-
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
Do you really think a top 13 finish is 'stunted'? And Top 7 non-ethnic? And beating established players like KPLX and KSCS? That's stunted growth?MikeShannon914 said:
This is where I think some people here don't really understand programming. Jack is DESIGNED to be a high cume, low TSL station. If the Bone is programming the same way, it's entirely possible that they're thinking the same way. Funny how KISS can follow the same programming format (play a wide variety of styles as long as they're top 40) and nobody accuses them of stunting their growth. KISS's TSL sucks. Not just bad it SUCKS. But their cume is so high it doesn't matter, they're still #1 non-ethnic.
Personal opinion, I think they're moving the format 'up' because they're tired of fighting KZPS head-to-head for an ever-aging demo (45-54 classic rockers) and are willing to be an AOR station almost, playing some new, some old, some recurrents, etc...
1- KESS
2 – KLNO
3 – KHKS
4 – KKDA
5 – KTCK
6 – KBFB
7t – KVIL
7t – KEGL
9 – KLUV
10 – KDMX
11t – KRNB
11t – KLTY
13t – KJKK
13t – KPLX
13t – WBAP
16 – KZPS
17 – KSOC
18 – KSCS
19t – KTCY
That's cool, just kinda odd to point to "evidence" to back up your claim when the evidence doesn't say what you say it says.jeffdfw said:
Not to mention trends are notoriously unstable. That's why we look at averages book to book, - or advertisers buy based on quarterly books instead of monthly trends- because teh sampling errors will likely work themselves out month-to-month-to-month, but would look really odd isolated in one month.
And the one other thing to remember for you that think The Bone needs to change formats...
What format would you suggest, and where do you think you're going to get that audience from. For example, Mr Shannon, your classic alternative...What % of whose audience do you think you'll get? Just ballpark us- a quarter of ___'s audience, half of ____'s audience, etc. And then what, roughly do those add up to?
Because having gone through my fair share of format changes, that's the question the suits are asking- what's the perceived upside of this deal- then they're asking what is it going to cost us (not only in paying off contracts, hiring new jocks etc, but also in lost revenue as advertisers don't make the translation to the 'new' format) to put the format on, market it (because if you want to get 20% of Jack's audience, you'll have to do TV or outdoor, or direct mail or something...) etc...
This is the question I ask anybody who's talking about format changes- show me either ratings or evenue, and tell me which part of which pie you think you're going to get. Content wise we probably didn't need any of the 3rd sports stations that have tried to succeed here- but they look at KTCK's revenue (#2 in the market) and think to themselves "If I can even get 10% of that we'll quadruple what we're doing now".
That's why movin replaced the Oasis. They look at Kiss at #3, and think 'if we can pull off X % of that audience, we'll get better 25-54 ratings(which ='s more revenue)...
Once we have an idea of where you think this audience will come from, we can quibble on if it'll work-
Because if you tell me that 50% of your audience is coming from Jack, I'll point outthat 'classic alt' is probably only 20-25-30% of their playlist (TOPS!), and I'm not sure that you'll not only get people who are P1's for that music, but also another 25-30% of their audience...
What format would you suggest, and where do you think you're going to get that audience from. For example, Mr Shannon, your classic alternative...What % of whose audience do you think you'll get? Just ballpark us- a quarter of ___'s audience, half of ____'s audience, etc. And then what, roughly do those add up to?
Because having gone through my fair share of format changes, that's the question the suits are asking- what's the perceived upside of this deal- then they're asking what is it going to cost us (not only in paying off contracts, hiring new jocks etc, but also in lost revenue as advertisers don't make the translation to the 'new' format) to put the format on, market it (because if you want to get 20% of Jack's audience, you'll have to do TV or outdoor, or direct mail or something...) etc...
This is the question I ask anybody who's talking about format changes- show me either ratings or evenue, and tell me which part of which pie you think you're going to get. Content wise we probably didn't need any of the 3rd sports stations that have tried to succeed here- but they look at KTCK's revenue (#2 in the market) and think to themselves "If I can even get 10% of that we'll quadruple what we're doing now".
That's why movin replaced the Oasis. They look at Kiss at #3, and think 'if we can pull off X % of that audience, we'll get better 25-54 ratings(which ='s more revenue)...
Once we have an idea of where you think this audience will come from, we can quibble on if it'll work-
Because if you tell me that 50% of your audience is coming from Jack, I'll point outthat 'classic alt' is probably only 20-25-30% of their playlist (TOPS!), and I'm not sure that you'll not only get people who are P1's for that music, but also another 25-30% of their audience...
Chuck said:
Lee Abrams stated in an R&R column in the early 1990s that primarily the music that people listen to from the time they were 16-20 years of age was the music that would be omnipresent in their existence. If you go by that logic as far as music purchased, that is very true with me.
Though I did have a spurt from the time I was 23-27 where I purchased quite a bit of music, but not as much as when I was 16-20.
I can understand that some are the exception when it comes to embracing new music. I'm about to turn 40, yet there is new music out there by artists most people never heard of which I'm really into. None of that music could be embraced in a commercial rock format.
lafayetteindependentradio said:
And Abrams was just paraphrasing what sociologists and cultural anthropologists have studied for decades and decades... the root of musical taste is formed in early adolescence, and either follows a straight line into maturity or branches out into similar but broader areas into adulthood.
That's among the reasons why we are not too likely to find a big country station in New York City, either.
M
MikeShannon914
Guest
I completely agree with that (me, agree with DE?!? WOW.) HOWEVER, how do 'newer' formats like Smooth Jazz and Christian AC figure into that? And same for the old elevator music/MOR? None would be something kids are "raised" on, in most households, anyway.
And I've seen a strange transition happen with many a 40-yr old over the last 10-15 years, where someone goes from Classic Rock or AC over to Country. Not just adding a preset, but changing their musical tastes to a completely different genre. Never could figure that one out. And we're not talking Classic Country or crossover AC stuff, just mainstream music like KSCS/KPLX.
Maybe it's menopause. I've seen the Rock-to-Country thing happen more with women.
And I've seen a strange transition happen with many a 40-yr old over the last 10-15 years, where someone goes from Classic Rock or AC over to Country. Not just adding a preset, but changing their musical tastes to a completely different genre. Never could figure that one out. And we're not talking Classic Country or crossover AC stuff, just mainstream music like KSCS/KPLX.
Maybe it's menopause. I've seen the Rock-to-Country thing happen more with women.
MikeShannon914 said:Maybe it's menopause. I've seen the Rock-to-Country thing happen more with women.
It happened to me about age 50. The truth is "Today’s Country" wasn't that much different from Three Dog Night, The Doobie Brothers or The Eagles, except somebody added a steel guitar and a fiddle. I've even heard some "country" songs that also had a CHR version which, interestingly enough, left the steel and fiddle out of the mix.
I have since come to my senses and embraced the music I enjoyed from about age 14 to 25 or so. I have also embraced modern versions done in the same style. There are some talented musicians out there. The good news is I had very broad musical tastes. Still, I won't argue with D.E. or Lee Abrams on this point. I think that is a fairly correct assessment. The popularity Smooth Jazz and Christian AC is because are just extensions of the music popularized by Steely Dan and others, thirty plus years ago. History (and music) tends to repeat itself.
MikeShannon914 said:
"Beautiful Music" came from a generation raised on big band... using, at the beginning, big band songs in more lush arrangements. Thus, a progression.
Smooth Jazz came out of soft soul and r&b and a bit of new age, a derivitive of jazz and even pop derivitives. Sade, to name one, also had CHR and AC hits. A progression.
Chrisitian AC comes from people who grew up mostly on CHR and progressed to AC at the same time that they found strength in their faith. Also a progression.
Of course, I simplify. But look at how some folks went from Top 40 to progressive and hard rock, others from Top 40 to Hot AC to AC or Smooth Jazz... they are logical progressions. Even in the South some go from Top 40 or CHR to more modern country... still logical.
Rascal Flatts and Taylor Dayne and such sure sound like CHR pop with a tiny twang. It makes lots of sense, especially in higer profile country markets.
One of the things to think about is who is turning to SJ, C-AC, etc. In a lot of cases, at least anectodally, I'd say it's people who've run out of other options- they don't like their other choices and SJ or CAC is their least objectionable alternative (short of paying 14.95 a month to XM or Sirius)MikeShannon914 said:
We know that a lot of Oasis's audience was older and black. Okay, if you're a 55 year old black man, what station is going to appeal to you? The Edge? The Eagle? Classic rock? Country?
And I know a few soccer mom types who aren't particularly religious but listen to KLTY because the know it's 'safe for the whole family'. (You know, if they were smart, they'd market themselves using that phrase)...They know they don't have to worry about Eminem singing about killing his wife and stuffing her in a car trunk, and they'll never have to answer the question "Mommy what did that mean when he said 'she never even lost her head even when she was giving head" followed by "Mommy can we walk on the wild side someday?"
Chuck said:
Advertisers aren't ignoring the over 50 crowd, they're just not using radio to get to them. Ever watch your average cable news show? Viagra ad, mutual fund company ad, prostrate ad, mutual fund ad, life insurance ad, mutual fund spot, Just for men hair coloring ad, another viagra spot, mutual fund spot, followed by the chick that's fallen and can't get up.
Notice anything about them? Yep, most of them target older folks, who make up the majority of cable news watchers, And rather than have to buy a couple hundred radio stations around teh country, they buy one (or a couple) of networks, and they can probably get similiar reach, cost per million, etc.
They're not leaving it on teh table, they're just betting it on craps (or crap) (TV), instead of radio. They're betting it on the blackjack table (US News and World Report, Money, Time, etc) of magazines instead of radio...
little1 said:
The 55 year old black man is going to listen to KLUV, KSOC, KKDA or KHVN. Maybe KESN or KTCK if they are die hard sports fans. The talk stations may be appealing if the 55 year black man is conservative in nature, or just likes to hear from the "other" side.
I still think that a radio station can make money by marketing itself to the older demo. You may have to cut costs in other areas, but if you really research your demo and focus on the local ad dollars, their is money to be made.
But if you really think about it, there is not a station that targets black men in this market. The closest is KKDA. Thats why this market needs a black talk station.
I was using that as an example, but from your list, do you really think the Eagles, Rod Stewart, and some of theother stuff that KLUV plays now really appeals to a 55 year old black male? I think that's a default choice when there's nothing else...And the same with KHVN...I won't pretend to be an expert on what the urban stations are playing, and how they differ, but doesn't Heaven 97 lean gospel? If you're not particularly religious, do you think someone will listen to it willingly? Or are we back to an option of last resort?
Unfortunately, because of demographics, economics, etc, there are segments of teh audience that are both underserved and overserved. I think in this case, there's not a station specifically targeting older black males, so for them, it's what station is the next least objectionable...And liek you said, for some it'll be KKDA, KHVN, KSOC, etc etc...
Unfortunately, because of demographics, economics, etc, there are segments of teh audience that are both underserved and overserved. I think in this case, there's not a station specifically targeting older black males, so for them, it's what station is the next least objectionable...And liek you said, for some it'll be KKDA, KHVN, KSOC, etc etc...
little1 said:
Im just going by what my old man listens to. He likes the 60's oldies. So when I in the vehicle with him it was on KLUV or KKDA. KHVN is a last resort because the old man can not stand modern day gospel music. He is very old school.
And yes I think people will listen to gospel music if they are not religious. The old negro spirituals can touch a persons heart if they are not an every day/week church goer. Trust me, I know. In my earlier years I was not a church goer, but if a good ole gospel song came on I stayed with it.
There are some interesting responses over at Edison Media Reserach to this article:
For Some, Radio Is Still The Best Way To Hear Music
http://www.edisonresearch.com/home/archives/2008/05/for_some_radio.php
For Some, Radio Is Still The Best Way To Hear Music
http://www.edisonresearch.com/home/archives/2008/05/for_some_radio.php
It's after 11pm on a Saturday night, and the female announcer on The Bone sounds like she's talking to and trying to impres "13" year olds and those that are "13" mentally, even though teir bodies have moved on....
Just my take...
Notheing specific to give as an example.... it's just how it hits you in the gut.
Dallas Radio....
Whooooo Hooooo...
Just my take...
Notheing specific to give as an example.... it's just how it hits you in the gut.
Dallas Radio....
Whooooo Hooooo...
B
busyradioguy
Guest
Wonder if the KDBN microphone "smells like a beer".
TheRover said:
I think if "local radio" wants to stay relevant, perhaps it should be...um, local. I don't understand why Citadel, Entercom, CBS, etc. think putting on non-local content on their local stations is going to save them. It may have some real short-term cost savings to make profits look better, but long-term, how is this going to help?
How is Citadel putting a satellite "True Oldies" feed with Imus in the morning on stations in Atlanta and DC going to make those stations relevant? Or Entercom now testing 7-Midnight shows to network on its stations to remove a local shift (i.e. the 7-Midnight show on KAMX Austin simulcast on its other hot AC outlets around the country; apparently another one for its country stations soon to come)? For many urban ACs around the country, almost the entire day is now syndicated national shows from morning drive (Joyner or Harvery) to midday (Williams) to afternoon (Baisden) to night (Sweat Hotel). If the NAB keeps running ads about how great "local" radio is and how terrible those national satellite services are, how is what is current path broadcast radio is going down any different?
I may be naive, but I would think if you are faced with many challengers, you would want to construct something that people want to hear that is fairly exclusive. Love them or not, KKDA-FM and KTCK seem to do that. On fringe signals, KFWR and KHYI seem to be doing that. KGSR in Austin plays and interviews Texas artists in its mix and has a HD2 channel that plays all-local artists. Why run KEGL and KDGE as generic outlets with playlists that could easily be mistaken as from stations in Des Moines? Why not mix in a local rock band every couple of hours into the rotation to make them something different than what you could hear listening to the rock formats on XM or Sirius? In other words, why not make them something people in their signal coverage seek out?
- Status