Do You Really Care About Radio?

[TheBigA]

From my perspective the content (or lack thereof) is the main problem.

The content that's there is there for a reason.

The radio companies do very different things on their other platforms. Radio companies have no personal biases against any kind of content. They'll run Christmas music in October, even when the boss is Jewish. It doesn't matter. If you'd pay a monthly fee for the content you wanted, rather than taking what advertisers support, you'd get a completely different menu.

The content most people choose hear on their mobile devices is mostly the same as what's available on OTA. We know. We can see exactly what they listen to. So content isn't really the issue, at least as far as the mass audience is concerned. The only difference is they have access to more choices. But most don't use them. Just like most people don't watch most of the cable channels available.

 

[landtuna]

The content that's there is there for a reason.

The radio companies do very different things on their other platforms. Radio companies have no personal biases against any kind of content. They'll run Christmas music in October, even when the boss is Jewish. It doesn't matter. If you'd pay a monthly fee for the content you wanted, rather than taking what advertisers support, you'd get a completely different menu.

The content most people choose hear on their mobile devices is mostly the same as what's available on OTA. We know. We can see exactly what they listen to. So content isn't really the issue, at least as far as the mass audience is concerned. The only difference is they have access to more choices. But most don't use them. Just like most people don't watch most of the cable channels available.

Not sure what that was all about. The claim was that "everyone listens to mobile 'radio' " and that clearly isn't true. Some do. Some don't. For those who don't there are the same reasons that trouble OTA radio.

You point out that there are many more choices for music today than OTA radio and that is very true. OTA radio is never again going to be the first choice for "It's me. It's free." music. So it's off to other content - talk, sports or anything that isn't available on your mobile device. Whether there will be enough choices to keep advertiser-supported radio in business is a question that is being answered slowly.

 

[TheBigA]

The claim was that "everyone listens to mobile 'radio' " and that clearly isn't true.

I didn't make that claim. My point is that radio companies will provide whatever content attracts the most money on whatever platform they're on.

Whether there will be enough choices to keep advertiser-supported radio in business is a question that is being answered slowly.

The problem isn't the programming choices, but the advertisers. I'd fix your sentence this way: "Whether there'll be enough ADVERTISERS to keep advertiser-supported radio in business...." Radio companies program whatever will attract the audiences advertisers want to reach. If that's polka rap music, then that's what it is. If the advertisers go away, then the dial will go silent.

 

[landtuna]

I didn't make that claim.

I didn't say you did.

My point is that radio companies will provide whatever content attracts the most money on whatever platform they're on.

Based upon repeat opinions here by people in the business radio is going through a transformation driven largely by falling revenues. Large corporations have taken on gigantic debt to try to corner markets and have instituted things like voice tracking to reduce costs on those clusters. The tried and true professionals have largely been kicked off the air because they cost too much. These examples are not indicative of a healthy industry.

Someone not too distant said on these boards that radio's true customer are the advertisers. If true, that may be the bottom line problem and I don't need to go into all the ramifications.

A radio station, any radio station, once had competition from others in its own market. Should it now find itself forced off the air and onto the Internet it now has competition from hundreds or thousands. Should the Internet ever become truly mobile terrestrial radio will die virtually instantly. This also is not the sign of a healthy industry as it will become so fragmented no one will make money.

The problem isn't the programming choices, but the advertisers. I'd fix your sentence this way: "Whether there'll be enough ADVERTISERS to keep advertiser-supported radio in business...." Radio companies program whatever will attract the audiences advertisers want to reach. If that's polka rap music, then that's what it is. If the advertisers go away, then the dial will go silent.

We are seeing more and more OTA stations which are not advertiser supported (religious, hucksters, etc.). As the competition dwindles there will come a point that the advertisers will balance out the number of stations. Radio will not die but its days as a growth industry will.

 

[TheBigA]

Based upon repeat opinions here by people in the business radio is going through a transformation driven largely by falling revenues. Large corporations have taken on gigantic debt to try to corner markets and have instituted things like voice tracking to reduce costs on those clusters. The tried and true professionals have largely been kicked off the air because they cost too much. These examples are not indicative of a healthy industry.

