Are diehard listeners of this format TOO fickle?

[AC Tones]

OK, gang. Time for me to vent, yet again, but not in the way those who REALLY know me on and off this board would think. And let me say up front to my friends here that you always will be my friends, regardless of our differences of opinion.

I have got to tell you, I have only been on this side of radio (station operator/programmer) for 16 months, but frankly, I don't know how some of you guys have survived doing this for 20+ years or more in the industry. Maybe it is ALL about passion and determination, because if I had none I would gave given up this hobby a long time ago and gone back to online gaming to pass away my time...LOL But seriously guys, I have to ask the question, is it possible that this format's hardcore listeners ask programmers to do the impossible (hit a home run with EVERY song or format tweak)?

As my regular listeners know, within the past week or so, I have taken a few shots down the field (football analogy), as it were, i.e., an innovative, out of the box approach to this format by injecting some change of pace vocal cuts that you have not and probably won't ever hear played on a typical Smooth Jazz station (some long-lost, under-appreciated AOR, Quiet Storm, AAA, and Pop cuts). But with very few exceptions (which I have already been crushed for), most of the new vocals I have added were VASTLY underplayed and I think represent a refreshing change of pace to an instrumental-heavy format that I think DESPERATELY needs it. I did expect a little blowback, but I have been surprised as to just how fervent it has been. In the past week alone, I have been flamed for adding a reputable national news service (The CBS' World News Roundup) to my M-F programming, which mind you, airs only TWICE daily at 11:00AM and Midnight Eastern (late edition) for 7 minutes. All I was really trying to do was give the station a more polished, professional sound, and keep who I already assume to be sophisticated listeners informed (I figured most would care about what's going on in the world, and wouldn't mind a little bit of news). Sure, I know you guys listen to me on your laptops and Iphones, and don't come to “The .wav” for news. But come on, gang. Haven't we gone a little too far with this Slacker and Ipod stuff? The addition of CBS syndicated news feeds was as much about injecting a change of pace to the, dare I say, monotony, as it was to add to the professionalism of the station. I am a throwback in every since of the word, and even though I am only 41, I have an appreciation for what radio ONCE was for me as a kid—a source for feel good music and information. When did listeners' definition of “ideal” radio become exclusively a human-less delivered, glorified, on-demand, overgrown Ipod, or at the other side of the radio spectrum, a nonstop news/sports talk show soapbox derby for overpaid syndicated blowhards with opinions?? What happened to the listeners' desire for balance? Is there anything wrong with spinning great music but spending just a couple minutes to keep folks “orally” informed about what is going on in the world and their communities? Why can't we have good programming and still have an ability to connect with our listeners on a personal level?

For the first time since I found this board, I am going to do something that I thought was once unthinkable for me: pat myself on the back. I have seen plenty of egos come and go on this board over the past year, and much to my chagrin, PERSIST beyond all belief or comprehension, and ignore the opinions of the uneducated “outsiders” and mavericks. But IMO, I think my programming is some of the best that this format has seen in some time, and those who listen to me for 10-12+ hours a day (not all of whom are who some believe are radio-info sycophants) have validated this for me. I believe my programming has always been innovative, and I am one of the best contemporary jazz streams either NO ONE knows about, NO ONE wants to acknowledge even exists because of their own ego or professional jealousy (because they know where to find me), or because they have been fed a garbage product for so long all they do is look at this format purely as background music and do not consider it a listening experience or lifestyle, like it should be. The fact is, I run a 24/7 operation from the basement of my modest split-level home without the luxury of professional studio equipment/infrastructure, or spending ONE DAY in the business. I wear the hats of station manager, music director, program director, prodcution manager, sales and marketing manager, blah blah blah. I have had professional imaging done, my cross-fade settings are tight, and my playlist is 3700 cuts strong. And yet, I still get flamed for trying to my best to inject some well needed life into this format WHILE taking on the giants of corporate radio. I can say with a great degree of confidence that if I had even 1/10 the resources of a terrestrial radio station like KTWV, I could sell this product to be profitable in numerous markets, despite what the pundits may say. I am that confident in my own abilities. But I have to admit, I thought I had the answers for this format long ago, gang, but I don't. I've tried. I'm exhausted. But one thing I can take from this whole experience is that the guys who criticize me the most are guys who I now consider lifetime friends that I never would have had the pleasure of getting to know had I not decided to launch this venture. And while we may have our differences of opinion, I respect these guys knowledge and taste in music FAR more than some of the industry and so-called “in the know” blowhards who regularly post on this board. If you guys could only take a moment to see how just how arrogant and out of touch you are with your listeners, maybe my job would have been a little easier. But you guys have made listeners so cynical, critical, and sour that they would rather listen to their Ipods or queue up Slacker. How sad is that? That's not radio, guys, not even close!!

