Are diehard listeners of this format TOO fickle?

[AC Tones]

Yep, there sure was, smart guy. And it was a well-programmed station back in the 80s until a few other smart guys got their hands on it and destroyed it as well.

WBMW was owned by Infinity going back to when they bought it some time before SJ was even a recognized format until 2000 when Infinity merged into CBS. During the entire period the company had the same management, headed by Mel Karmazin.

And your point is? My point was at one time (prior to corporate radio's obsession with acquisition, power, and greed), WBMW and other stations broadcasting "Easy Listening music for yuppies" in the 1980s and early 1990s were well-programmed. Peter Angelos still owns the Baltimore Orioles and owned them when they had very competitive teams and went to the playoffs in consecutive years in the mid-1990s. But guess what? They have STUNK ever since then, and have had 12 straight losing seasons. And you want to know why? Because Mr. Angelos has chosen to meddle with the franchise, let his HUGE ego get in the way, not stay in his lane, and not allow the "baseball" people to make "baseball" decisions. This is the perfect analogy, in my mind, for what happened to radio. Corporate suits decided it was more important to listen to other corporate suits who researched exactly what P&G execs wanted to hear on radio to sell it to the "target demographic." One big problem with that strategy. "History has proven" (I see you like those words) that you can't "buy" championships. It takes a good farm system, an infusion of younger talent, and management that knows when to stay in their lane and empowers people who know what they are doing to make sound decisions for the longterm health of the franchise. If Clear Channel ever decides it wants to get out of the Smooth Jazz business for good, my hope is they file an application to own a major league baseball franchise. My beloved Orioles may actually find a way to get out of the cellar for good.

 

[AC Tones]

BTW, could SOMEONE please post a new thread so we can have some sane discussion about this format again and rid ourselves of these Al Qaeda-like hijackers?

 

[mock3]

There is a section on Radio-Info to discuss the Business of radio. I'm also getting tired of reading posts on this Smooth Jazz section that have nothing to do with the format.

And I think we all agree that the consultants ruined the format when they tried to appeal to a wider audience. In attempting mass appeal, they lost those who loved the NAC format and never gained the masses who were already happy hearing those "mass appeal" songs on the pop/oldies stations. Now they have no one.

But with internet and satellite, no one can decide what music I should listen to. I'm in control--the way it should be.

I also think that the CBS News updates on the wav station are a good idea. It adds some extra "personality" to the station. Great idea! Although I will note that I'm more of a Fox News guy rather than CBS.

 

[davideduardo]

There is a section on Radio-Info to discuss the Business of radio. I'm also getting tired of reading posts on this Smooth Jazz section that have nothing to do with the format.

The whole issue and scenario for SJ in the last few years is related to the business aspect of radio. The format continued to have sizable audiences, but those audiences had aged more in lockstep with the passage of time. Unfortunately, there is just about no market at all for listeners over 55... and since we are talking about advertiser supported commercial radio, we have the essence of the issue. And that issue is 100% business related.

 

[davideduardo]

And your point is?

My point is that there was no ownership change, no change in management, no introduction of outside influences through the Infinity ownership period. Any changes were dictated by audience feedback, not by the owners.

Corporate suits decided it was more important to listen to other corporate suits who researched exactly what P&G execs wanted to hear on radio to sell it to the "target demographic."

I'm sorry that you have such a poor understanding of the business side of radio that you reach this kind of conclusion.

Advertisers like P&G and Coke and Toyota and the like commit an amount of advertising and marketing support to each brand, and provide that data plus a research profile of the target consumer to their agency. The agency may do additional consumer research, more focused on brand perceptions and the like. And then, after a campaign is designed, the media budget is divided by medium and allocated to each US market the campaign will extend to. TV network reach and even internet marketing nationally can be supplemented by local print, radio, spot TV, outdoor and such.

The client does not select radio stations or even look at the fomats. The agency picks stations that will meet price goals on audience delivery in the target ages the client's goods or services have been designed for and where a good ad ROI can be attained. Stations that will not meet rate demands are not bought, without even looking at the format (although some advertisers will specifically stay out of talk morning shows or talk radio stations due to concerns about the environment).

Stations in rated markets all over the US know that essentially all ad buys are against ages under 55, and so they develop formats that appeal to persons under 55. They do that because otherwise, there will not be a revenue potential that will pay expenses, let alone make a profit.

Oh, and if you check, professional sports is not about winning games. It is about pleasing the fans. Winning may help please them, but there are so many other factors involved. In the case of Baltimore, the rebuilt stadium, the rebirth of the downtown area and the wonderful restaurants is an element in the team's prosperity or lack of same... just as fielding a good team is.

 

[Bill Harmonic]

"The whole issue and scenario for SJ in the last few years is related to the business aspect of radio. The format continued to have sizable audiences, but those audiences had aged more in lockstep with the passage of time. Unfortunately, there is just about no market at all for listeners over 55... and since we are talking about advertiser supported commercial radio, we have the essence of the issue. And that issue is 100% business related."...DavidEduardo

I have to agree with Mr. Gleason 100% that the smooth jazz problem is business related especially when it applies to advertiser supported commerical radio on  terrestial signals. I also find it ironic that he now quotes Winston Churchill ("Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it") at the bottom of his posts because this is exactly why the format has gone away. He's part of the problem and not part of the solution. It isn't that he can't see the solution, he just can't see the problem and either he doesn't get it or he doesn't care. The format has declined because the research which has dominated the direction for the past decade or so simply would not allow for any other opinions that we needed to look for a younger audience. Mr. Gleason is a brilliant businessman and researcher but he's just like the people who drove the format where it is today. Passion and soul is not in their fiber and without that element, they're not getting the entire view and this applies to any format. But everyone is not seeing the larger picture here. Terrestial radio has bigger problems so quit wasting your time trying to get this dead horse up and walking on this delivery system. Here are some interesting points from people far smarter than myself:

“In 2010, you have to try new things, take some risks, explore music and maintain the brand in novel ways.” … Jacobs Media

"The the goal, of any organization, of any brand is to create customers (listeners) and you accomplish that by continually innovating to add value to their lives.” … Tom Asker/Marketer, Writer, Blogger at A Clear Eye
 
“The future will be more about highly targeted content than what appeals to the masses. Narrow you focus and program to people who are highly passionate.” …Alan Furst’s Program Director Blog

"Radio law is meant to be studied and then consciously broken. It’s that combination of creativity and grounding-in-the-basics that allows and encourages a programmer to do something else when appropriate." … Sean Ross/Edison Media Research, Radio-Info.Com

“The future doesn’t fit in the containers of the past.” ...Rishad Tobaccowla/CEO of the Denuo Group (Ad Agency)

“Nothing happens when you do nothing.” …Dan Halyburton/President of RadioTime

“Stop trying to get better. Start getting different. Stop tweaking the numerator. Change the denominator." …Count Basie/ Musician, Bandleader, Composer

The future of this sound depends on the next level of programmers and researchers finding the balance that will sell contemporay instrumental music to a new audience that will embrace and appreciate it. David is very good but he only tells us where we've been and what has been done to this point. Everyone knows that already. I'm listening to the people who are trying to tell us where to go and how they want to go there. I may agree or not agree but at least they are trying to work toward a successful future. I'm waiting for some to join that conversation about what's coming up and how we do that instead of supporting and retelling us how we got here and how great that is. I believe that everything changes and everything ends. Smooth jazz on terrestial radio may have come to an end. It may have an expired shelf life but that does not mean it's out for the count. I don't want to go where the path may lead. I'm going instead where there is no path and trying to leave a trail. I may or may not make it but at least I'm trying and that is what makes this the good fight. I'm more interested in hearing from people on where they think this format should go and not what it looks like in the rearview mirror.

