• 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

History of "West Outer" San Bernardino County

R

Ryan Williams

I'm curious on the history and reasoning behind the area of western San Bernardino County that is excluded from both the Los Angeles and Riverside-San Bernardino markets. This is the area around Chino and Ontario up through Rancho Cucamonga. Was this area ever part of either market? I would guess the area in question has a population of probably 500,000-700,000, so it is not nothing.

I've been in and through the area a number times and don't remember any significant signal issues. There might be some shadowing issues for the Mount Wilson signals north of the 210, but that area is not super populated.

It seems very strange.
 
Ryan Williams said:
I'm curious on the history and reasoning behind the area of western San Bernardino County that is excluded from both the Los Angeles and Riverside-San Bernardino markets. This is the area around Chino and Ontario up through Rancho Cucamonga. Was this area ever part of either market? I would guess the area in question has a population of probably 500,000-700,000, so it is not nothing.

I've been in and through the area a number times and don't remember any significant signal issues. There might be some shadowing issues for the Mount Wilson signals north of the 210, but that area is not super populated.

It seems very strange.
Click to expand...


Simple. Riverside and San Bernardino, in AM days, were almost separate markets. Several bad signals in each part. When the market was consolidated by Arbitron, the AMs barely covered the new area and certainly not beyond. So the market was set as the area up against the foothills to the East from San Berdoo down to Riverside and the surrounding towns such as Moreno Valley and Redlands.

The stations did not want the western area of the county in the survey as the LA stations had better signals and dominated. And those areas, back then, were far less built up.

As FM started to dominate, LA signals covered most of the area like locals. And everyone in the Inland Empire market thought that adding that area would reduce their shares and increase the dominance of the LA stations.

The LA stations did not originally want the zone, as back them most of the AMs did not get to the east very well. And later, LA was so big it did not make much difference but adding it would have likely reduced shares for the LA stations as the Inland Empire stations on FM did cover it and would drag down the LA shares overall.
 
Ryan Williams said:
That actually makes a lot of sense. Thank you for the detailed explanation.
Click to expand...

It does not make a lot of sense. We're referencing a population, that as stated in your first post, comprises more than a half million of disenfranchised listeners who have no possible selected access to ratings diaries to influence what local broadcasters understand the local audience wants to hear. How does Nielsen allow this to fester? That region should be assigned into the Riverside/San Bernardino market; with past rationalizations discarded in favor of the mathematically right thing to do.
 
david said:
It does not make a lot of sense. We're referencing a population, that as stated in your first post, comprises more than a half million of disenfranchised listeners who have no possible selected access to ratings diaries to influence what local broadcasters understand the local audience wants to hear. How does Nielsen allow this to fester? That region should be assigned into the Riverside/San Bernardino market; with past rationalizations discarded in favor of the mathematically right thing to do.
Click to expand...

Neither the Riverside/San Bernardino MSA nor the Los Angeles MSA use diaries. Both are People Meter markets.

Ratings do not tell stations what people want to hear. Proprietary perceptual and music research does that.

Ratings tell advertisers where they will be able to reach consumers.

Listeners are not "disenfranchised" by not being in a survey area. The Riverside / San Bernardino stations have enough information to determine their programming with or without that area. And the LA stations would not make any changes to serve well under a million people in a market approaching 14 million.

In fact, it is likely that adding that area to the Inland Empire survey area would hurt the stations in that market because it's a zone dominated by LA listening and that would reduce the share and rating of the IE stations, leading advertisers to think that buying just LA stations would be enough.

Ratings are not intended to serve the listener. They are a way of helping advertisers to find effective ad channels and to know what the right price is for each.
 
DavidEduardo said:
Ratings are not intended to serve the listener. They are a way of helping advertisers to find effective ad channels and to know what the right price is for each.
Click to expand...

Remember, if you are not paying, you are not the customer. In most cases, you are the product.

Radio stations do not sell music (or talk), they play it. Their customers are their advertisers, their product is the number of people listening and their demos. If this survey desert it is not an issue for their advertisers, then it is not an issue, period.
 
In the IE, we use to get from advertisers.. 'everyone is listening to KOLA'. Now we are getting, "we can't listen to KOLA anymore because they changed the music'.

Out little 'super LPFM' has been gaining audience due to this... no one else is playing 50's to 80's and everything else too LOL.

we almost have a coverage of a Class D FM.. 22 KM to 28 KM..... once our boosters are up, our 60db will have the holes filled in.

I think the only IE station that every hit the LA market was KFROG, when LA didnt have a country station.

Stay true to your format. The sliding format of KOLA (25-54) is not working like it used to, as KFROG beat them for the first time in years in the last book.
 
Rickw4pc said:
The sliding format of KOLA (25-54) is not working like it used to, as KFROG beat them for the first time in years in the last book.
Click to expand...

And yet KOLA is still #1 in cume. That hasn't changed, even after the lockdown. They're #1 by a lot too.

The goal of an LPFM is different from that of a commercial FM. If you can attract funding by playing 50s & 60s, knock yourself out. That audience can afford to pay to hear their favorite music, and they should.
 
Rickw4pc said:
I think the only IE station that every hit the LA market was KFROG, when LA didnt have a country station.
Click to expand...

You have a local station that decided to be listed "above the line" in LA and which actually leads the local ratings, too. Hint: it is in Spanish and owned by Entravision. It gets very significant LA numbers.

Stay true to your format. The sliding format of KOLA (25-54) is not working like it used to, as KFROG beat them for the first time in years in the last book.
Click to expand...

The last three books are irrelevant and even Nielsen said to ignore them outside of the crisis period.

Jan-Feb-Mar average: KOLA 6.3, KFRG 5.6.

Out little 'super LPFM' has been gaining audience due to this... no one else is playing 50's to 80's and everything else too LOL.
Click to expand...

How do you know that your station is gaining audience? I do not see any stand-alone LPFM listed in the ratings. Are you even encoded?
 
DavidEduardo said:
How do you know that your station is gaining audience? I do not see any stand-alone LPFM listed in the ratings. Are you even encoded?
Click to expand...

Yup we are encoded and you even called us a Super LPFM. We don't subscribe to Nielsen, and as you know, the Radio Research Consortium provides data for non-profits like ours for a much lower rate. You can see trends with their report that uses Nielsen's NRD that shows Cume Persons, Time Spent Listening and AQH Persons.

Plus we use other information, like number of people connected to our stream through our encoder, unique web site hit connected to the player. etc etc.

Our encoder doesn’t even include the stream stuff because we have the encoder up at the transmitter and not in the studio.

Rick KQLH
 
Rickw4pc said:
Yup we are encoded and you even called us a Super LPFM. We don't subscribe to Nielsen, and as you know, the Radio Research Consortium provides data for non-profits like ours for a much lower rate. You can see trends with their report that uses Nielsen's NRD that shows Cume Persons, Time Spent Listening and AQH Persons.
Click to expand...

As I said, the subscriber report does not show any LPFM.

It shows listening to the HD2's of Froggy and KPCC and the stream of KLYY. No other incoded stream or HD-2 or above makes the book. Or made it over the last 12 months.
 
DavidEduardo said:
As I said, the subscriber report does not show any LPFM.

It shows listening to the HD2's of Froggy and KPCC and the stream of KLYY. No other incoded stream or HD-2 or above makes the book. Or made it over the last 12 months.
Click to expand...

We show up in the Nielsen’s National Regional Database ... it's produced in the fall and spring.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom