KGO radio, making money on its own? depending on valuation or Meg Whitman?
gvk2
was losing money such that they filed for Chapter 11 or something.
Now, what I was wondering is ...would KGO radio make money on its
own? If so, at what valuation and loan level?
Or, to put it another way, even during these difficult times, would
KGO radio make a profit if a individual owned it outright (with no
loans).
Obviously if you borrowed 90% of the money to purchase the station,
making a profit would be far more difficult.
Any idea on its current value and, if you know, how much did Disney
or Citadel payed for the station.
Will they make a profit this year solely because of Meg Whitman's
deep pockets.
Might it be that Meg Whitman's spending alone, will account for all
the profits made in all California broadcast media combined in 2010?
San Diego to Crescent City...
I imagine she will spend 100 million of the 150 million just on radio
and TV spots.
I've heard she will spend more than all mattress companies combined.
Oh well, she can't stuff it all under her mattress, so why not spend
it.
Speaking of Meg Whitman and mattresses... does she have a boyfriend or
significant other?
John Higdon
<d6c17bfc-8652-4878...@u31g2000pra.googlegroups.com>,
gvk2 <gvk...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Or, to put it another way, even during these difficult times, would
> KGO radio make a profit if a individual owned it outright (with no
> loans).
KGO and KSFO, even with debt service, would be quite profitable without
the Citadel albatross around their necks.
> Any idea on its current value and, if you know, how much did Disney
> or Citadel payed for the station.
The stations were sold with a large group of stations; there was no
itemization. At any given moment, a station is worth what someone will
pay for it. There are two components: stick value (what's the facility
worth) and business value. Both KGO and KSFO do good business, but the
stick value isn't what it used to be.
> Will they make a profit this year solely because of Meg Whitman's
> deep pockets.
See above. The only thing that is in KGO's way is Citadel itself.
> Might it be that Meg Whitman's spending alone, will account for all
> the profits made in all California broadcast media combined in 2010?
> San Diego to Crescent City...
Oh, please. Her spots don't bring any more revenue to stations than any
other spots. Sold out is sold out.
> I've heard she will spend more than all mattress companies combined.
> Oh well, she can't stuff it all under her mattress, so why not spend
> it.
Stations usually run sold out. That means that if the station runs a
political spot, it isn't running some other spot. For stations, the
political season is revenue neutral.
--
John Higdon
+1 408 ANdrews 6-4400
AT&T-Free At Last
Jim
> I've read that KGO radio's parent company Citadel Broadcasting is or
> was losing money such that they filed for Chapter 11 or something.
>
> Now, what I was wondering is ...would KGO radio make money on its
> own? If so, at what valuation and loan level?
>
> Or, to put it another way, even during these difficult times, would
> KGO radio make a profit if a individual owned it outright (with no
> loans).
You're asking if KGO could compensate for being an
AM radio station with nearly no compelling content, could it
somehow make money under a different ownership?
"Hey, Louie, KGO's now owned by an individual."
"Oh boy! I'm going to sit here and listen to it.
Just a sec while I shut off this obnoxious
little NPR station. The noive of those guys
asking me to pay them to broadcast."
David Kaye
>I've read that KGO radio's parent company Citadel Broadcasting is or
>was losing money such that they filed for Chapter 11 or something.
It's a fascinating situation. The stockholders got screwed but people such as
Farid Suleman and his staff managed to get stock in the reorganization -- the
very people who ran the ownership into the ground in the first place.
>Now, what I was wondering is ...would KGO radio make money on its
>own? If so, at what valuation and loan level?
I'm sure they would. Even though their audience skews into the upper age
ranges, I'm sure that they're making money. They appear to have the heaviest
spot load of any radio station, and most of their advertisers have been with
them for years. Those are both signs of a healthy station.
>Any idea on its current value and, if you know, how much did Disney
>or Citadel payed for the station.
While KGO and KSFO are incorporated in their own name, and thus
accounted separately, (KGO-AM Radio, Inc, a Deleware Corporation) they were
bought as part of a group, and I doubt that anybody except the deep insiders
know what the value is.
>Will they make a profit this year solely because of Meg Whitman's
>deep pockets.
Political ads work against a station because the station has to sell ads at
their LOWEST rate as long as the candidate has their voice in the ad. This is
why you'll often hear professionally done ads for candidates done by
professional announcers and then a tag by the candidate in their own voice at
the end. This is done to get the lowest rate. Of course, with Meg doing her
own ads this is not an issue. So, a station such as KGO, which would normally
book its morning drive ads at AAA rates, probably has to charge the candidates
their B rates if they want to have their ads played during that time period.
Also, a lot of stations are insisting on getting cash up front these days for
political ads because too many candidates and campaigns have gone bust and
simply not paid their bills in the past.
I think most stations really really really hate to have political ads on at
all, for the two reasons above, plus the fact that listeners perceive that
the station is taking a particular political stance based on who runs ads on
their station. Stations (like any business) usually want to steer as clear
from controversy as possible, so as not to alienate people.
Jim
A day without KGO is only half as good as two days without KGO.
Jim
> You're asking if KGO could compensate for being an
> AM radio station with nearly no compelling content, could it
> somehow make money under a different ownership?
Very poorly worded on my part. I intended to ask:
Could KGO compensate for uninteresting programming
by being owned an individual?
Well, yes. If that person realizes as I do that
AM listener call-in radio is for crackpots and is
not radio that anyone *sits* and listens to
attentively except for the bedridden. Those
stuck in auto traffic may sit, too, but they
aren't really listening.
A day without KGO is like the day after you get
over the flu.
SMS
> Political ads work against a station because the station has to sell ads at
> their LOWEST rate as long as the candidate has their voice in the ad.
Nothing is stopping the stations from telling Whitman that they're sold
out and have no time for her ads. Demand drives up ad prices. Even if
political ads get the lowest rate for a specific time period, that rate
is being pushed up in value by higher demand.
You can be sure that all the large advertisers on KGO are also getting
the lowest rate for a specific time as well.
gvk2
>
> Stations usually run sold out. That means that if the station runs a
> political spot, it isn't running some other spot. For stations, the
> political season is revenue neutral.
>
I had the impression from the unusual nature of some current ads on
KGO that they were now selling cut rate space that 3 years ago was
being filled by "normal" companies.
I assumed they were just trying to fill up empty zones.
Certainly other, less popular, stations much have loads of open ad
space. I keep hearing funky ads by mom and pop outfits. Stuff that
was never heard on the radio 5 or 10 years ago.
As to Meg Whitman, she should hire Gene Burns to do her spots.
After all, Gene Burns got me, a near vegetarian, to try some of
those delicious Johnsonville Brats.
rtn...@yahoo.com
Rutherford Harsh IV, head of neurosurgery at Mass. General Hospital
but they are divorced.
SMS
> From my experience, the stations who can profit most from political
> season are the ones that aren't sold out. If they have a sales force
> that can actually go out & sell to the campaigns it can be a windfall.
If any candidate sees a benefit from advertising on those types of stations.
Right after the primary, Whitman's going to have to do even more massive
advertising as she moves herself from the right (necessary to win the
Republican primary) to the middle (necessary to win the general election).
Personally she disgusts me with her lies about Poizner, who actually is
a pretty good guy, not one of those far-right Orange County Republican
wackos like Darrell Issa.
Her ads are like the PG&E proposition 16 ads. All designed to mislead
people. That may work for the Republican primary, but if she doesn't
come up with some substance to battle Jerry Brown, he approach won't
work in the general election.
Governing California is a pretty hopeless task with an initiative system
where people keep voting for more and more expensive programs and also
vote for lower and lower taxes. Maybe it's time we just had a going out
of business sale.
John Higdon
<de50e56a-9f2e-47b4...@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
gvk2 <gvk...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I had the impression from the unusual nature of some current ads on
> KGO that they were now selling cut rate space that 3 years ago was
> being filled by "normal" companies.
> I assumed they were just trying to fill up empty zones.
That may be, but they are still paid spots. Sure, the quality of
advertisers has dropped everywhere, but that doesn't change the way
spots are priced and sold.
> Certainly other, less popular, stations much have loads of open ad
> space. I keep hearing funky ads by mom and pop outfits. Stuff that
> was never heard on the radio 5 or 10 years ago.
See above. Stations adjust their spot prices so that they are close to
sold out. If they actually sell out, they raise the prices a bit. There
are a number of station traffic systems that do all of this on an
automated basis. My stations use that sort of system, as well as the
big, corporate owned stations.
> As to Meg Whitman, she should hire Gene Burns to do her spots.
> After all, Gene Burns got me, a near vegetarian, to try some of
> those delicious Johnsonville Brats.
Meg does what her handlers tell her to do.
David Kaye
>Nothing is stopping the stations from telling Whitman that they're sold
>out and have no time for her ads.
Can't do that. The time has to be made available at the lowest rate to all
qualified candidates. Period. I'm sure that since John Higdon is an expert
in station operations, he can fill you in on the rest.
>Demand drives up ad prices. Even if
>political ads get the lowest rate for a specific time period, that rate
>is being pushed up in value by higher demand.
A station licensed by the FCC cannot play fast and loose with these laws.
They'll get fined, or in the worst case, have their license yanked. The feds
are adamant about stations making the time available if the station decides to
run political ads. It's all or nothing.
David Kaye
>Things might have changed since I was involved with that, but that's
>what I remember as well. Ad prices vary with demand. If a station
>raises its rates then the price of political ads goes up as well.
But a station cannot just simply up the rate during a political campaign. As
I remember it (I'll have to check), a station must offer its lowest published
rate. The FCC will get very very pissed off if a station screws around with
this.
David Kaye
>I had the impression from the unusual nature of some current ads on
>KGO that they were now selling cut rate space that 3 years ago was
>being filled by "normal" companies.
>I assumed they were just trying to fill up empty zones.
Personally, I don't know what KGO is doing. John Higdon, being closer to KGO,
would have all the information about how they sell their time.
What I do know is that it's a practice among a lot of stations to put bonus
spots for existing advertisers into the schedule in order to make the station
sound full. This benefits the advertiser because they get the extra exposure
at no added cost.
This is also true of radio networks. Where they used to put in PSAs or news
content to cover local spots, now the networks put in bonus spots, so if the
local affiliate doesn't cover the spot they end up bonusing the national
advertiser.
I'm actually surprised KPIG doesn't do this in SF. It would sound much better
if they bonused local ads during their lean times than to run those awful
nationally produced PSAs.
CUT RATE ADS: Now, as to running "cut rate" ads, this is also common practice
at stations. There are basically three kinds of ads: (1) those that run at
specific times, such as within the KNBR baseball broadcasts; (2) those that
run within specific time zones, such as spots running within Class AAA time or
Class AA time (best and second-best time blocks), etc.
And then there is (3) ROS, or run of schedule. Those ads are sold as a cheap
package of X number of spots per month. They can be placed anywhere. At most
stations, they try to stick in at least one or two ROS spots during Class AA
time (second-best time) to be nice to the advertiser, but this isn't usually
in the contract and won't always happen. Normally the ROS spots run in the ad
holes, which is normally the post-7pm dayparts and on the weekends. But this
can vary a lot between stations, depending on what time of day is hot for the
station. KBLX gets good ratings at night; KGO doesn't.
>Certainly other, less popular, stations much have loads of open ad
>space. I keep hearing funky ads by mom and pop outfits. Stuff that
>was never heard on the radio 5 or 10 years ago.
Advertisers have abandoned radio in droves. Radio is not as efficient a buy
as TV, especially because it's not as large a buy. With a regional chain like
Best Buy, it is far easier and cheaper to reach hoards of people with TV than
with radio. For Best Buy this is especially true when they can sponsor sports
and get the guys to go out and buy those hugely expensive TVs and computers.
On the other hand, Safeway does better with radio than TV because they catch
commuters on their way home as they drive past Safeway. This is why though
you'll see Safeway TV ads, they spend a large part of their budget on radio.
Of course, you might ask John Higdon since I know absolutely nothing about
radio or TV broadcasting.
Dave Barnett
Things might have changed since I was involved with that, but that's
what I remember as well. Ad prices vary with demand. If a station
raises its rates then the price of political ads goes up as well. It's
a touchy situation though, because if you have a customer who's been
loyal for a long time, then all of a sudden you have to raise their
rates... Well - you know.
The concept of telling Meg "We're sold out" or lying about discounts,
etc. is just not feasible. I suppose there are stations that would do
that, but I don't know of any.
From my experience, the stations who can profit most from political
season are the ones that aren't sold out. If they have a sales force
that can actually go out & sell to the campaigns it can be a windfall.
Dave B.
David Kaye
>In answer to your other question, Ms. Whitman was married to Griffith
>Rutherford Harsh IV, head of neurosurgery at Mass. General Hospital
>but they are divorced.
Gil? You're still hanging out here?
gvk2
> In answer to your other question, Ms. Whitman was married to Griffith
> Rutherford Harsh IV, head of neurosurgery at Mass. General Hospital
> but they are divorced.
>
Wikipedia says
"Whitman is married to Griffith Harsh IV, a neurosurgeon at Stanford
University Medical Center.[8] They have two sons.[8] Whitman has
lived in Atherton, California since March 1998.[9]"
Still married or divorced?
Last name "Harsh"... Odd name, Harsh the 4th
leansto...@democrat.com
A Meg Whitman spot has all the charm of a Dr. Bill monologue, but they
are better than male performance clinic ads, work at home schemes, and
any spot selling mattresses.
I wonder if Meg can say "and a one two three four?"
SMS
> SMS<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Nothing is stopping the stations from telling Whitman that they're sold
>> out and have no time for her ads.
