K-Big Assumptions

[Element9]

All this talk about KB changing format from oldies to progressive talk and how disenchanted KB listeners will automatically flock to WHTT catapulting it into the ratings stratosphere. Don't buy it. KB didn't exactly put up big numbers doing oldies. Most of KB's listeners believed that Elvis was God and the Beatles and British Invasion ruined rock n roll music forever.

WHTT doesn't appear to play much Elvis these days and plays more 70s and 80s than ever before. Bobby Vee, Gogi Grant and Trini Lopez are gone from WHTT and haven't been heard from in years. I don't expect former KB listeners to move to WHTT en masse, let alone be able to find the FM band. My guess is KB's blue hairs go to AM 740 and WHTT fluctuates between 3rd and 5th, 12+ Persons, which is really an irrelevant barometer for guaging a station's success. It's all about 25-54, not 55+.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Disenfranchised

That was kind of my point with the "So, Where to Now?" post below. I didn't see any mass movement to WHTT indicated, but a lot of the posters were people outside the market.

KB shared a lot more audience with WECK than WHTT. Now that they're both gone, WBEN might get more of them than anyone else.

WJJL might have an opportunity, but I doubt that they have the wherewithal to take advantage of it. Canadian stations may also benefit.

 

[Bob1370]

Re: Disenfranchised

> That was kind of my point with the "So, Where to Now?" post
> below. I didn't see any mass movement to WHTT indicated, but
> a lot of the posters were people outside the market.

WHTT was the station that 'KB shared most of its listeners with while they both were oldies=oriented. These folks don't know CHWO. They DO know WHTT...and don't have any other obvious place to go if they continue listening to radio at all.

> KB shared a lot more audience with WECK than WHTT. Now that
> they're both gone, WBEN might get more of them than anyone
> else.

I'd question that assumption. WECK wasn't much affected by 'KB's presence between 2003 and 2006. And if that WERE true, those folks (who represented over a 3 share in the end) now have nowhere to go but WHTT either. CHWO is an unknown quantity to most Buffalonians, and its signal is distant enough that while it comes in well on a good car radio, those little desktop radios in most people's offices and kitchens are a different story.

As far as WBEN picking up the audience...well, if they still had Bill Lacy fronting a personality-driven morning show, I'd say that would be a possibility. (He's over at WHTT now.) Then again, if they still had that kind of morning show, and still had their popular Newsday midday news hour, they'd still be #1 overall in the market. WBEN is still suffering from some of its past mistakes and is in no position to reclaim audience except perhaps in the evenings (where Ron Dobson will do better than his network predecessors).

> WJJL might have an opportunity, but I doubt that they have
> the wherewithal to take advantage of it. Canadian stations
> may also benefit.

WJJL also has signal problems in Erie County, bigtime. It won't be a factor.
Bottom line...these listeners still depend on radio, and need to go somewhere. There is literally no other obvious place for them to go. Expect WHTT to have a very successful spring '06 book.

 

[Debaser]

Re: Disenfranchised

I think the point here is that if KB had had any audience to share, Entercom would not have changed the format.
As much as some of us wanted that station to succeed, it didn't, pure and simple. Case closed. The audience to "share" is negligable...loud and disappointed, but negligable.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Debaser on 02/13/06 02:00 PM.</FONT></P>

 

[Element9]

Re: Disenfranchised

> > That was kind of my point with the "So, Where to Now?"
> post
> > below. I didn't see any mass movement to WHTT indicated,
> but
> > a lot of the posters were people outside the market.
>
> WHTT was the station that 'KB shared most of its listeners
> with while they both were oldies=oriented. These folks don't
> know CHWO. They DO know WHTT...and don't have any other
> obvious place to go if they continue listening to radio at
> all.
>
While KB shared its P1 listeners with WHTT, WHTT shares its P1 listeners with 97 Rock, WJYE and WYRK. Although KB listeners ping-ponged back and forth to WHTT, there weren't a lot of 35-54's in the KB cume, which WHTT seems to be pursuing with a vengeance these days. Also, KB had virtually no listeners after Danny and Tom signed off at 10 and those that were there were likely diehards who weren't fond of anything contemporary (read "post 1972.")