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." ...George Bernard Shaw

 

[mock3]

The format continued to have sizable audiences, but those audiences had aged more in lockstep with the passage of time.

The audiences of the radio format aged because the music played was aged. Of course your audience will age if you become a Motown station and constantly play Patti Labelle, Marvin Gaye, Chaka Khan, etc.

Young listeners, and I am one of them so I speak from experience, usually listen to newer music. People 25-54 enjoy Praful, Nils, Zero 7, Alkemix, Ken Navarro, Acoustic Alchemy, etc. We don't sit through Young Holt Unlimited and we don't sit through Stevie Wonder or Aretha Franklin. Those artists are from before our time or when we were young kids and the music has not aged well. But instead of playing new and hip music, the radio stations played the same 30 year old oldies and then wondered why their audiences aged.

 

[AC Tones]

Points all well-taken, Bill. I don't dispute Mr. Gleason is a brilliant businessman, but that doesn't mean he is in touch with the diehard passionate listeners of this brand of music, and that has been my point since day one.

My desire to try to market my stream to terrestrial radio stations FOR FREE is predicated solely on my desire to share it with as many like-minded passionate listeners as I can. Sure, I have GLOBAL reach on the Internet. But I have read comments from listeners on this board (mostly older ones), and have received similar comments privately by e-mail that they lament the fact that my stream is not broadcasted over a terrestrial signal because they do not have a broadband connection at home and cannot afford to pay for a mobile one. These are the folks I want to reach out to and embrace. This is not to say I want to ignore the younger audience. Quite the contrary. You know that one of my most consistent messages on this board has been to try to find ways to cultivate a younger audience and capitalize on the surge of new music from talented young artists. That said, I know that my older listeners are some of the most passionate and loyal that I have (and generous as well, as far as donations), and they know a heck of a lot about the artists and have a true appreciation for the roots of this music. I feel it is my duty to consider their desires and interests (since radio has ignored them for decades), and it troubles me I am reaching less and less of them now since I decided to go 128 kbps full time last week.

Chris

 

[davideduardo]

I have to agree with Mr. Gleason 100% that the smooth jazz problem is business related especially when it applies to advertiser supported commerical radio on terrestial signals. I also find it ironic that he now quotes Winston Churchill ("Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it") at the bottom of his posts because this is exactly why the format has gone away.

The reason why the format has seen considerable attrition is that it has difficulty in attracting under-55 listeners, and is thus not able to capture the revenues that it once did.

The reasons for this can be any of these....
-- Declining appeal everywhere of instrumentals.
-- Lack of new music that appeals to newer and older listeners (look at the disasters caused by adding Chill)
-- Lack of an early recognition of the need to "feed the format" with more new artists or songs.
-- Lack of promotion of the format after consolidation ("it's alone in the format so it does not need promotion.")
-- Scaling back of live hosts, promotions, contests due to the economy (no station or format is immune to this).

Whatever the reason or combination of reasons, right now as a terrestrial radio format, SJ has difficulties that are severe. It's usually a simpler solution to change format than to try to reinvent a declining or difficult one, and in bad economic times, it's and even easier decision.

He's part of the problem and not part of the solution. It isn't that he can't see the solution, he just can't see the problem and either he doesn't get it or he doesn't care. The format has declined because the research which has dominated the direction for the past decade or so simply would not allow for any other opinions that we needed to look for a younger audience.

That's a mistaken view on research. One of the things a good music test will do is bring in users of radio who are lighter users of your station, but who don't reject it. Thus you get people who might use a SJ station more. What station's don't do is just research their own core, particularly portions of the core that are "undesirable" such as older demos. What this means is that a "good" test will include those younger side listeners and potential listeners. And the same goes for perceptual research, too.

Mr. Gleason is a brilliant businessman and researcher but he's just like the people who drove the format where it is today. Passion and soul is not in their fiber and without that element, they're not getting the entire view and this applies to any format.

