Dave Ramsey

[del_griffith]

Dave's show is filler for radio folks, but the people who listen really listen. And his audience skews a LOT more female than most talk. All the people wringing their hands over no female listeners, this is what you're going to have to do to get them. Hollywood gossip radio shows aren't going to work. Liberal political talk absolutely won't work. Money shows like Dave and Clark Howard do work.

I almost missed this: Who is wringing their hands over no female listeners? There are formats that deliver female listeners. Any hand-wringing is over no young listeners.

In any market, there is usually one blow-torch, heritage talker that has Rush locked up (usually along with Hannity and Beck) and takes the lions share of the talk audience. What options does another AM station have? Ramsey and Howard do better than the other "also ran" talkers.

Taking a syndicated show (or not) is a business/programming decision and has nothing to do with what I (or any programming decision maker) happens to like. Conservations on this board (and elsewhere) often are ruled by the following logic: What I like is good. What is good is good programming. If I ran a radio station, I'd program what I like (and the world would beat a path to my door). Real world programmers have made some dumb decisions but they program based on what they think an audience will like and not for their own amusement (which they expect an audience will share).

People, especially people on the right, decry government spending and massive deficits. Politicians, especially on the right, come along and say government should act more like business and get it's finances in order like real people. Problem is business runs on debt and most "real people" are deeply in debt - as much or more than the government. College loans. Mortgages. Car loans. Credit cards. So, let Rush rant about government spending. If Ramsey gets "real people" to be "fiscally responsible" and avoid personal "deficit spending," he may be doing some good.

I have two hard tea party type friends. Rabid. Both bankrupt. One twice. Both still deeply in debt. When I ask why the government should stay within its budget and yet they don't (debt means you spent more than you made) I get the F-U.

 

[markbohach]

Dave's show is filler for radio folks, but the people who listen really listen. And his audience skews a LOT more female than most talk. All the people wringing their hands over no female listeners, this is what you're going to have to do to get them. Hollywood gossip radio shows aren't going to work. Liberal political talk absolutely won't work. Money shows like Dave and Clark Howard do work.

I almost missed this: Who is wringing their hands over no female listeners? There are formats that deliver female listeners. Any hand-wringing is over no young listeners.

In any market, there is usually one blow-torch, heritage talker that has Rush locked up (usually along with Hannity and Beck) and takes the lions share of the talk audience. What options does another AM station have? Ramsey and Howard do better than the other "also ran" talkers.

Taking a syndicated show (or not) is a business/programming decision and has nothing to do with what I (or any programming decision maker) happens to like. Conservations on this board (and elsewhere) often are ruled by the following logic: What I like is good. What is good is good programming. If I ran a radio station, I'd program what I like (and the world would beat a path to my door). Real world programmers have made some dumb decisions but they program based on what they think an audience will like and not for their own amusement (which they expect an audience will share).

People, especially people on the right, decry government spending and massive deficits. Politicians, especially on the right, come along and say government should act more like business and get it's finances in order like real people. Problem is business runs on debt and most "real people" are deeply in debt - as much or more than the government. College loans. Mortgages. Car loans. Credit cards. So, let Rush rant about government spending. If Ramsey gets "real people" to be "fiscally responsible" and avoid personal "deficit spending," he may be doing some good.

Two well made points here-

Ramsey is strong- very strong- among 25-40 women. They manage the household budget. This fact alone
makes Ramsey's show very sellable to banks, grocery stores and other retail outlets. I actually have buyers asking
to be specifically placed in the Dave Ramsey Show. That does not happen with any other show we carry.

Dave is helping 'real people' out of debt. We have several churches in our listening that now offer Financial Peace
University. The number of young families signing up for these classes is huge. These families are making a determined
effort to control their own lives. And we pick up listeners when they find out that Dave is on the air each afternoon.
(We call that a win-win here in the radio business)

I miss the point about giving the same advice over and over. Dave has his core beliefs and that is what you hear.
If listeners were tiring of it, the ratings would show it- and that is just not the case. Nationally his audience continues to grow and locally, Dave is our most consistent time slot. There is not a week where I don't hear from a listener how much they love the 'debt free screams'.

Are these my personal opinions?- no
These are the professional reasons I program the Dave Ramsey Show at my real radio station.
Actual strong audience and real advertising sales is a combination that can't be beat with any theoretical discussion.

mb

 

[schmave]

Count this poster among those who rely on Mark's station to hear Dave Ramsey OTA. I listen on either the AM or FM two or three days a week depending on where I am in central Ohio. My aunt and uncle live in Lancaster and once taught FPU, but not sure where. I told them the show was on your station and to my surprise, they hadn't known previously. Now they do, and they listen as well.
Some of the vitriol in this thread is just way, way over my head, as if there's some personal ax to grind with Ramsey. If there wasn't a need, he wouldn't have the empire he does. I'm not in debt but I listen for money management tips (and to see if the advice I would give is the same he does), and just because I enjoy the show.

 

[wadio]

If there wasn't a need, he wouldn't have the empire he does.

The same was once said of Jim and Tammy Fae Baker, Jimmy Swaggart, Sonny Bloch, Bernie Madoff and many others. They were once trusted spiritual and financial leaders. Only time will tell.

 

[umfan]

@markbohach,

Can you reveal what it costs to air the show? Do you pay directly for it or just agree that so many of the national ads within the show must clear and that you can only sell x number of spots during the show?

Thanks.

 

[del_griffith]

Mark: Thank you for your personal insights. I've always wondered how well it performed or if it was just filler. Reason being is it often is aired by a second tier station, especially in the Clear Channel stable of stations. You seldom see it on the top talk station in the market when CC has air rights.

Someone questioned what will bring Ramsey down. I think a good example to use as a catalyst was in his second hour on 7-18. He went of on what he terms social media haters. Dave has a lot of good things going for him. Dave's also got thin skin. And truthfully, there is some social media hate. But there is also some social media criticism that is constructive and accurate. But he lumps it all into one pile to demonize. And of course it seems sucessful talk radio needs its villians. There's nothing wrong with tamping down the disinformation or misinformation. But to go after anyone who disagrees with or questions a media personality is a bit strong. And that thin skin will get him in trouble. Dave's pissed that the common man has the ability to go past his filters and gate keepers and express an opinion, whether correct or incorrect.

Another incident happened either in late May or early June when he got into a Twitter war with some financial pros over his 12% investment return claims. He also brought on a fellow who blogged a Motely Fool article about the 12%. Dave spent more time tearing the guy down because he hadn't read his books or attended Financial Peace University than he did discussing the merits or lack of the writers claim. In fact, Dave did admit the 12% claim was motivational. But his focus was on demonizing the author rather than the accuracey of his return claim.

That type of arrogant type attitude will be the catalyst of a potential fall.

 

[markbohach]

@markbohach,

Can you reveal what it costs to air the show? Do you pay directly for it or just agree that so many of the national ads within the show must clear and that you can only sell x number of spots during the show?

Thanks.

Sorry I can't get too specific but we do agree to a split of spot inventory in the hour. His endorsements of our local sponsors do involve a cash fee.

mb

 

[markbohach]

If there wasn't a need, he wouldn't have the empire he does.

The same was once said of Jim and Tammy Fae Baker, Jimmy Swaggart, Sonny Bloch, Bernie Madoff and many others. They were once trusted spiritual and financial leaders. Only time will tell.

Huge differences here. Dave is not on the air begging for contributions, nor is he directly selling securities.
Buy his books and DVDs- or not. Take his advice- or not.

People who follow the baby steps and get out of debt do it themselves. Dave is just moral support.
That's a huge difference.

mb

 

[KMGX]

Perhaps if Dave Ramsey had the personality of Bill Handel then maybe his show would be entertaining. As it is, however, he sounds like a smooth talking, used-car-salesman type who states the obvious/agreeable points in order to rope you in to buying something you don't need. He does these seminars whereby he charges people---presumably in debt---a significant amount of money and proceeds to give them advice as to what to do. Mind you, he sells additional items (DVDs, books, etc) at these seminars.

