I have never been so excited about radio as I am now. [Archive]

Cringer

01-09-2006, 09:51 AM

I went to sleep at midnight and got up at 4:50 AM this morning. Just so I can listen to Howard Stern live. THis is the first time I have ever been able to hear him live at my house. And now I will be able to listen live every day. Since I have my Sirius in my workout room when at home, I went ahead and ran/incline walked for an hour and am now sitting here on the treadmill listening.

Great show too. They even did a press conference with tons of media there. He also said he is NOT married. There is NOT a ton of cussing, since Howard said it actually kind of bugs him and it gets old.

Bubba The Love Sponge is on this afternoon, a guy banished from normal radio for the last two years.

I am officially done with normal radio. I haven't listened much the last year anyways but now there is not much reason. (I guess I am a Sirius fanboy :) )

Also, Sirius announced the other day that they have added over 300,000 new subscriptions since Dec. 27th (that was the day they announced they had gone over 3 million). And today Howard said he was told that they had more subscriptions turned on yesterday then the 180,000 they had on Christmas day. I guess Howard is having a big impact, even though some thought he wouldn't.

Ok, i am done being over-excited.

rkmsuf

01-09-2006, 10:27 AM

I have one but haven't hooked it up yet.

jeff061

01-09-2006, 10:30 AM

I'm getting sick of all these "Free Radio" commercials. Those alone may drive me to satellite. Some things should remain free? Why? You get what you pay for.

albionmoonlight

01-09-2006, 10:40 AM

Toddzilla

01-09-2006, 10:43 AM

How was the show?

wade moore

01-09-2006, 10:50 AM

Cringer

01-09-2006, 10:51 AM

How was the show?

It was great. It was different from what it usually is but that is because it was the first show and they had a ton to get in. In the end it went 5 hours and 20 minutes, and was commercial free!! They had a few spots where they played a song or two, like when they brought in the press for the press conference. And they played a song after about 15 minutes because they had technical problems. Other then that it was non-stop.

Also, they have George Takaei as an announcer all week. Yes, Sulu from Star Trek. He was great.

Now they have an after show...show. With Gary and John Heihn (sp?) hosting. Talking behind the scenes stuff for an hour or so.

The show is going to be great uncensored.

And on to the government trying to censor satellite....there are people trying to get it done. Especially this religious group who has always been after Howard Stern. It is stupid. Not only do you NOT have to buy Sirius, if you do you can block channels. Any channel you want to keep you kid from hearing you can.

Cringer

01-09-2006, 10:54 AM

Meh, never been a big Stern fan...

Anyway... even if he does get like 500,000 people to subscribe... is that really making up for the money they spent on him? I'm very curious as to what the magic number of subscribers is.....

Almost 3,000,000 people have gotten Sirius since the announcement over 1 year ago. They had 600,000 subscriber then. The magic number to pay for the show was around 2,000,000 if I remember correctly. Anyways, that was one of the things Howard said this morning, that they have already paid for themselves without doing a show. And trust me, a lot more then 500,000 of those 3 million signed up for Howard. You can see a bit of evidence of this on Sirius boards, and Howard Stern boards.

M GO BLUE!!!

01-09-2006, 10:55 AM

wade moore

01-09-2006, 10:59 AM

Almost 3,000,000 people have gotten Sirius since the announcement over 1 year ago. They had 600,000 subscriber then. The magic number to pay for the show was around 2,000,000 if I remember correctly. Anyways, that was one of the things Howard said this morning, that they have already paid for themselves without doing a show. And trust me, a lot more then 500,000 of those 3 million signed up for Howard. You can see a bit of evidence of this on Sirius boards, and Howard Stern boards.Interesting, i figured the magic number was higher than that..

good for them if so... I have a show or two that if it went satellite (Don and Mike Show or the Sports Junkies) I would probably buy it for them, otherwise i'm holding off...

jeff061

01-09-2006, 10:59 AM

Stern just got 200 million in Sirius stock for hitting subscriber targets over the past year. I'd imagine so far things are going according to plan.

Cringer

01-09-2006, 11:00 AM

Working in radio for the past 15 years I can't immagine what it is like to do a show without commercials for several hours. What's going to happen when Stern has too much coffee and says "OK, you guys... I gotta take a piss."

By the way... My take on Stern is that the attraction to him is much the same as the attraction to a car wreck. Wheen he was married and the show was kind of a put on it seemed like a fun little lark. Now it has devolved into a head-on collision with meat scattered everywhere. I couldn't even listen anymore when he was on K-Rock, and I'm not going to pay for it now.

Part 1, they will have commercials. Today was special because of the first show. Starting tomorrow they have 6 commercials an hour, which is nothing really especially compared to his old KROCK show. And Howard said he doesn't pee during the show....
:)

As for part 2, I can understand this some. I have heard people say that the show has just gotten boring/bad/dull over the last couple years because of the whole FCC stuff, and moving to Sirius. But I would say this show shows that those days are in the past somewhat. If you get curious I would find the show in a newsgroup and give it a try. If not, like I said, I understand that point of view totally. A lot of my excitement comes from not ever having been able to hear Stern on a daily basis, so I never got tired of certian parts of it.

Toddzilla

01-09-2006, 11:25 AM

Working in radio for the past 15 years I can't immagine what it is like to do a show without commercials for several hours. What's going to happen when Stern has too much coffee and says "OK, you guys... I gotta take a piss."

That doesn't mean they won't take breaks. On O&A, they just say "I gotta piss, we need to take a break," and they play a old show clip, promos for other XM channels, or some sponsor stuff.

KWhit

01-09-2006, 12:09 PM

JonInMiddleGA

01-09-2006, 12:46 PM

...there are people trying to get it done.

Said it before, will say it again -- you can absolutely 100% count on this being done. Not today, not tomorrow, but (to pick a timeline) say by 2010 at the latest. Bank on it.

Especially this religious group who has always been after Howard Stern.

While those folks are an element (I'm drawing a blank on the name but I believe it's the Donald Wildmon group you're referring to, or else it's the one that's not so much religious as it is anti-Stern, which is mostly one guy in ... Cincinnati IIRC) they aren't the reason this is such a slam dunk to happen. It's assured because the broadcast entities, both radio & tv, aren't going to put up with an unequal playing field much longer. More than anything else, including religion, money motivates ... and those folks are downright motivated.

CamEdwards

01-09-2006, 12:52 PM

JonInMiddleGA

01-09-2006, 12:54 PM

Howard said this morning, that they have already paid for themselves without doing a show.

Bwahahahahaha.

Checked the financials on the company lately?

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/P134732.asp
"despite revenue growth of 250% and net subscriber growth of 97%, Sirius posted a net loss of $180.4 million, or 14 cents a share, compared with a net loss of $169.4 million, or 14 per share, in the same period last year. I guess if your net loss rose by 6.5% year-over-year, you might want to downplay it too."

This is a company that's losing more than $500 million a year, and has been losing hundreds of millions for a number of years now. Unless they're expecting to be bailed out by the government, sooner or later that model must collapse under the weight of its own losses.

They still haven't even sniffed breaking even, not once in their lifetime, nor are there any realistic signs they're likely to ever do so.

JonInMiddleGA

01-09-2006, 12:56 PM

I've never understood the fascination with him, but that's just me. He's much too pompous for me to enjoy listening to.

Interestingly, he is one of the reasons why I decided to choose XM when I got my satellite radio this XMas. I didn't want to be counted as somebody who followed Howard to satellite. :)

Glad to see I'm not the only person who had that reaction.

Oddly enough, I had considered getting Sirius several times, pretty much solely because of the "Hair Nation" channel, which is included in my Dish Network package so I've heard it plenty enough to know how it sounds, what the playlist & library depth is, etc.

But the Stern deal killed any interest I might have had in giving them a penny ever.

JonInMiddleGA

01-09-2006, 12:57 PM

How was the show?

http://www.radioandrecords.com/Newsroom/2006_01_09/howardstern.asp

Howard Stern made his debut on Sirius at 6am ET — using a butt trumpet pumping out the sounds of farting to the tune of "Also Sprach Zarathrustra," better known as the theme from 2001. The first words spoken on the new Howard Stern Show were by the show's new announcer, George "Mr. Sulu" Takei, who introduced "the most testosterone-filled man on the planet!"

Charming as always ;)

rkmsuf

01-09-2006, 12:59 PM

cool, had no idea butt trumpets existed.

I for one find him and the whole show amusing.

wade moore

01-09-2006, 01:10 PM

Jon - the stuff you posted about financials is more on what my understanding was... maybe (although i still question it) stern has paid for himself, but he has yet to "save" Sirius...

I read a very good article about 6 months ago in Business 2.0 that shows how successful XM has been and some of the ways that they feel their model is more sound.

Desmond

01-09-2006, 01:19 PM

The shame of Stern is that he never gets credit for the brilliant social satirist he once was. And the further he moves towards shock jock/zoo type radio the less likely that is to happen. People have this notion that he's always been like this, when the truth is that at one time he was an amazing observational humorist, quite possibly the greatest ever when you consider he was doing it for 4 hours a day, 5 days a week.

He had an ability to make even the lamest C List celebs seem interesting with his interviews and his views on marriage, home life, racial issues, celebrity bullshit etc were just timeless both for their truth and humor.

Once the marriage ended though his focus went from observational humor to toilet humor, in spades. Or maybe 4 hours of listening to what it's like to bang a supermodel isn't just as funny as 4 hours of how fucking depressing it is to be surrounded by amazingly sexy women who want to sleep with but you cant because you love your wife, even though you really, really, really want to.

After the marriage the show really became all about the E show, much more strippers, and various naked women, which really became grating to listen to over radio.

The change in supporting cast was also a real killer. He went from everyday dolts who were interesting because they were, in fact, normal people who just happened to be general dolts (John, Grillo, Gary, Gange, Scott) to people who were trying way too hard to be wacky to get their foot in the door (benji, richard, sal).

Billy West and then Jackie leaving was as much the nail in the coffin as much as anything. Suddenly the fact that Robin was a mental case was pretty much ignored, Fred stopped talking pretty much altogether. They may have been happier, but they weren't in any way as interesting.

JonInMiddleGA

01-09-2006, 01:24 PM

wade moore

01-09-2006, 01:27 PM

I grew to dislike Stern over the years when I used to like him..

I thought it was me growing out of being a teenager, but Desmond makes some good points that may play a role...

kcchief19

01-09-2006, 01:36 PM

This is a company that's losing more than $500 million a year, and has been losing hundreds of millions for a number of years now. Unless they're expecting to be bailed out by the government, sooner or later that model must collapse under the weight of its own losses.

They still haven't even sniffed breaking even, not once in their lifetime, nor are there any realistic signs they're likely to ever do so.It's like this post time traveled. It was the same thing said about Amazon.com five years ago. That company totalled billions of losses, including a $650 million loss in 1999 alone. It took eight years before Amazon posted it's first profit.

It's not the losses that are a focus. It's the willingness of investors to continue supporting the company and it's whether or not the company is investing in its future or just pouring money down the drain. Until my eyes were opened through further study, I similarly believed Sirius was losing too much money and was in danger of failing. But the losses they have incurred have really been caused by two factors: initial investments in long-term programming and higher costs for recruiting new subscribers. I'm more worried about the second factor -- analsysts seem to think Sirius is paying more to get subscribers than XM is.

I think this is a format here to stay. The fact that terrestrial radio is scared pantless is a good indication of that. I think there will be a change in the business model at some point, maybe more like what cell phone companies do -- provided you the cheapest radio for free to get you in the door, then try to upsell the phone and services.

Will it be as universal as cell phones or cable TV? I'm not convinced of that. But I've seen forecasts that predict that it will only take a base of 8-10 million subscribers to make a satellite radio company profitable. At the rate both XM and Sirius are going, I think it's fair to believe they will make it.

spleen1015

01-09-2006, 01:37 PM

I don't know what's so funny about a guy saying the same things and asking the same questions to 100s of different attractive women.

"Man, you have nice breasts."
"Thanks, Howard."
"I'd like to sleep with you."
"Thanks, Howard."
"Man, look at that butt."
"Thanks, Howard."
"You're gorgeous!"
"Thanks, Howard. Want to use the Spankanator on me?"
"Of course I do. I wish you'd let me sleep with you."
"Thanks, Howard."

Yikes.

rkmsuf

01-09-2006, 01:41 PM

spleen1015

01-09-2006, 01:45 PM

You should check out David Lee Roth then. He's providing some tremendous commentary.

