Recently it seems as if I have gotten into a lot of discussions with people about the business of radio. Did you hear so-and-so got fired? Did you hear about the changes that so-and-so is making? These kind of discussions. The next question is always "why would they do that?" I always give the same answer... money. Radio "talent" and many people that work in this industry simply don't get it. No station in their right mind would ever make a change that would cost them a lot of money. If you are in radio and you are not attached to money, you will always be (and should be) worried about your job. Any person in the industry should ask themselves "what would it cost to fire me?" and "Am I simply an expense?"
I got fired one time when I was making 2 g's a month. Why? Because though I may have felt like I was talented and I worked hard, in the end, firing me meant 2 g's was added back to the bottom line. They gained 2 g's and lost nothing in return except my "talent." If you are not attached to money and if you do not generate money, you are an expense. Many that work in radio are so arrogant about their "talent" that it is truly amazing. I honestly wonder how some people have made it so long being so clueless. If you are so talented, sponsors should be beating down the door to be a part of your show or shift. Sales people should have it easy. Surely people with money see that talent too.
How much money would it cost a station to get rid of so-and-so, or make so-and-so change? How many sponsors would drop? The next time you hear about some radio station making a change and you wonder why, the answers lie in the questions above. People are either attached to money, or they are an expense... no matter how much "talent" they have.