JACK FM

[radiofriend1]

looks like it may finally beginning to take hold

haven't heard them in about 6 mos. -- are they doing anything different or better than before??

 

[Walter Graff]

They don't earn anywhere near as much as the oldies format they killed. Yet another foolish move by the radio industry who forgot that teh older people might be old but they are not dead (and they have lots of money to spend too!). Is that where the phrase "you don't know JACK S*IT" comes from?

I think John Billett, former chairman of Billett Consultancy (from the UK) who tried to make a name in advertising in the US said it best when talking about the lessons he learned working in the US:

"There is a division in America -- which I haven't seen elsewhere -- between entrepreneurial, creative, imaginative, not afraid to investigate change, looking for the next opportunity, dynamic and rigorous companies, and the disturbingly large number of companies who aren't that. They seem to be covered in bureaucracy, those who seem to be reluctant to change ... driven by process where everything is taken by committee. If I had one criticism of America, it would be that some decisions take an unseemly amount of time to be made. It is as though Sarbanes-Oxley, Enron, all of this corporate governance, has gripped the flare of certain companies so the prize of getting it wrong is larger than the prize of getting it right."

Oldies WCBS earned $34mill and was ranked 8th. JACK earned $16.1mill in 06 and ranked 16th. While they have a small listening audience, more are starting to listen probably by default because of how bad the rest of radio is in NY. At least with JACK you don't have to hear the nameless annoying DJs and get a wide range of music that more fits your taste than most of the music out there that doesn't.

Now if they'd go back to oldies, they'd easily double their income in a town desperate for oldies. But then again read Billett's comments above again to understand why they can't.

 

[davideduardo]

They don't earn anywhere near as much as the oldies format they killed. Yet another foolish move by the radio industry who forgot that teh older people might be old but they are not dead (and they have lots of money to spend too!). Is that where the phrase "you don't know JACK S*IT" comes from?

First, the figures about station $$ are not "earnings" but gross billings, before expenses. We don't know how much a station "earns" unless we work for it.

CBS-FM had billed over $40 million in 2000. It would have billed in the low 20's in 2005 if they had continued to do oldies, principally due to the old demos that were getting older.

"There is a division in America -- which I haven't seen elsewhere -- between entrepreneurial, creative, imaginative, not afraid to investigate change, looking for the next opportunity, dynamic and rigorous companies, and the disturbingly large number of companies who aren't that. They seem to be covered in bureaucracy, those who seem to be reluctant to change ... driven by process where everything is taken by committee. If I had one criticism of America, it would be that some decisions take an unseemly amount of time to be made. It is as though Sarbanes-Oxley, Enron, all of this corporate governance, has gripped the flare of certain companies so the prize of getting it wrong is larger than the prize of getting it right."

That is nice, but irrelevant. The fact is that radio stations have to offer to advertisers audience segments that those advertisers want to reach. If few or none want to reach 55+, then radio stations can not program principally for 55+ because there is no market for those wares.

Oldies WCBS earned $34mill and was ranked 8th.

Again, it did not earn $34 million. It billed that in 2004. It would have billed much less in 2005 had it continued its route.

JACK earned $16.1mill in 06 and ranked 16th.

That, again, was gross billings. In fact, they might just have made more money on Jack if the expenses were cut drastically. The fact is, what they billed in 2006 is probably no less than what the trend showed they would bill if they kept the oldies format. So there was no billing loss, but maybe there was a nice decrease in costs and an increase in BCF. We have no way of knowing this, though, as we don't own the station.

Now if they'd go back to oldies, they'd easily double their income in a town desperate for oldies. But then again read Billett's comments above again to understand why they can't.

Nope. Going back to oldies would find the billings even lower, as the audience would be even older two years later, and even more listeners would be over 55 and not in the scope of most ad buys.

 

[BACKnUSSR]

David you said:

"CBS-FM had billed over $40 million in 2000. It would have billed in the low 20's in 2005 if they had continued to do oldies, principally due to the old demos that were getting older".


They billed 34M in 2004.....how do you arrive at the "low 20's" projection for 2005???
FYI...the station was well on track to do over 30-35M at the time the plug was pulled.

 

[oaktree]

David, I'm sorry...but I think your bias against "old" people 50-55+ is showing.

