> First off, let me just state that I really don't appreciate
> your insinuation that I'm not being truthful in my comments.
> If you have issues with my opinions or they differ than
> yours and you want to state that, fine, that's what this
> board is for, sharing of opinions. But don't question my
> truthfulness.
>
> The radio station in which I performed this task was WIFE
> radio in the town of Connersville, located in southeastern
> Indiana, approximately halfway between Indianapolis and
> Cincinnati. Connersville is a small town, so no, it is not
> a "rated market". The 52 share I speak of, comes from the
> yearly report that the company purchases from Arbitron,
> showing ratings for individual counties. So, yes we did
> have a 52 in our primary target, which was more than double
> what it had been (in the low 20's). In addition, we also
> showed signifigant growth in neighboring counties, as well.
> So no, it is NOT a fabrication. It did happen.
> While I respect your decisions and opinions, I must correct
> you in that, yes I have read articles in various
> publications stating stations should only play about 400
> songs (and no, I don't have a list of what publications or
> articles I read these in, as I generally have not kept a
> list of every article I read, what mag it was in, nor when I
> read it).
>
> I never suggested playing stiffs. And we didn't play
> stiffs. Certainly there are songs that did well chart-wise,
> but for whatever reason, haven't held up well over the
> years; we generally avoided those. What we did find,
> though, in listening to our market, was that people were
> generally tired of hearing heavy rotation songs every couple
> of hours (I had several comments, BTW, from listeners who
> switched to us for that reason), and were desiring to hear
> some classic cuts that were not being played. We simply
> gave them what they wanted, and it worked.
>
> BTW, I never worked for a "parts house". I DID work for an
> electronics company and it was BEFORE the PD job.
>
> In reference to your comment about playing what our
> listeners wanted....that's EXACTLY what we did. Our
> listeners said they wanted to hear the new music, but also
> wanted to hear some occasional Cash, Haggard, Owens, Arnold,
> etc. And we gave it to them. I drilled the customer
> service idea into my airstaff, getting them to equate the
> listener with customers, making them realize if we didn't
> give them what they wanted, they'd go elsewhere, just like
> they do when they shop.
>
> If you were able to knock off a competitor with your ideals,
> kudos to you, you did your job well and obviously the other
> guy didn't, be it with song selection, promotion, whatever
> the reason was. And no, I didn't work in a market of 17
> million, 5 million, or even 500,000, BUT, no matter the size
> of the station or the market, the name of the game is to
> bring in as many listeners as possible, and that's what I
> did; moreso than anyone else who has programmed that
> station.
>
> And finally, you want to know why I'm not currently in
> radio? Well, because when the general manager left, the
> ownership gave the job to a salesperson who had no
> management experience whatsoever (had only sold radio and
> newspaper ads all her career), she didn't like the format we
> were doing despite it's success, she really wanted an oldies
> station, so she replaced me with one of the weekend guys and
> had him take out all of the pre 90 music and replaced it
> with top 40 oldies from the 60's, 70's, 80's. Now, they are
> playing current and recent gold country mixed with Beatles,
> Bryan Adams, Starland Vocal Band, etc. In case you are
> wondering, from what I hear, pretty much the entire
> community has now tuned out.
>
>
>
> > > You know, I find the argument about having only 300-400
> > > songs rather amusing, but I've yet to have anyone give
> me
> > a
> > > convincing argument that it works. I just don't buy the
> > > "people only want to hear so many songs" routine. I was
> a
> >
> > > program director until January of this year at a country
>
> > > station, and let me just state that when I took over,
> our
> > > playlist was only about 500 songs all no more than 3-4
> > years
> > > old. I threw that format out, brought back many of the
> > 90's
> > > hits, as well as songs from the 60's, 70's, and 80's.
> All
> >
> > > told, we were rotating about 2500 songs. Guess what?
> We
> > > more than DOUBLED our audience share. We had a share of
>
> > 52!
> >
> >
> > I can find no station in a rated market with a share over
> > 26, and that is from every rated station in every rated
> > market in the US in Spring, 2005.
> >
> > Unless you can give us the calls and market and explain
> why
> > no station appears with a 52 share, I will have to
> attribute
> > this whole story to the realm of fabrication to make a
> point
> > that otherwise could not be made.
> >
> > A lie is not a good premise for a conclusion, you know.
> >
> > > According to the so-called experts who say you can only
>
> > > play 400 or so songs (be it country, oldies, AC, etc)and
>
> > be
> > > successful, that should never have happened.
> >
> > No expert has made a decision about playlist length. What
> we
> > do is see how many songs we can find that will test
> > positively and not harm our stations by being included in
> > the playlist. The length of the list is self-determining,
> in
> > fact.
> >
> > > I think the
> > > real problem is (and I don't believe most programmers in
>
> > > most formats get this)in the presentation. If you know
> > what
> > > you are doing, you can still get a good rotation of your
>
> > > best testing songs, yet still slip in some good songs
> that
> >
> > > help break up the sameness.
> >
> > Depending on the format, once you get out of the songs
> that
> > are positive, the ones left over are stiffs. In other
> words,
> > no matter how nice the glue you put it together with, the
> > songs are stiffs.
