Ignore Boomer Advertising at Your Station's own Peril

[landtuna]

Do you understand what the word "sacred cow" means?

Yes.

Stations like WABC or WLS obviously had lots of teen listeners, but it was not their primary or exclusive targeted demo. You can read Rick Sklar's book if you don't believe me. They may have played The Beatles in the 60s, but they also played Louis Armstrong, Tony Bennett, Al Hirt, and other MOR artists. Those older artists were to bring in the slightly older demos, 25-49.They considered themselves to be "mass appeal," not Top 40. The other thing to know is there were fewer Top 40 stations than those targeting older listeners.

I qualified my statements by location and year (mid-50's thru early 60's - pre Beatles). I don't know what WABC or WLS played back then but I do remember what my two T-40 stations played and it wasn't Al Hirt or Tony Bennett. I still have the Hooper weekly charts from 60-62.

By the way, Sinatra's teen fans from the 30s were in their 30s by the 1950s and their 40s by the 1960s.

Frankie began his singing career in 1935 with the big bands. A bobby soxing teen of that era would have been approximately 30 years old in 1950 and most probably have the same listening habits as my parents. And they did listen to Sinatra (and his peers).

Quite a few of the slightly older teens I knew in the mid-50's were already into jazz. Big Band and Swing was for older folks.

OK, so two males in their 30s that don't usa OTA radio. They are unusual, based on my studies. The numbers for women in their 30s are very different. If 25-49 is the sacred cow, women in that age group are the golden sacred cow.

As I have stated, it isn't only my two boys but their friends as well. I make it a point to ask and have yet to find one that listens to anything except the AM drive. My 20-22 year old daughters and 25-year old son don't even listen to that much.

I'm not trying to argue with you but based upon my personal observations your study isn't reflective. It might be interesting to hang a PPM meter around their necks and see what they do and don't listen to. In any case, it is pretty clear to me anyway that radio, unless they can reach out to the emerging adult population, will be in ratings hell within one generation.

 

[bossbill]

Perhaps you're correct. Nobody listens to the radio anymore. The many that come to pick up the prizes and call on the phone are all fooling us. And the ones that respond to our advertising messages are somehow finding out in some other way.

May as well turn off the transmitters...

 

[landtuna]

Perhaps you're correct. Nobody listens to the radio anymore. The many that come to pick up the prizes and call on the phone are all fooling us. And the ones that respond to our advertising messages are somehow finding out in some other way.

May as well turn off the transmitters...

We really do need a sarcasm icon Bill. I got your message but remember.....I didn't say nobody was listening. I was answering a statement made by another poster that the younger generation doesn't listen - at least not in the numbers that my generation did. And the problem with that is the number seems to be dropping.

We kind of got off topic because the original issue was that radio is making a mistake not addressing (at least in larger numbers) the relatively well-heeled 50+ market. That generation buys much more than Gold Bond powder and sit-down bathtubs. TV and newspapers seem to understand there is a market there but not mainstream radio. (And before Eduardo jumps me again, I do understand that agencies initiate the buys but I use 'radio' and 'TV' to differentiate the medium.)

 

[bossbill]

I'm 65. I buy lots of products. But I'm too old to be told that I should like Coke instead of Pepsi. Much of what we do in marketing is moving consumers from one brand to another. And it is very difficult to do that with older demographics.

It is much easier to get a 25 year old to change brands.

 

[jh]

That said, I highly doubt your statement about 25-49 always being the sacred sales demo. While it may be true now and may have been for a number of years I doubt it was during my youth. When I was a teen (mid-50's thru early 60's) the T-40 stations targeted us. To be sure they also advertised products like cars for older folks but the DJ's, music and a majority of ads were intended to reach teens and very young adults. Mobile shows were located at hot spots like the skating rink, auto accessory stores (seat covers were a big item then), drive-in burger joints and movie theaters. Lots of on-air topics around the high schools as well. Granted - I lived in a smallish Southwestern town of 50-100K population so perhaps my experience isn't typical. However, when I visited friends in 1960 in the San Joaquin Valley of central California their radio stations seemed just like mine.

In that same era the 25+ crowd were listening to Sinatra, the Ink Spots and Gogi Grant. I don't remember any parents of the era listening to T-40 stations unless pressured by their kids. More likely they tuned in to Arthur Godfrey and the like. If it was music it was what we now call 'standards'.

As for young adults graduating to radio....never before has their been such a variety of cheap mobile devices to listen to all genres of what once was radio. I've watched my oldest two boys grow up into their 30's now and they still use the same type of portable electronics they did in the 80's. Neither listen to radio.

Back then, the sales demo was still 25-49. Those stations the 25+ crowd listened to were the big billers, not the Top 40 stations. Most top 40 stations in the late 50s or early 60s had that format because they couldn't compete with the full-service MOR stations in reaching adults. The Top 40s often did play more MORish music during middays to reach adults and had competitive news departments, again to reach adults. There were a lot of businesses back then who wouldn't advertise on top 40 stations because they felt the audience was "only kids."

WLS and WABC switched to top 40 because they weren't able to compete with the WGNs and WORs for the more lucrative adult audience.

 

[landtuna]

Back then, the sales demo was still 25-49. Those stations the 25+ crowd listened to were the big billers, not the Top 40 stations.

I don't have billing numbers but I do have the Hooper & Pulse ratings for my most popular T-40 radio station of the late 50's/early 60's (KTKT in Tucson) and according to Hooper they were rated #1 in the market for at least the 3 years for which I have playlists. Whether or not the ratings translated into dollars I don't know but I do remember a significant number of their commercials were directed at an audience older than teens.

 

[MattParker]

Back then, the sales demo was still 25-49. Those stations the 25+ crowd listened to were the big billers, not the Top 40 stations.

I don't have billing numbers but I do have the Hooper & Pulse ratings for my most popular T-40 radio station of the late 50's/early 60's (KTKT in Tucson) and according to Hooper they were rated #1 in the market for at least the 3 years for which I have playlists. Whether or not the ratings translated into dollars I don't know but I do remember a significant number of their commercials were directed at an audience older than teens.

Contrary to popular belief, the weekday audience (6am-7pm) audience for top 40 radio "in the day" was largely 18 to 35. Teenagers took over after 7pm (and playlists were tweaked to reflect this with more hard rock and less MOR cross overs).

 

[landtuna]

Contrary to popular belief, the weekday audience (6am-7pm) audience for top 40 radio "in the day" was largely 18 to 35.

This jives with both my personal memory and with the documentation I have although the playlists were clearly directed at listeners 12+.

Teenagers took over after 7pm (and playlists were tweaked to reflect this with more hard rock and less MOR cross overs).

The shifts in the late 50's/early 60's in my T-40 stations began at 6am and were 3 hour segments until midnight. The most popular dayparts respectively were 3-6pm, 6-9am then 6-9pm (actually 7-10pm) Except for special shows the playlists didn't seem to change over the 24-hour period during the week. Some of the weekend was taken up by syndicated shows and Sundays back in the day had different music or religious programs until noon.

 

[TheBigA]

I'm not trying to argue with you but based upon my personal observations your study isn't reflective.

I'm not surprised. My study is far more scientific that "personal observations."

Look...the reason we call 25-49 a sacred cow is because it's where the advertising money is. No question. And in the business of broadcasting, it doesn't matter if a station is #1. If it isn't making money, it's dead. The history of the broadcasting business is filled with top rated radio stations that got flipped because they weren't making money. Entire genres of music have disappeared from radio because of money, not ratings. Smooth Jazz, Beautiful Music, and Adult Standards to name a few. Oldies is on its deathbed, even though stations like WCBS-FM and KOOL-FM are ratings powerhouses.

The sacred cow is money, and the demo that attracts it is 25-49. That's what this thread is about. Until aging boomers can somehow change the mind of the advertising community, major stations don't want formats that attract mainly over-55. The funny part to me is that a lot of major companies are run by boomers. You'd think they'd want their products pitched to people of their generation. Yet when the ad buys are made, boomer companies don't direct the majority of their ad money to media that are used by boomers. I don't know why that is.

 

[davideduardo]

This jives with both my personal memory and with the documentation I have although the playlists were clearly directed at listeners 12+.

Ratings in the 50's and early 60's were nowhere near as granular and as sliced-and-diced as they are today, particularly since the Pulse and Hooper ratings did not even measure true day by day listening as the diary later did, and thus did not have real weekly cume data.

The shifts in the late 50's/early 60's in my T-40 stations began at 6am and were 3 hour segments until midnight. The most popular dayparts respectively were 3-6pm, 6-9am then 6-9pm (actually 7-10pm) Except for special shows the playlists didn't seem to change over the 24-hour period during the week.

Actually, any time after the freeze was lifted, the listening in evening hours was less than the daytime hours, based on all the data I have seen. While Top 40 got huge shares at night, remember that a 20 share at night is surpassed by a 7 share in the daytime.

Some of the weekend was taken up by syndicated shows and Sundays back in the day had different music or religious programs until noon.

Prior to AT40, which began, I think, in 1970, the "syndicated shows" were those vinyl Lutheran and Baptist music-based religious shows, the various armed forces shows and such. The first syndication / barter model that worked, in fact, was AT 40.

In the 60's and 70's, when license renewal expectancy guidlines mandated about 8% news, public affairs and "other" programming on AMs, Sunday morning was often made up of such material, at least until 9 AM or even 10 AM. And not just on Top 40 stations.