I don't find any of this stuff entertaining. I used to like Stern. When I finally moved into a market that had him in 1999, I listened to him every day. Then the show became the same thing over and over. Whoever said they were catering to the E! show is probably right.

I saw Stern on Larry King the other night. He was interesting to watch. I think the guy is talented if he stayed away from all of the stupid crap that goes on with the women and all of the other stuff.

The fact that he started his opening show on Sirius with the theme from 2001 in farts tells me his show is not for me.

I'll stick with Mike & Mike.

KWhit

01-09-2006, 02:25 PM

The fact that he started his opening show on Sirius with the theme from 2001 in farts tells me his show is not for me.
Ding, ding, ding!

Cringer

01-09-2006, 03:46 PM

Bwahahahahaha.

Checked the financials on the company lately?

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/P134732.asp
"despite revenue growth of 250% and net subscriber growth of 97%, Sirius posted a net loss of $180.4 million, or 14 cents a share, compared with a net loss of $169.4 million, or 14 per share, in the same period last year. I guess if your net loss rose by 6.5% year-over-year, you might want to downplay it too."

This is a company that's losing more than $500 million a year, and has been losing hundreds of millions for a number of years now. Unless they're expecting to be bailed out by the government, sooner or later that model must collapse under the weight of its own losses.

They still haven't even sniffed breaking even, not once in their lifetime, nor are there any realistic signs they're likely to ever do so.

Yeah, they lose money. What this guy doesn't point out is that XM loses almost as much money as Sirius. Neither company makes a profit. From what I have read recently both are expected to start breaking even over the next 1-2 years. Both companies are growing, it doesn't happen overnight. Sirius is behind XM because of a piss poor start and not getting on the air as fast.

The XM/Sirius race (http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.asp?Feed=FOOL&Date=20060106&ID=5398093)

JonInMiddleGA

01-09-2006, 03:52 PM

What this guy doesn't point out is that XM loses almost as much money as Sirius. Neither company makes a profit.

Oh you're absolutely right about that, I really didn't give XM any thought in the discussion but I'd bitchslap them with the exact same sort of numbers.

Neither makes a profit.
And no realistic expectations I've seen yet give any good reason to believe they ever will, at least not in the amount of time they should reasonably be allowed to continue hemmorhaging cash.

st.cronin

01-09-2006, 03:53 PM

I may be thinking of somebody else, but didn't Amazon almost go under a few years back?

GrantDawg

01-09-2006, 03:54 PM

While those folks are an element (I'm drawing a blank on the name but I believe it's the Donald Wildmon group you're referring to, or else it's the one that's not so much religious as it is anti-Stern, which is mostly one guy in ... Cincinnati IIRC) they aren't the reason this is such a slam dunk to happen. It's assured because the broadcast entities, both radio & tv, aren't going to put up with an unequal playing field much longer. More than anything else, including religion, money motivates ... and those folks are downright motivated.

But broadcast radio and television's power is already very weak. It is in the best interest of the companies that own most broadcast networks to keep the government out of cable since they own heavy cable interest as well. I would say there is almost zero chance that the FCC will regulate cable, but certain right-wing congressmen will try to use that "cause" to get votes for years to come.

JonInMiddleGA

01-09-2006, 03:56 PM

But broadcast radio and television's power is already very weak. It is in the best interest of the companies that own most broadcast networks to keep the government out of cable since they own heavy cable interest as well. I would say there is almost zero chance that the FCC will regulate cable, but certain right-wing congressmen will try to use that "cause" to get votes for years to come.

You've got the investment part right but not the "how they're looking at it" part.
The broadcast networks would like nothing better on earth than to see cable disappear off the face of the earth completely. That's why the love the ala carte propositions that are floating around, that's why they want nothing in life more than to see the cable vs broadcast playing field leveled. Never underestimate the amount of "get even" that motivates people.

Desmond

01-09-2006, 03:57 PM

How much commercial revenue do the 2 entities create? Am I wrong in that it initialy was supposed to be commercial free but has since started to move away from that?

Draft Dodger

01-09-2006, 03:59 PM

4:50 AM just to listen to a guy on the radio?
I wouldn't even do that to hear Cam.

GrantDawg

01-09-2006, 03:59 PM

You've got the investment part right but not the "how they're looking at it" part.
The broadcast networks would like nothing better on earth than to see cable disappear off the face of the earth completely. That's why the love the ala carte propositions that are floating around, that's why they want nothing in life more than to see the cable vs broadcast playing field leveled. Never underestimate the amount of "get even" that motivates people.

And telegraph companies would have loved to cut telephones out of the market and even the playing field. Never underestimate how much money trumps the will to get even.

Cringer

01-09-2006, 04:05 PM

How much commercial revenue do the 2 entities create? Am I wrong in that it initialy was supposed to be commercial free but has since started to move away from that?

Both have commercial free MUSIC channels. There are commercials on the talk shows and stuff, especially ones that are from TV/normal radio snce they have commercials already.

As far as how much they make, I have no idea. The Sirius commercials are not all that high end right now, but they are starting to get more name brand companies show up.

Cringer

01-09-2006, 04:08 PM

4:50 AM just to listen to a guy on the radio?
I wouldn't even do that to hear Cam.

lol. Well, it had extra benefits. First it gave me a good amount of time to work out, so I went long on the treadmill this morning. Also it should make it easier for me to get my nap in once I get on the truck this evening, so I can actually be fully awake to drive tonight.

Farrah Whitworth-Rahn

01-09-2006, 04:48 PM

4:50 AM just to listen to a guy on the radio?
I wouldn't even do that to hear Cam.I would if he'd do the show naked.

Cringer

01-09-2006, 04:57 PM

I would if he'd do the show naked.

Can you see pictures on your radio? :confused:

If I had that I might actually want Playboy Radio on Sirius, because I can't think of anything else it will have to offer.

Farrah Whitworth-Rahn

01-09-2006, 05:00 PM

Can you see pictures on your radio? :confused:

If I had that I might actually want Playboy Radio on Sirius, because I can't think of anything else it will have to offer.Cam's show is also broadcast via a live net stream.

Cringer

01-09-2006, 05:16 PM

Cam's show is also broadcast via a live net stream.
Forgot about that. :thumbsup:

Lorena

01-09-2006, 05:28 PM

Okay, enough of the politics and how much each company is losing. Let's get to the good stuff...

What were the revelations?? I'm dying to know!

Draft Dodger

01-09-2006, 05:32 PM

I would if he'd do the show naked.

meh. I'm still sleeping in.

Draft Dodger

01-09-2006, 05:33 PM

lol. Well, it had extra benefits. First it gave me a good amount of time to work out, so I went long on the treadmill this morning. Also it should make it easier for me to get my nap in once I get on the truck this evening, so I can actually be fully awake to drive tonight.

so, if I'm reading this right...you are getting up extra early so that you can sleep while you are driving?

JonInMiddleGA

01-09-2006, 06:21 PM

What were the revelations?? I'm dying to know!

Okay, I'll bite ... I'm lost here. What were what "revelations"?

Toddzilla

01-09-2006, 06:28 PM

Yeah, they lose money. What this guy doesn't point out is that XM loses almost as much money as Sirius.]

While true, XM has nearly twice the number of subscribers as Sirius and pays less-per-subscriber to sign them up ($80 vs. $120? per new sub.) So it looks like XM is much closer to break-even than Sirius. That, and they don't have a half-billion dollar contract over their heads.

Mota

01-09-2006, 06:31 PM

I just hope that the government does not get into the business of censoring this voluntary product for which you need to affirmatively register and pay to access.

"I need to protect my children from satellite radio. If there were only some way to keep it from coming into my home/car. Some easy action that I could take or not take to keep from hearing it. Awww, screw it. I'll just ask the government to help me."

You're lucky you're not Canadian. We just got Sirius satellite about a month ago, and it will NOT have Howard Stern because our regulatory board (the CRTC) thinks they should decide what is best for us.

Also we have these stupid Canadian content rules, so instead of a channel dedicated to college football, we get 4 channels of hockey. The reason this is so sad is that we already have tons of sports channels that only talk about hockey, why do I need to pay for more of the same?

Cringer

01-09-2006, 06:40 PM

so, if I'm reading this right...you are getting up extra early so that you can sleep while you are driving?

So I can get a decent nap before I have to drive. Nap in an hour from now, start driving about midnight. :D

Cringer

01-09-2006, 06:42 PM

The revelations.....

1. I cheated on my wife and she caught me.

2. I once hid in a bathroom Closet and pleasured myself watching my family members went to the bathroom (cousin & Aunt)

3. In the last year I got a girl pregnant and had to pay for her abortion.

4. I think I am addicted to porn, I masturbate twice a day, and prefer it to sex.

5. I have spent well over $10,000 on internet porn.

6. My buddy and I once order massage girls to a hotel room and they ripped us off and left us standing there in our underwear.

7. I have pleasured myself with meat and vegetables.

8. I have a half sister never met and don’t want to.

9. I’ve had cosmetic surgery.

10. A guy once blew his load on my chest.

11. I once had my stomach pumped for alcohol poisoning and when I woke up an acquaintance of the same sex was fondling my genitals.

The participants....who's is who's is revealed next week.
Howard, Robin, Fred, Bengie, Gary, Sal, Richard, Jason, Sal, Artie, Scott

Lorena

01-09-2006, 06:47 PM

Okay, I'll bite ... I'm lost here. What were what "revelations"?

It might not have entertainment value to you, but each of the "major" cast members had to come up with a juicy secret and reveal it on the show today.

Lorena

01-09-2006, 06:48 PM

Ahh... nvm, I found the revelations but don't know who they belong to.

Lorena

01-09-2006, 06:50 PM

11. I once had my stomach pumped for alcohol poisoning and when I woke up an acquaintance of the same sex was fondling my genitals.

I'd be shocked if this wasn't Artie

Farrah Whitworth-Rahn

01-09-2006, 06:51 PM

For like two seconds I read that as "Arlie".

I was wondering what he was hiding.

Buccaneer

01-09-2006, 06:52 PM

I would if he'd do the show naked.
...and I get my stereo speakers placed in the middle of the floor.

JonInMiddleGA

01-09-2006, 07:06 PM

7. I have pleasured myself with meat and vegetables.

Damn, I didn't know that HA had been added to the Stern cast.

Swaggs

01-09-2006, 07:12 PM

#5 has to be Richard, right?

st.cronin

01-09-2006, 07:14 PM

I'm not a fan of the show, but how is it even possible to spend 10k on internet porn?????

JonInMiddleGA

01-09-2006, 07:58 PM

I'm not a fan of the show, but how is it even possible to spend 10k on internet porn?????

Doesn't seem all that tough, especially since it didn't say "in the past year" or set any kind of time limit.

Figure, what, $10 to $20 per month for a single service?
Let's say $15 X 12 months, that's $180 year.
20 services X $180 = $3,600
$3,600 annually X 3 years and voila ... $10k in porn spending.

Marmel

01-09-2006, 08:35 PM

Lorena

01-09-2006, 08:49 PM

A few guesses

6 has to be Artie, that reads just like he talks and would be typical of him.

I'd guess Howard's is #5.

8 could be Fred

10 must be Robin

I'm sure most girls have had a guy release on them, so I doubt 10 would be Robin.

6 and 11 both sound like Artie.

5 definitely sounds like Richard which leads me to believe that it's not him (too easy)

Logan

01-09-2006, 09:12 PM

jaygr

01-09-2006, 09:28 PM

If I remember (from free radio), Artie said that he would seriously have to consult a lawyer to see if there could be any action from his revelation. So I'll guess that he knocked up a chick.

I believe that was with his original revelation, which Will said was not up to par, so Artie told the story on the air. It was something with him and his friend stealing a car from a wiseguy, getting scared and returning it.

(which now that I see all the revelations, Artie made a good point that if it were anyone else but him it would have been a good revelation. Too bad for him he already told so many great stories lol. Furthermore, anyone else think with the exception of 2 or 3, the revelations are a little lame overall? Maybe not lame, just that some don't seem to be in the same league as some of the others.)

Galaxy

01-09-2006, 11:00 PM

Said it before, will say it again -- you can absolutely 100% count on this being done. Not today, not tomorrow, but (to pick a timeline) say by 2010 at the latest. Bank on it.

