-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
March 2016 Boston Radio Ratings.
- Thread starter freqlost
- Start date
And with the Bruins stumbling along (eventually to miss the playoffs), the Celtics overachieving but ultimately heading for one-and-done or two-and-done in their playoffs, and plenty of doubts about the potential of the Red Sox, EEI and BZ-FM failed to top 10.0 combined again.
Funny about WROR. It's never been a favorite on this board, except for Lorne and Wally's show, and is often criticized as bland in its presentation and boring in its music. Yet the vast listening public -- the 99 percenters who are neither in radio nor obsessed with radio minutiae -- loves it.
The stations were first and third among men 25-54. The morning and afternoon shows were first and second in that demographic. It seems like the stations are doing okay.
http://www.boston.com/sports/sports...st-weei-third-in-nielsen-audio-winter-ratings
the 6+ numbers are what a friend of mine appropriately calls "the beauty queen numbers", they are worthless for anything more than bragging rights if you are not higher than the 6+ rating in your P1.
And how does WEEI 850 come in 34th in the market according to the Globe..... are there even 34 stations or streams monitored by the PPM in this area?
And how does WEEI 850 come in 34th in the market according to the Globe..... are there even 34 stations or streams monitored by the PPM in this area?
29 of them are listed. There are certainly more signals than that audible in at least part of the market -- ethnic AMs like WUNR and WESX, college FMs like WMBR, WHRB and WZBC, suburban commercial FMs like WATD and WBOQ. Wouldn't the PPMs detect those?
There are 115 stations including translatorsin the MSA. There are 106 without the translators. A quarter of them regularly show in the book with a 0.1 or above.
One, WJIB, I know does not encode. Some of the smaller stations may not either, but nearly all get the free encoders.
I know that WMBR doesn't encode. I doubt that WZBC does either.
T
Tilden
Guest
Interesting to read that the non commercial WGBH-FM 89.7 New/Talk format has better ratings than the commercial WRKO.
Anyone know if Howie Carr's Ratings are included in the WRKO low ratings or are they separate since his show in syndicated and he buys time to be in 680.
Looks like Entercom doesn't happen...much.
Anyone know if Howie Carr's Ratings are included in the WRKO low ratings or are they separate since his show in syndicated and he buys time to be in 680.
Looks like Entercom doesn't happen...much.
Another sign that AM is dead.....
WBZ is the only successful station left on the entire AM band in Boston....and even WBZ is showing signs of wear and tear.
WBZ is still the #1 biller in the market, and its billings are stable in a market with no revenue growth.
WRKO, at about $6 million in revenue, is likely profitable as well.
Then we have a bunch of stations that are "successful" on a lesser scale with revenue that supports the assumption that the stations are profitable to their owners: WEZE, WNNW, WAMG, WROL, WWDJ, WRCA and several others.
WROR is a juggernaut. I hear them on everywhere and for a reason. It's a strong station with tested musical depth--every song is a winner. 'ZLX seems lost in a narrow lane between 'ROR, WBOS and WAAF. They try to respond by going deeper, and they are too unfamiliar for the masses. They go for more new rock and they bump into 'AAF. WZLX is a station in trouble, and that trouble is spelled "WROR." They could benefit from a PD/MD who isn't steeped in how things are "supposed to be" in Boston radio. Fresh ears.
As for the AM's, don't shed a tear for WRKO or WBZ. Both are doing very well and will continue to ride the wave of this election well into 2018.
As for the AM's, don't shed a tear for WRKO or WBZ. Both are doing very well and will continue to ride the wave of this election well into 2018.
In what world is WRKO "doing well"?
Don't forget the other half of that fact, they have very high expenses as well. They didn't look great in the last monthly, we'
ll see if this is the the "new normal" for them.
I see the quote marks ;-) I suppose it all depends on one's definition of successful.
Some may consider successful a station that has only a handful of listeners and maintains the ability to pay it's "nut" every month.
If that's your criteria, then you are right.
One certainty is that individual books in PPM can unfathomably wobble, even for major stations.
And by "successful" I mean that those stations make a very good return on investment, even if they are not ratings performers. If an operator is getting back a 15% to 20% ROI on a lower tier technical facility, that pays for the cost of the money and is a better investment than most. And there are operators like Salem who know how to be very profitable with that kind of station.
That goes without saying. However, time will tell if they are settling into a new norm....
Yes, I understand your view of "success". However, my definition of a successful broadcaster is more than simply ROI.
I understand where you are coming from, most of us here are passionate about radio and the craft, but there are many successful broadcasters who are now working as used car salesmen because they were unsuccessful businessmen.
It gets a bit more complicated when there are stockholders involved and they insist on maximizing ROI.
For the record, my radio heroes are Simon Geller, Ed Perry, and Bill Bittner
Only on a radio board would anyone argue about the meaning of "success" or "doing well." In any other sector of the free market, the answer is easy--consistently profitable. Both WBZ and WRKO are consistently profitable operations. Yes, they have lower BCF margins. Yes, it costs more to stand out on a technology platform that dates back a century. And yes, they attract older listeners who don't harbor the AM bias of those under 60 and are hungry for the content only available there. When you view those stations through that tight lens, I'd say both are successful in their own way.
Bob Bittner!
You are correct, I am ashamed to have to admit I got it wrong, I will rip up my ( worthless) First Phone ticket and
change AP ribbons for the next 6 months as penance .
What do you use to get the purple AP ink off your fingers?
- Status