Power to Amp?

[AMRocks]

In many CBS markets, they are blowing up the CHR station they have and renaming it, Amp. The most recent is happening with the former Beasley station in Philly this week.

Do you think they'll do the same thing here in Miami?

Power has a very long history here. Does CBS care about that? But Y100 seems to beat them in the ratings all the time. And now with Hits, they have 2 strong competitors.

I'd love to hear the board members' thoughts.

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

I've long said that the reason Power has never reclaimed their former glory is because they left behind what made them unique: they WERE the Miami sound. They defined what the music of Miami sounded like in their heyday. They lost that when they attempted to go after 99 Jamz in the early 2000's, and they've never recovered it.

The question of CBS dropping the name and changing the format is an easy one to answer: yes. CBS used to care about heritage and crafting unique stations, but that's rapidly changing given their approach toward getting out of radio altogether. I said when this deal first went down that it would be the end of Power 96, and I don't anticipate that taking much longer. Will it be Amp? That I actually doubt. With Y-100 and Hits in the picture, it's difficult to imagine them envisioning any sort of real success with a mainstream CHR, and make no mistake about it, every decision they're making right now is about making the station as profitable as possible before turning around and selling it again. Find the most underserved money demographics in the market, and that'll be where CBS is headed with the Miami cluster.

 

[davideduardo]

I've long said that the reason Power has never reclaimed their former glory is because they left behind what made them unique: they WERE the Miami sound. They defined what the music of Miami sounded like in their heyday. They lost that when they attempted to go after 99 Jamz in the early 2000's, and they've never recovered it.

You keep repeating this statement despite it being untrue. When Power eliminated the last vestiges of freestyle and other EDM forms they went up in ratings as they moved to a fuller rhythmic and hip hop position. The market had changed.

Power was not going directly at WEDR... any more than Power 106 in LA was going after The Beat. In fact, both Power in Miami and Power in LA went through the same process of shedding the dance and moving more fully into hip hop and both increased their ratings.

What has changed over the last two decades in Miami is that the Cuban American population has become listeners of rhythmic English language radio, since essentially all the Cuban population from the teens to 45 or over is US born and does not listen to Spanish language radio as much as before.

Obviously, you did not like the change. But Bill Tanner is a good programmer and knows Miami and did the right thing.

The question of CBS dropping the name and changing the format is an easy one to answer: yes. CBS used to care about heritage and crafting unique stations, but that's rapidly changing given their approach toward getting out of radio altogether. I said when this deal first went down that it would be the end of Power 96, and I don't anticipate that taking much longer. Will it be Amp? That I actually doubt. With Y-100 and Hits in the picture, it's difficult to imagine them envisioning any sort of real success with a mainstream CHR, and make no mistake about it, every decision they're making right now is about making the station as profitable as possible before turning around and selling it again. Find the most underserved money demographics in the market, and that'll be where CBS is headed with the Miami cluster.

CBS is doubling up on radio in the markets where they have TV as they, along with a number of other TV / Radio operators have discovered the huge synergies in combining radio with TV, particularly in promotion. CBS has been quite clear about keeping the major market stations where they have TV.

CBS does not change heritage names on highly profitable stations. Power is essentially tied for the position of being the #2 highest billing English Language station in Miami (tie with WLYF and just a a few percent behind WHYI) so it is really unlikely that they would change name. Like any current based station, they will follow the trends and the blend may vary, just as it has in the past.

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

You keep repeating this statement despite it being untrue.

You keep repeating your objection to the facts despite that I've shown you you're wrong several times over. Tanner is a good programmer, and ratings went up in the short term, but in the long run, they fell behind, and they've stayed there ever since. It's not about good programming in a given format, it's about crafting a unique angle to that format and tailoring it for the local tastes, and when Power turned away from that, their position fell. This isn't about my personal tastes, it's fact. Period. You can deny it all you want, but it is fact as shown in the ratings.

 

[davideduardo]

You keep repeating your objection to the facts despite that I've shown you you're wrong several times over. Tanner is a good programmer, and ratings went up in the short term, but in the long run, they fell behind, and they've stayed there ever since. It's not about good programming in a given format, it's about crafting a unique angle to that format and tailoring it for the local tastes, and when Power turned away from that, their position fell. This isn't about my personal tastes, it's fact. Period. You can deny it all you want, but it is fact as shown in the ratings.

That's just wrong. And it is not shown in the ratings.

