Changing the Perception of the 55 and Over Demographics.

[kevinsealy]

Broadcast companies are accepting this myth that people over 55 can't be persuaded by advertisers which is why it's hard find a station that caters to Pop Standards and Rock 'N'Roll Oldies.

Now should be the time instead of blasting Infinity for what they've done to WCBS-FM, our focus should be what could we do to bring back Oldies and Pop Standards.

This is something that involves a massive campaign or petition drive to Madison Avenue advertising agencies that the 55 + demographics not only have the purchasing power and even more than the 25-54, but they still can be moved by advertisers if the product is marketed right.

It's going to take someone or a group that has the energy and time to spearhead this campaign. Some research may be required before a campaign could be launched.

I very much would like to see this campaign implemented because of my love for broadcast radio and one who has majored in Communications in college. And if this drive could get moving, I would like to be involved in some way.




Thanks,<P ID="signature">______________
Kevin L. Sealy</P>

 

[davideduardo]

> Broadcast companies are accepting this myth that people
> over 55 can't be persuaded by advertisers which is why it's
> hard find a station that caters to Pop Standards and Rock
> 'N'Roll Oldies.

Kevin, I have posted this before... radio has NOTHING to do with the fact that the older a person gets, the harder it is to sway them with mass media advertising. The decisions on media usage come from the advertisers themselves, generally after considerable research.

This is why oldies and standards can still work in smaller and suburban markets... where stations talk directly to smaller local clients. When there are agencies and marketing departments involved, 55+ radio formats are out of luck.

Again, the abandonment of older skewing formats is due to the lack of interested advertisers, not to something radio or radio sellers are doing.
>
> Now should be the time instead of blasting Infinity for what
> they've done to WCBS-FM, our focus should be what could we
> do to bring back Oldies and Pop Standards.

Face it. You can not. The P&G's and McDonlads and GMs of the world have proven to thier satisfaction that it is too costly to change buying patterns on older consumers to make it wourth while. Couple that with the low income of over retirement age people, and there is little incentive for radio to go where no advertiser wants to tread.
>
> This is something that involves a massive campaign or
> petition drive to Madison Avenue advertising agencies that
> the 55 + demographics not only have the purchasing power and
> even more than the 25-54, but they still can be moved by
> advertisers if the product is marketed right.

Ad agencies only obey the dictates of advertisers. The agencies are intermediaries, doing what the client orders.

Plus, there is so much research against going after older people with mass media that this is a very, very lost cause.
>
> It's going to take someone or a group that has the energy
> and time to spearhead this campaign. Some research may be
> required before a campaign could be launched.

There is no research that would convince P&G that their research is wrong. And neither the RAB nor some group is going to try to get a format that is dead back to life when the real issue is getting more revenue into the salable part of radio.
>
> I very much would like to see this campaign implemented
> because of my love for broadcast radio and one who has
> majored in Communications in college. And if this drive
> could get moving, I would like to be involved in some way.

I would not build false hopes on this. It took two or three decades to get advertisers to recognize Black radio, starting in the late 50's and 60's, and the same time to get them to recognize the value of Hispanic radio, starting in the 70's and 80'. By the time any progress was made, all the standards and oldies fans would be dead.

 

[kevinsealy]

Re: Changing the Perception of the 55 and Over Demographics.(Then Let's Give Up!!)

> > Broadcast companies are accepting this myth that people
> > over 55 can't be persuaded by advertisers which is why
> it's
> > hard find a station that caters to Pop Standards and Rock
> > 'N'Roll Oldies.
>
> Kevin, I have posted this before... radio has NOTHING to do
> with the fact that the older a person gets, the harder it is
> to sway them with mass media advertising. The decisions on
> media usage come from the advertisers themselves, generally
> after considerable research.
>
> This is why oldies and standards can still work in smaller
> and suburban markets... where stations talk directly to
> smaller local clients. When there are agencies and marketing
> departments involved, 55+ radio formats are out of luck.
>
> Again, the abandonment of older skewing formats is due to
> the lack of interested advertisers, not to something radio
> or radio sellers are doing.
> >
> > Now should be the time instead of blasting Infinity for
> what
> > they've done to WCBS-FM, our focus should be what could
> we
> > do to bring back Oldies and Pop Standards.
>
> Face it. You can not. The P&G's and McDonlads and GMs of the
> world have proven to thier satisfaction that it is too
> costly to change buying patterns on older consumers to make
> it wourth while. Couple that with the low income of over
> retirement age people, and there is little incentive for
> radio to go where no advertiser wants to tread.
> >
> > This is something that involves a massive campaign or
> > petition drive to Madison Avenue advertising agencies that
>
> > the 55 + demographics not only have the purchasing power
> and
> > even more than the 25-54, but they still can be moved by
> > advertisers if the product is marketed right.
>
> Ad agencies only obey the dictates of advertisers. The
> agencies are intermediaries, doing what the client orders.
>
> Plus, there is so much research against going after older
> people with mass media that this is a very, very lost cause.
>
> >
> > It's going to take someone or a group that has the energy
> > and time to spearhead this campaign. Some research may be
> > required before a campaign could be launched.
>
> There is no research that would convince P&G that their
> research is wrong. And neither the RAB nor some group is
> going to try to get a format that is dead back to life when
> the real issue is getting more revenue into the salable part
> of radio.
> >
> > I very much would like to see this campaign implemented
> > because of my love for broadcast radio and one who has
> > majored in Communications in college. And if this drive
> > could get moving, I would like to be involved in some way.
>
>
> I would not build false hopes on this. It took two or three
> decades to get advertisers to recognize Black radio,
> starting in the late 50's and 60's, and the same time to get
> them to recognize the value of Hispanic radio, starting in
> the 70's and 80'. By the time any progress was made, all the
> standards and oldies fans would be dead.
>



David Eduardo:

From what you're implying, we might as well throw in the towel because there's no hope in seeing a return of Oldies on the New York radio airwaves.

