Saturday, September 29, 2007
Relevant Radio seeks to blunt impact of $4.7 million FCC penalty
A reader noted this report by Mark Pattison of Catholic News Service. The possible penalty is the difference between Relevant Radio's withdrawn bid and the winning bid in an auction for FM radio spectrum in Yarnell, Arizona. RR says software problems lead it to erroneously think the location would let a station's signal reach metropolitan Phoenix. When that problem was discovered, it withdrew its bid.
There might be a good reason for this "for-profit arm" but it would be better if it were in RR's Annual Report [20 pp. pdf].
Update: Relevant Radio not directly affected by FCC fine
Patricia Kasten, with Mark Pattison, reports in The Compass on reaction from Trish Luerck, CEO of Relevant Radio.
Still nothing on the reason for the for-profit subsidiary and why it bids on licences. ¶ 9/29/2007 06:32:00 PM
Bob Atwell, chairman of Relevant Radio and its nonprofit parent, Starboard Media Foundation, said that the FCC is aware of Relevant's circumstances. The proposed penalty is "more than one-third of our (annual) budget" of $12 million, he said, and more than the net worth of Advance Acquisitions, Starboard's for-profit arm that engaged in the auction.
There might be a good reason for this "for-profit arm" but it would be better if it were in RR's Annual Report [20 pp. pdf].
Update: Relevant Radio not directly affected by FCC fine
Patricia Kasten, with Mark Pattison, reports in The Compass on reaction from Trish Luerck, CEO of Relevant Radio.
"It was less than adequately explained by Catholic News Service (CNS)," said Luerck, "reporting it as if Relevant Radio had been levied these fines. But it was, in fact, Advanced Acquisitions, a wholly owned subsidiary of Starboard Media" which is also the parent company of Relevant Radio.
Still nothing on the reason for the for-profit subsidiary and why it bids on licences. ¶ 9/29/2007 06:32:00 PM
Comments:
<< Home
Since Relevant Radio apparently doesn't subscribe to Arbitron or any ratings services, how do these otherwise seemingly astute business men and women evaluate their efforts? How many listners do (or don't) they actually have? Is success measured simply by managing to raise enoigh to stay on the air, buy new stations, and pay FCC fines?
At least they're consistent with the hierachy they idealize:
http://www.usccb.org/comm/archives/2007/07-015.shtml
At least they're consistent with the hierachy they idealize:
http://www.usccb.org/comm/archives/2007/07-015.shtml
# posted by 
: 5:12 PM
: 5:12 PM
With the caveat that because I can't link to what I hear on the radio, you have to rely on my memory (or not)...
They say they don't subscribe because they can't afford to.
They then sometimes kind of denigrate ratings. "If we can reach even one person ..." and so on.
Better if they stuck to the former and gave a peek at whatever rough substitutes for ratings they use.
Diocesan and parish ratings and rankings sound good to me.
They say they don't subscribe because they can't afford to.
They then sometimes kind of denigrate ratings. "If we can reach even one person ..." and so on.
Better if they stuck to the former and gave a peek at whatever rough substitutes for ratings they use.
Diocesan and parish ratings and rankings sound good to me.
Starboard (aka Relevant Radio) plays with the "big boys" in radio - - just look @ the Long Island, Minneapolis, and Austin (TX) buys of the past few years. By lying off some 75% of their staff during the same period they knew what they were doing.
Post a Comment
# posted by : 1:25 PM
: 1:25 PM<< Home
