July 2024 Bay Area Radio PPM Ratings

[HenryOchs]

Here are the July 2024 San Francisco Radio PPM Ratings:

https://ratings.****************/content/arb009

And the July 2024 San Jose Radio PPM Ratings:

https://ratings.****************/content/arb215

Any thoughts or observations?

 

[K.M. Richards]

For everyone's reference in having a meaningful discussion, key demo rankings courtesy Research Director:

25-54
#1 KOIT
#2 KISQ
#3 KSAN
#4 KMVQ
#5t KLLC
#5t KQED
#5t KMEL
#5t KITS

18-34
#1 KOIT
#2 KMEL
#3 KITS
#4t KISQ
#4t KSAN
#6 KMVQ
#7 KYLD

18-49
#1 KOIT
#2 KISQ
#3 KMVQ
#4 KMEL
#5 KITS
#6 KYLD

RADIO RATINGS ROUNDUP, July 2024, Part I | Research Director, Inc.

-Steve Allan, Programming Research Consultant About XTrends: XTrends is radio’s favorite tool for reviewing ratings. Click here to see why a

researchdirectorinc.com

 

[Radiopaw]

Radio-Insight provided PPM’s. Just making it easier for those who prefer this site.

San Francisco – RadioInsight

San Jose – RadioInsight

 

[Radiopaw]

KIOI, KLLC, KBLX and KRBQ are all completely missing from key demo rankings and sliding up and down, with the last 3 seeing occasional rock bottoms.

Think we are perhaps saturated in some formats, but I suppose we have more signals then most major markets due to San Jose’s partial coverage.

Probably won’t see anything other then small adjustments, there’s a bunch of formats I’d love to see tried as radio begins to slowly falter more and more, but I really think we will begin to see sales in the next year of some of these like 97.3 or 102.9.

 

[K.M. Richards]

Radio-Insight provided PPM’s. Just making it easier for those who prefer this site.

San Francisco – RadioInsight

San Jose – RadioInsight

Those are still the meaningless 6+ numbers (the only ones Nielsen allows to be made public). It even says so in the header: "Average Quarter Hour Share for Persons 6+, Mon-Sun 6AM-Mid".

What I posted was the demographic rankings, which are different from the "PPMs" (and all that term refers to is that the market is big enough for Nielsen to use the Portable People Meter). Those who "prefer" to use those numbers for discussion will invariably come to erroneous conclusions, as both David and I have said many times. "PPM" is not a term that magically converts 6+ numbers into something meaningful.

 

[Radiopaw]

Those are still the meaningless 6+ numbers (the only ones Nielsen allows to be made public). It even says so in the header: "Average Quarter Hour Share for Persons 6+, Mon-Sun 6AM-Mid".

What I posted was the demographic rankings, which are different from the "PPMs" (and all that term refers to is that the market is big enough for Nielsen to use the Portable People Meter). Those who "prefer" to use those numbers for discussion will invariably come to erroneous conclusions, as both David and I have said many times. "PPM" is not a term that magically converts 6+ numbers into something meaningful.

You said this last time, and I agree with you that the demographics are better and everyone that frequents this forum knows that. Some people still want to see the PPM numbers and Radio-Insight does a better job then the site Henry posted. No harm in that.

 

[K.M. Richards]

Some people still want to see the PPM numbers and Radio-Insight does a better job then the site Henry posted.

Now there, I must agree with you. Lance does format those numbers much better.

 

[davideduardo]

You said this last time, and I agree with you that the demographics are better and everyone that frequents this forum knows that. Some people still want to see the PPM numbers and Radio-Insight does a better job then the site Henry posted. No harm in that.

Remember, the 6+ or 12+ bulk numbers are as useful as the funny and entertaining lists that David Letterman used to feature on his late-night TV show: amusing but valueless!

How do I know they are without value?
Nielsen, which spends hundreds of millions each year researching radio gives them away.

Why do they give them away, then?
People love lists. By getting free publicity, Nielsen enhances its name recognition and that makes recruiting participants in its surveys easier. So they reap a huge benefit by granting free access to a portion of their research that nobody would ever, ever pay for.

Example of being "valueless"?
MeTV FM in Chicago shows in the top 10 in 6+ PPM numbers. Yet they are barely in the Top 30 stations in 25-54 or 18-49. And their ad sales reflect that.

 

[e-dawg]

Hmmmmm….KISq 98.1 The Breeze is missing in the San Jose ratings.

 

[Radiopaw]

Remember, the 6+ or 12+ bulk numbers are as useful as the funny and entertaining lists that David Letterman used to feature on his late-night TV show: amusing but valueless!

How do I know they are without value?
Nielsen, which spends hundreds of millions each year researching radio gives them away.

Why do they give them away, then?
People love lists. By getting free publicity, Nielsen enhances its name recognition and that makes recruiting participants in its surveys easier. So they reap a huge benefit by granting free access to a portion of their research that nobody would ever, ever pay for.

Example of being "valueless"?
MeTV FM in Chicago shows in the top 10 in 6+ PPM numbers. Yet they are barely in the Top 30 stations in 25-54 or 18-49. And their ad sales reflect that.

I agree, I just feel that if we post the numbers, we should at least support a better website - and someone who at least I know gives a lot of a crap about the industry.

Apologies if it’s redundant

 

[K.M. Richards]

Example of being "valueless"?
MeTV FM in Chicago shows in the top 10 in 6+ PPM numbers. Yet they are barely in the Top 30 stations in 25-54 or 18-49. And their ad sales reflect that.

If I may, I would like to add a rhetorical question to that example:

When was the last time you heard of any agency making a buy based solely on the 6+/12+ numbers?

 

[davideduardo]

Hmmmmm….KISq 98.1 The Breeze is missing in the San Jose ratings.

Perhaps they no longer subscribe to the embedded market. I see the San Jose embedded market going away in the nearish future, just like Orange County disappeared as a breakout of the LA book.

 

[davideduardo]

If I may, I would like to add a rhetorical question to that example:

When was the last time you heard of any agency making a buy based solely on the 6+/12+ numbers?

1963?

 

[K.M. Richards]

1963?

Late December, when there were Four Seasons (oh, what a night). 😁

 

[Weiserguy]

I've written this before, but you guys keep missing the point. The 6+ numbers give you one thing that the demo breakouts don't: they give you (to the extent of the survey's underlying accuracy) an apples-to-apples comparison of how the total listenership of subscribing stations compares to each other, across all demographics that have graduated kindergarten. A seven-year-old counts the same as a geriatric person in a wheelchair as a a sports-obsessed young male as a 29 y/o female equipping her first home. Raw listenership. That comparison has nothing to do with ad sales, revenue, profit, ancillary/non-traditional revenue, etc. It is simply a synthesis of each station's raw popularity in the market, the total number of ears each station gets, or total market impact. And no matter how tightly you insist on tying the blinders on your heads, that ain't chopped liver.

 

[davideduardo]

I've written this before, but you guys keep missing the point. The 6+ numbers give you one thing that the demo breakouts don't: they give you (to the extent of the survey's underlying accuracy) an apples-to-apples comparison of how the total listenership of subscribing stations compares to each other, across all demographics that have graduated kindergarten. A seven-year-old counts the same as a geriatric person in a wheelchair as a a sports-obsessed young male as a 29 y/o female equipping her first home. Raw listenership. That comparison has nothing to do with ad sales, revenue, profit, ancillary/non-traditional revenue, etc. It is simply a synthesis of each station's raw popularity in the market, the total number of ears each station gets, or total market impact. And no matter how tightly you insist on tying the blinders on your heads, that ain't chopped liver.

And still, Nielsen and Arbitron before it gave those numbers away because, other than marquee value, they are still worthless and have no value of any kind.

(This is spoken as an owner and manager who prohibited staff from looking at the 12+ numbers. I never went so far as to tear pages out of the books, and I knew that they did look... but I wanted to make sure they knew that I did not employ them to do well in 12+.

 

[Radiopaw]

Honestly the only real issue I have with the discourse around 6+/PPM is that this is the only place to discuss radio, some of us just like radio and that statistic, while useless for business, is a neat insight for us who like radio. That statistic, shows how popular a radio station is with the public audience — it’s just a share of listening. It’s cool, it’s fun, it’s interesting.

I don’t agree with the opinion that this forum is “elitist” but I would argue that things like this contribute to the perception you’ll see of some people arguing that.

Useless but fun.

 

[K.M. Richards]

Raw listenership. That comparison has nothing to do with ad sales, revenue, profit, ancillary/non-traditional revenue, etc. It is simply a synthesis of each station's raw popularity in the market, the total number of ears each station gets, or total market impact. And no matter how tightly you insist on tying the blinders on your heads, that ain't chopped liver.

As far as the business of radio is concerned, yes it is chopped liver.

Listeners are the "product" that radio stations sell to advertisers. The ad clients do not care about the "seven-year-old, the geriatric person (with or without wheelchair), or the sports-obsessed young male" if they are targeting the "29 y/o female equipping her first home".

Let me answer my own rhetorical question from post #11: The last time agencies made buys without looking at the demographics first was likely in the days of Hooper, which did not tally ages of people listening. Every ratings service from Pulse onwards has made those distinctions and those matter exponentially more important than "raw listenership".

The 6+/12+ numbers matter only to people outside of the business who don't know any better. I had hoped that the segment of that demographic which reads and posts here would have gotten that by now. Apparently I hoped in vain. 😟