Entercom

[tbolt909]

When he was CEO of Arbitron, Owen Charlebois told me once that there were three kinds of Arbitron subscribers...

First, the ones whose ratings had dropped a lot. They knew that it was all because of Arbitron's defective system.

Second, were those who had stayed the same. They thought that Arbitron was doing a good, stable job.

Third were those whose ratings had soared. Of course, that was due to good management and good programming at the station.

Nothing has changed.

It's always easier to have a scapegoat. Blame the system, not the product. Radio is no longer relevant to many people.

It would be interesting if every ownership group agreed to stop buying Nielsen. You said in another post that nobody in the Top 50 markets wanted PPM except ad agencies. Stations could opt out of Nielsen permanently. Would Nielsen survive with only ad agencies as clients? Since COVID 19 has decimated Radio revenue, paying for Nielsen is like salt in the wound...

 

[TheBigA]

Radio is no longer relevant to many people.

Radio doesn't program to them.

 

[Rusty Bridges]

Over-sampling is not an issue... it is under-sampling where very few people respond and they are severely weighted up. I'd love to have consistent over-sampling as it makes the margin of error less.

No argument. However, and this is key, the term "over sampling" was used because it had been referred to in a previous post. That duly noted, the point of my post should be clear: sampling varies and weighting makes up for the variations.

I am reporting what is in front of my eyes on Neilson. If i owed a 50,000 watt station, wall-street funded FM and was being beat by a locally owned 1KW AM that covers one county, i would not be happy. Fact is, the stations we are beating or coming close to should be hanging their head in shame. WECK is now in the same league as any 3-5 share station. Then you have your mammoth league....WYRK, WBLK, WBEN, WGRF.

Kinda makes me wonder what you'd do if one of those stations "hanging their head in shame" flipped to the format you're doing on your kilowatter and three translators. You might be left holding a knife in a gunfight. Fact is, those stations are doing a format that benefits their entire cluster, adding efficiency and helping the clusters overall reach. They're targeting 35-49 and 45-54; not interested in 55+ or 65+ demos that contribute to a station's Persons 35+ standing. There's a good reason WHTT evolved from Oldies back to Classic Hits. If HTT was still Oldies, you wouldn't dare compete with them. They'd blow you out of the water. Those stations that you're beating are giving you room to operate. Stop ridiculing them and enjoy the free pass they've given you so you can crow about your ratings and revenue on a message board.

 

[TheBigA]

sampling varies and weighting makes up for the variations.

Just for some context, though it should be pointed out that many political polls done by educational institutions and other groups use even smaller groups as representative for a much larger area. So as much as I might complain about sample size, we see a lot of surveys, studies and polls every day that are even less exact.

 

[PTBoardOp94]

Just for some context, though it should be pointed out that many political polls done by educational institutions and other groups use even smaller groups as representative for a much larger area. So as much as I might complain about sample size, we see a lot of surveys, studies and polls every day that are even less exact.

Political polls are not a good comparison. In a political poll, there are generally only four answers (D candidate, R candidate, Someone Else, Not Sure), which means a smaller sample size has less sampling error than an equivalent number of respondents in a Nielsen diary survey, where there are easily a couple dozen valid listening choices.

To put it another way, if the political poll is +- 3%, that's generally fine. If a poll comes out and says Biden leads Trump by 26 +-3 points in New York state, the sampling error is too small to matter.
If a Nielsen book is +- 3 shares for every station in the broadest 12+ sample, that's the difference from first to tenth.

 

[TheBigA]

Political polls are not a good comparison. In a political poll, there are generally only four answers

It depends on the poll. But in my post I also referred to other "surveys, studies, and polls," which would include, for example, the Edison Research studies we see regularly. Their sample size isn't much bigger than a Nielsen sample, and they often ask more questions.

What helps Nielsen isn't the sample size, but the consistency of the survey period, rather than a one-time answer to a question or series of questions.

 

[CTListener]

Political polls are not a good comparison. In a political poll, there are generally only four answers (D candidate, R candidate, Someone Else, Not Sure), which means a smaller sample size has less sampling error than an equivalent number of respondents in a Nielsen diary survey, where there are easily a couple dozen valid listening choices.

To put it another way, if the political poll is +- 3%, that's generally fine. If a poll comes out and says Biden leads Trump by 26 +-3 points in New York state, the sampling error is too small to matter.

Although in the case of Trump-Biden, as was the case with Trump-Clinton, you have the tactic of Trump voters acting as "false flags" for the opposition just to embarrass the mainstream media pollsters. That's not going to be enough to embarrass them on New York, obviously.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Just for some context, though it should be pointed out that many political polls done by educational institutions and other groups use even smaller groups as representative for a much larger area. So as much as I might complain about sample size, we see a lot of surveys, studies and polls every day that are even less exact.

It's quite possible that ratings are as accurate at political polls. And how "impressions" from websites translate into actual sales.

 

[TheBigA]

It's quite possible that ratings are as accurate at political polls. And how "impressions" from websites translate into actual sales.

Or streams qualify as sales. I had a label rep try to tell me that streams of songs are becoming more indicative of hits than monitored airplay because of the drop in radio cume.

 

[tbolt909]

No argument. However, and this is key, the term "over sampling" was used because it had been referred to in a previous post. That duly noted, the point of my post should be clear: sampling varies and weighting makes up for the variations.



Kinda makes me wonder what you'd do if one of those stations "hanging their head in shame" flipped to the format you're doing on your kilowatter and three translators. You might be left holding a knife in a gunfight. Fact is, those stations are doing a format that benefits their entire cluster, adding efficiency and helping the clusters overall reach. They're targeting 35-49 and 45-54; not interested in 55+ or 65+ demos that contribute to a station's Persons 35+ standing. There's a good reason WHTT evolved from Oldies back to Classic Hits. If HTT was still Oldies, you wouldn't dare compete with them. They'd blow you out of the water. Those stations that you're beating are giving you room to operate. Stop ridiculing them and enjoy the free pass they've given you so you can crow about your ratings and revenue on a message board.

Some things should be obvious. A format that plays 60s Oldies Pop isn't likely to attract many listeners under 55.
That's why there are so few stations doing that format.

Once the demos are deemed "unsellable and undesirable", those formats are obsolete. It's curious that music from the 80s and 90s is not considered "Oldies" even though that was 30-40 years ago. Someone born in 1990 may have never heard of Kurt Cobain or (Radio)...

 

[SirRoxalot]

You know, 'bolt, you're so anti-radio that it makes one wonder why you're here on a RADIO board.

 

[Buddy Shula]

No argument. However, and this is key, the term "over sampling" was used because it had been referred to in a previous post. That duly noted, the point of my post should be clear: sampling varies and weighting makes up for the variations.



Kinda makes me wonder what you'd do if one of those stations "hanging their head in shame" flipped to the format you're doing on your kilowatter and three translators. You might be left holding a knife in a gunfight. Fact is, those stations are doing a format that benefits their entire cluster, adding efficiency and helping the clusters overall reach. They're targeting 35-49 and 45-54; not interested in 55+ or 65+ demos that contribute to a station's Persons 35+ standing. There's a good reason WHTT evolved from Oldies back to Classic Hits. If HTT was still Oldies, you wouldn't dare compete with them. They'd blow you out of the water. Those stations that you're beating are giving you room to operate. Stop ridiculing them and enjoy the free pass they've given you so you can crow about your ratings and revenue on a message board.

What a loser comment. I got a free pass?.. why didn’t weck have a 3.1 share before I bought it? And loser, I am competing with whtt. They have a signal to do their work. We actually have to work. They are not blowing us out of the water. They are reacting to things we are doing. I don’t need stations that suck to bring in ad buys for other stations. I do it with one station. We will see who is bankrupt first, me or them. In the meantime, try to buy a station. See how that works out for you. Keep your ass on the sidelines where you belong. Go get me some gator aid so I can do the work while you sit on your ass with a fake name because your embarrassed for yourself , and try to put down others.

 

[Buddy Shula]

Some things should be obvious. A format that plays 60s Oldies Pop isn't likely to attract many listeners under 55.
That's why there are so few stations doing that format.

Once the demos are deemed "unsellable and undesirable", those formats are obsolete. It's curious that music from the 80s and 90s is not considered "Oldies" even though that was 30-40 years ago. Someone born in 1990 may have never heard of Kurt Cobain or (Radio)...

Our entire goal is people over 50 plus. From day one. We are a top three in that demo.

You don’t know your ******* from third base

Another one who is a coward and hides behind a fake name so no one can find out about your illustrious broadcast career. Come on coward....?what you hiding? Do you use fake pictures to on match.com to be someone your not?

 

[davideduardo]

Our entire goal is people over 50 plus. From day one. We are a top three in that demo.

