Los Angeles Ratings ... NOT the 6+ numbers

[Jstnpspck]

While we're rehashing the unimportance of 6+ numbers, can anybody explain the significance of the "numbers that matter"? They all overlap! 25-54, 18-34, 18-49... is one set the "younger" numbers? the "female" numbers? Numbers of some geographic importance?

 

[davideduardo]

While we're rehashing the unimportance of 6+ numbers, can anybody explain the significance of the "numbers that matter"? They all overlap! 25-54, 18-34, 18-49... is one set the "younger" numbers? the "female" numbers? Numbers of some geographic importance?

Ad agencies generally have specific target audiences for each client. They may be the traditional “big three” of 18-34, 25-54 or 18-49 or may be more complex such as “English dominant Hispanic women 21 to 39”.

Back when ratings were in a printed book, we just got a small array of numbers. But now an agency can specify age, gender, ethnicity, language usage, income level and more on the computer in accordance with a client’s target.

In markets with multiple counties, you can even do geographic breaks.

 

[Loverofradio]

Let me just say this. How many times have we seen a station, in particular an FM station change directions or flip, due to horrible 6+ numbers? Yes, those numbers aren’t the end all be all. But, the 6+ numbers don’t completely lie on how well a station is actually doing. 97.1 hovered around a 1 share in 6+ before flipping to KNX. If those numbers just absolutely don’t matter at all, then why flip (just using that station as an example).

 

[K.M. Richards]

Leaving out its effects on the success of a given station, are 6+ ratings a somewhat accurate estimation of its total audience?

Yes, it is that.

But the problem is that even knowing the relative size of the total audience, you still do not have any idea how young or old that audience is from the 6+ numbers, and that's important to any meaningful critical discussion of a station.

 

[K.M. Richards]

While we're rehashing the unimportance of 6+ numbers, can anybody explain the significance of the "numbers that matter"? They all overlap! 25-54, 18-34, 18-49... is one set the "younger" numbers? the "female" numbers? Numbers of some geographic importance?

First, when Nielsen crunches the raw data., a 29-year-old will be counted in all three of those. But a 21-year-old will only be part of the last two and a 38-year-old, only counted in the first two. The overlap is not of consequence because all the stations and agencies care about is "how many listeners in the age group we program to?"

There are also gender-based breakouts in each demo ... e.g. Males 25-54, Women 18-34. Those are, of course, subsets of the full demographics.

Subscribers to the full Nielsen reports can access things like number of diary/PPM entries per zip code but you're never going to get any kind of public disclosure of those.

Let me just say this. How many times have we seen a station, in particular an FM station change directions or flip, due to horrible 6+ numbers? Yes, those numbers aren’t the end all be all. But, the 6+ numbers don’t completely lie on how well a station is actually doing. 97.1 hovered around a 1 share in 6+ before flipping to KNX. If those numbers just absolutely don’t matter at all, then why flip (just using that station as an example).

You can be certain that Audacy was using the demographic breakouts to make the decision. The 6+ numbers would have been reflective of that, but they were not used for the decision itself.

Stations do not "change directions or flip" based on 6+ numbers, however it may appear to the layperson. This is further proof that using 6+ for evaluating stations is meaningless.

 

[Gregg.]

As David says (and will likely continue to until it finally sinks in with everyone) those numbers are of little, if any use in determining a station's actual standing. Every station has a target demographic and what is important to them -- and which should be what's important to everyone here, since you all obviously care who's doing better than their competitors -- is not going to be the 6+ numbers.

But once again, the 6+ numbers aren't useless. They just don't give you the exact demographics you are looking for.

Let's look at the 25-54 stations in Los Angeles:

1) KIIS-FM .... It's #4 overall
2) KOST ... It's also #2 overall
3) KBIG ... It's also #3 overall
4) KLVE ... It's #5 overall
5 tie) KCBS-FM ... It's #9 overall
5 tie) KLAX ... It's #8 overall
7) KRTH ... It's #1 overall

So this is not so far from the 6+ numbers. Yes, KRTH is weaker than I'd expect for the #1 station. And I notice KTWV doesn't make the top 7 even though it's #6 overall. But it could be #8 25-54, we don't know. It's not like a #15 or 20 station is #2 in 25-54.

Same for 18-34 and 18-49. They were all the same stations, just in a different order. You'd think maybe a low ranking Hip Hop station might break through in 18-34? Nope. Older-skewing KOST and KRTH both beat KRRL and KPWR in 18-34. KRRL is #16 overall, KPWR is #20. And even if they super-serve the 18-34 demo, neither one is showing up in the 18-34 contest.

