• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Gene Pitney dead at 65

Re: Help Me From Writing Bad Checks!!

> Regurgitation of the same ol'
> same ol' is redundant.

Please tell that to the people who parrot the following viewpoints:

"Too bad radio doesn't program (insert Oldies artist) anymore."
"Radio is missing the chance to reach us Oldies fans."
"The ad agencies don't understand how much money 55+ listeners have."
"Satellite is better than terrestrial radio."

I could go on and on, but my point is that those viewpoints get posted at least as often as David, OldiesCat, or myself posting the reality view.<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
Re: Who said Pitney is a Hero??

> Personally, I think radio is declining because nobody plays
> the MOnotone's "Book Of Love" from the original "fat" vinyl
> Argo pressing.

Ahhh......Jersey Doo Wop holdin' steady on the rockn roll turntable!
<P ID="signature">______________

AOL IM: wnjoldies
Oldies Board co-moderator</P>
 
Re: Help Me From Writing Bad Checks!!

> > Regurgitation of the same ol'
> > same ol' is redundant.
>
> Please tell that to the people who parrot the following
> viewpoints:
>
> "Too bad radio doesn't program (insert Oldies artist)
> anymore."
> "Radio is missing the chance to reach us Oldies fans."
> "The ad agencies don't understand how much money 55+
> listeners have."
> "Satellite is better than terrestrial radio."
>
> I could go on and on, but my point is that those viewpoints
> get posted at least as often as David, OldiesCat, or myself
> posting the reality view.

And... the fact is that many who ask these questions are curious, are not radio insiders, and are open to hearing an expalnation for something that looks odd to them. I have received many e-mails thanking me for taking the time to explain how radio works. While the business aspect bothers some, most Americans know that business is driven by a need for profit, and are very understanding.

And then there are those who do not want to know the truth. Sort of like Freddy Kreuger with a tote box of 45's (remember those vinyl wrapped boxes that held our precious records?).
 
Re: Help Me From Writing Bad Checks!!

> > But they are new to some of the new posters, or those who
> > just do not understand what drives commercial radio.
>
> Should read killing commercial radio, since the business
> model is a highway to failure with an aging tech that is
> quickly becoming detached from listeners and outmoded vs
> newer tech and future tech that will increase competition
> for ears and less slices of the pie for a medium that has to
> shoulder, in some instances, spot loads of 20 minutes per
> hour to survive.

You see, this is why KM and OC and I post over and over.

None of what you say is really true or prevalent.

1. Radio cume is off 2% over the last 30 years.
2. TSL is off from 21 hours a week to 20:15 a week in last 55 years.
3. Nearly no music stations except in small markets run 20 minutes of spots.
4. Clear Channel runs 10 minutes an hour in music dayparts, 12 in others.
5. Today's commercial loads are far less than in the Top 40 glory years of WLS and WABC and the 560's and 60's.
6. Many companies, like Univsion Radio, had 10 minute to 11 minute loads going back a decade or more.
>
> How will radio survive when the next generation of desired
> demos has turned to other methods of entertainment?

There is literally no loss in the "desired demos"
>
> In closing, I don't see why a simple discussion of an artist
> who has passed, who had a few (IMHO) good songs, deserves
> yet another David Eduardo detour in his quest to re-educate
> the world. David would be the one screaming about liver
> disease from alcohol consumption in the middle of a New
> Year's Eve party.

I only entered the discussion when the absurd statement that the fact that oldies radio no longer played Pitney songs was a symptom of the downfall of radio. Wrong, hyperbole, distorted and, in the end, untrue. We don't play Pitney because he appeals to out-of-the-money demos and his songs don't test in sales demos.
 
Re: Who said Pitney is a Hero??

> > Personally, I think radio is declining because nobody
> plays
> > the MOnotone's "Book Of Love" from the original "fat"
> vinyl
> > Argo pressing.
>
> Ahhh......Jersey Doo Wop holdin' steady on the rockn roll
> turntable!

Did you ever see the original pressing? Not a pressing after the song hit the charts, but the first shipments? Probably one of the thickest pieces of vinyl anywone had ever seen. Must have pressed at a small indie, or something wroing with the presses. Back a decade or two, that was one of the "when radio geeks have a beer too many" trick questions.

Another is to name how many US hits had the European stippled center ridge (Those Were The Days, Mary Hopkin was one).
>
 
Re: Who said Pitney is a Hero??

> David, you said:
>
> "The fact is that I never much liked the music, and to make
> a hero out of an artist that was not "hero-sized" seems
> absurd,"
>
> then you said ....
> "I said "hero sized" which would put Pitney in the category
> of the Superemes, Stones, Beatles, Beach Boys, etc"
>
> Your phrase "and to make a hero out of an artist..." means
> to me that you are saying that others were making Pitney out
> to be a hero ... THAT is why I countered with my opinion
> that no one is calling him a "hero" or "hero sized", but you
> have your perception and I have mine so we'll let it be....

we are arguning semantics. My point is that Pitney is hardly the artist to use in a "you are killing radio because you don't play him" argument.
 
Re: Help Me From Writing Bad Checks!!

No, you are posting the "conventional wisdom" view.

I had friends who worked for the State Department in the late 80's who said that the idea that the USSR would collapse and the Berlin Wall would come down was laughable.

Who's laughing now, the optimists from back them or those who thought that skepticism equaled reality?
 
Re: Help Me From Writing Bad Checks!!

> No, you are posting the "conventional wisdom" view.

There is nothing except a "reality" point of view in saying that agencies do not buy radio for 55+. If and when this changes, radio will adapt formats to reach the new "sales demos." In the meantime, we do not and can not program for an audience that is unsalable at present.
 
Re: Help Me From Writing Bad Checks!!

No, but if you care about oldies radio you should be doing what you can to help advertisers "see the light" as it were instead of just accepting the status quo.

Be a "dissident" not an apparatchick.

Just my opinion.

This comment is not meant to refer to you personally based upon your experiences with radio stations in tyrannious states. Just talking in general.
 
Re: Help Me From Writing Bad Checks!!

>
> None of what you say is really true or prevalent.

Yes it is.

>
> 1. Radio cume is off 2% over the last 30 years.

Ask me where it will be in 10 years.

> 2. TSL is off from 21 hours a week to 20:15 a week in last
> 55 years.

Ask me where it will be in 10 years... ESPECIALLY with NEW members in the desired demos.

> 3. Nearly no music stations except in small markets run 20
> minutes of spots.

BUT... talk stations do

> 4. Clear Channel runs 10 minutes an hour in music dayparts,
> 12 in others.

That's 12 minutes more than an IPOD or most Satellite programming (Satellite I feel is also a short-lived tech in the face of other tech on the horizon).

> 5. Today's commercial loads are far less than in the Top 40
> glory years of WLS and WABC and the 560's and 60's.

Doesn't matter. There weren't as many options then in portable media. It's impossible to compare it and you should know that. You can't say radio vs radio anymore, you have to start comparing radio to other entertainment. For instance, a recent study (your favorite word) says that cell phone useage is competing for ears vs radio in the car... and winning. Now, what happens when that tech is part of a full network where any INTERNET stream can be heard and the price of that service is built in to the monthly cost of the cell phone? What happens when that feature is even in the CHEAPEST of cell phones? Who will be listening to YOUR BORING over researched corporate radio station then?

> 6. Many companies, like Univsion Radio, had 10 minute to 11
> minute loads going back a decade or more.

There were less options even 10 years ago.


> There is literally no loss in the "desired demos"

TODAY. How about 10 years from now when we have all of these teens from TODAY in the desired demo TOMMORROW?
 
Re: Help Me From Writing Bad Checks!!

> No, but if you care about oldies radio you should be doing
> what you can to help advertisers "see the light" as it were
> instead of just accepting the status quo.

Radio is just 8% of ad buys, and is almost always a supplement to multi-media buys. There is nothing cost effective a hadful of 55+ formated stations can do to change the minds of agency clients who decided on the campaign specs long before we in radio learn about thier existence.

Radio's simple solution is to provide formats that appeal to the ages advertisers want.
 
Re: Help Me From Writing Bad Checks!!

> >
> > None of what you say is really true or prevalent.
>
> Yes it is.

I gave you evidence to the contrary.
>
> >
> > 1. Radio cume is off 2% over the last 30 years.
>
> Ask me where it will be in 10 years.