 

[davideduardo]

Back then, the sales demo was still 25-49. Those stations the 25+ crowd listened to were the big billers, not the Top 40 stations. Most top 40 stations in the late 50s or early 60s had that format because they couldn't compete with the full-service MOR stations in reaching adults. The Top 40s often did play more MORish music during middays to reach adults and had competitive news departments, again to reach adults. There were a lot of businesses back then who wouldn't advertise on top 40 stations because they felt the audience was "only kids."

And a lot of advertisers did not buy r&b or Spanish language stations because "that audience does not have any money." Advertiser stereotypes are one of the biggest problem faced by any station that is not the one Mr. or Ms. Advertiser personally listens to.

And there were entire companies like McLendon and Storz that were built by doing Top 40 in the 50s and seing their stations become the market leaders in billings. Or Star (irrespective of Mr. Burden's integrity issues), Balaban, Crowell-Collier, Leland Bisbee, and lots of great independents like Cece Heftel's KIMN (a converted MOR).

WLS and WABC switched to top 40 because they weren't able to compete with the WGNs and WORs for the more lucrative adult audience.

By the very early 60's ABC knew it had to change the radio model and the way the network operated. WABC changed because, first, WMCA's Good Guys devoured everyone's lunch, and WINS and WMGM were killing in ratings and billings. KQV and WLS were converted because ABC felt that the format was part of the new model. The ABC top 40 station adult demos made them very strong sales performers as well.

When you had a daytime Top 40 getting a 40 share in 1952... operating prinicpally during hours when the audience was all adult... would seem to be the main reason that MOR's died in dommino-effect fashion to become Top 40 stations in the 50's.

 

[Mike Sheridan]

I'm 65. I buy lots of products. But I'm too old to be told that I should like Coke instead of Pepsi. Much of what we do in marketing is moving consumers from one brand to another. And it is very difficult to do that with older demographics.

It is much easier to get a 25 year old to change brands.

Try discounting Coke and place advertising stating that you are having a sale...DUH. Pepsi's marketing years ago was aimed at older people who wanted to be thought of as young and hip. "The Pepsi Generation" and "Pepsi, for Those Who Think Yong" it worked!

The average 25 year old is more into video games than music. To them radio is old technology, if they do listen it's to CD's and MP3's they got from the internet.

 

[TVradioguru]

And there you have it folks, the sweeping generalization of the day. :

Sure MP3 players are popular with the under 30 demographic, but I've not seen any data to back up your particular claim. In fact, 18-34 males listen to quite a bit of radio, especially active rock and sports talk.

 

[Mike Sheridan]

And there you have it folks, the sweeping generalization of the day. :

Sure MP3 players are popular with the under 30 demographic, but I've not seen any data to back up your particular claim. In fact, 18-34 males listen to quite a bit of radio, especially active rock and sports talk.

Try getting out from behind the spreadsheet and open your eyes.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Here's the dichotomy. Talk to 18-30s, especially guys, and they'll tell you that they don't listen to radio. Check ratings, especially PPM data, and it turns out that the vast majority still sample radio, but their TSL sucks. In other words, they turn to radio more than they admit, but they don't find programming that they find compelling, or worthy of a "like".

Today's kids are remarkably media aware, and remarkably averse to being "sold". Slick, "corporate" presentations are anathema to them. In some ways, they're not so far different from the counter-culture crowd that spawned the birth of FM "underground" stations in the late '60s / early '70s. Figure out how to program to them, and you might have a key to radio's future.

 

[TheBigA]

Here's the dichotomy. Talk to 18-30s, especially guys, and they'll tell you that they don't listen to radio. Check ratings, especially PPM data, and it turns out that the vast majority still sample radio, but their TSL sucks. In other words, they turn to radio more than they admit, but they don't find programming that they find compelling, or worthy of a "like".

But the TSL was starting to suck over 20 years ago when the programming wasn't as it is now. So obviously that isn't the reason why TSL is going down. The fact is they don't have to listen to radio. There are lots of other places that are far more personalized. The fact that they still do, even though most of radio is aimed at an older demo says a lot to me.

If they don't like "slick corporate presentations," how do you explain their love of high tech video games or shows like American Idol? What they want is to be involved in the process. They see no seed for DJs or PDs picking their music or dictating their playlist. They build their own playlists and listen to them when they want. Radio personnel will need to learn to let go of the product more, and forget about the days of top-down programming.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Radio ain't video games. Video games are not interrupted by (obvious) advertising, and engage players on a one-to-one basis, and bring in money once - when you pay for it. American Idol isn't as popular with 18-30 as it is with 25-54. Many people watching American Idol actually don't like how "slick" it's gotten.

Some people prefer interactive entertainment. Some people don't want to be bothered, they just want to hear "music they like", and don't have the time or inclination to download songs and build playlists. Otherwise, they wouldn't sample radio at all. And, there's a lot of radio these days that isn't music-centric.

There's a big difference between "starting to suck" and "really sucking". In fact, TSL started dropping around 1980 - about the time that consultants and syndicators convinced local management that local talent was "bothersome" and "expensive". Most managers came out of sales, and were convinced that talent was an expense, not an attraction. Thus began the game that we still play - how much can we dilute the content without it diluting the revenue.

What's become painfully obvious to many people is that the more the content was diluted, the weaker the revenue became when the economy was stressed. With consolidation, corporate ownership diluted local management, shedding anybody who pushed back against corporate dictates that made little sense in a locally competitive situation. Fewer owners meant less competition, and fewer voices objecting to corporate dictates.

Yes, I know that you're going to argue all of this. Have at it. It won't change the obvious trends over the last 30 years in radio. Spin it any way you want, but the truth is simple. Radio is mostly local, and stations that serve that local audience are at the top of the ratings in most markets.

 

[TheBigA]

Sorry but you're really just making up a lot of stuff there. Video games don't engage players? Are you crazy? The rest of your post is just more of the typical rant. Keep living in the past. Someday you'll have your own museum where you can talk on and on about how things used to be. The past is over. It's time to wake up and deal with the present. The past was over before "corporate" and "consultants" got involved. The past was over while it was still going on. The corporates and consultants are simply reacting to the realities that have been obvious for 25 years. Radio has to change, and hiring more DJs, letting them say or play what they want, and getting corporates out of the way aren't the solutions.

 

[davideduardo]

Many people watching American Idol actually don't like how "slick" it's gotten.

Citation or source please. Otherwise, this is just your opinion.

In fact, TSL started dropping around 1980 - about the time that consultants and syndicators convinced local management that local talent was "bothersome" and "expensive".

Actually, TSL reached its peak in the 1987-1988 period, and has declined very, very slowly since then.

In 48 of the top 50 markets, there is now no way of comparing TSL since the ratings methodology has changed so significantly that comparisons can not be made.

Since you are wrong on the time period, then the correlation with "consultants and syndicators" does not work, either.

1988 was, however, the year when portable CD players broke the $100 price point. This was also the era when we started seeing some real momentum in home personal computers and gaming. Similarly, this marked the time when some cable networks were approaching or reaching a decade of development with the concomitant variety of offerings that non-broadcast TV provided.

Syndication, except for satellite services for smaller market stations, was at a low in 1988. While in the 70's and early 80's many top 50 markets might have had a third of their FMs on a syndicated format such as SRP, Bonneville or another Beautiful Music service or products in other genres from TM, Drake-Chennault, IGM, Peters, etc., by the late 80's most of that type of syndication was dead and the companies providing them either closed or moved to short form syndication.

Most managers came out of sales, and were convinced that talent was an expense, not an attraction.

In the 60's and 70's most managers came out of sales, too. That reasoning does not work. Try something new.

What's become painfully obvious to many people is that the more the content was diluted, the weaker the revenue became when the economy was stressed. With consolidation, corporate ownership diluted local management, shedding anybody who pushed back against corporate dictates that made little sense in a locally competitive situation. Fewer owners meant less competition, and fewer voices objecting to corporate dictates.

When radio billing in most markets fell around 30% (relatively in line with all ad media except Internet) in the great recession, you have a situation where the decline in billings is greater than the operating margin of most stations in medium and smaller markets and approaching those in larger markets. You can not expect the same staff and expenditures in such a situation when doing so puts the entire enterprise at risk.

It won't change the obvious trends over the last 30 years in radio.

The problem is that your timeline and base facts are all wrong.

Radio is mostly local, and stations that serve that local audience are at the top of the ratings in most markets.

"Local" today has a totally different meaning than it used to. In no small part due to the profusion of cable networks and the Internet and products like Facebook, one's "local community" now has very little to do with geography.

 

[davideduardo]

Here's the dichotomy. Talk to 18-30s, especially guys, and they'll tell you that they don't listen to radio. Check ratings, especially PPM data, and it turns out that the vast majority still sample radio, but their TSL sucks.

Huh?

I took the LA market (PPM), and found the PUR (Persons Using Radio) for 12+ 6-Midnight for the period of the last three months of last year to be 9.8. Men 18-34 was 10.4.

To crosscheck, I went to a very different market, Chicago, and found the 12+ PUR at 10.0 and the Men 18-34 PUR to be 9.6. That's a PPM market, too.

Even in quirky New York City (odd because of the much higher public transit usage, which affects in-car radio use) 12+ averages 9.3 and Men 18-34 average 8.6.

So, your point... and specific citation of the PPM... is invalid.