Questions, Answers, and Analysis (cont.)

Here is Part 2 of Mr. David Strand's Questions and Answers and our analysis.

How come “Issues, Etc.” was the only show that had to ask for money on the air?

It was not the only program soliciting funds from listeners. Other hosts on other shows
also encourage listeners to contribute to the ministry of KFUO-AM. Beyond that, the
station regularly runs prerecorded messages throughout the day encouraging the same
thing. Virtually all program hosts, along with other staffers, participate in the station’s
annual “Sharathon.” Further, there are “Give Now” buttons on the KFUO website, and
periodically on the Synod’s main website, for the benefit of all of KFUO.

Analysis:  The question is incorrectly put.  Of course all the shows encourage listeners to contribute to KFUO-AM.  Of course the station runs prerecorded messages encouraging contributions to KFUO-AM.  Of course staff members and program hosts are asked to participate in "Sharathon" fund raising.   But the question remains:  Why was Issues, Etc. the only show on KFUO-AM that had to raise its own funds?

Was “Issues” credited for all the revenues it brought in?

Yes, all donations specifically earmarked for “Issues,” including Reformation Club
income, were credited to “Issues.” Beyond that, the program was credited for at least its
pro rata share of non-earmarked gifts, and during the past year, was credited with a
generous proportion of the non-gift revenue to the station. Again, the allocations, as part
of the accounting practices relating to KFUO-AM, have been described by the Treasurer
of the Synod as “accurate,” “fair,” and “very reasonable.”

The only “Issues”-related support that does not figure into the equation are the funds
given by congregations directly to radio stations in their locales. These monies do not
come into St. Louis, are not part of the KFUO-AM or “National Issues” budgets, and are
not tracked by the LCMS Foundation or Accounting Department.

Analysis:  The fact that there were donations specifically earmarked for Issues, Etc. and a Reformation Club to support it, demonstrates the unique fundraising status of Issues, Etc. compared to the other shows on KFUO-AM.  The answer fails to mention the 40% that the LCMS Foundation keeps for funds that it raises.  The question asks if the funds were "credited" to Issues, Etc.  One might ask whether this was before or after the 40% tax levied by the Foundation.

The second paragraph raises some questions.  Was there money available to Issues, Etc. given by congregations and individuals to local radio stations that were not accounted for?  How much was this?  How did this affect the bottom line of Issues, Etc.?

Why did you cancel “Issues, Etc.” on the eve of its “Issues 300” fundraising campaign?

“Issues 300” was not a formal, sanctioned fundraising effort being done in cooperation
with the LCMS Foundation; rather, it was an effort by Rev. Wilken and Mr. Schwarz to
raise funds for the syndication of the one-hour Sunday-evening broadcast. There were no
ads, publicity, direct-mail materials, telemarketing strategies, or donor visitations poised
to be set in motion by the Foundation. There were no projections to suggest that “Issues
300” would offer significant help in meeting the fiscal and stewardship responsibilities of
reducing, and eventually eliminating, the large budgetary variances at KFUO-AM.

Analysis:  This is a good question, but the answer begs the question.  As indicated above, Issues, Etc. was responsible to raise money to support itself as a mission and ministry of the LCMS.  The LCMS Foundation kept 40% of all funds raised for Issues, Etc.  Issues, Etc, recognizing the large potential of the syndicated Sunday evening audience and the internet followers, initiated its own campaign to have 300 congregations pledge $1000 from their congregational budgets.  Here is the U-Tube video for the campaign. 

If successful, it would have raised $300,000 for the show.  According to Mr. Strand's first answer, the annual deficit of KFUO-AM was $620,000, and the deficit for Issues, Etc. was $250,000.  If the Issues 300 campaign would have been successful, it would have offset the Issues, Etc. deficit with $50,000 to spare and would have offset the entire KFUO-AM budget deficit by 48%.  This is hardly insignificant.

The first sentence is revealing.  The Issues 300 campaign was not a "formal, sanctioned fundraising effort being done in cooperation with the LCMS Foundation."  This Foundation keeps 40 cents on the dollar.  The Issues 300 campaign did not raise any money for the Synod and it Foundation, therefore it was irrelevant to the decision to cancel the show for financial reasons.

Why would you discontinue what was easily the most listened to program at KFUO-AM?

In terms of broadcast audience, probably the most listened to program on KFUO-AM is
its Sunday-morning worship service. “Issues,” the most heavily resourced program in
terms of fundraising and production costs, and airing during the evening drive-time slot,
had a solid core of listeners. But considerably less expensive programs such as “The
Bible Study” also have broadcast-audience followings—perhaps equal to, or, at times,
even exceeding that of “Issues.”

Analysis:  The question and the answer do not line up.  What is meant by "most listened to"?  The answer speaks to actual radio listeners.  Mr. Strand reported that Issues, Etc. had an average of 1,650 listeners according to a 3-4 year old ratings data.  He does not report what the numbers are for the Sunday morning worship services or the other "less-expensive" programs.  In fact, the answer is purely speculative - "probably the most listened program..." "perhaps equal to, or at times, even exceeding...."  Probably and perhaps do not constitute hard facts.

As in the past, Mr. Strand does not include the internet audience of Issues, Etc. which by several independent analysis was quite large.  By framing this as strictly a radio programming issue, he is neglected the large mission and ministry implications.

The premise must also be considered.  Is it proper to make a decision on a "mission and ministry" of the LCMS solely on the basis of numbers?  Does not content also enter into the discussion?  Issues, Etc. had a unique content, compared to the rest of KFUO-AM's programming.

Why in your posted statements have you cited the low broadcast-audience and livestreaming
numbers of “Issues, Etc.” but said nothing about the show’s download
figures?

Owing to several factors, download numbers are not as accurate or reliable as broadcast
or streaming statistics. Anomalies (such as oddly inconsistent tallies, sometimes large
ones) are known to occur in download counts. Moreover, the majority of KFUO-AM
downloaders receive their programs, or audio files, via automatic subscription. The
automatically transferred files are counted as downloads whether their recipients actually
listen to them or not.

Analysis:  This answer is based on unsubstantiated claims.  What are the "several factors" that make download numbers "not as accurate or reliable" as 3-4 year old broadcast statistics?  Is there a concrete example or a reference to "anomalies" in download counts that are known to occur?  The final sentence is particularly interesting.  There is no guarantee that automatically transferred files are actually listened to.  There is equally no guarantee that live listeners are actually listening!

That being said, “Issues, Etc” was the most downloaded program on KFUO-AM. In
February 2008, “Live Stats,” the service that counts our AM downloads, credited
“Issues” with 95,594 downloads, an average of 3,414 a day. “The Bible Study” got
85,121, an average of 2,935 a day.

Analysis:  These are impressive numbers and a welcome admission.

Since last October (discounting November, when a sizable anomaly was known to occur),
the average count of monthly “Issues” downloads was 113,801, or 3,793 a day. These
are good numbers, and KFUO-AM is grateful to those who have accessed “Issues” and
other AM programs in this way. Of course, providing this downloading service incurs
costs for the Synod, including about $30,000 this past year for bandwidth. There also are
costs associated with the preparation, storage, and maintenance of the downloadable
archives. It might also be pointed out that downloaders don’t typically translate into
donors, of whom there were 558 individuals and 39 congregations to “Issues” last year.
Downloading is a wonderful technology, but a live radio station also needs a strong and
growing core of live listeners to sustain itself.

Analysis:  The cited "sizeable anomaly" is left unexplained, though the average counts are quite high, as is acknowledged.  What is interesting is the turnabout in responsibility, blaming the internet listeners for costing the Synod money! 

The download traffic was costing the Synod $30,000.  How was this figure arrived at?  Is this related to poor equipment and inefficiency at KFUO?  If bandwidth and archiving are so costly, why was there not a nominal fee charged for downloads (as opposed to live streaming audio)?  Internet consumers are accustomed to paying small fees for the privilege of downloading music, etc.  In addition, why wasn't a more interactive web site with member privileges explored as a way to tap into the acknowledged large internet audience?

The answer states that "downloaders don't typically translate into donors" yet Issues, Etc. was cancelled just as it was about to put that very premise to the test with "Issues 300."  How many other shows on KFUO-AM claim 558 individual supporters and 39 congregations?

