• 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

Good News (maybe) For Oldies Fans

Jack vs. Oldies

They were inching higher before the final phase of the summer book. Right now, they're a little higher.

In our instantanous "I want it now!" society, the concept of "it's still early in the game" is foreign to many (or maybe it's their auto-bias against Jack that clouds their view).
> >
> I know WJMK went down 12+, but are the 25-54 numbers higher
> than the oldies format or just about the same?
>
 
OT sort of: JOCK-FM and "could care less" does not = "couldn't care less"

> Critics love them but most the general public could care less.
>
I'm not singling out Cat, but I see this (at least 2X in this thread by 2 diff posters) not only here but seemingly everywhere in society... WHY are ppl in the habit of saying "I could care less" when they really mean the exact opposite - "I could NOT care less" or "I couldn't care less"
Sorry just a pet peeve of mine that I expressed on the Angels Fan Forum as well :>)

As to JOCK-FM, how come NO radio station hasn't taken SportsTalk to the FM band already??? With the success of JACK-FM, wouldn't it be a natural to have a SportsTalk station go to the FM dial and call themselves "JOCK-FM" ??? Or would they expose themselves to a lawsuit??
You don't have to pay me any royalties!!

BTW, the San Diego Chargers games are broadcast on an FM station, I'm sure there are plenty of major market pro teams that do the same, not just in the NFL. <P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by SuperRadioFan on 10/26/05 08:21 PM.</FONT></P>
 
JOCK-FM

It's a figure of speech that's been around for ages. There are tons of other expressions that make no sense but they're part of our whacky American brand of English.

There are FM sports-talk stations- WGFX in Nashville is one that ocmes to mind.
"Jock FM"- that might be kinda cool. Don't know they'd expose themselves to a lawsuit (maybe just a little jock itch!)
> >
> I'm not singling out Cat, but I see this (at least 2X in
> this thread by 2 diff posters) not only here but seemingly
> everywhere in society... WHY are ppl in the habit of saying
> "I could care less" when they really mean the exact opposite
> - "I could NOT care less" or "I couldn't care less"
> Sorry just a pet peeve of mine that I expressed on the
> Angels Fan Forum as well :>)
>
> As to JOCK-FM, how come NO radio station hasn't taken
> SportsTalk to the FM band already??? With the success of
> JACK-FM, wouldn't it be a natural to have a SportsTalk
> station go to the FM dial and call themselves "JOCK-FM" ???
> Or would they expose themselves to a lawsuit??
> You don't have to pay me any royalties!!
>
> BTW, the San Diego Chargers games are broadcast on an FM
> station, I'm sure there are plenty of major market pro teams
> that do the same, not just in the NFL.
>
 
Re: More signs of the times..

> [Makes allmost no difference to me - XM truly is a great
> thing....]
>
>
> Wish we could convince more Oldies fans. Sure would save a
> lot of frustration on this board. All we can do is keep
> trying..........

Is this where I'm supposed to express my usual opinion that people who have abandoned terrestrial radio for satellite have no business posting here?<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
Re: More signs of the times..

> >
>
> [Makes allmost no difference to me - XM truly is a great
> thing....]
> >
> Wish we could convince more Oldies fans. Sure would save a
> lot of frustration on this board. All we can do is keep
> trying..........
>


XM will never be more than a niche player. I haven't heard anything that makes me want to pony up $12/month (plus a new radio, plus $75 "activation fee") to hear. My guess is that most others will continue to feel the same. This board is not even remotely representative of the general public.
 
Re: More signs of the times..

> XM will never be more than a niche player. I haven't heard
> anything that makes me want to pony up $12/month (plus a new
> radio, plus $75 "activation fee") to hear. My guess is that
> most others will continue to feel the same. This board is
> not even remotely representative of the general public.

Online activation fee: $9.99
Over the phone: $14.99
XM Roady2: $50
Service: $12.99/month

And its worth it: to hear Soul Street, 50's on Five, 60's on 6 and Up Yours is worth the $90 bucks I spent. Its also worth it not hear "Greatest Hits of the 60's & 70's" spewed every 3 minutes.....<P ID="signature">______________

AOL IM: wnjoldies or jamminoldies105
CBS-FM lives at http://67.83.125.155:8010
Oldies Board co-moderator</P>
 
Re: More signs of the times..

> Is this where I'm supposed to express my usual opinion that
> people who have abandoned terrestrial radio for satellite
> have no business posting here?

Radio is doing what is has to do to stay profitable - ad buyers dont waht 55+ for some stupid reason. So if they dont play the music I want to hear, I will go somewhere else to be entertained. Im not abandoning it - I still listen to TJ on WJRZ, and Bob Pantano on WOGL. But most oldies stations dont play thaty many pre 65 oldies songs. WJRZ, WILW, WVLT, WWKB, and WRLL are the only oldies stations I know of that still play a fair amount of pre 65 oldies. <P ID="signature">______________

AOL IM: wnjoldies or jamminoldies105
CBS-FM lives at http://67.83.125.155:8010
Oldies Board co-moderator</P>
 
Re: More signs of the times..

> > [Makes allmost no difference to me - XM truly is a great
> > thing....]
> >
> >
> > Wish we could convince more Oldies fans. Sure would save
> a
> > lot of frustration on this board. All we can do is keep
> > trying..........
>
> Is this where I'm supposed to express my usual opinion that
> people who have abandoned terrestrial radio for satellite
> have no business posting here?
>

That is your opinion as a "poster" and not as a "moderator," correct?

(I know it is the former, but some of the newbies may not.)
 
Re: More signs of the times..

> [Is this where I'm supposed to express my usual opinion that
> people who have abandoned terrestrial radio for satellite
> have no business posting here?]


I guess we must have missed the word "Terrestrial" in the heading of this board. Does this mean that if we are talking about Chicago Oldies, we need to post on the Chicago board? And please note.............the moderator of this board is an active participant in the XM discussion.
 
Re: More signs of the times..

> > >
> >
> > [Makes allmost no difference to me - XM truly is a great
> > thing....]
> > >
> > Wish we could convince more Oldies fans. Sure would save
> a
> > lot of frustration on this board. All we can do is keep
> > trying..........
> >
>
>
> XM will never be more than a niche player. I haven't heard
> anything that makes me want to pony up $12/month (plus a new
> radio, plus $75 "activation fee") to hear. My guess is that
> most others will continue to feel the same. This board is
> not even remotely representative of the general public.
>
There is no $75.00 activation fee for XM. As far as the $12.95 monthly fee for the service most people blow that amount on junk food in three days.
 
Re: More signs of the times..

> > Is this where I'm supposed to express my usual opinion
> that
> > people who have abandoned terrestrial radio for satellite
> > have no business posting here?
>
> Radio is doing what is has to do to stay profitable - ad
> buyers dont waht 55+ for some stupid reason. So if they dont
> play the music I want to hear, I will go somewhere else to
> be entertained. Im not abandoning it - I still listen to TJ
> on WJRZ, and Bob Pantano on WOGL. But most oldies stations
> dont play thaty many pre 65 oldies songs. WJRZ, WILW, WVLT,
> WWKB, and WRLL are the only oldies stations I know of that
> still play a fair amount of pre 65 oldies.
>
I have XM in my vehicle and I also spend nearly 10 hours a night listening to talk radio programs from bay area terrestrial radio stations and then its on to 60's on six and Phlash Phelps for me! Why be stuck with just one choice for
radio when you can have two and I am just about to buy Sirius also so I can continue to hear Howard Stern after the end of the year!
 
Re: More signs of the times..

> There is no $75.00 activation fee for XM. As far as the
> $12.95 monthly fee for the service most people blow that
> amount on junk food in three days.

That doesn't automatically mean that "most people" will spend it for radio.

As has been pointed out on another board, the same people who think nothing of paying $40 and up every month for cable television (or Dish/DirecTV) balk at paying for radio. The reason: Television is an active medium whereas radio is more of a passive medium, from a listener perspective.

All too often, those of us who post on these boards lose sight of the fact that we are far from average listeners. What we think is not indicative of the general public's view.
<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom