how does one become a Broadcast Consultant?

[davideduardo]

Re: Consultant?

> > This is a radio board. Since you did not specify any other
>
> > kid of consultant, the assumption is logical that you were
>
> > referring to radio.
>
> I said already twice that I was NOT referring to radio
> consultants.

This is a radio forum.

> Pay attention.

Jawohl, mein fuhrer.

 

[KMRichards]

Re: Consultant?

> > I said already twice that I was NOT referring to radio
> > consultants.
>
> This is a radio forum.
>

David's point is valid.

Starting a thread on "consultants" on this board automatically creates the presumption that the subject is <u>radio</u> consultants, and disclaiming that as the thread progresses is essentially meaningless other than saying "I started an off-topic thread".

You're not going to win this argument, because you set yourself up for it. <P ID="signature">______________


</P>

 

[954]

Re: Consultant?

> Starting a thread on "consultants" on this board
> automatically creates the presumption that the subject is
> radio consultants, and disclaiming that as the thread
> progresses is essentially meaningless other than saying "I
> started an off-topic thread".
> You're not going to win this argument, because you set
> yourself up for it.

Does this, from the first posting, sound like
it was intended to be a serious thread about
radio consulting?

> It sounds like fun, traveling around
> the country delocalizing radio stations
> and turning them into jukeboxes with
> transmitters. Do you just hang your
> shingleand say "I'm a consultant now"?

Were I a radio consultant, I'd call that a cheap shot.

Since I'm not one, I think it's funny.

BTW -- go to famousradioconsultantsschool.com.

You think I set myself up, fine.

73s from 954<P ID="signature">______________
Guest Deejay on WFUN, 1971</P>

 

[KMRichards]

Re: Consultant?

> Does this, from the first posting, sound like
> it was intended to be a serious thread about
> radio consulting?
>
> > It sounds like fun, traveling around
> > the country delocalizing radio stations
> > and turning them into jukeboxes with
> > transmitters. Do you just hang your
> > shingleand say "I'm a consultant now"?
>
> Were I a radio consultant, I'd call that a cheap shot.

Yes, but I've seen a lot of serious threads start with cheap shots, so to your question above, my answer is "yes, it did sound like it".

And your arguments, primarily with David, reinforce the impression that this was your intention. Judging from some of the other posts (besides yours, mine, and David's) I am not alone in having that impression.

Sorry, but on a message board, with no face-to-face contact, impressions are all we have to go on.<P ID="signature">______________


</P>

 

[954]

Re: Consultant?

> > Does this, from the first posting, sound like
> > it was intended to be a serious thread about
> > radio consulting?
> >
> > > It sounds like fun, traveling around
> > > the country delocalizing radio stations
> > > and turning them into jukeboxes with
> > > transmitters. Do you just hang your
> > > shingleand say "I'm a consultant now"?
> >
> > Were I a radio consultant, I'd call that a cheap shot.
>
> Yes, but I've seen a lot of serious threads start with cheap
> shots, so to your question above, my answer is "yes, it did
> sound like it".
>
> And your arguments, primarily with David, reinforce the
> impression that this was your intention.

MY intention?

I wasn't the one who started the thread.

I just added my impressions and an old joke that has
a lot of truth in it.

> Judging from some
> of the other posts (besides yours, mine, and David's) I am
> not alone in having that impression.
>
> Sorry, but on a message board, with no face-to-face contact,
> impressions are all we have to go on.

True.

On a serious note, DE has previously admitted that he
likes very few oldies. So, conceivably, a consultant
such as him may be responsible for screwing up
the playlists of oldies stations... expecting everyone
to share his likes.

DE has repeatedly said that people only like hits...
maybe because the people who like a deeper playlist
have alreadfy quit listening to shallow oldies
stations like Majic and stick to their CDs and LPs
and web radio. I have 176 oldies (from my CDs) loaded on
my PC now. I think that's more than DE thinks a playlist
should have. So then who needs radio?

That's why I don't have a lot of respect for radio
consultants and I thoroughly enjoyed that cheap
shot from I forget who.

Mea culpa and 73s from 954<P ID="signature">______________
Guest Deejay on WFUN, 1971</P>

 

[davideduardo]

Re: Consultant?

>
> On a serious note, DE has previously admitted that he
> likes very few oldies.

I personally am not a hard core oldies listener. That does not mean I can not deliver to the listener who has a greater passion for such music the songs such listeners tell me they want, collectively, to hear.

> So, conceivably, a consultant
> such as him may be responsible for screwing up
> the playlists of oldies stations... expecting everyone
> to share his likes.

My LA oldies station has an active library of nearly 800 songs, with another several hundred in specialty shows (the equivalents of a do-wop show and a british Invasion show, for example). In the July Arbitron extraps, the station was #5 25-54 in LA. I stand by those results as credentials... especially since the signal does not touch 60% of the market population.
>
> DE has repeatedly said that people only like hits...
> maybe because the people who like a deeper playlist
> have alreadfy quit listening to shallow oldies
> stations like Majic and stick to their CDs and LPs
> and web radio.

Were that true, we would find a couple of things happening. First, the use of radio, on a cume basis, would decline. Second, we would be forgetting that most oldies stations do not have a listening problem... they ave a demographich problem. It's not about how many people listen, it is about the fact that most are over 55 and not marketable.

Playing deeper oldies makes the format less attractive to under-55 persons, not more attractive.

> I have 176 oldies (from my CDs) loaded on
> my PC now. I think that's more than DE thinks a playlist
> should have. So then who needs radio?

Actually, I have more than 600 50's, 60's and 70's English oldies on my computer. But that is MY taste.

As to listeners, a station pays as many songs as pass research. No more, no less. The listeners determine that.
>
> That's why I don't have a lot of respect for radio
> consultants ....

You still do not have a real idea of what a consultant does, so that observation does not surprise me at all.

 

[954]

Consultant joke

> > DE has repeatedly said that people only like hits...
> > maybe because the people who like a deeper playlist
> > have alreadfy quit listening to shallow oldies
> > stations like Majic and stick to their CDs and LPs
> > and web radio.
>
> Were that true, we would find a couple of things happening.
> First, the use of radio, on a cume basis, would decline.
> Second, we would be forgetting that most oldies stations do
> not have a listening problem... they ave a demographich
> problem.

That's not inconsistent with what I said. If the people
who are bored with a small playlist have stopped
listening, then the "hits only" people who are left
reinforce the "hits only" philosophy because of
their preponderance in surveys.

> Playing deeper oldies makes the format less attractive to
> under-55 persons, not more attractive.

How do you justify that?

You're saying that people under 55 (of which I am
one) are, basically, shallow people?

Basically, when I listen to our oldies station, I
change the station when I'm sick of the repetition.

I've heard the save song three times in one day.
Good reason not to stay tuned.

Considering all the thousands of songs that
could be classified as oldies (even after
removing the bombs), an oldies station
shouldn't have to repeat more than about
3 times a month, unless it wanted to in
the case of the most popular songs.

100 songs/year x 25 years = 2500
minus 10% for duplicates = 2250
divided by 10 songs/hr = about 225 hours
a month is 720 hours

That'd keep it interesting.

73s from 954
<P ID="signature">______________
Guest Deejay on WFUN, 1971</P>

 

[davideduardo]

Re: Consultant joke

>
> That's not inconsistent with what I said. If the people
> who are bored with a small playlist have stopped
> listening, then the "hits only" people who are left
> reinforce the "hits only" philosophy because of
> their preponderance in surveys.

If people bored with small playlists had stopped listening, as I said, the total percentage of persons using radio would decline. It has not.

There is no survey bias introduced by any specific type of listener. In fact, for decades 5% of the population has not used radio at all in the survey period.
>
> > Playing deeper oldies makes the format less attractive to
> > under-55 persons, not more attractive.
>
> How do you justify that?

People under 55 did not live the 60's oldies era. While they may know many of the oft-played biggies, they will not have any memories associated with minor hits or the novelty type material.
>
> You're saying that people under 55 (of which I am
> one) are, basically, shallow people?

No, I am saying that most under-55s will not relate emotionally with most pre-1970 songs. Oldies staitons develop TSL by means of mood, memories and music, in that order.
>
> Basically, when I listen to our oldies station, I
> change the station when I'm sick of the repetition.

Since you are under 55, admitedly, that makes sense. Most of the rest of the under populaiton of the US agrees.
>
> I've heard the save song three times in one day.
> Good reason not to stay tuned.

Most people do not listen all day. The average listener to radio spends 20 hours a week with radio, or about 3 hours a day. Stations want to play songs on a rotation that allows the biggest, favorite songs to play often enough that the average listener will hear favorites (redundancy intentional) every time they tune in.

I would not play a song that often, as there are other ways to work with music scheduling... but the technique is not wrong and works.

Again, the problem of oldies stations is not TSL, not cume. It is the age of the listeners.
>
> Considering all the thousands of songs that
> could be classified as oldies (even after
> removing the bombs), an oldies station
> shouldn't have to repeat more than about
> 3 times a month, unless it wanted to in
> the case of the most popular songs.

OK, there are really lonly about 50 to, in a strech, 60 real hits from any year. Let's say youu play 62-70, that means about 450 songs. Some that were hits are not any more.
>
> 100 songs/year x 25 years = 2500

Too broad. You will make no one happy. There are too many options in most markets that are more specific to a demo.

> minus 10% for duplicates = 2250
> divided by 10 songs/hr = about 225 hours
> a month is 720 hours
>
> That'd keep it interesting.

You would get NO listeners.

I have had it done to me. My 450 songs to another station's 1800 songs... classic rock, in this case. A year later, I had the same 16 share, they had a 1.8, and went away soon after. My cume was 4.2 million, theirs was less than 300 thousand. We sold advertising, they did not.

 

[OldiesCat]

joke's on U

oh, yes- that kind of hit firepower will keep 'em coming back <LMAO>.

The usual "there are thousands of songs you could play" blindness. Radio is about playing songs people want to hear TODAY, not about most of the that hit the charts over 50 years.

Please remember- the model for successful Oldies stations was not a creation of radio programmers. It was designed according to what everyday, normal (non- radio geeks) said they wanted to hear.


> Considering all the thousands of songs that
> could be classified as oldies (even after
> removing the bombs), an oldies station
> shouldn't have to repeat more than about
> 3 times a month, unless it wanted to in
> the case of the most popular songs.
>
> 100 songs/year x 25 years = 2500
> minus 10% for duplicates = 2250
> divided by 10 songs/hr = about 225 hours
> a month is 720 hours
>
> That'd keep it interesting.
>
> 73s from 954
>

 

[954]

Under 55

> People under 55 did not live the 60's oldies era. While they
> may know many of the oft-played biggies, they will not have
> any memories associated with minor hits or the novelty type
> material.

David, get a calculator. I'm under 55...

I was in junior high school when the Beatles
were on Ed Sullivan. I lived through the
great 50s-60s rock & roll era. I played
Hound Dog and Teddy Bear over and over.
I bought Meet The Beatles (but nothing else by them).

No memory of novelty songs? I first heard
Witch Doctor (and Purple People Eater, I
think) in 1st grade!!!

I enjoyed all the great rock & roll music
of the early sixties.

Admittedly, I am atypical, but I "discovered"
classical music in high school and gave up on
rock. Then listened to excellent local talk
radio (all Dems with one token Republican
back then) and MOR and country in college, too.

By then rock & roll was too much about drugs
and protest for my tastes. Maybe country was
the music of the Silent Majority. To quote
a song, I was country when country wasn't cool.
About ten years before Vinnie Barbarino made it cool.

I think the best rock & roll is the stuff I
never heard until the oldies format came
to south Florida -- music of the early days
of rock & roll from before I was old enough
to have a radio!

Basically, what I'm saying is you assume too much.

You say "People under 55 did not live the
60's oldies era."

Right. I lived in a log cabin the 1850s until
I was 35. With a little help from Marty McFly.

73s from 954
<P ID="signature">______________
Guest Deejay on WFUN, 1971</P>

 

[954]

another radio consultant question

> You still do not have a real idea of what a consultant does,
> so that observation does not surprise me at all.

You are correct.

I know that Radio Consultants:

1. Flip stations and get listeners pissed.
2. Cut playlists and get listeners pissed.
3. Do research.

What else do they do that I don't know about?

73s from 954

<P ID="signature">______________
Guest Deejay on WFUN, 1971</P>

 

[davideduardo]

Re: another radio consultant question

> > You still do not have a real idea of what a consultant
> does,
> > so that observation does not surprise me at all.
>
> You are correct.
>
> I know that Radio Consultants:
>
> 1. Flip stations and get listeners pissed.

This is a last resort. Generally, a consultant tries to improve an existing operation, as a format flip is horribly expensive, and lost revenue is not made up for years.

> 2. Cut playlists and get listeners pissed.

Nope. Consusltants do not cut playlists. Listenrs cut playlists if they only show they like a small number of songs incommon.

> 3. Do research.

Consultants do not do research. Research companies do research. Consultant help to get the maximum value out of the research because they have more experience in interpreting it.
>
> What else do they do that I don't know about?

1. Help find talent they may have found in other markets around the country.
2. Help get competitive talent relocated to another market where they no longer compete.
3. Help in marketing and promotion plans to develop a strategy, rather than tasks.
4. ratings interpretation.
5. Ongoing talent development, airchecking, strategy sessions.
6. Assistance in making station aware of trends in other markets that may impact the specific market.
7. Helop on writing liners, imaging, etc. to emphasize the core values station wants to won and can own.
8. Assistance in optimizing music scheduler, such as Selector.
9. Meetings with sales to update on station development.
10 Assistance to GM in getting funding from corporate to do promotion, etc.
11 Conferences with programmers in other markets with similar formats to exchange ideas and discuss format issues.

... and that is just a start.