WHTT sounds young(er) and contemporary, with lots of forward momentum and jocks who personalize the multitude of positioning liners and talk about issues of the day rather than "what song was hot in 1962 and what dead guy would have been 94 today." The oldies image has been completely and perhaps justifiably abandoned. Interestingly enough, although the station seems to be positioned toward women, it's said to place several notches above The Lake in every male demo and daypart. Not a good sign for WLKK, whose numbers are down significantly in all dayparts, especially in its target demo.

WHTT isn't out of the woods, however. WJYE and WTSS are formidable opponents, not to be taken lightly. And of course, there's WYRK which owns every demo in sight in just about every daypart, especially morning drive where WHTT places in the middle of the pack.

 

[Philip_Airtime]

My guess is
> KB's blue hairs go to AM 740 and WHTT fluctuates between 3rd
> and 5th, 12+ Persons, which is really an irrelevant
> barometer for guaging a station's success. It's all about
> 25-54, not 55+.

I want to challenge the assumption that the success of radio station should be judged on how it does 25 to 54. Now, I don't need a lesson in advertising demographics. I know how it works. A radio station with high numbers of listeners aged 25 to 54 is considered a tremendous success because those are the people advertisers want to reach. A station like the Edge is considered a success because it attracts a large number of males between 18 and 34. And if you're a business who caters to that age group, you'll want to be on that station? So, I get it!

But why do the rest of us have to follow the advertising model of judging a radio station's success? When 73,000 fans show up at Ralph Wilson Stadium, do we only count those aged 25 to 54? Of course not. So, why not judge the success of a radio station on its total listeners? To me, WYRK is the number one station in the market because it has the highest overall audience. Again, I know that radio stations today target a specific age group. And they should be judged on their success at reaching that age group. But are we supposed to dismiss WBEN's power in this market because it drops from number two 12+ to number seven 25-54?

And I would argue that WECK was a ratings success for a station with a lousy signal on the AM band. Yes, its audience was over 55. But aren't those people human? Don't they count? And the thing is, WECK brought in money from advertisers who want to reach the older audience. But CBS, because we're all taught in this business that young is good and old is bad, made the stupid decision to change the format to one that is likely to attract a younger but definitely smaller audience. Yeah, that makes sense.

I'm just suggesting that we think outside the box here, folks.

 

[IBadget1]

Re: Disenfranchised

> WJJL also has signal problems in Erie County, bigtime. It
> won't be a factor.
> Bottom line...these listeners still depend on radio, and
> need to go somewhere. There is literally no other obvious
> place for them to go. Expect WHTT to have a very successful
> spring '06 book.

What about Legends 990 WLGZ in Rochester? How well does it come in in Buffalo?<P ID="signature">______________
Ivan Badget
Waipahu, Hawaii</P>

 

[mike704]

Re: Disenfranchised

> WJJL also has signal problems in Erie County, bigtime. It
> won't be a factor.
> Bottom line...these listeners still depend on radio, and
> need to go somewhere. There is literally no other obvious
> place for them to go. Expect WHTT to have a very successful
> spring '06 book.

Hi Bob, always enjoy reading your posts.

My feeiling is you are basically right but some people will just stop listening to the radio. This will lead to the incorrect conclusion that people over 50 don't listen to the radio.

MikeM

 

[mike704]

>
> I'm just suggesting that we think outside the box here,
> folks.

I like what you said but that's not going to happen. Radio today is more Science than it is Art. So far Science isn't doing that well. When they do think outside the box it's really way out!

MikeM

 

[Bob1370]

Re: Disenfranchised

> > WJJL also has signal problems in Erie County, bigtime. It
> > won't be a factor.
> > Bottom line...these listeners still depend on radio, and
> > need to go somewhere. There is literally no other obvious
> > place for them to go. Expect WHTT to have a very
> successful
> > spring '06 book.
>
> What about Legends 990 WLGZ in Rochester? How well does it
> come in in Buffalo?
>
Different kind of station, heavy on melodic pop oldies and standards, light on rock, more like what WECK used to be until recently. The crowd that liked 'KB or WBBF or WAXC back in their heyday in the 60s and 70s isn't their target.

And the signal is listenable in the car in northern Erie and Niagara counties by day, but inaudible in homes and offices in the city of Buffalo and south towns--and nowhere to be found at night when it changes patterns and shoots all its power eastward through the city of Rochester and down I-90 toward Syracuse.

 

[Element9]

Re: Disenfranchised

> I think the point here is that if KB had had any audience to
> share, Entercom would not have changed the format.
> As much as some of us wanted that station to succeed, it
> didn't, pure and simple. Case closed. The audience to
> "share" is negligable...loud and disappointed, but
> negligable.
>

Succinctly assessed. Sadly, but truly.

 

[topsound]

Am I Crazy? (was Re: Disenfranchised

> > I think the point here is that if KB had had any audience
> to
> > share, Entercom would not have changed the format.
> > As much as some of us wanted that station to succeed, it
> > didn't, pure and simple. Case closed. The audience to
> > "share" is negligable...loud and disappointed, but
> > negligable.
> >
>
> Succinctly assessed. Sadly, but truly.
>

This post is somewhat self-serving, given my background. However, even though I programmed 60s-based Oldies, I am not personally in its "core" demo. So perhaps I am able to view this situation somewhat objectively (an objectivity which I believe helped me as a programmer).

For the life of me, I cannot figure out why it's not obvious that 60s-based Oldies have a legitimate place in the radio landscape here. The median age of the marketplace matches up well with the format. The median disposable income of the market lines up even better. From 1989 through the early 2000s, 60s-based Oldies on FM was consistently top five 25-54 (even though it was really a 35-64 format) and did acceptably well from a revenue standpoint (often exceptionally well). You SHOULD be able to get decent ratings and make some money (at least with direct sales).

I totally understand, and am not criticizing, why the FM Oldies station has changed focus. The proof is in the numbers, and although I have no inside info, I assume it has also had a positive effect revenue-wise. WHTT is an excellent sounding station, and still plays a significant amount of music that is unique to the market. However, as someone who prefers a "traditional" Oldies mix (including a sprinkling of Elvis, Buddy, and the Everlys), I'm outta luck now.

Thus the question in my subject arises. Am I crazy to think that traditional oldies (done at a reasonable level of quality and visibility) would be a better choice (artistically, in the ratings, and financially), than some of what we hear now (without naming names)? Where would fans of this format go to hear it? If it's not on FM is it dead? What about "available" AM stations? HD? Internet Radio? Is satellite the only option? Do you really need local personality?

Your thoughts are welcome. What can REALISTICALLY be done to bring it back?

Tom

 

[Philip_Airtime]

Re: Am I Crazy? (was Re: Disenfranchised

Thanks for a really great post, Tom. I would say that in a community with a population that skews older, a 50s and 60s oldies station would appear to be viable. But in answer to your question, I don't see an FM station in Buffalo that would take a chance on this format. So, it would appear the alternatives for listeners who really want to hear this music are Internet and satellite radio stations.

Personally, my music tastes are the 60s and later. I really enjoyed KB when I heard tunes from the mid-'60s and onward. I didn't care for some of the obscure '50s music the station played. The bottom line was that I listened to KB for its personalities. Yet, I know most listeners to KB probably wanted to hear the music. And now they have no free radio alternative.

Frankly, Entercom made a huge mistake here. KB is once again a meaningless station in this market. They might as well shut off the transmitter and save money. KB was the perfect station to make a go of this format, if it had only been properly programmed and promoted. It's too late now.