Only in America can someone have an entire career around such a simple premise as "Don't spend more money than you make". What kind of country-bumpkin calls a radio show when they're in debt. "Well yee-haw, heeeey there Dave, um I have about ninety-thousand dollars in debt... what should I do?" Normally, the answer would be "stop spending money on non-essential items you idiot" ... instead it's ten minutes of evaluating the budget with an "oh by the way, I have a seminar for $149..."

Blah to all that!

 

[MC]

Telling people to stay out of debt, or at least reduce it, is probably a good thing. A paid off house might not be that good if you have a creditor go after your house and your state does not have that big of a homeowners homestead exemption. A house in Tennessee where Dave is is $150k to 300k, in Silicon Valley California a 1200 sq ft tract home is $ 1 million dollars, paying off that might be a challenge even for a high paid tech person.

I see billboard for the Ramsey show around the country giving local station information, who pays for those? the stations, Ramsey or both?

 

[del_griffith]

No doubt about it. No debt or low debt is the way to go. Honestly, I go with no debt and am working toward that and getting close.

My understanding is there is Ramsey money in the billboards.

 

[Gregg]

I don't find Ramsey any more repetitive than Talk Radio hosts who keep telling me Obama is a socialist or that the Democrat(ic) Party is evil. Hey if all radio weren't repetitive, it wouldn't have ratings. People like the same message (or the same songs) over and over.

I feel a bit uncomfortable when Ramsey ties his financial advice, which I think is mostly good, to Evangelical Christianity. OK, so he's an Evangelical Christian. I assume Clark Howard is Jewish but he doesn't tie his faith to his advice. I don't understand why Ramsey's "Financial University" seems to be tied to Protestant churches. But OK, in a large part of the country, I guess people associate the two.

WOR, Clear Channel's NYC outlet, gives him two hours a day, one of them in competition with Rush, one with Hannity. He was first on at night but was doing so well, they moved him to afternoons. As someone above pointed out, you need some Talk Radio shows that aren't about Conservative Us-vs.-Them politics. Many women don't want to hear that and they need Talk shows that aren't combatitive.

I think he's absolutely right that people shouldn't go into debt for a lifestyle they really can't afford. I grew up in a house with only one bathroom and a one-car garage. Why are people with middle-class incomes buying McMansions? When you buy a car on installments, you're paying several thousand dollars more than the sticker price. And the minute you drive it off the lot, you've also lost several thousand dollars. Let's give Ramsey props for saying that, even though many car dealers are radio advertisers.

I haven't heard anything shady when I've listened. Yeah, he hawks his own projects more than he should but all Talk Radio guys do that. I think he's a got a decent show.

 

[FredLeonard]

Interesting. Clark Howard is Jewish. Dave Ramsey is evangelical. You're looking for financial advice. Who y' gonna call? Jesus Saves; Moses Invests.

 

[caller10]

Mark: Thank you for your personal insights. I've always wondered how well it performed or if it was just filler. Reason being is it often is aired by a second tier station, especially in the Clear Channel stable of stations. You seldom see it on the top talk station in the market when CC has air rights.

Someone questioned what will bring Ramsey down. I think a good example to use as a catalyst was in his second hour on 7-18. He went of on what he terms social media haters. Dave has a lot of good things going for him. Dave's also got thin skin. And truthfully, there is some social media hate. But there is also some social media criticism that is constructive and accurate. But he lumps it all into one pile to demonize. And of course it seems sucessful talk radio needs its villians. There's nothing wrong with tamping down the disinformation or misinformation. But to go after anyone who disagrees with or questions a media personality is a bit strong. And that thin skin will get him in trouble. Dave's pissed that the common man has the ability to go past his filters and gate keepers and express an opinion, whether correct or incorrect.

Another incident happened either in late May or early June when he got into a Twitter war with some financial pros over his 12% investment return claims. He also brought on a fellow who blogged a Motely Fool article about the 12%. Dave spent more time tearing the guy down because he hadn't read his books or attended Financial Peace University than he did discussing the merits or lack of the writers claim. In fact, Dave did admit the 12% claim was motivational. But his focus was on demonizing the author rather than the accuracey of his return claim.

That type of arrogant type attitude will be the catalyst of a potential fall.

Here's some good background on the Twitter war:

here:
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20130603/FREE/130609989

and the actual tweets here:
http://storify.com/producersweb/dave-ramsey-s-twitter-war-with-fee-based-advisors

as well as a recent book by Forbes columnist Helaine Olen "Pound Foolish" she states in an interview:

"Almost all of these people are massively conflicted and are selling you stuff. Dave Ramsey’s radio show is essentially a three-hour commercial for the Lampo Group (Ramsey's company)."

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865579176/QA-with-Helaine-Olen-author-of-Pound-Foolish.html?pg=all

 

[del_griffith]

Another possible crack in the facade. One of the show's sponsors announced yesterday they were closing shop. Perk Street Bank who had been a sponsor for a couple of years announced they couldn't get funding and on short notice announced that in September they would be closing their doors. No biggie, except that the bank offered a perk in the form of money back when customers used their debit card. In their announcement of closing, the bank noted any unclaimed perks were now void. If you had accumulated 20, 200 or 400 dollars in perks that had been unclaimed they were now gone.

Dave notes on his web site that "finding a reliable company is sometimes difficult. We have done our research and found these companies to be the best." My thought has long been if those are the best, I would hate to see the average or worst.

During his show yesterday, Dave noted that his company had not received advanced info about the shut down. Only that a few weeks ago the company had come to him to pull advertising because a sale was in the works. Dave also shared some Tweets he had received and lashed out as some of them. As expected, there were some very disappointed fans who in some cases lost over $100 dollars in earned perks/rebates. Someone on his web forum noted they had accumulated $400 in unclaimed perks that have now vanished. Dave essentially told them to grow up and get over it.

He also mentioned that he had had the founders in his home for dinner and the move disappointed him and he was pissed they hurt his reputation. He also vowed that any venture the founders are involved in he would spread the word to avoid them.

So where does the line exist when a host or host's company personally recommends and endorses a product that doesn't live up to their promises? Does "damage" to a host outweigh damage to listeners?

 

[Small Market Guy]

Notice how many women call his show. It's an aberration in talk radio. He probably has the best and most affluent demo of any show on radio.

 

[wadio]

He probably has the best and most affluent demo of any show on radio.

Makes no sense. Why would an affluent person want to listen to Ramsey' pedestrian advice?

 

[FredLeonard]

Notice how many women call his show. It's an aberration in talk radio. He probably has the best and most affluent demo of any show on radio.

A true believer spouting the industry line.

So, he gets women callers. Where is your proof of the demographic make-up of people who call as opposed to the people who get on? Best demo how? Most affluent? Where's your proof?

As Wadio points out, affluent people (women or men) don't need the kind of get out of debt advice Dave dishes out and are unlikely to have the problems his callers often describe.

 

[del_griffith]

He probably has the best and most affluent demo of any show on radio.

Makes no sense. Why would an affluent person want to listen to Ramsey' pedestrian advice?

I can be a quick Ramsey critic, but I don't think his advice is always pedestrian. At the core it is. But there are some tricky situation calls where he does handle them with insight. And sometimes there are some heart wrenching calls that he handles with grace.

As to callers, he is more and more pre-screening calls. All debt free calls are now prescreened. Others have called when the show doesn't air live and select callers will get a callback during live hours. Much of this seemed to have a catalyst when he did his Fox Business Show. The show aired at 8 pm eastern. It taped in the morning in Nashville. All callers to the tv show were pres-screened. When Dave asked for calls on the tv show, Dave wasn't taking calls. His answering machine was.

 

[Small Market Guy]

He probably has the best and most affluent demo of any show on radio.

Makes no sense. Why would an affluent person want to listen to Ramsey' pedestrian advice?

They become affluent AFTER following his advice. That's the entire idea of the show. Just listen to how many callers make six figures and are broke.

Of course, advertising on a show that tells people not to spend money is another issue.