Fall Phase I Diary Numbers Are Out

[FCR]

The numbers are fairly similar to those of the Summer book (with the exception of WCBS-FM which is now tied for third for 12+ with a 4.2).

The stations that had a bad PPM showing in the pre-currency are in place where we're used to seeing them.

Other thoughts?

 

[MarcR]

Other thoughts?


[/quote]

*Yawn*! ;D

The ratings derived from the diary methodology are about as valid as election returns from the country of Belarus!

 

[mikerock]

What happened with PPM? Compared to the diary ratings were they so far off (probably more accurate) that it would really shake up things? So therefore they have to go back and rig it so it comes out close to the diary ratings?

 

[RadioFixerCLE]

The "Black" formatted stations (WBLS et. al.) complained that it was short-changing them, so Arbitron put the system on hold in some cities until they work something out.

Dunno what the plan is. Still gotta keep an eye on the "Little Green Light", however.

 

[davideduardo]

What happened with PPM? Compared to the diary ratings were they so far off (probably more accurate) that it would really shake up things? So therefore they have to go back and rig it so it comes out close to the diary ratings?

The PPM system was launched to soon. They did not have, and were not close to, getting MRC accreditation, the sample was as much as 40% off in some demos, and there was no proportinality in many of the stratification varibles. In other words, totally inaccurate.

 

[davideduardo]

The "Black" formatted stations (WBLS et. al.) complained that it was short-changing them, so Arbitron put the system on hold in some cities until they work something out.

The real issue is that they were not going to get MRC accreditation, what with the sample quotas way off (as much as 40% in some age cells) and the proportionality witin cells on certain stratification variables was just not there. In other words, not a proportional sample because Arbitron has not figured out yet how to do a panel based survey and can not get a big enough panel and can not get ongoing participation.

 

[davideduardo]

The ratings derived from the diary methodology are about as valid as election returns from the country of Belarus!

The diary survey is very, very close to totally proportional and has met a full sample size quota. The PPM does not have a full sample, has no proportionality on many of the stratification variables, and has poor compliance rates by meter carriers. The MRC will not accredit it in its present form.

Your comment is about 100% off.

 

[RadioFixerCLE]

The real issue is that they were not going to get MRC accreditation, what with the sample quotas way off (as much as 40% in some age cells) and the proportionality witin cells on certain stratification variables was just not there. In other words, not a proportional sample because Arbitron has not figured out yet how to do a panel based survey and can not get a big enough panel and can not get ongoing participation.

Maybe the perfect way to solve this is to just increase the number of participants carrying the PPM.

I've always maintained the samples for all these "Ratings" and "music test" surveys were wayyy too small. ???

 

[SirRoxalot]

[Sarcasm /ON]

Boy, those idiots at CBS-FM sure screwed up when they killed the Jack format, didn't they!

Those "classic rock album cuts" like "Radar Love" just won't work on CBS-FM!

CBS-FM won't make it without those '55-64 classics!


[Sarcasm /OFF]

 

[lalumia]

everyone thought I was crazy when I said CBS FM would go hurtling toward #1 instantly' most of the nay sayers proclaimed that the ratings would be a 'little better' than JACK and that it would be a short honeymoon for CBSFM, who are STILL playing 60s records everytime I turn them on, which is often, so yar har har and a bottle of rum to all!

 

[MarcR]

The diary survey is very, very close to totally proportional and has met a full sample size quota. The PPM does not have a full sample, has no proportionality on many of the stratification variables, and has poor compliance rates by meter carriers. The MRC will not accredit it in its present form.

Your comment is about 100% off.
[/quote]

What we reliably know about radio listenership in New York City is that WLTW, Z-100, WCBS-FM and Q104.3 are the most listened to stations in the market 12 plus (and probably 25-54 also). As for everybody else, the diary methodology has been, as I stated above, about as accurate as election returns from the quasi-communist country of Belarus!
And incidentally, the "poor compliance rates by meter carriers", which, presumably greatly impacts the stations you consult, is *Not* the fault or responsibility of Arbitron.

 

[Whiplash]

Congratulations to CBS-FM. What they have done, hasn't been accomplished since Scott Shannon's "Worst To First" with Z-100.

For a station to double its ratings, even 12+ just doesn't happen that much anymore.

Its also caused a movement towards the 80's with some oldies/classic hits stations across the country.

An A+, job well done!!

 

[disney fanatic]

Re: [Sarcasm /ON]

Those "classic rock album cuts" like "Radar Love" just won't work on CBS-FM!

Yep! It's like WBPM all over again, I guess that "Classic Hits 92.9" is trying to mess around with this format in the HV area after dumping oldies from the former "Cool 92.9".

CBS-FM won't make it without those '55-64 classics!

Don't give up the ship, CBS-FM is a great station and it's in the third place in the 1st phase of the Arbitrends. Go CBS-FM!!!!

I guess that sometimes during the Sunday's "New York Radio Greats" show, they played a number of 50's and early 60's songs on that rotation during Sunday's show with Don K Reed, where he is still on at the end of every month during his NY Radio Greats show.

I always listened to the "NY Radio Greats" on Sundays where they brought in some guest jocks that are part of NYC radio including Don K Reed which will be coming back by December 30th, but Norm N Nite from Sirius Gold will be back this Sunday. Last week, Don Bomard (a name which would later become as Bob Shannon) was a guest jock.

I guess CBS-FM is back in high gear after all of its "Jack" mess from 2 years ago. Keep up the station and never let it die.

 

[KFodor]

Yes, I admit...I got a good laugh out of "Rox-A-Lot's" sarcasm, and it couldn't have been more well placed.

There clearly is a market for the Classic Hits format. And CBS-FM, by choosing to go the personality route, is creating a "new form" of the oldies format. It used to be said that you couldn't play songs post 1973 or so on oldies stations. CBS-FM (and some others around the country), are proving that's just not true anymore. Even though, I admit, it's not the original "oldies radio" formula. There is a passion among listeners for music which began in the "Beatles-era" and extended into the early to mid 1980's. The music reaches its' intended target. I'm not surprised it seems to be working. OK, don't call it "oldies" if you don't want to. But every song they're playing is between 25-40 years old.

And, the fact that the station does salute its' prior heritage by playing some of the earlier years records here and there as "spice" is also laudable. I recognize it's "not enough" for some of the hard-core 50's fanatics and oldies geeks (of which I am one). But radio is a business. It's about selling advertising, and always was. And reality today is: advertisers are looking for a demographic that's under age 55. Radio can't change that unless advertisers decide they want to change that.

As to the silly argument about "Radar Love", it peaked in the top 15 nationally as a hit "single". Most top 40 stations across America played it when it was a hit (even if dayparted after 7 pm). The song tests well with both the Classic Rock and Classic Hits audiences. Audience perceptions about songs can change with time, you see. The additional influence of Album-Oriented rock stations and later, M-TV on the "mainstream" music audience now pushed 20 or so years down the road explains why a song no longer necessarily needs to have been a "top 5 singles" hit to be significant enough to play. It can also explain why a song that may not have been played by a particular "Top 40" giant could fit a CBS-FM style station today. Yes, most of the time one might want the "top 5" status, but not in all cases anymore. It's how the targeted audience perceptions to certain songs have changed.

We live now in a day and age where even a few select Led Zeppelin songs can be heard on some hotter-leaned A/C-styled stations, depending on the target audience. Whoda thunk it, huh?

Anyway, congrats on a good trend for CBS-FM. We'll see how the whole book plays out.

 

[disney fanatic]

Thanks Jason Roberts for commenting about CBS-FM and it's back on track once again. On the other WBPM is similar to what CBS-FM does, sorta like the "Radar Love" and "I've Got My Mind Made Up" from several weeks ago. Here is what previously played on "Classic Hits 92.9", just to see if CBS-FM does well.

http://www.wbpmfm.com/played.php

 

[MarkW]

What miserable numbers for K-ROCK!

Some of the wimpy alternative crap the station plays does not mesh well with the image they are trying to create.

If CBS were smart, they'd adopt a true Active Rock stance for WXRK -- and I'm not talking the half-assed, schizo version WYSP is doing, either.

I'm talking a focused, balls-to-the-wall Active Rock like KUPD in Phoenix or WJJO in Madison.

 

[davideduardo]

Maybe the perfect way to solve this is to just increase the number of participants carrying the PPM.

Aside from the fact that radio could not afford a larger sample, it would take an immense increase in sample to make any change. The issue is who is in the sample, and today there is undersampling in 18-34 by 40% and no proportionality on ethnicity, language usage, geography in the individual cells like 18.24, 25-34, etc. The sample size is adequate, and very expensive to radio.

Stastically, you have to quadruple the sample to achieve a reduction of one standard error... no station could afford that.

I've always maintained the samples for all these "Ratings" and "music test" surveys were wayyy too small. ???

I've seen replication studies for ratings, and done them for audience research. This is the best way to test a sample, but very expensive. Essentially, you take several identically recruited groups for the same study and the same date and compare. If the results are equal, then the sample size is adequate. I have done this with perceptuals and music tests, where a large sample is recruited and tested, and then two or three or four groups are drawn from the sample using random non repetitive numbers to break the group into parts. Music testing fully replicates for any number above about 80 persons, for example.

Keep in mind that, if obtained from a vendor, a music test in the NY area of about 100 persons is going to cost around $40 thousand dolllars. Recruiting and incentives can be as much as $250 per respondent! Most stations would rather have two or three a year with a 100 person sample than one with 200, particularly since the extra 100 will not change the results in any actionable manner.

 

[lalumia]

What miserable numbers for K-ROCK!



well, everyone said I was crazy, so I'll be crazy again(although I've said this before)
K Rock needs to identify and incorporate it's 70s NY Rock scene roots into the mix, that means the harder side of Blondie, Talking Heads, Ramones, and not big sellers at the time but now legendary acts like the Dead Boys, Wayne County & the Electric Chairs, New York Dolls/Johnny Thunders,The Psychotic Frogs,The Dictators and Cherry Vanilla, to add an exotic identifying 'brand' celebrating NY(alongside their currents or whatever they're playing)...
I know, I was crazy when I said CBS FM was headed for #1, and I suppose I'm crazy now but try it, you'll like it

 

[Julius Leonard Marx]

David:

Sounds like what we have is a choice between:

(1) A valid sample and a notoriously unreliable instrument.
(2) An inadequate sample and a reliable instrument.

Arbitron's monopoly and their continued use of diaries is indefensible. Agencies don't trust Arbitron numbers and so they avoid buying radio. Arbitron gets their feet held to the fire and finally moves toward PPM but early numbers suggest accurate numbers might go against some segments heretofore over-counted. So they play the race card and the industry, as usual, caves in.

 

[davideduardo]

David:

Sounds like what we have is a choice between:

(1) A valid sample and a notoriously unreliable instrument.
(2) An inadequate sample and a reliable instrument.

Arbitron's monopoly and their continued use of diaries is indefensible. Agencies don't trust Arbitron numbers and so they avoid buying radio. Arbitron gets their feet held to the fire and finally moves toward PPM but early numbers suggest accurate numbers might go against some segments heretofore over-counted. So they play the race card and the industry, as usual, caves in.

No, no and no.

Agencies wanted electronic measurement principally for its fast delivery.

The PPM in NY had bad measurement, period, and the MRC would not certify it... there is talk of reviewing Houston, the only accredited market.

The sample was not adequate in 18-34. It is not proportional within age cells on ethnic balance and language usage... in other words, all the Hispanics that are Spanish dominant could be over 45 and as long as there are the right 12+ number, Arbitron would accept it. The sample has to be proportional in every cell to be a true representation of the universe.

While many broadcasters complained, it was the growing dissatisfaction of ones like Cox and Clear that had the most effect; the real stop on the rollout came from the MRC, though. They simply said the methodology and implementation were not certifiable and Arbitron knows that the MRC, mostly an advertiser and agency orgainization, by withholding accreditation could make the results totally suspect.

The diary is a perfectly useable methodology, even today. In the only accredited market (partly because Arbitron used in home recruitment), the diary and PPM shares are very, very close to each other. Cumes expand in the PPM, but the expansion cume is veeeeeeeeeery light listening, and the P1 and P2 listeners are comparable to the diary in percentage of total listening; all you get is about 50% ot 80% more cume that nearly never listens and is totally unreachable with normal reach and frequency strategies.

The main reason agencies want the meter, beyond immediacy, is that it will allow posting like the metered homes do in the tv world. That will revolutionize radio, and not for the better.