> >
> > I have given several times my best example which is a
> > classic rock station in a market of 17 million. We had 450
>
> > songs, a competitor decided to go with 1800 songs. We kept
>
> > our 16 share, the competitor got, at best, a 1.8. A year
> > later, out of format. The problem was playing 1350 stiffs,
>
> > and had nothing to do with presentation.
> >
> > > As a listener, I get extremely
> > > annoyed at stations that play the same few songs over
> and
> > > over. For example, the old WENS in Indianapolis was
> very
> > > bad. We used to joke that you could listen to them
> Monday
> >
> > > and Tuesday, and you didn't have to listen the rest of
> the
> >
> > > week, because you already knew what they would be
> playing.
> >
> > > Plus, Q95, the classic rock station, there, was as bad
> if
> > > not worse. Me and some co-workers at an electronics
> > company
> > > used to joke about how they seemed to play Pink Floyd
> > every
> > > half hour.
> >
> > You said you were a PD. Now you work at a parts house?
> >
> > > People do notice if you're playing the same
> > > thing over and over again, and I don't care what anyone
> > > says, it's not good radio.
> >
> > Test some real listeners sometime. If they have 25
> favorite
> > songs by one artist, you had better play them all, even if
>
> > that means playing one every hour. It is called, "playing
> > what th elistener wants." Doing that gets ratings. Playing
>
> > obscure deep cuts does not, as Lee Abrams proved back in
> the
> > early 70's when he killed the free form album rock
> stations
> > with tight lists of hits people actually cared about.
> >
> > > I'll even go as far as to say
> > > that should I get another opportunity to program a
> > station,
> > > be it oldies or country either one, I HOPE my
> competition
> > is
> > > playing only 400 or 500 songs, because in a matter of
> > months
> > > I will have taken a large amount of their audience away.
>
> > > That's not being egotistical, either, that's simply
> truth.
> >
> >
> > And I hope I sometime get another competitor playing 2000
> > songs. The last one was like shooting fish ina barrel. In
> > fact, it was not even challenging, as we knew from call
> out
> > and research that the other station was dead before it was
>
> > on for 24 full hours.
> >
> > In any case, let us know what your mythical radio station
> > was called... and why you are not in radio still if you
> got
> > twice the share of hte highest rated station in the USA
> > today. Right.
> >
Hey, WD,
Take his comments with a grain of salt. This is from a guy who has repeatedly stated that oldies would never return to radio. Obviously, he hasn't been to the Chicago board today.
> your insinuation that I'm not being truthful in my comments.
> If you have issues with my opinions or they differ than
> yours and you want to state that, fine, that's what this
> board is for, sharing of opinions. But don't question my
> truthfulness.
>
> The radio station in which I performed this task was WIFE
> radio in the town of Connersville, located in southeastern
> Indiana, approximately halfway between Indianapolis and
> Cincinnati. Connersville is a small town, so no, it is not
> a "rated market". The 52 share I speak of, comes from the
> yearly report that the company purchases from Arbitron,
> showing ratings for individual counties. So, yes we did
> have a 52 in our primary target, which was more than double
> what it had been (in the low 20's). In addition, we also
> showed signifigant growth in neighboring counties, as well.
> So no, it is NOT a fabrication. It did happen.
> While I respect your decisions and opinions, I must correct
> you in that, yes I have read articles in various
> publications stating stations should only play about 400
> songs (and no, I don't have a list of what publications or
> articles I read these in, as I generally have not kept a
> list of every article I read, what mag it was in, nor when I
> read it).
>
> I never suggested playing stiffs. And we didn't play
> stiffs. Certainly there are songs that did well chart-wise,
> but for whatever reason, haven't held up well over the
> years; we generally avoided those. What we did find,
> though, in listening to our market, was that people were
> generally tired of hearing heavy rotation songs every couple
> of hours (I had several comments, BTW, from listeners who
> switched to us for that reason), and were desiring to hear
> some classic cuts that were not being played. We simply
> gave them what they wanted, and it worked.
>
> BTW, I never worked for a "parts house". I DID work for an
> electronics company and it was BEFORE the PD job.
>
> In reference to your comment about playing what our
> listeners wanted....that's EXACTLY what we did. Our
> listeners said they wanted to hear the new music, but also
> wanted to hear some occasional Cash, Haggard, Owens, Arnold,
> etc. And we gave it to them. I drilled the customer
> service idea into my airstaff, getting them to equate the
> listener with customers, making them realize if we didn't
> give them what they wanted, they'd go elsewhere, just like
> they do when they shop.
>
> If you were able to knock off a competitor with your ideals,
> kudos to you, you did your job well and obviously the other
> guy didn't, be it with song selection, promotion, whatever
> the reason was. And no, I didn't work in a market of 17
> million, 5 million, or even 500,000, BUT, no matter the size
> of the station or the market, the name of the game is to
> bring in as many listeners as possible, and that's what I
> did; moreso than anyone else who has programmed that
> station.