After flushing the trance and freestyle and other dance stuff, the station went back up and sustained its performance for many years. In fact, the next big change took place when all kinds of realignments took place following the conversion to PPM.

For example, in the 5 books from Spring, 2001 to Fall 2002 (just Spring and Fall) they had a 6.0, 5.6, 5.5, 4.8 and 5.3 share. The 5.3 was good for #1 in 12+ and #2 to WEDR in 18-34 and 18-49. On the other hand, in the Spring 99 book they had a 5.1, a 5.1 in Summer, a 4.9 in Fall, a 5.2 in Winter 2000 and a 5.1 in Spring of 2000. So you see that they were well up in the two years after 1999. Not down.

And in the 5 books from Spring 2003 to Spring 2004 they did 5.6, 5.4, 4.8, 5.5 and 5.7 with that final Spring 2004 being #1 in 12+, 18-34 and 18-49.

So there is the 1999 year vs the 2000 to 2004 years. All the successive years did better than 1999 when they finally decided to drop the dance stuff.

Source: Maximi$er.

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

You keep focusing on one genre of music when we both know that wasn't the only change, which is a lie of omission on your part that doesn't help your effort to discredit my point. And you seem to think that the period you're referring to is the "long run" I mentioned when it's actually the "short term" that I pointed it out to be. They went head-to-head with 99 Jamz and it didn't work in the long run. They've been middling ever since.

Keep attempting to spin the numbers any way you like, but the facts speak for themselves. Power 96 is not the force it once was. It hasn't been since the turn of the century. The decisions made at that time were ultimately their downfall, and that is self-evident.

 

[davideduardo]

You keep focusing on one genre of music when we both know that wasn't the only change, which is a lie of omission on your part that doesn't help your effort to discredit my point. And you seem to think that the period you're referring to is the "long run" I mentioned when it's actually the "short term" that I pointed it out to be. They went head-to-head with 99 Jamz and it didn't work in the long run. They've been middling ever since.

The major change in Power in the 1999-2000 period was to get rid of the last vestiges of dance and go more straight forward hip hop.

WPOW was not targeting WEDR, as they were focused on Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites since the very beginning as a rhythmic station. The demos in the late 90's and early 00's was first Hispanic, second non-Hispanic whites and then a smaller percentage of African Americans. WEDR on the other hand is predominantly Black in audience composition... then and now. So WPOW never, ever went head to head with WEDR (mostly because WEDR has had a lower power ratio as do many urban stations).

I gave you a time frame of 1998 to 2004. That is definitely a "long term" run in radio in anyone's book. I could have gone on through the start of PPM and demonstrated that the station sustained its position in rank, even as the entire market fragmented and compressed. And WPOW did very well going into PPM; it's now, as I said, tied for second place in billings among English language stations and has maintained a strong 18-34 and 18-49 position even as there are now many 18-34 CHR offerings in Spanish that never existed before (WXDJ, WRTO, WMGE).

Keep attempting to spin the numbers any way you like, but the facts speak for themselves. Power 96 is not the force it once was. It hasn't been since the turn of the century. The decisions made at that time were ultimately their downfall, and that is self-evident.

Huh? It's tied with WLYF in billings, and just a couple of percent below WHYI (the leader, of course, in billing is WAMR a station I know extremely well). WPOW, in the highly compressed PPM world, averaged #1 in 18-34 for the last quarter of 2014 and #2 in 18-49. That's better than it was doing in 1988-1999. It's cume is over a million and it is at the top of the heap there. How can you possibly say that it is "not the force it once was" when it is in a stronger ratings position than the period that you mysteriously think was a "better" point in their history?

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

I've already explained all of this to you before, David, and you simply don't like it, so I'm not going to get dragged into it all over again. Take the hint: we're not going to agree on this, and the argument won't get anywhere. The original poster asked for my opinion of what was going to happen under CBS ownership, and I gave it. You disagree. Good for you.

 

[davideduardo]

I've already explained all of this to you before, David, and you simply don't like it, so I'm not going to get dragged into it all over again. Take the hint: we're not going to agree on this, and the argument won't get anywhere. The original poster asked for my opinion of what was going to happen under CBS ownership, and I gave it. You disagree. Good for you.

Translation: you don't believe the Arbitron ratings and have decided that, even if Power went on an upswing starting in 2000, you don't like what they did so you are going to talk trash about the station even though you are 1000% wrong.

So then answer this: what station or agency were you at in the 1999-2004 period that gave you access to the core demo numbers? Were you programming or managing a Miami station in that period? Do you know the billing for the stations in the market from that period onward? What was the African American audience of Power before and after they allegedly "went up against WEDR"?

Final piece of data:

WPOW % of Black cume:
Spring
1999 17%
2000 17%
2001 18%

Average percentage Hispanic: 51%
Average non-Hispanic white: 29%

Cume 1999 470,000. Cume today: 1,050,000

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

Oh, David, you're all over the map in terms of what you think my point is. You haven't once been able to nail it down because you're so absorbed in ratings and billing and data that you can't see the forest for the trees. I'd love to explain it further to you, but we've been having this argument for more than a decade, and it bores me now. Your translation is nothing more than a hollow attempt at claiming a victory you don't have, and no one actually cares. So keep reveling in your assumed superiority. I'll just sit back and continue to laugh as exactly what I've been saying all this time continues being proven correct.

 

[davideduardo]

Oh, David, you're all over the map in terms of what you think my point is. You haven't once been able to nail it down because you're so absorbed in ratings and billing and data that you can't see the forest for the trees. I'd love to explain it further to you, but we've been having this argument for more than a decade, and it bores me now. Your translation is nothing more than a hollow attempt at claiming a victory you don't have, and no one actually cares. So keep reveling in your assumed superiority. I'll just sit back and continue to laugh as exactly what I've been saying all this time continues being proven correct.

The purpose Beasley had in buying and operating WPOW was to get good ratings so they could get good billings and make a good profit.

To get good ratings, they got Bill Tanner and his team. To get good billings and profits they got Greg Reed.

There is no forest. The purpose of any commercial station is to make money... and power achieved that purpose for the 28 years they owned the station.

You did not answer my question about your programming and management experience in Miami or even how you had access to the granular-level ratings. All the information points to your opinions being based on incomplete, partial and even inaccurate information

There is no need to engage in ad hominems in the process of looking at the facts about WPOW.

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

I didn't engage in any ad hominem attacks, I pointed out why you're so far off in your assumptions about me -- and your assessment of my position. And your questions about my experience will go unanswered simply because the answers don't matter to the accuracy or validity of my point. You can rest assured that I know the market well enough to know what I'm talking about.

 

[davideduardo]

I didn't engage in any ad hominem attacks, I pointed out why you're so far off in your assumptions about me -- and your assessment of my position. And your questions about my experience will go unanswered simply because the answers don't matter to the accuracy or validity of my point. You can rest assured that I know the market well enough to know what I'm talking about.

Phrases like "so keep reveling in your assumed superiority" and the general tone of your post would seem to me to more than amply qualify as an ad hominem blast.

My question about your experience is more than relevant: since your conclusions about WPOW are de facto unsustainable, I believe you are dealing with partial or inaccurate data. Analysis of the granular level data in Maximi$er and the revenue data from MK and other sources invalidate, totally, your position.

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

No, an ad hominem "blast" would be me calling you an idiot, which I haven't done, because you're not. You're a very intelligent person with a good handle on a great many things, but you do assume an air of superiority because you believe that your data is the only standard of measure that is necessary or valid, and you look down on anyone who points out the flaws in both the data itself and the way you interpret it, as I have repeatedly. Pointing that out is not an ad hominem attack, nor is the tone in which I do it. What it is is the response of someone who has made his point and made it well many times, and is tired of going through the runaround with you just because you don't like the things that he points out. Which is exactly why my experience isn't relevant in the least: I could have all the experience in the world, I could have access to every ounce of information that you do, I could have intimate knowledge of the inner workings at WPOW, and you would still argue with me about this because you cannot accept even the possibility that your numbers might not add up to the whole of the sum. Question David Eduardo's methodology? Why, how DARE I!

 

[davideduardo]

I could have all the experience in the world, I could have access to every ounce of information that you do, I could have intimate knowledge of the inner workings at WPOW, and you would still argue with me about this because you cannot accept even the possibility that your numbers might not add up to the whole of the sum. Question David Eduardo's methodology? Why, how DARE I!

As far as I know, the metrics for commercial stations are to some extent ratings, to a greater extent billings and to the greatest extent, Broadcast Cash Flow. It's why people build or buy radio stations.

Yes, a station may be a more fun investment than a hardware store. And a station is a bit of the entertainment business, once removed. And big stations may still have some influence on music and artists, although not as much as in the pre-new media era. And ownership of a station might be seen as a position of importance in the medium and smaller market. But none of those things amount to anything compared to the goal, and need, for making a profit to sustain operations and give a measure of return on investment to the owner.

So when you say that WPOW ceased to be what it had been (whatever those qualities were) when is can be seen to have increased ratings and revenue after it "changed" is obviously, then, a subjective opinion based on your reaction to that change. In such a case, you err in generalizing about something that is purely personal. You don't like how Power changed after 1999. You don't like the elimination of freestyle, trance and other dance music. But more listeners liked the change than did not, and that caused advertisers to spend more money on the station.

Just say it, then. The station was not as appealing to you after they nuked the dance stuff that the rest of the market was sick of. That is a valid personal opinion and one I could very much respect. But pretending that the station did something self-destructive at that time is just wrong.

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

Nope, this isn't about me. My measure of success is not reliant upon my personal taste. And no matter how many times you make that accusation, you're still going to be wrong. I've explained the factors at play to you before, you simply don't like them (even though they've only ever been proven correct).

 

[davideduardo]

Nope, this isn't about me. My measure of success is not reliant upon my personal taste. And no matter how many times you make that accusation, you're still going to be wrong. I've explained the factors at play to you before, you simply don't like them (even though they've only ever been proven correct).

Then what is the measure of "success" of a radio station?

I'm hoping for something reasonable and perhaps a different perspective. I am also hoping that you don't talk about pleasing or serving in some way a small group of listeners who can not support a radio station in the open market.

 

[TC99]

CBS is doubling up on radio in the markets where they have TV as they, along with a number of other TV / Radio operators have discovered the huge synergies in combining radio with TV, particularly in promotion. CBS has been quite clear about keeping the major market stations where they have TV.

This is probably we see Joe Rose every morning on the local Morning Show. I would think he would have a non-compete after leaving WTVJ.

 

[doublejm1]

I'd like to chime in.

I grew up listening to Power 96 and, like JoshTheRadioDude, feel that Power 96 just isn't the powerful force it used to be. However, to DavidEduardo's point, such claims are largely subjective, because the numbers seem to tell otherwise.

Many of us became accustomed to hearing dance and freestyle music on the station over the years. To see it transition to an urban format was surprising, if not jarring.

If DavidEduardo's numbers are correct -- and I don't doubt they are -- it really wouldn't surprise me.

The fact of the matter is that freestyle and 90s dance music are no longer that popular, except among a small group of devotees who grew up listening to such music. That group includes me, even though I was born in 1985 and thus am not exactly within the demographic of people who followed freestyle in the 80s. Whenever I ask my friends if they were ever into Coro, Stevie B, or Lisa Lisa, I get a blank look in response. Freestyle -- and later dance -- just didn't resonate with a lot of people. Even if it did back then, they seem to remember very little about it today.

There are various Power 96 air checks floating around the internet. Some of them date to 1998-1999, and I noticed that Power 96 was already becoming heavier on urban/hip hop around that time (Jay-Z, etc.).

I read an article somewhere where Kid Curry, who served as program director from 1996 through 2005, stated that Power 96 is all about following the trends. If something is in style, that's what Power will play -- plain and simple.

I'm sure many people would agree that one thing that made Power so great back in the day was that it wasn't corporate and cookie-cutter as so many stations (Power is no exception) are today. Its playlist was tailored to the South Florida market. In addition to playing Top 40 songs, they featured songs from local talent and up-and-comers whom you didn't necessarily see on MTV or VH1.

Another reason why I feel Power 96's glory days are well behind is because I think the jocks/DJs they have today don't hold a candle to the ones they had on the air in the 80s and 90s, including Cox on the Radio, Bo Griffin, Felix Sama, DJ Laz, Dimas Martinez, Joe Nasty, Tony the Tiger, and Kid Curry. Again, it's just my opinion. I'm sure a lot of hip hop lovers would say that Power 96 has gotten better over the years, but I beg to differ.

It all boils down to what one's taste in music is.

 

[davideduardo]

I'm sure many people would agree that one thing that made Power so great back in the day was that it wasn't corporate and cookie-cutter as so many stations (Power is no exception) are today. Its playlist was tailored to the South Florida market. In addition to playing Top 40 songs, they featured songs from local talent and up-and-comers whom you didn't necessarily see on MTV or VH1.
.

That, of course, is the effect of having a strong local programmer guided by the South Florida legend that is Bill Tanner.