This is not a shameless self-promotion, a sympathy plea, or a plea for donations. I know some of my longtime Radio-info nemeses/detractors will accuse me of such (and you know exactly who you are), but my station has always been a reflection of my passion, determination, and about giving new hope to a genre that has a terminal form of radio cancer, whether we want to admit to it or not. If I get bounced from this board or lose my reporter status, so be it. I do this purely for the intrinsic value of knowing that there are guys out there who listen to me 10-12 hours a day, and would genuinely miss my stream if I decide one day to pull the plug on it. But sometimes I wonder if it is worth the effort of being a 24/7 one-man show when the Smooth Jazz ship has taken on WAY TOO MUCH water because the chosen ones of corporate radio steered it right into an iceberg.

Chris

 

[davideduardo]

But IMO, I think my programming is some of the best that this format has seen in some time, and those who listen to me for 10-12+ hours a day (not all of whom are who some believe are radio-info sycophants) have validated this for me. I believe my programming has always been innovative, and I am one of the best contemporary jazz streams either NO ONE knows about, NO ONE wants to acknowledge even exists because of their own ego or professional jealousy (because they know where to find me), or because they have been fed a garbage product for so long all they do is look at this format purely as background music and do not consider it a listening experience or lifestyle, like it should be.

Programming is a subjective subject, an intangible, and a matter of taste. You think your programming is great. Give yourself a pat on the back. Oh, I forgot... you just did, while dismissing the many hard working people in the industry who disagree with you.

I can say with a great degree of confidence that if I had even 1/10 the resources of a terrestrial radio station like KTWV, I could sell this product to be profitable in numerous markets, despite what the pundits may say.

The reason the format has run into issues most places is that the music itself, whoever's blend you look at, is now appealing to mostly those over 55. You could have half of the over-55's in any market, and you could not make money. There is no money out there for that age group.

... I respect these guys knowledge and taste in music FAR more than some of the industry and so-called “in the know” blowhards who regularly post on this board. If you guys could only take a moment to see how just how arrogant and out of touch you are with your listeners, maybe my job would have been a little easier.

Programmers in the larger markets are likely more in touch than you could ever hope to be... they regularly consult with listeners about every song they play and about the presentation and image of their formats.

... but my station has always been a reflection of my passion, determination,

In other words, you think that because you like it everyone else should. That's just plain arrogant.

the Smooth Jazz ship has taken on WAY TOO MUCH water because the chosen ones of corporate radio steered it right into an iceberg.

Yeah, we did that with oldies, beautiful music, MOR, standards, etc. The iceberg is called "unsalable demos."

 

[armandoiazz]

Chris, you do a heck of a job with the format. Smooth Jazz/NAC was advertised as a "unique" format. Yet it morphed into soft R & B oldies and the same limited play list of instrumentals.

At least in the DC Metro Area, the 55 and over crowd is affluent and contrary to what a lot of so called industry professionals might believe; they are not trolling the pet food isles of Giant looking for dinner. As a result, you have what I define as the forgotten demographic. A whole bunch of folks who can't turn to anything on terrestrial radio! And what does terrestrial radio do; they all compete for the same limited demographic with the same limited number of formats.

Look at what happened to TV. The networks wouldn't run certain programming as it wouldn't appeal to the correct demographic. Well let me see there are so many cable stations out there catering to demographics that the networks wouldn't touch.

Just as the networks didn't see the light with TV; the same is true with radio. The internet will be the home of the format and just as the networks started their own cable channels they are doing the same thing with internet radio. Just look at what CBS has done with Smooth Jazz. IMHO, I think their internet programming is far better than what they programmed on terrestrial radio.

There is an affluent 55+ plus demographic out there and the experts are missing the boat.

 

[recto101]

Chris, you do a heck of a job with the format. Smooth Jazz/NAC was advertised as a "unique" format. Yet it morphed into soft R & B oldies and the same limited play list of instrumentals.

At least in the DC Metro Area, the 55 and over crowd is affluent and contrary to what a lot of so called industry professionals might believe; they are not trolling the pet food isles of Giant looking for dinner. As a result, you have what I define as the forgotten demographic. A whole bunch of folks who can't turn to anything on terrestrial radio! And what does terrestrial radio do; they all compete for the same limited demographic with the same limited number of formats.

Look at what happened to TV. The networks wouldn't run certain programming as it wouldn't appeal to the correct demographic. Well let me see there are so many cable stations out there catering to demographics that the networks wouldn't touch.

Just as the networks didn't see the light with TV; the same is true with radio. The internet will be the home of the format and just as the networks started their own cable channels they are doing the same thing with internet radio. Just look at what CBS has done with Smooth Jazz. IMHO, I think their internet programming is far better than what they programmed on terrestrial radio.

There is an affluent 55+ plus demographic out there and the experts are missing the boat.

Look at TLC on Cable it once had documentaries like National Geographic Channel/ Discovery/ Travel Channel/ Science Channel and History channel before it morphed into like MTV, VH1 and E today.

 

[salemjedi54]

Chris,
I applaude you for your vision. You truly are "thinking outside the box". Don't worry about the folks who DON'T like The .wav. Worry about make sure the folks who support you are getting entertained. Vocals don't bother me. I like the addition of Steely Dan, Michael Franks, Sarah Vaughn and folks of the genre. Just do what you feel is best.

 

[davideduardo]

At least in the DC Metro Area, the 55 and over crowd is affluent and contrary to what a lot of so called industry professionals might believe; they are not trolling the pet food isles of Giant looking for dinner. As a result, you have what I define as the forgotten demographic. A whole bunch of folks who can't turn to anything on terrestrial radio! And what does terrestrial radio do; they all compete for the same limited demographic with the same limited number of formats.

There is an affluent 55+ plus demographic out there and the experts are missing the boat.

It's not radio that ignores 55+. Radio would be pleased to have broader demos to appeal to.

Advertisers do not want to advertise to 55+ on radio, and they instruct their ad agencies to buy the demographics they want. This is about return on investment, not affluence. Older consumers take a lot more convincing to try different products, and that means more ads... so many, that the ad cost is greater than the profit on the sales generated. And that's why you have no commercial stations going for 55+... no advertisers want it.

 

[Interstate 78]

AC - The station sounds fine to me. Your original goal I believe was to sound like Jones, but even better, and so far, you've more than surpassed that. Heck, even Jones, whom everyone here praised up and down, added some of those vocals you just mentioned. Vocals can work with this format, but they just have to be the right ones! My only gripe with smooth jazz is why are they playing Whitney Houston when Michael Franks has a huge collection of tunes. That's just one example. Play vocals. But just play the right ones. You're playing the right ones. If it's not too personal of a question, how are your ratings? Your hit count? Whatever method you use to gauge listenership? If it's steady or going up you're fine. I have a feeling most of your irate complainers may just be us folks here on this message board.

 

[sjs1959]

At least in the DC Metro Area, the 55 and over crowd is affluent and contrary to what a lot of so called industry professionals might believe; they are not trolling the pet food isles of Giant looking for dinner. As a result, you have what I define as the forgotten demographic. A whole bunch of folks who can't turn to anything on terrestrial radio! And what does terrestrial radio do; they all compete for the same limited demographic with the same limited number of formats.

There is an affluent 55+ plus demographic out there and the experts are missing the boat.

It's not radio that ignores 55+. Radio would be pleased to have broader demos to appeal to.

Advertisers do not want to advertise to 55+ on radio, and they instruct their ad agencies to buy the demographics they want. This is about return on investment, not affluence. Older consumers take a lot more convincing to try different products, and that means more ads... so many, that the ad cost is greater than the profit on the sales generated. And that's why you have no commercial stations going for 55+... no advertisers want it.

I love AC's mix and listen frequently, but David hits the nail on the head. Ads do not work as well on older, more experienced consumers, so advertisers don't want to spend money on that demo. And if they don't want to buy the demo, then how can you sell it?

The Internet is where we will have to go for this format for the foreseeable future. Fortunately, that's where the .wav comes in for us!

 

[AC Tones]

Thanks for the nice comments, gang. I do concede that generating a significant amount of advertising revenue for the 55+ crowd is not in the cards. But that doesn't mean they won't listen or be loyal. Fortunately, I do not have the massive overhead that terrestrial outlets have, so I don't even have to waste my money or effort on even going after the target demo. I can play what I want, and I cannot think of a more ideal way to share my passion with everyone than from the comfort of my own home. But as armando noted, there are certain markets with a higher percentage of what I call "sophisticated" listeners that may get you some local advertising dollars (theaters, upscale restaurants and clubs, etc.). And I still contend this format is very survivable in smaller and medium-sized markets in resort areas and those with a higher percentage of retirees. And with super-talented young artists emerging with their own unique sound, I do believe this affords us an opportunity to go after a younger audience. We just have to be smarter about it than we have been in the past.

I-78, in response to your original question, let's just say I am far from being Arbitron-rated at this point But I do report my weekly spins to the Groove Jazz Top 30 Internet chart, and was recently asked to provide my "Programmer Picks" of some of the best new stuff I have heard, so I am getting there. In the acoustic guitar-spirit of Peter White, I am taking "Baby Steps." You can check out my submission at www.groovejazzmusic.com. Just click on the "Internet" button at the top of the page.

Taking a lot of shots with the vocals, guys. So have patience. In fact, I heard one that I added today play about an hour ago that was WAY too fast and hard for what I am trying to do. So while I want push the envelope on the change of pace cuts, I know when I have gone too far.

Thanks again for the support!

Chris

 

[JoshB]

At least in the DC Metro Area, the 55 and over crowd is affluent and contrary to what a lot of so called industry professionals might believe; they are not trolling the pet food isles of Giant looking for dinner.  As a result, you have what I define as the forgotten demographic.  A whole bunch of folks who can't turn to anything on terrestrial radio!  And what does terrestrial radio do; they all compete for the same limited demographic with the same limited number of formats. 

There is an affluent 55+ plus demographic out there and the experts are missing the boat.

It's not radio that ignores 55+. Radio would be pleased to have broader demos to appeal to.

Advertisers do not want to advertise to 55+ on radio, and they instruct their ad agencies to buy the demographics they want. This is about return on investment, not affluence. Older consumers take a lot more convincing to try different products, and that means more ads... so many, that the ad cost is greater than the profit on the sales generated. And that's why you have no commercial stations going for 55+... no advertisers want it.

According to the so called experts, I should be listening to rap and watching BET, which I don't like either of.  I'm so tired of being put in a box by the so called "experts" in the industry.  I'm in my mid-20s and I along with a good number of people in my age range love the genre.  It's not just listened to by the older (no offense to anyone in this range) crowd.  Why don't these so called geniuses actually go to the concerts and see for themselves.  Heck, you don't even have to go that far, why not go to facebook, add Sky Smooth Jazz (sky.fm facebook page) as a friend and come back and tell me if the majority of 2800+ people look like they are over 55+ ?  :

Chris, you are doing an excellent job with the station.  As for the criticism, I wouldn't take it too seriously.  I think people are just having flashbacks and are a little concerned about "The .wav" going down the same road as some of their own smooth jazz stations, with more pop vocals and a more limited playlist.  As I mentioned in an email to you, I actually like the vocals, but what I had suggested was to maybe include vocals the incorporate more jazz artist and to play some songs that you never hear on the radio.  This will keep listeners from getting bored and will encourage them to come back to hear another new great track.  Definitely don't be afraid to expand your library,  I love hearing new fresh music.  Thanks for believing in the format, when a lot of people are choosing to give up on it. 

 

[Nock]

I was 18 when I started listening to this music. 30 something years later and still listening. Isn't that what you call a loyal listener?

Nock

 

[davideduardo]

According to the so called experts, I should be listening to rap and watching BET, which I don't like either of.

Experts don't guess. As for radio usage, they look at ratings and also commission proprietary research.

We know as a fact that you are atypical. There are not enough listeners to smooth jazz in the under 45 and under 55 ages to have any impact on sales. Media buyers generally buy a certain number of stations deep, startinng at the top, to reach any desired age group. smooth jazz, on an 18-34 or 25-44 buy does not come in high enough in rank to get on the buys.

I'm so tired of being put in a box by the so called "experts" in the industry.

The fact that Memphis is 50% African American does not mean every resident is half Boack and half White. It means that there are two big groups there, and that is a start for serving subsets... whether it be radio or for a potato chip manufacturer. If you don't fit in a fairly large box, you probably will not be served directly. That's why the curry section at the supermarket in Sioux City is not as large as the one in Washington, DC.

I'm in my mid-20s and I along with a good number of people in my age range love the genre. It's not just listened to by the older (no offense to anyone in this range) crowd. Why don't these so called geniuses actually go to the concerts and see for themselves.

Concert attendance indexes in inverse proprotion to age. And a venue full of concert goers is not representative of the market overall. When a major market station may need a half million to well over a million cumers to compete for sales, a venue with a few thousand people does not mean anything... a Cajun concert in Rochester could do that, and there is agreement that Cajun is not a format option in most places.

Heck, you don't even have to go that far, why not go to facebook, add Sky Smooth Jazz (sky.fm facebook page) as a friend and come back and tell me if the majority of 2800+ people look like they are over 55+ ?

The data used by advertisers and their agencies consists of quantitative views of the universe... that is, the entire market. From this, they extract data on the market segment they seek, based on their own product research. And unless a radio station delivers efficiently... meaning lots of poeople at a good cost... the desired target, the station will not be on an ad buy.

 

[JoshB]

Experts don't guess. As for radio usage, they look at ratings and also commission proprietary research.

We know as a fact that you are atypical. There are not enough listeners to smooth jazz in the under 45 and under 55 ages to have any impact on sales. Media buyers generally buy a certain number of stations deep, startinng at the top, to reach any desired age group. smooth jazz, on an 18-34 or 25-44 buy does not come in high enough in rank to get on the buys.

Well can their research explain why so many stations now are losing money? Can they explain why a lot of former smooth jazz stations like WJZW 105.9, which lasted several years with decent ratings, but flipped because they weren't attracting a "good demo" , lasted only like one or two years , had dismal ratings, and had to end up flipping formats again?? Why is that. please explain to us common people, who are just to thick to understand how the magically radio industry works? :

The fact that Memphis is 50% African American does not mean every resident is half Boack and half White. It means that there are two big groups there, and that is a start for serving subsets... whether it be radio or for a potato chip manufacturer. If you don't fit in a fairly large box, you probably will not be served directly. That's why the curry section at the supermarket in Sioux City is not as large as the one in Washington, DC.

Concert attendance indexes in inverse proprotion to age. And a venue full of concert goers is not representative of the market overall. When a major market station may need a half million to well over a million cumers to compete for sales, a venue with a few thousand people does not mean anything... a Cajun concert in Rochester could do that, and there is agreement that Cajun is not a format option in most places.

Heck, you don't even have to go that far, why not go to facebook, add Sky Smooth Jazz (sky.fm facebook page) as a friend and come back and tell me if the majority of 2800+ people look like they are over 55+ ?

The data used by advertisers and their agencies consists of quantitative views of the universe... that is, the entire market. From this, they extract data on the market segment they seek, based on their own product research. And unless a radio station delivers efficiently... meaning lots of poeople at a good cost... the desired target, the station will not be on an ad buy.

Interesting how they try and quantify all this data about audiences. So those folks at the concerts and the subscribers on the page, are atypical or outside the "norm". So I guess they don't spend money? Again, in my opinion, showing just how out of touch the industry is and why it is failing today. I'm pretty sure, those folks probably have more disposable income than many other people my age.

 

[davideduardo]

Well can their research explain why so many stations now are losing money?

There are three classes of stations that lose money. First, those that are such poor facilities that even with paid religion or ethnic they can't make it. Second are stations that got beaten by a better competitor. And third are those with formats that would be nice, but not huge money producers in a good economy... and which become unprofitable in hard times.

Much of the distress in the industry comes from the economy... not radio itself. Since radio is not a growth industry, a downturn hits hard.

Can they explain why a lot of former smooth jazz stations like WJZW 105.9, which lasted several years with decent ratings, but flipped because they weren't attracting a "good demo" , lasted only like one or two years , had dismal ratings, and had to end up flipping formats again??

The champs of marketing, Proctor & Gamble, has a 50% success rate in new product introductions... half of all products fail. But that is great in the categories they are in where the average success rate is just over 20%... 4 out of every 5 new products fails. And no industry does more consumer research than H&BA and package goods.

Some radio formats fail. Stations change again, and give it another try. It's been that way since the 50's.

Interesting how they try and quantify all this data about audiences. So those folks at the concerts and the subscribers on the page, are atypical or outside the "norm". So I guess they don't spend money? Again, in my opinion, showing just how out of touch the industry is and why it is failing today. I'm pretty sure, those folks probably have more disposable income than many other people my age.

Concert goers are not representative of the appeal of a radio format. Club goers are not representative of the appeal of a radio format. First, if you take a concert in NY that draws 20,000.... you are talking about a tiny percentage of the 16,000,000 persons in the market. Second many people will go to a concert for one artist while they may not like a radio format based on similar artists because their interest is in that one artist, not the genre.

Radio is bought based on the number of ears in the target age group, not on the affluence of the listener group. Were affluence a factor, there would be lots of 55-64 buys... and there are essentialy none of those.

All the things you blame radio for are actually due to the need of radio to appeal to advertisers, delivering the ages that they want. So go insult P&G and McDonalds and Coke, not radio, please.

 

[AnotherCat]

One thing I've always wondered is who decided that the people who are 55 now were going to be like their parents as far as musical tastes. The parents of this generation grew up in the 30s and 40s with big band music and standards then the late 40s and 50s pre-rock were one of the most bland conservative eras for pop music that made the charts. The original elevator music and stuff like Mitch Miller and Doris Day. It was partially the post-war culture settling down and the brashness of the big band era toned down. But now there is this assumption that people who grew up with some type of rock and had their musical tastes affected by progressive rock are going to suddenly want the Elevator music that our parents used to torture us with in the car - Easy Listening versions of pop songs?

It's a different world and a different generation with a different musical history. The whole movement to remove elements from the genre that were "too exciting" like electric guitar solos, horn sections, uptempo music..and to present the music with a B/EZ attitude (formality, announcer-ish voices, etc) was really misguided and has done a lot of damage over the last decade.

 

[Nock]

Cat

You said exactly what I have been trying to say and could not figure it out.

Nock

 

[JoshB]

There are three classes of stations that lose money. First, those that are such poor facilities that even with paid religion or ethnic they can't make it. Second are stations that got beaten by a better competitor. And third are those with formats that would be nice, but not huge money producers in a good economy... and which become unprofitable in hard times.

Much of the distress in the industry comes from the economy... not radio itself. Since radio is not a growth industry, a downturn hits hard.

