AAA needed here

[davideduardo]

There's a difference between losing money and not making as large a profit as the mother company wants. A Triple-A would NOT lose money in Dallas. If you're point is that it's unlikely that a Triple-A would be a top 5 performer in this town, they you're probably right. But I could see a Triple-A settling in between 5 and 15--depending on how well it's done.

... more like the 1.2 share predicted in another post.

If you look at AAA in markets that have some of the demographic characteristics of Dallas, you see that the format may not be viable at all.

First, you have a large country lifestyle group. Then there is significant Black population and a huge Hispanic segment. Together, this narrows the potential down to around a third of the market, not all of whom have any interest in AAA.

Another example would be AAA in Los Angeles, with similar total ethnicity (albeit in a different set of percentages) where AAA managed to barely break a 1 share in what many considered a musically progressive market.

The main point is that owners are scared of the format, as it generally underperforms unless you look for a heritage AAA such as Denver has (and where shares are way off the peak)

Since the level of radio usage in Dallas is within tenths of a point of the levels in the rest of the naiton, saying there are many AAA listeners who don't listen to radio is without grounds, proof or logic: if you think there is a 15 share for AAA, and the AAA listeners are not using radio, why are 94% of all Dallas MSA residents using radio today?

 

[SmokeRing]

The main point is that owners are scared of the format, as it generally underperforms unless you look for a heritage AAA such as Denver has (and where shares are way off the peak)

Since the level of radio usage in Dallas is within tenths of a point of the levels in the rest of the naiton, saying there are many AAA listeners who don't listen to radio is without grounds, proof or logic: if you think there is a 15 share for AAA, and the AAA listeners are not using radio, why are 94% of all Dallas MSA residents using radio today?

Triple-A underperforms because most radio companies don't know how to hire Triple-A programmers and talent. Heritage Triple-A's probably work today because they were grandfathered in to the corporate nest without too much tampering. I know that's the case with KGSR in Austin. It's probably the case in Denver as well.

Also, your 94% stat doesn't speak to how much these listeners are using the radio. Does 5 or 10 minutes a day make someone a radio "user"? If so, I wouldn't brag on that stat. And how many of those 94% are "using" radio for MUSIC? If I were to predict the station that would stand to lose (or share) the largest portion of its listenership to a Dallas Triple-A, I'd pick KERA--which isn't rated by Arbitron. News Talkers would also lose some listeners.

The fact is that there's no station in Dallas that comes anywhere close to serving Triple-A listeners. Since that demo tends to REALLY love music, they MAY be limping along with other stations. But I bet they're relying on their own music libraries.

One last point: Triple-A draws from a higher educated demo. The higher educated in Dallas aren't really served by anyone right now. There aren't any "smart" stations. There are certain individual shows and talents here and there who appeal to the higher educated demos. But most all of Dallas' stations have dumbed down the product over the last 20 to 25 years.

This may sound like an elitist analysis. But that demo exists. And it's not being served in Dallas.

 

[davideduardo]

Triple-A underperforms because most radio companies don't know how to hire Triple-A programmers and talent. Heritage Triple-A's probably work today because they were grandfathered in to the corporate nest without too much tampering. I know that's the case with KGSR in Austin. It's probably the case in Denver as well.

How many expereinced and successful AAA programmers are there? AAA is kinda' like dance; every listener has a different view of what the mix and played songs should be. There is probably less consensus in this format than any other one in the US.

[/quote]Also, your 94% stat doesn't speak to how much these listeners are using the radio.[/quote]

Overall, they are using about 10% less than they did 15 years ago. And the range of usage is about the same it was in the first Arbitron...

Does 5 or 10 minutes a day make someone a radio "user"? If so, I wouldn't brag on that stat. And how many of those 94% are "using" radio for MUSIC? If I were to predict the station that would stand to lose (or share) the largest portion of its listenership to a Dallas Triple-A, I'd pick KERA--which isn't rated by Arbitron. News Talkers would also lose some listeners.

KERA is rated by Arbitron. All stations, commercial and non-commercial, loacal and out of market, satellite and terrestrial, are rated. The published reports given to the trades do not included non-coms, but every subscriber has the exact data on all stations of any kind...

The fact is that there's no station in Dallas that comes anywhere close to serving Triple-A listeners. Since that demo tends to REALLY love music, they MAY be limping along with other stations. But I bet they're relying on their own music libraries.

You have no proof of this unless you have surveyed the market with some kind of format search study. The fact that other companies do this and have not done AAA probably proves that there is NOT a big interest group in this format.

One last point: Triple-A draws from a higher educated demo. The higher educated in Dallas aren't really served by anyone right now. There aren't any "smart" stations. There are certain individual shows and talents here and there who appeal to the higher educated demos. But most all of Dallas' stations have dumbed down the product over the last 20 to 25 years.

Ad buys are not made on educational level. And certainly not all educated people listen to AAA. I'm a college type, and I find the music unfamiliar, uninteresting and irrelevant. I say this to show that you are over-generalizing about the appeal of the format.

 

[KPLEXCOMPLEX]

Smokering,your assesment is far more credible,but to discuss,and debate, with D.E. gives fodder for his pleasure of arguing.It is like running a brand new car into a brickwall. He's never wrong in his world.

 

[davideduardo]

Smokering,your assesment is far more credible,but to discuss,and debate, with D.E. gives fodder for his pleasure of arguing.It is like running a brand new car into a brickwall. He's never wrong in his world.

Of course, smokering posted non-truths like the one about KERA not being rated... you seem to prefer lies to reality.

 

[SmokeRing]

How many expereinced and successful AAA programmers are there? AAA is kinda' like dance; every listener has a different view of what the mix and played songs should be. There is probably less consensus in this format than any other one in the US.

Which is why YOU are not the guy we should be listening to on this topic. You seek "consensus." Translation: You're in the business of being a Copy Cat. You study the successes of OTHERS and then give advice on how to cheaply rip it off. Original ideas aren't valued by you or the people you consult. The true innovators in this business are always years (or even a decade or more) ahead of your conventional wisdom.

So, no, you couldn't possibly see the need for a Triple-A in Dallas. Nor would you have the faintest idea of how to program one here successfully. But you're not alone. (See the Zone and the Merge.)

By the way, I gotta own my mistake on KERA. I've always heard it's not rated. And, since I've never seen any public postings of KERA ratings, I assumed what I'd heard was correct.

 

[Robert Bass]

I'd pick KERA--which isn't rated by Arbitron.

Yes it is, but the data is not combined with the commercial stations. Arbitron was going to start combining the non-comm stations with the comm stations, beginning with the Fall '06 books. Long story short, those plans were scrapped.

R

 

[davideduardo]

Yes it is, but the data is not combined with the commercial stations. Arbitron was going to start combining the non-comm stations with the comm stations, beginning with the Fall '06 books. Long story short, those plans were scrapped.

Not quite, Robert. Actually, Arbitron was going to start putting the non-coms in the data given to the press. It has been in the Maximiser data that subscribed commercial stations get for over a decade.

Traditionally, non-coms are not shown in the printed book (eliminated last year) and the Arbitrends. In Maximiser, the full-book data, such data has always been included.

 

[davideduardo]

Which is why YOU are not the guy we should be listening to on this topic. You seek "consensus."

I disagree here. We are in the broadcasting business (or at least I am). That means we look for the BROADest opportunity to serve a listener with BROADly accepted music or entertainment.

Formats where there is little consensus in the target group are very hard to program. The reason new AAAs are practically unknown is that too much is expected of them by each individual listener to form an audience base. On the other hand, the heritage staitons have more or less helped form the market's taste over the years, a la KBCO, and the listeners do have a consensus as the station itself created it!