 

[K.M. Richards]

Sorry, don't buy the logic. You show in your own comparisons how disparate the 6+ rankings are from the demographic-based rankings. It may not matter to you that KIIS is #4 in 6+ but iHeart cares more about that #1 ranking in 25-54. Audacy would see the wide discrepancy of KRTH in the same light.

And so do the ad agencies ... which is critical in a market which is almost entirely dependent on national ad revenue.

I maintain that a discussion of stations based on 6+ is extremely flawed. That is why I tried to make the discussion more factual by posting the information from Research Director. Unfortunately, most of you want to cling to the meaningless 6+ numbers even though, as Bill Murray's character in Meatballs chanted ... "IT JUST DOESN'T MATTER!"

That stubbornness on your collective part makes you much less credible when you post, even if you don't see it yourselves.

 

[ChannelFlipper]

Sorry, don't buy the logic. You show in your own comparisons how disparate the 6+ rankings are from the demographic-based rankings. It may not matter to you that KIIS is #4 in 6+ but iHeart cares more about that #1 ranking in 25-54. Audacy would see the wide discrepancy of KRTH in the same light.

And so do the ad agencies ... which is critical in a market which is almost entirely dependent on national ad revenue.

I maintain that a discussion of stations based on 6+ is extremely flawed. That is why I tried to make the discussion more factual by posting the information from Research Director. Unfortunately, most of you want to cling to the meaningless 6+ numbers even though, as Bill Murray's character in Meatballs chanted ... "IT JUST DOESN'T MATTER!"

That stubbornness on your collective part makes you much less credible when you post, even if you don't see it yourselves.

Is there any way we can move off of this topic? Just asking.

 

[K.M. Richards]

Is there any way we can move off of this topic? Just asking.

Sure. Just stop posting. I'm going to continue answering challenges to my logic as long as others post those challenges, because my answers have been fact-based and not some fantasy idea that 6+ ratings have some actual meaning in the industry.

I'm sure David is as tired as I am of explaining this to an audience which discards anything that doesn't fit their preconceived notions.

 

[michael hagerty]

Let me just say this. How many times have we seen a station, in particular an FM station change directions or flip, due to horrible 6+ numbers? Yes, those numbers aren’t the end all be all. But, the 6+ numbers don’t completely lie on how well a station is actually doing. 97.1 hovered around a 1 share in 6+ before flipping to KNX. If those numbers just absolutely don’t matter at all, then why flip (just using that station as an example).

I think it’s much more likely that those stations changed direction or flipped based on demographics and billing than on 6+ numbers.

 

[fybush]

I think it’s much more likely that those stations changed direction or flipped based on demographics and billing than on 6+ numbers.

Right - the "horrible 6+ numbers" are a symptom, not the disease. You can show relatively low in 6+ if you're programming to a narrow demographic that bills well, like a sports station that makes all its money off men 25-54 and doesn't need to do well at all with younger listeners or women in general. Those stations aren't going to flip regardless of the 6+ numbers.

For 97.1, though, it was after a broader demographic - let's say 18-49, both male and female. Even though you didn't see those specific numbers, they were probably pretty low, which then reflects in the 6+ as well. Audacy's decision to flip was surely based on more specific demographics and revenue numbers than just the 6+.

 

[davideduardo]

And so do the ad agencies ... which is critical in a market which is almost entirely dependent on national ad revenue.

One correction: most revenue at major stations... which would be perhaps the top 20 to 25 stations in LA... does come from agencies, but much of it comes from local agencies, the local branches of national agencies and large businesses that have "house agencies" (for those not in the industry, that is an ad department of a company that behaves just like an agency, with a creative staff, a media department, etc.),

Whether local, national or a house shop, an agency generally buys based on data analysis. In the case of radio, it is rating (not share). or, increasingly, AQH persons (which equate to "persons" metrics in streaming and web data).

And, most important to those who pick apart each book when it comes, agencies look at multiple book averages, not just the latest one. It's not unusual to see them looking at 6 month averages, and exclusions of December and Holiday from averages.

 

[K.M. Richards]

One correction: most revenue at major stations... which would be perhaps the top 20 to 25 stations in LA... does come from agencies, but much of it comes from local agencies, the local branches of national agencies and large businesses that have "house agencies" (for those not in the industry, that is an ad department of a company that behaves just like an agency, with a creative staff, a media department, etc.),

That was what I meant, but you said it using a lot more words than I did. 😜

 

[K.M. Richards]

Another stray thought: Once we get past those 20 to 25 stations, we are below the ones that are owned by major group owners, and into those which, because of size, do more specialized programming. With the exception of sports (which we have discussed the separate agency philosophy about to death over the years), those stations would never be considered for agency buys anyway.

Once we get that far down the list, the 6+ numbers are about as meaningful as the demographic breakouts. And we rarely, if ever, discuss those stations anyway.

So why can't the discussion be based around the more relevant numbers? Why does everyone cling to the 6+ numbers even when shown that they are not a valid basis for comparison?

 

[Radiopaw]

Good analysis should compare multiple data sources and weight then by relevancy. Weight 6+ less.

Additionally, many here are just radio fans, many people just enjoy the discussion and dreaming of what the dial could be to personal taste.

I think it’s important to remember that.

 

[K.M. Richards]

Additionally, many here are just radio fans, many people just enjoy the discussion and dreaming of what the dial could be to personal taste.

Those who are radio fans should, in my view, be willing to accept reality when that is the counterpoint to their personal wishes; there is little to be gained from participating in a discussion if you do not learn anything from it.

The new management has posted, in several places, that the new direction for RD is pointed away from posts fantasizing about what one person thinks a station might do when there are several legal and regulatory reasons why it can't happen. Market considerations are also something that should be taken into account here but often are not.

I'm just following that direction by the management, by trying to introduce facts into the discussion in the hope of helping to redirect the focus into intelligent and realistic posts.

(Oh, and I agree with you on weighting data. 6+ numbers are weighted at zero relevancy in my view.)

 

[semoochie]

What demos do News and Talk stations sell to advertisers? 45-54 Men hardly seems adequate. Total audience numbers don't appear so obviously bad!

 

[K.M. Richards]

What demos do News and Talk stations sell to advertisers? 45-54 Men hardly seems adequate. Total audience numbers don't appear so obviously bad!

News-Talk is another one of those formats where the agencies have specific accounts that want that audience, even though much of it is 55+. There's likely to be enough of that business to keep KNX and KFI going for many years to come, along with most of the Sports-formatted stations.

In fact, the stations themselves do very little (if any) direct sales in those formats. They just wait for the agency buys to come in.

 

[hotpatrick2004]

Since some of the previous remarks are (barely disguised) arrows pointed at me, I will offer my opinion about discussion of stations based on the 6+ numbers in the hope that everyone will understand why I tried to create a more focused discussion by providing the rankings from Research Director.

As David has said so many times that he is probably extremely tired of having to do so, the 6+ numbers are released by Nielsen for public relations purposes ... to keep their brand name awareness high to aid them in soliciting new participants for the ratings process. Nothing more, nothing less. My guess is that Research Director only covers those because with those numbers being the most public, they would be criticized for ignoring them. But the stations themselves do not care what their 6+ numbers are (and the agencies especially do not), so any opinion expressed by anyone based on those numbers is essentially meaningless.

There is no valid reason to "discuss" stations that are not among the top players in their target demographics based on the 6+ numbers, because even if you had their demo numbers, the difference between -- to take the current example -- KROQ and KYSR is likely to be within the margin of error and therefore essentially the same rating.

By all means, compare stations by programming. Is "The Woody Show" doing better than Klein/Ally? Is the music mix more attractive to the target demo for one station than another? Is there a specific current title or titles that Alt plays to death and 106.7 won't touch (or vice versa)? Those are valid discussion points. How a station is doing is 6+ is not.

To sum up my overall opinion -- attack me if you want, but I am entitled to one -- anyone who passionately defends one station over another based on the meaningless, PR-driven, non-demo ratings makes themselves look totally clueless.

I would agree w ya K.M. you offer valuable insight on this sight.

 

[davideduardo]

News-Talk is another one of those formats where the agencies have specific accounts that want that audience, even though much of it is 55+. There's likely to be enough of that business to keep KNX and KFI going for many years to come, along with most of the Sports-formatted stations.

In fact, the stations themselves do very little (if any) direct sales in those formats. They just wait for the agency buys to come in.

But if you listen to KFI specifically, you will note that a huge percentage of their business is local direct. They have a list of advertisers who seem to want the foreground format which is viewed as making ads more noticeable. The agencies shy away from talk formats as many national and regional accounts don't want to be associated with "people like Rush Limbaugh" or Fox News.

The national agency buys that do use talk are mostly "talk specific" campaigns that are for clients who want the demo and mindset of the talk format.... think the equivalent of My Pillow but on radio.

The news station has broader agency appeal, but they still do a huge amount of local because of their age spread which does not appeal to most agency accounts.

Sports is not a demographic buy... it is a "guys" buy. AM, FM, Shortwave. Sports is often even a special "sports marketing" budget that the rest of radio never even has a chance at.