 

[davideduardo]

Re: Under 55

> > People under 55 did not live the 60's oldies era. While
> they
> > may know many of the oft-played biggies, they will not
> have
> > any memories associated with minor hits or the novelty
> type
> > material.
>
> David, get a calculator. I'm under 55...
>
> I was in junior high school when the Beatles
> were on Ed Sullivan. I lived through the
> great 50s-60s rock & roll era. I played
> Hound Dog and Teddy Bear over and over.
> I bought Meet The Beatles (but nothing else by them).

Then you are just about to drop out of the demo. Over 55, no advertiser interest. And the fact stands that most 60's oldies fans who relate to the music are over 55.

 

[OldiesCat]

consultant question

Not true. It's those who own and manage the radio stations who do these things.
(on top of that, it's a real cheap, wise-ass, smarmy and very old & tired shot).

One thing that gets missed in all this is that the use of consultants is way down since consolidation in the mid/late 90s. Yet, they still take the heat for what others do (then blame "the consultants" because they don't have the stones to face the music).
>

> I know that Radio Consultants:
>
> 1. Flip stations and get listeners pissed.
> 2. Cut playlists and get listeners pissed.
> 3. Do research.
>
> What else do they do that I don't know about?
>
> 73s from 954
>

 

[OldiesCat]

Under 55

And that is the biggest thing most people in radio fail to take into consideration: WE ARE ATYPICAL.

Radio geeks live in an entirely different world than our listeners. Because of what we do, we view things very differently, yet insist we "know" (or pretend to) what we think listeners want. "I remember...", "I think..." and "when I was..." are moot--we don't listen to media the same, nor do we use media the same as the audience we're targeting. But we insist on arguing that we know what listeners want because of our preferences vs. doing our homework (research)and giving listeners what THEY tell us they want (and not "lots of my friends say..." and tring to manipulate that as research). Can research be the tail that wags the dog- of course. But, as in any business, the most successful radio stations identify an open market position, research what that target audience wants and expects, then fills the hole. It's no different than how auto makers, retailers or service industry does business. Radio is just so much more personal and emotional and, more often than not, it's those things that drive radio types off course.


>
> Admittedly, I am atypical, but I "discovered"
> classical music in high school and gave up on rock.

 

[954]

Radio Geek

> And that is the biggest thing most people in radio fail to
> take into consideration: WE ARE ATYPICAL.

Good essay, OldiesCat. But I wouldn't necessarily
define myself as a radio geek. (Or am I?)

I am an opinionated, demanding listener.

> Radio geeks live in an entirely different world than our
> listeners. Because of what we do, we view things very
> differently, yet insist we "know" (or pretend to) what we
> think listeners want. "I remember...", "I think..." and
> "when I was..." are moot--we don't listen to media the same,
> nor do we use media the same as the audience we're
> targeting. But we insist on arguing that we know what
> listeners want because of our preferences vs. doing our
> homework (research)and giving listeners what THEY tell us
> they want (and not "lots of my friends say..." and tring to
> manipulate that as research). Can research be the tail that
> wags the dog- of course. But, as in any business, the most
> successful radio stations identify an open market position,
> research what that target audience wants and expects, then
> fills the hole. It's no different than how auto makers,
> retailers or service industry does business. Radio is just
> so much more personal and emotional and, more often than
> not, it's those things that drive radio types off course.
> >
> > Admittedly, I am atypical, but I "discovered"
> > classical music in high school and gave up on rock.
>
<P ID="signature">______________
Guest Deejay on WFUN, 1971</P>

 

[OldiesCat]

Radio Geeks

Generally, I'd say if we're on this board, we ARE some kind of Radio Geek <LOL>.
Sometimes that's a seasoned radio professional, sometimes you've been in radio a number of years chasing your dream, could be a listener who's a radio junkie. We are all very different than those listeners we target.

>
> Good essay, OldiesCat. But I wouldn't necessarily
> define myself as a radio geek. (Or am I?)
>
> I am an opinionated, demanding listener.
> > And that is the biggest thing most people in radio fail to
> > take into consideration: WE ARE ATYPICAL.

 

[davideduardo]

Re: Radio Geek

> > And that is the biggest thing most people in radio fail to
>
> > take into consideration: WE ARE ATYPICAL.
>
> Good essay, OldiesCat. But I wouldn't necessarily
> define myself as a radio geek. (Or am I?)

If you are on this board, like all of us, you are defintely a radio geek.

 

[Kansas]

Re: How does one become a fool?

> > Where do I sign up for this job?
>
> It has often been said that a defendant who acts as his own
> lawyer is represented by a fool.
>
> A lawyer is a good example of a consultant... someone who
> knows more than you do and who can, sometimes with
> inspiration, prevent you from making mistakes (or making
> another one, if you are guilty!)
>
> I just can not see why the resentment, hatred and total
> misunderstanding towards consultants.
>

Good point, Dave. I agree 100 percent.