You've reached our premium or archival content
To access this page, and more great content just like it, you need to become a paid subscriber.
If you already have an account, please login.
Otherwise, registration is quick and you'll have access instantly after payment.
More Radio Stations hey??.... hmmm.. keep this up and we will run out of frequencies.. they will be so close they will splatter each other. Honestly.. What are their reasons to have/not have them... or are they just being greedy so they can have their stations scattered over the airwaves. I wouldn't mind more stations - More jobs - but at least have new variety in it.. instead of having another 5 or so Novas, MMMs, 2Days, Mix's, or WSFMs...
When fewer people control more of what we see and hear, isn't that dangerous? And isn't that what has been happening to Radio right across Australia?
Look what has happened in radio ownership in the Pacific Northwest USA. There are 47 radio stations, in Seattle and Portland that have enough audience to show up on an Arbitrend survey. 32 of them are owned and operated by three out-of-state Radio conglomerates: Clear Channel, Entercom and Infinity. Almost 70%. They control the music, the news, the advertising. In addition, Clear Channel owns 26% of the stations in Spokane.
Local owners have lost control over local radio broadcasting. This sneaked up on all of us. We weren't watching when our local owners were squeezed out and the big boys took over the playing field.
Whereas only two decades ago, most radio stations in the market had separate news departments, today most radio stations do not have any news departments. The music is homogenized, and your local announcer may, in fact, be in Townsville.
Competition for remaining jobs drives down wage standards. as someone said: "If you get fired in Mackay by DMG; you have been fired by 63 stations."
The corporations have dictated programming formats and have applied them across the board, from station to station and city to city. Fewer and fewer entities control more and more content. The public airwaves are no longer serving the public. Do we need more radio stations?I don't think so....
Being in the Melbourne market, I'd have to say no. The market is crowded as it is, with every single format being covered. There are stations down here like 3MP and 3AK which are commercial and I'd have to question whether they even break even, as well as Mix101.1. Remember the name of the game is commercial radio, and its all about profits. If more players join the game, then the money needs to be shared, therefore less profits. An interesting opinion I hold is regarding the Geelong market, which I believe would have to be one of the over serviced markets in Australia. In Geelong, you can receive pretty much all of the Melbourne stations, also on the outskirts of Geelong you can hear 3CS/Mixx Colac plus theres 2 local commercial FM stations. Lucky Geelong listeners can get a mix of metro, provincial and regional stations!
My argument for new stations is simply, 1. There's not enough revenue to go around, 2. Not enough space in the spectrum (especially FM),
3. Only the big boys can afford the cost of new licences so forget about any new players, 4. New stations doesn't necessarily mean lots of new jobs in this world of hubs and satellite distribution of content. But hey, all this doesn't mean anything since the ABA and the Federal Governmant stand to make a lot of money out of the sale of new licences.
I would have to agree with camel and especially Roy J. for their points of view in issuing more stations. I think the community would definately benefit from more stations, as there simply becomes more choice on the dial and each targeted audience gets better penetration. As DMG's argument is based on, more stations won't necesssarily mean more of the same, because for the big player's in the market's, it is not commercially sensible to do so. Also, for dance music listener's like myself we don't get a fair go, especially on the FM dial. I hope that there are more licences issued in the near future than just the four planned, because i am sick and tired of listening to 'New' music that came out 4 months ago!! Unfortunately, commercial radio in Australia is not even close to the quality of stations in New Zealand and Europe...come on David, please issue more commercial frequencies across the country!
We dont need more stations. We need more owners. Once upon a time we aspired to work for kick butt organisations. Now we have less to choose from and it's hard to find management on the cutting edge. Most networks are run by accountants who just love the figures but cant figure the love we have for the biz. I'm presently lucky working for the best of an average lot. A couple of years ago I felt I was working for car salesmen and rip off merchants. With a govt that enforced diversification of ownership we would get a better product and bring back some of the good operators to the biz.
Of course we need more especially in rural and regional areas. I come from Horsham (Victoria) where there are only two commercial stations - one AM and one FM - and the same company, Ace Radio, owns them both. They mostly take their programs from other stations on relay, and we need a choice. There would be a big market, particularly for another FM station - if only we could get another license here - (Austereo; DMG are you listening) as quite frankly the current station is crap, and most of the younger generation have had enough of it.
Why do we need more regional stations when all they do is broadcast networked programmes from a capital city for most of the day? How 'local' is that? The ABA should place more accountability on the new stations that are launched and ensure that the needs of the local community are served over more networked music programming or talk programmes that are geared for an Australia-wide audience. The same should be asked of the community stations that are trying to sound commercial. If they are not truly benefiting their community, what constitutes their reason for taking up valuable space in an over-crowded spectrum.
Firstly, I am all for format diversity (especially in regional markets), having just spent the easter weekend in Wagga Wagga, I found the local DMG stations did very little for me (as Star was running a top 400 countdown across the weekend) It made me wonder what people who wanted something else (apart from gold tracks) were doing.
People complain that certain members of the community radio sector are sounding like defacto commercial stations, they are doing it to fill a void that the commercials have left. If there were at least 1 more commercial licence issued in in each regional market, I think we would see some format diversity.
DMG might complain about the revenue loss, but there is more than one way to skin a cat. Think outside the box. There is more than one way to make money out of a client than selling them ads.
I wonder why how radio in Victoria had changed, Especially in Geelong when the old 1341 AM Frequency was once known as 3GL until the start of the 1990's when 3GL converted to FM and changed it's name to K-rock and broadcast on 95.5 FM. 3CV based in Maryborough in Central Victoria was known as a Classic Hits Station with Reception getting up to Bendigo and down to Ballarat until October 1999 when Bendigo's Star FM Commenced and 3BO changed format and 3CV became radio 1071, Easy Listening Victoria.
Back to the 1341 AM Frequency, That Frequency was used in Melbourne by a Chinese Speaking Station that's currently on that Frequency, so one more things for sure that the 1341 AM Frequency should stay in the Geelong area and to be used for either a Commercial or a Open Narrowcasting Service based in the area.
I'd think if we were to have more FM licences allocated, they should be used for something OTHER than CHR/Top40 or similar, going by Sydney, I found WS-FM is a good change to hearing 2DAY, C91.3 (perhaps The Edge?) and Nova969 play the similar types of music.
What's a big area of music or talk that Sydney doesn't have a station for? Community stations do provide a wider vareity of music, though a lot of the community stations in Sydney concentrate on the ethnic programs, thus don't suit every listener. I find that's the biggest drawback with community radio having full time listeners, the inner station variety. One minute the station is playing a Classic Retro show, the next show is something entirely different. Listeners don't use TV guides to listen to radio (usually)
Another example, on the South Coast of NSW.. We have i98, Power FM (Nowra and Bega), Wave FM, 2ST x 3 (999khz, 102.9 and 106.7), 101.1 (country automation) and tourist radio (88.0 usually) - All but one of those stations are owned by the SAME group. Lots of variety there! I think the TSA's of Nowra and Wollongong and the rest of the South Coast need at least one other commerical station with a different owner.
This doesn't just apply for commerical stations, a desision made by the ABA was allocating three community licences to community station 2UUU (all taking the same program), and when a new South Coast community licence was applied for (92.7), guess who had a winge to the ABA (as well as the above commerical group), and tried to stop the new licence? 92.7 only broadcasts to a small part of 2UUU's TSA anyway and now has only 50 watts ERP.
How can we bring variety to listeners when the already existing stations (much the same as each other) have a winge about a different kind of station trying to get established? Hey, they already have 3 community licences, how the hell did they get all of those anyway? Why stop a new station which is modern and fresh and plays music apart from country (read the ABA investigation).
I say, new stations in areas that there is a need for, and new stations to stop monolopy in existing areas. No use bringing in more CHR/Top40 either.
Thank God I've seen the light! New stations mean new owners since the licences are sooo cheap and there'll be new niche formats offered and lots of jobs to match, not to mention the sales revenue will continue to be plentiful to all concerned ( as the kids using this forum are telling us ). If this is the case, sell as many licences as possible! Now back to my easter eggs brought to me by the easter bunny. Come on.. more posts from industry professionals... PLEASE!!
On the issue of competition. Yes we need more stations - absolutely!.