With the first two, that's not always the case. I know a small class A station in my local market that has been on the air for years with the same format. Do they make a lot of money, probably not, but they are still on the air, despite competition from a bigger station with the same format. The owners just aren't that greedy like the Clear Channels of the world. SJ has been through one recession before, what all of a sudden just made it unprofitable? What makes KIFM flourish in San Diego, while WJZW in DC fails? If it's all about attracting more listeners as you say, why flip from a format that attracts the same demo (let's say the 55+ older crowd, although I beg to differ) with higher numbers over to years to one, that could barely attract anyone and had competition from other stations? In this case WJZW went from SJ to oldies. The oldies only lasted a year, before flipping to rock. It sounds like someone doesn't know what they're doing.

The champs of marketing, Proctor & Gamble, has a 50% success rate in new product introductions... half of all products fail. But that is great in the categories they are in where the average success rate is just over 20%... 4 out of every 5 new products fails. And no industry does more consumer research than H&BA and package goods.

Some radio formats fail. Stations change again, and give it another try. It's been that way since the 50's.

Well that thought process may have made since in the 50s, but you are in the 2000s now, where radio has a ton of competition from Internet radio, satellite radio, mp3 players etc. Why would I as listener continue to listen to your lousy product, when I can find other products that are far superior. It's getting much easier for one to listening to radio on their mobile device, while in a car or on public transportation. As matter of fact, I'm finding it harder to find a portable FM radio these days.

Concert goers are not representative of the appeal of a radio format. Club goers are not representative of the appeal of a radio format. First, if you take a concert in NY that draws 20,000.... you are talking about a tiny percentage of the 16,000,000 persons in the market. Second many people will go to a concert for one artist while they may not like a radio format based on similar artists because their interest is in that one artist, not the genre.

Radio is bought based on the number of ears in the target age group, not on the affluence of the listener group. Were affluence a factor, there would be lots of 55-64 buys... and there are essentialy none of those.

Where are you coming up with these conclusions? I guess you never saw the pictures of the large crowds at the Capital Jazz Fest, which had multiple SJ artist performing. Maybe the industry (and advertisers) though, should change their business model. We are a country of 300+ million people from different backgrounds, obviously not everyone is going to have the same taste in products, no matter what age group they are in.

All the things you blame radio for are actually due to the need of radio to appeal to advertisers, delivering the ages that they want. So go insult P&G and McDonalds and Coke, not radio, please.

No, I blame the industry. Instead of being contempt with the money they were making from a niche format like SJ, they got greedy and watered down the format, trying to attract more people, but it backfired and caused a lot of loyal listeners to get turned off completely. It's not just smooth jazz, but a bunch of other formats too, where you guys in the industry play the same thing over and over again. Why would someone choose that, when they have access to thousands of station via the Internet?

 

[davideduardo]

With the first two, that's not always the case. I know a small class A station in my local market that has been on the air for years with the same format. Do they make a lot of money, probably not, but they are still on the air, despite competition from a bigger station with the same format.

By bad facilities I did not mean well placed A's. I mean stations at the edge of a market, or ones that are rimshots, AMs that are daytimers or which have very bad night coverage, etc. Most of those, except for the salvation of religious and ethnic programming, are not viable.

Well that thought process may have made since in the 50s, but you are in the 2000s now, where radio has a ton of competition from Internet radio, satellite radio, mp3 players etc. Why would I as listener continue to listen to your lousy product, when I can find other products that are far superior. It's getting much easier for one to listening to radio on their mobile device, while in a car or on public transportation. As matter of fact, I'm finding it harder to find a portable FM radio these days.

I am describing the decision making process for business in general... using Proctor & Gamble, not radio, as an example. Some new products fail. Some succeed, and that applies to radio. The fact that 95% of the population uses radio indicates that most people continue to use radio, even if they are also using other sources of entertainment. And much of what they are listening to on strems is simply the same thing that is on a radio station... just a different transmission device.

Concert goers are not representative of the appeal of a radio format. Club goers are not representative of the appeal of a radio

Where are you coming up with these conclusions? I guess you never saw the pictures of the large crowds at the Capital Jazz Fest, which had multiple SJ artist performing. Maybe the industry (and advertisers) though, should change their business model. We are a country of 300+ million people from different backgrounds, obviously not everyone is going to have the same taste in products, no matter what age group they are in.

In LA, to give an example, 20,000 persons at a major venue do not make a raidio format when a successful station needs to cume around 2 million or more. As I said, a cajun festival could do that well, but there are no cajun radio stations outside of a part of Louisiana...

All the things you blame radio for are actually due to the need of radio to appeal to advertisers, delivering the ages that they want. So go insult P&G and McDonalds and Coke, not radio, please.

No, I blame the industry. Instead of being contempt with the money they were making from a niche format like SJ, they got greedy and watered down the format, trying to attract more people, but it backfired and caused a lot of loyal listeners to get turned off completely. It's not just smooth jazz, but a bunch of other formats too, where you guys in the industry play the same thing over and over again. Why would someone choose that, when they have access to thousands of station via the Internet?

The issue with SJ has been the ageing of the demographics. Period.

As most of the listeners moved into ages advertisers do no usually seek, the revenue base declined... in some cases horribly. Add in a bad economy, and a mildly profitable format can become unprofitable with no end in sight. Those folks who believe in the format have tried to find a way to keep the concept alive, but for a younger demo.

Playing the favorite songs over and over (really, in this kind of format it means the average listener hears the same song about two or three times a month) is the only way to get ratings. Stations that play a tighter list, all other factors being equal, nearly always beat stations with extended lists in the ratings. And ratings are the basis for ad buys...

 

[AC Tones]

According to the so called experts, I should be listening to rap and watching BET, which I don't like either of.

Experts don't guess. As for radio usage, they look at ratings and also commission proprietary research.

We know as a fact that you are atypical. There are not enough listeners to smooth jazz in the under 45 and under 55 ages to have any impact on sales. Media buyers generally buy a certain number of stations deep, startinng at the top, to reach any desired age group. smooth jazz, on an 18-34 or 25-44 buy does not come in high enough in rank to get on the buys.

Concert attendance indexes in inverse proprotion to age. And a venue full of concert goers is not representative of the market overall. When a major market station may need a half million to well over a million cumers to compete for sales, a venue with a few thousand people does not mean anything... a Cajun concert in Rochester could do that, and there is agreement that Cajun is not a format option in most places.

Although I posted the link to Carol's blog, for the purposes of this "old, tired" argument, I thought it was more effective to selectively and directly quote it:

Significant Programming Shifts

Kepler continues: "I also wanted to pass along some innovation regarding programming on the Smooth Jazz Network. We have been studying PPM music flow data for the past year and are seeing some interesting trends.

"1. While the format is seeing some struggle in the depth and reach, (somewhat due to smaller sample within some demos), we do see the format reflecting stronger numbers (in Los Angeles for example) in 25-54, reflecting a younger audience than we saw prior to PPM.

"2. In strategic research studies across the broad consumer market, we also see potential among the younger end of the 25-54 demo. We commonly see a real taste for the music, but often times that younger age group is unaware of the local Smooth Jazz station.

Here's a comment Mr. Kepler makes about concert goers:

Kepler strikes an upbeat note: "Even with the challenges facing everyone in every business, this is a very exciting time for the format: with new artists coming on board; perhaps the busiest summer tour schedule I've seen in recent years; and the fact that today our format holds more of a solid, unique and exclusive position compared to other radio formats than ever before.

It sure seems to me a couple industry folks aren't exactly on the same sheet of music, er, I mean "radio."

 

[Nock]

I am describing the decision making process for business in general... using Proctor & Gamble, not radio, as an example. Some new products fail. Some succeed, and that applies to radio. The fact that 95% of the population uses radio indicates that most people continue to use radio, even if they are also using other sources of entertainment. And much of what they are listening to on strems is simply the same thing that is on a radio station... just a different transmission device.

This all reminds me of how the record industry went down the toilet. Remember some young college kid who figured out how to transfer mp3 files and the record companies denied it would do anything to them? Radio in same state of denial.

Nock