CBS-FM: "New York's Home For The Holidays"

[scooty430]

As for people leaving town, you're wrong. People leave town in New York. You said they didn't. You are wrong. They go to the Hamptons, they go to Florida, they go to Paris, they go to the Cape, they go to the Berkshires.

Not in sufficient numbers to affect the ratings. In fact, there are plenty of people taking trips all year long, day in and day out. If you check the lines and load capacity at JFK or EWR or LGA, you will see that the holidays are now only a few percent higher in travel than other weeks of the year.

The fact that there is constant travel means that no particular week or month is going to be affected much more than any other. In any case, non-active meters are simply excluded from the sample so there is pretty much no impact at all on ratings as the univers never changes except that one time a year total population is updated.

And as I said, the Hamptons are inside the NY radio market.

Now, where do you get your data that Z100 listeners are richer than CBSFM listeners?

I didn't say that. The fact you can not read and understand is at the core of the mistakes in reasoning and fact that you incessantly post.

I said that WHTZ has more upper income listeners than CBS FM. And it does. Tapscan, Arbitron (diary and PPM) and Scarborough show the stratification of audiences by income level. WHTZ ranks higher in $50 k and up listeners (the upper half, based on average family income) than CBS FM.

That seems really suspect. Last time you spouted data, someone called you on it and you had to admit you were wrong.

Wrong. I got addtional data for NY which allowed me to correct the July 4 timespan information, and I ammended my own statement. Again, you don't read too well.

Who cares if the Hamptons are in the NYC market? The point is that people go on vacation in the summer. The Hamptons are just an example. Again, you are blind (or maybe just not too worldly) if you do not know this.

It is really laughable that you think travel is "constant" all the time. Have you ever even been on a plane? Did you ever notice that airline tickets are DOUBLE in the summer? And DOUBLE at Thanksgiving and Xmas? Now, why do you think that is? (If I were you, I'd now have three condescending and patronizing paragraphs teaching about supply and demand, but I'll spare anyone else reading..)

I'm confused about your WHTZ comment. You first say that they are not richer, then you say they are. Correction, you say, "they are not richer, there are more upper income people bla bla bla." Stop hiding behind ridiculous semantic technicalities. You use jargon and pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo to try and further your arguments. It's tedious.

Ultimately, you are proven wrong by WCBS themselves. They went ahead and repeated the A to Z just a few short months later, they continue to play 50s through 80s, they continue to do Sunday night specials with loads and loads of AWFUL STIFFS that we all "endure...."

Sigh....If they'd only listen to you. Maybe they'd be the #3 station in town. Oh wait, they are.

 

[scooty430]

I don't put much (if any) faith in these meters:

But all the industry has faith in the base system. Electronic measurement has been used in TV for two decades.

- the type of person who would wear a meter (in need of money, into following rules, lured by silly contests, willing to endure annoying phone calls, maybe not too bright) is a subset of the general population. Not a representative sample.

I recommend you read the Coleman research study on persons who have carried the meter. The folks are pretty average, and enjoy participating... not for the money, but for the fact that they count.

- not enough meters out there. One single meter has way too much power in changing things.

You have a degree in statistics and polling? There are plenty of meters, and the industry issue is in the proportionality of the distribution in age, sex, geographical, ethnic, etc., cells. In any case, the radio industry can not afford larger panels.

- people don't wear the meters all day or remember to charge them,

On days they don't, they are not counted. And they are reminded to carry the next day. According to Arbitron and the Coleman study, after about the first month compliance is quite good. If there is ongoing lack of compliance, the household is replaced. That's how panels work.

but they are still counted because you score more "points" if you listen more.

You don't get more points for listening more.

And if you don't carry, you are not counted on the day(s) you don't. You are not in-tab.

They should only count people who have it on all day.

Usage is determined by the motion detector, not listening. And there are minimum daily carriage times to be in tab.

- too easy to "fake" it by listening to a station all day to boost ratings

There is no incentive to do that. You count whether you listen or not.

- Arbitron coming under fire from many corners - as we've all read. One incident you could ignore, but so many? Where there's smoke, there's fire.

The issue, as reported in all the industry trades, is meeting demographic quotas and a variety of related issues. The technology is not in question. The ability of a sample of the population to show quite accurately the behaviour of the universe, etc., are issues those in advertising and marketing laid to rest 70 or 80 years ago or more.

Yes, you do get more points for carrying the meter more often. The wearers get cash incentives and are entered in weekly sweepstakes drawings. The more you wear, the more cash you get (and you get to increase your odds in the sweepstakes.) It's based on hours worn.

 

[scooty430]

Variety is composed of playing songs each listener loves,

This is my favorite Eduardo "line."

Since you are into citing statistics and "the facts," perhaps I can direct you to a dictionary. Variety means a wider assortment of choices, not "more favorites."

The shorter the playlist, the less variety. Period.

 

[davideduardo]

Variety is composed of playing songs each listener loves,

This is my favorite Eduardo "line."

Since you are into citing statistics and "the facts," perhaps I can direct you to a dictionary. Variety means a wider assortment of choices, not "more favorites."

The shorter the playlist, the less variety. Period.

"Variety" in radio does not mean "more songs" because variety in this case is a perception, not the soup section at Hills (looking for a comparison fitting the era of the songs).

Variety perception declines among listeners when too many songs are played. This is because the high passion songs are not played enough and the luke-warm and borderline negative ones are taking their place.

I've mentioned it before, but a Classic Rock station I did in a market larger than NY had about 500 songs in the library. That was all there was, out of over 2000 tested songs, that did not have more negative scores than positive ones. The station debuted at #1 (and it still is) 9 years ago... and along the way, we got a competitor that played over 1000 songs and focused on telling listeners they had more songs and more variety.

The competitor, who played all songs that had been in the past hits of some scale, never got over a 1.8 share. We had around a 20 share, and were always at the top. In a major perceptual project, we were told by the listeners that we had greater variety.and better music. The competitor lasted less than a year and changed format.

The reason you are not a programmer is that you do not understand that radio is an intangible. Variety is not created by song count, but by the way the best songs are rotated, mixed into sets, etc. Variety declines rapidly when weak songs are added because listeners interpret the play of songs they don't like or they have little passion for as detracting from variety.

Again, variety in radio is a perception that has nothing to do with "how many songs." It has to do with how good each song is to each individual listener. So playing songs some listeners like but that are neutral or negative to most is not varitey, it is the lack of variety.

You just got for free what good programmers learn at some expense... usually the loss of a job where they thought they could win by playing more songs than the competitor.

 

[fang39]

Variety is composed of playing songs each listener loves,

This is my favorite Eduardo "line."

Since you are into citing statistics and "the facts," perhaps I can direct you to a dictionary. Variety means a wider assortment of choices, not "more favorites."

The shorter the playlist, the less variety. Period.

"Variety" in radio does not mean "more songs" because variety in this case is a perception, not the soup section at Hills (looking for a comparison fitting the era of the songs).

Variety perception declines among listeners when too many songs are played. This is because the high passion songs are not played enough and the luke-warm and borderline negative ones are taking their place.

I've mentioned it before, but a Classic Rock station I did in a market larger than NY had about 500 songs in the library. That was all there was, out of over 2000 tested songs, that did not have more negative scores than positive ones. The station debuted at #1 (and it still is) 9 years ago... and along the way, we got a competitor that played over 1000 songs and focused on telling listeners they had more songs and more variety.

The competitor, who played all songs that had been in the past hits of some scale, never got over a 1.8 share. We had around a 20 share, and were always at the top. In a major perceptual project, we were told by the listeners that we had greater variety.and better music. The competitor lasted less than a year and changed format.

The reason you are not a programmer is that you do not understand that radio is an intangible. Variety is not created by song count, but by the way the best songs are rotated, mixed into sets, etc. Variety declines rapidly when weak songs are added because listeners interpret the play of songs they don't like or they have little passion for as detracting from variety.

Again, variety in radio is a perception that has nothing to do with "how many songs." It has to do with how good each song is to each individual listener. So playing songs some listeners like but that are neutral or negative to most is not varitey, it is the lack of variety.

You just got for free what good programmers learn at some expense... usually the loss of a job where they thought they could win by playing more songs than the competitor.

And there, in a nutshell, is why Radio is in the sad state it's in.

 

[davideduardo]

Who cares if the Hamptons are in the NYC market? The point is that people go on vacation in the summer.

And lots of people go on vacation in the winter, spring and fall. They just go to different places... they ski or go to the Caribbean or Florida in the nasty cold months, and go to other places in the muggy hot ones.

The Hamptons are just an example.

You picked an example inside the NY MSA, which means no loss of the ability to listen to most favorite stations.

Again, you are blind (or maybe just not too worldly) if you do not know this.

I've worked in more countries than you have likely visited.

It is really laughable that you think travel is "constant" all the time. Have you ever even been on a plane?

One of my frequent flier programs has nearly 4 million miles on it. I fly over 100 thousand miles each year, going to markets to talk to listeners.

Did you ever notice that airline tickets are DOUBLE in the summer? And DOUBLE at Thanksgiving and Xmas?

Only if you buy them late. But that applies on the 11th of May or November 5th, too.

Now, why do you think that is? (If I were you, I'd now have three condescending and patronizing paragraphs teaching about supply and demand, but I'll spare anyone else reading..)

You are getting into another area you know little about. Please don't tell a person who has flown millions of miles about airlines, since you are making all kinds of wrong assumptions. The fact is, in the last two years, capacity has decreased, almost all flights are quite full or totally full, and there is no xcess capacity added at holiday times; the vacation traveler displaces business travelers resulting in the same capacity levels... because business travelers do not travel on holidays for obvious reasons.

I'm confused about your WHTZ comment. You first say that they are not richer, then you say they are. Correction, you say, "they are not richer, there are more upper income people bla bla bla." Stop hiding behind ridiculous semantic technicalities. You use jargon and pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo to try and further your arguments. It's tedious.

I will say it again: All the data sources available to advertisers and radio show WHTZ has more upper income listeners than CBS FM. Try to understand that. Upper income is defined as roughly being those households earnig at or above the national median.

[/quote]Ultimately, you are proven wrong by WCBS themselves. They went ahead and repeated the A to Z just a few short months later, they continue to play 50s through 80s, they continue to do Sunday night specials with loads and loads of AWFUL STIFFS that we all "endure...."

Sigh....If they'd only listen to you. Maybe they'd be the #3 station in town. Oh wait, they are.
[/quote]

In 25-54, before the first A to Z they were 5th. Now they are down to 8th. I feel that much of this 20% decline in share is due precisely to the thinks you mention, which are giving the station a tarnished, old image when they need to focus on the music that 35-55 year olds are passionate about. In the process, they have lost 200,000 25-54 cumers while the unsalable 55+ cume has been static.

 

[davideduardo]

And there, in a nutshell, is why Radio is in the sad state it's in.

Yeah, finding out from listeners what they really want to hear has got to be bad.

 

[fang39]

And there, in a nutshell, is why Radio is in the sad state it's in.

Yeah, finding out from listeners what they really want to hear has got to be bad.

If it were only true.....

 

[davideduardo]

Yeah, finding out from listeners what they really want to hear has got to be bad.

If it were only true.....

Why would it not be true?

 

[scooty430]

Variety is composed of playing songs each listener loves,

This is my favorite Eduardo "line."

Since you are into citing statistics and "the facts," perhaps I can direct you to a dictionary. Variety means a wider assortment of choices, not "more favorites."

The shorter the playlist, the less variety. Period.

"Variety" in radio does not mean "more songs" because variety in this case is a perception, not the soup section at Hills (looking for a comparison fitting the era of the songs).

Variety perception declines among listeners when too many songs are played. This is because the high passion songs are not played enough and the luke-warm and borderline negative ones are taking their place.

I've mentioned it before, but a Classic Rock station I did in a market larger than NY had about 500 songs in the library. That was all there was, out of over 2000 tested songs, that did not have more negative scores than positive ones. The station debuted at #1 (and it still is) 9 years ago... and along the way, we got a competitor that played over 1000 songs and focused on telling listeners they had more songs and more variety.

The competitor, who played all songs that had been in the past hits of some scale, never got over a 1.8 share. We had around a 20 share, and were always at the top. In a major perceptual project, we were told by the listeners that we had greater variety.and better music. The competitor lasted less than a year and changed format.

The reason you are not a programmer is that you do not understand that radio is an intangible. Variety is not created by song count, but by the way the best songs are rotated, mixed into sets, etc. Variety declines rapidly when weak songs are added because listeners interpret the play of songs they don't like or they have little passion for as detracting from variety.

Again, variety in radio is a perception that has nothing to do with "how many songs." It has to do with how good each song is to each individual listener. So playing songs some listeners like but that are neutral or negative to most is not varitey, it is the lack of variety.

You just got for free what good programmers learn at some expense... usually the loss of a job where they thought they could win by playing more songs than the competitor.

And there, in a nutshell, is why Radio is in the sad state it's in.

Seriously. Playing the same 500 songs for 9 years is seen as a victory.

 

[scooty430]

Yeah, finding out from listeners what they really want to hear has got to be bad.

If it were only true.....

Why would it not be true?

Because listeners are bored and abandoning radio in droves.

 

[fang39]

Yeah, finding out from listeners what they really want to hear has got to be bad.

If it were only true.....

Why would it not be true?

Because listeners are bored and abandoning radio in droves.

Basically true. IMHO, the industry is doing everything but admit what they've been doing for the past 15 or so years isn't working. Whether its PPM or diaries, the fact is that Radio is no longer the player it once was when it comes to entertainment and information. It has been replaced by the likes of the internet and personal listening devices. You can spin the numbers any which way you like, but that's what you are paid to do. Keep drinking the Kool-Aid. Until programming is returned to people who have a passion for creating good radio and not corporate "bean counters", will the cycle be broken. The idea that through consolidation, one person can be responsible for programming mulitple formats is ludicrous. It's just another way for the corporate suits to squeeze the last possible bit of profit out of their failing stations. We've just experienced an election year which clearly demonstrated that people are not satisfied with the status quo and demanded change. Radio is no different in that regard.

 

[oldies76]

The reason you are not a programmer is that you do not understand that radio is an intangible. Variety is not created by song count, but by the way the best songs are rotated, mixed into sets, etc. Variety declines rapidly when weak songs are added because listeners interpret the play of songs they don't like or they have little passion for as detracting from variety.

Again, variety in radio is a perception that has nothing to do with "how many songs." It has to do with how good each song is to each individual listener. So playing songs some listeners like but that are neutral or negative to most is not varitey, it is the lack of variety.

You just got for free what good programmers learn at some expense... usually the loss of a job where they thought they could win by playing more songs than the competitor.

This is how radio USED TO BE..not anymore. If what you said above is true, then all of WCBS-FM would have been shut down long ago..low ratings, loss of revenue, everyone unemployed.

That's obviously not the case and the listeners of NYC are happy as ever. They are lucky to say the least, having a station that spins the hundreds, if not thousands of DIFFERENT songs.

You really should listen to CBS-FM for about 2 weeks, mix in a specialty and then tell us what stiffs do or what specialties ultimately do.

This is a new era D.E....get used to it.

 

[davideduardo]

This is how radio USED TO BE..not anymore. If what you said above is true, then all of WCBS-FM would have been shut down long ago..low ratings, loss of revenue, everyone unemployed.

Stations do not shut down, they change format unless they are rural daytime AMs or somesuch.

Facts: CBS-FM as a true oldies station was declining in sales demos and, thus, was off roughly 20% in sales between 200 and 2005. The Jack experiment was a misguided effort to correct the ugly demos .. and it did equal the old CBS FM in 25-54. However, CBS learned in Philadelphia that Classic Hits might be stronger yet in PPM (Philly had PPM back 6 years ago), so they came back as pretty much a classic hits station.

Of course, there were specialty shows in the nearly unlistend to dayparts, like Saturday or Sunday after 7 PM... but that really does not affect the key 6 AM to 7 PM where nearly all the revenue comes from.

None of these facts or reactions is dated. They represent the same logic we used 20, 30 and even 40 years ago. The basic premise of finding a listener group that advertisers want, talking to the potential listeners, and doing what they want has not changed in half a century, save for the enabling technology of computers and such.

That's obviously not the case and the listeners of NYC are happy as ever.

The vast majority of New Yorkers don't listen to CBS FM, ever. You are giving too much credit to a single station that reaches on segment of the audience in a diverse and immense metro. At any given moment, 99.5% of New Yorkers 12+ are not listening to it (that's the way with all stations, too... all are niche players in a crowded arena).

They are lucky to say the least, having a station that spins the hundreds, if not thousands of DIFFERENT songs.

As I said, most don't even listen by accident.

You really should listen to CBS-FM for about 2 weeks, mix in a specialty and then tell us what stiffs do or what specialties ultimately do.

I can spare myself the agony of hearing SSgt Barry Sandler and simply look at MediaBase. While the new A to Z has cut out a lot of the dinosaur stuff, there are plenty of tunes there that go beyond the "oh, wow" territory and enter the "oh, gawd" area.

[/quote]This is a new era D.E....get used to it.
[/quote]

It's not a new era because people have not changed; they are attracted by the familiar and positive and repelled by the unfamiliar and ugly. And, since listeners will quite readily give these opinions in detail, as long as a station talks to enough listeners who represent the core audience, it will do well.

 

[adma]

Metaphorically speaking, I'd look at it this way.

John McCain = dotty old-school oldies-radio geezers.

Sarah Palin = the benchmark said geezers hold for classic-hits "younger demos", and the attraction thereof.

Barack Obama = those who roll their eyes at those clueless McCain/Palin types and their imbecilic audience targets.

 

[RJJ-RADIO]

Don't you think that this whole thread is being blown out of proportion, I don't ever recall WCBSFM going allx-mas so why would they start now at a most crucial time when they are still trying to establish themselves. If they are going to even entertain the thought why wouldn't they take the hd-2 or hd-3 spot for a all x-mas format. As far as the Home For The Holidays sweeper, the reason they are using it is for there core audience to identify with the station in other words they are throwing us a bone. So if they play Harry Harrison's May You Always poem does this mean that Harry is coming out of retirement and becoming the morning mayor and the stations turning to an all x-mas format. People lets get a grip.

 

[wmgcbs]

Don't you think that this whole thread is being blown out of proportion, I don't ever recall WCBSFM going allx-mas so why would they start now at a most crucial time when they are still trying to establish themselves. If they are going to even entertain the thought why wouldn't they take the hd-2 or hd-3 spot for a all x-mas format. As far as the Home For The Holidays sweeper, the reason they are using it is for there core audience to identify with the station in other words they are throwing us a bone. So if they play Harry Harrison's May You Always poem does this mean that Harry is coming out of retirement and becoming the morning mayor and the stations turning to an all x-mas format. People lets get a grip.

This thread is not being blown out of proportion at all. See the following article which appeared in the Daily News last Thursday. http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/2008/11/06/2008-11-06_wltw__wcbs_are_dueling_over_christmas_mu.html

In the article, David Hinckley states that CBS-FM will be playing all Christmas music from Thanksgiving to Christmas, while keeping the classic hits format on HD-2 and streaming online. Additionally, the CBS-FM Hall of Fame schedule ends early this month... on Thursday, November 20.

This article was linked on Radio-Info's homepage last week. Additionally, it was noted that WLTW has billboards up (at least one) on the NJ Turnpike promoting its all Christmas format as well.

 

[RJJ-RADIO]

I stand corrected, very intresting article but I still don't understand the need for WCBSFM to go all x-mas when WLTW claims stake on this every year.

 

[wprt949]

In the article, David Hinckley states that CBS-FM will be playing all Christmas music from Thanksgiving to Christmas, while keeping the classic hits format on HD-2 and streaming online. Additionally, the CBS-FM Hall of Fame schedule ends early this month... on Thursday, November 20.


they just got this station started agian when are the djs and listeners of radio stations going to start speaking out about this stuff and try to fight it
mabye when the dems take too the fcc this will all end we can go back to 36 hours of non stop christmas music from christmas eve-day

 

[scooty430]

I think THIS is why they did the A to Z again so soon. They wanted to send a signal to the hardcore fans that they will still be around playing good music after the Xmas thing ends.

It's a good strategy. I am definitely more willing to forgive them for doing all Xmas, because they've spent a week being so enjoyable.

But it's a real silly idea. The listener that would wants a SPRINKLING of Xmas music is out of luck. Two or three per hour is fun. 24/7 is nauseating overkill.

WCBS will have to compete with the other Xmas station and split that audience. They'll also be forced to play a lot of Adult Contemporary cheese that will alienate the core audience, because there aren't really enough Oldies/Rock Xmas songs to fill up 24/7.

Anyhow, I'm out of market, but I will disappear until it's over, and I know many in NYC will do the same.