First we lost Country, then Pop Standards and most recently Oldies.What this may lead to is Classic Rock may follow and in the major cities we may have wall to wall Hip Hop stations like we had multiple Top 40 stations in the glory days of Top 40.



Thanks,<P ID="signature">______________
Kevin L. Sealy</P>

 

[lalumia]

Re: Changing the Perception of the 55 and Over Demographics.(Then Let's Give Up!!)

He's also implying that the only audience for Disco,soul & Rock n Roll is over the age of 55,and record sales indicate that's a DEAD WRONG assumption. 18-45 yr.olds are avidly consuming new complilations product from Elvis,Ray Charles,Beatles,Supremes,Rolling Stones,the Doors,etc.and that's reflected in the usage of songs from 55-75 in tv commercials aimed at the younger demo, songs that they RESPOND to because they luv them and want to hear them again.Even the NY punk sound,demeaned and ignored when it was new, now finds TV ad hits from Iggy Pop("Lust For Life"."The Passenger"),T.Rex("20th Century Boy)" and The Ramones ("Blitzkrieg Bop"),which the audience obviously loves,even through many of them have no idea who they're listening to.60s garage band The Sonics have recently been used the same way, in a car commercial which has elicited response(to the music) from that younger demo.
> > > Broadcast companies are accepting this myth that people
>
> > > over 55 can't be persuaded by advertisers which is why
> > it's
> > > hard find a station that caters to Pop Standards and
> Rock
> > > 'N'Roll Oldies.
> >
> > Kevin, I have posted this before... radio has NOTHING to
> do
> > with the fact that the older a person gets, the harder it
> is
> > to sway them with mass media advertising. The decisions on
>
> > media usage come from the advertisers themselves,
> generally
> > after considerable research.
> >
> > This is why oldies and standards can still work in smaller
>
> > and suburban markets... where stations talk directly to
> > smaller local clients. When there are agencies and
> marketing
> > departments involved, 55+ radio formats are out of luck.
> >
> > Again, the abandonment of older skewing formats is due to
> > the lack of interested advertisers, not to something radio
>
> > or radio sellers are doing.
> > >
> > > Now should be the time instead of blasting Infinity for
> > what
> > > they've done to WCBS-FM, our focus should be what could
>
> > we
> > > do to bring back Oldies and Pop Standards.
> >
> > Face it. You can not. The P&G's and McDonlads and GMs of
> the
> > world have proven to thier satisfaction that it is too
> > costly to change buying patterns on older consumers to
> make
> > it wourth while. Couple that with the low income of over
> > retirement age people, and there is little incentive for
> > radio to go where no advertiser wants to tread.
> > >
> > > This is something that involves a massive campaign or
> > > petition drive to Madison Avenue advertising agencies
> that
> >
> > > the 55 + demographics not only have the purchasing power
>
> > and
> > > even more than the 25-54, but they still can be moved by
>
> > > advertisers if the product is marketed right.
> >
> > Ad agencies only obey the dictates of advertisers. The
> > agencies are intermediaries, doing what the client orders.
>
> >
> > Plus, there is so much research against going after older
> > people with mass media that this is a very, very lost
> cause.
> >
> > >
> > > It's going to take someone or a group that has the
> energy
> > > and time to spearhead this campaign. Some research may
> be
> > > required before a campaign could be launched.
> >
> > There is no research that would convince P&G that their
> > research is wrong. And neither the RAB nor some group is
> > going to try to get a format that is dead back to life
> when
> > the real issue is getting more revenue into the salable
> part
> > of radio.
> > >
> > > I very much would like to see this campaign implemented
> > > because of my love for broadcast radio and one who has
> > > majored in Communications in college. And if this drive
> > > could get moving, I would like to be involved in some
> way.
> >
> >
> > I would not build false hopes on this. It took two or
> three
> > decades to get advertisers to recognize Black radio,
> > starting in the late 50's and 60's, and the same time to
> get
> > them to recognize the value of Hispanic radio, starting in
>
> > the 70's and 80'. By the time any progress was made, all
> the
> > standards and oldies fans would be dead.
> >
>
>
>
> David Eduardo:
>
> From what you're implying, we might as well throw in the
> towel because there's no hope in seeing a return of Oldies
> on the New York radio airwaves.
>
> First we lost Country, then Pop Standards and most recently
> Oldies.What this may lead to is Classic Rock may follow and
> in the major cities we may have wall to wall Hip Hop
> stations like we had multiple Top 40 stations in the glory
> days of Top 40.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>

 

[davideduardo]

Re: Changing the Perception of the 55 and Over Demographics.(Then Let's Give Up!!)

> He's also implying that the only audience for Disco,soul &
> Rock n Roll is over the age of 55

Disco was the product of the mid-late 70's, and not the same as 60's oldies or standards, the subject of this discussion.

Rock or "rock n roll" is a pretty loose term and can define anything form the time of Elvis and Chuck Berry to today's modern or alternative rock.

Soul, likewise, is an almost-generic term for Black music from the 60's through today. Sould Train has gone through various decades of existance by presenting the current variation of whatever Soul was at the time.

Again, we were talking about 60's oldies and standards.

>,and record sales indicate
> that's a DEAD WRONG assumption. 18-45 yr.olds are avidly
> consuming new complilations product from Elvis,Ray
> Charles,Beatles,Supremes,Rolling Stones,the Doors,etc.and
> that's reflected in the usage of songs from 55-75 in tv
> commercials aimed at the younger demo, songs that they
> RESPOND to because they luv them and want to hear them
> again.

Very few of them want to hear them on the radio, and very very few of them buy music from this era. Compare the population between 12 and 54 with the record sales in such demos for some Supremes reissue... it's like one person per mellion buys it out of the demo that originally consumed it in the 60's.

>Even the NY punk sound,demeaned and ignored when it
> was new, now finds TV ad hits from Iggy Pop("Lust For
> Life"."The Passenger"),T.Rex("20th Century Boy)" and The
> Ramones ("Blitzkrieg Bop"),which the audience obviously
> loves,even through many of them have no idea who they're
> listening to.60s garage band The Sonics have recently been
> used the same way, in a car commercial which has elicited
> response(to the music) from that younger demo.

This would explain why none of these show up on SoundScan, I suppose.

There will always be people who like some music that was not intended for them. Whether it be young people liking old music of another generation, or the sliver of the population that likes "World Music" there is not enough of either to create a viable radio format based on a few chimera-like appearances of "oldies" on TV commercials.

P.S. Most of the usage of old tunes on TV is because newer good songs are too costly to license. So they pick campy, fun songs form the past and hope like mad that the selection does not date the product instead of enhance it.

 

[lalumia]

Re: Changing the Perception of the 55 and Over Demographics.(Then Let's Give Up!!)

> > He's also implying that the only audience for Disco,soul &
>
> > Rock n Roll is over the age of 55
>
> Disco was the product of the mid-late 70's, and not the same
> as 60's oldies or standards, the subject of this discussion.
>
>
> Rock or "rock n roll" is a pretty loose term and can define
> anything form the time of Elvis and Chuck Berry to today's
> modern or alternative rock.
>
> Soul, likewise, is an almost-generic term for Black music
> from the 60's through today. Sould Train has gone through
> various decades of existance by presenting the current
> variation of whatever Soul was at the time.
>
> Again, we were talking about 60's oldies and standards.
>
> >,and record sales indicate
> > that's a DEAD WRONG assumption. 18-45 yr.olds are avidly
> > consuming new complilations product from Elvis,Ray
> > Charles,Beatles,Supremes,Rolling Stones,the Doors,etc.and
> > that's reflected in the usage of songs from 55-75 in tv
> > commercials aimed at the younger demo, songs that they
> > RESPOND to because they luv them and want to hear them
> > again.
>
> Very few of them want to hear them on the radio, and very
> very few of them buy music from this era. Compare the
> population between 12 and 54 with the record sales in such
> demos for some Supremes reissue... it's like one person per
> mellion buys it out of the demo that originally consumed it
> in the 60's.
>
> >Even the NY punk sound,demeaned and ignored when it
> > was new, now finds TV ad hits from Iggy Pop("Lust For
> > Life"."The Passenger"),T.Rex("20th Century Boy)" and The
> > Ramones ("Blitzkrieg Bop"),which the audience obviously
> > loves,even through many of them have no idea who they're
> > listening to.60s garage band The Sonics have recently been
>
> > used the same way, in a car commercial which has elicited
> > response(to the music) from that younger demo.
>
> This would explain why none of these show up on SoundScan, I
> suppose.
>
> There will always be people who like some music that was not
> intended for them. Whether it be young people liking old
> music of another generation, or the sliver of the population
> that likes "World Music" there is not enough of either to
> create a viable radio format based on a few chimera-like
> appearances of "oldies" on TV commercials.
>
> P.S. Most of the usage of old tunes on TV is because newer
> good songs are too costly to license. So they pick campy,
> fun songs form the past and hope like mad that the selection
> does not date the product instead of enhance it.
>
NEWER GOOD SONGS? You mean,all of those timeless,universal,soon to be classics that really energized the record industry this year, like,umm,err, WHAT exactly?

 

[Harold]

Re: Changing the Perception of the 55 and Over Demographics.(Then Let's Give Up!!)

> > > He's also implying that the only audience for Disco,soul
> &
> >
> > > Rock n Roll is over the age of 55
> >
> > Disco was the product of the mid-late 70's, and not the
> same
> > as 60's oldies or standards, the subject of this
> discussion.
> >
> >
> > Rock or "rock n roll" is a pretty loose term and can
> define
> > anything form the time of Elvis and Chuck Berry to today's
>
> > modern or alternative rock.
> >
> > Soul, likewise, is an almost-generic term for Black music
> > from the 60's through today. Sould Train has gone through
> > various decades of existance by presenting the current
> > variation of whatever Soul was at the time.
> >
> > Again, we were talking about 60's oldies and standards.
> >
> > >,and record sales indicate
> > > that's a DEAD WRONG assumption. 18-45 yr.olds are avidly
>
> > > consuming new complilations product from Elvis,Ray
> > > Charles,Beatles,Supremes,Rolling Stones,the
> Doors,etc.and
> > > that's reflected in the usage of songs from 55-75 in tv
> > > commercials aimed at the younger demo, songs that they
> > > RESPOND to because they luv them and want to hear them
> > > again.
> >
> > Very few of them want to hear them on the radio, and very
> > very few of them buy music from this era. Compare the
> > population between 12 and 54 with the record sales in such
>
> > demos for some Supremes reissue... it's like one person
> per
> > mellion buys it out of the demo that originally consumed
> it
> > in the 60's.
> >
> > >Even the NY punk sound,demeaned and ignored when it
> > > was new, now finds TV ad hits from Iggy Pop("Lust For
> > > Life"."The Passenger"),T.Rex("20th Century Boy)" and The
>
> > > Ramones ("Blitzkrieg Bop"),which the audience obviously
> > > loves,even through many of them have no idea who they're
>
> > > listening to.60s garage band The Sonics have recently
> been
> >
> > > used the same way, in a car commercial which has
> elicited
> > > response(to the music) from that younger demo.
> >
> > This would explain why none of these show up on SoundScan,
> I
> > suppose.
> >
> > There will always be people who like some music that was
> not
> > intended for them. Whether it be young people liking old
> > music of another generation, or the sliver of the
> population
> > that likes "World Music" there is not enough of either to
> > create a viable radio format based on a few chimera-like
> > appearances of "oldies" on TV commercials.
> >
> > P.S. Most of the usage of old tunes on TV is because newer
>
> > good songs are too costly to license. So they pick campy,
> > fun songs form the past and hope like mad that the
> selection
> > does not date the product instead of enhance it.
> >
> NEWER GOOD SONGS? You mean,all of those
> timeless,universal,soon to be classics that really energized
> the record industry this year, like,umm,err, WHAT exactly?
>

One of the hosts of the "Mythbusters" program on the Discovery
Channel wears a T-shirt that says, "I reject your reality and
substitute my own." David would probably like one of those
T-shirts since it reflects many of his responses.

Consider this: David claims that "old tunes" are used
on TV commercials because "newer good songs are too
costly to license." Well I don't know about that.
But then he claims that "campy, fun songs form (sic) the
past" are used by major ad agencies. Picture, if you will,
an advertising agency selecting a song as the music bed of a
commercial and then hoping "like mad that the selection
does not date the product..."

My dear readers...Do you believe that major advertising
agencies spend oodles of their clients' money creating
commercials in so flip a manner? I didn't think so.

 

[davideduardo]

Re: Having trouble with new, old and older, are we?

> >
> > P.S. Most of the usage of old tunes on TV is because newer
>
> > good songs are too costly to license. So they pick campy,
> > fun songs form the past and hope like mad that the
> selection
> > does not date the product instead of enhance it.
> >
> NEWER GOOD SONGS? You mean,all of those
> timeless,universal,soon to be classics that really energized
> the record industry this year, like,umm,err, WHAT exactly?
>

Are you 17 or 18? When I do research, only teens think that everything over a year old is an oldie.

By newer, as you should be able to tell from the context, I meant songs that were not 35 to 40 years old. Those, except for Beatles tunes, can be licensed really inexpensively compared to most recognizable songs of hte 80's and 90's.

 

[davideduardo]

Re: Lighten up.

>
> One of the hosts of the "Mythbusters" program on the
> Discovery
> Channel wears a T-shirt that says, "I reject your reality
> and
> substitute my own." David would probably like one of those
> T-shirts since it reflects many of his responses.
>
> Consider this: David claims that "old tunes" are used
> on TV commercials because "newer good songs are too
> costly to license." Well I don't know about that.
> But then he claims that "campy, fun songs form (sic) the
> past" are used by major ad agencies. Picture, if you will,
> an advertising agency selecting a song as the music bed of a
>
> commercial and then hoping "like mad that the selection
> does not date the product..."
>
> My dear readers...Do you believe that major advertising
> agencies spend oodles of their clients' money creating
> commercials in so flip a manner? I didn't think so.

Lighten up. Obviously, you did not see the inherent sarcasam in my post. My intent was to try to show that ad agencies and major companies do NOT actually do things blindly. There has to be a reason. But they do do things creative in a wild manner.

The creative process at an agency, however, is very loose, flip and unstructured. It is often filled with excurisions into the surreal and the throwing of paper missiles, lots of "what if" quickie storyboards, and general idea tossing. That is how the creative process works when done in a team fashion. They don't all sit in cubicles and cogitate.

Once a campaign is developed, (and often there are several variants) the client approves or disapproves. At that point, a lot o fht ecreative is tested in focus groups, and the TV creative is Burked, often in several different markets.

The end product is verified to the extent it can be verified. But the creative process is ofen very loose, spontaneous and goofy.

It works in radio, too. At one station, every 90 days I took the programming and promotion staff to a beach villa and we played in the surf and sand and pool and drank beer while we designed our efforts for the next three months or so.

Methinks you are a tad too serious. The (sic) was a giveaway (I'm dyslexic, in case you care... criticisizing spelling and grammar on the web is very anal... many of us are not English primary and lots of users have handicaps. Again, lighten up, guy.)

 

[davideduardo]

Re: The answer is "yes."

>
> From what you're implying, we might as well throw in the
> towel because there's no hope in seeing a return of Oldies
> on the New York radio airwaves.

I don't think a return of oldies is likely, as no one wants a format that has grown out of the sales demos. But you might see quiete a few suburban stations trying it, as it is probably still salable for another 10 years. This will certainly provide some of the market with the format.
>
> First we lost Country,

Country is an issue of appeal in a highly ethnic market. Standards is an issue of the listeners being 99% over age 65, and no effort (like Emmis' bold try with red in St. Louis) to make standards appealing below that age has worked.

Oldies is not as bad... it still gets a lot of 45-54, but in another half-decade, most of these will be gone.

> then Pop Standards and most recently
> Oldies.What this may lead to is Classic Rock may follow and
> in the major cities we may have wall to wall Hip Hop
> stations like we had multiple Top 40 stations in the glory
> days of Top 40.

Stations will always program what will get them a salable audience. If 60% of a market wants hip hop, that is what you will get. If 15% wants something in Spanish, that is what you will get. Classic rock, at least, is a maleable format, where some older stuff can be eased out and some newer stuff eased in. I have even had a classic rocker that also played currents (I know, it sounds silly... but it worked in a market bigger than NY). Rock will hybridize and transform, but sure will not go away... for a long time.

Stating the obvious... they are not making any new 60's songs. But they are making new rock tunes.

