[BC] Fallout from cuts

[Kent Winrich]

Interesting Rich.  I dont see any mention of apologizing for mis-management
in my comment.  I wish that you and Dana would stop trying to put words in
my mouth please.

My main concern is with the employees of these companies, many of them good
friends of mine.

I am also concerned about the business that you armchair quarterbacks love
to rip on, yet are unable to offer any solutions.



On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 11:46 PM, Rich Wood <richwood at pobox.com> wrote:

> ------ At 07:29 PM 5/1/2008, Kent Winrich wrote: -------
>
>  I guess I am amazed that people in the business wish ill of others in the
> > business.
> >
> > If you think that the failure of one of these companies will not effect
> > YOUR
> > job, you better wake up!  Just think if the value of station drops to
> > "fire
> > sale" level.  That would not be good for broadcasting as a whole.
> >
>
> I'm amazed that you can be an apologist for astoundingly bad management.
> Do you honestly believe that firing your creative people, you know, the ones
> who create your product, just so you can keep the guys at the top safe is
> the right way to go? If any of us failed in our jobs the way these guys have
> we'd be out on our butts for reasons much more substantial than cost
> cutting. Radio One is throwing money at the very people who have reduced
> their stock value close to a delisting value. Citadel at least withheld a
> multimillion dollar bonus to the doood at the top as its value drops to
> nearly nothing. Why do you suppose the banks want out of the Clear Channel
> deal? The stock is well below what it was when they made the deal. If you
> agree to buy a house and the house burns down before the deal is done are
> you still expected to close on it? That's what's being expected of the
> banks. I think the deal needs to be postponed until the stock
>
>  Also, how many of you have actually worked for a "local" company?  Most
> > people I have talked to were not giving glowing reports.  Please note,
> > most
> > does not mean ALL.
> >
>
> I'm glad your sweeping generalization was limited. Many companies were
> local prior to consolidation. How can we have warm fuzzies for companies who
> fire hundreds of people who were performing at a higher level of
> productivity than the folks who ordered them fired? I think the stockholders
> and, especially, Boards of Directors, need to grow some gonads and throw the
> bums out. Instead, the worse their performance the more money they get.



Rich, it is no longer the 1960s.  Things have changed.  Yet some cant seem
to grasp that concept, and wish for the good ole days.  Those that hang on
to the old days will be swept away.

OK once you throw the "bums" out.  Then what?


>
>
> I'll bet, as soon as the companies go private, the bloodbaths will begin,
> again, as they try and pay the new mortgage and pocket as much cash as they
> can.
>
> Rich
>