You don’t know your ******* from third base

Another one who is a coward and hides behind a fake name so no one can find out about your illustrious broadcast career. Come on coward....?what you hiding? Do you use fake pictures to on match.com to be someone your not?

Buddy... your point is valid, but your rather aggressive expression of it is not. Take it easy... this is not a competition with a winner and a loser; it's OK to have differences of opinion. Oh, and tbolt is wrong, too. He should know now that a local operator can target undeserved segments and be successful.

 

[davideduardo]

Some things should be obvious. A format that plays 60s Oldies Pop isn't likely to attract many listeners under 55.

Who said that Buddy was looking for uner-50 listeners? Certainly not Buddy who is making money serving the older end of the demographic scale.

That's why there are so few stations doing that format.

No, it is why so many group owned stations are not doing it. It takes, I believe, a local owner with contacts and friends and respect in the local business community to do a 50+ format as it's sold with a different method that by-the-numbers selling.

The rating book is the cash register of the clients. Service to advertisers with copy updates and a "partnership" to achieve success are needed. Groups who have 5 or 6 stations don't know how to do that and when they try, it does not work.

Once the demos are deemed "unsellable and undesirable", those formats are obsolete. It's curious that music from the 80s and 90s is not considered "Oldies" even though that was 30-40 years ago. Someone born in 1990 may have never heard of Kurt Cobain or (Radio)...

An operator like Buddy can make money serving client needs and offering a consumer group that he "owns" and knows how to serve.

There is no need to demean an owner who is willing to invest his retirement fund against the belief that there are un-served listeners and local advertisers who want to reach them. Radio needs more innovators like this.

 

[TheBigA]

He should know now that a local operator can target undeserved segments and be successful.

You got me thinking that maybe it's been a long time since Buffalo had an actual local operator who's aggressive, knows the market, AND is a super salesman. That last thing is the key. You combine a guy who knows the market, is passionate about music, and can sell, and you have what we call THE TRIPLE THREAT.

 

[davideduardo]

It's quite possible that ratings are as accurate at political polls.

No, they are less accurate. We know that. And that is OK.

A political poll tries to determine which of two candidates will win. Even a 1% error can fail to predict the outcome.

In radio ratings, a 5% error or even 10% is OK. Advertisers look for a range, not a "winner". And since they look at ratings, not share, it makes the top tier of stations look pretty much the same.

Radio is like a horse race where any horse in the top 10 gets the winner prize. And there are also prizes for different colored horses, and different genders and different places of origin. Radio wins by serving specific sub-groups. Politicians win by having more votes than the single other guy.

And how "impressions" from websites translate into actual sales.

Advertisers are becoming more and more aware that web impressions, which are highly inaccurate in stratification by age, gender, ethnicity, income, education and other break-outs, are less helpful than imagined. There is huge waste.

 

[davideduardo]

You got me thinking that maybe it's been a long time since Buffalo had an actual local operator who's aggressive, knows the market, AND is a super salesman. That last thing is the key. You combine a guy who knows the market, is passionate about music, and can sell, and you have what we call THE TRIPLE THREAT.

Good point. It takes someone like Buddy to do it; not all of us can or want to.

I resisted buying a smaller market station for the last decade because my personality is not one that enjoys visiting local car dealers and merchants.

I am a probably a less effective sales person because I don't like doing it. I did it, though, during about 20 years of my career as I had no option when I was owner or manager. I had to work my way up to programming!

 

[tbolt909]

Who said that Buddy was looking for uner-50 listeners? Certainly not Buddy who is making money serving the older end of the demographic scale.

There is no need to demean an owner who is willing to invest his retirement fund against the belief that there are un-served listeners and local advertisers who want to reach them. Radio needs more innovators like this.

Buddy demeans himself by his ridiculous posts. Any criticism sends him into a childish tantrum. He constantly rails against the "Corporate" system that he was once part of. David, you must have missed his post where said that his station is a "player" in 25-54 (whatever that means). You constantly preach that older demos do not respond to Advertising and it's too hard to get a sale.
Which is it?

You are right that Radio needs more innovators...

 

[CTListener]

Radio is like a horse race where any horse in the top 10 gets the winner prize. And there are also prizes for different colored horses, and different genders and different places of origin.

I have no real-world experience in radio but I've been trying to beat the horses since my teens. If each race had 10 winners, I might actually cash a few tickets now and then.