>
> And finally, you want to know why I'm not currently in
> radio? Well, because when the general manager left, the
> ownership gave the job to a salesperson who had no
> management experience whatsoever (had only sold radio and
> newspaper ads all her career), she didn't like the format we
> were doing despite it's success, she really wanted an oldies
> station, so she replaced me with one of the weekend guys and
> had him take out all of the pre 90 music and replaced it
> with top 40 oldies from the 60's, 70's, 80's. Now, they are
> playing current and recent gold country mixed with Beatles,
> Bryan Adams, Starland Vocal Band, etc. In case you are
> wondering, from what I hear, pretty much the entire
> community has now tuned out.
>
>
>
> > > You know, I find the argument about having only 300-400
> > > songs rather amusing, but I've yet to have anyone give
> me
> > a
> > > convincing argument that it works. I just don't buy the
> > > "people only want to hear so many songs" routine. I was
> a
> >
> > > program director until January of this year at a country
>
> > > station, and let me just state that when I took over,
> our
> > > playlist was only about 500 songs all no more than 3-4
> > years
> > > old. I threw that format out, brought back many of the
> > 90's
> > > hits, as well as songs from the 60's, 70's, and 80's.
> All
> >
> > > told, we were rotating about 2500 songs. Guess what?
> We
> > > more than DOUBLED our audience share. We had a share of
>
> > 52!
> >
> >
> > I can find no station in a rated market with a share over
> > 26, and that is from every rated station in every rated
> > market in the US in Spring, 2005.
> >
> > Unless you can give us the calls and market and explain
> why
> > no station appears with a 52 share, I will have to
> attribute
> > this whole story to the realm of fabrication to make a
> point
> > that otherwise could not be made.
> >
> > A lie is not a good premise for a conclusion, you know.
> >
> > > According to the so-called experts who say you can only
>
> > > play 400 or so songs (be it country, oldies, AC, etc)and
>
> > be
> > > successful, that should never have happened.
> >
> > No expert has made a decision about playlist length. What
> we
> > do is see how many songs we can find that will test
> > positively and not harm our stations by being included in
> > the playlist. The length of the list is self-determining,
> in
> > fact.
> >
> > > I think the
> > > real problem is (and I don't believe most programmers in
>
> > > most formats get this)in the presentation. If you know
> > what
> > > you are doing, you can still get a good rotation of your
>
> > > best testing songs, yet still slip in some good songs
> that
> >
> > > help break up the sameness.
> >
> > Depending on the format, once you get out of the songs
> that
> > are positive, the ones left over are stiffs. In other
> words,
> > no matter how nice the glue you put it together with, the
> > songs are stiffs.
> >
> > I have given several times my best example which is a
> > classic rock station in a market of 17 million. We had 450
>
> > songs, a competitor decided to go with 1800 songs. We kept
>
> > our 16 share, the competitor got, at best, a 1.8. A year
> > later, out of format. The problem was playing 1350 stiffs,
>
> > and had nothing to do with presentation.
> >
> > > As a listener, I get extremely
> > > annoyed at stations that play the same few songs over
> and
> > > over. For example, the old WENS in Indianapolis was
> very
> > > bad. We used to joke that you could listen to them
> Monday
> >
> > > and Tuesday, and you didn't have to listen the rest of
> the
> >
> > > week, because you already knew what they would be
> playing.
> >
> > > Plus, Q95, the classic rock station, there, was as bad
> if
> > > not worse. Me and some co-workers at an electronics
> > company
> > > used to joke about how they seemed to play Pink Floyd
> > every
> > > half hour.
> >
> > You said you were a PD. Now you work at a parts house?
> >
> > > People do notice if you're playing the same
> > > thing over and over again, and I don't care what anyone
> > > says, it's not good radio.
> >
> > Test some real listeners sometime. If they have 25
> favorite
> > songs by one artist, you had better play them all, even if
>
> > that means playing one every hour. It is called, "playing
> > what th elistener wants." Doing that gets ratings. Playing
>
> > obscure deep cuts does not, as Lee Abrams proved back in
> the
> > early 70's when he killed the free form album rock
> stations
> > with tight lists of hits people actually cared about.
> >
> > > I'll even go as far as to say
> > > that should I get another opportunity to program a
> > station,
> > > be it oldies or country either one, I HOPE my
> competition
> > is
> > > playing only 400 or 500 songs, because in a matter of
> > months
> > > I will have taken a large amount of their audience away.
>
> > > That's not being egotistical, either, that's simply
> truth.
> >
> >
> > And I hope I sometime get another competitor playing 2000
> > songs. The last one was like shooting fish ina barrel. In
> > fact, it was not even challenging, as we knew from call
> out
> > and research that the other station was dead before it was
>
> > on for 24 full hours.
> >
> > In any case, let us know what your mythical radio station
> > was called... and why you are not in radio still if you
> got
> > twice the share of hte highest rated station in the USA
> > today. Right.
> >
Hey, WD,
Take his comments with a grain of salt. This is from a guy who has repeatedly stated that oldies would never return to radio. Obviously, he hasn't been to the Chicago board today.