While those folks are an element (I'm drawing a blank on the name but I believe it's the Donald Wildmon group you're referring to, or else it's the one that's not so much religious as it is anti-Stern, which is mostly one guy in ... Cincinnati IIRC) they aren't the reason this is such a slam dunk to happen. It's assured because the broadcast entities, both radio & tv, aren't going to put up with an unequal playing field much longer. More than anything else, including religion, money motivates ... and those folks are downright motivated.

I just do not see it happening. Too much outrage from the general population, and it could teter on the right to free speech debate. Also, satelite radio is starting to establish itself as a big enough player with enough supporters, and cable is here to stay. Remember, many of the broadcast networks own cable networks (Fox's empire-Fox News, Fox Sports, Direct TV, FX, Fox), Disney owns ABC, ESPN and the rest of those ESPN channels, General Electric/Universal owns all the NBC networks and I think other channels like USA Network, Turner-CNN/TBS/TNT).

panerd

01-10-2006, 05:59 AM

Said it before, will say it again -- you can absolutely 100% count on this being done. Not today, not tomorrow, but (to pick a timeline) say by 2010 at the latest. Bank on it.

While those folks are an element (I'm drawing a blank on the name but I believe it's the Donald Wildmon group you're referring to, or else it's the one that's not so much religious as it is anti-Stern, which is mostly one guy in ... Cincinnati IIRC) they aren't the reason this is such a slam dunk to happen. It's assured because the broadcast entities, both radio & tv, aren't going to put up with an unequal playing field much longer. More than anything else, including religion, money motivates ... and those folks are downright motivated.

So let me get this straight... free radio has made such terrible programming choices and sold so much excess advertising that people are willing to pay $10+ a month for an alternative. ($13 radio!) Free television is so bad that people are willing to pay $10+ a month to watch shows on HBO that actually have a script and aren't about exploiting someone's reality. (Some of which could actually play on the regular networks) Instead of the solution being to create a free product that people will come back to, it is too regulate the other?

Ten years ago I would have turned to the Republicans to stop this lunacy. I know I can't go to the Democrats. So who do I go to?

CamEdwards

01-10-2006, 09:16 AM

just popped in to say I'm not wearing pants. :D

Farrah Whitworth-Rahn

01-10-2006, 09:33 AM

just popped in to say I'm not wearing pants. :DLiar. Prove it.

Logan

01-13-2006, 05:52 PM

So how'd the first week go? Were the revelations revealed?

Cringer

01-13-2006, 06:42 PM

So how'd the first week go? Were the revelations revealed?

They were supposed to reveal them on this coming Monday, but now it will be Tuesday because they don't want people missing it because of the holiday.

The first week was great. George Takai was amazing on the show all week. He and Artie were funny as can be together. Takai was on as the 'announcer' but ended up being a good size part of the show, so much so people have been trying to talk him into staying on the show. But he lives in Cailfornia so he won't be staying.

Also, after the show is The Wrap Up Show, with Gary and John Hein. It's pretty good, gives you a look at whats going on during the show that's not on the air. Also, Bubba the Love Sponge is on in the afternoons on Howards other channel, and Howard keeps calling into his show and BSing with him all the time. He is doing it right now actually.

Howard even did a show today. (His show is only going to be Monday through Thursday normally, with a show hosted by Gary and John Hein on Friday, but the show is now a full 5 hours or more a day instead of 4, with only 6 minutes of commercials an hour.)

Good shows all week for the most part.

Cringer

01-13-2006, 07:28 PM

Oh, and one of the funny things of the week is a couple of fights that are starting to get going.

1. Bubba the Love Sponge and Ronnie (the limo driver) have been bitching at each other for a couple days on a couple different shows. Bubba wants to fight him (he trains with Hulk Hogan so he thinks he can kick anyones ass), but Ronnie won't do it.

2. This one started last week actually, when Howard was doing a technical test that wasn't announced. They started talking about Martha Stewart and her daughter. Her daughter runs Martha's channel on Sirius. Howard called Martha's daughter 'cunty' and I guess it turned into a big deal around Sirius. Now Bubba is on to her because she made a rude ass comment to Bubba's producer in the hall for no reason. So there has been a good amount of bashing of Martha Stewart's daughter on both shows for a couple days now.

Marmel

01-14-2006, 12:31 AM

George Takai was so amazing that I have a feeling the show won't be as good next week..call it a temporary disappointment. It was amazing how great he fit in with everybody else. The second Arnold phone call was a blast, as was Howard's thank you song to him. The chemistry between him and Artie was perfect. As much as I like Artie, I never felt like he found his niche on the show, but I think he found it now as the computer illiterate, dumb ass, gutter mouth, guy on the show. It fits his stand up style and seems to complete the circle that I felt was a little left open since Jackie left. Hopefully he can keep it up. The show has been as great as ever this week.

Desmond

01-14-2006, 01:21 AM

I enjoyed what ive heard of the show this week alot more than I thought I would.

Like Marmel and Cringer I thought Takei was excellent, Howard talking to him about his sexuality was really interesting, old school Howard, in that despite it being graphic you could sense there was an honest fascination about the pracitce of gay sex.

I didn't enjoy the Bubba stuff as much, just seems forced crudeness to me. But I did enjoy the general tone of just a bunch of people shooting the shit and being funny.

Cringer

01-14-2006, 01:29 AM

stevew

01-14-2006, 04:18 AM

They were supposed to reveal them on this coming Monday, but now it will be Tuesday because they don't want people missing it because of the holiday.

The first week was great. George Takai was amazing on the show all week. He and Artie were funny as can be together. Takai was on as the 'announcer' but ended up being a good size part of the show, so much so people have been trying to talk him into staying on the show. But he lives in Cailfornia so he won't be staying.

Also, after the show is The Wrap Up Show, with Gary and John Hein. It's pretty good, gives you a look at whats going on during the show that's not on the air. Also, Bubba the Love Sponge is on in the afternoons on Howards other channel, and Howard keeps calling into his show and BSing with him all the time. He is doing it right now actually.

Howard even did a show today. (His show is only going to be Monday through Thursday normally, with a show hosted by Gary and John Hein on Friday, but the show is now a full 5 hours or more a day instead of 4, with only 6 minutes of commercials an hour.)

Good shows all week for the most part.

I think he said he was doing the revelations on monday right before the show ended(about 10-11ish). Unless he later changed his mind.

Cringer

01-14-2006, 09:45 AM

I think he said he was doing the revelations on monday right before the show ended(about 10-11ish). Unless he later changed his mind.

Heck if I know for sure any more. They said every possible scenario at some point. I guess we'll find out what it is for sure on Monday.

Bearcat729

01-17-2006, 03:16 PM

REVELATIONS REVEALED
And here they are, completely revealed:

1. I cheated on my wife and she caught me...

And the revelation belongs to: SCOTT

2. I once hid in a bathroom closet and pleasured myself when my family members went to the bathroom...

And the revelation belongs to: SAL

3. In the last year, I got a girl pregnant and had to pay for her abortion...

And the revelation belongs to: RICHARD

4. I think I'm addicted to porn - I jerk off twice a day and prefer to masturbate than have real sex...

And the revelation belongs to: JASON

5. I have spent well over $10,000 on internet porn...
THE FANS:

And the revelation belongs to: JD

6. My buddy and I once ordered massage girls to our hotel room, but they ripped us off and we were left staring at each other in our underwear...

And the revelation belongs to: GARY

7. I have pleasured myself with meat and vegetables...

And the revelation belongs to: ROBIN

8. I have a half-sister I've never met and don't want to...

And the revelation belongs to: FRED

9. I've had cosmetic surgery...

And the revelation belongs to: HOWARD

10. A guy once blew his load on my chest...

And the revelation belongs to: ARTIE

11. I once had my stomach pumped for alcohol poisoning and when I woke up in the hospital, an acquaintance of the same sex was fondling my genitals...

And the revelation belongs to: BENJY

Logan

01-17-2006, 06:33 PM

And I'll guess that Howard has had some cosmetic surgery.

Thumbs up for me :).

Did he elaborate on what he did? In recent years it seemed like his face changed...maybe some laser surgery to get rid of wrinkles? A little liposuction around his stomach?

Ksyrup

01-18-2006, 06:53 PM

David Schultz of Earvolution (http://www.earvolution.com/) has issued the following report:

When Howard Stern moved to Sirius Satellite Radio, he became Sirius' strongest argument for attracting people away from terrestrial radio. In the last two weeks, a surprising entrant has emerged to challenge Stern as satellite radio's greatest marketing tool: David Lee Roth.

Since taking the commercial airwaves on January 3rd, Roth's inaugural broadcasts have been scatterbrained messes with little to no coherent thought being applied to the subjects discussed during the most misguided call-in show in recent history. In the absence of guests, well, to be fair, interesting guests, Roth must carry the show with his wit and charm. Instead, Roth falls back on stories of his recent exploits as a New York EMT and rehashes old grudges with Sammy Hagar and Eddie Van Halen. In 1985, when Roth oozed charisma, this might be interesting. In 2006, it's painful radio.

The majority of Roth's show revolves around his monologues on political and social issues. At the core of Roth's problems is his lack of pedigree to credibly offer opinions on many of the weighty issues he wants to discuss. Roth wants listeners to buy into the belief that he is an intelligent, thoughtful social critic without making any effort to build up such a rapport with his audience. To most listeners, David Lee Roth is an increasingly irrelevant, aging rock star. America likely cares no more for his thoughts on President Bush's policies or legislative enactments than they would about Courtney Love's views on health care or Paris Hilton's thoughts on the amendments to the tax code. Before his predecessor Howard Stern confronted politics, he had earned the trust of his audience, generally reserving his strongest, most lucid opinions for issues within his bailiwick as a performer (e.g. censorship, the FCC) or as a longtime New Yorker (e.g. daytime highway construction, living in New York after 9/11).

Read the rest of the article at Earvolution.com (http://www.earvolution.com/2006/01/sirius-satellite-and-xm-radios-newest.asp).

Ksyrup

01-24-2006, 06:59 PM

Honestly...what did these people think they were buying into?!

Mitch Marconi of The Post Chronicle (http://www.postchronicle.com/) has issued the following report:

David Lee Roth's welcome at the radio staion formerly known as K-Rock has just about worn itself out. Lolyd Grove notes that Roth's antics are said to have become "an outrage to some at station 92.3 Free FM."

Lloyd Grove gives us the Lowdown:

Looks like rock-star-turned-shock-jock David Lee Roth is having an ugly launch as Howard Stern's successor, with radio station staffers grumbling about Roth's allegedly bad behavior. My sources at 92.3 Free FM — formerly K-Rock — tell me that the former VAN HALEN front man and his manager, Matt Sencio, "are totally out of control and out of their league when it comes to producing a radio show," as one disgruntled employee put it.

"This guy [Roth] is impossible to work with. A real arrogant, self-righteous a-," says a Lowdown spy. "All the execs know they made the two biggest errors in radio history — letting Stern go to Sirius and hiring this moron Roth. He never preps for a show. He is out the door five minutes after the show, unless he is 'forced' to record a commercial or re-record ones he made errors on."

Lorena

01-24-2006, 07:14 PM

JonInMiddleGA

01-24-2006, 07:22 PM

Tsk tsk... I'm sure 92.3 "Free FM" regrets letting Howard go BIG TIME. I wonder how much money they're losing...

Not nearly as much as you might think, finding people willing to advertise during Stern's show has been notoriously difficult for years.

Most national advertisers won't touch him with a 10 foot pole & many local advertisers can't afford the rates stations try to get for him. He's long been a Catch-22 for stations who couldn't find ways to convert his morning ratings into revenue in other dayparts (i.e. such as selling ads on a 6a-10p rotating basis, taking advantage of his part of that rating to get a higher rate but putting the spots somewhere else that had lower numbers)

Depending upon what they're paying DLR vs what they were paying for Stern, this could well turn out to be a case of addition-by-subtraction for some stations.

Anthony

01-24-2006, 09:14 PM

i thought Matt Sencio, DLR's manager, was John Sencio, the MTV VJ from the 90's. i googled Matt Sencio and found this article. i just instantly realized how much i miss the 90s, and i felt older all of a sudden. seeing some of these names brought me back to my teens. fuck Father Time.

tied to the 90's

Some days just blend into the next. And other days, you find a website like www.johnsencio.com.