 

[bierkenstock]

You've Made The Case For the Agencies

Sorry, Kevin, but Exhibit A for the ad agencies' contention that advertising to Oldies and Standards audiences is not cost-effective is the fact that people who listen to those formats do little but bemoan the loss of "their music" and talk about protests ("heck no, we won't go" - WKRP in Cincinnati, episode 1.2) -- rather than getting satellite radio (XM Radio or Sirius) or even mp3 players.

The music is available in New York (and everywhere else) but you need a satellite receiver to hear it. But Oldies and Standards fans don't seem disposed to using all the disposible income I keep hearing about to buy a new product or to change their listening behaviors. Instead, they mostly complain about how it was better before and let's get it back the way it was.




>
> From what you're implying, we might as well throw in the
> towel because there's no hope in seeing a return of Oldies
> on the New York radio airwaves.
>
> First we lost Country, then Pop Standards and most recently
> Oldies.What this may lead to is Classic Rock may follow and
> in the major cities we may have wall to wall Hip Hop
> stations like we had multiple Top 40 stations in the glory
> days of Top 40.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>

 

[Mouth1390]

> > Broadcast companies are accepting this myth that people
> > over 55 can't be persuaded by advertisers which is why
> it's
> > hard find a station that caters to Pop Standards and Rock
> > 'N'Roll Oldies.
>
> Kevin, I have posted this before... radio has NOTHING to do
> with the fact that the older a person gets, the harder it is
> to sway them with mass media advertising. The decisions on
> media usage come from the advertisers themselves, generally
> after considerable research.
>
> This is why oldies and standards can still work in smaller
> and suburban markets... where stations talk directly to
> smaller local clients. When there are agencies and marketing
> departments involved, 55+ radio formats are out of luck.
>
> Again, the abandonment of older skewing formats is due to
> the lack of interested advertisers, not to something radio
> or radio sellers are doing.
> >
> > Now should be the time instead of blasting Infinity for
> what
> > they've done to WCBS-FM, our focus should be what could
> we
> > do to bring back Oldies and Pop Standards.
>
> Face it. You can not. The P&G's and McDonlads and GMs of the
> world have proven to thier satisfaction that it is too
> costly to change buying patterns on older consumers to make
> it wourth while. Couple that with the low income of over
> retirement age people, and there is little incentive for
> radio to go where no advertiser wants to tread.
> >
> > This is something that involves a massive campaign or
> > petition drive to Madison Avenue advertising agencies that
>
> > the 55 + demographics not only have the purchasing power
> and
> > even more than the 25-54, but they still can be moved by
> > advertisers if the product is marketed right.
>
> Ad agencies only obey the dictates of advertisers. The
> agencies are intermediaries, doing what the client orders.
>
> Plus, there is so much research against going after older
> people with mass media that this is a very, very lost cause.
>
> >
> > It's going to take someone or a group that has the energy
> > and time to spearhead this campaign. Some research may be
> > required before a campaign could be launched.
>
> There is no research that would convince P&G that their
> research is wrong. And neither the RAB nor some group is
> going to try to get a format that is dead back to life when
> the real issue is getting more revenue into the salable part
> of radio.
> >
> > I very much would like to see this campaign implemented
> > because of my love for broadcast radio and one who has
> > majored in Communications in college. And if this drive
> > could get moving, I would like to be involved in some way.
>
>
> I would not build false hopes on this. It took two or three
> decades to get advertisers to recognize Black radio,
> starting in the late 50's and 60's, and the same time to get
> them to recognize the value of Hispanic radio, starting in
> the 70's and 80'. By the time any progress was made, all the
> standards and oldies fans would be dead.
>
David, normally I agree with your posts because they are rooted in fact and not in opinion. Ted David presented some interesting news about that 50 and older buyer on the other board that could be interesting for older skewing radio formats. On the other hand, I agree that since major market radio stations depend on advertising agencies for the bulk of their business. . .adult/standards radio and oldies are in deep trouble.

 

[willie67]

There is a much bigger, sadder problem here.

Hey, y'all-

David's right. And, the saddest thing about ad agencies dictating what's economically viable and what isn't is that, collectively, the FM band needs diversity now more than it ever has before.

Taking away the choices people can access on a plain ol' FM radio will drive people to either ipod or satellite faster, or they'll just turn the radio off altogether, helping broadcast radio become irrevelent even sooner.

> >
> > One of the hosts of the "Mythbusters" program on the
> > Discovery
> > Channel wears a T-shirt that says, "I reject your reality
> > and
> > substitute my own." David would probably like one of
> those
> > T-shirts since it reflects many of his responses.
> >
> > Consider this: David claims that "old tunes" are used
> > on TV commercials because "newer good songs are too
> > costly to license." Well I don't know about that.
> > But then he claims that "campy, fun songs form (sic) the
> > past" are used by major ad agencies. Picture, if you will,
>
> > an advertising agency selecting a song as the music bed of
> a
> >
> > commercial and then hoping "like mad that the selection
> > does not date the product..."
> >
> > My dear readers...Do you believe that major advertising
> > agencies spend oodles of their clients' money creating
> > commercials in so flip a manner? I didn't think so.
>
> Lighten up. Obviously, you did not see the inherent sarcasam
> in my post. My intent was to try to show that ad agencies
> and major companies do NOT actually do things blindly. There
> has to be a reason. But they do do things creative in a wild
> manner.
>
> The creative process at an agency, however, is very loose,
> flip and unstructured. It is often filled with excurisions
> into the surreal and the throwing of paper missiles, lots of
> "what if" quickie storyboards, and general idea tossing.
> That is how the creative process works when done in a team
> fashion. They don't all sit in cubicles and cogitate.
>
> Once a campaign is developed, (and often there are several
> variants) the client approves or disapproves. At that point,
> a lot o fht ecreative is tested in focus groups, and the TV
> creative is Burked, often in several different markets.
>
> The end product is verified to the extent it can be
> verified. But the creative process is ofen very loose,
> spontaneous and goofy.
>
> It works in radio, too. At one station, every 90 days I took
> the programming and promotion staff to a beach villa and we
> played in the surf and sand and pool and drank beer while we
> designed our efforts for the next three months or so.
>
> Methinks you are a tad too serious. The (sic) was a giveaway
> (I'm dyslexic, in case you care... criticisizing spelling
> and grammar on the web is very anal... many of us are not
> English primary and lots of users have handicaps. Again,
> lighten up, guy.)
>

 

[Harold]

Re: Any Lighter and I'd be Airborne

> >
> > One of the hosts of the "Mythbusters" program on the
> > Discovery
> > Channel wears a T-shirt that says, "I reject your reality
> > and
> > substitute my own." David would probably like one of
> those
> > T-shirts since it reflects many of his responses.
> >
> > Consider this: David claims that "old tunes" are used
> > on TV commercials because "newer good songs are too
> > costly to license." Well I don't know about that.
> > But then he claims that "campy, fun songs form (sic) the
> > past" are used by major ad agencies. Picture, if you will,
>
> > an advertising agency selecting a song as the music bed of
> a
> >
> > commercial and then hoping "like mad that the selection
> > does not date the product..."
> >
> > My dear readers...Do you believe that major advertising
> > agencies spend oodles of their clients' money creating
> > commercials in so flip a manner? I didn't think so.
>
> Lighten up. Obviously, you did not see the inherent sarcasam
> in my post. My intent was to try to show that ad agencies
> and major companies do NOT actually do things blindly. There
> has to be a reason. But they do do things creative in a wild
> manner.
>
> The creative process at an agency, however, is very loose,
> flip and unstructured. It is often filled with excurisions
> into the surreal and the throwing of paper missiles, lots of
> "what if" quickie storyboards, and general idea tossing.
> That is how the creative process works when done in a team
> fashion. They don't all sit in cubicles and cogitate.
>
> Once a campaign is developed, (and often there are several
> variants) the client approves or disapproves. At that point,
> a lot o fht ecreative is tested in focus groups, and the TV
> creative is Burked, often in several different markets.
>
> The end product is verified to the extent it can be
> verified. But the creative process is ofen very loose,
> spontaneous and goofy.
>
> It works in radio, too. At one station, every 90 days I took
> the programming and promotion staff to a beach villa and we
> played in the surf and sand and pool and drank beer while we
> designed our efforts for the next three months or so.
>
> Methinks you are a tad too serious. The (sic) was a giveaway
> (I'm dyslexic, in case you care... criticisizing spelling
> and grammar on the web is very anal... many of us are not
> English primary and lots of users have handicaps. Again,
> lighten up, guy.)
>


David's Plan for Effective Business Management:

"At one station, every 90 days I took the programming
and promotion staff to a beach villa and we played in
the surf and sand and pool and drank beer while we
designed our efforts for the next three months or so."

I am sure that if you, dear readers, owned a radio
station you would be somewhat less inclined to have
your financial future determined by people who were
frolicing in the surf..while drinking beer..than
David is.

David writes, "...criticisizing spelling and grammar
on the web is very anal.." David is not a writer, so
I can forgive him if he is unaware of some of the
rules of the craft. Putting a "(sic)" after a word
is done when quoting another's comments. A good writer
wants to present that quote accurately. So even misspellings
are included as a way of showing that the quote hasn't been
edited or otherwise changed. The "sic" means "spelling
incorrect." It is an acknowledgement by the editor that
the original quote is presented EXACTLY as it first
appeared with no changes. It also signifies that the
editor understands that the word is misspelled.

David writes, "...many of us are not English primary.."
Didn't you once mention on the forum that you're from
Ohio? I haven't been to Ohio recently. Have things
changed there THAT much??

 

[davideduardo]

Re: Give it a rest. You are making us sic.

>
> David's Plan for Effective Business Management:
>
> "At one station, every 90 days I took the programming
> and promotion staff to a beach villa and we played in
> the surf and sand and pool and drank beer while we
> designed our efforts for the next three months or so."

>
> I am sure that if you, dear readers, owned a radio
> station you would be somewhat less inclined to have
> your financial future determined by people who were
> frolicing in the surf..while drinking beer..than
> David is.

And maybe that is why radio is not any fun, for the employees and for the listeners, at so many companies today. You, of course, would fit right in.

The station where we did that holds the record for books and years at #1 in a top 50 market. 20 years this last book... in a top 15 market... with, nearly all the time, higher shares thatn the #2 and #3 stations combined. We did it because we felt radio had to be fun. We did it by doing five morning shows a day, from 5 AM to Midnight. We never bought a TV spot or a billboard, but created an incredible talent lineup. Did I say we had fun?

> David writes, "...criticisizing spelling and grammar
> on the web is very anal.." David is not a writer, so
> I can forgive him if he is unaware of some of the
> rules of the craft. Putting a "(sic)" after a word
> is done when quoting another's comments. A good writer
> wants to present that quote accurately. So even misspellings

David is a published writer, in two languages. However, posting and writing are a different thing. My stepbrother actually was editor (4th generation) of a little US newspaper with circulation of about 400,000, so I know a tiny bit about writing for the media, as well. I simply choose not to pay much attention to style on the web as we are not graded on grammar, syntax and spelling.
>
> are included as a way of showing that the quote hasn't been
> edited or otherwise changed.

And, although I know this, I find it fairly pretentious to use when the spelling error does not change the inherent meaning of a word. In this case, a "normal" dyslexic inversion of two characters.

> The "sic" means "spelling
> incorrect." It is an acknowledgement by the editor that
> the original quote is presented EXACTLY as it first
> appeared with no changes. It also signifies that the
> editor understands that the word is misspelled.