Translation: You're in the business of being a Copy Cat.

No, I am neither in the business of copying nor that of inventing. I am in th ebusinhess of finding what people want, and delivering it in the best crafted manner possible.

It really does not matter to me that there is a similar station in another market. Local listeners neither know nor care.

It does not matter that there is a similar station in the market, if listeners are found to not significant defects in its programming, then it is likely I would see an opportunity to give a better version of that format to them.

A totally new format is not likely unless both a large volume of unplayed or underplayed music exists and listeners feel that no other staiton does an adequate job of playing it and, finally, that those listeners would switch at least part of the time to such a format. This was the basis for a format I developed in 2000 that we now have on in 12 markets... an unserved, large (broad) and responsive audience segment.

Innovation to innovate is useless. Innovation to satisfy a significant need is being responsive.

You study the successes of OTHERS and then give advice on how to cheaply rip it off.

Actually, I study the tastes and needs of listeners and find out if they are being adequately served. If a weak attempt is being made by someone else, the response is to do a better job, which always means a more costly, better staffed and better promoted effort.

Original ideas aren't valued by you or the people you consult.

My favorite quote from all the things published about me references Mega 98.3 in Argentina. The largest daily paper said, "It took a foreigner to show us Argentines that we liked our (own) national rock." In other words, nobody in a market of 17 million had ever done a format based on 100% local artists... and yet, when done, the station became #1 in about 30 days.

Tell me that is not original?

The true innovators in this business are always years (or even a decade or more) ahead of your conventional wisdom.Therefore this is kind of a never-ending circle.

People so far ahead are like the old saw about what pioneers always get for their efforts: shot. You can not put a station that nobody likes on and hope they evolve into listeners. A station has to appeal out of the box to a signficant audience or it will fail.

So, no, you couldn't possibly see the need for a Triple-A in Dallas. Nor would you have the faintest idea of how to program one here successfully. But you're not alone.

Most of what you need to know about programming a format should come from the listener. That aside, there is no evidence of a history of using an AAA mix in the market, and new AAAs are seldom successful today; in addition, the market is too ethnic to sustain a format that is both fairly niched and very, very non-ethnic in appeal.

By the way, I gotta own my mistake on KERA. I've always heard it's not rated. And, since I've never seen any public postings of KERA ratings, I assumed what I'd heard was correct.

Fari enough. This is a common misconception, so it's also a natural mistake... because the numbers for non-coms is not released to the press. with the PPM next year, they will be per Arbitron-.

 

[Robert Bass]

Yes it is, but the data is not combined with the commercial stations. Arbitron was going to start combining the non-comm stations with the comm stations, beginning with the Fall '06 books. Long story short, those plans were scrapped.

Not quite, Robert. Actually, Arbitron was going to start putting the non-coms in the data given to the press. It has been in the Maximiser data that subscribed commercial stations get for over a decade.

That's what I meant. Looks like I worded it a tad bit incorrectly.

R

 

[little1]

You would and could do all that.

And you would get a 1.2 (if you're lucky) and lose money hand over fist...


(And if you disagree with my assesment, try this- look at the current landscape, and tell me where this station is going to get it's audience from. Just ballpark figures of 10% of it's audience from here, 20% of it's audience from there, etc...
Then we can see if we agree with your predictions...Because offhand, I don't think you're typical young edge listener is going to sit through mellow AAA, blues, calssic rock, etc...Classic alternative maybe...
So just tell us where you think this audience will come from. KVIL's male listeners? Do you think both of those guys will switch? And all seven of the men that listen to mix? Hell, if they're girlfriends and wifes won't give them their testicles back long enough to let them switch to a real radio station now, what makes you think they'll have the cojones to switch to AAA? )

Man alive! What a harshly written post to read, first thing in the morning. Little1, you need to lighten up a bit.

R

Harshly Written? Please. I didn't even stretch or get warmed up for that one. I can be a LOT harsher than that.

What's harsh anyway? Predicting that they'd only get a 1.2? Claiming KVIl only has 2 male listeners, (And the mix 7) none of which currently can regain possesion of their testicles from their wifes/girlfriends or mothers? Or both. And in one case, all 3... ;D
That's not harsh, that's truth.

And have you noticed that nobody has risen to the challenge. One person thinks this new AAA format will draw some men from Mix. Who, if memory serves has like a 2.5ish) and is something like 75% female. So if they get ALL those men (which they won't) they get a .6. Now you need to get another .6 just to get to where I've predicted they'd be. Where are you going to find these educated musicial elite? Listening to Pugs and Kelly? Listening to fart jokes on the Ticket? Kiss 106? Heaven 97?

As someone said, those peeps might be out there, but they're not being served currently. So not only are you programming a format that has a limited 'upside' as far as expected rating, you probably have to spend a fair amount to try and market it.

Like I said, a 1.2 and money hemmoraging from the bottom line...

 

[Robert Bass]

Harshly Written? Please. I didn't even stretch or get warmed up for that one. I can be a LOT harsher than that.

Please don't. This place stays friendlier that way.

R

 

[little1]

Maybe that's the problem.

You guys want to be friends with each other, and not hurt each others feelings, and just keep repeating the beliefs of the herd mentality (The big companies (Cheap Channel, Cume-less and Can't Braodcast schitte)(And aren't you guys SO clever with those names) all suck, consultants suck, playlists suck, succesful formats suck, pretty much everything that anybody is doing succesfully anywhere at anytime sucks)...

Some of us are here looking for insight and analysis of the market- not a place to hang out with our 'cyberfriends' and make jokes about what station would do best amongst Guernseys in Grayson County...

But if that's what floats your boat, have at it...

 

[little1]

Oh, by the way, I notice no one still hasn't come up with where this mythical AAA stations ratings are going to come from...

It shouldn't be that hard. Anybody with a basic understanding of the major (and mid-major) stations in the market, and the demographics and ratings of those stations, ought to be able to, off the top of their head, guesstimate the impact of a new format...

Of course, that's assuming one actually knows something about the radio business. And not just an interest in talking about it because that's what your "friends" are talking about...

 

[little1]

And the reason I'm being harsh is because it's amateur hour to throw out "This market needs a AAA" or "a REAL rock station" or whatever...

I realize this might come as a shock, especially for those of you that don't have to worry about making money at your stations, but generally these radio stations are in business to try and make a profit.

Companies spend thousands of dollars a year trying to judge what the audience wants. If there was really a significant 'want' for those formats, some station that's sucking hind T*T would flip to it...

 

[SmokeRing]

Companies spend thousands of dollars a year trying to judge what the audience wants. If there was really a significant 'want' for those formats, some station that's sucking hind T*T would flip to it...

On the one hand, you claim to avoid the corporate herd mentality. But then you endorse this theory that Triple-A isn't wanted in Dallas, or else the corporate herd would have one already. If you're going to claim the former, then be consistent.

By the way, I answered your question about audience. I guarantee you: The Triple-A crowd doesn't rely on radio for its favorite music. This audience isn't being measured right now (except in a blinking thought bubble over David Eduardo's head). You build it (correctly), they will come.

And what if it cycles around a 2.5? Big deal. That would be fine for a Triple-A. It would make money. What's embarrassing is all these mainstream formats weighing in at 2.5's and much worse.

If you're going to be mainstream, then bring me a 3.7 or above, or go home.

One last bit of advice. You apparently have a thing about the ownership of your testicles. In the future, when you feel the urge to write more about that--don't do it. The more you dwell on it, the more people are going to assume you're overcompensating for a "little 1."

