Classic Hits: Evolution or Revolution?

[michael hagerty]

Repetition = "every time I tune in, they play bad songs"

Not the true definition of "Repetition". The listener's definition is when someone tunes in and hears an overplayed good song 5 times a week.

Okay...one more time (third, fourth...I've lost count).

The typical desired core target listener for a Classic Hits station listens for 20-40 minutes a day, usually at the same time and shares his or her listening with, on average, six other stations.

On a station like KOOL or KRTH, with 800 songs and properly managed rotation (which I painstakingly outlined for you in an earlier post) they don't hear the same song five times in a week, a month or probably even in a quarter. They're hearing the heaviest rotations once every three weeks. That's why Brown Eyed Girl still tests well...because the programmers understand how the desired audience uses radio and has crafted rotations that ensure the target audience's expectations are met.

 

[michael hagerty]

1 to 2 p.m.:

Love Will Find a Way -- Pablo Cruise
Oh Sherrie -- Steve Perry
No Matter What -- Badfinger
This Will Be -- Natalie Cole
Come See About Me -- Supremes
Pop Muzik -- M
You Are Everything -- Stylistics
We Don't Talk Anymore -- Cliff Richard
Why Can't We Be Friends? -- War
Devil With a Blue Dress/Good Golly Miss Molly -- Mitch Ryder
Imagine -- John Lennon
Boogie Wonderland -- Earth, Wind & Fire
Babe -- Styx
Maniac -- Michael Sembello

Again, this station isn't wishing on a star. This is just a really good mix of mostly uptempo hits from three decades and representing a variety of musical styles, with two slow tracks (Lennon and Stylistics) for a change of pace. When I want to be surprised, I try Internet radio or Sirius XM, but to me, there's nothing at all wrong with DRC-FM for driving around the area or even banging away at the computer keyboard.

Both the hours you've posted look solid. The Cliff Richard is a bit of a surprise, but given all the other songs, I'm sure you're looking at a station that takes tests as seriously as KRTH and doesn't deviate from it.

 

[michael hagerty]

David, I could listen to your station for a week tops, then you'd lose me with just 500 songs, even with a huge DJ personality factor. That's if I didn't die of boredom first.

WDRC has tapped into the pinnacle of music quality and artisanship. General consensus is that the '70s represent the greatest decade for music, usually slightly edging out the '60s and trumping the '80s. The Beatles were collectively more active during the '70s than they ever were in the '60s.

Music quality surged in the '60s and reached a high ebb in the mid to late '70s & early '80s not only for Classic Hits, but also for A/C and even Country. It would be very hard for a station to go wrong with such a focus. There are so many fantastic, worthy songs from that period that receive little to no airplay because the charts remained so clogged with other excellent songs for years and therefore they did not chart quite as high. WDRC recognizes this, and is evidently trying to bring great Top 40 hits out of mothballs such as these:

Wham Bam - Silver (#16, '76)
Gettin' Ready For Love - Diana Ross (#27, '77)
She Did It - Eric Carmen (#23, '77; Cash Box #15; Canada #11)
Star Baby - The Guess Who (#39, '74; CB #30; Canada #9)
When She Was My Girl - Four Tops (#11, '81; CB #10)
Shake It - Ian Matthews (#13, '77; CB #10)
Signed, Sealed, Delivered - Peter Frampton (#18, '77; CB #13)
How Much Love - Leo Sayer (#17, '77; CB #9)
Gemini Dream - Moody Blues (#12, '81)
Heaven on the Seventh Floor - Paul Nicholas (#6, '77; CB #5)
You Made Me Believe in Magic - BCR (#10, '77; CB #7; Canada #2)
Rock and Roll Love Leter - Bay City Rollers (#28, '76; Canada #6)
Ariel - Dean Friedman (#26, '77; CB #17, 5 mos. on Hot 100)
Come Back - J. Geils Band (#32, '80)
Romeo's Tune - Steve Forbert (#11, '80)
This Song - George Harrison (#25, '77)
Ai No Corrida - Quincy Jones (#28, '81)
Heart to Heart - Kenny Loggins (#15, '82)
Lovely Day - Bill Withers (#30, '78; CB #23)
Take Me Home - Cher (#8, '79)
You're the Love - Seals & Crofts (#18, '78)
Winds of Change - Jefferson Starship (#38, '83)
Say You'll Stay Until Tomorrow - Tom Jones (#15, '77)
Let's Pretend - Raspberries (#35, '73; CB #18; RW #14)
Hold On - Santana (#15, '82; CB #9)
Break Away - Art Garfunkel (#39, '76)
Deeper Than the Night - Olivia Newton-John (#11, '79)
Hope You Love Me Like You Say You Do - Huey Lewis/News (#36, '82; CB #33)
Get Used to It - Roger Voudouris (#21, '79)
Play the Game Tonight - Kansas (#17, '82)
Better Love Next Time - Dr. Hook (#12, '79)

Also, Alice Cooper (ALL of his ignored Top 20 hits from 1976-1980). And ditto that for Juice Newton! Seems like all her stuff gets ignored these days.

Folks, songs like these will liven up your all too predictable playlists!
Here's a few more obscure hits to check out. And some of them were
actually bigger hits than what their Billboard ranking suggests.

Don't Hide Your Love - Cher (#46, '72, Neil Sedaka tune)
Keep On Dancin' - Gary's Gang (#41, '79; CB #33; UK #4)
What Cha' Gonna Do For Me - Chaka Khan (#53, '81; CB #49)
Keep This Heart in Mind - Bonnie Raitt (#104, '82)
Turn to Gold - David Austin (#68, '84 in UK)

Transoceanic songs such as the cool one just above might also be considered! All the extinct "medley hits" of the early '80s are also neat. (Just a thought.)

Okay...those are not lost hits. Those are....well, I'll count the ones that peaked between #15 and #20 as near-misses, but the rest? They're stiffs. Huge disappointments to the artists and their labels.

We went over this in another thread, but there was a much bigger gap in sales between a #1 record and a #10 record than there was between a #20 record and a #40. And below that, all the way down to #100, less still.

Ultimately, though, what counts is whether the desired target audience for a station wants to hear a record today. Chart positions from 35 years ago aren't something the average 40 year old knows or is influenced by if you tell them.

 

[semoochie]

I would think that the amount of time that a song is originally popular, would have an effect on its long term popularity. The fact that it's familiar to most of the target audience, as long as it's in the right genre' and doesn't have any strong negatives, should create a positive response, even if it wasn't really a favorite at the time.

 

[michael hagerty]

I would think that the amount of time that a song is originally popular, would have an effect on its long term popularity. The fact that it's familiar to most of the target audience, as long as it's in the right genre' and doesn't have any strong negatives, should create a positive response, even if it wasn't really a favorite at the time.

If that theory were true, it could only work for records from a time when the target listener was tuned in to pop music and would be exposed to a record's length of popularity. The age at which that happens varies, but let's just use Arbitron's earliest age for teens, age 12.

We want to reach 40 year olds, so that's someone born in 1973. For length of original popularity to be a factor for those people, the record can't be older than 1985.

But there are other problems with that theory:

A record that was on the charts a long time "without really becoming a favorite" is a red flag in itself...indicating that not enough people cared about it at the same time for it to do well. There's no reason to expect that to have changed just because time has passed.

Ultimately, the only measure of a record's suitability for airplay in 2013 is to test it now. Even back in the day, most teenagers weren't chart freaks. They used the radio more than their adult lifestyles would accommodate, but they weren't keeping close tabs on every record. They turned the radio up when a favorite song came on...and most only had a handful of favorites at any given time.

Those people, now in their 40s, with jobs, families, lives and interests (and between 6 and 9 other radio stations on their presets) are the target classic hits listener. They're not looking for "the soundtrack of their lives"...they want a few of their favorite songs when they push the button...and there are a lot of buttons.

 

[oldies76]

Okay...those are not lost hits. Those are....well, I'll count the ones that peaked between #15 and #20 as near-misses, but the rest? They're stiffs. Huge disappointments to the artists and their labels.

To the actual artists, you are correct, but to an average classic hits station, those are all "lost hits", meaning songs that are rarely, if ever played today, compared to the well-tested songs that get played frequently. In fact, some classic hit stations have a "lost 45" feature and even some of those songs are not at positions 20-30, they may be in the top 10. Crazy isn't it?

 

[oldies76]

But when disliked songs occur, particularly with some frequency, the listener's emotional reaction is "every time I listen, they play those songs I hate." That's repetition... bad songs, any bad songs, with frequency... that's repetition.

Meaning bad songs to that particular person, but good songs to others listening. So in reality, everyone has their favorites and dislikes, regardless what's being aired.

 

[michael hagerty]

Okay...those are not lost hits. Those are....well, I'll count the ones that peaked between #15 and #20 as near-misses, but the rest? They're stiffs. Huge disappointments to the artists and their labels.

To the actual artists, you are correct, but to an average classic hits station, those are all "lost hits", meaning songs that are rarely, if ever played today, compared to the well-tested songs that get played frequently. In fact, some classic hit stations have a "lost 45" feature and even some of those songs are not at positions 20-30, they may be in the top 10. Crazy isn't it?

A stiff doesn't become a "lost hit" simply because time has passed and it hasn't been played in a while. It's still a stiff.

As to the stations that feature former Top 10s as "lost 45s"...they're actually doing what you've been advocating...trying to find a safe place to occasionally play a record that is close, but not quite there in music testing. What it should tell you is that the list of viable candidates is extremely small.

 

[michael hagerty]

But when disliked songs occur, particularly with some frequency, the listener's emotional reaction is "every time I listen, they play those songs I hate." That's repetition... bad songs, any bad songs, with frequency... that's repetition.

Meaning bad songs to that particular person, but good songs to others listening. So in reality, everyone has their favorites and dislikes, regardless what's being aired.

No...meaning songs that a significant percentage of the audience has indicated either disinterest or dislike towards, that increases the risk of tune-out.

Again, it's consensus. What songs the largest number of listeners possible have in common with each other. Not one of my favorites you don't like followed by one of yours that I don't like followed by one of Biondi4Mayor's that neither you nor I like.

The pizza analogy, in other words.

 

[Biondi4Mayor]

Creativity is frowned upon in radio, and it both sucks, and it shows. For example, Classic Hits stations could have jumped on the Beach Boys latest album or the new Rolling Stones "trend". The internet oldies station I listen to, plays the Beach Boys' "That's Why God Made The Radio" alongside all the classics....And it sounds good.

But no, they'll just stick to their tired old playlists. Radio needs help!

And we've now come full circle:


Re: Which is the bigger "tune out" factor?
« Reply #267 on: December 31, 2012, 05:04:53 PM »
Reply with quoteQuote
Quote from: Biondi4Mayor on December 31, 2012, 04:45:50 PM


This format needs to be exectuted better. It cannot be strangled by research.

New York: WCBS-FM #2 overall
Los Angeles: KRTH-FM #6 overall
Chicago: WLS-FM #8 overall
San Francisco: KOSF-FM #9 overall
Dallas: KLUV-FM #7 overall
Houston: KGLK-FM #9 overall
Philadelphia: WOGL-FM #7 overall
Atlanta: WSRV-FM #6 overall
Boston: WROR-FM #4 overall

This is a format that needs to be executed better and is being strangled?

I didn't say this the first time around, but your examples are pretty lousy. This is a 60's-80's board, but some of those stations (WSRV for example) are more Classic Rock than classic hits, and acts like Tom Petty (w/ 90's material, or even Pearl Jam) show up on some of those. Def Leppard is playing as I type this on WSRV, to compare that as a success for "Oldies/Classic Hits" is lousy. WCBS is a given success, WLS has tanked below the top 10 since then (holiday arguement aside) and we agreed earlier that K-Earth is more older sounding, and more close to what we as fans would like (in that slightly more 60's songs are played).

Radio allienates both its oldest and its youngest listeners. Younger people can look elsewhere, and trust me they do, and the older people are thrown aside. So, yes the industry is strangling itself...what's left is the middle core of listeners who will inevitably look in other forms of media for music or "age-out". Radio is a lot like Borders the bookstore, too afraid to face the facts of a competitive and changing media world. There's been little evolving lately, and ultimately it is taking itself down. The only people who deny this fact are the most high-ups, or the most disillusioned. Our arguement is that radio needs to evolve more creatively, and your argument is that it should practically remain the same as nothing is wrong.

 

[michael hagerty]

Creativity is frowned upon in radio, and it both sucks, and it shows. For example, Classic Hits stations could have jumped on the Beach Boys latest album or the new Rolling Stones "trend". The internet oldies station I listen to, plays the Beach Boys' "That's Why God Made The Radio" alongside all the classics....And it sounds good.

But no, they'll just stick to their tired old playlists. Radio needs help!

And we've now come full circle:


Re: Which is the bigger "tune out" factor?
« Reply #267 on: December 31, 2012, 05:04:53 PM »
Reply with quoteQuote
Quote from: Biondi4Mayor on December 31, 2012, 04:45:50 PM


This format needs to be exectuted better. It cannot be strangled by research.

New York: WCBS-FM #2 overall
Los Angeles: KRTH-FM #6 overall
Chicago: WLS-FM #8 overall
San Francisco: KOSF-FM #9 overall
Dallas: KLUV-FM #7 overall
Houston: KGLK-FM #9 overall
Philadelphia: WOGL-FM #7 overall
Atlanta: WSRV-FM #6 overall
Boston: WROR-FM #4 overall

This is a format that needs to be executed better and is being strangled?

I didn't say this the first time around, but your examples are pretty lousy. This is a 60's-80's board, but some of those stations (WSRV for example) are more Classic Rock than classic hits, and acts like Tom Petty (w/ 90's material, or even Pearl Jam) show up on some of those. Def Leppard is playing as I type this on WSRV, to compare that as a success for "Oldies/Classic Hits" is lousy. WCBS is a given success, WLS has tanked below the top 10 since then (holiday arguement aside) and we agreed earlier that K-Earth is more older sounding, and more close to what we as fans would like (in that slightly more 60's songs are played).

Radio allienates both its oldest and its youngest listeners. Younger people can look elsewhere, and trust me they do, and the older people are thrown aside. So, yes the industry is strangling itself...what's left is the middle core of listeners who will inevitably look in other forms of media for music or "age-out".

I have to agree about WSRV. They're listed as Classic Hits, but after looking at today's playlist so far, I'd call them classic rock.

If WCBS-FM were a given success, CBS wouldn't have junked it for "Jack" 7 years ago. They survive today because they came back changed.

WLS? You can't discount the effects of a Holiday book. Here in Phoenix, one of the ACs KOOL and several other stations share audience with got a 15.9 playing all-Christmas music. They're usually in the 4s. That extra 11-point-something came at other stations' expense.

KRTH? Three 60s songs an hour, an active library that reaches into the 1990s and that's "more older sounding"?

25-54 has always been the money demo. For a 20-year span, a combination of the Baby Boom and record prosperity made teens desirable. And 55+ has been regarded as a tough sell for 40 years.

 

[CTListener]

Creativity is frowned upon in radio, and it both sucks, and it shows. For example, Classic Hits stations could have jumped on the Beach Boys latest album or the new Rolling Stones "trend". The internet oldies station I listen to, plays the Beach Boys' "That's Why God Made The Radio" alongside all the classics....And it sounds good.

But no, they'll just stick to their tired old playlists. Radio needs help!

And we've now come full circle:


Re: Which is the bigger "tune out" factor?
« Reply #267 on: December 31, 2012, 05:04:53 PM »
Reply with quoteQuote
Quote from: Biondi4Mayor on December 31, 2012, 04:45:50 PM


This format needs to be exectuted better. It cannot be strangled by research.

New York: WCBS-FM #2 overall
Los Angeles: KRTH-FM #6 overall
Chicago: WLS-FM #8 overall
San Francisco: KOSF-FM #9 overall
Dallas: KLUV-FM #7 overall
Houston: KGLK-FM #9 overall
Philadelphia: WOGL-FM #7 overall
Atlanta: WSRV-FM #6 overall
Boston: WROR-FM #4 overall

This is a format that needs to be executed better and is being strangled?

I didn't say this the first time around, but your examples are pretty lousy. This is a 60's-80's board, but some of those stations (WSRV for example) are more Classic Rock than classic hits, and acts like Tom Petty (w/ 90's material, or even Pearl Jam) show up on some of those. Def Leppard is playing as I type this on WSRV, to compare that as a success for "Oldies/Classic Hits" is lousy. WCBS is a given success, WLS has tanked below the top 10 since then (holiday arguement aside) and we agreed earlier that K-Earth is more older sounding, and more close to what we as fans would like (in that slightly more 60's songs are played).

Radio allienates both its oldest and its youngest listeners. Younger people can look elsewhere, and trust me they do, and the older people are thrown aside. So, yes the industry is strangling itself...what's left is the middle core of listeners who will inevitably look in other forms of media for music or "age-out".

I have to agree about WSRV. They're listed as Classic Hits, but after looking at today's playlist so far, I'd call them classic rock.

If WCBS-FM were a given success, CBS wouldn't have junked it for "Jack" 7 years ago. They survive today because they came back changed.

WLS? You can't discount the effects of a Holiday book. Here in Phoenix, one of the ACs KOOL and several other stations share audience with got a 15.9 playing all-Christmas music. They're usually in the 4s. That extra 11-point-something came at other stations' expense.

KRTH? Three 60s songs an hour, an active library that reaches into the 1990s and that's "more older sounding"?

25-54 has always been the money demo. For a 20-year span, a combination of the Baby Boom and record prosperity made teens desirable. And 55+ has been regarded as a tough sell for 40 years.

WROR Boston is definitely a classic rock-leaning classic hits station. When rival WODS went CHR last year, many on the Boston board speculated that WROR would be picking up "Brandy," "The Hustle," "Midnight Confessions," "My Girl" and a bunch of other pop/soul/disco tunes that WODS had in its rotation. It didn't. It's still heavily tilted toward the big hits of classic rock ("Layla," "Walk This Way," "Don't Stand So Close to Me") and pop with a rock edge (Elton John's "Saturday Night's Alright For Fighting," yes. Elton's "Daniel," no.) No Supremes, no Stylistics, no Aretha, a select few Michael Jackson tracks are pretty much the only songs by black artists, other than Jimi Hendrix who was a rock artist not an R&B performer, on the playlist. The fact that the station is doing well without having to accommodate WODS's library indicates to me that there's no need for it to do anything differently.

 

[CTListener]

11 a.m. to noon on WROR Boston:

you ain't seen nothing y 01/24/2013 @ 12:01 pm bachman turner overdrive
centerfold 01/24/2013 @ 11:57 am j. geils band
another brick in the wall 01/24/2013 @ 11:54 am pink floyd
solsbury hill 01/24/2013 @ 11:49 am peter gabriel
take me home tonight 01/24/2013 @ 11:46 am eddie money
hotel california 01/24/2013 @ 11:34 am eagles
lido shuffle 01/24/2013 @ 11:30 am boz scaggs
breakdown 01/24/2013 @ 11:27 am tom petty & the heartbre
what i like about you 01/24/2013 @ 11:24 am romantics
levon 01/24/2013 @ 11:19 am elton john
band on the run 01/24/2013 @ 11:08 am paul mccartney
money for nothing 01/24/2013 @ 11:03 am dire straits
jumpin jack flash 01/24/2013 @ 11:00 am rolling stones

 

[Biondi4Mayor]

Creativity is frowned upon in radio, and it both sucks, and it shows. For example, Classic Hits stations could have jumped on the Beach Boys latest album or the new Rolling Stones "trend". The internet oldies station I listen to, plays the Beach Boys' "That's Why God Made The Radio" alongside all the classics....And it sounds good.

But no, they'll just stick to their tired old playlists. Radio needs help!

And we've now come full circle:


Re: Which is the bigger "tune out" factor?
« Reply #267 on: December 31, 2012, 05:04:53 PM »
Reply with quoteQuote
Quote from: Biondi4Mayor on December 31, 2012, 04:45:50 PM


This format needs to be exectuted better. It cannot be strangled by research.

New York: WCBS-FM #2 overall
Los Angeles: KRTH-FM #6 overall
Chicago: WLS-FM #8 overall
San Francisco: KOSF-FM #9 overall
Dallas: KLUV-FM #7 overall
Houston: KGLK-FM #9 overall
Philadelphia: WOGL-FM #7 overall
Atlanta: WSRV-FM #6 overall
Boston: WROR-FM #4 overall

This is a format that needs to be executed better and is being strangled?

I didn't say this the first time around, but your examples are pretty lousy. This is a 60's-80's board, but some of those stations (WSRV for example) are more Classic Rock than classic hits, and acts like Tom Petty (w/ 90's material, or even Pearl Jam) show up on some of those. Def Leppard is playing as I type this on WSRV, to compare that as a success for "Oldies/Classic Hits" is lousy. WCBS is a given success, WLS has tanked below the top 10 since then (holiday arguement aside) and we agreed earlier that K-Earth is more older sounding, and more close to what we as fans would like (in that slightly more 60's songs are played).

Radio allienates both its oldest and its youngest listeners. Younger people can look elsewhere, and trust me they do, and the older people are thrown aside. So, yes the industry is strangling itself...what's left is the middle core of listeners who will inevitably look in other forms of media for music or "age-out".

I have to agree about WSRV. They're listed as Classic Hits, but after looking at today's playlist so far, I'd call them classic rock.

If WCBS-FM were a given success, CBS wouldn't have junked it for "Jack" 7 years ago. They survive today because they came back changed.

WLS? You can't discount the effects of a Holiday book. Here in Phoenix, one of the ACs KOOL and several other stations share audience with got a 15.9 playing all-Christmas music. They're usually in the 4s. That extra 11-point-something came at other stations' expense.

KRTH? Three 60s songs an hour, an active library that reaches into the 1990s and that's "more older sounding"?

25-54 has always been the money demo. For a 20-year span, a combination of the Baby Boom and record prosperity made teens desirable. And 55+ has been regarded as a tough sell for 40 years.

Looking at WROR too, is more Classic Rock leaning. Led Zepplin, Tom Petty, few female, few black artists.

I don't see any 90's on K-Earth, I guess my comment (too vague I think) was more meant to say that the station still plays "Baby Love" and "When A Man Loves A Woman" more than "We Didn't Start The Fire" or "I Won't Back Down". Sorry, my wording was a little poor the first time

I know this isn't the right forum for this but I know you follow Chicago a little bit as well, so I'd like to flush out the details from my perspective regarding WLS.....
In 2012, WLS-FM billed 10.6 Million, their relative competitor WJMK, billed 7.8 Million. Typically, before a shift towards rock in the fall for WLS, they were (as you said) in the 4.0+ range, but that changed with the format. WJMK was typically in the lower 2.0 - 2.3 range. WJMK skewed younger, while WLS skewed pretty old. I give you that, and I get that. Let's say for instance (FOR INSTANCE!) WLS's ratings remain the same (barring any holiday talk), they're much more in line age-wise, and ratings wise with WJMK. Therefore, it would be reasonable to expect similar billing - a 2.8 Million Loss behind WLS. BUT, WJMK has far better billings for its ratings than compared to WLS. WLS now has to compete with a far better WDRV (with a BIGGER library by the way) who bills 21.0 Million. Here's where I'm going with this, why would a station allienate an audience (providing no weekend specials, no late night anything to even relieve any of the older listeners) for what would be fair to project as a loss money wise. There skewing towards an area already well covered in ratings, and ad-buyers, do they think they can seriously compete? Most of my thinking and comments, typically come from my experience with these stations. Is it seriously worth losing a few million dollars just to shave the "forbidden" older audience? And yes, this is hypothetical, but it is not a complete stretch.

Regarding creativity, radio has to do something!!! WRIT-Milwaukee (who still calls themselves OLDIES!!!) typically gets ratings in the 6+ even 7+ range, and they go a lot older than typical classic hits. BUT, during Christmas, they go all Christmas (which is perfect because many of the mainstays on holiday stations are older ie: Carpenters, Brenda Lee) and they post even bigger ratings. What a concept!!!!!! A great way to treat oldies fans during the year, and get mass appeal and bigger billing come the holiday!!!! This is a little more in line with what I was talking about creatively. Provide more older shows for folks at night or on weekends (when David claims no one listens) but don't anger your loyal public!!!!!! Seriously!!!!

Advertising (an area I know little about) still makes little sense. Turn on the TV, a TON of ads, on multiple channels are medicine, hosptial, AARP, or Walgreens related. If these companies want to advertise on TV, then older skewing radio is perfect for them! The money is out there, but I get the feeling that as soon as age goes up, the format goes down because of little attempt to cater to the older skewing ages. The need to go young will hurt radio in the future, as the younger generations are far more media literate, and able to multi-task, so good luck reaching them through an un-evolving medium.

 

[michael hagerty]

Radio is a lot like Borders the bookstore, too afraid to face the facts of a competitive and changing media world. There's been little evolving lately, and ultimately it is taking itself down. The only people who deny this fact are the most high-ups, or the most disillusioned. Our arguement is that radio needs to evolve more creatively, and your argument is that it should practically remain the same as nothing is wrong.

Radio as a whole is its own conversation, but this format, which darn near died in the middle of the previous decade, is now a strong performer and attracting younger listeners than before. It's doing that through rigorously applied music testing, meticulously designed rotations and by adding music from more recent years...all things that get a lot of heat on this board. But the fact is, they are the reason there's a format to discuss in 2013.

 

[Biondi4Mayor]

Radio is a lot like Borders the bookstore, too afraid to face the facts of a competitive and changing media world. There's been little evolving lately, and ultimately it is taking itself down. The only people who deny this fact are the most high-ups, or the most disillusioned. Our arguement is that radio needs to evolve more creatively, and your argument is that it should practically remain the same as nothing is wrong.

Radio as a whole is its own conversation, but this format, which darn near died in the middle of the previous decade, is now a strong performer and attracting younger listeners than before. It's doing that through rigorously applied music testing, meticulously designed rotations and by adding music from more recent years...all things that get a lot of heat on this board. But the fact is, they are the reason there's a format to discuss in 2013.

Ok, but now those listeners (me being one you just described) are tired of it. The songs currently played don't need the ax, but there's little excuse for all songs (almost all, there's plenty of exceptions though) to be deleted based on age. Connect with these new audiences and old audiences that you claim were saved because of the testing. Now take it one further. Bring personality to the format. Expose them to specialty shows, appointment listening, further online interraction, social media interaction. Speaking of which, I'm a fan of one of the classic hits stations on facebook, you know what their last two posts were? One about Pearl Jam, the other about Nikki Minaj!!! They don't know their own audience!!! Take your format, and make it something special. Sure, greatest hits stations will never be number one in ratings, but you can develop a following more effectively than they are doing now.

 

[michael hagerty]

I know this isn't the right forum for this but I know you follow Chicago a little bit as well, so I'd like to flush out the details from my perspective regarding WLS.....
In 2012, WLS-FM billed 10.6 Million, their relative competitor WJMK, billed 7.8 Million. Typically, before a shift towards rock in the fall for WLS, they were (as you said) in the 4.0+ range, but that changed with the format. WJMK was typically in the lower 2.0 - 2.3 range. WJMK skewed younger, while WLS skewed pretty old. I give you that, and I get that. Let's say for instance (FOR INSTANCE!) WLS's ratings remain the same (barring any holiday talk), they're much more in line age-wise, and ratings wise with WJMK. Therefore, it would be reasonable to expect similar billing - a 2.8 Million Loss behind WLS. BUT, WJMK has far better billings for its ratings than compared to WLS. WLS now has to compete with a far better WDRV (with a BIGGER library by the way) who bills 21.0 Million. Here's where I'm going with this, why would a station allienate an audience (providing no weekend specials, no late night anything to even relieve any of the older listeners) for what would be fair to project as a loss money wise. There skewing towards an area already well covered in ratings, and ad-buyers, do they think they can seriously compete? Most of my thinking and comments, typically come from my experience with these stations. Is it seriously worth losing a few million dollars just to shave the "forbidden" older audience? And yes, this is hypothetical, but it is not a complete stretch.

I really don't follow Chicago. I've never been there.

As to your example, though, revenues aren't chained to ratings on a point-by-point basis. As I've mentioned before (perhaps in another thread, it's all starting to blur), the objective is to rank within the top 5 or so of a key demo. That will usually get you in on most of the agency buys, and that generates the money. So losing a couple of points in 6+ may well be meaningless within the demo and has no bearing whatsoever on revenues.

Regarding creativity, radio has to do something!!! WRIT-Milwaukee (who still calls themselves OLDIES!!!) typically gets ratings in the 6+ even 7+ range, and they go a lot older than typical classic hits. BUT, during Christmas, they go all Christmas (which is perfect because many of the mainstays on holiday stations are older ie: Carpenters, Brenda Lee) and they post even bigger ratings. What a concept!!!!!! A great way to treat oldies fans during the year, and get mass appeal and bigger billing come the holiday!!!! This is a little more in line with what I was talking about creatively. Provide more older shows for folks at night or on weekends (when David claims no one listens) but don't anger your loyal public!!!!!! Seriously!!!!

Milwaukee only has 18 signals that show up in Arbitron. Six of them are talk, news/talk or sports...one is Spanish language. So that's 11. If you factor out Country (just for this argument, because there are people who listen to Classic Hits and Country), the only remaining music stations are 2 CHRs, a Hot AC, a Variety Hits, an AC, an alternative an Urban plus an AM Classic Country and a AAA run by a non-profit. Simply put, there are far fewer places for the audience to tune out to and far fewer competitors for the ad buys.

Advertising (an area I know little about) still makes little sense. Turn on the TV, a TON of ads, on multiple channels are medicine, hosptial, AARP, or Walgreens related. If these companies want to advertise on TV, then older skewing radio is perfect for them! The money is out there, but I get the feeling that as soon as age goes up, the format goes down because of little attempt to cater to the older skewing ages.

A chunk of those ads (Hoveround, other home medical supplies) are direct response ads...and those don't work as well on radio as they do on television. Your audience there isn't 55+, or even 65+, it's largely 80+ and mobility impaired.

Beyond that, the Walgreens, CVS, Rite Aid and other chains don't slant their ads strictly toward upper demos...they do a ton of family business too...and mom and dad are (generally) between 25 and 54.

If older-skewing radio was perfect for them, Adult Standards would have been an easier sell and would still be in a lot of markets where it's not.

 

[michael hagerty]

11 a.m. to noon on WROR Boston:

you ain't seen nothing y 01/24/2013 @ 12:01 pm bachman turner overdrive
centerfold 01/24/2013 @ 11:57 am j. geils band
another brick in the wall 01/24/2013 @ 11:54 am pink floyd
solsbury hill 01/24/2013 @ 11:49 am peter gabriel
take me home tonight 01/24/2013 @ 11:46 am eddie money
hotel california 01/24/2013 @ 11:34 am eagles
lido shuffle 01/24/2013 @ 11:30 am boz scaggs
breakdown 01/24/2013 @ 11:27 am tom petty & the heartbre
what i like about you 01/24/2013 @ 11:24 am romantics
levon 01/24/2013 @ 11:19 am elton john
band on the run 01/24/2013 @ 11:08 am paul mccartney
money for nothing 01/24/2013 @ 11:03 am dire straits
jumpin jack flash 01/24/2013 @ 11:00 am rolling stones

This may actually be very smart programming in a market like Boston with minimal Hispanic influence whose audience is tuned into 70s music. Remember, that's the decade where there was a huge migration of teens to FM Album Rock. WROR is playing the hits here (Solsbury Hill and Levon didn't chart all that well at the time, but they've tested well since)...

 

[michael hagerty]

Radio is a lot like Borders the bookstore, too afraid to face the facts of a competitive and changing media world. There's been little evolving lately, and ultimately it is taking itself down. The only people who deny this fact are the most high-ups, or the most disillusioned. Our arguement is that radio needs to evolve more creatively, and your argument is that it should practically remain the same as nothing is wrong.

Radio as a whole is its own conversation, but this format, which darn near died in the middle of the previous decade, is now a strong performer and attracting younger listeners than before. It's doing that through rigorously applied music testing, meticulously designed rotations and by adding music from more recent years...all things that get a lot of heat on this board. But the fact is, they are the reason there's a format to discuss in 2013.

Ok, but now those listeners (me being one you just described) are tired of it.

As John Cleese said in Monty Python's cheese shop sketch: "Explain the logic underlying that conclusion, please."

Is there anything (evidence, not personal feelings or hearsay) to indicate that Classic Hits listeners as a whole are tired of it? The ratings and revenues suggest otherwise.

 

[CTListener]

Up the coast from Boston, in Gloucester, Mass., is 104.9 WBOQ, where most of WODS's old playlist lives on -- along with a bunch of playlist padders that attest, no doubt, to its lack of testing. Although its signal reaches the Boston area, reception in Boston proper is impossible thanks to a Class D squatter on the frequency, Northeastern University's WRBB. Anyway, here's the last hour:

Angel of the Morning -- Juice Newton (!)
Soul Deep -- Box Tops
Piano Man -- Billy Joel
No Reply -- Beatles
If This Is It -- Huey Lewis
Ain't Too Proud to Beg -- Temptations
Nights Are Forever Without You -- England Dan/JF Coley
Blinded by the Light -- Manfred Mann's Earth Band
Suavecito -- Malo
The Best of Times -- Styx
Sweet Soul Music -- Arthur Conley
Sir Duke -- Stevie Wonder
I'm a Man -- Spencer Davis Group
Here Comes the Rain Again -- Eurhythmics