January book is out

[ckg279]

Per **************** and AllAccess.com . 12+ only. Just the top 5 stations are listed; go to the sites mentioned for full 12+ ratings.

1. WBEN(930) 8.6(up .3)
2. WBLK(93.7) 8.4(down .5)
3. WYRK(106.5) 8.3(up .1)
4. WGRF(96.9) 7.1(down .2)
5. WTSS(102.5) 6.4(up .1)

Other notes:

*Star 102.5 seems to riding the after-effects of their nearly 2 month long stint of playing Christmas music.
*WBUF is STILL not ready to rock; they're at a 1.9 (and so is classical WNED-FM/94.5).
*The Wolf likewise hasn't broken from the pack; WLKK is at 1.5(up .3).
*WBFO continues its slow and steady tick upwards at a 3.4(and they're tied with WECK).

Comment away, everyone.

 

[tbolt909]

Really nothing new here. WBUF and WLKK are shining examples of futility. There's no demand for these tired Country & Classic Rock clones. WYRK is about 2 shares below their previous level, but The Wolf is proving there's no demand for more of the same. Ditto for WBUF. The premise of "stealing" listeners by serving up the same garbage doesn't work.

Of course, these are "Fake Ratings". Everyone knows that Nielsen threw thousands of diaries over Niagara Falls. All of them had WECK written in yellow crayon...

 

[Rusty Bridges]

January 2022 Trends Persons 12+, 6 a.m.-Midnight, Monday - Sunday IOW, "The Beauty Contest"

The Radio-Online heading still erroneously reads "2020." Probably a template issue with R-O or Nielsen.
§
While everybody here focuses on the top movers and shakers, I couldn't help but look at the bottom, where the once dominant 1520 now creaks with age and puts up a 0.3. What time and technology have done, eh?

 

[TheBigA]

Really nothing new here. WBUF and WLKK are shining examples of futility. There's no demand for these tired Country & Classic Rock clones.

Well it's not that there's "no demand." It's just there's not as much demand. When you have a city that can receive 20 radio stations, and when a handful of companies own 4 or 5 stations apiece, not everyone can be in the Top 5 or 10. So you budget accordingly. These stations get more detailed information that we do. They know more about those who listen, and they also know how much it costs them to program their stations. If each company can get one or two in the Top 5, you're doing good.

 

[CassChopper96]

WTSS and WKSE must be audacys wall of women

 

[ckg279]

Well it's not that there's "no demand." It's just there's not as much demand. When you have a city that can receive 20 radio stations, and when a handful of companies own 4 or 5 stations apiece, not everyone can be in the Top 5 or 10. So you budget accordingly. These stations get more detailed information that we do. They know more about those who listen, and they also know how much it costs them to program their stations. If each company can get one or two in the Top 5, you're doing good.

And when you add in ALL of the stations in Toronto & the rest of southern Ontario, that pushes it to about 35-40 stations.

 

[TheBigA]

And when you add in ALL of the stations in Toronto & the rest of southern Ontario, that pushes it to about 35-40 stations.

Correct, but they don't factor in the share numbers for the Buffalo book.

 

[Buddy Shula]

Per **************** and AllAccess.com . 12+ only. Just the top 5 stations are listed; go to the sites mentioned for full 12+ ratings.

1. WBEN(930) 8.6(up .3)
2. WBLK(93.7) 8.4(down .5)
3. WYRK(106.5) 8.3(up .1)
4. WGRF(96.9) 7.1(down .2)
5. WTSS(102.5) 6.4(up .1)

Other notes:

*Star 102.5 seems to riding the after-effects of their nearly 2 month long stint of playing Christmas music.
*WBUF is STILL not ready to rock; they're at a 1.9 (and so is classical WNED-FM/94.5).
*The Wolf likewise hasn't broken from the pack; WLKK is at 1.5(up .3).
*WBFO continues its slow and steady tick upwards at a 3.4(and they're tied with WECK).

Comment away, everyone.

I would also note, WECK was tied with WBFO at #10. What is the wattage of WBFO? How much money does WBFO have? Both answers are ALOT

Also, very interesting that WECK was 0.1 share away from the EDGE for 9th overall, another Wall Street, 50k watt station.

So with all of these obstacles for WECK, trying to compete with 2 hands behind our back, small signal, barely cover Niagara County, we STILL are top 10, almost 9, beating Breeze, JACK, Wolf, WNED, etc.

 

[Buddy Shula]

I spoke with a rep from Nielsen today regarding weighting. They said “ we weight up 12-30 year olds because they tend to not fill out diaries.” So they assuming that this group actually listens to radio, but just don’t fill out diary. How the HELL is that fair?

First off, 12-30 years olds AREN’T listening to radio, so why do they need fair representation. ?

Also, if I vote in an election by mail in ballot in Lancaster, they count my vote. If I do not send the ballot back, they do not count my vote. They don’t weight the vote assuming that some people, just are not sending in their ballots.

If you want to vote, you send in the ballot. Simple as that. If a 20 year old does not send in his radio diary ballot, why should Nielsen assume that person still needs representation?

If you do not vote, you don’t get counted. Why the **** is that so hard to understand? Why would stations, who’s listeners send back the main in ballots be punished because they assume younger people are being underserved?

In my world. You vote or don’t. The person who gets the most votes, wins. Nothing is assumed, and has to be weighted.

I show you the advances average quarter hour listening, which is proof WECK gets knocked down up to .08 due to weighting. Like the electoral college, this is the same method. It’s an old unreliable system. PPM would be much more indicative of the truth.

Think of it, Nielsen is ASSUMING that there is a percentage of 12-30 year old who listen to certain stations! So because they ASSUME that, they automatically give this group more credit, and punish the voters like at WECK who actually vote and send in their ballots .

Total Bullshit, the same bullshit Nielsen pulls when they print who’s stations get into the ratings. There is a Nielsen rule that if station owner is a female or minority, they will show in the ratings for free. If you are a white guy like me, I HAVE to pay for Nielsen, or they will basically treat the station as it does not exist. We will not show up. For instance , WUFO, WXRL, female owned, WLOF not for profit , non taxable religious. But for me? I have to pay thru the nose, who my station does not exist to Nielsen.

Totally discriminatory.

 

[SirRoxalot]

It'll take another book or two to flush the Christmas music out of the system. A few things stand out to me:

1. WYRK appears to have stopped the bleeding. They're still down over 30% from their heyday.
2. WMSX had a nice run going that seems to have hit a wall with Christmas music. Star owned that audience. It will be interesting to see what happens once the Christmas taint runs its course.
3. The Bills were very good for WGR. The Sabres are unlikely to keep those numbers up as the Nov-Dec-Jan numbers get left behind.

 

[TheBigA]

Totally discriminatory.

You can't compare ratings to voting. They're not the same thing. That's a fake comparison.

Ratings are a survey, a poll. That's all. They do weighting because they can't give a diary to every person in Buffalo.

The reality is you don't need ratings to sell WECK. It doesn't matter if your station is #10 or #1. Advertisers buy your station because of YOU. They know you and they trust you. If anyone else owned that station, regardless of ratings, it would make less money.

 

[davideduardo]

Well it's not that there's "no demand." It's just there's not as much demand. When you have a city that can receive 20 radio stations, and when a handful of companies own 4 or 5 stations apiece, not everyone can be in the Top 5 or 10. So you budget accordingly. These stations get more detailed information that we do. They know more about those who listen, and they also know how much it costs them to program their stations. If each company can get one or two in the Top 5, you're doing good.

This is sort of like comparing a NYC Midtown five-star restaurant with a great place for a slice somewhere in the Boroughs. Both can make money, but they have to be run according to the income potential. The gourmet place can afford tuxedos for the wait staff and a sommelier with $1,000 bottles while the pizza place sells table wine from Italy at $5 a glass. I'd get out of the pizza place for $25 to $30 but the Manhattan place might set me back $300. So each measures the costs and both can send the owner home with money.

Because we rank stations from first on down, there is a tendency to think about radio like a horse race. But in a big market like NYC, there may be 50 or more stations (including suburban and LI ones) that are profitable. And the top biller may not be the most profitable because its expenses might be much higher.

I've been in markets where my salary or retainer was higher than the gross billing of some bottom-tier stations. But the owner of that low billing station might be making a lot more for their family than if they worked for a bigger station on a salary.

 

[tbolt909]

You can't compare ratings to voting. They're not the same thing. That's a fake comparison.

Ratings are a survey, a poll. That's all. They do weighting because they can't give a diary to every person in Buffalo.

Buddy cries "rigged" and "fraud". He even moans about being a persecuted White Little Guy. WECK would likely get hurt if the PPM rating system was used in Buffalo. WECK listeners would think the PPM device is a Communist Surveillance gadget. "Give me back my paper diary and crayon"!!

WECK is certainly doing OK in the ratings. They are in the mid 3 share range. They are consistently above stations with better signals. None of this matters to Buddy. It's all about Nielsen cheating and defrauding WECK. The only reason WBEN is still in the Top 3 is because Nielsen is counting diaries from deceased listeners...

 

[Buddy Shula]

You can't compare ratings to voting. They're not the same thing. That's a fake comparison.

Ratings are a survey, a poll. That's all. They do weighting because they can't give a diary to every person in Buffalo.

The reality is you don't need ratings to sell WECK. It doesn't matter if your station is #10 or #1. Advertisers buy your station because of YOU. They know you and they trust you. If anyone else owned that station, regardless of ratings, it would make less money.

I appreciate that, but I do not think it is true.

WECK would make money for anyone. Radio would make money for anyone. It does not matter who is at the helm.

WECK is a top 5 50+ (WBEN, WHTT, YRK, GRF, WECK)

I do not care of it's a poll or a vote. If I put a poll on the website, the winner would be the one with the most amount of votes. I would not weight it because of the people who don't listen to radio or the station.

I don't care of we are #1 or 10 either. I see the diaries. I see what they say. They write how much they love the big WECK, in one case, and mention nothing else. However, they give all of their quarter hours to a station in Canada. Others confuse what they are writing. They still say the love the beautiful music format with no songs on WJYE. How the **** is that correct???

It's wrong . The system is archaic. And yes, that goes for WECK as well. We could be number 25 or 5 for all I know. I showed on this board the advances I got Monday. I get them every month. IN that same post, I predicted come Thurs, the ratings will show a whole different thing because of the voodoo math. I was right.

I added everything up from the last three books, without weighting. WECK BEAT the Edge, Kiss, MSX, 1077, was one share from STAR, and tied BFO. What I added up were the exact quarter hours from the last three advances from each station.

Than the fake news arrives on Thurs. The voodoo math.

 

[Buddy Shula]

Buddy cries "rigged" and "fraud". He even moans about being a persecuted White Little Guy. WECK would likely get hurt if the PPM rating system was used in Buffalo. WECK listeners would think the PPM device is a Communist Surveillance gadget. "Give me back my paper diary and crayon"!!

WECK is certainly doing OK in the ratings. They are in the mid 3 share range. They are consistently above stations with better signals. None of this matters to Buddy. It's all about Nielsen cheating and defrauding WECK. The only reason WBEN is still in the Top 3 is because Nielsen is counting diaries from deceased listeners...

Your so dumb, and bitter and full of hate towards this industry, you see what around what I am trying to say.

I would love to have PPM. It's a fairly true measurement.

What I do not like is a measurement that is old and incorrect.

If we had PPM and WECK had a .5 share, fine. At Least I would know it is pretty accurate. This diary system is a joke, and everyone, not just me knows it.

Plus it is discriminatory. The fact that minority and women station get to be in the book for FREE, and because I am a white male, I have to pay, is discriminatory against me. Bolt, do you actually believe that is the right thing to do??

NPR and Christian stations get tax breaks, Minority and women stations get ratings for free. What do I get? You know how much I pay between ratings, payroll taxes, and corporate tax? Thank God Trump passed tax breaks to give corporations some breathing room. Even with that, I pay a shit ton of taxes.

 

[Rusty Bridges]

The person with the most votes wins.

Nope, not always. Why did the 45th president "win" the election when his opponent scored 4 million more votes in 2016? There's this thing called the Electoral College.

If I put a poll on the website, the winner would be the one with the most amount of votes. I would not weight it because of the people who don't listen to radio or the station.

Web polls are notoriously inaccurate because they count "incoming" votes and are not controlled, properly segmented and accounted for. TV stations "web poll" numbers are laughable, grossly inaccurate, and frankly do a disservice to properly covering an issue from a journalistic perspective.

That aside, people under 30 do listen to radio, perhaps not as often and not as long, so they may get weighted up. But weighting applies to all demographic cells. Weighting has been explained here by several posters on at least three occasions, in basic, understandable terms.

Dead people aren't filling out Nielsen diaries, although it's a fact that some folks, very much alive, write down radio stations as a matter of habit. This happens most often with legacy listeners, but would it be a surprise if a few WECK listeners said "I listen all the time," and their diaries reflected it? The same thing happens with WBEN, 97 Rock and WYRK, perhaps not to the extent that WBEN listeners might over-estimate their time spent listening, but it happens in every format and every diary market.