Actually, I am principally a programmer who uses research as a tool. And since radio is a business, every one of us in radio needs to be a business person, aware of the need to please advertisers as well as listeners. And any new technology / new media extensions of our brands will have to meet this same criteria.

Terrestial radio has bigger problems so quit wasting your time trying to get this dead horse up and walking on this delivery system.

If this is your view, feel free to produce no-revenue web streams or derivitives. Those alternatives are not options to radio companies, so there is no point of comparison... and you can not expect radio stations to change their model as there is no viable alternative at present.

Here are some interesting points from people far smarter than myself:

None of those things or concepts is anything any significant terrestrial station is not trying to do today. The constraints of the economy are the biggest constraints on faster change where change is appropriate, not the mentality of the good managers and programmers in radio.

 

[AC Tones]

OT, but I figured why not hijack my own thread since others feel the need to do it themselves?

Baltimore's "former" WSMJ 104.3FM just flipped AGAIN, less than 18 months after they ditched Smooth Jazz. Not the least bit surprised. The station was garbage. Yet more brilliant research and consulting undertaken by Clear Channel. WSMJ was an OK Smooth Jazz station when it was locally programmed before BA got their hands on it and made it unlistenable, but at least they lasted close to 4 years on the air ;D

http://www.radio-info.com/sections/...ores-wchh-flips-from-modern-rock-to-chr-z1043

 

[darksoldier]

The smooth jazz terrestrial horse has left the barn. Terrestrial requires too much revenue to have a TRADITIONAL approach to radio revenue success. Couple that with the weak economy, and many radio companies lack of movement to a new or changed approach (they move like Carriers....not battleships), and where they put the profits they do make, I believe the genre is pretty much done on traditional radio....for the near future.

Smooth Jazz is a LIFESTYLE...not just a format. Success requires it to become a living, breathing entity with an almost familial support system. Without promotion and events...(Hey we are all getting together at grandma Gerts house for hoopla....spread the word! ...Thanks Coach Romeo), the genre cannot cover its nut at most broadcasting outlets.

Well, "Who Moved My Cheese?" (Great book). The answer is SPOT SALES IS NOT WHERE YOU MAKE THE NUT if you are in a "non saleable" demographical format. I won't argue the saleability of the format because it has the value the buyer perceives it to have. (Keep in mind that agency folk tend to be about 25-40 years old, and you tend to think your age bracket is the most viable.) The cheese has been moved and the rat who endeavors to find it will eat. The rat who sits in the corner and simply ponders the question will FLIP FORMAT.

If in fact Smooth Jazz is a lifestyle in as much as a format, then you have to make the nut by providing the lifestyle that accompanies the format. Thus, the station is just a big marketing tool for what you REALLY sell. ISSUE....That calls for investment outside the traditional, the acquisition and retention of PASSIONATE VALUE CREATORS not VALUE MANAGERS. It means that the GM is just an accountant/business manager....the talent is your livestyle host, and your promotions/NTR person is your nutcracker. Yes, I listed them bottom to top. If in the traditional broadcasting world the GM is the Kingfish (making some ungodly figure) and is really a fairly insignificant wart on the azz of the operation when you talk the lifesyle business, you have no lifestyle hosts in the building or in the street, and you have no one creating a lifestyle draw in terms of events with corporate, "lifestyle-ee", and lifestyle wannabe participation, then you have a FAILURE.

You HAVE to make it SEXY! Jay Z said it best... "Young enough to buy the right car, but old enough not to put rims on it." That's what I think smooth jazz is when done properly. There are plenty of hot, hip, up tempo, even danceable cuts that can be integrated or exist within the genre (right car)....without the mindless verbiage...(22's)


That's my rant for the day! ;D

 

[davideduardo]

I won't argue the saleability of the format because it has the value the buyer perceives it to have. (Keep in mind that agency folk tend to be about 25-40 years old, and you tend to think your age bracket is the most viable.)