I am a Brisbane resident and you only have to look at the history of the Brisbane market to see what happens in the absence of competition. With the ownership of both the Today Network (B105)and the Triple M network being with Austereo from the early 90's and Brisbane only having two commercial licences through to 2001 (at which time the ARN/DMG 97.3fm was introduced), Brisbane was stuck with an Austereo FM Duopoly. So what did that mean to Brisbane radio listeners? - the answer was simple. Quite clearly we had the worst
capital city radio in Australia. Both stations were formatted for
their own specific demographic, no need to compete, and tough luck
if neither of those demographics suited the listener. You could always have swapped across to commercial AM but then again there was a very similar situation with two of the three AM being owned by ARN and the 3rd was a talk station. Since the
introduction of 97.3fm there is no doubt that all FM radio stations in
Brisbane have improved their product and that is no coincidence!
To now see an attempt by ARN and Austereo to stop further licence issues is not surprising. At the time of the draft licence plan for Brisbane being released, I recall the major objections put forward from both these companies to stop the Ipswich station (now River 949) from being received throughout the entire Brisbane region. In that particular instance it seemed OK from ARN's and Austereo's perspective for their signals to be received in the Ipswich licence area however the reverse situation was totally unacceptable to them.
They quite obviously did not want the competition and it now seems history is repeating itself!
So ABA for the sake of us poor Brisbane listeners who are scared from what seemed to be a never ending Austereo FM Duopoly, we say the more competition the better.
After working within the radio industry over the last 15 years I feel it would be beneficial to have more stations, city and provincial. This would force the other players to work harder and be more creative with their stations, open up the industry for nurturing new talent, both on-air and off-air. I feel the industry has fallen into a slump and we've forgotten about cutting edge and fly by the seat of your pants programming. With new licenses, it may force some of the stations to get out amongst it and find out what their listeners want, go to the shopping centres, visit the schools, go to the pub, get in touch with the audience, not just focusing on the research which was originally implemented as a tool, not a bible. Programmers should forget the business model and use some of that 'old fashioned' gut instinct.
WoW... I dont think Jamie Camel Liked my Coment
OOOps Sorry Jamie but ive had 28 years this May non stop in radio..
John Caruso wrote :-
"Didn't we get cheaper flights when Virgin started flying? And when the telecommunications industry opened up we all got better service and cheaper calls. More radio stations? What do you think?"
The answer of course is (ta da) Cheaper radio. i.e. More networking, voice tracking,"multi-tasking" etc. Cheaper flights mean't less in flight service and even worse food and the cost of telecommunications was falling faster BEFORE deregulation
Commercial radio is there for one reason, to make money, and if the revenue falls then costs are cut in the programming and promotions areas to keep the profits up. However if profits are healthy then there is more money for the program and promotions areas.
To just auction off licences willy nilly, without regard for profitability will result in poor quality radio as each station in the market struggles to keep the profits up. The pie is only so big and the more pieces you cut it into the smaller each piece becomes. The ABA should look at the revenue from the market before deciding whether or not to allocate a new licence. There are markets out there where the stations have full books (believe it or not), these markets obviously can support another station so give them one. However there is no point in allocating another licence to an area (say Charleville or Innisfail) where the sole incumbent is struggling, as both will finish up owned by a network and local programming will become a thing of the past as it has in so many areas.
I am also amused by the claims from the community sector that they need the 5 minute limit and tagging removed. Afterall how many community stations have a full book between 6am and 6pm ? I believe in "tagging as it helps identify the station and the degree of local support. What is also needed is a proper definition of a "Sponsorship Announcement" from the ABA instead of the convoluted and fluid "interpretation" currently used whenever a commercial station whinges.
While I'm on my soapbox, I also feel that owners should be restricted to one station per market and there should be a limit on the total number of stations that a network can own. It's also about time that APRA stopped being so bloody hungry, There is something wrong when a network can afford to pay an overnight jock out of the money saved by not playing music in the time used for talk breaks.
(RESENT WITH SPELLING AND GRAMMAR CHECKED)
I am all for DMG picking up an extra licence in each capital city. No doubt DMG must at least obtain the new Adelaide and Brisbane licences in their own right so that the Nova network then becomes complete. Given Nova's innovative approach to radio advertising sales, it would be great to see Nova in every major city. Nova would serve as a beacon for promoting the industry as a whole if that happens. It is especially wrong Adelaide be denied a new station given SA-FM in 1980 was the last totally new licence granted.
However, while DMG are entitled to a second licence in Sydney and Melbourne, it would be even better if we scored a fourth owner of capital city FM licences. Perhaps RG Capital, Rural Press or Hot Tomato. Or a consortium of these owners, given DMG seem to be the only ones able to bid the exceptionally big dollars by themselves. Any spare cash left over, Mr. Torv?
The 91.5 Melbourne and 95.3 Sydney licences are the last opportunity for major innovation at a commercial radio level in this country, or at least while digital delivery remains undecided and ever-delayed. DMG would no doubt apply all the usual economies of scale that make up a two-station operation, meaning the next new station may be built more by accounting measures than marketing ones. Or at least more so than if you had the other regional players moving into the big cities.
The ABA must be mindful that a key opponent to having new licences, ARN, is largely foreign-owned. Profits are heading overseas, so you can safely assume such companies, with global-scale economies their priority, really haven't got that much time for dealing with local business communities in search of advertising campaigns that work.
Bottom-line bean-counting then becomes more important than marketing
performance and management innovation. More diversity of ownership would best ensure greater numbers of people are in there identifying new innovative ways of marketing radio as an advertising vehicle.
So what if it creates economic uncertainty for existing stations? Newspapers and magazines are available in abundance and magazines especially must treat economic uncertainty as something to thrive on. There's no government protection here. They must always dig deeper for innovative new ways of doing things to stay afloat and keep ahead. So must most businesses and workers in the real world.
Marketing performance, not bottom-line protection, is what will attract more listening-time and advertisers to radio. Given there's no abundance of AM and FM frequencies, I would suggest we need to jam as much innovation on the dial as possible.
I think most ppl that have posted here have got it right! It's not a matter of do we need more stations its a matter of we need more diversity in formats on radio.
Radio has forgotten how to be exciting in the new millenium! Bring back the days when pd's tried something new and took a dive and went for it and not tried to copy something else from the city. Give your jocks something that is fresh and they will sound fresh too! AND KNOW YOUR MARKET!
As for the country stations the ABA has to make a real investigation into country radio and not have the wool pulled over their eyes by the multi nationals. Mr Flint look at some stations in the bigger provinsional towns and you will see that both AM and FM in those towns have only 4 hours of local programming on them before they go to a network feed. THIS IS WRONG!
Multi national owners are using their country stations as coladeral to finace their cap city stations and taking their ausience for granted. The ABA must at least legislate for the country stations a minimum amount of local programming that they must adhear to and not allow the bigger owners the chance to network 20 hours plus of programming.
Lets get back to the days when local radio serviced the local audience and country stations actually gave a kid a go on air and turned him into a great jock! WHere is someone meant to go for a start on air NOW!
Regarding Anonymus User 24/4 about Austereo trying to stop River 94.9 broadcasting into Brisbane. I remember exactly 10 years ago in Sydney when Wesgo and Austereo opposed 96.1 ONE FM's conversion from 2KA in Penrith saying that they didn't want their signal being heard in Sydney....too much competetion etc etc. Wesgo/Austereo thought was was OK for them to broadcast to Penrith & Blue Mountains, but didn't think the vice versa was OK. There was a much publicied court case which Mike Walsh won (previous owner of 2KA/ONE FM). And guess who was outside broadcasting in High St Penrith the following week....you guessed it.... 2DAY FM.
It seems to me that the point is very clear! More diversity not really more of the same. Is the Go!
This can only mean we run out of channels AM/FM some where. Not to mention the rising costs to keep them operating means you are left with less from the shrinking revenue pool.
Like it or not to me the AM vs FM argument is not an issue. At the end of the day RADIO is ONLY a means of delivery. If you have a format people want they will stay listening. Maybe it should be renamed to "entertianment". Netcasting is an example and so is pay tv at the end of the day the are just more Pictures or Audio Entertainment for the public. Who doesn't give a toss about the behind the sences politics.
Yes get Radio (Audio Entertainment) back to the days of being a good listen. I'm sure this can be done if we all tighten our belts a bit---but we know who will not want to play don't we???
Also I've long been of the mind that "pay per watt" licenses should be issued and community radio abolished. This would mean the "quasy commercial" under tones of community stations will get sorted out fast. You would then become every bit a commercial operation just on smaller power. The idea of running the same power as a bigger station is not realistic (in real life) for most community stations. Larger commercial licenses over a given power are auctioned via a "sealed bid" and drawn out of a hat. This stops the fatest wallet winning every time!!!!!!!The ABA won't like that because there is no fat over priced cheque for the government!!!! "Valuable precise public resource" boo humbug ABA!!! So adjust the % of annual revenue for it's renewal.
I'm for a total rework of the system agian as per back in 1992 when the ABA was formed. There is a need already on the horizon to rework the way "broadcasting services" are thought of given the merging technologies--internet and digital systems etc--. I do believe though in fareness the ABA arrived on the scene with all it's "elastic interprations" of it's act to try and regulate all these emerging technologies. It's now 10 years on and a lot has changed another rethink is in order!!!!
More services Yes! But still limit control of the bigger ones as it is now no more than 2 per market.
I agree with Brian 27/04 that when FM104 was privately owned and operated in the 80's, it was excellent to listen to and had the highest ratings in Australian radio industry, something like 40% market share for Brisbane. At least Nova in Sydney, Melbourne and Perth has brought innovation to the fore and has managed to change the commercial radio industry; look at their ratings, with higher programming and a fresher approach to radio they have been successful. They have to innovate and raise the bar or else people will tune elsewhere. I also think the ABA has done a great job with issuing new community licences which give everyday Australians the chance to get involved with radio, have a go, and be part of a station/ community then one-day maybe move on into the commercial industry. This also provides unique formats which promote diversity and keeps the culture Australian rather than, "Americanised". What the ABA now needs to do, is get the commercial industry functioning and stand up to the incumbent's who resist competition. How can Sydney, not support more than 2 new commercial licences with a population of 4 million?!?! when Townsville, for example, has supported four. It's almost unbelievable. I have to agree with everyone that is disappointed in the commercial radio in Brisbane. With River94.9, they have changed things incredibly. Getting involved in the community, doing live broadcasts, promoting the station with Parties and events all across south-east qld. It's great. I haven't seen the other's do much. The way to get people involved, changing the business culture of radio all depends on competition. Without it, there is no incentive for the other's to produce better programming because their ratings are still high. Unfortunately community radio isn't included in the ratings therefore they are seperate from commercial radio altogether and are not competing directly with them. The number of commercial licences should be increased..as Justin Cristie said, a fourth owner of an FM licence in Sydney and maybe Melbourne and Brisbane would be great for the listener, certainly advertisers' as there is more choice and better serving of each demogprahic. The way for radio to progress and enter a new era, is by making frequency space available for more competition in the commercial sector. Let's see what will happen when 95.3 Sydney goes to air.
Whether or not new or existing operators vying for new licences will bring more diversity to programming is not really the issue. I feel that the cost of the new auctioned licences are too prohibitive for any new players to enter into the sector and make a go of it. How many 'new conglomerates' have bought in in recent times? Not too many. Simply the big are getting bigger because they have the ability to do so. The networks are able to build on their interests by buying up struggling independents or bid for any new licences and in doing so, are continuing to create cheaper radio by cutting down on staff and using the available technology to keep more of the profits as profits. As someone trying to get into the industry, I've been watching this trend for years. Will the big boys become weaker because of a dwindling dollar or will they continue to sell on the strenghts of the big sellable networks behind them? I look forward to seeing that answered in time. As for de-regulation of the community radio sector, that's for another forum. I'd like to hear Camel's view on selling outside the box. I'm asking.
Here's a thought....10-15 years ago there were half as many stations and twice the number of jocks compared with today where there are twice the number of stations and half as many jocks. Would adding more stations continue this trend?
No I think Australia has enough radio stations, we aren't as big as say a country like America so can't justify having hundreds of niche radio stations - maybe what we need is more challenging formats rather than brand new stations starting from scratch. Not to mention that there is not that many frequencies available on the spectrum anymore. I really think digital radio should be examined and digital radio stations created rather than traditional bricks and mortar stations, since digital radio is something that will become a lot more prevalent in the future and may very well be the main radio employers in the future market place.