In many markets Classic Hits does very well. But in Philadelphia it’s struggling why is that?
-
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
WOGL
- Thread starter CassChopper96
- Start date
Hasn't seemed to hurt WCBS-FM New York.
A number of miss-steps in Philly. Starting in the spring when they went too deep into the 2000s and too deep into the "Rap". Alienating their target listener. CBS-FM on the other hand didn't sway as deep and generally speaking hasn't played many questionable titles. There is a Classic Hits station in Kansas City pulling around a 15 share. What is their music mix? Still play 70s titles...majority from 76 on. And post 2000?Very little. WOGL could learn something there. CBS-FM also benefits from not having a "Jack" type station up against them in NYC. It was a disaster when they were Jack.
As I often say, the goal of radio isn't to score high in 6+ ratings. It's to make money. You're absolutely right that the way to get big 6+ numbers is to play 70s music. Play 70s pop for classic hits or do The Breeze and play 70s soft rock. Big ratings. Terrible sales. If radio didn't have to appeal to sellable demos, life would be so much easier. The biggest problem with WOGL isn't in the 6+ ratings. It's in the 35-54. A lot of their audience is over 55. That's why they keep changing the music.
This is easily solved. Moved Relax & Rewind from B101, and move Today’s hits and yesterday’s favorites to B101. It’s not an image problem, it’s using public knowledge against them. If they think it’s an oldies stations, give them a station specializing in relaxing music. Having B101 and Big 98.1 playing the same music wouldn’t be profitable.
Problem there is that relaxing music would blow off almost all of the marketable male audience, and a good portion of the sales-friendly audience of both genders, because, unlike in the last century, today's listeners tend not to transition to softer, slower tunes in middle age. They live in a loud, rhythmic world right into their 40s and 50s, largely because that's what CHR stations were playing 90 percent of the time 20 years earlier.
Kind of odd hearing that since Philly is an area built on that (not on the same level as Motown since that was incepted in Detroit).
There is some truth in this but I don’t think it’s universal. Personally I love me some Black Eyed Peas and I’m way past that demo. However, WDAS obviously does very well with their audience playing softer R&B. I don’t know how that would translate into the pop world tho for that same age group. For example, I can’t imagine a station in 2025 playing mostly Celine Dion, Sarah McLachlan, and I’ll throw in Michael Bolton for good measure. But then again I’m not sure it’s ever been tried.
It wouldn't work. The closest we got to that was the Breeze and that failed not that long ago. In 2025, nobody wants to hear a steady diet of 90s soft and slow songs.
I would bet with that kind of ratings 6 plus the station is doing well in 25-54 demos and is highly sellable.
Then why doesn't it get mentioned in the Research Director blogs?
RADIO RATINGS ROUNDUP, October 2025, Part II | Research Director, Inc.
Welcome to OCTOBER. For all intents and purposes this is likely the final survey of the year that will not be tainted by the foul stench of BURL IVES
WCBS-FM has dropped out of the top 5 across all key demos in the latest PPM.
Remember, agencies buy ratings, not share, in almost all cases. That means that, in most markets, the top 8 to 12 stations are all in the top two ratings point ranges.
Some agencies (Humility mode on: if Roddy Freeman reads this, he knows a lot more than I do...) are now buying AQH persons which is the closest to how new media is measured. But they buy multi-book averages, and exclude, often, summer and Christmas season months.
That said, within the margin of error of PPM ratings, stations can easily move around +/- 10% to 15% if they are highly rated. Low rated station can move as much as 50% and still be within the margin of error. A 0.7 share can be a 1.3 or a 0.4 without being unusually affected.
Agencies have bought on rating for many many decades. But, like David Letterman's constant "list" feature, people like seeing rankers... teams, radio stations, brands of athletic shoes.
Arbitron goes way back releasing share data that was not usable for sales (12´+) but which kept the Arbitron name viable. That helped them recruit participants as it gave them "street cred" when they got that phone call. Nielsen continued to release the data, just as they "always" did for TV.
Note: rating, share and AQH persons are the same thing... just like ½ and 2/4 are the same thing.
Would you explain the difference between 12+ and 6+ numbers?
Aside from 12+ meaning "people 12 and older" and 6+ meaning "people 6 and older," I feel like the biggest difference between them (for purposes of this conversation) is that back in the diary days, all the publicly-released numbers were surveys of people 12+ ... and since the PPM days rolled around, they've been of people 6+.
PPM Markets use 6+. Diary markets (approx 55 and up) use 12+