Very likely, PPM might show a marked difference in results across the board for Buffalo stations, but PPM isn't going to be used in Buffalo any time soon, if ever. So, for better or worse, stations play by the diary ratings rules. Know the rules, work to maximize performance under the rules, and live with the results.

§

Back to politics: Why does Wyoming, with about 600 thousand residents have two senators, while California with more than 39 million residents, also have two senators? And why are the Senate rules for legislation different from House rules? Diary to PPM?

But there is something of a correlation between politics/governance and radio, as it relates to land mass, geography and signal penetration. Put WECK's format on 92.9 and the results could be two shares better, Persons 12+, because the 92.9 signal covers and penetrates Erie and Niagara (the two county Buffalo metro) counties better than WECK and its three translators.

But if we're to believe that transmitters and towers are passe and the Internet is the ultimate listening platform, then it really doesn't matter ... or does it.

 

[davideduardo]

That aside, people under 30 do listen to radio, perhaps not as often and not as long, so they may get weighted up. But weighting applies to all demographic cells. Weighting has been explained here by several posters on at least three occasions, in basic, understandable terms.

Weighting is only used to make the sample totally proportional to the actual population. When people under 30 are "weighted up" is when the sample got too few of them and, to be proportional, each one that they got is given more weight.

There is no weighting for listening times or even for listening at all. Weighting is done to achieve balance for individual age groups, gender, geography, education, race and income.

Your points are well made. As to the PPM, its greatest effect would be to reduce the time spent listening on average by about 40% due to much greater precision than the rounded-up entries diary keepers tend to make. That would reduce the average audience size, and for buyers seeking cost per point or CPM goals, rates would drop dramatically.

 

[SirRoxalot]

It's pretty simple. If Buddy put up a poll on WECK he'd get one result. If Star put up the same poll, they'd get a different result. If 97-Rock put up the same poll, they'd also get different results. Ditto WYRK.

The point of the "voodoo math" is that they take the results of the entire audience and adjust to show how ALL the listeners responded. It's not voodoo. It's called statistical analysis. Take a course. Maybe you'll get it.

 

[davideduardo]

I would love to have PPM. It's a fairly true measurement.

You would not like it. Your AQH persons would drop by about 40%.

What I do not like is a measurement that is old and incorrect.

It is not "incorrect". It is just less precise. And it is about double the price.

If we had PPM and WECK had a .5 share, fine. At Least I would know it is pretty accurate. This diary system is a joke, and everyone, not just me knows it.

No, it is not a joke. It simply is less precise and takes more time to tabulate than the PPM data. For most advertisers who use ratings, it is accurate enough.

Plus it is discriminatory. The fact that minority and women station get to be in the book for FREE, and because I am a white male, I have to pay, is discriminatory against me. Bolt, do you actually believe that is the right thing to do??

This is a discussion of whether we should do some extra things to make up for past injustice. You decide it you think that is unfair.

NPR and Christian stations get tax breaks, Minority and women stations get ratings for free. What do I get? You know how much I pay between ratings, payroll taxes, and corporate tax? Thank God Trump passed tax breaks to give corporations some breathing room. Even with that, I pay a crap ton of taxes.

The minority stations and women-owned ones don't get the ratings for free. They just get listed where non-subscribers of other kinds would not be listed at all. Again, an effort to help right a deficiency of the past.

Unless those stations pay, they can not sell with the book or even get the electronic releases.

 

[Buddy Shula]

You would not like it. Your AQH persons would drop by about 40%.

It is not "incorrect". It is just less precise. And it is about double the price.

No, it is not a joke. It simply is less precise and takes more time to tabulate than the PPM data. For most advertisers who use ratings, it is accurate enough.

This is a discussion of whether we should do some extra things to make up for past injustice. You decide it you think that is unfair.

The minority stations and women-owned ones don't get the ratings for free. They just get listed where non-subscribers of other kinds would not be listed at all. Again, an effort to help right a deficiency of the past.

Unless those stations pay, they can not sell with the book or even get the electronic releases.

I disagree with about 30% of what you said. As for the above sentence “ unless those people pay”. Those people who don’t have to pay still show up in ratings. At that point an agency can decide if they are worth it. In my case, agencies do decide we are worth it, and I would not even show up to an agency if I did not pay. Do you agree it’s discriminatory?