Can KXOL move to another site given the crowded nature of the
allotments in Southern California?

There are so many stations nearby, plus Mexican allotments, that I'm
wondering if there is simply no way to move away from the old Power 106
site.

Also, since this is what company telling another what they can do with
what they own, and given the type of business being run here,
commercial radio, can charges under other business laws and antitrust
laws be brought against the party that telling the other what they can
and cannot do with their station be considered illegal under other US
law, forget the FCC regulations?

From what I got from the R&R report, it sounds like KXOL wanted to flip
to Hurban. If the complaining party that told KXOL they could not flip
to Hurban. does it with one of their stations, then there could be a
real serious legal case coming down the line.

The rationale for the veto was it would cut into Power 106's listener
base. Hurban draws listeners from Spanish formats and from
CHR/Rhythmics. Typical listener base is younger, 2nd/3rd generation
Hispanics in the US already and who also are typically bilingual as a
result.

I don't wish it on Emmis, CC, or anyone else involved for that matter.

On 19 May 2005 03:13:02 GMT, "James W Anderson"
wrote:

Also, since this is what company telling another what they can do with
what they own, and given the type of business being run here,
commercial radio, can charges under other business laws and antitrust
laws be brought against the party that telling the other what they can
and cannot do with their station be considered illegal under other US
law, forget the FCC regulations?

I would bet there would be fewer civil laws that would apply than FCC
regulations. KXOL knew what they were signing when they agreed to the
contract terms. Supposing KXOL's lease was up and another company
needed DTV antenna space. Why would this be any different than a
landlord leasing space to another tenant. What if Emmis decided to
triple the rent at the end of the lease? Would they be required to
keep SBS as a tenant even if they refused the new terms?

Rich

They're not telling KXOL what to program. This is strictly business, and has
nothing to do with federal law. It is VERY much like restrictive covenants
and homowners associatins. KXOL signed the lease in the first place. Now
they don't like it. Too bad. Shouldn't have agreed to it in the first place.

-George Csahanin
Awstin, TX

(Hi Doug!)

Also, since this is what company telling another what they can do with
what they own, and given the type of business being run here,
commercial radio, can charges under other business laws and antitrust
laws be brought against the party that telling the other what they can
and cannot do with their station be considered illegal under other US
law, forget the FCC regulations?