ARCHIVED - Decision CRTC 2000-168
This page has been archived on the Web
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. Archived Decisions, Notices and Orders (DNOs) remain in effect except to the extent they are amended or reversed by the Commission, a court, or the government. The text of archived information has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Changes to DNOs are published as “dashes” to the original DNO number. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats by contacting us.
|
Decision CRTC 2000-168 |
|
|
Ottawa, 17 May 2000 |
|
|
Joseph Rajda, doing business under the name of Pols-Haven Nepean (Barrhaven), Ontario – 199805123 |
|
|
6 December 1999 Public Hearing National Capital Region |
|
| Denial of new specialty FM station | |
|
The Commission denies the application by Joseph Rajda for a broadcasting licence for an English-language specialty FM radio programming undertaking at Nepean, with some programming in French and other languages. |
| The business plan | |
|
Mr. Rajda proposed a commercial station directed to listeners in the Barrhaven area of Nepean. A similar application by Mr. Rajda was denied in Decision CRTC 98-125. Barrhaven is a southern suburb of Ottawa, with a current population of approximately 21,000. The applicant did not elect to file a market survey, and seemed uncertain of the number of persons within the proposed coverage area that would likely listen to the station, but suggested a potential audience of somewhere between 5,000 and 8,000. |
|
The estimated revenue for the proposed station in its first year of operation is $71,500. The applicant proposed that between 14 and 18 commissioned sales people would be required to generate this level of advertising revenue, and claimed to have identified approximately 25 potential advertisers. He added that, although no firm commitments from advertisers had been offered, there were 2,500 businesses in Barrhaven. Mr. Rajda noted that many of these were home-based or small businesses that, in his opinion, are unable to afford to advertise on existing commercial radio stations. |
|
The Commission questions whether the applicant's business plan is realistic, especially in view of the limited size of the business community in Barrhaven and the lack of evidence of advertiser demand. The Commission notes that the modest potential income any sales person could expect to generate in such a situation could lead to a chronic shortage of sales staff. Additionally, while the applicant made reference to the involvement of the station in the local community, there were no details or letters from community groups or organizations reflecting the applicant's commitments in these areas. |
|
Moreover, the Commission notes that the applicant's plans for a fully commercial service are predicated on the use of a low power frequency that will provide a very limited signal. In the Commission's view, these factors raise serious concerns about the applicant's ability to achieve its audience and revenue projections, in an area well served by a wide variety of commercial radio stations. |
| Programming | |
|
The applicant proposed to serve Barrhaven with a minimum of 64 hours of programming each week. The station's studio facilities were to be located in the applicant's residence and the plans for the station called for only 2 permanent staff members, both of which would be members of Mr. Rajda's family. |
|
The Commission is concerned that this minimal level of staffing could result in difficulties related to day-to-day operation of the station. Without sufficient staffing, problems could occur in the maintenance of program logging equipment, continuity in the application of programming policies, and other administrative duties. |
|
The applicant proposed that no more than 50% of all music played weekly on the station would fall into either category 21 (pop, rock and dance music) or category 22 (country and country-oriented music). The plans also called for the inclusion of semi-classical and big band music, and for 40% of the music over the week to be made up of contemporary and traditional folk music. Mr. Rajda proposed that the spoken word content of the station would be in either English, French (maximum of 30%), or other languages (maximum of 14%). The applicant did not identify or specify the proportions of the other languages to be used. |
|
The applicant stated that the emphasis given to folk music in his proposal was based on conversations with various Barrhaven residents over the age of 30. He suggested that folk music appeals to the nostalgic nature of people in that age group, a demographic he suggests constitutes the majority of Barrhaven residents. However, no market survey substantiated the applicant's claims. |
|
With respect to the plans for the broadcast of Canadian music, the Commission is not convinced that the applicant demonstrated a full understanding of the requirements of the Radio Regulations, 1986, the regulatory mechanisms in place to ensure that individual musical selections qualify as Canadian selections, and the obligations of radio licensees under the Broadcasting Act. |
|
In regard to the applicant's plans for the station's contributions to the development of Canadian talent, the Commission notes that the proposed $4,000 annual budget would be spent on promoting, recording and offering air-time to local talent. The Commission notes that, for commercial stations such as Mr. Rajda proposed, most of the planned initiatives would be normal station costs, not representing out-of-pocket expenses for the applicant. As such, the majority of the proposed initiatives would not qualify as Canadian talent development. |
|
The Commission is also of the opinion that the applicant did not demonstrate a clear understanding of the unprotected status of the proposed frequency, and the obligations of the applicant related to the use of it. |
|
For all of the reasons noted above, the Commission has denied this application. |
|
Secretary General |
|
| This decision is available in alternative format upon request, and may also be examined at the following Internet site: www.crtc.gc.ca |
- Date modified: