Re: Wrong again, dude.
> >
> > My complaint with you, Sam, is that you refuse to accept
> > reality. It has been explained over and over and over to
> > you, by David E., myself, and several others, why Indie is
>
> > never going to be as great as you think it will.
>
>
>
> And your supposition that "Indie will never be be as great
> as you think" is somehow more founded in reality than my
> observation that Indie's numbers have risen?
The fact is that one or two extrapolated months do not make a consistent increase. There may be reweighting or sampling differences in Phase III, and it is possible that Indie is running a thenth or two above its previous level.
Considering that the stations in the top 5 wobble as muc as a point up and down, and don't read anything into it, I would not consider a tenth or tow on inde to be significant of anything other than the fact that this is what you get when you distribute 2,500 diaries per month in a market of 13 million.
> >
> > My complaint with you, Sam, is that you refuse to accept
> > reality. It has been explained over and over and over to
> > you, by David E., myself, and several others, why Indie is
>
> > never going to be as great as you think it will.
>
>
>
> And your supposition that "Indie will never be be as great
> as you think" is somehow more founded in reality than my
> observation that Indie's numbers have risen?
The fact is that one or two extrapolated months do not make a consistent increase. There may be reweighting or sampling differences in Phase III, and it is possible that Indie is running a thenth or two above its previous level.
Considering that the stations in the top 5 wobble as muc as a point up and down, and don't read anything into it, I would not consider a tenth or tow on inde to be significant of anything other than the fact that this is what you get when you distribute 2,500 diaries per month in a market of 13 million.