We got the point in the first sentence. As usual, you beat things to death. I think I will go meet with my PDs on the beach and create some fun radio. You are pretty anal _and_ boring.
>
> David writes, "...many of us are not English primary.."
> Didn't you once mention on the forum that you're from
> Ohio? I haven't been to Ohio recently. Have things
> changed there THAT much??
>

 

[tibbs]

Re: Any Lighter and I'd be Airborne

> David's Plan for Effective Business Management:
>
> "At one station, every 90 days I took the programming
> and promotion staff to a beach villa and we played in
> the surf and sand and pool and drank beer while we
> designed our efforts for the next three months or so."
>
> I am sure that if you, dear readers, owned a radio
> station you would be somewhat less inclined to have
> your financial future determined by people who were
> frolicing in the surf..while drinking beer..than
> David is.
>

Well, I used to own stations on the beach and beer ads (and bars)
were a huge part of our business. So, it is possible that would
not have been out of the question and a good "investment."
Just not every afternoon.


> David writes, "...criticisizing spelling and grammar
> on the web is very anal.." David is not a writer, so
> I can forgive him if he is unaware of some of the
> rules of the craft. Putting a "(sic)" after a word
> is done when quoting another's comments. A good writer
> wants to present that quote accurately. So even misspellings
>
> are included as a way of showing that the quote hasn't been
> edited or otherwise changed. The "sic" means "spelling
> incorrect." It is an acknowledgement by the editor that
> the original quote is presented EXACTLY as it first
> appeared with no changes. It also signifies that the
> editor understands that the word is misspelled.

I appreciate your forgiveness of David. What exactly has been
your contribution to society, sir? David is not a writer, but
he is entitled to his opinions and attempts to support them.
You appear to be a frustrated sixth grade bully or a low
level professor with a chip on your shoulder against people
who have become more successful than you. However, there is
always a place for proper grammar. So,,,, "sic" where is
your perfect post?
>
> David writes, "...many of us are not English primary.."
> Didn't you once mention on the forum that you're from
> Ohio? I haven't been to Ohio recently. Have things
> changed there THAT much??
>

Did David beat you out of a job or take your girlfriend?
Man. Take a chill pill.

 

[davideduardo]

Re: It isn't always fun in radio any more.

> Hey, y'all-
>
> David's right. And, the saddest thing about ad agencies
> dictating what's economically viable and what isn't is that,
> collectively, the FM band needs diversity now more than it
> ever has before.

I'm pretty amazed that my description of how to put fun back into radio... which we did, successfully for 20 years at #1... was criticized by Harold as not being fiscally sound. Fiscally sound was the 28% average annual increase in sales we had over that entire period!
>
> Taking away the choices people can access on a plain ol' FM
> radio will drive people to either ipod or satellite faster,
> or they'll just turn the radio off altogether, helping
> broadcast radio become irrevelent even sooner.

There is nothing like trying to put some fun back in the business. Dealing with new insurance, liability, wage and hour and other governmental regulations and keeping people focused on entertaining is really rough. The biggest effort by terrestrial radio should be towards keeping the paper pushing away from the entertainers and making the work environment fun. Nearly everyone I run into in general market radio says it is no longer nearly as much fun as it used to be.

A year ago, I was on a little panel at a convention, with a couple of other programmers. Three of them, representing names you would probably recognize, spent their time in the Green Room before the panel talking about the budgeting process... not programming. How can radio be fun if programmers talk about budgets when they gather, rather than entertainment?

Pass the beer, please.

 

[Harold]

Re: Give it a rest. You are making us sic.

> >
> > David's Plan for Effective Business Management:
> >
> > "At one station, every 90 days I took the programming
> > and promotion staff to a beach villa and we played in
> > the surf and sand and pool and drank beer while we
> > designed our efforts for the next three months or so."
>
> >
> > I am sure that if you, dear readers, owned a radio
> > station you would be somewhat less inclined to have
> > your financial future determined by people who were
> > frolicing in the surf..while drinking beer..than
> > David is.
>
> And maybe that is why radio is not any fun, for the
> employees and for the listeners, at so many companies today.
> You, of course, would fit right in.
>
> The station where we did that holds the record for books and
> years at #1 in a top 50 market. 20 years this last book...
> in a top 15 market... with, nearly all the time, higher
> shares thatn the #2 and #3 stations combined. We did it
> because we felt radio had to be fun. We did it by doing five
> morning shows a day, from 5 AM to Midnight. We never bought
> a TV spot or a billboard, but created an incredible talent
> lineup. Did I say we had fun?
>
> > David writes, "...criticisizing spelling and grammar
> > on the web is very anal.." David is not a writer, so
> > I can forgive him if he is unaware of some of the
> > rules of the craft. Putting a "(sic)" after a word
> > is done when quoting another's comments. A good writer
> > wants to present that quote accurately. So even
> misspellings
>
> David is a published writer, in two languages. However,
> posting and writing are a different thing. My stepbrother
> actually was editor (4th generation) of a little US
> newspaper with circulation of about 400,000, so I know a
> tiny bit about writing for the media, as well. I simply
> choose not to pay much attention to style on the web as we
> are not graded on grammar, syntax and spelling.
> >
> > are included as a way of showing that the quote hasn't
> been
> > edited or otherwise changed.
>
> And, although I know this, I find it fairly pretentious to
> use when the spelling error does not change the inherent
> meaning of a word. In this case, a "normal" dyslexic
> inversion of two characters.
>
> > The "sic" means "spelling
> > incorrect." It is an acknowledgement by the editor that
> > the original quote is presented EXACTLY as it first
> > appeared with no changes. It also signifies that the
> > editor understands that the word is misspelled.
>
> We got the point in the first sentence. As usual, you beat
> things to death. I think I will go meet with my PDs on the
> beach and create some fun radio. You are pretty anal _and_
> boring.
> >
> > David writes, "...many of us are not English primary.."
> > Didn't you once mention on the forum that you're from
> > Ohio? I haven't been to Ohio recently. Have things
> > changed there THAT much??
> >
>

So I try to be polite and explain things to David,
but he doesn't take correction well, does he? He takes
the opportunity to tell us how talented and accomplished
he is, presumably because he wants us to believe that
the opinions of mere peasants are not worthy in light
of David's illumination.

David's stepbrother, he tells us, is a fourth-generation
editor. I suppose that if your great-grandfather was an
editor somehow the talents can be passed along, perhaps
through the genes, to subsequent generations. Also, being
the brother of an editor, according to David, makes you a
bit more of an expert than us common folk.

With comments like this: "You are pretty anal _and_ boring,"
David shows just how little he can add to a discussion
other than vulgar insults. I give you leave, David, to
avoid reading my future posts. I wouldn't want to bore you.

 

[Harold]

Re: Any Lighter and I'd be Airborne

> > David's Plan for Effective Business Management:
> >
> > "At one station, every 90 days I took the programming
> > and promotion staff to a beach villa and we played in
> > the surf and sand and pool and drank beer while we
> > designed our efforts for the next three months or so."
> >
> > I am sure that if you, dear readers, owned a radio
> > station you would be somewhat less inclined to have
> > your financial future determined by people who were
> > frolicing in the surf..while drinking beer..than
> > David is.
> >
>
> Well, I used to own stations on the beach and beer ads (and
> bars)
> were a huge part of our business. So, it is possible that
> would
> not have been out of the question and a good "investment."
> Just not every afternoon.
>
>
> > David writes, "...criticisizing spelling and grammar
> > on the web is very anal.." David is not a writer, so
> > I can forgive him if he is unaware of some of the
> > rules of the craft. Putting a "(sic)" after a word
> > is done when quoting another's comments. A good writer
> > wants to present that quote accurately. So even
> misspellings
> >
> > are included as a way of showing that the quote hasn't
> been
> > edited or otherwise changed. The "sic" means "spelling
> > incorrect." It is an acknowledgement by the editor that
> > the original quote is presented EXACTLY as it first
> > appeared with no changes. It also signifies that the
> > editor understands that the word is misspelled.
>
> I appreciate your forgiveness of David. What exactly has
> been
> your contribution to society, sir? David is not a writer,
> but
> he is entitled to his opinions and attempts to support them.
>
> You appear to be a frustrated sixth grade bully or a low
> level professor with a chip on your shoulder against people
> who have become more successful than you. However, there is
> always a place for proper grammar. So,,,, "sic" where is
> your perfect post?
> >
> > David writes, "...many of us are not English primary.."
> > Didn't you once mention on the forum that you're from
> > Ohio? I haven't been to Ohio recently. Have things
> > changed there THAT much??
> >
>
> Did David beat you out of a job or take your girlfriend?
> Man. Take a chill pill.
>

Mr. Tibbs tells us this:

"You appear to be a frustrated sixth grade bully or a low
level professor with a chip on your shoulder against people
who have become more successful than you."

You sure know how to contribute to civilized discussion.
Well I can tell you I am not a sixth-grader. And when I
was, I wasn't a bully. I left that avocation to others.
They grew up to become radio station owners.
Nor am I a professor, of low or high standing. And I am
not so shallow as to believe that whatever anyone else
does makes them more or less successful than any other
person. I don't envy anyone for their money or material
possessions. I also don't think a wall of plaques and
awards from industry associations means anything. A
person who has the respect of even just one worthy
person has all the success for which one can hope.

No..David didn't beat me out of a job nor take my
girlfriend. And to answer your question: "What exactly
has been your contribution to society, sir?" You will
have to forgive me for so small a contribution. But I
have shown that when enticed into a legitimate debate
David resorts to personnel insults. That is a worthy
contribution, wouldn't you say?

 

[Harold]

Re: It isn't always fun in radio any more.

> > Hey, y'all-
> >
> > David's right. And, the saddest thing about ad agencies
> > dictating what's economically viable and what isn't is
> that,
> > collectively, the FM band needs diversity now more than it
>
> > ever has before.
>
> I'm pretty amazed that my description of how to put fun back
> into radio... which we did, successfully for 20 years at
> #1... was criticized by Harold as not being fiscally sound.
> Fiscally sound was the 28% average annual increase in sales
> we had over that entire period!
> >
> > Taking away the choices people can access on a plain ol'
> FM
> > radio will drive people to either ipod or satellite
> faster,
> > or they'll just turn the radio off altogether, helping
> > broadcast radio become irrevelent even sooner.
>
> There is nothing like trying to put some fun back in the
> business. Dealing with new insurance, liability, wage and
> hour and other governmental regulations and keeping people
> focused on entertaining is really rough. The biggest effort
> by terrestrial radio should be towards keeping the paper
> pushing away from the entertainers and making the work
> environment fun. Nearly everyone I run into in general
> market radio says it is no longer nearly as much fun as it
> used to be.
>
> A year ago, I was on a little panel at a convention, with a
> couple of other programmers. Three of them, representing
> names you would probably recognize, spent their time in the
> Green Room before the panel talking about the budgeting
> process... not programming. How can radio be fun if
> programmers talk about budgets when they gather, rather than
> entertainment?
>
> Pass the beer, please.
>

"Pass the beer, please." Wait a minute!!!! That explains it.
That explains everything. I should have realized it. It's
the beer. Everything now can be viewed in that context. How
could I have missed it before. Beer!! Yes. Now it all makes
sense.