Do you guys remember John Sencio? Of course you do. He was one of MTV's premiere VJ's during the mid 90's. Sencio, Kennedy, Matt Pinfield, Idalis, Bill Bellamy, Simon Rex. I feel like I grew up with all those guys. I mean, for the most part, you really don't start watching MTV until you're in your early teens. So when I turned 13 in 1993, I had Sencio and crew there to greet me. They saw me through my awkward years... which hopefully will be coming to an end any day now. Let's go through the lineup. (note: we are ignoring mtv news icons, as they were not technically vj's. sorry tabitha soren)

Kennedy - I was one of the millions of people that kind of liked Kennedy, but didn't really like Kennedy in the mid-90's. I thought she was cool, but kind of annoying, but still pretty cool. You know? It was always hard to put your finger on her. When I started working at MTV I came across a tape of Kennedy interviewing Weezer on Alternative Nation, which has to be the funniest thing I've ever seen. Rivers Cuomo and Matt Sharp just sit there the whole time, ignoring her questions, causing Kennedy to go crazier and crazier by the minute. You have to see it.

Matt Pinfield - There are certain moments in your life that you never forget, and the moment that you discover that Matt Pinfield and Ian Robinson aren't the same person, happens to be one of them.

Bill Bellamy - Remember when it seemed like a safe bet that Bellamy was going to have a career post-MTV? That seems so long ago, doesn't it? I broke off all ties with Bill after he starred in Love Stinks with French Stewart. I hate that movie, and I hate that I watch it every time it comes on HBO. Damn you French Stewart!!!

Simon Rex - Remember when it seemed like a safe bet that Simon Rex was going to have a career post-MTV? Me neither. But I don't think anybody told him that, which explains why he keeps trying and trying and trying.

Idalis - I was in love with Idalis, which was pretty surprising since she wasn't exactly my type at the time. I mean, my ideal woman was Jenny McCarthy, a chick that could be considered Idalis' blonde haired, blue eyed opposite. Yet I still had a massive crush on Idalis. In fact, she was probably the first girl with "flava" that I was ever attracted to. Not since the Japanese girl from Karate Kid II has a single woman drawn me to an entire race the way Idalis did. Latino girls... you have her to blame. But yes, Idalis' run on Six Feet Under last season that ended with her and Rico having some crazy sex on her living room floor... yeah, highlight of my year.

And that brings us to John Sencio. Sencio, in some ways, was my favorite. He wasn't particularly funny, he wasn't extremely good looking, and he wasn't exactly 'cool,' but he was... there. I can't explain it. He was just there, and he was good at being just there. Ten years later, Sencio has become the sort of go-to punchline between my friend Dan and I when it comes to MTV related topics (although Sway is beginning to compete for that title, and rightfully so.) Before any MTV event, he'll be sure to ask me, "Will Sencio be there?" I've also returned to my desk at work to find the voicemail, "Hi Bob, it's John Sencio... just curious if you wanted to maybe hang out later... can you let me in the building?"

http://www.johnsencio.com/frontpggfx/John%20Sencio%20841B%20LR1.jpg

I hope this isn't coming off as mean, because it's not supposed to be. Like the Friars say, "We roast the ones we love." Well, I love John Sencio, and you should too. He's deserving of our love, because nobody was better at just being there than he was. Even if he did make a cameo in the afformentioned Love Stinks. We'll overlook that.

But I urge you to check out JohnSencio.com to check out how well he's doing. Browse the photo gallery. Download his music (his music!). And if you feel inclined, send him an email. Dan did. And on that note, I'll leave you with Dan's email.

To: John Sencio
Subject: Question For The Man

Point of contention amongst all my buddies, please help if possible...

John Sencio banged the following while at MTV:

a) Idalis
b) Jenny McCarthy
c) Kennedy
d) Kurt Loder
e) all of the above

Your input is appreciated John. Big fan.

Dan

Cringer

02-14-2006, 09:09 PM

Scott Ferrall has a show on one of Howard's channels now. Not sports talk either. Pretty damn good. Guy is nuts, nice to hear him on the air again.

ice4277

02-14-2006, 09:10 PM

Scott Ferrall has a show on one of Howard's channels now. Not sports talk either. Pretty damn good. Guy is nuts, nice to hear him on the air again.
Every f'ing time I turn on one of his channels, I hear the stupid Howard 100 news. It seems like they air that 12 hours out of the day, and it sucks.

Cringer

02-14-2006, 09:24 PM

Every f'ing time I turn on one of his channels, I hear the stupid Howard 100 news. It seems like they air that 12 hours out of the day, and it sucks.

Yeah, but they are getting better with things like Ferrall being added. They aren't going to throw just anyone on. I do wish they would do more repeats of the specials they have though. I always miss those. Things like Meet the Sterns and the Intern Show I have not heard at all yet.

In a few months they will have the channels filled out better though. I get the impression that after getting Bubba they didn't look for anything else for a show until last month.

Toddzilla

02-15-2006, 07:53 AM

Yeah, but they are getting better with things like Ferrall being added. They aren't going to throw just anyone on. My, that's quite the contradiction.

Arctus

02-15-2006, 08:33 AM

Every f'ing time I turn on one of his channels, I hear the stupid Howard 100 news. It seems like they air that 12 hours out of the day, and it sucks.

There was some discussion on today's show about reformatting. They may be going in the direction of having all live and produced content on channel 100, and replaying Stern's show repeatedly on channel 101. Howard said that he is becoming aware that it make sense to replay his show on the PM drive, but that he did not wan't to end up "competing" with Bubba.

rkmsuf

02-15-2006, 08:36 AM

There was some discussion on today's show about reformatting. They may be going in the direction of having all live and produced content on channel 100, and replaying Stern's show repeatedly on channel 101. Howard said that he is becoming aware that it make sense to replay his show on the PM drive, but that he did not wan't to end up "competing" with Bubba.

That sounds like a good way to go. The main show has been great. All the other extra stuff kind of dumb. I have no interest in howard 100 news. or really the wrap up show.

Just make great main shows and play those with the occasional special feature like a roast or something.

IwasHere

02-17-2006, 03:18 AM

I went the XM route and just purchased this mobile unit from Amazon.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0006GFVPC/002-3116732-3373663?v=glance&n=172282

For only $100.00 you get a mobile Walkman type unit,and...

MyFi receiver with a clip-on antenna, an integrated rechargeable battery, a complete home accessory kit (with antenna and audio cable), a complete vehicle accessory kit (with antenna), stereo earbud headphones, a remote control, a remote battery, a belt clip/stand, a protective carrying case, and quick-start guides and user's manuals in English and Spanish.

I use it at home and in my car as my main source for music. I use it as a walkman at the gym by recording 5 hours of my favorite music the night before I go to the gym.

The only flaw is that I have found the Portable Antenna feature to be useless. I can only get clear reception when it is in ti's home or car cradle. For me the portble antenna thingy is worthless. The five hours of record time makes the Walkman feature nice for the gym though.

JonInMiddleGA

02-17-2006, 06:26 AM

http://www.radioandrecords.com/Newsroom/2006_02_16/xmlosses.asp

Due in part to increased Q4 ad spending to counter Stern's January debut on rival Sirius, XM's Q4 net loss rose from $190.4 million (93 cents per share) a year ago to $270.4 million ($1.22), higher than the 92 cents per share expected by analysts polled by Thomson First Call.

In fact, the increased spending drove XM's subscriber acquisition cost from $64 per customer in Q4 2004 to $89 in Q4 2005. However, XM CEO Hugh Panero said during this morning's earnings conference call that the company maintained SAC costs of $64 per customer throughout 2005 in anticipation of a late-year media blitz to combat Stern, and expects SAC to decline this year.

XM's Q4 revenue more than doubled, from $83.1 million a year ago to $177 million, as the company added 898,315 new subscribers during the quarter. However, Q4 EBITDA loss increased 43%, to $199.4 million, due in part to $25.3 million in de-leveraging costs.

For 2005, XM's net loss widened from $651.2 million ($3.30) a year ago to $675.3 million ($3.07), missing Thomson Financial's $2.78 forecast. 2005 revenue rose from $244.4 million in 2004 to $558.3 million, as the satcaster signed up 2.7 million new net customers during the course of the year. XM ended 2005 with 5.9 million subscribers, and topped the 6 million mark in January. However, 2005 EBITDA loss widened 12%, to $434.3 million.

For the year, XM realized $28 million in de-leveraging costs tied to retirement of long-term debt.

Looking ahead, XM expects to report positive cash flow from operations during Q4 2006.

http://www.radioandrecords.com/Newsroom/2006_02_16/xmdirector.asp
In a letter sent to XM Chairman Gary Parsons, Pierce J. "Jack" Roberts resigned his post on XM's board due to concerns that his warnings about the company's spending are going unheard.

"Given current course and speed, there is — in my view — a significant chance of crisis on the horizon," Roberts says. "Even absent a crisis, I believe that XM will inevitably serve its shareholders poorly without major changes now. I have been troubled about the current direction of the company and do not believe that it is in the best interest of the company's shareholders. I have made my analyses and observations known in an increasingly vociferous manner to the board and a number of senior managers of the company. I am not having any useful effect, and I care too much and believe in my own views too much to just 'go along.'"

Arctus

02-17-2006, 06:55 AM

In a letter sent to XM Chairman Gary Parsons, Pierce J. "Jack" Roberts resigned his post on XM's board due to concerns that his warnings about the company's spending are going unheard.

"Given current course and speed, there is — in my view — a significant chance of crisis on the horizon," Roberts says. "Even absent a crisis, I believe that XM will inevitably serve its shareholders poorly without major changes now. I have been troubled about the current direction of the company and do not believe that it is in the best interest of the company's shareholders. I have made my analyses and observations known in an increasingly vociferous manner to the board and a number of senior managers of the company. I am not having any useful effect, and I care too much and believe in my own views too much to just 'go along.'" [/I]

I don't know what he's bitching about. Dropping $55 Million on an Oprah Channel that will have Oprah on it for a total of 1/2 hour a week seems like a wise investment to me. :rolleyes:

rkmsuf

02-17-2006, 08:09 AM

the Richard bikini wax was one of the funniest things I've ever heard

JonInMiddleGA

02-17-2006, 12:07 PM

http://www.radioandrecords.com/Newsroom/2006_02_17/siriuslosses.asp

Friday, Feb. 17, 2006

Sirius Losses Widen As Revenue Grows

The subscription radio provider's Q4 loss widened from $262 million (21 cents per share) a year ago to $311 million (23 cents), a penny worse than the 22 cents per share expected by analysts polled by Thomson First Call.

Total Q4 revenue rose from $25.2 million to $80 million, as the company's subscription revenue increased from $22.7 million to $67.8 million. This boost was driven by the almost 1.3 million net new subscribers the company signed up during the quarter. Average monthly churn for Q4 was 1.5%, which equaled 124,034 customers who cancelled the service. Q4 advertising revenue rose from $507,000 a year ago to $3 million.

For 2005, Sirius' net loss grew from $712.2 million (57 cents) to $863 million (65 cents), a penny higher than Thomson Financial's forecast of 64 cents. Total 2005 revenue rose from $66.8 million to $242.3 million, as subscription revenue increased from $62.8 million to $223.6 million. Sirius signed up 2.5 million net new subscribers during the year. Subscriber churn for the year was 1.5%, as the company lost 346,000 net customers in 2005. Advertising revenue for the year rose from $906,000 in 2004 to $6.1 million.

Looking ahead, Sirius forecasts that it will have 6 million customers by the end of 2006 and expects to become cash flow positive — minus capital expenditures — by Q4 2006. The company expects to generate $600 million in total revenue this year, and $1 billion in 2007. However, it also expects average monthly subscriber churn to rise to 1.8% in 2006.

JonInMiddleGA

02-17-2006, 12:08 PM

So, for those keeping score, XM & Sirius combined to lose a little over 1.5 BILLION dollars last year.

albionmoonlight

02-17-2006, 12:26 PM

So, for those keeping score, XM & Sirius combined to lose a little over 1.5 BILLION dollars last year.
A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money.

Toddzilla

02-17-2006, 01:45 PM

I went the XM route and just purchased this mobile unit from Amazon...{EDIT}For only $100.00 you get a mobile Walkman type unit,andThe key differentiator, IMO, is the fact that XM has a true portable unit in which you can listen to live XM broadcasting. Sirius has yet to develop such a portable unit - they only have a device in which you must download content and listen to it later. Nothing quite like listening to 4-hour old news or a football game played yesterday.

JonInMiddleGA

02-17-2006, 03:05 PM

http://www.radioandrecords.com/Newsroom/2006_02_17/shareholderdiscontent.asp

A sell-off of XM Satellite Radio shares continued today after board member Pierce J. "Jack" Roberts resigned yesterday over concerns that his warnings about the company's spending are going unheard. The announcement came as XM said its Q4 per-share net loss was 30 cents higher than what analysts polled by Thomson First Call expected, and investors reacted by sending XM shares down 5% in Thursday's trading, to $23.98. The selling resumed with the opening bell on Wall Street today, with XM shares off more than 10% in late afternoon trading. As of 3:25pm ET, XM was off $2.17, to $21.57. Volume is more than three times its normal daily average, with 19.5 million shares traded. XM shares were valued at more than $37 a share in October 2005 but have since dropped consistently.

stevew

02-17-2006, 03:08 PM

I went the XM route and just purchased this mobile unit from Amazon.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0006GFVPC/002-3116732-3373663?v=glance&n=172282

For only $100.00 you get a mobile Walkman type unit,and...

I use it at home and in my car as my main source for music. I use it as a walkman at the gym by recording 5 hours of my favorite music the night before I go to the gym.

The only flaw is that I have found the Portable Antenna feature to be useless. I can only get clear reception when it is in ti's home or car cradle. For me the portble antenna thingy is worthless. The five hours of record time makes the Walkman feature nice for the gym though.

That must have recently dropped in price. I would have seriously considered getting XM if that was that price when i bought my sirius radio(Instead of the xm thing being 250.)

albionmoonlight

02-17-2006, 03:31 PM

albionmoonlight

02-17-2006, 03:35 PM

dola--

That sort of makes me think of when I went to a wrestling board once and noticed that a couple of guys were debating whether to buy or sell shares of WWE based, in effect, on whether they liked last night's RAW or not. A kindly soul or two tried to tell them that maybe there was a little more to responsible investing than that--but you got the sense that a brick wall would have been a better audience for any sage advice.

IwasHere

02-17-2006, 04:33 PM

Bearcat729

03-01-2006, 12:06 PM

Has anyone else heard about the possibility of Jim Rome leaving his show to go work for Howard Stern? All I have seen is a post on the Stern Fan Network and it's not a reliable source.

hxxp://www.sternfannetwork.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=102363

Toddzilla

03-01-2006, 01:13 PM

I doubt we'll be hearing Scott Ferrall on Howie 101 ever again.

Logan

03-01-2006, 04:21 PM

I heard a teaser news story last night during a commercial that Stern is getting sued again. Anybody know what it's about?

(Obviously I wasn't teased enough to watch :).)

KWhit

03-01-2006, 04:22 PM

I doubt we'll be hearing Scott Ferrall on Howie 101 ever again.
Why?

JonInMiddleGA

03-01-2006, 04:55 PM

I heard a teaser news story last night during a commercial that Stern is getting sued again. Anybody know what it's about?

http://www.radioandrecords.com/NewsRoom/2006_02_28/cbssues.asp
Tuesday, Feb. 28, 2006

CBS Sues Howard Stern

In a 43-page complaint filed today, CBS charges that Stern "repeatedly and willfully" violated his contract with former employer Infinity Broadcasting — now CBS Radio — by using the company's airtime for his own financial benefit by promoting his current employer, Sirius Satellite Radio, on the air.

The suit also claims that Stern "fraudulently concealed" stock options that were part of his contract with Sirius and that he collected on those options not long after debuting on the subscription radio service in January.

In a statement, CBS says, "All of Stern's actions for which he received this expedited compensation occurred during the time that Stern was under exclusive contract with CBS Radio, when the Sirius payment terms to Stern were kept secret."

panerd

03-01-2006, 05:01 PM

http://www.radioandrecords.com/NewsRoom/2006_02_28/cbssues.asp
Tuesday, Feb. 28, 2006

CBS Sues Howard Stern

In a 43-page complaint filed today, CBS charges that Stern "repeatedly and willfully" violated his contract with former employer Infinity Broadcasting — now CBS Radio — by using the company's airtime for his own financial benefit by promoting his current employer, Sirius Satellite Radio, on the air.

The suit also claims that Stern "fraudulently concealed" stock options that were part of his contract with Sirius and that he collected on those options not long after debuting on the subscription radio service in January.

In a statement, CBS says, "All of Stern's actions for which he received this expedited compensation occurred during the time that Stern was under exclusive contract with CBS Radio, when the Sirius payment terms to Stern were kept secret."

I will never understand lawsuits like this. As an average radio listener I am well aware the part of Stern's contract is going to be Sirius stock. But CBS radio is unaware that this is happening. :rolleyes:

JonInMiddleGA

03-01-2006, 05:07 PM

As an average radio listener I am well aware the part of Stern's contract is going to be Sirius stock. But CBS radio is unaware that this is happening. :rolleyes:

A couple of things come to mind:
a) what did you know & when did you know it? And what did CBS know & when did they know it?

which really relates to
b) What did Stern claim officially to CBS vs whatever assumption/guess/intuition
we/they had about how a deal would be structured?

The latter, connected with the former, basically means that we don't know how Howard might have screwed himself if he lied/misrepresented something during the process.

Klinglerware

03-01-2006, 05:13 PM

I will never understand lawsuits like this. As an average radio listener I am well aware the part of Stern's contract is going to be Sirius stock. But CBS radio is unaware that this is happening. :rolleyes:

I'm under the impression that while the suit seems petty, I could see why CBS would do it. If Stern's contract had a clause that would give him a strong incentive to undermine CBS's market position while Stern was still under contract with CBS (the allegedly secret expedited stock option windfall that activated if Sirius hit a certain subscriber target), then it would seem (from CBS' perspective) like litigation worth pursuing...

Arctus

03-01-2006, 05:39 PM

I'm under the impression that while the suit seems petty, I could see why CBS would do it. If Stern's contract had a clause that would give him a strong incentive to undermine CBS's market position while Stern was still under contract with CBS (the allegedly secret expedited stock option windfall that activated if Sirius hit a certain subscriber target), then it would seem (from CBS' perspective) like litigation worth pursuing...

Stern claims that he had management approval to openly discuss his transition to Sirius during his show, and that it was encouraged due to the high ratings he was drawing. Who knows if this is true......

Assuming Howard wasn't blatantly lying during his show, I think CBS are fools for filing this lawsuit because:

1. His buzz regarding his switch to Sirius had pretty much died down, his only significant forum was the 3.3 Million Sirius subscribers. CBS put Howard back into the media spotlight.

2. I can't see how CBS can win their case. CBS let Howard openly discuss his future for 14 months on the airwaves that they control. Now they are suing him for damages caused by what he said on airwaves fully under their own control?

My two favorite theories as to why CBS filed the lawsuit are:

1. To deflect attention from their worse than abyssmal performance in the ratings that were just released.

2. Their real objective are the archive tapes that are in Howard's possession. CBS does own the physical tapes, but Howard owns the intellectual property on them. CBS realizes that the only way it can regain market share is to replay old Stern shows.

Arctus

03-01-2006, 05:56 PM

Dola,

On a related note, Bubba The Love Sponge (who has the 4:00PM slot on Howard 101) was faxed an intent to file an injunction (I may be butchering the phrase....the point is it was not an actual injunction, just a warning) by Clear Channel at 5:00 PM today.

This was in response to Bubba's declaration that all of his contractual obligations to Clear Channel ended on 2/28/06; and that he would speak truthfully on three topics regarding Clear Channel at 5:05 PM today. He classified one as "a bomb" and two as "nuggets".

If he was really planning to come out swinging, he certainly telegraphed his punches. I can't help but think that Clear Channel reacted exactly how Bubba wanted them to.

Cringer

03-01-2006, 06:14 PM

According to Stern, the stock options was something he was always going to get no matter what. What the jump in Sirius subscriptions did was excellerate when he got those stock options.

Either way, it's petty crap by CBS IMO.

st.cronin

03-01-2006, 06:18 PM

Arctus

03-01-2006, 06:25 PM

I got Sirius because I recently accepted an assignment that has me commuting 120 miles to work (and another 120 miles back) each day. I spend a solid four hours a day listening to it. It made my commute much easier, and somewhat enjoyable.

Cringer

03-01-2006, 06:30 PM

Maybe it's my lifestyle, but I'm totally bewildered by people paying actual money for satellite radio, and I don't even live in a good free radio market.

I guess it's not really any different than people spending 4 dollars a day on starbucks cappucinos.

Actually I think it is much better then paying for Starbucks. It blows regular radio away IMO. There really is not much comparison. There is so many choices of things to listen to. I would say it has cut down on some of my TV watching, which wasn't much anyways I guess but it has cut it down.

If I had to choose between FOFC and my Sirius, I choose Sirius in a second. And in a way I pay for FOFC.

Toddzilla

03-01-2006, 06:30 PM

Why?He had a "tryout" stint a few weeks ago and it was a disaster. Seemingly Ferrall, who had been a pretty loyal friend to Opie and Anthony, trashed O&A on his website prior to his show. O&A fans completely tied up his phones for the entire week, basically making the show a 4-hour commercial for O&A and XM.

panerd

03-01-2006, 07:08 PM

Maybe it's my lifestyle, but I'm totally bewildered by people paying actual money for satellite radio, and I don't even live in a good free radio market.

I guess it's not really any different than people spending 4 dollars a day on starbucks cappucinos.

It's 12.95. That is three drinks out a bar one night. One pizza a month. A case or two of bottled water. It is Tivo for radio but 1000 times more useful. My buddy tried to make the same argument you did and I told him that my 12.95 is the money that he pays on credit interest every month that I was smart enough to aviod. Like Cringer said until you have it you don't realize what you are missing. And not to try and sound elitist but I haven't heard of a lot of people going back to regular radio after having Sirius or XM.

st.cronin

03-01-2006, 07:11 PM

It's 12.95. That is three drinks out a bar one night. One pizza a month. A case or two of bottled water. It is Tivo for radio but 1000 times more useful. My buddy tried to make the same argument you did and I told him that my 12.95 is the money that he pays on credit interest every month that I was smart enough to aviod. Like Cringer said until you have it you don't realize what you are missing. And not to try and sound elitist but I haven't heard of a lot of people going back to regular radio after having Sirius or XM.

I don't have tivo, either.

panerd

03-01-2006, 07:27 PM

I don't have tivo, either.

Sorry. I have a friend that doesn't have cable, but that doesn't convince me it's not something worth having. Tivo and Sirius are well worth the money spent each month.

JonInMiddleGA

03-01-2006, 08:02 PM

And not to try and sound elitist but I haven't heard of a lot of people going back to regular radio after having Sirius or XM.

http://www.radioandrecords.com/Newsroom/2006_02_17/siriuslosses.asp
Average monthly churn for Q4 was 1.5%, which equaled 124,034 customers who cancelled the service. ... it also expects average monthly subscriber churn to rise to 1.8% in 2006.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/technology/2006-02-19-satellite-radio_x.htm
Chart shows Q3 2005 churn rate of 1.4%

Basically, the pair have the same churn rate around 1.5% per month, that's 18% of customer per year, or roughly 1 out of every 5 customers who subscribe eventually leave. (A figure that I personally believe is misleading because it would seem to include those who got some 1-year-free deal or similar with a car purchase & then simply opted not to renew, something I would consider less harshly than I-bought-it-and-didn't-like-it.)

Still, that sort of turnover has to be a concern considering that a high priority for both services is to increase their commercial spot sales in the coming year, both in revenue & in simple spot count. Watch for that to drive away at least a small number who were into the services for the whole "no commercials" aspect of it.

st.cronin

03-01-2006, 08:04 PM

Sorry. I have a friend that doesn't have cable, but that doesn't convince me it's not something worth having. Tivo and Sirius are well worth the money spent each month.

A thing is worth what somebody is willing to pay for it. I just don't see it, was all. More a comment on me than anybody buying the service.

stevew

03-01-2006, 08:08 PM

What receivers does everyone have? I was gonna start a new thread, but it's more likely to get views here. Anyone have that s50, and opinions if so?

wade moore

03-01-2006, 08:09 PM

Since someone mentioned the terrible "FreeFM" ratings for the book that just came out...

I thought I'd toss this question out to Jon... I'm not sure how much you are willing/able to say, but...

I've said before I'm a big Don and Mike fan. Now that I work from home, I'm able to listen to at least the first hour or two of their show via their stream along with some of the other shows that I like, including several on their home station (WJFK).

Today they mentioned how their ratings are the same/very similar to the last book. They have about a 6.4 share (that may be for target audience of 24-54 or whatever it is), but the rest of the station had a 1.5. That's all of the details they had at the time. I'm curious because I (and D&M) have been very critical of the odd mixture and format of the station for a talker. Are you able to say what the ratings for the other main shows (Junkies 6-10, Peter Rosenburg 10-12, O'Reilly 12-2, Penn Jillette 2-3, D&M 3-7, Jay Severin 7-9)?

Arctus

03-01-2006, 08:28 PM

Still, that sort of turnover has to be a concern considering that a high priority for both services is to increase their commercial spot sales in the coming year, both in revenue & in simple spot count. Watch for that to drive away at least a small number who were into the services for the whole "no commercials" aspect of it.

My understanding is that Sirius has no plans to place spots on their music channels. Are you saying that this is not the case, or that they intend to increase advertisements on their talk channels?

JonInMiddleGA

03-01-2006, 08:49 PM

My understanding is that Sirius has no plans to place spots on their music channels. Are you saying that this is not the case, or that they intend to increase advertisements on their talk channels?
from the previously cited USA Today article
While XM and Sirius offer commercial-free music channels, they're also ramping up ad sales for talk, news and sports stations.

Selling more ad time is a natural progression as each company creates channels around celebrities, such as Sirius' Stern deal and XM's Oprah Winfrey pact. For 2005, ad sales contributed about 2% of revenue for Sirius, about 3.5% for XM.

Now, that's the official "party-line" if you will, basically that it's only for the non-music channels. Whether I believe that's their ultimate intention is a different matter altogether.

JonInMiddleGA

03-01-2006, 09:16 PM

I thought I'd toss this question out to Jon... I'm not sure how much you are willing/able to say, but...

right now I'm so sick of looking at the work I'm still doing tonight (and since last Tuesday) that I'm willing to latch onto just about any distraction ;)

Lemme see what the numbers have to say (they talk to me you know)
Sure enough, you got it right, that 6.4 Share is indeed P25-54, so I'll start there:

D&M 3p-7p is a 6.4 Share (i.e. 6.4% of radio's in use) & a 1.3 Rating (i.e. 1.3% of all P25-54 in the market)

But that's about where their comments & reality part company.

6a-10 -- 4.6 Share/1.1 Rtg
10a-12n -- 5.8 Share/1.0 Rtg
12n-2p -- 3.7 Share/0.7 Rtg
2p-3p -- 2.0 Share/0.4 Rtg (looks like this is a bust)
7p-9p -- 1.1 Share/0.1 Rtg (low, even for a bad daypart, IMO)

Out of curiosity, I also checked M25-54 (which is, presumably, the target)
6a-10a -- 6.9 Share/1.8 Rtg
10a-12n-- 10.0 Share/1.8 Rtg
12n-2p -- 5.9 Share/1.2 Rtg
2p-3p -- 3.0 Share/0.6 Rtg
3p-7p -- 9.9 Share/2.1 Rtg
7p-9p -- 1.9 Share/0.2 Rtg

Now, doing a little thinking about what those numbers say, I go & look at Audience Composition for D&M. In the Average Quarter Hour, their listeners are 78% Male,53% are M25-44, 84% White, 58% are "Exclusive" (i.e. they listened to no other station during that time during the survey period)

And, contrary to what they seem to be saying:
71.8% of Don & Mike listeners also listen to the station sometime from 6a-3p
57.1% of listeners between 6a-3p also listened to D&M at some point

And, just to put those earlier numbers in some perspective ...
6a-10a -- The station has the #7 share P25-54 / #1 share M25-54
10a-3p -- The station has the #6 share P25-54 / #1 share M25-54
3p-7p -- The station has the #2 share P25-54/ #1 share M25-54
7p-12m -- The station has the #23 share P25-54 /#21 share M25-54

So, best I can tell ... they're seem to be trying to generate a little rivalry between themselves & the rest of the shows, but it's not like D&M are doing that much better than the rest of the station & they pretty clearly have a lot of the same listeners as the rest of the shows (the dismal 2p-3p notwithstanding)

wade moore

03-02-2006, 04:56 AM

JonInMiddleGA

03-02-2006, 06:48 AM

That's VERY interesting....

FWIW, I think their main point is to try and drive O'Reilly and Severin off the station... and I think perhaps the 10-12pm guy (although they are less willing to say that on the air because he is a local guy who just started his first ever show in January)...

Interesting indeed, especially the thought about the 10a-12n guy (since he actually is doing a better share than D&M). Typically petty radio jealously, nothing unusual about that.

Another note is that, now that you bring up the Stern thing, the most recently released full book covers a time before he departed (assuming they didn't change him until the beginning of the year). That means that they may have been talking about the Phase 1 trends for the Winter book which came out a couple of days ago. I don't get the detailed trends by daypart but overall (Mon-Sun 6a-12m, P12+), the station is about the same as their average for the past year, not as high as last book but higher than 2 others in 04-05.

I'm missing data from a couple of survey periods apparently but looking back a little bit at P25-54 starting with Fa05 (most recent book), back to Fa03
Fa05-Su05-Su04-Sp04-Fa03

3p-7p Rtg = 1.3 - 1.0 - 1.3 - 1.5 - 1.0
3p-7p Shr = 6.4 - 5.2 - 6.9 - 7.4 - 5.5

12n-2p Rtg = 0.7 - 0.6 - 0.5 - 0.8 - 0.7
12n-2p Shr = 3.7 - 3.3 - 2.9 - 4.3 - 3.6

10a-12n Rtg = 1.0 - 0.9 - 0.6 - 1.0 - 0.7
10a-12n Shr = 5.8 - 4.9 - 3.6 - 5.5 - 4.2
(meaning that Rosenburg beat anything Ron & Fez did in their last 18 months)

Also, kind of an odd thing, O'Reilly audience is actually a little younger than than of D&M, at least in the most recent book (40 vs 41) AND they're actually more loyal than D&M's audience (62% were exclusive, vs 58% for D&M). At the moment at least (because their have been some ugly failures elsewhere in the replace-Stern attempts) it looks like this is more "D&M don't like O'Reilly,new guys, et al" than anything more substantive. And I'd bet that the WJFK sales staff aren't too unhappy with not having to be told "I can't buy your mornings anymore" ;)

Note:
Fall basically = Oct - Dec
Summer = July - Sept
Spring = April - June
Winter = Jan - March

wade moore

03-02-2006, 06:59 AM

That means that they may have been talking about the Phase 1 trends for the Winter book which came out a couple of days ago
Yes. ;)... I probably should have said that. I don't know how much that changes what you said, but the only parts of the lineup that are the same now as they were in December is D&M and O'Reilly. So, for instance, the 10-12 numbers are for Ron and Fez (who D&M think should be back, but I hated).

10a-12n Rtg = 1.0 - 0.9 - 0.6 - 1.0 - 0.7
10a-12n Shr = 5.8 - 4.9 - 3.6 - 5.5 - 4.2
(meaning that Rosenburg beat anything Ron & Fez did in their last 18 months)
But I'm confused, I thought you said you didn't have the breakdown for anything this year? The numbers from your first post are fa05, right? which would mean they are for R&F not Rosenburg?

I'm sure I sound like I'm defending D&M, which I would like to since I like them so much, but I'm more trying to truely understand if this is a petty radio jealousy thing and they are totally spinning it, or if the station is doing it that bad... they literally made titanic references to the ratings at the station which in my experience it seems like they've been pretty honest about ratings.. but this totally doesn't jive with what you're saying?

Toddzilla

03-02-2006, 07:27 AM

From dcrtv.com:
In morning drive, WJFK-FM netted a 4.4 share among the age 25-to-54 "money" demo for 8th place in the rolling November-to-January Arbitrend average. That was down only a little bit from Howard Stern's 4.6 share in the fall. But, when you break down the numbers to reflect only the post-Stern radio universe after 1/1, sources tell DCRTV that WJFK-FM's full-day audience is below a 2.0 share. We're told that Stern had a 5.5 in November, a 5.4 in December, and that the Junkies had a 2.3 morning drive share in January. In Baltimore, via WHFS, the news for the Junkies was even worse. In the age 25-to-54 demo, Stern's two last months produced a 5.9 and a 7.6. The Junkies had only a 1.8 morning drive share in January.

Toddzilla

03-02-2006, 07:31 AM

So, for instance, the 10-12 numbers are for Ron and Fez (who D&M think should be back, but I hated). Ron and Fez are alive and well on XM 202 from 11-2 weekdays!

Toddzilla

03-02-2006, 07:33 AM

What receivers does everyone have? I was gonna start a new thread, but it's more likely to get views here. Anyone have that s50, and opinions if so?Triple Dola - wow...

The S50? Why bother? It can't play live audio, you have to dock it to your computer and download content, so what's the purpose? Listen to 2 day old football games? Yesterday's news? XM has had a true portable unit for almost 2 years now.

JonInMiddleGA

03-02-2006, 07:41 AM

But I'm confused, I thought you said you didn't have the breakdown for anything this year? The numbers from your first post are fa05, right? which would mean they are for R&F not Rosenburg?

I won't swear I remember this myself, but I thought R&F left earlier than Stern
(from the wjfk-fm wikipedia entry: "In early August 2005, Ron and Fez left WJFK for XM Satellite Radio. They were replaced by The Peter Rosenberg Show.")

As for what they're really doing ... only they really know for sure. But I do know this much: only a complete idiot gets themselves upset about anything in a P1 or even P2 Trend Report (there is no P3 per se, it completes the book & they release the whole thing at that point).

Among other reasons, only the entire rating period is demographically balanced remotely correct. In other words, they try to get it right across the whole but not necessarily across any one trend, so the swings from P1-P2-P3/Actual Book are sometimes ridiculous. With a station like JFK that's over 80% white audience, if P1 skews heavily black or heavily female, they'll get killed in the trend. And then they'll end up with an equally unrealistic monster trend in the 2nd or 3rd phase, it ends up balancing out.

Having bought the market a number of times, and knowing a little about the D&M schtick, here's how I kinda figure it (right or wrong):
a) They really do wish Stern, R&F, etc. were still there. I agree that those are better matches to the D&M style.
b) I expect the morning numbers there to end up be better than the average ex-Stern station but not as good as Stern put up. (Hard not to beat the first trend for Adam Corolla in LA, he was the lowest rated morning show of any full-time station in the market. You could roll down your car window & yell and get a bigger audience than he managed in January).
c) O'Reilly looks to be doing just fine in D.C., as I would expect him to. If anything, I believe his performance their is above-average for him, and skews noticeably younger than I'm accustomed to seeing from him.
d) What's good for O'Reilly is, in both their minds & my mind, bad for D&M ... because if the serious political stuff gets hot (as it is prone to do approaching an election cycle), that's bad news for D&M. Conceivably they could find themselves on the wrong end of a trend ... and that ain't good for job security ;) I've got no idea where they are in their contract cycle, but if they're looking at renewal in the next 12-18 months, the last thing they want to see is something new doing well, it would make their lives a little harder at the negotiating table.

JonInMiddleGA

03-02-2006, 07:58 AM

From dcrtv.com:

I didn't expect D&M to do well in Baltimore, the underperformance there doesn't surprise me to be honest. There's always some push-pull when talent perceived as being from Market X starts airing in adjacent Market Y.

Oilers9911

03-02-2006, 08:10 AM

Yeah, this idiocy sure seems like it is worth paying for. http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

The revelations.....

1. I cheated on my wife and she caught me.

2. I once hid in a bathroom Closet and pleasured myself watching my family members went to the bathroom (cousin & Aunt)

3. In the last year I got a girl pregnant and had to pay for her abortion.

4. I think I am addicted to porn, I masturbate twice a day, and prefer it to sex.

5. I have spent well over $10,000 on internet porn.

6. My buddy and I once order massage girls to a hotel room and they ripped us off and left us standing there in our underwear.

7. I have pleasured myself with meat and vegetables.

8. I have a half sister never met and don’t want to.

9. I’ve had cosmetic surgery.

10. A guy once blew his load on my chest.

11. I once had my stomach pumped for alcohol poisoning and when I woke up an acquaintance of the same sex was fondling my genitals.

