That's my point. The ad marathons are the tradeoff for no subscription fee, no user name & password, and no sharing personal data. The surveys I see say most people do both FM radio and streaming, depending on the circumstance.
-
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
KBZT in dire straits overall share now at 1.3?
- Thread starter 30james
- Start date
That's my point. The ad marathons are the tradeoff for no subscription fee, no user name & password, and no sharing personal data. The surveys I see say most people do both FM radio and streaming, depending on the circumstance.
I have to agree with David. The commercial load today makes FM hard to listen to. When I travel into the L.A. market in particular, I can barely stand to listen to radio for more than 15 minutes. Even in my home city, San Diego, it's pretty rough. I quickly go back to SiriusXM or music on my iPhone.
Yet the commercial load now on average is a minute or two less than it was 15 years ago, depending on format.
Stations on the whole are making less money, and costs have risen.
As CTListener says, non-coms in the majority of markets are in a single format, based on the NPR model. The others, if they exist, tend to be in niche formats such as classical and jazz. I don't know of any significant, full signal CHR, AC, Hot AC, Country, Urban, CHUrban, or other significant commercial format.
The issue with the commercial overload is that it drives listeners to new media, whether paid or ad-supported with fewer commercials.
Add in TSL irritants such as excessive use of the Voltair, and you have hard to listen to commercial stations. Everything we learned in the early 70's about lighter commercial loads has been forgotten. Now new media is doing to radio what FM did to AM 40 to 50 years ago.
Last edited:
If on-air stations had other alternatives, they would take them. How much would you pay to hear CHR format on an FM station commercial free? The only way it would work is as a national format to spread the cost over 50 states, the way it's done at Sirius.
There's no law that prevents it from happening. We're starting to see the oldies format at more non-coms, although typically at LPFMs. AAA is also becoming common. I expect to see alternative more often, based on the success of KEXP.
Yet the LPFMs have neither the power nor the coverage to be of any significance. So few LPFM are doing anything notable; the bulk are religious and there are a few that think they are low-power versions of Pacifica such as the one in San Diego that seems to have fallen appart.
AAA is a format that is running out of any ability to survive on commercial radio. However, it seems to be a "potential" for non-coms when they adopt the same music and formatics policies (not the same songs... just the same concepts of formatics) as were used for the format back in the 80's and 90's. Alternative can do the same if they adopt a broader focus in some markets where the rhythmic influence has not taken over entirely.
The same people who own LPFMs could also own full power FMs if they had more money. There's no reason in the world why passionate music fans can't pool their money, appeal to the broader population of music fans for membership fees, and use their combined resources to buy full power FM stations. It's been done. People obtain LPFMs because they're cheap and easy to own. But that same approach can be used to buy full power FMs rather than have them go to EMF or other religious broadcasters.
Yes, commercials are a turn off to some people. But they are the ONLY way radio stations can make enough money to staff and operate those stations. Nobody plays commercials in order to drive away listeners. That's not why they run commercials. They play commercials to pay for operations. It's the cost of doing business. I have done on-air pledge-athons and I've sold spots. Neither are easy, both are turn-offs, but they're necessary. We're all looking for an alternative.
There are alternatives that require going against the system. My first FM did six 20" spots an hour, and sold them to one exclusive client in a product category. The exclusivity was the value added, and it was my most profitable radio station despite being the first and, for several years, only FM in the market that I didn't own.
I did that because I wanted an FM when nobody else did. I was willing to not sell anything until I got my desired price, using the exclusivity strategy to justify it.
While that would not be a necessarily good strategy today, what I am suggesting is that a forward thinker might find some way to create a "value added" proposition today that would bypass CPP and AQH considerations to some extent and allow commercial stations to run with much lower spot loads.
All of us who did FM in the late 60's and into the 70's realized that lower loads than AM was a key factor to getting consumers to move to FM. Commercial limits, ranging from Shulke and Bonneville stations to the early CHR FMs like WMYQ/WDRQ/KSLQ all emphasized the commercial loads which were about half those of the big AMs of the day.
Now, we are back at the levels of spots of the late 60's AMs. And we wonder why TSL sucks.
I recall when satellite radio (XM & Sirius) was just starting, I was in a Best Buy and decided to ask an employee about it. His first advantage was the music channels only had 8 minutes an hour of commercials. I thought lots of FMs had 8 minute commercial loads when I got in to radio. Placement was 4 two minute breaks hourly.
David Field has been talking about this for a long time. It takes the co-operation of major clients to make it happen. They have to be involved in the entire plan, including the content. The bad news is the idea eliminates the small advertisers because the price is out of their range. iHeart is doing a form of top-line value added system with their BIN. You hear it being done with studio naming rights and other value-added tools. My point is it's being done, it works in some applications but not all. It will take time to get advertisers to buy in.
If for-profit radio can't get away from these long blocks of commercials, it simply has no future. The listener has options now. He doesn't have to sit patiently during a procession of pitchmen barking their 1-800 number over and over.
I realize stations need advertising to survive, but there's more than one way to present that advertising. Wouldn't it be more effective if the local DJ briefly name-drops the advertiser's name and product, in a conversational way, during his normal chatter, as he segues smoothly into the next song? Going instead into an endless block of 20- or 30-second spots simply cues the listener to turn the station (or to switch to Apple Music or his mp3 player or whatever).
I realize stations need advertising to survive, but there's more than one way to present that advertising. Wouldn't it be more effective if the local DJ briefly name-drops the advertiser's name and product, in a conversational way, during his normal chatter, as he segues smoothly into the next song? Going instead into an endless block of 20- or 30-second spots simply cues the listener to turn the station (or to switch to Apple Music or his mp3 player or whatever).
Sure, if that's what the advertiser wants. I hear DJs do it all the time. But the advertiser usually wants control over how his product is being presented. They usually want approval over the content, the presentation, and the environment. Some stations don't have DJs. Advertising is sold in time increments, so the recorded spot solves the issues the advertisers have. Since they're the ones paying, they get to determine how its done. If you paid for FM, you'd be in that position.
As you said, there are other options, but they usually require monthly subscription fees or membership, user names and passwords, and giving up a lot of personal information that the service then resells to other people. With radio, just turn it on and listen.
The problem with advertising is the buyer controls content. You can't ask for the advertising and then tell them how it is going to be utilized. Think of this in a way of any purchase you make as a consumer. If you're buying something and the seller dictates how you use it, you likely have a suggestion of a rather unpleasant place they should go.
One of the interesting failures I heard from iHeart was Dallas' Lone Star 92 Texas-centric format where the advertising was branded to the station. Only 1 in each type of business. Each advertiser became the official (beer, airline, etc.). All commercials were ad-libbed by jock and limited to one spot per hour.
It was very clever advertising. I recall: A Tornado Warning right as afternoon drive began was announced and the jock suggested trying out that little bar down the street from work until this storm passes. He suggested going in and getting a Coors Beer. He said you know you have a great little bar if the mountains are blue because that indicates that Coors Beer is the perfect temperature.
Another jock, coming out of an Allman Brothers tune stated his wife loved the Allman Bros. and they were playing in New Orleans on Friday night. Since their anniversary was Friday he booked one of the 5 daily Southwest flights to New Orleans where he'll treat the wife to dinner in the French Quarter and then on to the concert.
I think the failure was multiple issues: Advertisers not understanding the concept or the cost didn't match their criteria and I think the format evolved to more of what you might hear in a biker bar, pretty far removed from the initial format that included Willie Nelson liners.
It was very clever advertising. I recall: A Tornado Warning right as afternoon drive began was announced and the jock suggested trying out that little bar down the street from work until this storm passes. He suggested going in and getting a Coors Beer. He said you know you have a great little bar if the mountains are blue because that indicates that Coors Beer is the perfect temperature.
Another jock, coming out of an Allman Brothers tune stated his wife loved the Allman Bros. and they were playing in New Orleans on Friday night. Since their anniversary was Friday he booked one of the 5 daily Southwest flights to New Orleans where he'll treat the wife to dinner in the French Quarter and then on to the concert.
I think the failure was multiple issues: Advertisers not understanding the concept or the cost didn't match their criteria and I think the format evolved to more of what you might hear in a biker bar, pretty far removed from the initial format that included Willie Nelson liners.
BINGO!
Give me a great commercial free rock station where listeners have significant say in the music, can interact with on-air personalities, and can enjoy clean audio processing, and I'd contribute in a heartbeat!
100,000 watt 89.7 The River in Omaha has been following such a model for decades. I believe the station is owned by an area college or community college, so most of the air talent consists of students. What's interesting is after many years of being a very conservative mainstream rocker, Z92 in Omaha within the past few years has transitioned to straight-up Active Rock. It'll be interesting to see if that move makes it more difficult for the River to be viable.
I don't think this is an improvement. I personally would much rather have 2 long breaks an hour than a jock telling me about Jenny's Diner and Best Western of Smallville between every record.
Interesting the River (KIWR) was mentioned - they at one time had an equally professional and well programmed AAA/Alternative format - and during that format, were the launchpad for Free Beer & Hot Wings, now a pretty successful syndicated morning show. Then they transitioned to heavy modern/active.
Both formats were well done. I wonder with the Z92 shift if The River might go back in the Alt/AAA direction?
Both formats were well done. I wonder with the Z92 shift if The River might go back in the Alt/AAA direction?
Ironically, it seems the online model is following radio's model of irritating the consumer with 'spot loads'. Now there are two commercials in a row on most of the popular YT vids, with longer songs having them pop up in the middle.
No big deal, but what happens when they jack it up to three or four? I think a lot of people will start tuning out. I also have seen more websites packed with what I refer to as 'commercial desperation' -- a news site with so many ads slammed at you that it slows the site to a crawl, and suddenly it looks like it's 2002 and a virus hit you with non-stop pop-ups.
I know -- like most people here -- advertising is what makes the sites money, and is what keeps the entertainment free. But how far can they push the listener, or -- in this case I'm referring to -- the online viewer?
No big deal, but what happens when they jack it up to three or four? I think a lot of people will start tuning out. I also have seen more websites packed with what I refer to as 'commercial desperation' -- a news site with so many ads slammed at you that it slows the site to a crawl, and suddenly it looks like it's 2002 and a virus hit you with non-stop pop-ups.
I know -- like most people here -- advertising is what makes the sites money, and is what keeps the entertainment free. But how far can they push the listener, or -- in this case I'm referring to -- the online viewer?
In re: to my earlier statement, "Do you think programming on FM sounds as good today as it did 25 years ago? Just curious. My answer would be a resounding NO."
Here's the reason I feel that way:
- Contests: most are national with minimal chance of winning these days; local stations offered far more contests on a local level back in the day that made listening more fun.
- Personalities: even in medium sized markets, many DJs did a flat out great job entertaining the audience. Great deliveries, great music knowledge, many infused comedy bits and quirky personality into their shows, etc. Today, too many sound like they are "just going through the motions" and do little to enhance the overall sound of their radio station.
- Service elements: Back in the day, the air talent would talk about things that were going on in the community that were of interest to me. I'd hear the current weather and forecast. I'd hear sports scores.
- Creative: Some imaging / production sounded incredible 15, 20, 25 years ago. That stuff really didn't start to sound great until the second half of the 80's, and it peaked in the 90's. Today, even on many major market stations, imaging consists of barely more than dry liner reads. BORING!
- Connection between air personality and listener: There were more opportunities to be "part of the radio station" on a personal level in many instances years ago, especially for stations that targeted younger adults (CHR, Urban, Alternative, Rock). Today? Not so much.
I will say commercial loads were generally more annoying 20 or 30 years ago than now, but the other stuff was often SO GOOD that I didn't mind as much sitting through the commercials. And back in the day, ad duplication didn't seem quite as bad as it does now.
Here's the reason I feel that way:
- Contests: most are national with minimal chance of winning these days; local stations offered far more contests on a local level back in the day that made listening more fun.
- Personalities: even in medium sized markets, many DJs did a flat out great job entertaining the audience. Great deliveries, great music knowledge, many infused comedy bits and quirky personality into their shows, etc. Today, too many sound like they are "just going through the motions" and do little to enhance the overall sound of their radio station.
- Service elements: Back in the day, the air talent would talk about things that were going on in the community that were of interest to me. I'd hear the current weather and forecast. I'd hear sports scores.
- Creative: Some imaging / production sounded incredible 15, 20, 25 years ago. That stuff really didn't start to sound great until the second half of the 80's, and it peaked in the 90's. Today, even on many major market stations, imaging consists of barely more than dry liner reads. BORING!
- Connection between air personality and listener: There were more opportunities to be "part of the radio station" on a personal level in many instances years ago, especially for stations that targeted younger adults (CHR, Urban, Alternative, Rock). Today? Not so much.
I will say commercial loads were generally more annoying 20 or 30 years ago than now, but the other stuff was often SO GOOD that I didn't mind as much sitting through the commercials. And back in the day, ad duplication didn't seem quite as bad as it does now.
It depends on the format and the station. I'm always amazed at how many personalities from the 90s are still at the same stations 25 years later. I read all these comments about all the people getting fired, yet somehow thousands of people (including me) remain very gainfully employed. You were talking in another thread about WHQG in Milwaukee, and their morning show has been there since 1987. I saw a press release about Jim Kerr celebrating his 40th year on the air in NYC.
- Status