• 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

Inland Empire's Wild Took a Big Hit from Latino 96

R

RyanCA

Down from (ratings deleted) to (ratings deleted)!! The new KXOL up from a ZERO to (ratings deleted)!
Even KIIS beat Wild 96. KDAI isn't doing so hot either at a (ratings deleted).

Poor Styles.


MOD EDIT:

Remember guys, we are not yet allowed to post Arb numbers. However, posting the rankings is OK (example KIIS is # 1 12+ and so on).<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Kyle_Hojem on 10/20/05 07:04 AM.</FONT></P>
 
I was also surprised by the numbers. But the only winner in this book was KGGI, who remained in the top spot despite a one-point slip.
 
> I was also surprised by the numbers. But the only winner in
> this book was KGGI, who remained in the top spot despite a
> one-point slip.

I don't think KXOL will continue to show in the IE, as the new transmitter site has total shadowing towards the area.
 
I thought we werent allowed to post numbers here.



> > I was also surprised by the numbers. But the only winner
> in
> > this book was KGGI, who remained in the top spot despite a
>
> > one-point slip.
>
> I don't think KXOL will continue to show in the IE, as the
> new transmitter site has total shadowing towards the area.
>
 
> I don't think KXOL will continue to show in the IE, as the
> new transmitter site has total shadowing towards the area.

Agree... it is very surprising that KXOL even made it there. As far as I know, you have to have a pretty good car radio in the IE to pick up 96.3. Now that they have a powerful 96.1 out there, I would think there would be interference to adjacent 96.3.
 
> Down from (ratings deleted) to (ratings deleted)!! The new
> KXOL up from a ZERO to (ratings deleted)!
> Even KIIS beat Wild 96. KDAI isn't doing so hot either at a
> (ratings deleted).
>
> Poor Styles.
>
>
> MOD EDIT:
>
> Remember guys, we are not yet allowed to post Arb numbers.
> However, posting the rankings is OK (example KIIS is # 1 12+
> and so on).
>

Ryan:

How about having some real facts before you post:

(1) No one cares or looks at 12+ - and certainly no one makes money off of it.

(2) In Riverside, the wobbles are much greater than in, for example, Los Angeles and the third month showed some odd results for KGGI and KWIE.

(3) As David correctly stated, KXOL isn't likely to consistently show up in Riverside because it doesn't penetrate the market well enough.

(4) KXOL has not showed up at all in the Inland Empire until September, when out of nowhere, it got nearly a 4 share 18-34. However, all of the diaries were in a small area of the metro with ENORMOUS TSL and small cume.

(5) That same month that KXOL showed up, KIIS, Power 106, and several L.A. Spanish stations also scored HUGE months - while the local stations: KGGI, KWIE, and even KCXX had off months - well below any level we've seen. It could have been a month where there were a lot of commuter diaries.

(6) It actually hurt KGGI as much - if not more than KWIE. KGGI usually is in the 8-11 share range 18-34 every month. They scored in the 4-share range that month (something no one has ever seen). KWIE also went down - the same month - and KXOL had that big month - but again - in a small area of the metro.

(6) In Riverside, the stations only sell local rankings - they remove the stations out of the metro and sell locally. KWIE has consistently been No. 2 or No. 3 locally 18-34 - swapping back and forth the No. 2 slot with KCAL. Yes, I said 18-34 - what they sell - not 12+!!! KWIE was No. 3 once again.

(7) As far as KDAI goes, it is sold as an L.A. station, so the Riverside numbers are irrelevant.
 
> I thought we werent allowed to post numbers here.

We aren't, and Kyle edited the first post in the thread to remove the ratings references.

However, we are allowed to post the rankings (i.e., KIIS is #1) and we can say that a station had a "x"-point increase or decrease from the last book, as long as the ratings themselves are not quoted.

I would think, Freddy, you would be more worried about Entravision's announcement about the "Jose" format than what KXOL did in the one IE book it was able to be received for.<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
Does Arbitron measure in-car listening?

