cable TV did when it first started? > They pulled in the broadcast signal where the reception was good and sent it > down the cable to their subscribers. Replace the cable with the Internet, > and it's the same thing. All the cable companies were doing was renting a > cable connection and a box. At least that's how I see it. It's just that > Congress back then decided the broadcasters should get a cut from the pie. > I'm not sure that was the right decision then (or now), but that's the law > that was made. If Aereo shouldn't have to pay broadcasters for > retransmission, the cable companies shouldn't either. > > -Shawn > ________________________________________ > From: Gary's Ice Cream [gary@garysicecream.com] > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 3:01 PM > To: Shawn Mamros > Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today > > The way I saw Aereo was that it was no different than someone having a > "SlingBox" at their home and sending the signal to themselves somewhere else > - except that instead of the SLingBox being in their own house it was > located somewhere else where the reception was better....so basically all > Aereo was doing was renting you a box and a location for the box to be > housed with an internet connection for your convienence....they weren't in > the program distribution business, they were in the equipment rental > business. > > Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA > www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Boston-Radio-Interest > [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of > Shawn Mamros > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 11:50 AM > To: Brian T. Vita; Boston Radio Group > Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today > >> I really think that this is a case where big money, ie. the cable >> companies, wiped out the smaller startup. > Actually, it was mostly the broadcasters who were fighting this one. The > issue in question is the provision in the Copyright Act of 1976 requiring > cable companies to pay broadcasters for the right to retransmit their > content. The broadcasters argued that the same provision should apply to > Aereo, and the Court agreed with that assessment. Honestly, I have a hard > time seeing a logical counterargument to that. > > It's probably long past time for the Copyright Act of 1976 to be reevaluated > in light of all of the technology changes in the past four decades. Good > luck getting today's politicians to do that, though. > > -Shawn > > > > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3986/7766 - Release Date: 06/29/14 > > -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D.| 92 State Street| Suite 700 | Boston, MA 02109-2004 617.367.0468|Fx:617.507.7856| http://www.attorneyross.com From kenwvt@gmail.com Sun Jun 29 21:40:18 2014 From: kenwvt@gmail.com (Ken VanTassell) Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 18:40:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today In-Reply-To: <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> References: <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> Message-ID: <1404092418175.93d8f8fb@Nodemailer> Each user had their own antenna, but not their own sling box type device because cloud dvr is already legal from a cable vision decision.? Sent from Mailbox On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 9:35 PM, Gary's Ice Cream wrote: > Not really......according to the way an engineer explained Aereo to > me.....each customer has their own slingbox connected to a tv receiver at > the data center. The customer has the channel changing capability of their > own tuner at the data center so basically it is a remote tuner for your tv. > According to the tech who worked there they don't have one feed per tv > station coming in and it isn't being distributed through a distribution > amplifier to a bunch of boxes. Each customer has his or her own slingbox (I > am using that as a generic term not as a brand name), their own tuner and > their own antenna. From the box it goes out to a combined internet > connection onto the web and each customer has their own unique IP address. > Correct me if I am wrong someone. > Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA > www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Shawn Mamros [mailto:mamros@MIT.EDU] > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 9:24 PM > To: Gary's Ice Cream > Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today > But how is that different from what cable TV did when it first started? > They pulled in the broadcast signal where the reception was good and sent it > down the cable to their subscribers. Replace the cable with the Internet, > and it's the same thing. All the cable companies were doing was renting a > cable connection and a box. At least that's how I see it. It's just that > Congress back then decided the broadcasters should get a cut from the pie. > I'm not sure that was the right decision then (or now), but that's the law > that was made. If Aereo shouldn't have to pay broadcasters for > retransmission, the cable companies shouldn't either. > -Shawn > ________________________________________ > From: Gary's Ice Cream [gary@garysicecream.com] > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 3:01 PM > To: Shawn Mamros > Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today > The way I saw Aereo was that it was no different than someone having a > "SlingBox" at their home and sending the signal to themselves somewhere else > - except that instead of the SLingBox being in their own house it was > located somewhere else where the reception was better....so basically all > Aereo was doing was renting you a box and a location for the box to be > housed with an internet connection for your convienence....they weren't in > the program distribution business, they were in the equipment rental > business. > Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA > www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Boston-Radio-Interest > [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of > Shawn Mamros > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 11:50 AM > To: Brian T. Vita; Boston Radio Group > Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today >>I really think that this is a case where big money, ie. the cable >>companies, wiped out the smaller startup. > Actually, it was mostly the broadcasters who were fighting this one. The > issue in question is the provision in the Copyright Act of 1976 requiring > cable companies to pay broadcasters for the right to retransmit their > content. The broadcasters argued that the same provision should apply to > Aereo, and the Court agreed with that assessment. Honestly, I have a hard > time seeing a logical counterargument to that. > It's probably long past time for the Copyright Act of 1976 to be reevaluated > in light of all of the technology changes in the past four decades. Good > luck getting today's politicians to do that, though. > -Shawn From martinjwaters@yahoo.com Sun Jun 29 22:49:10 2014 From: martinjwaters@yahoo.com (Martin Waters) Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 19:49:10 -0700 Subject: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today In-Reply-To: <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> References: <00b101cf92d7$39273b10$ab75b130$@cssinc.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200692@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu>, <01b801cf93cc$914ce1a0$b3e6a4e0$@garysicecream.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200EC7@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> Message-ID: <1404096550.30874.YahooMailNeo@web121405.