View Single Post
  #4   Report Post  
Old July 20th 04, 01:28 AM
Tim Perry
 
Posts: n/a
Default


In conclusion, all radio appears to be down, but Clear
Channel is down comparatively more because it has more
assets, stations, and is a "diversified media company".


therefore the enire stock comparison is invalid as a
measure of CCs radio division performance.


Except that they have the lowest P/E ratio of the group.
A P/E ratio is an indicator of optimism about future
prospects for a company. The higher the ratio, the more
investors expect them to do well.

compare "broadcast cash flow" or some other valid yardstick to indicate a
valid cause and effect


So Clear Channel must be in some other businesses, right?
They have a near monopoly on concert/event promotions,
so that should not be a problem.

it is if you are using those numbers to allege an impact on the absence of
one radio show


The other industry Clear Channel is invested in has
been up more than the radio industry. Compare Lamar and Obie.
Both are outdoor/billboard, which is Clear Channel's
other major business and works in synergy with their event
promotion business. In fact, Lamar and Obie are both
smaller and losing money. Both are up over the last
6 months. What does that tell you?


pretty much nothing that has to do with radio

It tells me that you are a republitard.

one of the advertising fallacies: if you cant make a valid point call
someone names

And that Howard and his listeners are beating the F
out of Clear Channel.

just my opinion but stale programming and almost 100% automation are doing a
better job of driving listeners away then any amount of fan action could
achieve

to equate the removal of one show from six stations as a
financial disaster at least in this case would be insane.


I am not equating it with financial disaster. That is the
exagerated non-sequitur you created. My argument is simply
that dumping Howard had a negative impact on profitability.


probably so but improvable unless you are privy to their accounting records.

That, as a business decision, they were better off with
Howard than without.


faced with huge fines id say it was more of a no brainer. they can always
put him back on when the political climate eases up.

The stations they dropped him from are
experiencing lower ratings (smaller audiences), which leads
to both less advertising and lower ad rates (smaller profit
margins).


its normal that when a programming changes that the ratings initially drop.

Add to that a boycott of Clear Channel stations,
products, and advertisers, and you have a more wide spread
impact than just the 6 markets.

stations love boycots. they have almost zero effect other then to generate
free media attention.