As readers to this board know from my earlier posts, my blood continues to boil over this move because of its pure stupidity. And then I read the post above that Wenger contacted Leslie Marshall just two weeks ago, after the WHLD news came out. So much for his contention that Entercom was planning this move for a year. It just pains me that I work in an industry that employs weasels like Wenger, when true talent like Danny Neaverth, Jack Armstrong and you, Tom, are left out in the cold. The injustice of it is maddening. I know that you're gainfully employed, Tom, but it's not in radio. And if radio does indeed succumb to the new technology, as some are forecasting, it will be because of people like Wenger, Ried, Silver and all the suits above them.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Conundrum

I believe that TS is correct in believing that there is a market for "real oldies" ('55 - '64), done well, with personality. Advertisers, however, have been beaten over the head with the theory that older buyers are impervious to advertising. I find that to be laughable.

When I want to buy something, I start looking for a sale. Advertising tells me who has what products on sale. Since service is the same everywhere (i.e. "non-existant"), price is usually the criteria. Tell me you have it cheap, and I'll be in to buy it.

Now, because 75% of the people in charge of buying and selling advertising are under the age of 35, I get ignored. A station that catered to my tastes, and stores that realized that I have more money to spend now than I did at 25 or 35 would get my business. Everybody would be happy.

OK, so I fit in a niche. Niche programming is a perfect product for an Internet stream. Put KB Real Oldies on the Internet, and you might have an identifiable market much larger than Buffalo.

There's only one problem. I'm pretty computer savvy, but I don't really like to listen to music on my PC. The audio quality isn't nearly as good as FM, and there are several FM stations I like to listen to. Moreover, I listen to music in my car more than anywhere else. It's hard to get the Internet stream in my car.

Hence, the conundrum. An Internet stream might be the perfect answer, but I'm not willing to be tied to my computer in order to listen to it.

Maybe HD radio is the answer. KB-HD, with Real Oldies on 1520-1.

What the heck, IBOC can't make the audio sound much worse than Randi Rhodes railing on about "them".

 

[topsound]

Re: Conundrum

> I believe that TS is correct in believing that there is a
> market for "real oldies" ('55 - '64), done well, with
> personality. Advertisers, however, have been beaten over the
> head with the theory that older buyers are impervious to
> advertising. I find that to be laughable.

(clip)

Hey Rox,

Thanks for replying. Knew I could count on you (BTW, Radnowski's been pretty quiet lately, hope he's OK).

I really want to know what people think about this. Would you go out of your way to listen to a station like this: I'm thinking 64-67 as the core years, with VERY selected 55-60, a little bit more featured from 61-63 (Orbisons, Four Seasons, girl group, early Motown, God there's some grrrrrreat stuff there that gets forgotten or ignored), and a sprinkling of 68-72 (post-Sgt. Pepper there was a significant change in the sound of the Top 40 charts).

By "go out of your way" I mean, which of these might you consider:
-putting up with the hassle and work-in-progress sound quality of a stream?
-putting up with the questionable sound quality and signal issues of a "fringe" AM signal?
-paying for hardware and monthly costs of satellite?
-buying an HD radio in your home and/or car?
-supporting any such ventures with your listening time and your disposable income (whether by paying directly or patronizing advertisers?)

This all assumes that 60s-based Oldies is a lost format as far as the big-time FM channels are concerned.

Keep those replies coming!

 

[Element9]

Re: Conundrum

> Thanks for replying. Knew I could count on you (BTW,
> Radnowski's been pretty quiet lately, hope he's OK).
>
I've had my run-ins with the resident house painter on this board and at the risk of sounding sentimental, I too wonder where the hell he is and hope he's OK too. Maybe he got too close to the paint thinner again.

> I really want to know what people think about this. Would
> you go out of your way to listen to a station like this: I'm
> thinking 64-67 as the core years, with VERY selected 55-60,
> a little bit more featured from 61-63 (Orbisons, Four
> Seasons, girl group, early Motown, God there's some
> grrrrrreat stuff there that gets forgotten or ignored), and
> a sprinkling of 68-72 (post-Sgt. Pepper there was a
> significant change in the sound of the Top 40 charts).

This is a good vintage, TS, read my concerns below.

> By "go out of your way" I mean, which of these might you
> consider:
> -putting up with the hassle and work-in-progress sound
> quality of a stream?

No

> -putting up with the questionable sound quality and signal
> issues of a "fringe" AM signal?

Not likely. See below, re: WLVL, WJJL, WSPQ, etc.

> -paying for hardware and monthly costs of satellite?

No

> -buying an HD radio in your home and/or car?

Not yet

> -supporting any such ventures with your listening time and
> your disposable income (whether by paying directly or
> patronizing advertisers?)

I'd have to be convinced


> This all assumes that 60s-based Oldies is a lost format as
> far as the big-time FM channels are concerned.
>
> Keep those replies coming!


You should have put this post at the top of the page. It’s worthy of debate. I’ve noticed that the deeper into the thread that a post appears, the less it’s likely to be read and even less likely it is to get a reasoned response.

Being 45+, I concur with your thesis, TS and with Rox as well, especially about nich programming. There’s a place for 60’s-based oldies on the radio. But you and I might differ as to what constitutes a 60’s oldie in the first place. Gene Pitney is a 60’s artist. “It hurts to be in love” is an outstanding song in my estimation. You might disagree. A guy might like it, a woman might think it's drek. I like the Beatles and would listen to just about anything they did, from “And your bird can sing” to “You know my name, look up my number.” You might think the Beatles have only a limited place in your 60’s format.

I’m not fond of the Shirelles. Leslie Gore doesn’t knock me out. On the other hand, women might want more of that. See what we’re getting into here? Years ago, a guy I know told me he wanted to buy WJJL. I told him he should have his head examined and that WJJL was worth about 10 cents more than the assets listed in their bankruptcy court filing. Nothing came of it.

What station is going to go all 60’s simply to suit you and me? WJJL? Hardly. WLVL? Can’t hear it south of the county line after sunset. WXRL? Its stone country and paid polkas are making its owner a very comfortable living. WSPQ? Can’t be heard farther north of Amour Duelles road.

The presentation of the 60s format is another issue. High energy? Conversational? Laid back? High personality with jocks talking about how they remember drinking their first beer to “Kicks” by Paul Revere and the Raiders? That’s out. It’s 2006. Controled personality jocks, with liners and flexibility to talk over songs that have lengthy intros? I notice the guys on WHTT use a hybrid approach, sometimes energetic and occasional conversational. It seems to work well. WHTT can sound superb one hour and the next it's playing three bad 70s disco songs.

There are so many issues to define. Having been a program director, you know all too well that a good airstaff needs direction, yet have the flexibility to bend the rules judiciously.

Personally, I believe music on AM is a lost cause. Yes, there are people who post on this board who love AM unconditionally and would listen to music on AM. They have their GE SuperRadios and RadioShack deluxe AM tuners. Most people don’t... they’re listening to a Crapasonic-500-B.

Another issue. 1966 was 40 years ago. While most people listened to music on AM back then, they eventually discovered that music sounded better on FM and moved away from the AM band when stations like the Super Q, QFM97, Rock 102 or WPHD, later WNYS and WHTT played the music they once listened to on AM.

Subsequent generations have no soft spot for music on AM. Therefore, the potential for a successful music format on AM is diminishing with every passing year.

1966 was 40 years ago. Amazing. If you were playing 40 year old music in 1966, it would have been from 1926! Of course, it wasn't rock 'n roll or a variation thereof. Kind of puts this thread in a whole new perspective.

-9-

 

[mike704]

Re: Conundrum

I too think this post brings up some good questions. For me part of the fun of listening to KB-1520 was I heard many of these songs the first time right there. The trouble is WKBW was many different things to different people.

I just listened to Bob Diamond's show from 1964 and none of you would like that at all. Lots of MOR sounding music, but I kind of liked it. Shows that KB wasn't all Rock & Roll. That came later, in 1964 it was top 30 which was just about anything that made the charts from Louis Armstorng doing "Hello Dolly" and Sammy Davis Jr.'s "The Shelter of Your Arms" to "Baltimore" by George Hamilton.


> > I really want to know what people think about this. Would
> > you go out of your way to listen to a station like this:
> I'm
> > thinking 64-67 as the core years, with VERY selected
> 55-60,
> > a little bit more featured from 61-63 (Orbisons, Four
> > Seasons, girl group, early Motown, God there's some
> > grrrrrreat stuff there that gets forgotten or ignored),
> and
> > a sprinkling of 68-72 (post-Sgt. Pepper there was a
> > significant change in the sound of the Top 40 charts).

Somewhere somebody said they didn't care much for Lesley Gore and that hurt! I like her stuff and never get tired of most of it but that's just my opinion.
>
> This is a good vintage, TS, read my concerns below.
>
> > By "go out of your way" I mean, which of these might you
> > consider:
> > -putting up with the hassle and work-in-progress sound
> > quality of a stream?
>
maybe but part of the fun of KB was hearing Buffalo radio, a part of the country that I'm very partial to. I listened to WHTT on the web this afternoon but I didn't find too much there that I couldn't hear elsewhere. That doesn't mean I didn't enjoy it.
>
> > -putting up with the questionable sound quality and signal
>
> > issues of a "fringe" AM signal?

As a Ham operator I do that all the time plus having been a full time DJ my hearing probaby shot anyway. You guys know that as we get older our ability to hear the high frequencies deminnishes anyway. Just think in about 20 years AM will sound like FM to us even without HD!
>
> > -paying for hardware and monthly costs of satellite?
>
So far I can live without it so no. My iPod has a fantastic amount of music and part of me doesn't trust the suits to keep playing what I enjoy. I can hear XM on my DirecTV and they're okay but The '50's Channel really misses the mark. They play a lot of really strange stuff. I'm not sure what they are going for but it doesn't work for me. I have played '50's music Rock & Roll, MOR, and Country but not what they are playing for the most part.
>
> > -buying an HD radio in your home and/or car?
>
Not yet but if they come up with something good to listen to yes I might. However I'm not going to pay $300 for a table radio.

> > -supporting any such ventures with your listening time and
> > your disposable income (whether by paying directly or
> > patronizing advertisers?)
>
> Yes if the NPR station where I live was still doing the excellent "Smooth Jazz" format they once had I would pony up some coin to support them.
>
>
> > This all assumes that 60s-based Oldies is a lost format as
>
> > far as the big-time FM channels are concerned.
> >

Oldies had a long run. It's gone for now. Isn't funny though when PBS does a pledge drive they bring out the '60's and '70's artists for concerts!

Oldies is just one type of music that I listen to though. What I find distressing are people who seem to have stopped listening to any new music past their High School or College days. I was listening to music way before most kids and I will be listening to new music long after most. There is good and bad in everything and since I started listening at an early age my taste skews a bit older than most. I even enjoy some of the stuff my parents generation listened to.

 

[topsound]

Re: Conundrum

> I too think this post brings up some good questions. For me
> part of the fun of listening to KB-1520 was I heard many of
> these songs the first time right there. The trouble is WKBW
> was many different things to different people.
>
> I just listened to Bob Diamond's show from 1964 and none of
> you would like that at all. Lots of MOR sounding music, but
> I kind of liked it. Shows that KB wasn't all Rock & Roll.
> That came later, in 1964 it was top 30 which was just about
> anything that made the charts from Louis Armstorng doing
> "Hello Dolly" and Sammy Davis Jr.'s "The Shelter of Your
> Arms" to "Baltimore" by George Hamilton.
>

Very true, and a good point. KB (and most Top 30 or Top 40) was geared towards the housewife during the midday. Remember that Freddie Klestine was the midday host, a long way from Biondi, Joey, and their successors. And morning shows were not as key as they became later. KB didn't start to rock until mid-afternoon, when the kids got out of school, and of course at night.

The irony is, that with WECK out of the mix, KB could have been more reflective of its history by making MOR a somehat more consistent part of its regular format. Personally, I'm not sure if this would have been a wise move or not (I believe that a rock & soul-based Oldies format has the best chance of success), but it would have been an interesting way to extend KB's lifespan a little longer. Your thoughts?