None of that has anything to do with content. The "tried and true professionals" you talk about are all over 67 years old, and in any other business, would be forced to retire. In the meantime, you yourself complain about blabby DJs, and that's what we hear too. So them leaving isn't a big problem for most listeners, who saw them as interruptions. So they're being kicked off the air because they talk too much and the audience doesn't need them any more.

The falling revenues have happened because we've gone through a depression. It goes back to advertisers. Too many platforms, too little ad money. But the debt has nothing to do with anything. The US is in trillions of dollars in debt, and services still get provided.

Someone not too distant said on these boards that radio's true customer are the advertisers. If true, that may be the bottom line problem and I don't need to go into all the ramifications.

If you have another way for the radio companies to pay for content, tell me. You refuse to pay a monthly fee. The only other choice is advertising.

We are seeing more and more OTA stations which are not advertiser supported (religious, hucksters, etc.).

Exactly. You won't pay for the music you like, but religious people gladly throw dollars at religious radio stations. So people like you will see your kind of radio go away, and formats that appeal to those who pay will prosper. It's a growth industry for them. As I said, people who do what I do don't care. We'll play doo wop music or anything that makes money.

 

[landtuna]

None of that has anything to do with content.

Well, yes, yes it does. That's one reason why, every single day, as I look through these boards I see one or more posts about another station flipping. They are not flipping because they are making too much money in their current format.

The "tried and true professionals" you talk about are all over 67 years old, and in any other business, would be forced to retire.

I know of no national law, save some very complicated jobs such as airline pilots, that require seniors to retire. Certainly, jobs like sitting in front of a mic while your brain and voice are still sharp would not be thrown to the curb for any other reason than cost. Certain people defy the odds....thinking of Paul Harvey here.

In the meantime, you yourself complain about blabby DJs, and that's what we hear too. So them leaving isn't a big problem for most listeners, who saw them as interruptions. So they're being kicked off the air because they talk too much and the audience doesn't need them any more.

No, you did not hear that from me. Bill Gardner, formerly of KOOL-FM, was one of the blabbiest DJ's in recent memory and also one of my favorites. Bill Heywood was another. Steve Goddard could probably be described as a "blabby" DJ but to me he is very entertaining.

The falling revenues have happened because we've gone through a depression. It goes back to advertisers. Too many platforms, too little ad money.

That certainly hasn't helped but radio was in trouble even before the recession hit. And you just certified my point....too many platforms and too little ad money. And the ad money drops a little bit year by year.

But the debt has nothing to do with anything. The US is in trillions of dollars in debt, and services still get provided.

The gubmint has an advantage that radio does not....it can print money. Debt can always be addressed by inflating the money supply. Radio cannot do that. Debt must be serviced or the company will flounder.

If you have another way for the radio companies to pay for content, tell me. You refuse to pay a monthly fee. The only other choice is advertising.

I can offer no fool-proof alternative. All I said was the current advertiser biz model is failing. It has already failed for newspapers and it is failing for radio.

To be honest, I do not listen to radio enough any longer that it is worthwhile for me to pay for play. That is why I have let XM die in every car I have bought. It would be worth it if I spent enough hours but I don't. Others might. But I doubt enough people will support OTA radio with subscriptions.

Exactly. You won't pay for the music you like, but religious people gladly throw dollars at religious radio stations. So people like you will see your kind of radio go away, and formats that appeal to those who pay will prosper. It's a growth industry for them. As I said, people who do what I do don't care. We'll play doo wop music or anything that makes money.

"My" music has already disappeared in my market so my listening is either over the Internet or my private library.

And you are wrong.....I have already paid for the music I like. I just didn't pay a radio station.

 

[TheBigA]

They are not flipping because they are making too much money in their current format.

You're equating their debt with format flips. That's not the reason. There are companies with no debt that flip formats.

I know of no national law, save some very complicated jobs such as airline pilots, that require seniors to retire.

No one is requiring them to retire. But radio is a subjective business, where your age can hurt your appeal to an audience. It's just a little creepy to have a 60 year old DJ playing music for people in their teens and 20s. Don't you think? I'm not talking Paul Harvey.

No, you did not hear that from me.

Sure you did. Go back to reply 379. Read what you wrote.

And you are wrong.....I have already paid for the music I like. I just didn't pay a radio station.

That's why it's not getting played on the radio.

 

[davideduardo]

After two days of non-stop interviews one thing stood out: 100% of the people used their phone to listen to music, radio stations and "radio like" streamers like Pandora.

Do you think any/many of the steamer-only folks are making money? I can think of several formats I'd love to do that don't seem to be available...

Only those who aggregate formats will be successful at the national level (I leave room for local format clusters in the future) and those, like Pandora and iHeart, will be a mix of at least two of these: traditional station streams, customizable streams, and programmed streaming only channels.

All have to reach a sustainable model with the RIAA folks.

And they have to have a sales model, like Pandora, if they want to generate ad revenue.

I can't see a single format being viable. It's all about "one app, many otions".

 

[landtuna]

You're equating their debt with format flips. That's not the reason. There are companies with no debt that flip formats.

I talked about income, not debt.

No one is requiring them to retire. But radio is a subjective business, where your age can hurt your appeal to an audience. It's just a little creepy to have a 60 year old DJ playing music for people in their teens and 20s. Don't you think?

I'm talking Steve Goddard and no, it isn't.

Sure you did. Go back to reply 379. Read what you wrote.

I am repeating what others have said. I have never said that "blabby" DJ's were offensive to me.

That's why it's not getting played on the radio.

I'm done griping about why my music isn't being played. I simply fire up my private library and am perfectly happy. Radio doesn't need me because I am too old and not in the mainstream of their target demos. Fine. Radio isn't in my mainstream of entertainment possibilities either. Only difference is.....I am not hurting for revenue or dependent upon advertisers.

 

[TheBigA]

I talked about income, not debt.

Actually you mentioned both in one sentence. In any case, commercial radio is a business, not a charity. So they flip formats to make money. They'll gladly flip it to your favorite format if it would make them money. But it has nothing to do with their debt. It's a business.

I'm talking Steve Goddard and no, it isn't.

I don't know who he is.

I am repeating what others have said.

If others are saying it, that's why they're gone. Not because of debt.

 

[landtuna]

Actually you mentioned both in one sentence.

Here is my sentence: "They are not flipping because they are making too much money in their current format." "Making too much money" refers to income, not debt.

In any case, commercial radio is a business, not a charity. So they flip formats to make money.

They flip formats because they think they can make more money in the new format than in the old. If they were already making really good money they most likely would not consider flipping as that is somewhat a gamble.

But it has nothing to do with their debt. It's a business.

If they have too much debt and not enough revenue to service it, it won't be a business for long.

I don't know who he is.

Steve Goddard is the afternoon jock on KOOL-FM. He is somewhat a throwback to the DJ's of old who took time to provide background on the songs he plays. I'm guessing he is also out of the desired demo of his own station but he is still a very good entertainer and a perfect example of why DJ's should not be kicked to the curb while they've still got the skills.

 

[DavidKaye]

No one is requiring them to retire. But radio is a subjective business, where your age can hurt your appeal to an audience. It's just a little creepy to have a 60 year old DJ playing music for people in their teens and 20s. Don't you think? I'm not talking Paul Harvey.

Sportscaster Johnny Holliday was working as a rock DJ at KYA in SF at about age 45 or so when his young daughter called in to request a song. It was then that he realized he was too old to be a rock DJ. That's when he quit and went into sports at ABC. I think it's all in his book, "Frpm Rock to Jock" Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_Holliday

 

[landtuna]

Sportscaster Johnny Holliday was working as a rock DJ at KYA in SF at about age 45 or so when his young daughter called in to request a song. It was then that he realized he was too old to be a rock DJ. That's when he quit and went into sports at ABC. I think it's all in his book, "Frpm Rock to Jock" Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_Holliday

I lived in S.F. and listened to KYA '66-'68 and you would think I would have remembered him but the DJ I remember from those days is Buck Herring (morning guy) instead.

I do remember the Beatles concert at Candlestick Park in '66 so much have heard Holliday. The Beatles were already falling out of favor as a group then and I remember that attendance was far less than a sell out.

I can't believe that a DJ would necessarily think they were too old to be a radio performer at age 45. Especially after being awarded as "America's number one DJ". I remember seeing photos of DJ's in their later years and being amazed at how old they were but their voices didn't betray them.

It's mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter. ;D

 

[davideduardo]

Steve Goddard is the afternoon jock on KOOL-FM. He is somewhat a throwback to the DJ's of old who took time to provide background on the songs he plays. I'm guessing he is also out of the desired demo of his own station but he is still a very good entertainer and a perfect example of why DJ's should not be kicked to the curb while they've still got the skills.

But the station appeals predominantly to people from the "radio talks to you" generation of those who were teens and young adults from the late 50's until the early 80's. To that group, DJs are fun. To most people who are younger, not so much; to many they are an obstacle to enjoyable listening.

 

[landtuna]

But the station appeals predominantly to people from the "radio talks to you" generation of those who were teens and young adults from the late 50's until the early 80's. To that group, DJs are fun. To most people who are younger, not so much; to many they are an obstacle to enjoyable listening.

That's why the younger fools....er, folks have their own stations and their DJ's have their baseball hats on backwards.

 

[davideduardo]

But the station appeals predominantly to people from the "radio talks to you" generation of those who were teens and young adults from the late 50's until the early 80's. To that group, DJs are fun. To most people who are younger, not so much; to many they are an obstacle to enjoyable listening.

That's why the younger fools....er, folks have their own stations and their DJ's have their baseball hats on backwards.

The prime sales demo... 25-54... is not overly populated with the "rotated cap" folks. You are talking about listeners to AC, to Country, to Hot AC, to Spanish AC, Spanish pop, Spanish oldies, Spanish Regional Mexican, Christian and Contemporary Christian, rhythmic oldies, album, classic and alternative rock, talk, sports.

Most of those listeners don't like yammering and chattering DJs, moronic repetition of the time (when a digital watch is $5 and every phone has a clock), and announcing of the names of songs we first knew by heart 15 years ago. Except for those who like a bit of talent-driven entertainment in mornings, the key phrase today is "shut up and play the music".

People can chat instantly by cellular, text and messaging with nearly anyone they want... usually with friends and family. They no longer want an inane DJ to chat at them on the radio.

 

[davideduardo]

I know of no national law, save some very complicated jobs such as airline pilots, that require seniors to retire.

No, but as Big A stated, many companies have mandatory retirement ages... otherwise Jack Welch would still be at GE... where he reached the mandatory age and retired.

No, you did not hear that from me. Bill Gardner, formerly of KOOL-FM, was one of the blabbiest DJ's in recent memory and also one of my favorites. Bill Heywood was another. Steve Goddard could probably be described as a "blabby" DJ but to me he is very entertaining.

But those folks have no appeal to people under 50 to 55. KOOL still has half its audience over the age of 55, and they are doing everything they can to shed the old listeners and invite 35-54 in... with some success, at least in the 45-54 demos.

That certainly hasn't helped but radio was in trouble even before the recession hit. And you just certified my point....too many platforms and too little ad money. And the ad money drops a little bit year by year.

The perfect storm of the recession, new media and the PPM hit in 2008. Radio's total revenues were growing up till then, and even the companies with a large debt load could project taking care of debt service and paydown of the principal.

I can offer no fool-proof alternative. All I said was the current advertiser biz model is failing. It has already failed for newspapers and it is failing for radio.

Most of the decline in revenue for radio is due to the recession... about 30% down from 2007, and at the worst point, being off by 40% in most markets.

Others might. But I doubt enough people will support OTA radio with subscriptions.

"OTA" is only a distribution method. The same content, if desirable on AM or FM, can be offered via apps, streams and such. "Radio" has to modify delivery to suit consumers; nobody buys a "radio" today but near 60% of the 12+ population will have a smart phone by the end of the year. The smartphone is today's radio, music collection, video source, TV substitute, US Mail replacement, and you can talk on it, too.

[/quote]"My" music has already disappeared in my market so my listening is either over the Internet or my private library. [/quote]

That is a separate issue, covered many times. Your music and your desired style of presentation can not be made profitable on the air or, in many / most cases, over the Internet if a sponsored model is used. Sponsors don't want 55+.

 

[landtuna]

No, but as Big A stated, many companies have mandatory retirement ages...