Agency time buyers don't determine the demographics of a buy. The client more often than not does, or the client determines that with the higher brass of the agency based on marketing factors. Buyers are given a target age spread, a budget and a cost per point for each market and they buy the stations that fit the goals. And they are audited as to fulfilling the goals.

The folks at the decision making level are generally well over 40, and many are well over 55. They aren't working based on personal factors, but, instead, based on the segment of the population the client's offering appeals to most and where advertising will create usage.

Changing the functions of staff members at a station will not create a change in the fact that you can't get a media buyer at an agency to buy outside the demo the client specified.

 

[darksoldier]

I won't argue the saleability of the format because it has the value the buyer perceives it to have. (Keep in mind that agency folk tend to be about 25-40 years old, and you tend to think your age bracket is the most viable.)

Agency time buyers don't determine the demographics of a buy. The client more often than not does, or the client determines that with the higher brass of the agency based on marketing factors. Buyers are given a target age spread, a budget and a cost per point for each market and they buy the stations that fit the goals. And they are audited as to fulfilling the goals.

The folks at the decision making level are generally well over 40, and many are well over 55. They aren't working based on personal factors, but, instead, based on the segment of the population the client's offering appeals to most and where advertising will create usage.


Changing the functions of staff members at a station will not create a change in the fact that you can't get a media buyer at an agency to buy outside the demo the client specified.

Agreed ...more often than not regarding who makes determinations on the demo of a buy, and the Value managers may well be 100, and great job of finding one line to make a fairly clear correction on ..... "changing the function" of staff members was not suggested...the value of them was opined, and how an agency is graded was not a major point of interest in the post.

The point was how to make the format work, and an opinion as to why it doesn't on terrestrial radio....So now that you have corrected an error....how about something constructive?

 

[davideduardo]

Agreed ...more often than not regarding who makes determinations on the demo of a buy,

I have never seen a case where a media buyer at a "real" agency could change the demo specs of a buy.

and the Value managers may well be 100,

What's a "Value manager?" The prior post said agency staff was 25-40, which is, of course, not true.

"changing the function" of staff members was not suggested...

Stating that the authority model of the manager is not appropriate in and of itself suggests changing or redoing the structure of a radio station.

and how an agency is graded was not a major point of interest in the post.

I did not suggest grading agencies... generally, though, the metric is gross billing.

how about something constructive?

I have no suggestion on how to make an older leaning format appeal to yonger demos without suggesting that the format be totally modified, which I think is what the folks like the Smooth Jazz Network are trying to do.

 

[Bill Harmonic]

David...

It would be very refreshing and a unique change of pace to hear where you think the smooth jazz format is heading and how it can get there. The only thing you do is to refute anything said on this board by anyone and that has gotten very, very old. But if you look closely everyone can see by what you've written where your alligence stands and the direction you would favor:

From "The Future of Smooth Jazz Radio" on October 12th...

“Of course, the real issue is that the format has had demographic issues. BA, the same company that invented the format and propagated it, has tried to keep the format under-55. Yet instead of congratulating them for trying, this group throws stones because it does not understand that a 55+ format can not be sustained... at least someone, BA, and Mr. Kepler specifically, is trying to keep the format alive. Were people like you to be listened to, the format would be totally gone already.”

From "Are diehard listeners of this format TOO fickle?" on November 5th...

“I have no suggestion on how to make an older leaning format appeal to yonger demos without suggesting that the format be totally modified, which I think is what the folks like the Smooth Jazz Network are trying to do.”

Something you can't refute is that a lot of people do not agree with your assessment of the situation so how does that BA Kool-Aid taste? Wait for it...the snarky and snappy point-by-point comback is on its way!

 

[AC Tones]

First of all, a big "Welcome back!" to darksoldier. We missed you around here, brother. I realize it seems very difficult to have any sort of civil or sane discussion these days on this board, but I can tell you it's great to have you back.

