Another step towards the death of radio

[frankberry]

When you block out non-subscribers it is no longer a valuable service.

If the stations want the benefit of "the book," they should pay for it. How is that in any way unfair?
I can understand why small market stations might not want to invest if they don't see a significant potential increase in their billing.
They shouldn't complain when the big agencies pass them by.

 

[TheBigA]

If the stations want the benefit of "the book," they should pay for it. How is that in any way unfair?

That's not the point. The station has already determined they don't need the information. That's why they chose to unsubscribe. What Nielsen is doing is not listing the station among other stations in the market. It's something they had always done before, so buyers of the book could see the whole market in an uncensored way.

 

[Groove1670]

If the stations want the benefit of "the book," they should pay for it. How is that in any way unfair?
I can understand why small market stations might not want to invest if they don't see a significant potential increase in their billing.
They shouldn't complain when the big agencies pass them by.

So you're saying we are the only option and you will buy? In many cases the ROI isn't there. I shouldn't be allowed to use the information, but if you are defacto standard, selected stations shouldn't be blacklisted. Suppose Saga has the #1 station in the market but the agency doesn't know that. That client is not getting their ROI from that agency.

If a second agency was considered in the buying decisions this wouldn't be a issue, but that is not the case.

Just curious, have you ever made financial decisions for small or medium market stations?

We will agree to disagree. One the great things I enjoy on about RadioDiscussions.

 

[Groove1670]

Ad agencies use commercial software like Strataview to make ad buys using data from Nielsen, plus ad rates from stations (that is a very simplified description, of course).

Yesterday, Nielsen announced that it would not allow Strataview to use the release data on non-subscribed stations. So agencies would have to do "paper transactions" to buy non-Nielsen stations and would have to request separate dayparts and rates from each station.

I predict some agencies will say, "The heck with it. Just don't buy radio" and be done with it.

I hear bagpipes. It must be a funeral.

In our case, it has never been a factor (as is with most rural & small markets). Life goes on. Will it be a issue if you have a station (or group) in a larger rated market if you don't subscribe. Will that force those non-subscribers to revaluate, or will the agency business that will (or could) be lost no be worth the subscription?

I would hear the take on this from a group like Townsend, Univision or Saga. Summit is now taking two books a year. Hasn't Cumulus pulled out of certain markets?

 

[TheBigA]

I would hear the take on this from a group like Townsend, Univision or Saga. Summit is now taking two books a year. Hasn't Cumulus pulled out of certain markets?

Summit agrees with you. Here's what they said:

http://www.insideradio.com/free/sum...cle_e58027e8-14fb-11eb-ae6e-6f685dbd6f09.html

“We just weren’t getting enough ROI back from the summer and winter survey periods,” Tanner explains. Michael Wright, COO at Midwest Communications, told Inside Radio in August that its agency business is declining while local direct is on the upswing at its 82 stations in small and medium markets.

 

[b-turner]

This is less of a radio issue as it is an advertising agency issue, if I am understanding this correctly. As advertising agencies strive to provide the most complete information to justify their actions to their clients, the advertising agency is having to dig further to gain an uncensored handle on each market where they buy. Advertising Agencies are among Nielsen's clients. If I was an advertising agency, I'd be yelling and screaming at Nielsen for not proving complete information without increasing my bottom line to uncover the unreported details.

 

[TheBigA]

If I was an advertising agency, I'd be yelling and screaming at Nielsen for not proving complete information without increasing my bottom line to uncover the unreported details.

If you were an advertising agency, you have thousands of ways to spend your clients' money. So sure, they'd love to know the complete picture, but they go with the way that appears to be easiest and get the most for their clients. Right now, the clients think digital is the way to go. Radio is always going to be a hard sell, and Nielsen is making it harder.

 

[b-turner]

My point is Nielsen's new policy means adavertising agencies are getting less than they pay for.

 

[TheBigA]

My point is Nielsen's new policy means adavertising agencies are getting less than they pay for.

You're right, but they don't know it.

 

[PTBoardOp94]

Right now, the clients think digital is the way to go. Radio is always going to be a hard sell, and Nielsen is making it harder.

I don't often see something BigA writes and feel compelled to state my agreement, but this is one of those times.

The agency buyers will keep using whatever methods they have been using. If the clients' results get worse, they will reduce their usage of radio. I doubt the buyers are paying close enough attention to know whether the Saga stations in Springfield, Mass. or the Townsquare cluster in Lafayette, La. are in the buy every time, so unless the associate at the ad agency responsible is familiar with this change, they won't even think to blame Nielsen.

 

[davideduardo]

My point is Nielsen's new policy means adavertising agencies are getting less than they pay for.

They pay very little... basically to cover costs... for the results. Agencies expect the media to pay for research.

 

[davideduardo]

A valuable service for who? IHeart, Cumulus? When you have groups like Saga and Townsquare dropping the service it is no longer a valuable service. When you block out non-subscribers it is no longer a valuable service.
However some won't be impacted: "The only exception will be for minority/ female owned companies with market billing below $7million, 501 C3 non-profits"

Agencies buy based on delivery. If they can buy a market based on the delivery of the ratings-subscribed stations, they are fine. OK, they don't buy the unlisted ones. But that does not affect the CPP for the ones that they can buy.

There is Eastlan. However, unless you want to pound your chest to local advertisers how good is it?

It's decent for smaller markets. Their systems for ethnic groups are improving, and that is the key to larger markets and ones with large ethnic populations.

Agencies? KATZ (I Heart) Places buys for over 4000 stations. Gen Media Partners gets the scraps and places buys with the remaining stations.

Katz is not an agency, it is a rep firm. It is the sales agent for stations in buying centers where each station can't have their own sellers.

 

[TheBigA]

I often read critics of Nielsen say they don't believe the numbers or any of the adjacent research Nielsen provides because they feel Nielsen is biased towards radio. This is an example where they are not. They are biased towards themselves.

 

[davideduardo]

I often read critics of Nielsen say they don't believe the numbers or any of the adjacent research Nielsen provides because they feel Nielsen is biased towards radio. This is an example where they are not. They are biased towards themselves.

The way that Arbitron drove Pulse and Hooper out of the market was to sell their service to agencies and media buyers. Once the buyers were predominantly Arbitron users, stations quit their Pulse and Hooper service contracts. Similarly, other services like Birch, Mediastat, Mediatrends, Audits & Surveys and the like focused on programmers and stations; as more stations became competitive in the 70's and revenue per station declined due to fragmentation, those services got cancelled.

So Arbitron focused on agencies. Stations had to buy them to sell effectively. Rep firms were mostly just Arbitron sellers, too.

Stations did not like the higher Arbitron prices. Similarly, they have never liked the high, high PPM prices. But that is what agencies want.

 

[TheBigA]

Stations did not like the higher Arbitron prices. Similarly, they have never liked the high, high PPM prices. But that is what agencies want.

Everything you're saying is why the Google was brought to court by the DOJ. Nielsen is using its monopoly in radio ratings to drive out competition, drive up prices and hurt non-subscribers.

 

[Groove1670]

Agencies buy based on delivery. If they can buy a market based on the delivery of the ratings-subscribed stations, they are fine. OK, they don't buy the unlisted ones. But that does not affect the CPP for the ones that they can buy.



It's decent for smaller markets. Their systems for ethnic groups are improving, and that is the key to larger markets and ones with large ethnic populations.



Katz is not an agency, it is a rep firm. It is the sales agent for stations in buying centers where each station can't have their own sellers.

I would go back and read the sentence again. It was agency with a question mark (generalization) before KATZ. Most agencies are not going to look at another ratings service other that Neilsen. I posted the question to an exec at brand B and he reluctantly agreed.

Spending 18k for a once a year survey is not going to help me in my small market.

 

[davideduardo]

I would go back and read the sentence again. It was agency with a question mark (generalization) before KATZ. Most agencies are not going to look at another ratings service other that Neilsen. I posted the question to an exec at brand B and he reluctantly agreed.

Spending 18k for a once a year survey is not going to help me in my small market.

I agree that the book does not contribute much in smaller markets.

When I was supervising WTNT and WNLS in Tallahassee, we subscribed. But on local sales we used the ratings later in the pitch when we had already pretty much closed. The ratings were used to demonstrate value and to explain why we had the highest rates but "the lowest cost" in the market.

Local merchants, from car dealers to dry cleaners, buy customers, not listeners. They want to get the word out to people who will come to their place of business. WTNT was (and is) a country station and selling it to a honky-tonk was easy; getting the downtown french cuisine restaurant near the capitol was a bit harder. Ratings do not sell a direct account; they reconfirm a good decision to an advertiser.

 

[Kelly A]

They want to get the word out to people who will come to their place of business. WTNT was (and is) a country station and selling it to a honky-tonk was easy; getting the downtown french cuisine restaurant near the capitol was a bit harder.

'Well con-sarnate Beatrice, these frogs legs have hardly any meat on em. Next time, let's go to Dairy Queen like I wanted.."

 

[CTListener]

'Well con-sarnate Beatrice, these frogs legs have hardly any meat on em. Next time, let's go to Dairy Queen like I wanted.."

Or forgo Chez Francois for Frank's Catfish Shack, which will probably have plump frog legs 'n' gravy on the menu, too. Francois and Frank may well be the same restaurateur, so be sure to include both in your quest for advertising!

 

[TheBigA]

RBR has done an analysis piece on this topic including interviews with owners:

https://www.rbr.com/extortion-or-product-protection-nielsen-subscriber-first-effort-fires-up-radio/

Interesting that they used the same word I used: extortion.