Could this help FM HD?

[radiophiler]

Two recent FM HD changes in Philadelphia make me wonder whether the ideas of which audiences to target with FM HD has been wrong all along.
102.9 recently changed its HD2 from Deep Tracks Classic rock to 50s and 60s Oldies.
And 106.1 HD2 is now smooth jazz, a rebroadcast of Clear Channel's loan AM station in Philadelphia.
One suggestion that had been made for years on how to get FM HD to be successful is to program to younger listeners. "It's how FM made it in the 1970s," is what conventional wisdom says.
Given that FM HD is more likely to be in luxury or up-level cars, perhaps the thing to do is to program these stations toward an OLDER demographic.
Unless you're listening to XM or online, it's very difficult these days to find those two formats on FM, even though as few as 10 years ago they were FM staples: 50s/60s and Smooth Jazz.
What happened to those two formats? They appealed to listeners mostly above 55, and the ad agencies in larger markets don't care as much about them.
Granted, there are still problems with this scenario, including getting advertisers, which I'm sure other posters will point out.
But: Too many times, we try to recreate the past. That's what they've been suggesting for FM HD subchannels ... make if like FM in the 1970s.
Perhaps the thing to do is to put on formats that are no longer available in the market that once were. They will have smaller audiences ... but at least they might be loyal.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

102.9 recently changed its HD2 from Deep Tracks Classic rock to 50s and 60s Oldies.
And 106.1 HD2 is now smooth jazz, a rebroadcast of Clear Channel's loan AM station in Philadelphia.

You are preaching to the choir - Houston has not one, but two oldies channels on HD-2, and I think there are still two smooth jazz formats.

I don't know what these ad agencies are thinking - I am over 55, a multi-millionaire, and spend lots of money on things I hear advertised on radio and TV. Young people may supposedly be a more desirable demographic, but those of us who have lived longer have made a lifetime of earnings and have more disposable income. I would think the money involved would make us a desirable demographic for advertisers, but I guess not. I certainly have the money to retrofit my cars with HD radio - where possible to get formats I want.

Ratings don't tell the whole story, you need to figure in purchasing power of a given demographic. Most 20 and 30 year olds I know are burning through small incomes and in deep debt, unable to make many discretionary purchases.

 

[JH_Radio]

Finally we got 50's-60's Oldies back. and Nac/SJ has been on the air for a while on the HD2 of 106.1. but now it has an analog presents unlike before, which may help it reach somebody.
They should get charly (what's his last name?) the same guy that does the voice guy for WPVI-TV and used to do the promo work for WOGL when it was 50's-70's Oldies "Oldies 98" to do the voice work for WMGKHD2.
I totaly agree that WIOQ having a mainstream CHR as its HD2
is pointless.
WXTU next generation? why not do classic country on that. WBEBHD2 could be soft AC.
i wonder as HD becomes more and more commonplace in cars if PD's and companies might consider the idea of doing more nitch formats. for example, not a CHR next to a CHR. or not two oldies stations in a given markit.
maybe say an oldies and standards. AAA? the blues? at this point though is it viable to make money on an HD side band? i dont think enough people have them yet , so a format such as the blues which you dont hear in a lot of places could just do wel with less advertisers.

I'm surprised that Clear Channel with its many Premium Choice feeds doesn't use those for the HD side bands. its at least live jocks on a lot of the formats.

 

[landtuna]

I don't know what these ad agencies are thinking - I am over 55, a multi-millionaire, and spend lots of money on things I hear advertised on radio and TV. Young people may supposedly be a more desirable demographic, but those of us who have lived longer have made a lifetime of earnings and have more disposable income. I would think the money involved would make us a desirable demographic for advertisers, but I guess not. I certainly have the money to retrofit my cars with HD radio - where possible to get formats I want.

Ratings don't tell the whole story, you need to figure in purchasing power of a given demographic. Most 20 and 30 year olds I know are burning through small incomes and in deep debt, unable to make many discretionary purchases.

I fully agree with your opinion and have so stated several times. When a knowledgeable person replies (Hi DE) it is usually with the opinion that it takes more ad money to get an "oldster" (like us) to switch products than it does to convince a youngster to try something new. While I might agree with that insofar as toothpaste and toilet paper are concerned I do not agree that it fits current marketing with much more expensive durable goods like cars. It is pretty visible today that the younger generations do not now have the financial resources that the pre-Boomers and early Boomers do but that they may never have those resources.

The other issue I take with ad agencies is that they apparently think once we buy into a product we become consumers of that product for life. BS! With the greatly increased ease of communication today it is child's play to research any product family and make decisions accordingly. I do that with virtually every major purchase I made (with the only exceptions being products that have a personal preference such as coffee). Judging by the number of reviews I see posted online there are many others of all ages doing the same thing.

While "customers for life" may have been standard in the earlier part of the last century it surely isn't today or you wouldn't see the proliferation of new products making huge inroads.

In short, commercials mean absolutely nothing to me if they ever did. At one time the only way you could judge a product was by its commercials or word of mouth. Many other means today to get opinions on any product in any market. The only function commercials have today is to compare price on products you are already inclined to buy - and even then you have to watch the fine print.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

While "customers for life" may have been standard in the earlier part of the last century it surely isn't today or you wouldn't see the proliferation of new products making huge inroads.

I hear that customer for life thing over and over again - yet so many of the products I buy now weren't even on the market a few years ago. I guess you really can teach this old dog new tricks! I am always trying new things, because I now have the disposable income to do so.

Those "old people don't change" arguments seem to be an excuse for rationalizing a given conclusion - and where is the research to support it?

 

[TheBigA]

One suggestion that had been made for years on how to get FM HD to be successful is to program to younger listeners. "It's how FM made it in the 1970s," is what conventional wisdom says.

If that's conventional wisdom, it's wrong. The problem with HD isn't a programming issue. It's a hardware issue. I've seen markets where there are lots of unique HD stations with great formats, and no one knows about them. They are their market's best kept secrets. And we'll see this in Philadelphia too. Cumulus made news a few months ago with the "first country station in NYC in 17 years." But the fact is that country music had been available on HD for years, and hardly anyone knew.

The fundamental difference between the 70s and today is the media environment. Back then, broadcasting had a monopoly in electronic media. And broadcasting had a monopoly with music aiming at young people. That's not the case today. Everything anyone can possibly think of is available somewhere. The advantage broadcasting has is ubiquity. But that advantage doesn't exist with HD Radio. The only way consumers can enjoy the programming on HD Radio is to buy a new radio. And consumers today simply don't buy radio-only devices. They buy other devices that also contain radios. And those devices don't offer HD Radio. So until HD Radio is standard in cars, mandated in AM/FM radios, and available in phones and other portable devices, HD Radio will continue to be big secrets.

 

[davideduardo]

I don't know what these ad agencies are thinking

It's not the ad agency folks who make these target market decisions. It is the ad agency clients who do that. They come to the agency, usually with a marketing plan, and require the agency to follow their specifications on the demographic target.

With the larger ad agency clients, there are millions of dollars in consumer research and even POS data about who actually buys their goods or services. And that is where the decisions come from.

 

[davideduardo]

Those "old people don't change" arguments seem to be an excuse for rationalizing a given conclusion - and where is the research to support it?

There is no "older people don't change" argument. What does exist is a return on investment argument. And it says that the older consumers get, the more ad impressions are required to either get a person to change a brand preference or to try a new product. In some cases, the cost of the sale exceeds the price of the product, and is not productive.

There are billions of dollars in research behind this. Yes, "billions" with a "b". But it is all proprietary, done by advertisers and marketers to understand their consumers. Most is covered by employment agreements and NDAs so we will never see it... but go to any agency and try to sell out of demo and they will tell you that the client will react most negatively if their targets are ignored.

 

[davideduardo]

The other issue I take with ad agencies is that they apparently think once we buy into a product we become consumers of that product for life. BS! With the greatly increased ease of communication today it is child's play to research any product family and make decisions accordingly.