>
> Can't do that. The time has to be made available at the lowest rate to all
> qualified candidates. Period.
Nope. Go read the FCC rules. Section 312 [47 U.S.C. §312]. They are not
required to sell unlimited time to a candidate or candidate(s). They are
required to sell "reasonable amounts of time." They are not expected or
required to bump other advertisers in order to allow a wealthy candidate
to buy up an unreasonable amount of time.
SMS
Stations adjust ad rates all the time. It would have been ridiculous if
they could not change rates during the Republican primary campaign for
governor which has been going on for a year, and corresponded with an
economic recovery that would have driven up rates anyway.
Mark Howell
wrote:
>Stations usually run sold out. That means that if the station runs a
>political spot, it isn't running some other spot. For stations, the
>political season is revenue neutral.
Actually it can be revenue negative, as Congress has legislated itself
and the Presidential candidates "lowest unit rate" guarantees for
federal candidates. IOW, they get to buy spots for the absolute
cheapest rate that anybody else ever gets. And they can't be turned
away.
Mark Howell
Mark Howell
wrote:
>I think most stations really really really hate to have political ads on at
>all, for the two reasons above, plus the fact that listeners perceive that
>the station is taking a particular political stance based on who runs ads on
>their station. Stations (like any business) usually want to steer as clear
>from controversy as possible, so as not to alienate people.
When Buck Owens' late sister, Dorothy, was still involved in running
his radio stations, we refused political advertising. We did offer
candidates blocks of free time on public affairs shows. The policy
was not imposed out of altruism -- it was done because political
advertising is a tune-out and we figured that banning it would give us
an advantage in the fall Arbitron book. But the policy went away
after Congress passed a law requiring time to be sold to federal
candidates, which IIRC happened in the early 1980's.
Mark Howell
David Kaye
>Nope. Go read the FCC rules. Section 312 [47 U.S.C. §312]. They are not
>required to sell unlimited time to a candidate or candidate(s). They are
>required to sell "reasonable amounts of time." They are not expected or
>required to bump other advertisers in order to allow a wealthy candidate
>to buy up an unreasonable amount of time.
I didn't say anything about unlimited time or bumping of other advertisers.
Why do you think I did?
BayAreaBroadcast
> Rutherford Harsh IV, head of neurosurgery at Mass. General Hospital
> but they are divorced.
>
A billionaire want to be governor so badly.
What is her motivation?
John Higdon
<76909dcb-6c3a-4417...@y38g2000prb.googlegroups.com>,
BayAreaBroadcast <bayareab...@gmail.com> wrote:
> A billionaire want to be governor so badly.
>
> What is her motivation?
A governorship is a stepping stone to the presidency.
Dave Barnett
> On 20/04/10 11:09 AM, Dave Barnett wrote:
>
>> From my experience, the stations who can profit most from political
>> season are the ones that aren't sold out. If they have a sales force
>> that can actually go out & sell to the campaigns it can be a windfall.
>
> If any candidate sees a benefit from advertising on those types of
> stations.
Every demographic votes. Some more, some less for sure. But they vote.
I heard a Meg Whitman ad on KAHI, and they don't even show up in the
Sacramento ratings.
Dave B.
John Higdon
Dave Barnett <dave.db...@SPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> Every demographic votes. Some more, some less for sure. But they vote.
> I heard a Meg Whitman ad on KAHI, and they don't even show up in the
> Sacramento ratings.
Just like she never bothered to show up at the polls.
(She hates it when you mention that!)
gvk2
>
> Just like she never bothered to show up at the polls.
>
> (She hates it when you mention that!)
>
Oh, come on, voting is for the little people. Meg had more important
matters to attend to.
Besides, she is taller than Poizner and Brown...right?
I don't really know, but that is my perception.
In June, Meg strong, Poizner wimpy.
In November, Meg smiles, Brown frowns.
Meg waves flags as its "morning in California" and has air-brushed
commercials with favorable lighting, while Jerry is portrayed as a
old "lefty" retread. Angry Jerry. Go away Angry Jerry, you don't
make me happy.
Rinse and repeat to the tune of $100 million.
Jose' Scott aka Hawkeye Joe
Discounters, John Komooda's "debt EE-lim-min-nate-ing" free (?) tape,
and Tom Shane, et al want to buy ad time, they shoul dbe OK... ;)
leansto...@democrat.com
Why bother voting if you can buy politicians? A bought and paid for
politician is way more effective than just one vote. It is a more
effective use of her time. Of course, she could have voted by mail
just not to look bad.
Once Meg is in office, she will offer her services on ebay. Probably
not by bid, but "buy it now." Expect pop ups on the governor's
website.