Silly rant

Doesn't fit in a category? It does now.
Post Reply
User avatar
awsherrill
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 10:30 pm
Location: Raleigh NC
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 4 times

Silly rant

Post by awsherrill »

I'm trying to decide where to rank this on the Fujita scale of whiny-ness. F4 maybe?

https://stationdomination.com/the-fcc-holding-us-back-/
User avatar
Shane
Posts: 959
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:08 am
Location: Omaha
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 7 times
Contact:

Re: Silly rant

Post by Shane »

I dunno, I’m inclined to agree with all of it but don’t have a solution. I can be whiny.
Mike Shane, CBRE
— — Omaha — —
Ron O'Brien
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2021 5:13 am
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 0

Re: Silly rant

Post by Ron O'Brien »

I totally agree with this guy.

I can see where airwaves need to be coordinated and managed to prevent overlap, but the rest is ancient history in too many ways. Unfair competition of sorts. The difference being that streaming is a private choice whereas over-the-air can be tuned in by children at any moment.

The public owns the airways, not the FCC. FCC is only supposed to manage.

I've been long debating whether to start a podcast vs. setting up a broadcast station, and this is ripe for convincing me to tilt toward streaming rather than the airways. The big advantage of air is local vs. worldwide. The other being autos vs. satellite radio.

Legit rant IMHO.
User avatar
Deep Thought
Posts: 3586
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 9:23 am
Location: La Grange, IL
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 46 times
Contact:

Re: Silly rant

Post by Deep Thought »

Ron O'Brien wrote: Mon Jun 14, 2021 4:51 pm I've been long debating whether to start a podcast vs. setting up a broadcast station, and this is ripe for convincing me to tilt toward streaming rather than the airways.
The performance royalty rates just went up more than 27%. At 15 songs per hour it will now cost you around $300 per listener per year to legally stream in the US. The minimum payment doubled to $1,000 per year. If you are even marginally successful and draw an average of 100 listeners per hour that's over $30 grand just for performance rights. That doesn't include ASCAP, etc. fees which everyone pays plus all your other operating expenses.

Nobody has ever been able to find a viable business model except for tiny mom-and-pop operations like Radio Paradise who are listener-supported. Streaming is the classic "we lose money on every sale but make it up in volume" scam.
Mark Mueller • Mueller Broadcast Design • La Grange, IL • http://www.muellerbroadcastdesign.com
Ron O'Brien
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2021 5:13 am
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 0

Re: Silly rant

Post by Ron O'Brien »

Deep Thought wrote: Mon Jun 14, 2021 5:02 pm
Ron O'Brien wrote: Mon Jun 14, 2021 4:51 pm I've been long debating whether to start a podcast vs. setting up a broadcast station, and this is ripe for convincing me to tilt toward streaming rather than the airways.
The performance royalty rates just went up more than 27%. At 15 songs per hour it will now cost you around $300 per listener per year to legally stream in the US. The minimum payment doubled to $1,000 per year. If you are even marginally successful and draw an average of 100 listeners per hour that's over $30 grand just for performance rights. That doesn't include ASCAP, etc. fees which everyone pays plus all your other operating expenses.

Nobody has ever been able to find a viable business model except for tiny mom-and-pop operations like Radio Paradise who are listener-supported. Streaming is the classic "we lose money on every sale but make it up in volume" scam.
Interesting, but I'm on the talk-radio vs. podcast hump rather than music streaming. Plenty of Classic Rock already out there, LOL.
TPT
Posts: 1051
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 3:18 pm
Location: St. Marys, WV
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: Silly rant

Post by TPT »

Without streaming, our audience is listening in the car. Hardly anyone has a table radio any more, but more and more people have devices like Alexa.
So the increase in royalty payments is another outrageous money grab by the mostly large corporations (and foreign; E.G. Sony and Bertelsmann) that really own most of the rights, not the musicians.

The FCC regulations mostly fall in the nuisance area. For example--political rules requiring immediate posting of political agreements to the public file--where the politicians pay no attention to the FCC's 1960's view of radio traffic. Typical "contract" arrived at through an e-mail exchange. Or the order comes in by FedEx envelope taped to the door of the station on Saturday morning for a Monday buy.

What is really outrageous is the large increase in regulatory "fees" (really a tax) proposed by the FCC. Especially after last year when many stations had billing drop by a third. Of course, the government doesn't care. The bureaucrats all got paid--and could work from home last year.

The small stations actually pay most of the fees collected, well out of proportion to their audience. Try this exercise: Look up the fee due from a Class A in the bottom 100 Arbitron market, and determine the cost per thousand based on the 12+ population of the market. Now look at the cost per thousand using the same method on the fee due in a top 100 market for the same class of station. Same coverage area--but the large market stations much larger population base to draw upon for revenue.
Post Reply