> I don't think KXOL will continue to show in the IE, as the
> new transmitter site has total shadowing towards the area.
>
If one lives say in Riverside and works in Orange County or even in LA or in central LA County (Bellflower for ex) and is an Arbitron diary respondent, and they listen almost exclusively to an out of market (from where they live) station, how is it measured? By just what they report? And what is the % of in-car listening vs at home listening? Do respondents differentiate the two?
 
Re: Does Arbitron measure in-car listening?

> > I don't think KXOL will continue to show in the IE, as the
>
> > new transmitter site has total shadowing towards the area.
>
> >
> If one lives say in Riverside and works in Orange County or
> even in LA or in central LA County (Bellflower for ex) and
> is an Arbitron diary respondent, and they listen almost
> exclusively to an out of market (from where they live)
> station, how is it measured?

The listening in each market is measured in that market, based on the home zip code of each diarykeeper. they can listen to DX reception of KOA from Denver, and that gives KOA a few LA qarter hours, but does nothing for the Denver book as the listening was not in Denver.

> By just what they report? And
> what is the % of in-car listening vs at home listening? Do
> respondents differentiate the two?

In car and at work listening is measured, in the same diary. The diaryt is given to the market where the person lives, and all listening therein.

In LA, about 30% of listening is in-car. The rest is at home and at work, about equal parts. Respondents tick off at home, in car, at work and other.

LA and Orange Counties are the LA metro. Much of Riverside and San Berdoo Counties are the Riverside market. Each is separate for the MSA survey.
>
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by David Eduardo on 10/21/05 06:16 AM.</FONT></P>
 
> Down from (ratings deleted) to (ratings deleted)!! The new
> KXOL up from a ZERO to (ratings deleted)!
> Even KIIS beat Wild 96. KDAI isn't doing so hot either at a
> (ratings deleted).
>
> Poor Styles.
>
>
> MOD EDIT:
>
> Remember guys, we are not yet allowed to post Arb numbers.
> However, posting the rankings is OK (example KIIS is # 1 12+
> and so on).
>

Ryan:

Did a little more research. And you couldn't be more wrong. Only 7% of KWIE's listeners switch to KXOL when they leave (compared to 69% for KGGI - who was also down this book).

As a matter of fact, the numbers clearly state that KWIE was almost unaffected by KXOL at all. So, you are wrong. Better check your facts next time.

When asked what station they switched from, less than 10% for KXOL in the I.E. came from KWIE.

Since KXOL showed up only in one month out of the four they've been on - and they have signal challenges, doesn't seem like anything can be correlated this book - other than maybe the rhythmic CHR shares are simply off.
 
> > Down from (ratings deleted) to (ratings deleted)!! The new
>
> > KXOL up from a ZERO to (ratings deleted)!
> > Even KIIS beat Wild 96. KDAI isn't doing so hot either at
> a
> > (ratings deleted).
> >
> > Poor Styles.
> >
> >
> > MOD EDIT:
> >
> > Remember guys, we are not yet allowed to post Arb numbers.
>
> > However, posting the rankings is OK (example KIIS is # 1
> 12+
> > and so on).
> >
>
> Ryan:
>
> Did a little more research. And you couldn't be more wrong.
> Only 7% of KWIE's listeners switch to KXOL when they leave
> (compared to 69% for KGGI - who was also down this book).
>
> As a matter of fact, the numbers clearly state that KWIE was
> almost unaffected by KXOL at all. So, you are wrong. Better
> check your facts next time.
>
> When asked what station they switched from, less than 10%
> for KXOL in the I.E. came from KWIE.
>
> Since KXOL showed up only in one month out of the four
> they've been on - and they have signal challenges, doesn't
> seem like anything can be correlated this book - other than
> maybe the rhythmic CHR shares are simply off.
>


Regardless. The Styles Stations are Down.
 
> > > Down from (ratings deleted) to (ratings deleted)!! The
> new
> >
> > > KXOL up from a ZERO to (ratings deleted)!
> > > Even KIIS beat Wild 96. KDAI isn't doing so hot either
> at
> > a
> > > (ratings deleted).
> > >
> > > Poor Styles.
> > >
> > >
> > > MOD EDIT:
> > >
> > > Remember guys, we are not yet allowed to post Arb
> numbers.
> >
> > > However, posting the rankings is OK (example KIIS is # 1
>
> > 12+
> > > and so on).
> > >
> >
> > Ryan:
> >
> > Did a little more research. And you couldn't be more
> wrong.
> > Only 7% of KWIE's listeners switch to KXOL when they leave
>
> > (compared to 69% for KGGI - who was also down this book).
>
> >
> > As a matter of fact, the numbers clearly state that KWIE
> was
> > almost unaffected by KXOL at all. So, you are wrong.
> Better
> > check your facts next time.
> >
> > When asked what station they switched from, less than 10%
> > for KXOL in the I.E. came from KWIE.
> >
> > Since KXOL showed up only in one month out of the four
> > they've been on - and they have signal challenges, doesn't
>
> > seem like anything can be correlated this book - other
> than
> > maybe the rhythmic CHR shares are simply off.
> >
>
>
> Regardless. The Styles Stations are Down.
>

But that wasn't what you said... you specifically mentioned KXOL hurting KWIE...

KWIE is still No. 3 18-34 locally.
 
Nope. Not worried.

David might be.



> > I thought we werent allowed to post numbers here.
>
> We aren't, and Kyle edited the first post in the thread to
> remove the ratings references.
>
> However, we are allowed to post the rankings (i.e., KIIS is
> #1) and we can say that a station had a "x"-point increase
> or decrease from the last book, as long as the ratings
> themselves are not quoted.
>
> I would think, Freddy, you would be more worried about
> Entravision's announcement about the "Jose" format than what
> KXOL did in the one IE book it was able to be received for.
>
 
> Nope. Not worried.
>
> David might be.

Wrong again, Freddy.<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
Re: Inland Empire's Wild Took no Hit from Latino 96

> Nope. Not worried.

Since you don't program a station, why would you be. The 103.1 signals have proven to not cover enough Hispanics to be viable in any Hisapnic format. Asian, now there is an option!
>
> David might be.

Entravision can not program its way out of a wet paper bag. Jose is a rip off of the Recuerdo format, badly done by post-adolescents who do not understand the music or lifestyle. Going nowhere, and the name and imaging are offensive to 25-49 Hispanics.
 
Re: Inland Empire's Wild Took no Hit from Latino 96

> > Nope. Not worried.

The only reason I'd have to be worried is I'd lose my favorite online station, but they probably would stay on the web even if they went off the air.


>
> Since you don't program a station, why would you be. The
> 103.1 signals have proven to not cover enough Hispanics to
> be viable in any Hisapnic format. Asian, now there is an
> option!

> >
> > David might be.


>
> Entravision can not program its way out of a wet paper bag.
> Jose is a rip off of the Recuerdo format, badly done by
> post-adolescents who do not understand the music or
> lifestyle. Going nowhere, and the name and imaging are
> offensive to 25-49 Hispanics.

May well be true, Do you find it offensive?



>
The only reason I'd have to be worried is i'd lose my favorite online station, but they probably would stay on the web even if they went off the air.
 
Re: Inland Empire's Wild Took no Hit from Latino 96

> >
> > Entravision can not program its way out of a wet paper
> bag.
> > Jose is a rip off of the Recuerdo format, badly done by
> > post-adolescents who do not understand the music or
> > lifestyle. Going nowhere, and the name and imaging are
> > offensive to 25-49 Hispanics.
>
> May well be true, Do you find it offensive?

Yes, for this market and those in the southwest, saying, in Spanish, "we play what we want" is rude. It goes against the basic courtesy and civility of the Mexican culture. And it sounds dumb in Spanish.
 
Re: Inland Empire's Wild Took no Hit from Latino 96

Interesting. You'd think this format would work without that stupid phrase.
I'm offended by it and I'm not spanish.




> > > Entravision can not program its way out of a wet paper
> > bag.
> > > Jose is a rip off of the Recuerdo format, badly done by
> > > post-adolescents who do not understand the music or
> > > lifestyle. Going nowhere, and the name and imaging are
> > > offensive to 25-49 Hispanics.
> >
> > May well be true, Do you find it offensive?
>
> Yes, for this market and those in the southwest, saying, in
> Spanish, "we play what we want" is rude. It goes against the
> basic courtesy and civility of the Mexican culture. And it
> sounds dumb in Spanish.
>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom