Do you want to save this business or not?

[Surfer]

Look, I'm venting (along with everyone else) so forgive me if I ruffle a few feathers but...

Radio can be saved but only if the people in radio who really want to save it do something about it. Admittedly, I'm not sure what that would be and maybe that IS THE PROBLEM...WHAT DO WE DO WITH IT? Companies have tried everything under the sun to fix this. We've listened to others who supposedly have done it successfully, we've tried blazing our own trails, we've tried HD, the internet, over leveraging our asset base and nothing seems to work. So, I think it comes down to one of two simple questions.

1) How long will radio simply allow others to continue taking their piece of the pie.
2) Does anybody really care anymore?

If number 1 is true, then how much longer are we going to sit here and let others destroy our beloved way of life? If you don't like corporate owners, go find somebody with money and buy a station. Maybe start a union. I honestly don't have any answers but I do have one observation (and I include myself as part of this problem). Radio people have been so beat up for so long we simply just don't care anymore. Which answers number 2. If that is the case, I would really like to see what the government tries to do if every radio owner turns in their license and says, "The hell with it!"

True, it won't happen, and even if it did somebody, somewhere would scream "They can't do that", but, in reality, that is exactly what is happening. All the people who really care about radio, aren't doing a darn thing to fix it. Why? Because nobody has really taken the time to figure out what it really is that's killing us! Consolidation, poor marketing, too many spots, lousy music rotation, COME ON PEOPLE...GET A GRIP! If you love this business, let's get together and fix it. Otherwise, let's go do what we're really all qualified to do...NOTHING!

Do you really want to sell real estate? Good, go. Do you really want to own an internet marketing company? Go. Do something, anything as long as you stay away from radio. The less people who don't give a damn about those of us who do the better!

I admit, my post here probably doesn't totally have all the facts straight or who-know-what else but, hopefully, you can sense my frustration. Do we want to fix it or not. If not, close this blasted board down, turn off the transmitter and go the hell home! If anybody's got real, proven, workable ideas, let's find a way to get a station and make it happen! Somebody out there has got to know how to save this business? Right?

 

[TheBigA]

Somebody out there has got to know how to save this business? Right?

Well...the problem is there's no one-size-fits-all solution for the entire radio business. There are multiple problems, starting with the dilution of audience shares among new and old media, the interest by advertisers in cheaper media that deliver more quantifiable numbers, and the desire by listeners to control the content they hear. All of this has led to less audience, less advertising, and less money to hire staff. Couple that with a few companies that also have big debt to pay, and you have the current situation. Solving one of those problems doesn't solve the others, which are equally difficult.

Spending money on traditional approaches to radio won't solve problem #3. Hiring more salesmen won't solve problem #2. Getting rid of debt won't do anything about the fundamental problems (1,2, & 3).

So it's a tough nut to crack, thus all the frustration. If it was simple, they'd have done it already.

 

[Surfer]

OK, that makes sense so then, what can be done. Actually done? My frustration is that nobody is doing ANYTHING! There has to be something, right? Please?!?

 

[TheBigA]

OK, that makes sense so then, what can be done. Actually done? My frustration is that nobody is doing ANYTHING! There has to be something, right? Please?!?

It's not going to get done from a message board, that's for sure.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

OK, that makes sense so then, what can be done. Actually done? My frustration is that nobody is doing ANYTHING!

Maybe it's just not visible. With thousands of radio stations in operation, I find it reasonable to assume that many of them are trying all kinds of concepts to hopefully keep their station viable. Most are too busy keeping things operating to spend much time with their peers comparing notes. Car dealers used to have (maybe still do) an interesting concept called "Twenty Groups". Their trade association would facilitate putting willing dealers into a group that that would meet 3 or 4 times a year. They first of all agreed to treat their conversations with confidentiality. They would share their financial statements with each other and they would critique each other. The would put their most perplexing challenges on the table for discussion. Do broadcasters do anything like that?

If it will help you sleep better at night, just keep in mind broadcasters are not the only business with challenges and sometimes disappointments. You asked the question:

Do you really want to sell real estate?

My wife was in Real Estate 30 years ago so I thought I knew something about the business. About four years ago I jumped in and became a realtor. Fell flat on my face. If you think conditions in radio have changed, find a mature Realtor and ask if he/she has had to deal with change. Their stories may make radio seem tame.

I commend you for asking the question.

Hope you are ready for the answers.

BigA said it straight. We are multiple industries with multiple solutions. On the West Virginia Board someone posted the question "Is anything happening?". One of the recent replies tells of a station for sale in Grafton. Follow the links. You will come to a You Tube video giving a "home tour" of the station. It's a good reminder that we all have our own path to follow. Grafton is a different game than say Metro Atlanta.

 

[Carmine5]

Jerry Del Colliano, of course, ponders this question frequently. And I think his recent blog "Life After Radio-8 New Ideas" offers some excellent ideas, not only on how radio professionals can survive by reinventing themselves but also on how the industry itself can morph into something more than it is.

http://insidemusicmedia.blogspot.com/2009/05/life-after-radio-8-new-ideas.html

As he and Mark Ramsey often point out, radio stations need to think more in terms of becoming media companies; offering multiple sources of entertainment and information; radio being just one part of it.

A good friend of mine, who was a mid-morning/weekend host for a Clear Channel station until he was fired, is learning videography and video editing. His idea is to offer web video packages to stations as secondary information/entertainment content for their sites. The revenue for this service would come from advertisers and/or a low cost subscription.

Also, as Jerry has mentioned, as stations become increasingly devalued it may be that radio professionals, those who know how to run them, can pool their resources, acquire stations for not too much money and manage them successfully.

But as both Del Colliano and Ramsey have often stated, radio as we know it today, is just about over and there's nothing that can be done to stop it. But that doesn't mean that, with some creative adaptation, it can't become more than it is.

C5

 

[TheBigA]

But as both Del Colliano and Ramsey have often stated, radio as we know it today, is just about over and there's nothing that can be done to stop it. But that doesn't mean that, with some creative adaptation, it can't become more than it is.

The problem that neither of them mention (and that I have recently discovered) is that the money to be made from new media opportunities is a fraction of what old media makes. So one will not be a replacement for the other.

Also, as Jerry has mentioned, as stations become increasingly devalued it may be that radio professionals, those who know how to run them, can pool their resources, acquire stations for not too much money and manage them successfully.

That's mainly wishful thinking. I've been tracking a lot of that action this past year, and I haven't seen a single example of someone outside of sales or upper management who has bought a station previously owned by a big company. And at last count, there are several hundred on the market. For the most part, those who know how to run them aren't the ones spending the money. Del Colliano was the one who was thrilled when Sam Zell bought Tribune, thinking it would be the centerpiece of a new Jacor. Jerry hasn't said much about that lately.

 

[4dude]

I believe its too far gone

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

As he and Mark Ramsey often point out, radio stations need to think more in terms of becoming media companies; offering multiple sources of entertainment and information; radio being just one part of it.

A good friend of mine, who was a mid-morning/weekend host for a Clear Channel station until he was fired, is learning videography and video editing. His idea is to offer web video packages to stations as secondary information/entertainment content for their sites. The revenue for this service would come from advertisers and/or a low cost subscription.

I haven't been following Ramsey so I will look into his writings.

This idea of becoming a media company may be the salvation of the industry, or it may be the "siren song" that lures operators into dangerous waters. I remember years ago having debates with station owners who could not see that having a local news gathering department was a legitimate, productive element of a radio station. Long term, its beginning to look like they won the debate.

I think I could buy into the idea that the large metro markets offer opportunity for radio stations to become media companies. But is that a viable route for smaller markets and rural markets?

 

[Carmine5]

But as both Del Colliano and Ramsey have often stated, radio as we know it today, is just about over and there's nothing that can be done to stop it. But that doesn't mean that, with some creative adaptation, it can't become more than it is.

The problem that neither of them mention (and that I have recently discovered) is that the money to be made from new media opportunities is a fraction of what old media makes. So one will not be a replacement for the other.

Also, as Jerry has mentioned, as stations become increasingly devalued it may be that radio professionals, those who know how to run them, can pool their resources, acquire stations for not too much money and manage them successfully.

That's mainly wishful thinking. I've been tracking a lot of that action this past year, and I haven't seen a single example of someone outside of sales or upper management who has bought a station previously owned by a big company. And at last count, there are several hundred on the market. For the most part, those who know how to run them aren't the ones spending the money. Del Colliano was the one who was thrilled when Sam Zell bought Tribune, thinking it would be the centerpiece of a new Jacor. Jerry hasn't said much about that lately.

Well, here's what we know so far; the industry in its current form is slowly dying; and I'm referring to my own industry, terrestrial television, as well as radio.

So instead of saying 'this idea or that idea won't work', start forming ideas that will or, at least, are worth a shot. If it means selling products online, doing podcasts or partnering with local businesses (instead of just selling to them), then try it.

One or two of these spit wads we throw up on the ceiling has got to stick.

C5

 

[Tom Wells]

I am uniquely unqualified to comment so I will.

I feel like I slept in a Holiday Inn Express this morning, so here goes.

As the Everly Brothers singing "Gone Gone Gone" segue into an obscure African thumb-organ piece on W-nuthin-nuthin-nuthin 1620,
I pine for the radio I met as a boy, that seems not to have self-awareness anymore or the honesty to recoginize its position, value, and utility in this universe. By playing the ratings and $ dollar game, we defined even as we formed a commercial model for radio, that we would live and die by commercial rules. Radio, the science and art, cares not how we use, tax, or regulate it.

I think radio, for it's immediacy and real-time "aether" (not computer-IP-distribution methods) will always have this advantage
if it can keep people from exiting the radio habit.

For me, the dream was over before it started as I listened to consultants ( sorry ) limit playlists and spontenaity (sp?) back in the 1970's.
As one who most admired the "oh wow" and the "what the hell is that" moments, the industry's desire to eliminate them
was reason No. 1 that I stayed out. No 2 was the death of the 1st Class ticket. No 3 was wise instructors telling us to stay
out of an industry already shinking by the late 1970s.

Still wish I worked in radio, but happy I didn't.
Time now to go on a little drive to see how the coverage is on my pt 15 AM after modulator repairs over the weekend.

Radio CAN be saved. The commercial cow aspect of radio must die, as feeding the cow is killing the art and service.

 

[TheBigA]

Radio CAN be saved. The commercial cow aspect of radio must die, as feeding the cow is killing the art and service.

OK...the alternatives are:

1) Subscription radio, where you pay for the service. Like satellite.

2) Government-supported radio, where the government pays the bills, and the public pays a tax on devices. That's the UK model.

3) All volunteer radio, where no one gets paid. Community radio. Like your Part 15 station. Still, they have utilities and facilities expenses. At some point, the hobby becomes expensive.

Which do you prefer?

The money has to come from somewhere. Radio's founding fathers decided it should come from private companies and advertisers. For those who don't like that approach, there's public, non-commercial radio.

The costs are not going down, but ad revenue is. The only way to keep people from exiting the radio habit is make other choices illegal. There is nothing radio can do to keep people from sampling other media, and using it when it suits their personal preferences. There is no format that radio can use that will appeal to all the people all the time. Radio can't personalize its air signal, but other media can. There are aspects of the devices themselves that are outmoded, but there's not much the radio industry can do about that. This endless rant against owners has grown tired and shrill because there are lots of non-corporate stations that are no better.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

This endless rant against owners has grown tired and shrill because there are lots of non-corporate stations that are no better.

Somewhere in the last two or three days in one of these threads that parallels this one, some one came back with some interesting numbers: The total number of stations owned by the limited number of "aggregators" or whatever we choose to call the people like Clear Channel and the others who have large numbers of stations.

Then this poster went on to tell how many stations are owned by people/companies who have... 20, 30 or 50 or more stations, leaving a large , large number of stations still operated by "small fish"... "mom and pops".. whatever.

I buy into your comment that there are a lot of non-corporate station that are no better. There are posts from time to time where people list particular stations, particular small groups that ARE better. Unfortunately there seems to be no resource that can give us a more granular analysis of who the good stations are and who the bad stations are.

Other than jump in your car and drive from city to city and listen to stations, visit a few and pick their brains (if they would sit still long enough for that) how does one ever come to any evaluation of the terrestrial radio industry that has validity.

You could speed up the process and get on the phone and call some people you trust.

If I were today a small-time radio owner and the market place was good enough to my stations that I could have the luxury of enough time to search out the direction and future of my industry.... how would I do it? ... where would I go? How would I know who to listen to and who to dismiss?

Attending NAB conventions and state broadcasters conventions is a long time source of such information but even that technique is not fully trustworthy. And it limits your input to once or twice a year.

I'm sure some would say broadcasters stay cloistered in their little world and don't do the kind of shoe-leather investigation I am trying to describe, and others would say broadcasters spend too much time chasing trends and should get back to their cloister and take care of the business at hand.

So what is an intelligent, diligent, head-on-straight kind of broadcaster supposed to do to figure out "where to dig the well to hit water"?

 

[SirRoxalot]

At the risk of being labelled "reactionary" and "out of touch", let me suggest that people simply look at what worked in the past, and contrast it with what's NOT working now.

First of all, radio's biggest problem is DEBT. It's sucking the life out of radio stations by forcing cuts that don't make either economic or programming sense. The Ponzi scheme has collapsed. Station values are falling to what many former owners consider to be reasonable levels. Multiples of 12-15x cash flow - not 12-15x net profit, have turned out to be unsustainable, especially in light of the economic downturn. BTW, stock prices had fallen considerably and revenue was stagnant BEFORE the downturn, which indicates that this problem isn't BECAUSE of the economic downturn. The problem has undoubtedly been worsened by the economic downturn.

So, problem #1 is reducing debt. How do you do that? The only effective answer that I see is bankruptcy. The stockholders are already screwed. There are some banks and some venture capitalists who will take it in the shorts. Well, guess who made the loans in the first place? Risky business doesn't always turn out well.

Secondly, radio has to become relevant to listeners - especially younger listeners. If radio doesn't figure out how to become relatable, it will simply die from disinterest. Radio still has a vast reach. It gets sampled by over 90% of the available audience. Unfortunately, current programming is turning off listeners faster than ever. We can argue over the "why", but there's NO disputing that current programming is NOT doing the job.

In the past, live local talent with the flexibility to instantly react to what was going on in a market was the programming that attracted - and kept - an audience. Even now, the daypart with the most live and local input - mornings - is typically the highest revenue-generating daypart. It works for both listeners and advertisers. The effectiveness of this approach varies by format. One thing's for sure - in market after market, the stations with the greatest amount of live and local programming are most likely to be the top rated stations.

The other approach is to cut costs to the bone by going to syndicated and/or VT programming. There are those who will argue that there's no money to pay for local talent, or that local talent isn't worth what they cost. I'd argue that local talent has to be ALLOWED to entertain and inform, and that good local talent more than pays for themselves by adding value for both listeners and advertisers, but that's an arguement that has been discussed before ad nauseum.

Either way, there needs to be a PROFESSIONAL, MOTIVATED sales force to service advertisers and sell them on the value of radio advertising, and help them invest their advertising dollars EFFECTIVELY. Talented professionals need to be available to create and produce commercials that WORK for the advertisers so that both the advertiser and the radio station benefit.

I believe that in many cases, costs are being cut without regard to the effect on revenue, and revenue is sinking even faster because of those cuts. The only good that comes of that is that it leads to bankruptcy, which helps to resolve problem #1.

 

[Carmine5]

Radio CAN be saved. The commercial cow aspect of radio must die, as feeding the cow is killing the art and service.

OK...the alternatives are:

1) Subscription radio, where you pay for the service. Like satellite.

2) Government-supported radio, where the government pays the bills, and the public pays a tax on devices. That's the UK model.

3) All volunteer radio, where no one gets paid. Community radio. Like your Part 15 station. Still, they have utilities and facilities expenses. At some point, the hobby becomes expensive.

Which do you prefer?

The money has to come from somewhere. Radio's founding fathers decided it should come from private companies and advertisers. For those who don't like that approach, there's public, non-commercial radio.

The costs are not going down, but ad revenue is. The only way to keep people from exiting the radio habit is make other choices illegal. There is nothing radio can do to keep people from sampling other media, and using it when it suits their personal preferences. There is no format that radio can use that will appeal to all the people all the time. Radio can't personalize its air signal, but other media can.

From all of the industry watchers and pundits that I have read, the bottom line seems to be that for the broadcast industry to survive at this point, it has to develop multiple income streams as well as provide multiple opportunities for advertisers beyond the terrestrial signal.

Naturally, this is going to take creative, fresh thinking and possibly partnering. But industry professionals have the skills to do it. The worst thing now is to become deflated and throw in the towel or continue doing business in the old way while hoping that the crisis will soon end.

C5

 

[TheBigA]

At the risk of being labelled "reactionary" and "out of touch", let me suggest that people simply look at what worked in the past, and contrast it with what's NOT working now.

That point of view only works if everything else has stayed the same. It hasn't. So what worked in the past won't work now, and it's not working at places that are trying to use old solutions to new problems. Just look around you.

Either way, there needs to be a PROFESSIONAL, MOTIVATED sales force to service advertisers and sell them on the value of radio advertising, and help them invest their advertising dollars EFFECTIVELY.

I work with experienced and motivated sales people, most of whom have been in radio longer than you. And they are flabbergasted by what they see. I know one guy who also understands new media, and is trying to incorporate that into his pitch, and even he is being killed by advertisers that simply are turned off by radio, high spot prices, and lack of clearly identifiable results. Don't blame the sales guys. They're trying to sell snow to eskimos. The advertisers don't care about live & local, DJs, or anything on the air. All the stuff you rant about doesn't matter to them.

Then again, if it's so easy, and everyone else is so dumb, why don't you start your own company? Become an agent, go to advertisers, create your own spots and sales campaigns for them, and place them on stations. Do a better job than the people you rant about. Have the big radio owners come to you begging for your money. Let me know when you start.

The only difference between now and 30 years ago is that back then, people were willing to take risks and start their own companies. Now, nobody wants to take risks any more. We've become a nation of employees, who want the 40 week with benefits. It's all about blaming the corporates. But no one wants to stand up and take their place. That's why I say that when the current owners go away, they'll be replaced by new owners who won't be any better. Because all the good people were too scared to take a risk. The problems won't be solved by simply getting rid of the current owners. It will require replacing them with better people. And, based on what I've seen in the past 6 months, I have no reason to believe that is going to happen.

We need people who are willing to take the bull by the horns, as they say, and do the work. This message board is proof that talk is cheap. Anyone with a computer can complain. It takes courage, brains, and energy to do the work. Everyone is looking for the quick and easy fix. Make it someone else's problem. THEY are the reason things suck. Not me. The old line was if you're not part of the solution, then you're part of the problem. Maybe people need to hear that again.

Here's how to start: Instead of writing posts that say what other people have to do, write a post telling us what YOU are going to do, and how YOU are going to solve problems. What will you do tomorrow that will make radio better. You can't control what others do, but hopefully you can at least have control over yourself. Your rants carry more credibility when it's YOUR butt on the line, and not someone else's.

 

[gr8oldies]

So, problem #1 is reducing debt. How do you do that? The only effective answer that I see is bankruptcy. The stockholders are already screwed. There are some banks and some venture capitalists who will take it in the shorts. Well, guess who made the loans in the first place? Risky business doesn't always turn out well.

OK, so we bankrupt out all this debt and someone is going to come in and fill radio stations with bodies? We'll be staffed like it was 1975? Who is going to fiance that?





In the past, live local talent with the flexibility to instantly react to what was going on in a market was the programming that attracted - and kept - an audience. Even now, the daypart with the most live and local input - mornings - is typically the highest revenue-generating daypart. It works for both listeners and advertisers. The effectiveness of this approach varies by format. One thing's for sure - in market after market, the stations with the greatest amount of live and local programming are most likely to be the top rated stations.

There is live, local talent that just plain suck. Your insistence that local, no matter who or what it is, always beats national is just plain wrong.


. I'd argue that local talent has to be ALLOWED to entertain and inform, and that good local talent more than pays for themselves by adding value for both listeners and advertisers, but that's an arguement that has been discussed before ad nauseum.

You really think Howard stern ever said "Mr. Bossman, can I talk dirty on the radio? Please? No, he just did.


I believe that in many cases, costs are being cut without regard to the effect on revenue, and revenue is sinking even faster because of those cuts. The only good that comes of that is that it leads to bankruptcy, which helps to resolve problem #1.


Yep, and a stabl;e of DJs will cure an advertising recession. maybe mopre local columnists will save the newspaper business?
[/quote]

 

[SirRoxalot]

Here's how to start: Instead of writing posts that say what other people have to do, write a post telling us what YOU are going to do, and how YOU are going to solve problems. What will you do tomorrow that will make radio better. You can't control what others do, but hopefully you can at least have control over yourself. Your rants carry more credibility when it's YOUR butt on the line, and not someone else's.

Perhaps it's time for YOU to "put up or shut up". How about YOU tell us just what successes YOU'VE been responsible for. What stations YOU'VE programmed. What company(ies) YOU'VE led to success. How about establishing YOUR credentials, Bub?

NOBODY "rants" on this board more than YOU, yet you haven't established ANY credibility. All you've done is parrot the corporate line from companies that put radio in this position in the first place. That, and continually attack PERSONALLY anyone who disagrees with you.

Your primary putpose appears to be to make sure that you've gotten the last word. Well, you're welcome to that. It doesn't mean the hundreds, or perhaps thousands of US in the trenches every day BELIEVE your corporate spew.

PS to gr8oldies - NOBODY expects to turn the clock back to 1975. Yes, there are bad local jocks. There are also good local jocks. There are MANY markets and MANY jocks where syndication gets routinely KILLED by local guys. And, it's hard to relate to an audience from miles away in a different time zone. Syndication works for formats that are music-intensive, but music-intensive formats are the ones most threatened by iPods and the Internet.

In either event, RELATABILITY is the key. If a syndicated show relates to an audience, it will do well, especially if it's up a against a jukebox playing somebody else's tunes. A decent live and local jock will usually beat syndication. It happens every day in markets across the U.S.

 

[TheBigA]

Perhaps it's time for YOU to "put up or shut up". How about YOU tell us just what successes YOU'VE been responsible for. What stations YOU'VE programmed. What company(ies) YOU'VE led to success. How about establishing YOUR credentials, Bub?

I'm not the one complaining and criticizing others. I'm not the one who says sales staffs aren't dedicated or motivated. I'm not the one who says the solution for radio is bankruptcy. And I'm not the one telling others how to spend their money. And I've never personally attacked you or anyone else.

You obviously KNOW what I've done, and what stations I've programmed, since you blame me directly for all the problems in radio right now. If you didn't already know who I am and what I do, how could you make such statements?

If you're going to come here and tell others how to reduce debt, give us your track record of how your solutions have worked for you personally. How were you able to turn around a money-losing radio station? How much of your own money did you invest in the turn-around? You say that spending lots of money on DJs will bring listeners back. Show me how you did that someplace lately, and it worked. Don't just make pronouncements that what worked before is better than what's not working now. That is no guarantee of anything, and shows a lack of responsibility.

So forget about Citadel, Clear Channel, Saga, and all the other owners you say have ruined radio. There's nothing you can do that will change them. The only person you can change is yourself. So tell us what you will do today that will change the course of radio.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

As the dust in the room begins to settle......

I just read a political blog that had a title that fits right into the heated expressions of this thread:

"Ouch! That's gonna leave marks."

Some people can't be sale people. Some people can't be GMs and Owners. Some people can't wow an audience with personality.

Those of us who can talk about the days when it was our waist that was thin, and it was our hair that was thick, often have this very romantic, spiritual, emotional view of radio. In "our day" we were often mentored by a station owner/manager who in a candid moment would tell you that he/she arrived in the position through a stroke of being at the right place at the right time. But to keep that place, they had to develop and adapt... they had to be good (unless they had family money). It was a day when everybody in the small stations was polishing their skills to work their way up the farm system and get to the bigger and then the yet bigger station. There were a lot of us who had multiple skills.

After 15 years in the business I was working in other lines of business and I was 35 or 40 years old before I knew there was such a thing as an M.B.A. I got to know a new employee and I knew what I saw him doing but I didn't know it was a profession with a title. He was a Manual Systems Analyst. I thought "Systems Analyst" was a newly created term of the computer industry. No, back in the day when accountants were still sitting on stools wearing a green eye-shade under a bare light bulb, there were analysts that designed the paper flow before computers arrived.

Here is where I am going: Working for a very well put together station in a town of 8 or 10 thousand in the Eastern Arkansas rice country in the 1950s is not even in the same universe and working for a large, group owned station in a big city in the 2000's where they are billing 7, 13, or 24 million per year.

Selling to the owner of a Western Auto franchisee automotive and hardware store somewhere in the Missouri section of the corn-belt is not the same as calling on the regional office for Kroger or the corporate office of a car deal who is operating 21 stores in three cities.

We could do a little less barking and growling at each other here if we could all back off and realize how diverse the challenges are.

Let me share a business example from another industry that fascinates me. Your first reaction is there is no way this example could every help us imagine some kind of new methodology for radio... but think this could trigger a brainstorm with someone.

A was amazed to learn that some universities were offering courses in how to do computer programming of computer games. Give me a break. Some people want to be doctors and save lives. Some people want to be generals and lead armies. Some people want to study diplomacy and bring peace to the earth.

And some people want to write computer games? yeah! I can see that at age 19. What are you going to do when you have a wife, a child, another on the way, and a dog, and your are 27 years old? Then I read one day who was searching the country to round up programmers who knew how to make things happen visually on screen.

Boeing. They were going to build this new airliner called the 777. It was so big and would use new fabrication techniques so a brand new building would be required. They were hiring game-programmers to write a simulation program where they could watch this airplane come down the assembly line (IN ANIMATION) and watch these animated people and the robots interfacing as they actually assembled the airplane. I'm thinking... what kind of a play-toy is this? What executive is stroking his own ego with his waste of time. And then it happened. As they began assembling the fuselage with parts fabricated around the world, the simulated automation machine took a top section of the fuselage and slammed it into the roof of the building. So they went back to the drawing board to rewrite the animation and soon discovered it was the building that had to go back to the drawing board. They were assembling an airplane from parts that had not been manufactured in a building that had not yet been built. The building would have to be just a little bit taller! So, the animation program more than paid for itself, the some executive who insisted on the animation had some ego to stroke after all.

How could we take that war story and develop some equally valuable tool to study radio? This would have to be something way beyond getting some people in a room to listen to records and vote on them. There is no CAD software that comes with a template of an "audience psychology" built in.

Even military people and police cadets go through a lot of training and exercises before they use live ammunition.

Do any of the broadcast companies have anything we could call "The Skunk Works"?

This kind of project ought to be down your alley, BigA! ;D