Ok... Kelly & Alpha are still off the air, now Steve and Vicki are joining them. Now, I will admit that I have absolutely no professional training or experience in this industry aside from being a listener, but I cannot understand what is going through the minds of the various program directors and station managers in this town...
The official statements coming from the bean counters -- er, I mean PD's is that people want more music, less talk. Well, it seems to this ignorant listener out here that someone in the prime demographic, with money to spend with their advertisers that wanted more music and less talk already has XM, Sirius, IPods or Internet Radio playing in their cars. How does less talk compete with no talk? If they can't afford these alternatives, then are they really prime advertising demographic members? If I was an advertiser, I don't want someone in the prime age group if they are unemployed/underemployed and not able to buy my wares.
So what is it that the local stations have that the other services don't? Well, local news/talk might be one thing -- seems noone wants to spend the money to do that one right -- and since there is no competition in this niche, WSB AM just keeps on with the same old repetitive formula. On the FM dial, the local banter between tunes is what builds listener loyalty -- I recall the competetive nature between WLS/WCFL in Chicago during the late 60's and early 70's -- seems you were a fan of one and dissed the other -- even though they both played off the same top 40 list. Now the "experts" say they want to take the banter away and provide more tunes --so why should I tune in to one over the other -- or why should I listen to a station that only plys tunes and commercials? I think I would prefer only tunes on satellite, mp3 or internet radio.
And while I'm on the soapbox, could someone tell me why 10% of the 20-35 year old demographic is better than 50% of the over 50? Seems we have more disposable income and probably less likely to have IPods in their cars.
Ok, stepping down for now.
The official statements coming from the bean counters -- er, I mean PD's is that people want more music, less talk. Well, it seems to this ignorant listener out here that someone in the prime demographic, with money to spend with their advertisers that wanted more music and less talk already has XM, Sirius, IPods or Internet Radio playing in their cars. How does less talk compete with no talk? If they can't afford these alternatives, then are they really prime advertising demographic members? If I was an advertiser, I don't want someone in the prime age group if they are unemployed/underemployed and not able to buy my wares.
So what is it that the local stations have that the other services don't? Well, local news/talk might be one thing -- seems noone wants to spend the money to do that one right -- and since there is no competition in this niche, WSB AM just keeps on with the same old repetitive formula. On the FM dial, the local banter between tunes is what builds listener loyalty -- I recall the competetive nature between WLS/WCFL in Chicago during the late 60's and early 70's -- seems you were a fan of one and dissed the other -- even though they both played off the same top 40 list. Now the "experts" say they want to take the banter away and provide more tunes --so why should I tune in to one over the other -- or why should I listen to a station that only plys tunes and commercials? I think I would prefer only tunes on satellite, mp3 or internet radio.
And while I'm on the soapbox, could someone tell me why 10% of the 20-35 year old demographic is better than 50% of the over 50? Seems we have more disposable income and probably less likely to have IPods in their cars.
Ok, stepping down for now.