The participants....who's is who's is revealed next week.
Howard, Robin, Fred, Bengie, Gary, Sal, Richard, Jason, Sal, Artie, Scott

wade moore

03-02-2006, 08:11 AM

Having bought the market a number of times, and knowing a little about the D&M schtick, here's how I kinda figure it (right or wrong):
a) They really do wish Stern, R&F, etc. were still there. I agree that those are better matches to the D&M style.
b) I expect the morning numbers there to end up be better than the average ex-Stern station but not as good as Stern put up. (Hard not to beat the first trend for Adam Corolla in LA, he was the lowest rated morning show of any full-time station in the market. You could roll down your car window & yell and get a bigger audience than he managed in January).
c) O'Reilly looks to be doing just fine in D.C., as I would expect him to. If anything, I believe his performance their is above-average for him, and skews noticeably younger than I'm accustomed to seeing from him.
d) What's good for O'Reilly is, in both their minds & my mind, bad for D&M ... because if the serious political stuff gets hot (as it is prone to do approaching an election cycle), that's bad news for D&M. Conceivably they could find themselves on the wrong end of a trend ... and that ain't good for job security images/smilies/wink.gif I've got no idea where they are in their contract cycle, but if they're looking at renewal in the next 12-18 months, the last thing they want to see is something new doing well, it would make their lives a little harder at the negotiating table.
I think this is probably a very accurate picture, and honestly, I don't think that far off from the message that they are getting across. They aren't saying that O'Reilly get bad ratings so much as THEY don't like him (and when I say they, it really means Don of course) and that he does not lend himself to sharing an audience with the rest of the shows on the station (Junkies are like D&M with some sports mixed in, Rosenburg is a 26 year old lefty that couldn't argue himself out of a paper bag, and Penn Jillette.. well.. he's a 1 hour filler that just makes NO sense). As for their contract, they are not within 12-18 months according to what they say on the show. I'm trying to remember, but I think they have somewhere between 3-5 years. I know that the junks just said within the last hour that they have 3 years.

I didn't expect D&M to do well in Baltimore, the underperformance there doesn't surprise me to be honest. There's always some push-pull when talent perceived as being from Market X starts airing in adjacent Market Y.

I think you misread the quote from there. This was talking about Stern ratings vs. Junkies ratings. Junkies were on HFS in Baltimore for like a year before it went to Spanish programming. I'm 99% sure that D&M have been on in Baltimore ever since they first went into syndication 10-15 years ago, but I could be wrong.

Another sid enote. Now that I think back, I think that in November-December the Junkies were on from 10-12. Hard for me to say because I just started working from home in January, so I missed this period. But I think that when HFS went to spanish, the Junks shortly after came back to JFK and did 10-12, then Ron and Fez did 7-9. While the Junks were on HFS, Ron and Fez did 10-12 AND 7-9.

But again, I could be mistaken.

CamEdwards

03-02-2006, 08:49 AM

wade moore

03-02-2006, 08:58 AM

i have some friends who have friends that work at JFK. The scuttlebutt was the station was going to move O'Reilly to 7-9 p.m. about 9 months/a year ago, but O'Reilly pitched a royal fit. Since O'Reilly's syndicated by Westwood One, and JFK's a CBS O&O, JFK was forced to back off.

Apparently the guy Rosenberg is also hosting the show for a ridiculously small amount of money. They were just looking to throw something in there at that time slot.
The top part was said on D&M at the time also, so I don't know how true that is either ;)...

As for PR. Yeah. He had a Saturday night show and they needed someone for mid-days, so they grabbed him. He is essentially just a step away from College Radio so he's smart to take the chance to jump on it for whatever they'll pay him. Hell, he still has to do the Saturday night show also.

As a total aside: I like PR as long as he's not talking politics. On his Saturday night show (and I think he did 7-9 weekdays in November and December?) I thought he was good. He talked sports some, talked normal mid-twenties stuff like tv, movies, women, etc. Politics was maybe 25% of his show. Now that he's on mid-days, politics is like 75% of his show. Unfortunately, he seriously cannot argue his points well at ALL. When I disagree with O'Reilly for instance, I can usually see the logic behind what he is saying. He gets his point across pretty convincingly, even if I still disagree with him. When PR makes a point I disagree with and someone questions it, he just kind of stumbles around and has no logic behind it. Ugh.

JonInMiddleGA

03-02-2006, 09:09 AM

I think you misread the quote from there.

I think I did.

Honestly, at this point I can't keep track of all the shows that have rotated around in that market or hardly any of the others any more. The movement is so constant (while my radio buys are fewer & farther between than ever as our main client has transitioned to TV) that it's almost a full-time job just to keep track of who's on where.

But again, I could be mistaken.
Even if you are mistaken, you're probably getting as close to accurate as a lot of people who work in any of the affected buildings, so I certainly wouldn't sweat it ;)

wade moore

03-02-2006, 09:11 AM

I think I did.

Honestly, at this point I can't keep track of all the shows that have rotated around in that market or hardly any of the others any more. The movement is so constant (while my radio buys are fewer & farther between than ever as our main client has transitioned to TV) that it's almost a full-time job just to keep track of who's on where.

Even if you are mistaken, you're probably getting as close to accurate as a lot of people who work in any of the affected buildings, so I certainly wouldn't sweat it ;)
Hah, the funny thing is that your last statement is actually what the most open message on D&M yesterday. That everyone is so closed lipped about the ratings when usually they come in bragging about them gave them the idea that it was bad news.

Anyway, I know I'm WAAAAAAAAAAAAY too in the weeds. I've just always been interested in this stuff, especially because as a 15ish year D&M fan (grew up with them almost), I have heard them talk about ratings so much.

Toddzilla

03-02-2006, 12:42 PM

d) What's good for O'Reilly is, in both their minds & my mind, bad for D&M ... because if the serious political stuff gets hot (as it is prone to do approaching an election cycle), that's bad news for D&M. Conceivably they could find themselves on the wrong end of a trend ... and that ain't good for job security ;) I've got no idea where they are in their contract cycle, but if they're looking at renewal in the next 12-18 months, the last thing they want to see is something new doing well, it would make their lives a little harder at the negotiating table.Especially in light of the reports that they burned bridges at both XM and Sirius. IIRC, they have a pretty inflated view of their self-worth and tried to impress this upon the satellite companies who didn't. Either D&M were made offers that were substantially lower than they expected, or they weren't made offers at all, in ewither case D&M told both companies to jump off a cliff. I think it would take a pretty extreme set of circumstances to see Don and Mike on sattelite radio.

Toddzilla

03-02-2006, 12:45 PM

JonInMiddleGA

03-02-2006, 01:17 PM

I think the upshot here is that WJFK is is serious serious trouble. I'm talking changing format/going out of business trouble.

I wouldn't think it's that dramatic ... not yet at least.
The afternoon looks okay for now, it's opposite is the bizarro 2p-3p slot that pretty much everybody knew was doomed from day one.

But these days there's probably not 10% of stations in the country that it would be completely unthinkable that you could see a format change at any given time, so anything is possible.

IwasHere

03-02-2006, 01:47 PM

I'll never look back I love my XM. I have it installed in my house, in my car, and I take it to the gym with me. XM2GO

The way I look at it the monthly subscription is about the cost of 1 cd. Just like my Netflix account, once I started adding up the DVDs / Cds I was buying every month this was a no brainer. I haven't bought a cd since I installed my satelite radio.

wade moore

03-02-2006, 01:47 PM

Especially in light of the reports that they burned bridges at both XM and Sirius. IIRC, they have a pretty inflated view of their self-worth and tried to impress this upon the satellite companies who didn't. Either D&M were made offers that were substantially lower than they expected, or they weren't made offers at all, in ewither case D&M told both companies to jump off a cliff. I think it would take a pretty extreme set of circumstances to see Don and Mike on sattelite radio.
This thought is strange to me...

The reason I say that is they signed their latest deal when Bart (for those that don't listen, Don's son) was going to College. Bart is now a Junior or Senior.. so... they signed that deal 2 1/2-3 years ago and they signed it for like 6 or 7 or 8 (some long time) years. So, why 2 1/2-3 years ago would satellite radio even have come with much? They were not a player. Either way, if XM and Sirius don't realize that that long ago they were a non-factor, then they are the ones that had self-assesment issues.

st.cronin

03-02-2006, 01:50 PM

I'm confused. Satellite radio is losing millions of dollars, but so is free radio? Is there some sort of impending market collapse on the horizon?

wade moore

03-02-2006, 01:56 PM

I'm confused. Satellite radio is losing millions of dollars, but so is free radio? Is there some sort of impending market collapse on the horizon?
My uneducated $.02 about Free Radio...

They need to accept that radio stations where Stern was a cornerstone of their market are going to have a rough run for a period. As much as I don't personally like Stern, I realize that he garnered a huge audience. Even if all of his fans didn't leave for Satellite radio (which surely they didn't), many of them left the stations that he was on. It will take some time (and some failed attempts) to find on-air talent that will be a building block like he was. You go from one of the top 5 ratings grabbers in the nation (i'm guessing, I don't have stats) to a mix around the country of untested radio talent (Corolla, Roth, etc), local shows shifted to a different time slot (a-la the junkies in DC), and maybe even format changes? None of these, even moved shows (changing time slots I think is a bigger deal than many people realize), are going to garner immediate ratings. It will take time to build these ratings.

In the meantime, various existing strong stations will "steal" the ratings.. maybe it's a music station, maybe it's a political talk station, etc... It's not that free radio is failing, it's that these stations that had Stern have taken a significant drop in ratings after he left. Both in his slot, and often in the slot following his and potentially elsewhere on the station. If these stations didn't see it coming, well, they're FOOLS. When CBS decided not to renew with Stern, they set these stations up for some period of heartache.

Now maybe Jon or someone that knows the industry besides being a talk radio fan can add-to/correct my statements.

Toddzilla

03-02-2006, 02:20 PM

So, why 2 1/2-3 years ago would satellite radio even have come with much? They were not a player. Either way, if XM and Sirius don't realize that that long ago they were a non-factor, then they are the ones that had self-assesment issues.You're assuming this took place back in 2003. To my knowledge D&M as recently as this past fall were in negotiations with Sirius, in which they played off their talks with XM. I believe the Don and Mike were talking with XM around the time Ron and Fez were in negotiations, too, which they ultimately accepted.

wade moore

03-02-2006, 02:24 PM

You're assuming this took place back in 2003. To my knowledge D&M as recently as this past fall were in negotiations with Sirius, in which they played off their talks with XM. I believe the Don and Mike were talking with XM around the time Ron and Fez were in negotiations, too, which they ultimately accepted.
How when they have somewhere between 3-5 years (can't remember which) left on their contract with Westwood One? It's not like Stern where he had like 6 months left.

JonInMiddleGA

03-02-2006, 02:27 PM

How when they have somewhere between 3-5 years (can't remember which) left on their contract with Westwood One? It's not like Stern where he had like 6 months left.

Nearly anybody can find a way to get themselves out of a contract if they want.

Heck, you could even argue (successfully is a different story mind you) that a non-compete clause, so common to radio, wouldn't be enforceable because you aren't going to another radio station per se.

wade moore

03-02-2006, 02:39 PM

Nearly anybody can find a way to get themselves out of a contract if they want.

Heck, you could even argue (successfully is a different story mind you) that a non-compete clause, so common to radio, wouldn't be enforceable because you aren't going to another radio station per se.
Gotcha, makes sense.

Either way, I like listening to them free via live stream, so it makes me personally happy that they are not on satellite. ;)

JonInMiddleGA

03-02-2006, 02:41 PM

Now maybe Jon or someone that knows the industry besides being a talk radio fan can add-to/correct my statements.

Not a bad take IMO, not bad at all. Although it frightens me quite a bit to have this post to indicate that you have a better understanding of the situation than a decent percentage of the so-called radio executives in the business these days. (But don't get cocky about that compliment, it's somewhat like damning with faint praise ;) )

It will be just like most any other change in radio (albeit across a larger scope due to market sizes & affiliates) -- there'll be a period of adjustment. I'm getting a vibe that CBS O&O's know that & are mostly in for the long haul, signals are more mixed from other companies but some of those who might flip formats sooner rather than later could very well have been planning to do that anyway. "Jack FM" and the various flavors of Hispanic programming are the hot things these days, there are very few markets in the country where somebody isn't considering a flip of at least one station to one or the other.

One thing I might challenge in your post is the notion of Stern as a "building block". Typically, that's been far from the truth. The majority of Stern stations had two audiences -- those that listened to Howard & those that tuned in after he went off. That's always been one of his biggest negatives for affiliates, he made it difficult to have a consistent audience. (This isn't unique to Stern btw, quite a few syndicated shows present the same problem).

Adding to the challenge for stations was that Howard was difficult to sell to the majority of advertisers, which in turn actually hurt them in other dayparts. I've bypassed more than one station completely for a buy because I couldn't use their morning & that limited their usefullness in the overall scheme of a media plan.