Second, it's also great to see another longtime "quality" poster (Bill Harmonic) also contribute again. PLEASE don't be a stranger, Bill. Your opinions are always refreshing and welcomed here.

Last of all, while Bill rightly noted that Mr. Eduardo has made his opinions very apparent on both threads Bill referenced, he was eerily silent on the one I started entitled "Wow, I guess there is potential for this format... Would you like to know why? Because the very format Mr. Eduardo has been doggishly stating for months on this board has NO future and grew "old" with its listeners seemingly OVERNIGHT has promise with the younger demo because Mr. Allen Kepler said so in a memo to his affiliates who have serve as the unfortunate brokers of his garbage product. Mr. Eduardo's "expert" opinions have been contradicted by the very man he has chosen to align himself with.

Any reasonable person can deduce from these exchanges that "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one." (Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan) So David, please respect the needs of the many, and take Mr. Kepler and yourself on a long all-expenses paid trip into retirement with those P&G advertising dollars you have collected over the years and leave the future of Smooth Jazz radio to the regular posters on this board (passionate, forward-thinking programmers and educated listeners). We have things under control, and do not need to retain your "expert" consulting services. In fact, if I had the money, I'd pay you just to leave.

 

[davideduardo]

Something you can't refute is that a lot of people do not agree with your assessment of the situation so how does that BA Kool-Aid taste? Wait for it...the snarky and snappy point-by-point comback is on its way!

For absolute snarky-ness, your response and that of AC Tones is more than adequate. The both of you love to talk about the uncivil discourse on this board, yet were you to review my posts you would see that my only intent has been to demonstrate two things. 1. That formats with significant over-55 listneing can not make money in terrestrial radio or in any ad supoorted medium. 2. The folkks who have invested their careers and lives in Smooth Jazz, such as the staff of BA, is only trying to find a way to make the format appealing to a younger demo.

What I get in response are people who believe media buyers determine the demos of ad buys, people who insult the BA staff that only wants to keep the format vable, and people who can't avoid taking ad hominem pot shots at me for being the bearer of a message that, while true, you don't want to hear.

 

[JoshB]

Something you can't refute is that a lot of people do not agree with your assessment of the situation so how does that BA Kool-Aid taste? Wait for it...the snarky and snappy point-by-point comback is on its way!

For absolute snarky-ness, your response and that of AC Tones is more than adequate. The both of you love to talk about the uncivil discourse on this board, yet were you to review my posts you would see that my only intent has been to demonstrate two things. 1. That formats with significant over-55 listneing can not make money in terrestrial radio or in any ad supoorted medium. 2. The folkks who have invested their careers and lives in Smooth Jazz, such as the staff of BA, is only trying to find a way to make the format appealing to a younger demo.

What I get in response are people who believe media buyers determine the demos of ad buys, people who insult the BA staff that only wants to keep the format vable, and people who can't avoid taking ad hominem pot shots at me for being the bearer of a message that, while true, you don't want to hear.

AC, I'm going to have to apologize for helping high-jack your thread, but I've gotta respond to this one, lol. Mr. Eduardo, how do you come that conclusion, that BA is trying to attract a younger demo? I'm being serious, I'm just curious. If anything, they seem to be doing the opposite. How does playing, the same old smooth jazz tunes, along with a couple of motown and R&B songs, would attract a younger demo? I take it you are a professional in the industry, judging from your responses. It seems that hip-hop and top-40 stations (which attract a younger demo) although repetitive in nature to some extent (especially the last few years), usually come out with newer music every few months, to keep attracting listeners. So why not do the same from SJ? Why keep playing the same thing over and over again, along with the oldies. I know they occasionally add new tracks, but not often. I disagree that younger people don't general like instrumentals. Electronica and techno are very popular with young people, although it may not be marketable to be "mainstream", why not incorporate some of this into SJ, just enough, so you don't draw too many folks away. Artist like Aya and Zero 7, would be good example. I think AC's station "the .wav" does a perfect job of this. He mixes them enough so they blend in perfectly with some of the other SJ tracks. He also plays a lot of new SJ artist, to keep people coming back. I don't see how you can sit here and say that BA is trying to attract a younger demo, by playing the same old artist along R&B oldies, and be trying attract younger listeners. It seems like they are contradicting themselves, if you ask me.

 

[Bill Harmonic]

Something you can't refute is that a lot of people do not agree with your assessment of the situation so how does that BA Kool-Aid taste? Wait for it...the snarky and snappy point-by-point comback is on its way!

For absolute snarky-ness, your response and that of AC Tones is more than adequate. The both of you love to talk about the uncivil discourse on this board, yet were you to review my posts you would see that my only intent has been to demonstrate two things. 1. That formats with significant over-55 listneing can not make money in terrestrial radio or in any ad supoorted medium. 2. The folkks who have invested their careers and lives in Smooth Jazz, such as the staff of BA, is only trying to find a way to make the format appealing to a younger demo.

What I get in response are people who believe media buyers determine the demos of ad buys, people who insult the BA staff that only wants to keep the format vable, and people who can't avoid taking ad hominem pot shots at me for being the bearer of a message that, while true, you don't want to hear.

David...

Don't be so touchy. You can dish it out but you can't take it? Maybe it's not what you say but how you say it. Look, I don't think there is a person who reads this board or writes on it, will dispute the fact you have stated that the biggest problem with the format is the 55+ demos. It's the elephant and the 800 pound gorilla in the room together. I agree totally but what I want to see is how the problem is being addressed. If it's not, then for the most part smooth jazz will leave terrestial radio and that migration is well underway with the internet (among others) as the leading choice of destination. But there are a lot of people who have also invested their careers, along with the folks at BA, into this format. What I challenge is that the dominant force in the format for the last couple of decades (BA), who added greatly to the progression of the music and this platform, also has driven the bus off the cliff because they developed their plan, sold the plan, made tons of money off the plan and then failed to see the changes that were needed to keep the goose laying the golden eggs. I have always given BA their props but there are other opinions and directions. Those need to be looked at seriously because the system is broken and it's need to be fixed. I have taken you Winston Churchill quote ("Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it") and ran with it. I have seen the history and been a part of it as well and if we do what we've always done, we'll get what we've always got. BA has an opportunity (like everyone else) to lead once again but it will take a radical change toward winning back and serving the primary listeners of this format who left their stations in huge numbers or who have gotten older and don't count in the troubled world of terrestial radio today. We've heard the message and know it by heart. We don't need to keep rehashing the old message. We know how we got here, but I want to know where we are going. If your not part of the solution, then you part of the problem and if you can't see the problem then you've failed to learn from history. We're not all stupid. Please do not mistake passion for ignorance. I recognize your contributions to the business and that's why I keep asking for you to step up and give us your two cents worth. If you defer to BA, I understand. See, I come from the background that all ideas are welcomed. Some may be great while others may not make the cut, but I want everyone to have their say because you never know what you might come out of that give and take. I've always believed that was the purpose of this board. I would love to see what you think the direction of smooth jazz could be and if all you can do is criticize and lecture on how it's been done in the past, then I guess you work is done here. Thank you very much for your contributions and I'm looking forward to what you can add.

 

[AC Tones]

Bill beat me to the punch. I can't speak for you guys. I'm "old", but not THAT "old" ;D But early on in grade school, success was measured based on both your "effort" and "achievement." I am NOT saying BA is not receiving "checks" or "check-pluses" for effort, but their "achievement" marks are not at all up to par. What frustrates myself, Bill, and others on this board is that BA has the resources, the reach, and "the history" to affect positive change with this format. But despite their best efforts, they are just not making the grade, and not open to constructive criticism. It is that simple, and that fact is not in dispute.