July Ratings

[davideduardo]

"Radio" doesn't program stations. People do. Some are good and some are bad. But you can't generalize. If you don't like what you hear, there are lots of available choices. Nobody forces you to listen. It's totally voluntary. But don't make judgements about people you don't know because of your personal taste.

What I always say when deficient or underperforming stations is mentioned is "Look at Proctor & Glamble".

The best marketer in the world introduces new products ("formats") constantly. They test market them extensively and do the world's best research. Yet half of them do not make it through their second year on the market.

Not every format will be #1. Not every format has to be #1 to make money. This is not a horse race; there can be 20 or more real winners in the larger markets.

 

[Mediafrog+]

Classic Rock is joining Oldies as the format where 90 percent of the artists on the playlist are deceased. Yeah, I know many stations are adding 90's bands to try to move the goalposts. Even many of those artists are in their 60's now...

I’ve had the thought in the past that it would be interesting to rate station playlists on a “dead versus living” basis. Who plays the greatest percentage of dead artists? We would have to give Classical a pass, as it would have a near 100% “dead rating”. But we would find some interesting numbers on many mainstream stations that have large listener bases.

 

[Deleted member 76036]

I was thinking the other day if reintroducing rock on 97.1 with The Eagle branding again was the right choice. I feel that The Eagle’s heritage branding has been tarnished so much and that, along with some of the other decisions that have been made, are holding it back.

I was also trying to think of other names/branding and for some reason this popped into my head: “X 97-1 - DFW’s New Rock and Kick Ass Rock from the 90’s and 2000’s!” —it may be a bit long, but it sounds newer to me, edgier and if they just got rid of the super old tunes…there ya go!

I wouldn’t expect a number 1 station, but I think they’d see better results. When I think of “The Eagle”, I think of a bald eagle, which makes me think of balding grandpas. Basically old and tired and plenty of naps throughout the day. Old and tired is the 50 year old music they’re playing. The naps are the talk shows. 😝

 

[neosolbrudda]

I was thinking the other day if reintroducing rock on 97.1 with The Eagle branding again was the right choice. I feel that The Eagle’s heritage branding has been tarnished so much and that, along with some of the other decisions that have been made, are holding it back.

I was also trying to think of other names/branding and for some reason this popped into my head: “X 97-1 - DFW’s New Rock and Kick Ass Rock from the 90’s and 2000’s!” —it may be a bit long, but it sounds newer to me, edgier and if they just got rid of the super old tunes…there ya go!

I wouldn’t expect a number 1 station, but I think they’d see better results. When I think of “The Eagle”, I think of a bald eagle, which makes me think of balding grandpas. Basically old and tired and plenty of naps throughout the day. Old and tired is the 50 year old music they’re playing. The naps are the talk shows. 😝

I'm surprised they haven't tried "The Brew", which is a name they use for some of their other rock stations.

 

[TheBigA]

I was also trying to think of other names/branding and for some reason this popped into my head: “X 97-1 - DFW’s New Rock and Kick Ass Rock from the 90’s and 2000’s!” —it may be a bit long, but it sounds newer to me, edgier and if they just got rid of the super old tunes…there ya go!

Would new branding cause rock fans to throw away their phones and stop using streaming services? If not, it won't matter.

My take is rock fans don't care about branding it all. It's just more corporate crap that interferes with the music.

Basically old and tired and plenty of naps throughout the day. Old and tired is the 50 year old music they’re playing. The naps are the talk shows. 😝

The only 50 year old music is the occasional Black Sabbath, AC/DC, or Led Zepplin. The vast majority is 90s and 2000s.

 

[dlf1]

I’ve had the thought in the past that it would be interesting to rate station playlists on a “dead versus living” basis. Who plays the greatest percentage of dead artists? We would have to give Classical a pass, as it would have a near 100% “dead rating”. But we would find some interesting numbers on many mainstream stations that have large listener bases.

During the AOR phase of Pirate Radio in Los Angeles, they had billboards that said “Less Music by Dead Guys.”

 

[davideduardo]

During the AOR phase of Pirate Radio in Los Angeles, they had billboards that said “Less Music by Dead Guys.”

And that format, done by Scott Shannon, tanked miserably and was done and gone very quickly.

 

[dlf1]

And that format, done by Scott Shannon, tanked miserably and was done and gone very quickly.

That was post Shannon, but yeah, that format didn’t last too long.

 

[tbolt909]

And that format, done by Scott Shannon, tanked miserably and was done and gone very quickly.

It became "Underground Radio". Even the buzzards weren't interested...😑

 

[davideduardo]

That was post Shannon, but yeah, that format didn’t last too long.

But the Pirate concept was done by him. All of us have an occasional error on our record!

 

[Deleted member 76036]

Would new branding cause rock fans to throw away their phones and stop using streaming services? If not, it won't matter.

Do you work for Spotify or something? Basically your take on everything is, “let’s just let traditional radio die. Everything is too expensive and nothing matters.” Can’t I just say one thing on here with you not responding and totally trashing my idea?

New branding would NOT cause rock fans to throw away their phones. We all know that. However, it would be something new and fresh and that’s the reason why stations rebrand in the first place. You of all people should know that. It happens all the time! It’s an investment and it does cost money, but if there was no benefit at all, radio stations across the country wouldn’t do that.

And I should’ve mentioned the 40 year old songs in addition to the 50 year old songs. People know where to find that, so I’d let Lone Star have that. Basically, I’d get rid of the 70’s and 80’s songs.

 

[TheBigA]

Do you work for Spotify or something? Basically your take on everything is, “let’s just let traditional radio die.

No I don't. I work in radio. Letting radio die would put me out of work. Counter-productive.

However, it would be something new and fresh and that’s the reason why stations rebrand in the first place.

You mean like The Freak? That was new and fresh, and you saw how people reacted. Based on that reaction, they decided to go back to the previous branding. Trying something completely new would just alienate the Eagle fans again. It seems that people like the Eagle brand.

Your idea is wonderful. Great idea! Keep coming up with ideas. But for now, it appears they're going to stay with The Eagle. Maybe they'll change the branding next time.

I’d let Lone Star have that. Basically, I’d get rid of the 70’s and 80’s songs.

I think if you compare playlists, you'll see Lonestar is primarily 70s and 80s, and Eagle is primarily 90s and 2000s. Perhaps once an hour or once every two hours, they throw in a Black Sabbath or Led Zeppelin. One an hour. Their data shows that most people only listen for one hour. One old song isn't going to kill you. But from what I gather, this current mix is not for you. That's fine. Just change the station and try something else. No harm, no foul.

 

[Deleted member 76036]

No I don't. I work in radio. Letting radio die would put me out of work. Counter-productive.

Good to know! 🙂

You mean like The Freak? That was new and fresh, and you saw how people reacted. Based on that reaction, they decided to go back to the previous branding.

The Freak was a completely different format. I used to listen to Maxim Radio on XM or Sirius back in the day and I sort of enjoyed that format. That’s what I was expecting The Freak to be. I think beyond the first day, I probably listened less than an hour total for the entire length it was on. Totally not for me.

I think with any format change, even if you go back to previous branding, it requires a bit of marketing. They might’ve had some listeners carry over from The Freak, but when iHeart abandoned The Eagle for The Freak, I think those rock listeners felt abandoned, as well. iHeart seemed to spend quite a bit on marketing to try and bring those listeners back and I still believe it would’ve be better spent on a rock format with a new name.

I think if you compare playlists, you'll see Lonestar is primarily 70s and 80s, and Eagle is primarily 90s and 2000s. Perhaps once an hour or once every two hours, they throw in a Black Sabbath or Led Zeppelin. One an hour. Their data shows that most people only listen for one hour. One old song isn't going to kill you. But from what I gather, this current mix is not for you. That's fine. Just change the station and try something else. No harm, no foul.

The current mix probably isn’t for me and I get that. However, I think what might be happening is that a super old song comes on. That causes me to usually flip to Alt 103.7. I like 88.1 indie, but they don’t come in the best where I live near I-20. If they’re not playing something I like, I might flip around a bit or throw on something on Apple Music. The old stuff on The Eagle doesn’t cause me to miss just 1 song. I miss several, because I don’t flip back for a while. I’m guessing I’m not the only one in a market of almost 7 million people that does this.

On a side note…I hope you received my DM that I sent you a while ago and I truly meant what I said. I’m not a negative person, but I’m really passionate. I would LOVE to meet up for lunch with you and anyone else on this board who’s in the DFW area sometime in the future. I think a face-to-face meetup would be great if you or anyone else is up for it! 🙂

 

[254dan]

Classic rock ain’t the same around here according to Lonestar 92.5 if they’re going to play classic rock on here, my advice is to play more of it.

I liked 92.5 better back in the early 2000’s when it was just “925 KZPS” they seemed to play more classic rock back then

 

[davecollett]

JACK is still playing what we want!

Yes sir they are.

 

[Radiopaw]

Would new branding cause rock fans to throw away their phones and stop using streaming services? If not, it won't matter.

Rock is just not popular, classic rock and alternative have more mass appeal but not modern rock. Modern rock is my favorite but really not a big player.

 

[johndavis]

During the AOR phase of Pirate Radio in Los Angeles, they had billboards that said “Less Music by Dead Guys.”

I remember those billboards, but it was KLSX, who was doing a younger version of classic rock before going hot talk.

 

[Loverofradio]

The Eagle will always be fine because it’s the first station that comes to mind to any male local direct advertiser in Dallas. Heritage branding. Same reason how KROQ has survived for so long. Everyone grew up listening to the Eagle in the market. They remember Russ. They remember Howard. Its brand is generational as well. The eagle will always make money.

 

[Kramer]

There's no money playing rock music on the radio.

This comment and those like them is why I come to this board only about once a month.

 

[tbolt909]

There's no money playing rock music on the radio.

This comment and those like them is why I come to this board only about once a month.

That's still more often than some who use Radio. Truth may be unpleasant to you. AAA stations are almost all listener supported non commercial ones. Some Classic Rock stations are still making money. Unfortunately, Rock is largely a nostalgia genre now. Pearl Jam just released a a very good new album, but it went unnoticed by Radio. That's just one example.

It takes effort to put together a compelling Rock format that will generate listener passion. Radio is just scrambling for survival, so I wouldn't expect much change...