A lot of the money that Stern did produce came indirectly. Stations sell quite a bit of advertising as ROS (Run Of Station), say 5a-7p. That's sold on the basis of the average rating during those 14 hours ... an average which often got artificially inflated by Stern putting up a 4.0 Rtg for four hours but the rest of the station posting a 1.0 Rtg for the other 10 hours. Lazy/unsavvy/ stupid media buyers don't always think this stuff through, so if they only get maybe 20% of their spots in Stern, the buy ends up falling short of expected delivery ... but the station already has the money (radio doesn't do nearly as much in the way of performance guarantees as television, never has, probably never will).

What a lot of those stations are going to have to learn is, well, how to sell a station for what it's really worth in the marketplace instead of an overinflated rate they've gotten used to. Those who can will do just fine - they'll have access to a broader range of accounts, most stations already deal with the same situation & do just fine, etc. This is not an unrideable horse by any means, but you've got to have the right people to do it.

wade moore

03-02-2006, 02:49 PM

What a lot of those stations are going to have to learn is, well, how to sell a station for what it's really worth in the marketplace instead of an overinflated rate they've gotten used to. Those who can will do just fine - they'll have access to a broader range of accounts, most stations already deal with the same situation & do just fine, etc. This is not an unrideable horse by any means, but you've got to have the right people to do it.
I think that this is what I was trying to say when I used the term "building-block". What I was trying to say maybe is "crutch". ;). I wasn't necessarily saying that the stations model was designed around him, but that he was the "bread-winner". And by bread-winner, I mean for ratings as I realize at least some of the challenges with advertising with him (mostly from past posts of yours I think). They need to find a new bread-winner, and maybe *gasp* that means working on your whole lineup, not just relying on some guy out of New York to do all of the work for you. In the end, stations like WJFK that have built at least somewhat of a model around the style and have an audience that at the minimum is at least a TALK audience throughout the day I would think will bounce back quicker than those stations that play music in the rest of the day. (it has been weird for me to adjust to the hampton roads area where FM stations only play talk shows in the morning).

JonInMiddleGA

03-02-2006, 02:53 PM

(it has been weird for me to adjust to the hampton roads area where FM stations only play talk shows in the morning).

You mean there are stations left in the country that actually play music in the morning instead of some idiot babbling away? Wow.

(If you're getting more than four songs an hour in a morning show these days on a station that isn't running jockless it's a bloody miracle)

wade moore

03-02-2006, 03:06 PM

You mean there are stations left in the country that actually play music in the morning instead of some idiot babbling away? Wow.

(If you're getting more than four songs an hour in a morning show these days on a station that isn't running jockless it's a bloody miracle)
No, unfortunately that's not what I mean.. Besides The Jack, The Bob, whatever that's how it is...

What I'm saying is that in the DC Area we had an FM talk station. That all of the "dedicated" (what I mean by dedicated is no music) talk shows where there or on AM.

Here, there is a station or two or three that has "dedicated" talk in the morning and then music for the rest of the day.

But of course, all of the stations have the mixed talk and muisc.. .I love talk radio, but i like my talk to have talk and my music to have music.

stevew

03-02-2006, 03:10 PM

Not a big fan of Tommy and Rumble, Wade?

wade moore

03-02-2006, 03:14 PM

Not a big fan of Tommy and Rumble, Wade?
Actually, I started out hating them... as I've lived here and commuted for at least an hour every morning for three years, I've grown to like them quite a bit. And they are one of those "dedicated" talk shows which is good to me. It's just strange for me that they go off the air, and the other 20 hours of the station are standard music radio.

JonInMiddleGA

03-02-2006, 03:14 PM

No, unfortunately that's not what I mean..

Damn, my reading comprehension seems to be gone to shit lately.

Hmm ... I wonder if sleeping 3-4 hours max for the past couple of weeks is causing that?

I love talk radio, but i like my talk to have talk and my music to have music.

Same here.
(which is why my P1 station is a sportstalk these days, there really aren't any appealing music options that fit the above criteria)

wade moore

03-02-2006, 03:18 PM

Damn, my reading comprehension seems to be gone to shit lately.

Hmm ... I wonder if sleeping 3-4 hours max for the past couple of weeks is causing that?

Same here.
(which is why my P1 station is a sportstalk these days, there really aren't any appealing music options that fit the above criteria)
I wish I got AM in my house.. I'm intrigued by Fox Sports suddenly having a station here... the ESPN station was ok, but the afternoon guy... I don't know if you've had the "pleasure" of listening to him (i think you and I may have discussed him before)... good GOD... luckily I have the internet and D&M now... But yeah, I have NEVER found a mix talk/music (and I just realized maybe I wasn't clear earlier.. I don't mean people like Tommy and Rumble that make cheesy goof songs, but ones that talk for 5-10 minutes, then play 4-5 songs, then talk,e tc) that I liked...

Damn.. I've been way rambling on this board lately... I think working at home with no one to interact with is starting to get to me...

wade moore

03-02-2006, 03:19 PM

Dola:

On my way into work when I was driving to Norfolk, I just finally remembered to bring CD's if I wanted to listen to music.

stevew

03-02-2006, 03:22 PM

Actually, I started out hating them... as I've lived here and commuted for at least an hour every morning for three years, I've grown to like them quite a bit. And they are one of those "dedicated" talk shows which is good to me. It's just strange for me that they go off the air, and the other 20 hours of the station are standard music radio.

I found a lot of their stuff amusing, but the longer i stayed there it got tedious. It was pretty professional sounding, though, for a show that was focused on solely one market.

wade moore

03-02-2006, 03:29 PM

I found a lot of their stuff amusing, but the longer i stayed there it got tedious. It was pretty professional sounding, though, for a show that was focused on solely one market.
There's no way I could listen to them for 3-4 hours, but a lot of that is because they have one of those shows that I think is designed to the commuter.. so to an extent I think they repeat themselves every hour to hour and a half at least at times..

But agreed, for a local show they're quite polished and professional. When I'm at home and have several choice with streaming radio, I rarely listen to them, but in the bastion of crap this area offers they are quite good.

JonInMiddleGA

03-02-2006, 03:32 PM

but ones that talk for 5-10 minutes, then play 4-5 songs, then talk,e tc) that I liked...

There were very good reasons that there was a long-standing radio "rule" that basically said "one thought per break". And that's about my tolerance for talk on a music station. Tell me the weather, tell me the time, kick it over to the traffic person, play the damn commercials & then get back to the music. Or, if there's no otherwise useful programming element, then tell me that Dee Snider had surgery yesterday if you're coming out of an old TS song, or simply revive the (unfortunately) dead art of backselling a song so that I might actually have some f'n clue who/what you just played.

Otherwise ... STFU & play the music, because nobody but your mother & your girlfriend tuned in to hear you run your bloody mouth.

st.cronin

03-02-2006, 03:48 PM

revive the (unfortunately) dead art of backselling a song so that I might actually have some f'n clue who/what you just played.

PREACH IT

I don't understand this at all. I'm not really paying attention to what you're telling me about a song before you play it. But over and over again, I hear a song and say "cool, who was that?" and then the dj comes on and rambles on about what to get his wife for her birthday or some such nonsense.

It makes no sense from any perspective.

Swaggs

03-02-2006, 04:18 PM

I was thinking about this earlier, and thought I'd ask about it here:

Basically, do you think Stern will continue to get high profile guests (actors plugging their shows/movies, athletes/wrestlers selling themselves, musicians plugging their tours/CDs, models promoting magazine spreads, etc) on his radio show now that his market is somewhat limited?

My thoughts: Howard has enough "credit" with some celebrities, that they will probably continue to visit with him. I also believe that comedians will continue to want to be on his show. But, with his audience limited to Sirius subscribers only (and I'm sure not all Sirius subscribers listen to Howard), I do not think he will continue to draw as good of guests consistently. (and yes, I realize that the best part of the show is when the regulars mess around and rip on one another and not the E!TV talkshow content).

I guess the wildcard is that his Sirius listeners are probably very reliable consumers, so it may be worth it for his guests to pander to them specifically, since Howard's audience may be more likely to purchase whatever his guests are plugging.

(edit: added a word that made the question make sense :) )

Cringer

03-27-2006, 02:05 PM

I doubt we'll be hearing Scott Ferrall on Howie 101 ever again.

Looks like Opie and Anthony and their 12 fans don't have the power they think they do.

Ferrall signed his contract, he has a regular show on Howard 101 every night now.

Toddzilla

03-27-2006, 03:12 PM

Ferrall signed his contract, The Pests have a regular show on Howard 101 every night now.

Fixed that part for you....

Cringer

03-27-2006, 03:54 PM

Pests to who I am not sure, but ok. :)

Toddzilla

03-29-2006, 08:19 AM

I 've had a chance to listen to some of the clips from Ferrall's show this week, and he's just not going to be phazed by the O&A fans anymore, IMO.

During the "tryout" week a few months ago, it was just that, a tryout, and at the time it was a huge miserable failure with > 90% of the calls coming from Pests which drove Ferrall crazy. He lost his composure more and more to the point on the Friday show - which was supposed to be his last - he was quiet, talking slow in a hushed voice, and you could tell he was a beaten man. He even admited as much on the air saying you probably wouldn't hear him on Sirius ever again.

Well, he who laughs last....

Improbably, Howard signed Ferrall to a full-time gig, so Scotty doesn't have to worry about the Pests. They can try to wreck his show, but they can't get him fired. Ferrall has security now, so he can go back to doing whatever it is he does best, and just blow off the O&A callers.

This round goes to Ferrall.

Toddzilla

03-29-2006, 08:22 AM

Dola - which brings up an intersting point.

I don't know if you've listened to the Scott Ferrall show, but it is downright abominable. Bubba is pretty awful too, IMO. It seems to me that Howard is trying hard to get more talent for the 2 stations he has to program, and he's filling them with inferior talent to make himself look better. Which isn't necessarily stupid - who in their right mind is going to buy a Sirius subscription just to hear Bubba? or Ferrall?

Toddzilla

03-29-2006, 08:23 AM

Double Dola - maybe unrelated, but DLR was canned today.

JonInMiddleGA

06-26-2006, 08:57 PM

This is sort of random necromancy, but this thread had more references to WJFK than a couple of the others that covered the same topics, so ...

http://www.radioandrecords.com/Formats/Newstalk.asp
CBS Radio hosts Opie and Anthony expand their syndication to a reported 11 broadcast affiliates with a return to WJFK-FM/Washington. The pair previously aired CBS Radio's DC Talk outlet four years ago during their last round of syndication with then-Infinity Broadcasting. Current WJFK morning show "The Junkies" remains in place from 6-10am ET, while local host Peter Rosenberg exits to make way for Opie and Anthony, who take the 10am-1pm Monday-Friday slot.

Meanwhile, in other satellite radio items today:
http://www.radioandrecords.com/Newsroom/2006_06_26/usatoday.asp

In a story called "Get Sirius: This radio company isn't making money yet," USA Today's Money advisor Matt Krantz this morning said, "Every time there's a new and exciting technology, investors want to pile in. And for some reason, they seem to forget about the price they're paying, virtually guaranteeing themselves poor returns. Satellite radio was a classic case." He notes that Howard Stern is "the biggest winner on the stock" with his bonus of $191 million in stock. But for the average investor, Sirius shares are down 35% since Stern started on the air. SIRI shares were up 12 cents to $4.59 with more than 31 million shares traded just before noon today.

and

http://www.radioandrecords.com/Newsroom/2006_06_26/topstory.asp
Speaking at a conference in New York City this morning, Siruis CEO Mel Karmazin acknowledged that he'd like to buy direct competitor XM Satellite Radio.

"Regarding XM — would we like to buy them? Sure. We'd love to buy them. Price would matter, so that would be an issue ... (and) there would definitely be the regulatory issue," he said, according to a Reuters report.

Karmazin also said it isn't likely that Sirius would be sold. He stressed that Sirius' business plan "doesn't really involve our doing a deal" and indicated he wasn't interested in Sirius being bought. "From our point of view, we don't see — other than if it was in the best interests of our shareholders — that we would be interested ever in being acquired," Karmazin said.
...
R&R then went directly to the government — the FCC — to learn just that {what the government would allow} And what we found was that the "regulatory issue," as Karmazin referred to it this morning, could be monumental.

One FCC insider said insight into the FCC's thinking on satellite mergers might be gained from looking at satellite TV company EchoStar's proposal to acquire direct competitor DirecTV. The FCC shot down that proposal within 60 days of its inception.