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Gary wrote: >The customer has the channel changing capability of their own tuner at the data center so basically it is a remote tuner for your tv. ???? That is just what cable?and satellite TV provide. Shawn wrote: >It's just that Congress back then decided the broadcasters should get a cut >from the pie. I'm not sure that was the right decision then (or now), but that's >the law that was made.? If Aereo shouldn't have to pay broadcasters for >retransmission, the cable companies shouldn't either. ???? I am sure that Congress made the right decision. The creators of intellectual property and the companies that buy the programs, sell the advertising that pays for them and all the rest, deserve to be paid when some utility company comes along and wants to grab their output in an attempt to make a profit. ???? What is it about the internet that appears to make more and more people think otherwise? It happened before with music.?Aereo was merely a cynical scam to get around the copyright law. Sure, the company said every viewer was connected to an individual antenna. But Aereo provided the antenna, received the signal and retransmitted it over the internet. Case closed. ????? Luckily the Supreme Court wasn't fooled. If the copyright law of 1976 needs to be changed, it is to strengthen it on behalf of the creators of content due to advancements in technology. Now, I would like to know what's going to be done to collect the royalties Aereo should have been paying. Plus, the battle goes on, as there appears to be no end to people with a new trick and a desire to make money from someone else's creative work without paying for it. ?????? I'm surprised that some broadcast people would look at Aereo as anything but a sleazy effort to find a loophole in the copyright law and steal content. Content is everything. Let us not weep for the Aereo people. Maybe now they can all get jobs developing the next brilliant TV show or movie. But I doubt it. From bob.bosra@demattia.net Mon Jun 30 09:09:08 2014 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 09:09:08 -0400 Subject: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today In-Reply-To: <1404092418175.93d8f8fb@Nodemailer> References: <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com>, <1404092418175.93d8f8fb@Nodemailer> Message-ID: I've always had difficulty believing that a "dime sized" antenna would be able to effectivelyreceive multiple channels. If they were carrying the complete Boston market, that would mean receiving signals from Boston, Needham, Marlborough, Boylston, Merrimack NH,Hudson NH, and Manchester NH with sufficient strength and without any multipath issues.The whole thing is troubling. You can agree or disagree about what the law should be, but it is what it is right now. I think the justices got this one right. -Bob > Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 18:40:18 -0700 > From: kenwvt@gmail.com > To: gary@garysicecream.com > Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today > CC: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org > > Each user had their own antenna, but not their own sling box type device because cloud dvr is already legal from a cable vision decision.? > Sent from Mailbox > > On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 9:35 PM, Gary's Ice Cream > wrote: > > > Not really......according to the way an engineer explained Aereo to > > me.....each customer has their own slingbox connected to a tv receiver at > > the data center. The customer has the channel changing capability of their > > own tuner at the data center so basically it is a remote tuner for your tv. > > According to the tech who worked there they don't have one feed per tv > > station coming in and it isn't being distributed through a distribution > > amplifier to a bunch of boxes. Each customer has his or her own slingbox (I > > am using that as a generic term not as a brand name), their own tuner and > > their own antenna. From the box it goes out to a combined internet > > connection onto the web and each customer has their own unique IP address. > > Correct me if I am wrong someone. > > Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA > > www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Shawn Mamros [mailto:mamros@MIT.EDU] > > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 9:24 PM > > To: Gary's Ice Cream > > Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today > > But how is that different from what cable TV did when it first started? > > They pulled in the broadcast signal where the reception was good and sent it > > down the cable to their subscribers. Replace the cable with the Internet, > > and it's the same thing. All the cable companies were doing was renting a > > cable connection and a box. At least that's how I see it. It's just that > > Congress back then decided the broadcasters should get a cut from the pie. > > I'm not sure that was the right decision then (or now), but that's the law > > that was made. If Aereo shouldn't have to pay broadcasters for > > retransmission, the cable companies shouldn't either. > > -Shawn > > ________________________________________ > > From: Gary's Ice Cream [gary@garysicecream.com] > > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 3:01 PM > > To: Shawn Mamros > > Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today > > The way I saw Aereo was that it was no different than someone having a > > "SlingBox" at their home and sending the signal to themselves somewhere else > > - except that instead of the SLingBox being in their own house it was > > located somewhere else where the reception was better....so basically all > > Aereo was doing was renting you a box and a location for the box to be > > housed with an internet connection for your convienence....they weren't in > > the program distribution business, they were in the equipment rental > > business. > > Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA > > www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Boston-Radio-Interest > > [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of > > Shawn Mamros > > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 11:50 AM > > To: Brian T. Vita; Boston Radio Group > > Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today > >>I really think that this is a case where big money, ie. the cable > >>companies, wiped out the smaller startup. > > Actually, it was mostly the broadcasters who were fighting this one. The > > issue in question is the provision in the Copyright Act of 1976 requiring > > cable companies to pay broadcasters for the right to retransmit their > > content. The broadcasters argued that the same provision should apply to > > Aereo, and the Court agreed with that assessment. Honestly, I have a hard > > time seeing a logical counterargument to that. > > It's probably long past time for the Copyright Act of 1976 to be reevaluated > > in light of all of the technology changes in the past four decades. Good > > luck getting today's politicians to do that, though. > > -Shawn From mward@iname.com Mon Jun 30 10:24:49 2014 From: mward@iname.com (Mike Ward) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 10:24:49 -0400 Subject: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today In-Reply-To: References: <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> <1404092418175.93d8f8fb@Nodemailer> Message-ID: As I recall, the Aereo lineup didn't include such outlying stations...just those in the heart of the market. We have an independent station here in the far southwest part of the market (Mansfield OH) that actually is on direcTV and Dish. But they ship their signal up to the Cleveland satellite receive facilities via an Internet-connected box. You can't really get their signal in the main part of the market. If Aereo had ever launched here, I'm pretty sure WMFD wouldn't be on the list. I don't know where to find the Boston Aereo lineup, but I bet stations like WBIN weren't on it. On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Bob DeMattia wrote: > I've always had difficulty believing that a "dime sized" antenna would be > able to effectivelyreceive multiple channels. If they were carrying the > complete Boston market, that would mean receiving signals from Boston, > Needham, Marlborough, Boylston, Merrimack NH,Hudson NH, and Manchester NH > with sufficient strength and without any multipath issues.The whole thing > is troubling. > You can agree or disagree about what the law should be, but it is what it > is right now. I think the justices got this one right. > > -Bob > > > Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 18:40:18 -0700 > > From: kenwvt@gmail.com > > To: gary@garysicecream.com > > Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today > > CC: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org > > > > Each user had their own antenna, but not their own sling box type device > because cloud dvr is already legal from a cable vision decision.? > > Sent from Mailbox > > > > On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 9:35 PM, Gary's Ice Cream < > gary@garysicecream.