Clear Channel seeks new listener measurement system

[raccoonradio]

Clear Channel's John Hogan: "We spend $55 million a year on ratings information. We want more for our money"

http://channels.netscape.com/ns/new...1100002708612&dt=20050613111000&w=RTR&coview=

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Clear Channel Communications Inc. Monday said it will solicit proposals for a new system to measure the listenership of radio stations, a move that could come at the expense of the current audience measurement firm Arbitron Inc.

...radio executives have long been dissatisfied with Arbitron's system, which relies on written diaries of what stations listeners are tuning in to over a three-month period.

 

[SaltyDog]

Finally!

This should have happened years ago. Better late than never. This antiquated system needs to be put out of its misery. While radio fights with other radio stations, other media steal ad dollars, in part because of superior audience measurement. Too few people acknowledge that it is this lousy ratings system that keeps a lot of big, national advertisers out of the medium. What keeps the current system going is inertia, and the self-interest of those whose livelihood depends on the arcane rules of the Arbitron game.

I would have expected a collaborative effort with other big radio companies but it's a start. This only works when the big dogs jump into the fray.

> Clear Channel's John Hogan: "We spend $55 million a year on
> ratings information. We want more for our money"
>
http://channels.netscape.com/ns/news/story.j> sp?id=2005061311100002708612&dt=20050613111000&w=RTR&coview=
>
>
> NEW YORK (Reuters) - Clear Channel Communications Inc.
> Monday said it will solicit proposals for a new system to
> measure the listenership of radio stations, a move that
> could come at the expense of the current audience
> measurement firm Arbitron Inc.
>
> ...radio executives have long been dissatisfied with
> Arbitron's system, which relies on written diaries of what
> stations listeners are tuning in to over a three-month
> period.
>

 

[SirRoxalot]

And the alternative is?

Everybody complains about Arbitron, but nobody does anything about it. I suspect this will just prompt Arbitron to roll out Portable People Meters in major markets and pass the cost along to subscribers. The devices are being utilized in other countries successfully, so there's no reason they shouldn't work in the US.

Then listen to CC whine when Arbitron tries to pump up the price on their contract to pay for the new technology...

 

[SaltyDog]

The alternative is electronic measurement, not necessarily Arbitron's PPM

> Everybody complains about Arbitron, but nobody does anything
> about it.
I hope Clear Channel is doing something about it and not just posturing for their next round of negotiations. Clear Channel and Infinity have both threatened to go without Arbitron in the past and both times I correctly guessed they wouldn't go through with it. At the time, Clear Channel was still trying to get its arms around all of their properties and maybe felt the time wasn't right. That may have been justified. I sense that Clear Channel is ready to deal with its problems now.

>I suspect this will just prompt Arbitron to roll out Portable People Meters in >major markets and pass the cost along to subscribers.

I don't believe that Arbitron's costs have as much to do with its pricing as much as the lack of competition. I don't blame Arbitron at all. They charge a lot because they can.

>The devices are being utilized in other countries successfully, so there's no >reason they shouldn't work in the US.

I agree wholeheartedly. For whatever reason, it's not happening very fast in the USA and it's hurting advertising more than people realize.

> Then listen to CC whine when Arbitron tries to pump up the
> price on their contract to pay for the new technology...

"Whine" is the word people trot out to belittle their opponents. They will complain (loudly) and should. I hope they'll just cross their arms and say "No". I think Clear Channel, Infinity, Entercom et al have been dealing too meekly with Arbitron. Arbitron isn't the enemy, it's just a vendor. What radio needs is a serious ratings company rivalry.

This might be nothing but a press release. I hope it's more than that. What good is it to be the 800 pound gorilla if you're going to let yourself get bitch-slapped by a ratings service company.?

 

[SirRoxalot]

Gorilla?

> What good is it to be the 800 pound gorilla if
> you're going to let yourself get bitch-slapped by a ratings
> service company.?

You may be the 800 pound gorilla, but if you don't offer an independent alternative to Arbitron, you're going to get bitch-slapped by agencies, advertisers, and other radio stations. Other vendors have taken on Arbitron and lost because advertisers trust Arbitron more than they trust radio sales people.

The true measure of a radio station's effectiveness is still their ability to bring people through the advertiser's door. Unfortunately, a real minority of sales people know how to sell based on something other than numbers, and a real minority of buyers know how to buy based on something other than numbers. I blame agency buyers as much as I blame radio sales people.

Megacorp owners have blown out experienced radio sales people because they could hire kids out of college for peanuts. They taught kids to sell by the numbers, and blew them out if they didn't hit quotas set by beancounters and Wall Street analysts. Sales people have been taught to do whatever is necessary to get the sale without any thought to the long term relationship with the customer. Neither the sales people nor the customer are well served.

 

[SaltyDog]

Re: Gorilla?

>> What good is it to be the 800 pound gorilla if you're going to let yourself >>get bitch-slapped by a ratings service company.?

>You may be the 800 pound gorilla, but if you don't offer an independent >alternative to Arbitron, you're going to get bitch-slapped by agencies, >advertisers, and other radio stations. Other vendors have taken on Arbitron and >lost because advertisers trust Arbitron more than they trust radio sales >people.

I'm guessing I didn't write clearly. Sorry. Clear Channel=800 lb. gorilla. Arbitron=Vendor. Yes, Arbitron is the dominant brand name in media ratings. I attribute it to longevity, inertia, and the fact that because agencies and others who have a vested interest in the status quo pay so little for the service. It's a brilliant business model.

>> The true measure of a radio station's effectiveness is still their ability to >> bring people through the advertiser's door. Unfortunately, a real minority of >> sales people know how to sell based on something other than numbers, and a
>> real minority of buyers know how to buy based on something other than
>> numbers. I blame agency buyers as much as I blame radio sales people.

I don't blame either one. Numbers = audience. The problem with Arbitron numbers are they aren't very good. If there were no ratings service and you were starting from scratch today, can you even imagine crafting the diary method?

>>Megacorp owners have blown out experienced radio sales people because they >>could hire kids out of college for peanuts. They taught kids to sell by the >>numbers, and blew them out if they didn't hit quotas set by beancounters and
>>Wall Street analysts.

True. I've been blown out by Clear Channel myself. No hard feelings. All business is tough and radio is tougher than most. It's a big company and big companies have a lot of bad managers. They also have a lot of good managers but probably fewer than they'd like since it's hard for big companies to retain entrepeneurial types. Arguably, they are better off without people like me. I don't feel too bad considering the caliber of other people who took a bullet.

>Sales people have been taught to do whatever is necessary to get the sale >without any thought to the long term relationship with the customer. Neither >the sales people nor the customer are well served.

I never saw that at Clear Channel. No one disagrees with the idea of long-term relationships. The trouble lies in the day-to-day execution under the unrelenting pressure to "hit the numbers". That's not something peculiar to Clear Channel. It's inherent in any publicly traded company.

 

[middlega]

Re: Gorilla?

> Other vendors have taken on Arbitron and lost because advertisers trust
> Arbitron more than they trust radio sales people.

Thank God.

For a while there (and at one of the local boards), I was starting to think
I was the only person who understood this. And it's why I'm not particularly impressed by this publicity stunt by CC.

Having come from the station side, I know all the problems Arbitron has, it's a very imperfect tool that can be picked apart sixteen ways to Sunday.

But ...

Now, after several years on the agency side, I also know that I trust Arbitron to be closer to reality than anything that CC/Infinity/et al can cook up with their own money.

One is bad, the other is worse.
And bad beats worse.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by middlega on 06/15/05 05:25 AM.</FONT></P>