We are talking about DJ's, not CEO's. But that aside, if you have a great name in the industry and your station is so short-sighted as to make you retire there would undoubtedly be another willing to hire you. Not all companies are stupid.

But those folks have no appeal to people under 50 to 55. KOOL still has half its audience over the age of 55, and they are doing everything they can to shed the old listeners and invite 35-54 in... with some success, at least in the 45-54 demos.

But we were not talking about the 55+ demo. We were talking about other people, not me, saying that motor-mouth DJ's are a reason they don't listen to radio.

However, since you brought it up, KOOL lost a very devoted fan of some 30 years running when they canned their once-great DJ lineup and started playing dreck post 1985. Some companies are stupid.

The perfect storm of the recession, new media and the PPM hit in 2008. Radio's total revenues were growing up till then, and even the companies with a large debt load could project taking care of debt service and paydown of the principal.

One of the unfortunate laws of economics is that the economy will go up and it will go down. You have to cover the down periods.....or else. That is why smart companies will have little to no debt and live below their means.

Most of the decline in revenue for radio is due to the recession... about 30% down from 2007, and at the worst point, being off by 40% in most markets.

I'll take your word for it but the bottom line is.....radio is still in decline. When the man puts the lock on the studio door it really doesn't matter what the worst reason was.

"OTA" is only a distribution method. The same content, if desirable on AM or FM, can be offered via apps, streams and such. "Radio" has to modify delivery to suit consumers; nobody buys a "radio" today but near 60% of the 12+ population will have a smart phone by the end of the year. The smartphone is today's radio, music collection, video source, TV substitute, US Mail replacement, and you can talk on it, too.

Content, yes. Mobility, not exactly. I doubt alternative distribution methods are going to overcome technical drawbacks any time soon. TCP/IP cannot handle the multitudes of connections. Cell phones cannot handle the thousands of data streams. HD radio, with its many drop outs will seem like nirvana compared to wifi hot spot jumping. And none of the above can get anywhere close to the fidelity of analog FM. Of course, with the crap being released these days maybe it won't matter.

That is a separate issue, covered many times. Your music and your desired style of presentation can not be made profitable on the air or, in many / most cases, over the Internet if a sponsored model is used. Sponsors don't want 55+.

OTA - perhaps not. Internet - absolutely. I can point to stations running Internet simulcasts right now that are doing just that. Just like an OTA station geared to twenty-somethings I can get a free ride on the Internet.

Now....can we please drop the 55+ demo thingy? I fully understand that there is nobody out there, save some medical providers, who want to sell me anything. And that's fine because I am not in the market for anything. I can get through the next 20 years without buying anything that I have never bought before - well, except for that $50K new car of a brand I hadn't owned before. Whoops!

 

[landtuna]

People can chat instantly by cellular, text and messaging with nearly anyone they want... usually with friends and family. They no longer want an inane DJ to chat at them on the radio.

We have a morning DJ here in Phoenix who has been #1 or very close for a very long time. The reason is she DOES chat up her listeners. Yes, she also plays music but the main attraction to her show are the features she does which all involve TALKING with listeners or callers or people to whom she calls.

I doubt any of her listeners would call her 'inane'.

 

[davideduardo]

We have a morning DJ here in Phoenix who has been #1 or very close for a very long time. The reason is she DOES chat up her listeners. Yes, she also plays music but the main attraction to her show are the features she does which all involve TALKING with listeners or callers or people to whom she calls.

I doubt any of her listeners would call her 'inane'.

Let's see... in 25-54... most recent book.

# 1 are Jonjay and Rich. Not "she" in any way.
# 2 is Piolín por la Mañana. He assures me he is a guy.
# 3 are Ned and Connie, but they don't play music.
# 4 is the Ben & Matt show. Both are guys.
# 5 is Jim Sharp followed by Barry Young.
# 6 is Mark Mayfield
# 7 is Matthew Blades on Mix
# 8 is Chris and Monica on the Peak
# 9 is Beth and Friends.

The first "solo" show by a woman is 9th. Is this the show you refer to as #1

(In any case, I mentioned that mornings were the exception when well done content could be well received... but those are morning shows, not jocks.)