 

[grantchester]

IMHO... A well done triple A station wouldn't take from any existing commercial station. It would bring in people who don't listen to radio much now. The worst sin such a station could make would be to get it's head up into the charts. My tastes would run towards a Classic AAA, with an emphisis on songs that people are vaguely familiar with, that sound good, but haven't been so commerically exploited as to be so totally burned out. I Love KGSR (k-geezer) for that they stand for, but I find it hard to listen very long, cause there's so much singer-songwriter crapola. How about some movie soundtrack music, some TV themes, some cartoon music, the Marlboro Man (magificent 7), light classics like William Tell and Bolero?
Bottom line... let a musicologist pick the tunes, and let the record companies pound sand....
g

 

[Robert Bass]

Maybe that's the problem.

You guys want to be friends with each other, and not hurt each others feelings, and just keep repeating the beliefs of the herd mentality (The big companies (Cheap Channel, Cume-less and Can't Braodcast schitte)(And aren't you guys SO clever with those names) all suck, consultants suck, playlists suck, succesful formats suck, pretty much everything that anybody is doing succesfully anywhere at anytime sucks)...

What I meant by friendly is, as in lets keep it clean. The testicle reference was unnecessary.

R

 

[davideduardo]

IMHO... A well done triple A station wouldn't take from any existing commercial station. It would bring in people who don't listen to radio much now.

That's a distinct possibility because you qualified the statement by saying, "who don't listen to radio much now."

While there have not been any public Arbitron studies, the BBM in Canada did a study years ago when they used the same method, diaries, as Arbitron. The recontacted, I was told, the light users and the non-users for a specific period. What the found was that there is a 5% to 6% that just does not use radio during a diary week. And of those, about half are radio users who could not listen that particular week due to things like being on vacation, having a long work schedule, an illness, death inthe family, etc. The other half are folks wo do not use radio at all.

Then there is a percentage of around 7%-10% that are very light users. Again, some are occasional kight users due to other pressing personal issues such as those above. The rest are divided into "lack of opportunity" and "lack of interest." LAck of opportunity light listeners are those, for example, who can't listen at work and commute by public transportation and don't listen at either location, and are mostly limited to short intervals at home in the morning or on occasions after work at home or weekends. The "lack of interest" folks are the ones you mention... as many as 5% in a market at the time (and in Canada, of course).

If there is a lack of interest group in Dallas, the question is the number of same that would also like AAA. Not all would, I think. This is also the primary group for satellite... they person from Jamaica who wants a reggae channel, the pure jazz buff, the AAA partisan, the new music fan, etc.

If there are enough unserved listeners in this group, and enough "settlers" on other stations (meaning those who settle for the best they can find, although it is not their first choice, not folks with covered wagons...) then AAA would work.

Again, my main question is whether a new AAA can satisfy all the different sub-currents in AAA. Already we have heard comments like "not too many singer songwriters" (from you, of course ) so not everyone is going to like the same blend. Beyond that, would anyone (meaning the owners) risk a format today that is so dependent on texture, spontaneity, unproven cuts, deep cuts and "feel" as well as one that requires really good knowledgable talent that would be most effective if allowed to play at least some random cuts and to alter the order of the songs to create moods at will? I think we know the answer to that one.

The worst sin such a station could make would be to get it's head up into the charts. My tastes would run towards a Classic AAA, with an emphisis on songs that people are vaguely familiar with, that sound good, but haven't been so commerically exploited as to be so totally burned out. I Love KGSR (k-geezer) for that they stand for, but I find it hard to listen very long, cause there's so much singer-songwriter crapola. How about some movie soundtrack music, some TV themes, some cartoon music, the Marlboro Man (magificent 7), light classics like William Tell and Bolero?

Same question. Name an owner in Dallas that would think such an idea creative and potentially viable.

Bottom line... let a musicologist pick the tunes, and let the record companies pound sand....

I think the latest RIAA gyrations are convincing lots of radio (as well as Internet) programmers that they share scant little common interest with the record companies.

 

[SmokeRing]

Quality post, David. Thanks. I think you're speaking directly to us now.