If Issues, Etc. was a "failure" as a local radio show, why wasn't an alternative proposed?  If downloading is a "wonderful technology" why not expand its utility?  The blunt cancellation of the show with no apologetic alternative indicates a lack of vision and foresight on the part of those responsible for "communication services."

(to be continued)

Comments

[Texas Confessional Pastor]

Your analysis is spot-on, of course. But I have another take on the following comment of yours:
"The first sentence is revealing. The Issues 300 campaign was not a 'formal, sanctioned fundraising effort being done in cooperation with the LCMS Foundation.' This Foundation keeps 40 cents on the dollar. The Issues 300 campaign did not raise any money for the Synod and it Foundation, therefore it was irrelevant to the decision to cancel the show for financial reasons."

NOT QUITE! That's exactly the point that the "issues 300" campaign did NOT USE the LCMS foundation, and he blames "Rev. Wilken and Mr. Schwarz" - I take this that Mr. Strand is saying, "these guys were going off on their own, cowboys that they are, and raising funds outside of officially approved methods, circumventing the 40% take"!!! So it WAS RELEVANT to the decision to cancel the show because they had a POLITICAL-FINANCIAL problem with Todd and Jeff, Todd and Jeff were hitting them in the POCKETBOOK WHERE IT REALLY COUNTS. You can call Mr. Strand and Rev. Kieschnick all the names in the book you want to call them - liberals, mega-church wanna-bes, whatever - and you won't get even a sniff. But you hit them in their POCKETBOOK, in the DOLLARS and CENTS of the whole thing, well, they will then turn on you like a pack of ravenous dogs, their anger will be unabated. That's when the THEOLOGICAL REASONS will drive their decision making, and yet, they can still claim it is for the FINANCIAL considerations at the same time. That's why they fired in Holy Week. That's why they released this on Ascension Eve. You are TOLERABLE even if you are in disagreement theologically and politically - but if you take their money or their votes away, they will turn you out and fast, as we've seen.

Case Dismissed. It looks like, in letting these guys write and forcing them under pressure to issue commentary and explanations, they are giving away their true colors. You can remain on in the LCMS so long as you do not challenge the money or the votes. Then they will take you out if you are not on the same team as they are theologically.

[Erich Heidenreich, DDS]

Strand says: "'Issues, Etc' was the most downloaded program on KFUO-AM. In February 2008, 'Live Stats,' the service that counts our AM downloads, credited 'Issues' with 95,594 downloads, an average of 3,414 a day. ...providing this downloading service incurs costs for the Synod, including about $30,000 this past year for bandwidth."

Hmmmm... That figure seems unreasonably high, given the current standard bandwidth fees in the industry. Amazon's S3 service charges under 20 cents per gigabyte. The following is from Amazon's website:

"Data transferred into Amazon S3 costs $0.10 per GB, while data transferred out of Amazon S3 costs $0.18 per GB for the first 10 TB (10,240 GB). Volume discounts are automatically applied for additional data transferred out of Amazon S3; the next 40 TB cost $0.16 per GB and all additional data transferred out of Amazon S3 in a month costs $0.13 per GB. Volume discounts are applied separately for the U.S. and for Europe. There is also a small per-request charge that depends on the operation and the location of the servers you are accessing. PUT and LIST operations cost $0.01 per 1,000 requests, while all other operations cost $0.01 per 10,000 requests for buckets located in the U.S. PUT and LIST operations cost $0.012 per 1,000 requests, while all other operations cost $0.012 per 10,000 requests for buckets located in Europe."

David Strand says the "average count of monthly 'Issues' downloads was 113,801." And, the average 1 hour episode of Issues, Etc. appears on my iTunes to be about 8MB.

113,801 downloads per month X 12 months = 1,365,612 downloads per year X 8MB each = 11,924,896MB/year.

That rounds out to 12,000 gigabytes per year. If they used Amazon's service, they could do this for under $2000/year. If it actually cost $30,000/year, as David Strand says, then the synod is paying $2.50 per gigabyte transfered - more than fifteen times what Amazon would charge.

It appears this cost figure is either inflated, or whoever was in charge of purchasing bandwidth (I hear this is handled at the IC) was not aware that there are much cheaper services out there to choose from than what they were using.