Cost of employee turnover

[redneckriviera]

I sometimes ask myself.. how is radio still surviving?

Are people really that conditioned to accept this crap??

-Rob

(Yes, I saw Tibbs' & rdxr's replies, but I wanted to go back to Rob directly)

Huh? What are you talking about?

Radio is still surviving because 93 percent of Americans (yes, 12 & over) listen to it on a weekly basis... and their time spent listening is still at 90 percent of the level it was a decade ago.

And you're one of those people, Rob. At least you sure seem to be a voracious consumer of radio. If it's all "crap," you're spending an inordinate percentage of your life listening to it. If you are wasting that much of your life listening to "crap," turn the thing off and put that chunk of your life to better use. Help the poor, feed the hungry, go back to school.

As for what radio content really is or isn't, sit down and take inventory of the radio stations serving your community (Navarre?). According to radio-locator.com, you should be able to receive 25 local-quality signals + another 21 more distant signals. Listen to each of those signals for a reasonable period of time and determine for yourself what different kinds of programming are being made available to you by those 46 radio stations--and what isn't. By my quick count, I identified at least 19 different program offerings.

How well IS the radio industry serving Navarre? How many do you want? What's missing? And among those program niches that are missing, how many would attract a large enough audience to be financially viable in Navarre?

I eagerly await your report?

LOL! Yeah, I'm "quoting" myself. Maybe I misunderstood you, Rob.

Were you talking about employee turnover? If so, I apologize. Never mind.

Radio survives the constant turnover because it's an abnormally profitable business (usually)... and because so many people think it's "Show Biz!" and want to work in "Show Biz!" In whatever capacity... for whatever the pay is...

 

[wannabepd]

While it is true employee retention is a key componant to success, it is the hiring process that is the make or break point when it comes to the staff. There are many managers who are average when it comes to their ability to spot talent and recruit it. Anyone can make a decision to hire someone. It is the talented manager who knows how to hire the right people and also knows how put the right people in the right position. When you are able to match the job with the person then you have a happy employee who will perform on a daily basis. The staff will just come to work and get it done everyday without allot of management needed. I have seen it happen. Redneck mentioned the other part of this. When you get the right people in the building don't try to come up with cute ways to compensate them. PAY THEM MONEY! Not every person working in radio is a talent. The biz is full of average broadcasters because that is all owners are willing to pay for. If a station owner wants the best people in the market it will cost money. No one who is a real talent is going to give it away. They don't have to. Many have moved on to other careers because the market will not pay them. They refuse to compromise what they have. The real good ones are able to go on to other careers and earn a great living. The average talent can't do that. Radio is suffering from a shortage of real talent accross the country and the talent needs to be recruited. Many of us said the hell with this, I am outa here....some of you know exactly what I mean. I am one of those who decided it is no longer worth it and retired from radio and moved on to something else and it was easy. I miss radio but not enough to give away the goods....

 

[Stewy]

wannabepd skirts around the main issue that causes the majority of problems in radio (and many other industries). Yes, you must pay them, straight up, but lets bring the ego issue into focus. To build a good staff I was taught that a manager should try and hire people that are BETTER than he/she is. But in the cut throat corp world that is career suicide and so they hire people that aren't as good. Therefore share/revenue stagnates and or suffers causing the dismissal of the manager often leading to the fact that now an inferior hiree becomes the new manager and the march down the stairs begins. This type of ego driven mentality could also be why so many excellent staffs around the country were released after station purchase under the excuse of "budget cutting".

I read comments on these boards about "can't they see" or "are they really that blind". Truth is that they've gone so far down the stairs into the deep darkness of the sub-basement that now their eyes have adjust to seeing the mushrooms grow and they can't stand the brilliant light of creativity. Think about it, doesn't all the swapping of mediocre people make sense if they are just chasing each other around the mushrooms? Are reliving a Lewis Carrol story? Wish I could find the white rabbit.

Stewy rambles once again

 

[redneckriviera]

wannabepd skirts around the main issue that causes the majority of problems in radio (and many other industries). Yes, you must pay them, straight up, but lets bring the ego issue into focus. To build a good staff I was taught that a manager should try and hire people that are BETTER than he/she is. But in the cut throat corp world that is career suicide and so they hire people that aren't as good. Therefore share/revenue stagnates and or suffers causing the dismissal of the manager often leading to the fact that now an inferior hiree becomes the new manager and the march down the stairs begins. This type of ego driven mentality could also be why so many excellent staffs around the country were released after station purchase under the excuse of "budget cutting".

I read comments on these boards about "can't they see" or "are they really that blind". Truth is that they've gone so far down the stairs into the deep darkness of the sub-basement that now their eyes have adjust to seeing the mushrooms grow and they can't stand the brilliant light of creativity. Think about it, doesn't all the swapping of mediocre people make sense if they are just chasing each other around the mushrooms? Are reliving a Lewis Carrol story? Wish I could find the white rabbit.

Stewy rambles once again

Rambling, perhaps--but interesting rambling.

But here's another thought to chew on. There ARE excellent managers in radio, but the stations they manage tend not to be the subject of conversation on these boards, except maybe for an occasional observation that they are boring... same old, same old. They rarely have openings, because people don't leave. They don't change formats... they just keep churning out great ratings and take most of the available radio revenue in the market. They don't make for good subjects of speculation and/or criticism.

And the days of rampant cost-cutting are coming to an end. Wall Street has fallen out of love with radio. Over the past 11 years the consolidators have consolidated just about everything worth consolidating, so there's nothing left to slash. Without being able to create "instant cashflow/profit" by slashing staff, there's no big jumps in profit anymore, which is what investors love. Throughout this 11-year period radio's share of the advertising pie stayed constant--same old 7 percent--so radio stocks have stalled and/or fallen.

When the biggest Wall Street radio group sells off one-third of its radio stations, it's a clue.

 

[Tibbs4]

Yeah, it's a sign of actually being damn smart! Why would you waste your time on difficult or underperforming stations
that don't bring in revenue as easy as better ones. CC love em or hate em, is so profitable it can throw away stations
we'd all go ga-ga to own, as if it was their trash. No good business keeps under-performing entities on to weigh the
business down.

To that, apply your spot on comments, rnr...and we get the same results. IMHO, they're planning on figuring out how to blow off the
under top 60 or 100, etc. local market's b y convincing agencies that they can reach the top most important markets easier
and cheaper and create the belief that it's not profitable for those agencies to fool all those mid-level or lower markets.
Hence, throw away the markets they were profiting from and pulling some of that revenue with them.


They'll get to hold on to the major chunk of the 7%, while the little guys fight for the pieces and pit their survival
on the backs of local advertisers.

Still, this is a result of those cost cutting measures and sucking the life out of these stations
to extract huge, quick profits and those profits are drying up, so they have to make the bigger horses work harder.

I think this makes sense, what I am trying to say. Off subject, but who believes in rules here, anyway.

 

[Stewy]

Neck's been reading my old posts. You know though, when things do move back to normal operations (good guess as to when), this board will just die. When 90% of stations are as they should be we won't have near the amount of garbage to point out.

 

[Stewy]

In light of the comings and goings of Tragic staff in AL & FL, it seems appropriate to resurect this thread begun by angry mini canine. And to think it happens after the book has started. If Tragic decision making holds true to past history it's time for format changes as the survey gets to the mid point.

Family Guy