I've showed your assessment of 'CBS-FM to a distinguished professional broadcaster who soundly disagrees with you, let alone the past management of CBS Radio, of which he has lots of experience.

I believe that the posters are right ... Fresh may be the "new face" in NY for now. Imus' loss will be felt, but not to the degree of Stern's. FREE FM is in free fall and needs huge buckets to bail it out, and a .1 increase overall 12+, despite climbing, barely, into the top 10 of a growing "older" demo 25-54 is not a quantum leap for JACK-FM.

You knoiw better than to make excuses...CBS-FM cut HUGE amounts of expense with the loss of the airstaff, basically putting JACK in automation mode. That's a big gap to cross, $23 million to $16 million in a year ... especially when CBS cut the guts out of 'CBS-FM to save costs and expenses.

You may be bright, but you tend to show your ignorance with a huge bias. The 25-54 isn't the hot demo today, anyway. Agencies I deal with every day are looking for 18-34 & men 18-24. 35-54 is more of a death knell today than 55+ because of the fickleness of an audience that doesn't need, like or respond to radio as we know it today.

It takes thought, not just number crunching, to get the pulse of a market. Ten deep with one of 25 stations (or more) chasing a demo cell doesn't mean "...a majority of big buys in a market." Maybe in Hispanic radio, but not for a station where there is still considerable head scratching as to "How come?"

A loss from $34-million to $23-million was certainly enough...but to add another $7-million in losses on top of that AFTER cutting expenses is no where near "the same as last year."

Losses are losses.

 

[davideduardo]

David, I'm sorry...but I think your bias against "old" people 50-55+ is showing.

I have no bias against any demo. The fact is that there are significantly few ad buys for persons 55+ in radio by ad agencies or ad departments of major advertisers. This is a fact that radio has to live with by not designing formats that appeal excessively to persons over 55.

50 to 55 is not the subject of my comments. In fact, it is not even a ratings or buying demo as Arbitron does not produce so narrow a break.

I've showed your assessment of 'CBS-FM to a distinguished professional broadcaster who soundly disagrees with you, let alone the past management of CBS Radio, of which he has lots of experience.

The problem is that there is noo assesment. CBS-FM had declining revenues... $40 million in 2000 to a projected low-20's in 1995 were the format to have continued. The revenue was plummeting. A change to a format more in salable demos was needed. As to whether they picked the right format or did the change correctly is a totally different subject, but the fact is that the station was failing.

I believe that the posters are right ... Fresh may be the "new face" in NY for now. Imus' loss will be felt, but not to the degree of Stern's. FREE FM is in free fall and needs huge buckets to bail it out, and a .1 increase overall 12+, despite climbing, barely, into the top 10 of a growing "older" demo 25-54 is not a quantum leap for JACK-FM.

What does that have to do with CBS-FM? We were not discussing Imus (key to a large percentage of WFAN's billings) or Fresh, which has done nicely so far... in its first book.

You knoiw better than to make excuses...CBS-FM cut HUGE amounts of expense with the loss of the airstaff, basically putting JACK in automation mode. That's a big gap to cross, $23 million to $16 million in a year ... especially when CBS cut the guts out of 'CBS-FM to save costs and expenses.

Let's say the same rate of decrease had been felt in 2006 and 2007 as in the period between 2000 and 2005.... CBS-FM would have been below $16 million now, on much higher expenses, and with lower 25-54 numbers than today and no chance of growth in-demo.

You may be bright, but you tend to show your ignorance with a huge bias. The 25-54 isn't the hot demo today, anyway. Agencies I deal with every day are looking for 18-34 & men 18-24. 35-54 is more of a death knell today than 55+ because of the fickleness of an audience that doesn't need, like or respond to radio as we know it today.

About 80% of buys fall into some part of 25-54. The remainder are for 18-34. There is little 18-24, and there is growth away from 25-54 into 18-49.

The heaviest use of radio is in 25-54, by the way, with 35-54 being even better than 25-34 in weekly usage of radio.

It takes thought, not just number crunching, to get the pulse of a market. Ten deep with one of 25 stations (or more) chasing a demo cell doesn't mean "...a majority of big buys in a market." Maybe in Hispanic radio, but not for a station where there is still considerable head scratching as to "How come?"

Most of the major market buys for big Hispanic stations are general market buys. And most Top 10 buys go quite deep to hit different audiences and they use reach and frequency on the group of stations they buy to guarantee not missing segments.

A loss from $34-million to $23-million was certainly enough...but to add another $7-million in losses on top of that AFTER cutting expenses is no where near "the same as last year."

The issue is the trending. The oldies audience got older every year, and most of it had moved out of desirable sales demos.

 

[davideduardo]

David you said:

"CBS-FM had billed over $40 million in 2000. It would have billed in the low 20's in 2005 if they had continued to do oldies, principally due to the old demos that were getting older".


They billed 34M in 2004.....how do you arrive at the "low 20's" projection for 2005???
FYI...the station was well on track to do over 30-35M at the time the plug was pulled.

By looking at the level it was billing before the switch and comparing with the same period in 2004.

 

[oaktree]

And if that demo got older and went away, David, then what replaced it? IT IS NOT a hugely successful format if they are treading water over four books to finally break into the top ten in a demo cell dominated by literally dozens of other stations in the market.

The fact is, the "turnaround" didn't happen, nor has the increase in "gross billing," one would surmise, with the numbers shown.

I don't think it's as much that CBS-FM got into the top 10 in 25-54 as much as everyone else, especially the urban stations, dropped like flies.

 

[BACKnUSSR]

By looking at the level it was billing before the switch and comparing with the same period in 2004.

Then you're wrong. If you had access to the monthly aging report, you would clearly see that billing was off only about 6% from the previous year.

 

[Yeziknoradio]

From what I can see here, oldies would have had better success than Jack FM, but perhaps not as much of a future as 101FM could have gained if they were to keep the personalities and go ahead with what WHTT (Buffalo) has done in recent years.

(refering to WHTT before it became Mix, respectfully.)

Due to the recent change to Mix FM in Buffalo NY, I would say that Fickle out of Rochester may be a better example.

I'm merely trying to suggest that an oldies *based* format, without letting all the staff go, would have been smarter than Jack.

***Note: WHTT Buffalo is an example of an oldies station that made gradual change to be what it has become today.

 

[LinoNYC]

It is as though Sarbanes-Oxley, Enron, all of this corporate governance, has gripped the flare of certain companies so the prize of getting it wrong is larger than the prize of getting it right."

This is more typical of the snow job that many conservative Americans have tried. Fact is that Sarbanes-Oxley was the result and consequence of scandals like Enron, not part of some liberal, punitive syndrome.

has gripped the flare of certain companies so the prize of getting it wrong is larger than the prize of getting it right

Bringing this back to radio, the problem here are the companies that are caught in the squeeze of decling listenership, advertiser demands, and often, huge debt load from having paid too much for the property to begin with. The latter BTW being the result of a Republican Congress' brand of deregulation.

It's sort of ironic to read Mr Billett's scolding admonitions when he is a citizen of a nation long hyde-bound in public school hierarchy , and the "buggery" of it's own "old boy" network.

Lino

 

[davideduardo]

By looking at the level it was billing before the switch and comparing with the same period in 2004.

Then you're wrong. If you had access to the monthly aging report, you would clearly see that billing was off only about 6% from the previous year.

An "aging" report is a collections tool. It shows the status of collections on unpaid accounts.

 

[Walter Graff]

I think the key underling fault in what has turned into this 'who made more' discussion is that deep down it hinges on the idea that the latest should make more than the last. I think that is part of the fallacy that is current radio. We all want to make a change once we have hit bottom, or saw what was the writting on the wall for a stations future. And with that change we hope we find what the public wants. But the way the market works today, I just don't see anyone making huge leaps with any format. Look at the numbers, they say that. Only the old school stations that have been doing it for a long time still hold on to the market share. The rest grab for what the can. The music industry doesn't produce music to sustain much of anything anymore so radio stations simply aren't a place that people listen like they used to. And stations like JACK weren't as much carefully thought out and executed ways of radio as much as they were simply reactions like FREE-FM was to Howard Stern. In JACKS case someone saw that a lot of people were forgoing radio for IPods, so they said let's make a radio station that was an IPOD. Only problem is you can't fine tune an IPOD for the masses. So what you have is a station that has slowly found a niche audience that likes variety and likes music without talking. Same problem now exists for Hip Hop. As was discussed in another thread Hip Hop is on the decline it seems. Two reasons; the industry can't support the talent it once turned out, and two people are turning to lesser names and music that you don't find on commercial radio anymore.

I say JACK will grow slightly more in its overall ratings (key word - slightly), but as I say time and again, the days of big 'hit', 'mega-share' radio are dead because radio is a reflection of the music industry and that is dead. Radio is a niche format now and shows what a good idea it was for one company to own many stations in a market as they are not going to reap hugely anymore from one station so need a lot of niches to make money. Today it's less like you having one hardware store in your town that did all the business and more like the larger stores that compete and take market share but no one is really better than the other, and even if someone new comes in, they are not going to take away all the business from anyone else, just find their niche.

 

[cadillacjack]

Walter, JACK-FM was created before the IPod in 2000. The idea behind the format is that people don't listen to music by category, they have wide ranging tastes. Listener comments accused us of lifting their CD collections and playing them on the station.

CJ

 

[Walter Graff]

Walter, JACK-FM was created before the IPod in 2000. The idea behind the format is that people don't listen to music by category, they have wide ranging tastes. Listener comments accused us of lifting their CD collections and playing them on the station.

CJ

Thanks for the correction. I'm sorry I made it sound like no thought went into it. I think I got confused by all the stations in other markets that blindly tried to imitate JACK soon after it appeared saying "Music like we stole it from your IPOD". I know of three stations that went with that angle for a while on weekends. They've since dropped it. Anyway it's a novel idea but will always be niche format as I see it because of the delicate balance of finding a CD play list that suits enough people. And of course not everyone wants to listen to their CDs/IPOD when listening to the radio. I think it's a good listen when I'm looking for a station that plays the variety of music I most want to hear.

 

[Garrett]

It is as though Sarbanes-Oxley, Enron, all of this corporate governance, has gripped the flare of certain companies so the prize of getting it wrong is larger than the prize of getting it right."

This is more typical of the snow job that many conservative Americans have tried. Fact is that Sarbanes-Oxley was the result and consequence of scandals like Enron, not part of some liberal, punitive syndrome.

has gripped the flare of certain companies so the prize of getting it wrong is larger than the prize of getting it right

Bringing this back to radio, the problem here are the companies that are caught in the squeeze of decling listenership, advertiser demands, and often, huge debt load from having paid too much for the property to begin with. The latter BTW being the result of a Republican Congress' brand of deregulation.

It's sort of ironic to read Mr Billett's scolding admonitions when he is a citizen of a nation long hyde-bound in public school hierarchy , and the "buggery" of it's own "old boy" network.

Lino

Sir,
Could you please be so kind as to tie your remarks to the subject at hand, instead of going on some politcal-rant which seems to have nothing to with JACK FM?

 

[BACKnUSSR]

By looking at the level it was billing before the switch and comparing with the same period in 2004.

Then you're wrong. If you had access to the monthly aging report, you would clearly see that billing was off only about 6% from the previous year.

An "aging" report is a collections tool. It shows the status of collections on unpaid accounts.

Yeah....so?

 

[davideduardo]

An "aging" report is a collections tool. It shows the status of collections on unpaid accounts.

Yeah....so?

So it is useless as a measure of a station's billing. It is a measure of the part of billing that remains uncollected.

 

[oaktree]

You know, this is all terribly amusing to read, but, in actuality, makes little to no sense. The thread started about the JACK-FM format on CBS-FM, then to the ratings, then to how JACK-FM in NYC has not fulfilled it's goal of surpassing what it did in ratings and billings as an oldies station. Now, we're into political philosophizing.

Let me add, again, to this discussion that has wavered so.

David - As broadcasters, we listen in one ear as just that, and with the other, as a listener. With one eye, we look at the current revenue of what the result of that listening is and with the other, we look at the bottom line. From that, we determine success, failure or "are we on the right track?"

You, in 90% of your many posts, some educated, some way off the radar, look at everything from a book of computer sheets culled from BIAfn. You see only finances. You see only revenues. You make comparisons of one station to another, from one station in ranking based on those revenues to a station across the country.

You also have a demonstrated bias against people over the age of 50.

Rankings are one thing. Markets across the country are, in fact, quite different. What works in one doesn't always work in another. One sales effort in New York may not measure the same kind of effort in Seattle. You, of all people, know that.

Not all the pieces of the radio puzzle fit just from your "numbers," including both revenues or ratings. That's the way radio is from market to market. If they all worked as well everywhere, there would only be one sales staff, we'd all be guaranteed the same or similar revenues and a lot of radio people on these boards would be happy working. But they aren't, and rightfully so.

One station's $25 million doesn't equal another station's $25 million in many respects. In fact, I can tell you a few million dollar properties who make far less than $25 million but are quite a bit more profitable than those that are ... and so can you.

We, as listeners, can tell the "tale of the tape" by what we see, without analyzing everything to death. Sure, "power ratios" and "CPM" can all be done automatically, but you know as well as I, that many agency buys are based on what's hot and what's not. They could care less about all that crap. They look at the demo cell numbers important to their client(s), the best deals they can get and a fair return on a cost-per-thousand basis, based on the number of stations and the number of dollars to divide for a successful buy for the client.

Some, while, thankfully, not using the 12+ beauty contest numbers, still use the "horse race game" in sizing up a market. and the buyers could care less about "ratios" and such. They're looking to make affordable buys with a decent return from the market they are buying and that's it. Usually, those buys are in the top 10 stations and always in the top five. After that, it's a crap shoot depending on the working between station and buyer, not just sitting around waiting for the phone to ring.

You tend to mix things a lot. We're either "irrelevant" on points you don't grasp or I, for one, find you "generalizing" too much. But it's a "live by the numbers, die by the numbers" game and the posters have every right to look at it that way because that how most people understand and play the game. They buy what's good for their clients.

A last place baseball team might still pull 3 million people a year, but that doesn't make them "good," or a World Series champ. In my opinion, JACK-FM, a gutted talent-less vast wasteland of iPod on shuffle, is not what New York listeners want, and the ratings and revenues show that.

JACK-FM has it's fans ... Just not enough of them.

The suits want to see $25-million in revenues now...not $16-million like last year. An increase overall of .1 doesn't equal a five-share, or a four, probably close to a three, maybe, if that, in the 25-54 cell. But it's far from being number 1. And oldies did a lot better with a 4 share, even with and extra $7 million thrown in.

Bet the suits at CBS had that now... And that's the point. What's that they say about figures lying...? Thanks for the education, but lighten up just a little.

 

[disney fanatic]

And if that demo got older and went away, David, then what replaced it? IT IS NOT a hugely successful format if they are treading water over four books to finally break into the top ten in a demo cell dominated by literally dozens of other stations in the market.

The fact is, the "turnaround" didn't happen, nor has the increase in "gross billing," one would surmise, with the numbers shown.

I don't think it's as much that CBS-FM got into the top 10 in 25-54 as much as everyone else, especially the urban stations, dropped like flies.

Now looked what happened in the Hudson Valley. Back in the end of January, WBPM's "Cool 92.9" was a good oldies station playing 50's and 60's music. Rick McCaffery was out at 92.9 when he is now hosting the "Solid Gold Jukebox" on WKIP in Poughkeepsie every Friday night playing 50's and 60's songs as well as the "Doo-Wop Cruise". I missed doo-wop music when it was on the former "Cool 92.9" on his last "Jukebox" show on Friday nights. I can't listen to WKIP to hear the "Doo-Wop Cruise" because of the coverage problems at night, but I rather listen to WKNY every Saturday to hear the oldies and doo-wop with Warren Lawrence as well as the WABC's Saturday Night Oldies Show with Mark Simone.

Now that "Cool 92.9" was done, classic hits came in when the format kicked off at the beginning of February as "Classic Hits 92.9 WBPM". They're now playing 60's, 70's and 80's music as an updated version of the oldies format, just like WCTZ's "The Coast" at 96.7 in Stamford, CT. I don't see classic hits coming to NYC on any frequency anytime soon.

There is also one oldies station that is in Hudson, NY is WCZR's "Cruisin' 93.5", that would bring some of the listeners from the loss of the former WBPM's "Cool 92.9". WCZR is now stuck with oldies in the upper Hudson Valley. Hudson is 110 miles north of NYC, but it's too far away to hear a full time oldies station. If I'm in the Kingston area, I can't pick it up, because the station splattered by WBWZ's "Star 93.3" which is 2 kcs up.

I love CBS-FM when it was oldies, but I still missed it. It was a great station for oldies.