Gamesmanship
JohnGault said:
The PPM is incredibly kind to WCBS-FM, and also to Classic Rock. Baby Boomers will probably be the biggest audience Terrestrial Radio ever has. The future after that will be Internet.
Advertisers will increasingly crave younger demos, but they will get them anywhere but old fashioned radio.
I do hope that if you hold any position of authority in this business, you work for my competitors. The problem with your ideas is that they are driven by your emotion, with all the strategy of "checkers" in a "chess game".
Mr. Gault, please fill us in on your exalted position in the industry. How about showing us your credentials before you expect us to take your judgements as fact, not just another opinion.
First of all, Oldies is toast. The new CBS-FM bears about as much resemblance to the old CBS-FM as a BMW 325 resembles a '65 Mustang. Even they know that they're Classic Hits, not Oldies. The music is decades newer in its focus. If you've looked at a rating book recently, you'll find that the primary demos for Classic Rock are 45+. Unless the music shifts to newer decades, which will alienate older listeners, 25-54 numbers will fade in the coming years.
It has been discussed at length why Baby Boomers are the biggest audience for terrestrial radio. They grew up with radio as their most immediate source of music and information. Corporate radio has abandoned younger demos, concentrating on short term revenue gains, with no thought about the long term. Not only that, the "iPodization" of radio formats (see Jack) has removed the element of relatable air personalities from the equation, reducing the added value that radio offered in the past. Boomers still listen to radio out of habit. Youngsters have no reason to get into the habit.
Recording techology is nothing new. The average MP3 is recorded at such a low bitrate that it's probably not much better fidelity than a cassette. Yes, an MP3 player can hold more music, but it still requires you to load up all that music, and add new music while blowing out stuff that you no longer want to hear. In other words, it requires time, expertise, and access to new music. Even with all that, you still don't find out about new music unless somebody introduces you to it. Radio survived other recording technologies because it offered something (besides commercials) in addition to the music.
Some terrestrial radio stations still offer more than just music. In many cases, you'll find them at the top of the ratings list. Sooner or later, after some of the "geniuses" follow Hollander's crash and burn path to obscurity, radio will again reinvent itself - as it did in the '40s with the advent of high-fidelity recording technology, in the '50s with the advent of TV, in the '70s with the advent of FM, and in the '90s with the advent of reliable digital technology. It will again become relevant, ubiquitous, and relatable to the young people of today who'll be saddled with jobs, families, homes, and all the other accoutrements of "growing up" that will eat up the time they have to dedicate to loading MP3 players.
Radio is a delivery system, with widely available inexpensive receiver technology that has a vast installed user base. Even today, Arbitron shows that the majority of younger demos still sample radio. Their TSL is down because the product doesn't serve them. Advertisers will still want 25-54s in ten years, and smart programmers will find a way to attract them to terrestrial radio.
Yes, other techologies are coming. WiFi Internet access is spreading like a virus that Dopie and Agony could only dream of. Cellular and old-line phone companies will use WiMax to extend high-speed Internet to an ever-widening group of people. Yet with all that availability, there are still problems to solve.
How do you make Internet radio pay? Subscriptions? HAH. Advertising? Show me an independent Internet radio station that makes money. And, we haven't even talked about the geniuses at the RIAA and Future of Music Coalition's attempt to price Internet delivery out of the market.
Who's best positioned to provide content - especially live and local content - to Internet listeners? Gee, that would be terrestrial radio stations, who already have content, sales forces, traffic departments, and the people required to handle the myriad "little things" required to create a profitable enterprise.
John, perhaps the suits need to invest a little emotion into their decisions, and stop treating radio stations like real estate that they buy low, cut costs, pump up the bottom line, then sell before it crashes because they destroyed the foundation. Perhaps they need to realize that their real product isn't "the next format", but the relationships that some talent are capable of building with listeners. Perhaps they need to understand that syndication, voice-tracking, and jockless formats are not in their best interests in the long term.
BTW, with your point of view, why SHOULD Entercom pay Wease twice the going rate for the market if terrestrial radio is in decline anyway? Your POV is that revenues are going to fall, so why commit to a long-term deal that will become more onerous as time goes on.
I realize that Wease is a talent - in Rochester at least - and that I'm advocating paying talent. I also realize that CBS built the entire radio station around Wease - much as a number of stations built themselves around Stern when he was syndicated on terrestrial radio. I believe that Wease, at this stage of his career, has declined in popularity, and that he's not worth what they paid him 10 years ago. On top of that, he's aging, has had health problems, and is rumored to have a few other problems that are likely to cause significant stress in the coming years. Stress ain't good for guys in Wease's shape. Not only that, he really has limited options in the market.
As I said before, he held CBS's feet to the fire during the last negotiation. This time around, karma has come back to bite him in the ass. His options are much more limited, and his pay is likely to be as well.