Still, habit and skepticism increase with age and loads of research shows that older consumers require more information, selling and convincing.

 

[landtuna]

Still, habit and skepticism increase with age and loads of research shows that older consumers require more information, selling and convincing.

If you are saying that older buyers tend to do more research on significant buys then I agree. But we aren't necessarily mated to certain products as the old adage indicated.

Has anyone ever figured out why Lipton sold more tea after Arthur Godfrey started selling it? Was it because Lipton was good tea or because everybody believed Godfrey?

 

[KB1OKL]

Still, habit and skepticism increase with age and loads of research shows that older consumers require more information, selling and convincing.

If you are saying that older buyers tend to do more research on significant buys then I agree. But we aren't necessarily mated to certain products as the old adage indicated.

Has anyone ever figured out why Lipton sold more tea after Arthur Godfrey started selling it? Was it because Lipton was good tea or because everybody believed Godfrey?

Neither, it was because everyone watched Godfrey.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

There are billions of dollars in research behind this. Yes, "billions" with a "b". But it is all proprietary, done by advertisers and marketers to understand their consumers. Most is covered by employment agreements and NDAs so we will never see it... but go to any agency and try to sell out of demo and they will tell you that the client will react most negatively if their targets are ignored.

Well, that's convenient for somebody. Scientific research that is not subject to independent verification is not valid. Therefore, the billions with a "b" is all wasted. Somebody wanted to support a conclusion they had already reached, and they drummed up fake or bad science to support it. I doubt the Mythbusters will take this one up, but they already busted "you can't teach an old dog new tricks". Given that dogs and humans are both mammals, and the Mythbusters show their scientific methodology - I'd tend to go with their research even if it was on a different species.

If I were an advertiser paying good money for advertisements - and somebody wouldn't show the scientific basis for their research, I'd kick them out the door and put my money where it belongs, with good, open, verifiable, and repeatable scientific results.

Just spent a lot of money at a restaurant I had never eaten at before. Oh - wait - old people don't try new things. I guess I imagined the event.

 

[umfan]

HD would take off like a rocket if most new cars had HD receivers in them. The ability to get more formats without a subscription is the key aspect that makes HD attractive, but if you have to get a new radio installed, it's not likely to be heard by many. I bought a portable HD receiver to hear the '80s and Smooth Jazz formats on HD in my market (Detroit) but reception quality with such a unit is hard. If HD radio would do what they need to do to get automakers to make HD standard, there'd be a viable future for this.

The FM spectrum is only getting more crowded. Free HD can be a vable competitor to satellite and the internet with more access.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

HD would take off like a rocket if most new cars had HD receivers in them. .... but reception quality with such a unit is hard.

Therein is the fatal flaw of HD radio. The HD era has coincided with the movement to ban whip antennas. The style gods dictated that whip antennas are unattractive on cars, so we get compromises instead of antennas. They work well enough on local stations to close in rim shots, but they don't have the DX capability needed to bring in the extremely weak sidebands that are spaced too widely. That is one of the reasons I am getting such good results with HD - part of it is the high power transmitters, tall towers, and flat terrain but the other part is a real whip antenna on the car. I also get 150 mile on a station or two from Austin, and spotty reception of Dallas stations from 250 miles.

On my daughter's new cars without a whip - nothing. Rim shots are there, not a trace of Austin or Dallas. Yes - I said "cars" as in plural. The first went back because it was a lemon, the second has worked for 14 months without a trip to the shop except routine maintenance. I had a car with windshield antenna - Noticeably less sensitive.

 

[davideduardo]

Well, that's convenient for somebody. Scientific research that is not subject to independent verification is not valid. Therefore, the billions with a "b" is all wasted. Somebody wanted to support a conclusion they had already reached, and they drummed up fake or bad science to support it.

No, this is "internal" research by companies ranging from P&G to Ford to Geico to Macy's and Wal Mart. It involves things like product testing, consumer panels, point of sale tracking, etc. It's mostly done exclusively for one brand and company to determine product / service issues, competitive perceptions, and consumption.

P&G pretty much invented consumer research back around 1930, and it has been very successful for them in the last 80-some years. And it is why P&G has a much higher new product success rate over history than any other company.

 

[KB1OKL]

The other issue I take with ad agencies is that they apparently think once we buy into a product we become consumers of that product for life. BS! With the greatly increased ease of communication today it is child's play to research any product family and make decisions accordingly.

Still, habit and skepticism increase with age and loads of research shows that older consumers require more information, selling and convincing.

That is just one of the many reasons IBOC is dead in the water, older consumers don't trust it with good reason and kids couldn't care less.

 

[KB1OKL]

HD would take off like a rocket if most new cars had HD receivers in them. .... but reception quality with such a unit is hard.

Therein is the fatal flaw of HD radio. The HD era has coincided with the movement to ban whip antennas. The style gods dictated that whip antennas are unattractive on cars, so we get compromises instead of antennas. They work well enough on local stations to close in rim shots, but they don't have the DX capability needed to bring in the extremely weak sidebands that are spaced too widely. That is one of the reasons I am getting such good results with HD - part of it is the high power transmitters, tall towers, and flat terrain but the other part is a real whip antenna on the car. I also get 150 mile on a station or two from Austin, and spotty reception of Dallas stations from 250 miles.

Maybe a dedicated DXer like you can get 150 mile reception in flat Texas with a whip antenna in a car, I had to put a Yagi antenna on the roof to get 40 mile reception here in hilly Ma of FM IBOC in my house.

I have a stubby antenna on my newer car and analog FM comes in good enough to not notice any difference between it and a whip antenna which I have on my older car. I would not buy an HD radio for either car, would be a waste of time and money.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

No, this is "internal" research by companies ranging from P&G to Ford to Geico to Macy's and Wal Mart. It involves things like product testing, consumer panels, point of sale tracking, etc. It's mostly done exclusively for one brand and company to determine product / service issues, competitive perceptions, and consumption.

P&G pretty much invented consumer research back around 1930, and it has been very successful for them in the last 80-some years. And it is why P&G has a much higher new product success rate over history than any other company.

Bad science = no science = pseudo-science

If they want to conclude that old people don't try new products - why bother doing the research in the first place? Just make the decision and don't pretend to back it up by science that can't be independently observed, verified, and repeated.

I have no respect or tolerance for bad science.

 

[KB1OKL]

No, this is "internal" research by companies ranging from P&G to Ford to Geico to Macy's and Wal Mart. It involves things like product testing, consumer panels, point of sale tracking, etc. It's mostly done exclusively for one brand and company to determine product / service issues, competitive perceptions, and consumption.

P&G pretty much invented consumer research back around 1930, and it has been very successful for them in the last 80-some years. And it is why P&G has a much higher new product success rate over history than any other company.

Bad science = no science = pseudo-science

If they want to conclude that old people don't try new products - why bother doing the research in the first place? Just make the decision and don't pretend to back it up by science that can't be independently observed, verified, and repeated.

I have no respect or tolerance for bad science.

It wouldn't take a lot of research to realize that HD radio will never sell.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

Maybe a dedicated DXer like you can get 150 mile reception in flat Texas with a whip antenna in a car, I had to put a Yagi antenna on the roof to get 40 mile reception here in hilly Ma of FM IBOC in my house.

I have a stubby antenna on my newer car and analog FM comes in good enough to not notice any difference between it and a whip antenna which I have on my older car. I would not buy an HD radio for either car, would be a waste of time and money.

Dedicated - but ONLY because of the music. Not because of any desire on my part to DX. I'd rather have my preferred formats local on good sticks.

Wow - MA sounds like a radio desert with multiple reception problems. I think I'd switch to satellite under those conditions for dependability - even with the horrible sound quality.

Those stubby antennas don't show their true nature until you are dealing with really weak signals. I've had really bad reception on a car radio improved dramatically by simply drilling the hole in the fender and putting in a whip. I go from no reception on stations I am interested in to dependable reception immediately. I've drilled more than one fender for friends, too, who are equally disgusted with local stations.