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Not really......according to the way an engineer explained Aereo to > > > me.....each customer has their own slingbox connected to a tv receiver > at > > > the data center. The customer has the channel changing capability of > their > > > own tuner at the data center so basically it is a remote tuner for > your tv. > > > According to the tech who worked there they don't have one feed per tv > > > station coming in and it isn't being distributed through a distribution > > > amplifier to a bunch of boxes. Each customer has his or her own > slingbox (I > > > am using that as a generic term not as a brand name), their own tuner > and > > > their own antenna. From the box it goes out to a combined internet > > > connection onto the web and each customer has their own unique IP > address. > > > Correct me if I am wrong someone. > > > Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA > > > www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Shawn Mamros [mailto:mamros@MIT.EDU] > > > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 9:24 PM > > > To: Gary's Ice Cream > > > Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today > > > But how is that different from what cable TV did when it first started? > > > They pulled in the broadcast signal where the reception was good and > sent it > > > down the cable to their subscribers. Replace the cable with the > Internet, > > > and it's the same thing. All the cable companies were doing was > renting a > > > cable connection and a box. At least that's how I see it. It's just > that > > > Congress back then decided the broadcasters should get a cut from the > pie. > > > I'm not sure that was the right decision then (or now), but that's the > law > > > that was made. If Aereo shouldn't have to pay broadcasters for > > > retransmission, the cable companies shouldn't either. > > > -Shawn > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: Gary's Ice Cream [gary@garysicecream.com] > > > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 3:01 PM > > > To: Shawn Mamros > > > Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today > > > The way I saw Aereo was that it was no different than someone having a > > > "SlingBox" at their home and sending the signal to themselves > somewhere else > > > - except that instead of the SLingBox being in their own house it was > > > located somewhere else where the reception was better....so basically > all > > > Aereo was doing was renting you a box and a location for the box to be > > > housed with an internet connection for your convienence....they > weren't in > > > the program distribution business, they were in the equipment rental > > > business. > > > Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA > > > www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Boston-Radio-Interest > > > [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On > Behalf Of > > > Shawn Mamros > > > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 11:50 AM > > > To: Brian T. Vita; Boston Radio Group > > > Subject: RE: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today > > >>I really think that this is a case where big money, ie. the cable > > >>companies, wiped out the smaller startup. > > > Actually, it was mostly the broadcasters who were fighting this one. > The > > > issue in question is the provision in the Copyright Act of 1976 > requiring > > > cable companies to pay broadcasters for the right to retransmit their > > > content. The broadcasters argued that the same provision should apply > to > > > Aereo, and the Court agreed with that assessment. Honestly, I have a > hard > > > time seeing a logical counterargument to that. > > > It's probably long past time for the Copyright Act of 1976 to be > reevaluated > > > in light of all of the technology changes in the past four decades. > Good > > > luck getting today's politicians to do that, though. > > > -Shawn > > From rbello@belloassoc.com Mon Jun 30 11:10:57 2014 From: rbello@belloassoc.com (Ron Bello) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:10:57 -0400 Subject: In-Reply-To: References: <00b101cf92d7$39273b10$ab75b130$@cssinc.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200692@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> <01b801cf93cc$914ce1a0$b3e6a4e0$@garysicecream.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200EC7@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> Message-ID: What has not been mentioned in this discussion is that cable companies substitute commercials that they have sold for those contained in the original transmission from the local TV channels. This revenue shift does not happen with the Aereo system. On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 2:05 AM, Martin Waters via Boston-Radio-Interest < boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org> wrote: > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Martin Waters > To: "Gary's Ice Cream" , "'Shawn Mamros'" < > mamros@MIT.EDU> > Cc: Boston Radio Group > Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 19:49:10 -0700 > Subject: Re: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today > Gary wrote: > >The customer has the channel changing capability of their > own tuner at the data center so basically it is a remote tuner for your tv. > > That is just what cable and satellite TV provide. > > Shawn wrote: > > > > > >It's just that Congress back then decided the broadcasters should get a > cut >from the pie. I'm not sure that was the right decision then (or now), > but that's >the law that was made. If Aereo shouldn't have to pay > broadcasters for > >retransmission, the cable companies shouldn't either. > > I am sure that Congress made the right decision. The creators of > intellectual property and the companies that buy the programs, sell the > advertising that pays for them and all the rest, deserve to be paid when > some utility company comes along and wants to grab their output in an > attempt to make a profit. > > What is it about the internet that appears to make more and more > people think otherwise? It happened before with music. Aereo was merely a > cynical scam to get around the copyright law. Sure, the company said every > viewer was connected to an individual antenna. But Aereo provided the > antenna, received the signal and retransmitted it over the internet. Case > closed. > > Luckily the Supreme Court wasn't fooled. If the copyright law of > 1976 needs to be changed, it is to strengthen it on behalf of the creators > of content due to advancements in technology. Now, I would like to know > what's going to be done to collect the royalties Aereo should have been > paying. Plus, the battle goes on, as there appears to be no end to people > with a new trick and a desire to make money from someone else's creative > work without paying for it. > > I'm surprised that some broadcast people would look at Aereo as > anything but a sleazy effort to find a loophole in the copyright law and > steal content. Content is everything. Let us not weep for the Aereo people. > Maybe now they can all get jobs developing the next brilliant TV show or > movie. But I doubt it. > > From mward@iname.com Mon Jun 30 11:14:31 2014 From: mward@iname.com (Mike Ward) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:14:31 -0400 Subject: In-Reply-To: References: <00b101cf92d7$39273b10$ab75b130$@cssinc.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200692@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> <01b801cf93cc$914ce1a0$b3e6a4e0$@garysicecream.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200EC7@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> Message-ID: Feel free to correct me, but I'm pretty sure cable/satellite systems don't/can't do spot inserts over broadcast/OTA channels. On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Ron Bello wrote: > What has not been mentioned in this discussion is that cable companies > substitute commercials that they have sold for those contained in the > original transmission from the local TV channels. This revenue shift does > not happen with the Aereo system. > > > > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 2:05 AM, Martin Waters via Boston-Radio-Interest < > boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org> wrote: > > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: Martin Waters > > To: "Gary's Ice Cream" , "'Shawn Mamros'" < > > mamros@MIT.EDU> > > Cc: Boston Radio Group > > Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 19:49:10 -0700 > > Subject: Re: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today > > Gary wrote: > > >The customer has the channel changing capability of their > > own tuner at the data center so basically it is a remote tuner for your > tv. > > > > That is just what cable and satellite TV provide. > > > > Shawn wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >It's just that Congress back then decided the broadcasters should get a > > cut >from the pie. I'm not sure that was the right decision then (or > now), > > but that's >the law that was made. If Aereo shouldn't have to pay > > broadcasters for > > >retransmission, the cable companies shouldn't either. > > > > I am sure that Congress made the right decision. The creators of > > intellectual property and the companies that buy the programs, sell the > > advertising that pays for them and all the rest, deserve to be paid when > > some utility company comes along and wants to grab their output in an > > attempt to make a profit. > > > > What is it about the internet that appears to make more and more > > people think otherwise? It happened before with music. Aereo was merely a > > cynical scam to get around the copyright law. Sure, the company said > every > > viewer was connected to an individual antenna. But Aereo provided the > > antenna, received the signal and retransmitted it over the internet. Case > > closed. > > > > Luckily the Supreme Court wasn't fooled. If the copyright law of > > 1976 needs to be changed, it is to strengthen it on behalf of the > creators > > of content due to advancements in technology. Now, I would like to know > > what's going to be done to collect the royalties Aereo should have been > > paying. Plus, the battle goes on, as there appears to be no end to people > > with a new trick and a desire to make money from someone else's creative > > work without paying for it. > > > > I'm surprised that some broadcast people would look at Aereo as > > anything but a sleazy effort to find a loophole in the copyright law and > > steal content. Content is everything. Let us not weep for the Aereo > people. > > Maybe now they can all get jobs developing the next brilliant TV show or > > movie. But I doubt it. > > > > > From kvahey@gmail.com Mon Jun 30 11:19:31 2014 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:19:31 -0400 Subject: retransmission Message-ID: Cable companies DO NOT insert their own ads on OTA stations, just on cable channels like CNN, NESN and the others. On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Ron Bello wrote: > What has not been mentioned in this discussion is that cable companies > substitute commercials that they have sold for those contained in the > original transmission from the local TV channels. This revenue shift does > not happen with the Aereo system. > > From gary@garysicecream.com Mon Jun 30 11:50:34 2014 From: gary@garysicecream.com (Gary's Ice Cream) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:50:34 -0400 Subject: OTA commercial subs..... Message-ID: <02f501cf947b$08428860$18c79920$@garysicecream.com> Oh yes they do! For a while (in the analog days before HDTV) I had a TV in my office on an antenna and I would often have it on as I prepared dinner (one in the living room was on cable, one in the office on antenna) so that whichever way I was facing I could see it) and in almost every spot cluster the cable feed would have one or two different commercials than the OTA signal. Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Mike Ward Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 11:15 AM To: Ron Bello Cc: Boston Radio Group Subject: Re: Feel free to correct me, but I'm pretty sure cable/satellite systems don't/can't do spot inserts over broadcast/OTA channels. On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Ron Bello wrote: > What has not been mentioned in this discussion is that cable companies > substitute commercials that they have sold for those contained in the > original transmission from the local TV channels. This revenue shift > does not happen with the Aereo system. > > > > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 2:05 AM, Martin Waters via > Boston-Radio-Interest < boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org> wrote: > > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: Martin Waters > > To: "Gary's Ice Cream" , "'Shawn Mamros'" < > > mamros@MIT.EDU> > > Cc: Boston Radio Group > > Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 19:49:10 -0700 > > Subject: Re: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today Gary > > wrote: > > >The customer has the channel changing capability of their > > own tuner at the data center so basically it is a remote tuner for > > your > tv. > > > > That is just what cable and satellite TV provide. > > > > Shawn wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >It's just that Congress back then decided the broadcasters should > > >get a > > cut >from the pie. I'm not sure that was the right decision then (or > now), > > but that's >the law that was made. If Aereo shouldn't have to pay > > broadcasters for > > >retransmission, the cable companies shouldn't either. > > > > I am sure that Congress made the right decision. The creators > > of intellectual property and the companies that buy the programs, > > sell the advertising that pays for them and all the rest, deserve to > > be paid when some utility company comes along and wants to grab > > their output in an attempt to make a profit. > > > > What is it about the internet that appears to make more and > > more people think otherwise? It happened before with music. Aereo > > was merely a cynical scam to get around the copyright law. Sure, the > > company said > every > > viewer was connected to an individual antenna. But Aereo provided > > the antenna, received the signal and retransmitted it over the > > internet. Case closed. > > > > Luckily the Supreme Court wasn't fooled. If the copyright law > > of > > 1976 needs to be changed, it is to strengthen it on behalf of the > creators > > of content due to advancements in technology. Now, I would like to > > know what's going to be done to collect the royalties Aereo should > > have been paying. Plus, the battle goes on, as there appears to be > > no end to people with a new trick and a desire to make money from > > someone else's creative work without paying for it. > > > > I'm surprised that some broadcast people would look at Aereo > > as anything but a sleazy effort to find a loophole in the copyright > > law and steal content. Content is everything. Let us not weep for > > the Aereo > people. > > Maybe now they can all get jobs developing the next brilliant TV > > show or movie. But I doubt it. > > > > > From markwa1ion@aol.com Mon Jun 30 11:56:25 2014 From: markwa1ion@aol.com (Mark Connelly) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:56:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today Message-ID: <8D16292FACD83C4-313C-2A400@webmail-d296.sysops.aol.com> Not to stir up a hornet's nest here, but what about retransmission of radio signals via remote receivers controlled over the internet? Examples: http://www.globaltuners.com/ http://websdr.ewi.utwente.nl:8901/ These are often used by radio amateurs (hams) to detect their own transmissions at distant locations but they can also be used to listen to normal AM, FM, shortwave, and longwave broadcasting stations. Listening to baseball games, something for which MLB.com would charge, is certainly within the realm of what remote radios can do. Mark Connelly South Yarmouth, MA On 6/29/2014 9:34 PM, Gary's Ice Cream wrote: > Not really......according to the way an engineer explained Aereo to > me.....each customer has their own slingbox connected to a tv receiver at > the data center. The customer has the channel changing capability of their > own tuner at the data center so basically it is a remote tuner for your tv. > According to the tech who worked there they don't have one feed per tv > station coming in and it isn't being distributed through a distribution > amplifier to a bunch of boxes. Each customer has his or her own slingbox (I > am using that as a generic term not as a brand name), their own tuner and > their own antenna. From the box it goes out to a combined internet > connection onto the web and each customer has their own unique IP address. > Correct me if I am wrong someone. > > Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA > www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com > From mward@iname.com Mon Jun 30 11:56:21 2014 From: mward@iname.com (Mike Ward) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:56:21 -0400 Subject: OTA commercial subs..... In-Reply-To: <02f501cf947b$08428860$18c79920$@garysicecream.com> References: <02f501cf947b$08428860$18c79920$@garysicecream.com> Message-ID: I've never experienced cable spot subbing over OTA channels, ever. One would think the station would be quite upset with a cable system covering its commercials...so this may have been some sort of arrangement to sell "extra" spots on top of promos or PSAs or something? Has anyone else seen cable systems subbing spots on broadcast channels? On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Gary's Ice Cream wrote: > Oh yes they do! For a while (in the analog days before HDTV) I had a TV > in my office on an antenna and I would often have it on as I prepared > dinner (one in the living room was on cable, one in the office on antenna) > so that whichever way I was facing I could see it) and in almost every spot > cluster the cable feed would have one or two different commercials than the > OTA signal. > > Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA > www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto: > boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Mike > Ward > Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 11:15 AM > To: Ron Bello > Cc: Boston Radio Group > Subject: Re: > > Feel free to correct me, but I'm pretty sure cable/satellite systems > don't/can't do spot inserts over broadcast/OTA channels. > > > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Ron Bello wrote: > > > What has not been mentioned in this discussion is that cable companies > > substitute commercials that they have sold for those contained in the > > original transmission from the local TV channels. This revenue shift > > does not happen with the Aereo system. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 2:05 AM, Martin Waters via > > Boston-Radio-Interest < boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > > From: Martin Waters > > > To: "Gary's Ice Cream" , "'Shawn Mamros'" < > > > mamros@MIT.EDU> > > > Cc: Boston Radio Group > > > Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 19:49:10 -0700 > > > Subject: Re: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today Gary > > > wrote: > > > >The customer has the channel changing capability of their > > > own tuner at the data center so basically it is a remote tuner for > > > your > > tv. > > > > > > That is just what cable and satellite TV provide. > > > > > > Shawn wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >It's just that Congress back then decided the broadcasters should > > > >get a > > > cut >from the pie. I'm not sure that was the right decision then (or > > now), > > > but that's >the law that was made. If Aereo shouldn't have to pay > > > broadcasters for > > > >retransmission, the cable companies shouldn't either. > > > > > > I am sure that Congress made the right decision. The creators > > > of intellectual property and the companies that buy the programs, > > > sell the advertising that pays for them and all the rest, deserve to > > > be paid when some utility company comes along and wants to grab > > > their output in an attempt to make a profit. > > > > > > What is it about the internet that appears to make more and > > > more people think otherwise? It happened before with music. Aereo > > > was merely a cynical scam to get around the copyright law. Sure, the > > > company said > > every > > > viewer was connected to an individual antenna. But Aereo provided > > > the antenna, received the signal and retransmitted it over the > > > internet. Case closed. > > > > > > Luckily the Supreme Court wasn't fooled. If the copyright law > > > of > > > 1976 needs to be changed, it is to strengthen it on behalf of the > > creators > > > of content due to advancements in technology. Now, I would like to > > > know what's going to be done to collect the royalties Aereo should > > > have been paying. Plus, the battle goes on, as there appears to be > > > no end to people with a new trick and a desire to make money from > > > someone else's creative work without paying for it. > > > > > > I'm surprised that some broadcast people would look at Aereo > > > as anything but a sleazy effort to find a loophole in the copyright > > > law and steal content. Content is everything. Let us not weep for > > > the Aereo > > people. > > > Maybe now they can all get jobs developing the next brilliant TV > > > show or movie. But I doubt it. > > > > > > > > > > > From scott@fybush.com Mon Jun 30 12:22:27 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 12:22:27 -0400 Subject: OTA commercial subs..... In-Reply-To: <02f501cf947b$08428860$18c79920$@garysicecream.com> References: <02f501cf947b$08428860$18c79920$@garysicecream.com> Message-ID: <53B18EC3.1070004@fybush.com> On 6/30/2014 11:50 AM, Gary's Ice Cream wrote: > Oh yes they do! For a while (in the analog days before HDTV) I had > a TV in my office on an antenna and I would often have it on as I > prepared dinner (one in the living room was on cable, one in the > office on antenna) so that whichever way I was facing I could see it) > and in almost every spot cluster the cable feed would have one or two > different commercials than the OTA signal. So here's what's happening: If you are an OTA TV station today, you have to make a choice every two years about how you will interface with the cable and satellite operators that serve your market. Choice A is "must-carry." Under must-carry, the station can compel the cable company to carry its programming. No money changes hands from either side - the cable company pays nothing for the signal, and the TV station gets the visibility of reaching the majority of viewers in the market (anywhere from 50%-95%, depending on the market) who use cable or satellite instead of OTA reception. Under must-carry, the cable company has to carry one stream of the station's programming (usually the x.1 channel), in HD if it's offered, on the station's virtual major channel number or a lower number. (In certain cases, if a station was historically carried by cable on a lower channel, it must remain there if it wants to.) Must-carry is usually chosen by smaller stations that want an audience and don't offer programming desirable enough to make them eligible for choice B. (Think WWDP or WTMU or WMFP...) Choice B is "retransmission consent." Under retransmission consent, a station waives its must-carry rights in exchange for the ability to negotiate with the cable/satellite provider on the terms under which it will be carried. In some cases, that's a straight money-for-carriage deal - the cable company pays a per-subscriber rate in exchange for the right to carry the station. However, many other pieces can go into the deal. If you're negotiating with an ABC owned-and-operated station like WABC-TV, you can expect that the rights to carry WABC will be tied into a deal to also pay a specific rate for ABC/Disney-owned cable channels such as ABC Family and the Disney Channel. (I think ESPN's channels are negotiated separately.) I would not be surprised to find out that WCVB's negotiations are linked in to carriage of A&E and other Hearst-owned networks. Station owners can also negotiate for carriage of subchannels ("if you take WCVB, you must also take MeTV"), for sister stations ("if you want NBC on WHDH, you have to also pay us for WLVI"), for channel position ("if you want to carry WHDH, you have to put WLVI on 12") - and if they want to, they can also negotiate to run split advertising on cable, allowing advertisers to buy viewers in specific regions. Some stations have even negotiated to provide cable with split newscasts for portions of a sprawling market. At least one of the stations serving the Charleston-Huntington WV market, for instance (WSAZ) sends the Huntington cable company a separate Huntington-only newscast while Charleston cable viewers and OTA viewers get a regional newscast. But - and this is important - it's not unilateral. Cable companies never have the right to replace ads on broadcast channels unless they have a deal in place with the TV station. And when they do, you may be certain that the TV station ends up getting most of the money from the ad. s From jjlehmann@comcast.net Mon Jun 30 12:04:45 2014 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 12:04:45 -0400 Subject: OTA commercial subs..... In-Reply-To: References: <02f501cf947b$08428860$18c79920$@garysicecream.com> Message-ID: <03d201cf947d$02f92920$08eb7b60$@net> > I've never experienced cable spot subbing over OTA channels, ever. > > One would think the station would be quite upset with a cable system > covering its commercials...so this may have been some sort of > arrangement to sell "extra" spots on top of promos or PSAs or > something? > > Has anyone else seen cable systems subbing spots on broadcast channels? I haven't seen any examples side by side, but I have heard that it is happening. I think it's mostly Comcast (xfinity) ads being inserted. Jeff Lehmann From map@mapinternet.com Mon Jun 30 12:59:40 2014 From: map@mapinternet.com (M.Casey) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 12:59:40 -0400 Subject: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today In-Reply-To: References: <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> <1404092418175.93d8f8fb@Nodemailer> Message-ID: Other than the DVR feature, I just can't see much of a reason for Aereo in the first place. But, maybe the DVR was really the main selling point. And yes--Aereo only provided the few basic channels that had a transmitter very near the center of the market. Their tiny antennas worked. Try it yourself sometime--stick a 1-2" piece of wire in the center receptacle of the F antenna input on the back of the TV and see how many channels you get. You will be amazed. In probably over 95% of Aereo's coverage area, a viewer could buy a $5 set of rabbit ears (20 times the size of the Aereo antennas) and get all or in many cases, even more channels than Aereo offered. Even if one had enabled some type of video cloud feed to his or her phone--still, I can't imagine that folks watching broadcast channels on their phones are going to be any significant chunk of actual viewing, with even the largest phones having a tiny screen--to the dismay of some current TV ads--the phones are really unwatchable-- but rather just a toy, or at the most , maybe just barely sufficing to be another place to get the news and weather. --Hey, here's an idea--why not just listen to a radio for news and weather--no phone fees, no service provider needed--and, other than the cost of the radio and the batteries, it's free---what an idea!-ha! So, now, we've really simplified LIFE. Forget Aereo ever existed. Just get a $5 pair of rabbit ears for your TV, and a $20 radio and you will be happy for years and years! Mark Casey K1MAP -----Original Message----- From: Mike Ward Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 10:24 AM To: Bob DeMattia Cc: Boston Radio Interest Mailing List Subject: Re: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today As I recall, the Aereo lineup didn't include such outlying stations...just those in the heart of the market. We have an independent station here in the far southwest part of the market (Mansfield OH) that actually is on direcTV and Dish. But they ship their signal up to the Cleveland satellite receive facilities via an Internet-connected box. You can't really get their signal in the main part of the market. If Aereo had ever launched here, I'm pretty sure WMFD wouldn't be on the list. I don't know where to find the Boston Aereo lineup, but I bet stations like WBIN weren't on it. On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Bob DeMattia wrote: > I've always had difficulty believing that a "dime sized" antenna would be > able to effectivelyreceive multiple channels. If they were carrying the > complete Boston market, that would mean receiving signals from Boston, > Needham, Marlborough, Boylston, Merrimack NH,Hudson NH, and Manchester NH > with sufficient strength and without any multipath issues.The whole thing > is troubling. > You can agree or disagree about what the law should be, but it is what it > is right now. I think the justices got this one right. > > -Bob ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3986/7770 - Release Date: 06/30/14 From wollman@bimajority.org Mon Jun 30 13:07:54 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 13:07:54 -0400 Subject: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today In-Reply-To: <53B0C53E.8010004@attorneyross.com> References: <00b101cf92d7$39273b10$ab75b130$@cssinc.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200692@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> <01b801cf93cc$914ce1a0$b3e6a4e0$@garysicecream.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200EC7@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> <53B0C53E.8010004@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <21425.39274.337359.152621@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > Whether they've got one antenna or a warehouse full of them, they're > still retransmitting the air signals of TV stations. Well, of course the argument they made -- and it was a good enough argument to get four Supreme Court justices to sign on -- was that they weren't "retransmitting" as the law defined it, but rather, they were in the equipment-rental business. Nobody would argue that Rent-A-Center is a cable company; Aereo simply took that one step further, by allowing customers the opportunity to rent space in a warehouse for their tuner/DVR. It's also important keep in mind that there are *two* separate copyrights involved here. There is the copyright on the individual programs, and then there is the copyright on the broadcast station's output. The Copyright Act of 1976 established a compulsory licensing scheme for the first case, and cable companies must pay a license fee that is redistributed by the Copyright Office proportionally to the owners of the programs. The Cable Act of 1992 introduced the retransmission-consent regime, and depending on how you look at it, that's either: (a) reasonable compensation for the broadcasters' investment in acquiring new programming, or (b) naked rent-seeking by broadcasters asking for additional revenue to which they would not be entitled were the cable companies not extending the reach of their signals. Both perspectives are legitimate, but only one has the imprimatur of the Supreme Court behind it. Note that there was a service very like Aereo which lost in the Court of Appeals on the grounds that it was not a cable company. If it's still timely, you can expect the operator of that service to ask for reconsideration on the basis of the Aereo decision. -GAWollman From scott@fybush.com Mon Jun 30 14:00:38 2014 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 14:00:38 -0400 Subject: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today In-Reply-To: References: <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> <1404092418175.93d8f8fb@Nodemailer> Message-ID: <53B1A5C6.3080405@fybush.com> On 6/30/2014 10:24 AM, Mike Ward wrote: > If Aereo had ever launched here, I'm pretty sure WMFD wouldn't be on the > list. I don't know where to find the Boston Aereo lineup, but I bet > stations like WBIN weren't on it. You are correct. Aereo's Boston lineup was only the signals in the core of the market, basically whatever transmitted from the Newton/Needham tower farm (2, 4, 5, 7, 25, 38, 44, 48, 56, 62, 68). I know they didn't carry the New Hampshire signals, and I don't think they carried 27 and 66 from out west, either. I do not think the legality of Aereo was as black-and-white an issue as some on the list would make it out to be. The problem is that we've quietly allowed the role of OTA broadcasting in America to change dramatically without ever openly examining or re-regulating it. For more than 60 years, we enjoyed the most robust system of OTA TV in the world. Viewers in New York and LA had seven channels of free TV long before those in London, Paris or Toronto had even two. Without ever establishing a state-funded national broadcaster, the combination of robust private enterprise and intelligent regulation meant that at the end of the analog era, something close to 99% of the US population had access to at least some free OTA TV, and better than 95% had access to all three major networks. Before the advent of retrans consent, it was unambiguously in the best interest of any TV station to be able to be seen by as many viewers as possible. More potential viewers equaled higher ad rates and higher compensation from the networks. And conveniently, the interests of the TV stations and the viewers were nicely aligned, too - it's an unambiguous good thing to have more free TV channels available, right? Then came the explosion in video offerings, diluting the importance of the mass-audience network programming that sustained OTA TV for all those decades. The DTV transition reduced the reach of many OTA TV signals and drained the pockets of station owners who had to buy new transmission systems. The networks stopped paying compensation TO the local stations, and started demanding compensation from the stations, instead. And THEN came retrans consent, which completely tilted the playing field. It was good for the station owners, because it provided a fat new revenue line that helped make up for some of those other revenue sources that were lost.(And remember, there are no local station owners these days. It's all big conglomerates looking to pay down debt.) Now it's no longer in a TV licensee's best interest to be seen widely OTA - in fact, it's a negative, because every viewer watching OTA (or on OTA relayed by Aereo) represents 50 cents or a dollar a month that it's not getting through a cable or satellite provider paying retrans money. I am not naive enough to think that "public interest, convenience and necessity" means much of anything in the media world of 2014. But I do think there needs to be a better accounting of how the relationship between TV broadcasters and the public has changed. If you lived in Fitchburg, let's say, you probably had reasonable free access to a dozen TV channels in 1990. In 2014, you'd have to put up a pretty hefty rooftop antenna to get most of those same stations. Aereo at least tried to tip the playing field back to something a little closer to level. Unlike a cable company, which bundles OTA content with its own proprietary content (and thus can be said to be profiting from the OTA content to the extent that its availability helps keep subscribers on board for the more lucrative cable-only channels), Aereo didn't offer its viewers any content they couldn't already have very legally plucked out of the air for free with no additional payment to anyone. For a fairly measly $8 a month, a viewer in Fitchburg (or Chatham, or Contoocook) could get the same channels that someone in Newton could see for free. There *is* a difference there, and while the majority didn't recognize that, Justice Scalia did. His dissent is important to read, because while he agreed with the majority that what Aereo was doing was illegal, he noted that the logic that "it looks like a cable system and thus should be regulated the same way" is slippery indeed. There was never a point along the slippery slope to retrans consent in which any regulator openly said "we want to insert a middleman between TV stations and viewers to collect money for what some viewers can still get for free." Did we intend for that to happen? Because it did, and shutting down Aereo doesn't make the problem go away. From Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com Mon Jun 30 13:29:42 2014 From: Donald_Astelle@Yahoo.com (Don) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 13:29:42 -0400 Subject: Aereo suspending operations as of 11:30 today References: <00b101cf92d7$39273b10$ab75b130$@cssinc.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200692@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> Message-ID: <2DD779A9C82C4CDDA0636B85DC6383B7@ownerd8aa55a4d> > The > issue in question is the provision in the Copyright Act of 1976 requiring > cable companies to pay broadcasters for the right to retransmit their > content. The broadcasters argued that the same provision should apply > to Aereo, and the Court agreed with that assessment. Honestly, I have a > hard time seeing a logical counterargument to that. There was a time when Cable Companies were retransmitting the local broadcast outlets without securing any rights. I believe the locally "community antenna" systems were for rural or valley areas without reception and they were non-profits....i.e..."community". Everything gets dicey when you start charging a fee....and you are perceived to be making money off the content owner. However, you have to appreciate the wording parsing that Aereo did in a rather convincing way that broadcast TV is free to those with an an antenna. And I could legally pay my neighbor to put MY antenna on his roof. There are some charities that parse language as well. WBUR for instance doesn't "sell" their swag during pledge time....they will gladly send you a "thank you gift" for your *donation* of $XX.xx This way there is no sales tax....when in effect they are selling stuff. From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Jun 30 15:05:15 2014 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 15:05:15 -0400 (EDT) Subject: OTA commercial subs..... In-Reply-To: <02f501cf947b$08428860$18c79920$@garysicecream.com> References: <02f501cf947b$08428860$18c79920$@garysicecream.com> Message-ID: Considering that more than 80% of a TV station's audience is watching on cable, if the cable company blocks an ad in the station's feed, that spot misses the lion's share of its intended audience. That can't be very palatable to the TV station or the advertiser, I would imagine. Rob From wollman@bimajority.org Mon Jun 30 16:05:54 2014 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 16:05:54 -0400 Subject: OTA commercial subs..... In-Reply-To: References: <02f501cf947b$08428860$18c79920$@garysicecream.com> Message-ID: <21425.49954.445391.956103@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > Considering that more than 80% of a TV station's audience is watching on > cable, if the cable company blocks an ad in the station's feed, that > spot misses the lion's share of its intended audience. > That can't be very palatable to the TV station or the advertiser, I would > imagine. Which is why they're prohibited from doing that without the station's consent. (In the pre-Cable Act regime, I believe this was simply flat-out prohibited, since there was no mechanism by which a station could give its consent, and the stations were likewise prohibited from providing a separate program feed to cable operators that was different from their OTA programming.) -GAWollman From gary@garysicecream.com Mon Jun 30 16:17:35 2014 From: gary@garysicecream.com (Gary's Ice Cream) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 16:17:35 -0400 Subject: OTA commercial subs..... In-Reply-To: <21425.49954.445391.956103@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <02f501cf947b$08428860$18c79920$@garysicecream.com> <21425.49954.445391.956103@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <035e01cf94a0$55d22f70$01768e50$@garysicecream.com> As I recall it was all promos that Comcast was replacing (NewsCenter5, Chronicle, etc) and a few PSA's. I don't think that they ever covered up a paid spot. Gary's Ice Cream, Chelmsford, MA www.garysicecream.com www.icecreamcollege.com -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Garrett Wollman Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 4:06 PM To: Rob Landry Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: Re: OTA commercial subs..... < said: > Considering that more than 80% of a TV station's audience is watching > on cable, if the cable company blocks an ad in the station's feed, > that spot misses the lion's share of its intended audience. > That can't be very palatable to the TV station or the advertiser, I > would imagine. Which is why they're prohibited from doing that without the station's consent. (In the pre-Cable Act regime, I believe this was simply flat-out prohibited, since there was no mechanism by which a station could give its consent, and the stations were likewise prohibited from providing a separate program feed to cable operators that was different from their OTA programming.) -GAWollman From kc1ih@mac.com Mon Jun 30 20:10:41 2014 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 20:10:41 -0400 Subject: In-Reply-To: References: <00b101cf92d7$39273b10$ab75b130$@cssinc.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200692@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> <01b801cf93cc$914ce1a0$b3e6a4e0$@garysicecream.com> <3AA2995FD42B2E48A2B762E850E68AA620200EC7@OC11EXPO33.exchange.mit.edu> <01d501cf9403$6c424990$44c6dcb0$@garysicecream.com> Message-ID: <2941ED5E-7617-4559-9595-7C93327018C1@mac.com> On Jun 30, 2014, at 11:14 AM, Mike Ward wrote: > Feel free to correct me, but I'm pretty sure cable/satellite systems > don't/can't do spot inserts over broadcast/OTA channels. > When I worked for a boston TV station we inserted different Comcast commercials over the Comcast commercials that were on the OTA feed, this only meant that subscribers received different spots (upgrade your service) than non-subscribers (low introductory price and we won't tell you what the price will be after your promotional period ends). Of course this was done in cooperation with Comcast. We did not do anything with commercials from other sponsors who had bought full-market coverage. Where commercials are sometimes inserted locally is on the cable/satellite networks, where certain spots are designated as being OK to cover per the provider's contract with the network. While on Dish Network the channels are distributed nationally you can still tell due to the sloppy switching when the are inserting a spot over the national spot. Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From kvahey@gmail.com Mon Jun 30 12:31:30 2014 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 12:31:30 -0400 Subject: OTA commercial subs..... In-Reply-To: <53B18EC3.1070004@fybush.com> References: <02f501cf947b$08428860$18c79920$@garysicecream.com> <53B18EC3.1070004@fybush.com> Message-ID: <67A86C16-55DF-46F2-AAB7-6631A4B04EF3@gmail.com> 20 years ago Hearst played hardball with the then Continental Cable to get ESPN2 cleared at launch and it was tied into WCVB (Hearst owns 20% of ESPN) Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 30, 2014, at 12:22 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: > >> On 6/30/2014 11:50 AM, Gary's Ice Cream wrote: >> Oh yes they do! For a while (in the analog days before HDTV) I had >> a TV in my office on an antenna and I would often have it on as I >> prepared dinner (one in the living room was on cable, one in the >> office on antenna) so that whichever way I was facing I could see it) >> and in almost every spot cluster the cable feed would have one or two >> different commercials than the OTA signal. > > So here's what's happening: > > If you are an OTA TV station today, you have to make a choice every two years about how you will interface with the cable and satellite operators that serve your market. > > Choice A is "must-carry." Under must-carry, the station can compel the cable company to carry its programming. No money changes hands from either side - the cable company pays nothing for the signal, and the TV station gets the visibility of reaching the majority of viewers in the market (anywhere from 50%-95%, depending on the market) who use cable or satellite instead of OTA reception. > > Under must-carry, the cable company has to carry one stream of the station's programming (usually the x.1 channel), in HD if it's offered, on the station's virtual major channel number or a lower number. (In certain cases, if a station was historically carried by cable on a lower channel, it must remain there if it wants to.) > > Must-carry is usually chosen by smaller stations that want an audience and don't offer programming desirable enough to make them eligible for choice B. (Think WWDP or WTMU or WMFP...) > > Choice B is "retransmission consent." Under retransmission consent, a station waives its must-carry rights in exchange for the ability to negotiate with the cable/satellite provider on the terms under which it will be carried. > > In some cases, that's a straight money-for-carriage deal - the cable company pays a per-subscriber rate in exchange for the right to carry the station. > > However, many other pieces can go into the deal. If you're negotiating with an ABC owned-and-operated station like WABC-TV, you can expect that the rights to carry WABC will be tied into a deal to also pay a specific rate for ABC/Disney-owned cable channels such as ABC Family and the Disney Channel. (I think ESPN's channels are negotiated separately.) > > I would not be surprised to find out that WCVB's negotiations are linked in to carriage of A&E and other Hearst-owned networks. > > Station owners can also negotiate for carriage of subchannels ("if you take WCVB, you must also take MeTV"), for sister stations ("if you want NBC on WHDH, you have to also pay us for WLVI"), for channel position ("if you want to carry WHDH, you have to put WLVI on 12") - and if they want to, they can also negotiate to run split advertising on cable, allowing advertisers to buy viewers in specific regions. > > Some stations have even negotiated to provide cable with split newscasts for portions of a sprawling market. At least one of the stations serving the Charleston-Huntington WV market, for instance (WSAZ) sends the Huntington cable company a separate Huntington-only newscast while Charleston cable viewers and OTA viewers get a regional newscast. > > But - and this is important - it's not unilateral. Cable companies never have the right to replace ads on broadcast channels unless they have a deal in place with the TV station. And when they do, you may be certain that the TV station ends up getting most of the money from the ad. > > s