I do not have a crystal ball. It took 40 years to decline 2%.
>
> > 2. TSL is off from 21 hours a week to 20:15 a week in last
>
> > 55 years.
>
> Ask me where it will be in 10 years... ESPECIALLY with NEW
> members in the desired demos.

It took 55 years through TV, 45's, cassettes, cable, VHS, DVD, CDs, Internet, etc. to go down by 45 minutes per person.
>
> > 3. Nearly no music stations except in small markets run 20
>
> > minutes of spots.
>
> BUT... talk stations do

So? Satellite talkers have commercials, and the CCU talkers, which are most of the big ones, have much lower limits as part of Less Is More.
>
> > 4. Clear Channel runs 10 minutes an hour in music
> dayparts,
> > 12 in others.
>
> That's 12 minutes more than an IPOD or most Satellite
> programming (Satellite I feel is also a short-lived tech in
> the face of other tech on the horizon).

But the ease of use and the analogy to commercial TV and cable shows this is not an issue unless way overdone.
>
> > 5. Today's commercial loads are far less than in the Top
> 40
> > glory years of WLS and WABC and the 560's and 60's.
>
> Doesn't matter. There weren't as many options then in
> portable media. It's impossible to compare it and you
> should know that.

I fail to see the difference between alternate music listening devices, like 45's or cassettes or CDs. None of those had a major impact on radio listening.

> You can't say radio vs radio anymore, you
> have to start comparing radio to other entertainment.

Like cassettes, CDs, cable, DVDs, VHS, computers, etc? Radio has been declared dead a half-dozen times, and just look...

> For
> instance, a recent study (your favorite word) says that cell
> phone useage is competing for ears vs radio in the car...
> and winning.

There is no evidence in Arbitron, either diary or the HOuston PPM, of changed listening levels.

> Now, what happens when that tech is part of a
> full network where any INTERNET stream can be heard and the
> price of that service is built in to the monthly cost of the
> cell phone? What happens when that feature is even in the
> CHEAPEST of cell phones? Who will be listening to YOUR
> BORING over researched corporate radio station then?

We will be using alternate distribution. Someone has to pay for this stuff, and it will generally be advertising (which is the only viable internet model, also)
>
> > 6. Many companies, like Univsion Radio, had 10 minute to
> 11
> > minute loads going back a decade or more.
>
> There were less options even 10 years ago.

Listening to our stations has increased. Nice try.
>
>
> > There is literally no loss in the "desired demos"
>
> TODAY. How about 10 years from now when we have all of
> these teens from TODAY in the desired demo TOMMORROW?

What has been found is that, as teens become adults, they have less time to devote to more work intensive media options, so they become part of the lifestyle, not all of it. 18+ listening has not suffered...
>
 
Re: Help Me From Writing Bad Checks!!

> > >
> > > None of what you say is really true or prevalent.
> >
> > Yes it is.
>
> I gave you evidence to the contrary.

You gave me evidence over the last 30 years with no future projections.

> >
> > >
> > > 1. Radio cume is off 2% over the last 30 years.
> >
> > Ask me where it will be in 10 years.
>
> I do not have a crystal ball. It took 40 years to decline
> 2%.

40 years where there were no viable portable alternative methods for content delivery.

> >
> > > 2. TSL is off from 21 hours a week to 20:15 a week in
> last
> >
> > > 55 years.
> >
> > Ask me where it will be in 10 years... ESPECIALLY with NEW
>
> > members in the desired demos.
>
> It took 55 years through TV, 45's, cassettes, cable, VHS,
> DVD, CDs, Internet, etc. to go down by 45 minutes per
> person.

Internet is another thing in its own. You can't watch TV, VHS, DVD & drive a car. If the internet, in the car (which is coming) will provide streaming audio, people will have many new options and radio will get lower and lower on the list.

CD's and cassettes are limited in storage space. When I can walk around with 10,000 songs on shuffle or browse the internet from my cell phone (which is coming) to find my favorite streaming station.....

> >
> > > 3. Nearly no music stations except in small markets run
> 20
> >
> > > minutes of spots.
> >
> > BUT... talk stations do
>
> So? Satellite talkers have commercials, and the CCU talkers,
> which are most of the big ones, have much lower limits as
> part of Less Is More.

Still doesn't matter. Ads are part of the business model that will fail radio, especially when programming is driven by those ads. When you have content that is not strickly ad driven and caters to very specific tastes, more people will seek THAT out. How I would love to listen to a Reel Radio aircheck on the way to work since THAT is specific to my tastes... it's probably an idea not that far off

>
> Like cassettes, CDs, cable, DVDs, VHS, computers, etc? Radio
> has been declared dead a half-dozen times, and just look...

Just look... look REAL hard.


> We will be using alternate distribution. Someone has to pay
> for this stuff, and it will generally be advertising (which
> is the only viable internet model, also)

Not when you have hundereds of thousands of people able to stream from their home computers over high speed internet connections. I can and 25-30 people can listen to my stream. It doesn't cost me any more than my monthly internet access bill and a monthly charge to a service that takes care of my AFTRA rights. There are enough radio geeks to flood the net.
 
Re: Help Me From Writing Bad Checks!!

> > > >
> > > > None of what you say is really true or prevalent.
> > >
> > > Yes it is.
> >
> > I gave you evidence to the contrary.
>
> You gave me evidence over the last 30 years with no future
> projections.

I do not have a crystal ball. But one thing is certain is that much of the current radio content will be distributed in new ways... a radio station is its content, not its transmitter.

> > I do not have a crystal ball. It took 40 years to decline
> > 2%.
>
> 40 years where there were no viable portable alternative
> methods for content delivery.

45's, cassettes, CDs, etc. There have always been different methods for music listening. So far, content delivery via alternate methods is less than 1% of listening. At some point, radio will have to use multiple delivery systems, but the time is not now.
> >
> > It took 55 years through TV, 45's, cassettes, cable, VHS,
> > DVD, CDs, Internet, etc. to go down by 45 minutes per
> > person.
>
> Internet is another thing in its own. You can't watch TV,
> VHS, DVD & drive a car.

In car listening is the smallest part of total radio listening. All the things I listed, and more, compete for entertainment time.

> If the internet, in the car (which
> is coming) will provide streaming audio, people will have
> many new options and radio will get lower and lower on the
> list.

Only if radio does not add additional channels of distribution.
>
> CD's and cassettes are limited in storage space. When I can
> walk around with 10,000 songs on shuffle or browse the
> internet from my cell phone (which is coming) to find my
> favorite streaming station.....

Several studies have shown the average number of songs on an iPod is around 300. That is less than most radio stations.
> >
> > So? Satellite talkers have commercials, and the CCU
> talkers,
> > which are most of the big ones, have much lower limits as
> > part of Less Is More.
>
> Still doesn't matter. Ads are part of the business model
> that will fail radio, especially when programming is driven
> by those ads. When you have content that is not strickly ad
> driven and caters to very specific tastes, more people will
> seek THAT out. How I would love to listen to a Reel Radio
> aircheck on the way to work since THAT is specific to my
> tastes... it's probably an idea not that far off

It requires spending of money. A percentage of people will spend for alternatives, but the average household income in the US suggests a major percentage will not or can not.
>
> > We will be using alternate distribution. Someone has to
> pay
> > for this stuff, and it will generally be advertising
> (which
> > is the only viable internet model, also)
>
> Not when you have hundereds of thousands of people able to
> stream from their home computers over high speed internet
> connections. I can and 25-30 people can listen to my
> stream. It doesn't cost me any more than my monthly
> internet access bill and a monthly charge to a service that
> takes care of my AFTRA rights. There are enough radio geeks
> to flood the net.

In the end, well programmed content will beat someone's home system with thier personal choice of music. And the home streamers have to pay ASCAP, BMI and RiAA licenses per avaialable stream, and that will not change.

Internet streams of the sort you mention do not pay AFTRA at all. That is jsut for major commercials.

I'll bet the geeks can not do news, traffic, talk shows, artist interviews, contesting, play by play, etc.
 
Re: WGLI

I am a bit curious. Why do you use as a nickname the calls and frequency of a station that no longer exists? WADO / HBC bought WGLA and nuked it so we could increase to 50 kw daytime... and that was quite a few years ago.
 
Re: WGLI

> I am a bit curious. Why do you use as a nickname the calls
> and frequency of a station that no longer exists? WADO / HBC
> bought WGLA and nuked it so we could increase to 50 kw
> daytime... and that was quite a few years ago.
>

You mean WGLI... yes. 1989 and nuked is a good way to put it.

http://www.wackradio.com/wgli/index.htm

I use it because alot of people I worked with at WNYG and WGLI are good friends. WGLI was a good station that was shoehorned in with ahideous pattern between 1280 WADO and 1300 WAVZ . Despite that, it did well for years... it really deserved a better frequency, but at least it had nighttime service (the only Suffolk County AM to have nighttime service until the late 1980's when all of these daytimers suddenly had 40 something watts to play with at night).

From approx 1965-1976, it did very well as a Top 40 station. It's fall came on bad programming decisions to change to an automated system (IGM) presenting easy listening/AC in the late 1970's (when you had WCTO-FM up the block doing almost the same thing). It came back for awhile in the 1980's as an oldies format with alot of talented jocks (back when, you know, it was "sellable") but WADO thru alot of money at ownership to make it go away.
 
Re: Help Me From Writing Bad Checks!!

> In the end, well programmed content will beat someone's home
> system with thier personal choice of music. And the home
> streamers have to pay ASCAP, BMI and RiAA licenses per
> avaialable stream, and that will not change.

There are already services that charge a small fee to take care of that for you while you stream

>
> Internet streams of the sort you mention do not pay AFTRA at
> all. That is jsut for major commercials.

But that will not stop them, until AFTRA or BMI etc catch up with them. It'll become like pirate radio, hard to control.

>
> I'll bet the geeks can not do news, traffic, talk shows,
> artist interviews, contesting, play by play, etc.
>

Alot of commercial stations lost some of those arts as well. WALK-FM used to be the de-facto place for Long Island news in the 1980's and 1990's. How about today? Newsday provides a :30 second update a few times a day. It's an afterthought

As for contests, that's only a way to distract from bad programming. A well programmed station (like WLTW-Fm in New York) doesn't need to run contests.
 
Re: Help Me From Writing Bad Checks!!

> > Internet streams of the sort you mention do not pay AFTRA at
> > all. That is jsut for major commercials.
>
> But that will not stop them, until AFTRA or BMI etc catch up
> with them. It'll become like pirate radio, hard to control.

I believe you are confusing AFTRA (the union representing on-air talent) with ASCAP (the music licensing organization).<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
Re: Help Me From Writing Bad Checks!!

> >
> > Internet streams of the sort you mention do not pay AFTRA
> at
> > all. That is jsut for major commercials.
>
> But that will not stop them, until AFTRA or BMI etc catch up
> with them. It'll become like pirate radio, hard to control.

AFTRA is only a concern if you have major agency commercials running. AFTRA is not a music rights or royalty collection agency, it is the union (American Federation of Television and Radio Artists) that represents talent for voiceovers in larger markets.

And ASCAP, BMI and SESAC have bots that look for streams and identify by fingerprints the songs that are not licensed from streams that are not covered in a contract. They have in hours lawyers who revel in coming down on streamers. And, RIAA is even worse.
>
> Alot of commercial stations lost some of those arts as well.
> WALK-FM used to be the de-facto place for Long Island news
> in the 1980's and 1990's. How about today? Newsday
> provides a :30 second update a few times a day. It's an
> afterthought

Some stations have listeners who do not want news. Each staiton serves a specific constituency and does is well. While some eclectic streams will get a few listeners, most will be someone's iPod on shuffle. No casual streamer has the money for really good equipment, music research, a good music scheduling program, etc.
>
> As for contests, that's only a way to distract from bad
> programming. A well programmed station (like WLTW-Fm in New
> York) doesn't need to run contests.

I thought WLTW did it's trips still. The CCU AC in LA has done Hawaii trips for a decade, and does extremely well with them. Contests add excitement, and more people than you think participate (I know an LA AC where over 50% of listeners have tried to win something int he last year... 600,000 people).
>
 
Re: Help Me From Writing Bad Checks!!

> > > Internet streams of the sort you mention do not pay
> AFTRA at
> > > all. That is jsut for major commercials.
> >
> > But that will not stop them, until AFTRA or BMI etc catch
> up
> > with them. It'll become like pirate radio, hard to
> control.
>
> I believe you are confusing AFTRA (the union representing
> on-air talent) with ASCAP (the music licensing
> organization).
>

Yes, our mistake.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom