LATEST RATINGS: V-103 & WSB-AM/NEWS TIED FOR #1

[jabba17]

A little known fact is that True Oldies listeners are dying off at a faster rate than any other radioo station's listeners in Metro Atlanta. This downward death spiral will continue for the foreseeable future.

Not if True Oldies significantly freshens their playlist and plays less 60s and more 80s.

 

[Talk_Dude]

A little known fact is that True Oldies listeners are dying off at a faster rate than any other radioo station's listeners in Metro Atlanta. This downward death spiral will continue for the foreseeable future.

Not if True Oldies significantly freshens their playlist and plays less 60s and more 80s.

How many younger people who might listen to True Oldies if it played more 80's would tune it in to hear any new playlists if they didn't know True Oldies had moved their playlist up a few decades? Aside from the radio geeks who participate in here, does anyone really think that there are still large numbers of people who don't like oldies from the 60's who nevertheless faithfully check out True Oldies to see if they've started playing 80's songs?

An old timer in advertising once told me that if you're doing something that's keeping customers from shopping at your store, changing it won't do you any good unless you aggressively advertise to let your non-customers know you've made the changes. Look at the risk Papa John's Pizza took in admitting that their pizza was bad, but they fixed it and now it's good. Do you think anyone who disliked Papa John's bad old pizza would have tried their new pizza if Papa John's didn't heavily advertise?

If True Oldies (or any other station) makes changes to appeal to a wider or different audience, then they also have to advertise out the wazoo to let people know. Otherwise, they're wasting their time.

 

[TheRealOtherNeil]

A little known fact is that True Oldies listeners are dying off at a faster rate than any other radioo station's listeners in Metro Atlanta. This downward death spiral will continue for the foreseeable future.

Not if True Oldies significantly freshens their playlist and plays less 60s and more 80s.

Look at the risk Papa John's Pizza took in admitting that their pizza was bad, but they fixed it and now it's good. Do you think anyone who disliked Papa John's bad old pizza would have tried their new pizza if Papa John's didn't heavily advertise?

They did such a lousy job in advertising that their pizza wasn't good that you didn't know that it was Domino's ad campaign. If someone as astute as you didn't know which pizza was being re-branded, how do you expect the general public to know if True Oldies and their 5000-song play list is starting to skew towards the 1980's.

Another discussion for another day would be, when is the cut-off for an Oldie song? For me it is the day before The Ramones formed.

 

[Talk_Dude]

Look at the risk Papa John's Pizza took in admitting that their pizza was bad, but they fixed it and now it's good. Do you think anyone who disliked Papa John's bad old pizza would have tried their new pizza if Papa John's didn't heavily advertise?

They did such a lousy job in advertising that their pizza wasn't good that you didn't know that it was Domino's ad campaign. If someone as astute as you didn't know which pizza was being re-branded, how do you expect the general public to know if True Oldies and their 5000-song play list is starting to skew towards the 1980's.

Another discussion for another day would be, when is the cut-off for an Oldie song? For me it is the day before The Ramones formed.

For an advertising campaign to work, two things must be accomplished. Both require skill on the part of the advertiser. Get only one half of it right, and you fail.

1. You have to get your message out and clearly heard.

2. You have to get your name out and clearly heard.

If an ad campaign fails because it doesn't accomplish step #2, that doesn't prove that advertising doesn't work. It only proves that particular campaign wasn't well done.

Few things work if done badly, most things work if done well. But things that are never done at all never work.

 

[KevinFodor]

Any ideas on where WSB is getting its listeners from? WGST maintained share...or perhaps this was a pre-election pop boosting all newstalkers? Might it be from True Oldies?

I mentioned a couple of months ago that I thought WSB would generate NEW listeners.

I think some of those new listeners might be younger people who quite honestly don't even know what AM radio is.

Plus I think there are others like me who listen sometimes now because I have always been annoyed with the signal going in and out every time I go under a bridge, plus I honestly never really thought about flipping to AM unless I was stuck in traffic. Although I don't usually listen for very long, I just find it more convenient and I do find myself listening way more than before.

You are right on. There are younger people (most often around age 35 or so), who will tune into talk radio on FM. The AM audience today is largely (with just some exceptions) over 50 (or at least over 45)...and most people under that don't listen to AM radio...get under age 40 and you may even find people who've never listened to AM...

As far as True Oldies is concerned: the problem with playing music from the 50's and 60's is not and has never been that there's not an audience for it today. There certainly is. The problem is: the vast majority of that audience is no longer salable to the advertising community. WCBS-FM, though proved you can move the music up about 10 years, include some of the 80's play a few "timeless hits" from the early years as "spice", still get numbers, and still survive financially.

I don't get to listen to True Oldies...but, if they are, in fact playing 5,000 songs that is way too broad. I once helped tank a station, ratings-wise by playing a 2,000 song library...I learned the hard way focused playlists...even those that operate with a bit of a larger universe for "spice" and "oh wow" cuts which are sprinkled in is really the way to go...

 

[jabba17]

A little known fact is that True Oldies listeners are dying off at a faster rate than any other radioo station's listeners in Metro Atlanta. This downward death spiral will continue for the foreseeable future.

Not if True Oldies significantly freshens their playlist and plays less 60s and more 80s.

Look at the risk Papa John's Pizza took in admitting that their pizza was bad, but they fixed it and now it's good. Do you think anyone who disliked Papa John's bad old pizza would have tried their new pizza if Papa John's didn't heavily advertise?

They did such a lousy job in advertising that their pizza wasn't good that you didn't know that it was Domino's ad campaign. If someone as astute as you didn't know which pizza was being re-branded, how do you expect the general public to know if True Oldies and their 5000-song play list is starting to skew towards the 1980's.

Another discussion for another day would be, when is the cut-off for an Oldie song? For me it is the day before The Ramones formed.

True story: I had a dream the other night that I was listening to True Oldies and they played the Dead Kennedys' "California Uber Alles" in commemoration of Jerry Brown winning the California governor's race.

 

[jabba17]

A little known fact is that True Oldies listeners are dying off at a faster rate than any other radioo station's listeners in Metro Atlanta. This downward death spiral will continue for the foreseeable future.

Not if True Oldies significantly freshens their playlist and plays less 60s and more 80s.

How many younger people who might listen to True Oldies if it played more 80's would tune it in to hear any new playlists if they didn't know True Oldies had moved their playlist up a few decades? Aside from the radio geeks who participate in here, does anyone really think that there are still large numbers of people who don't like oldies from the 60's who nevertheless faithfully check out True Oldies to see if they've started playing 80's songs?

An old timer in advertising once told me that if you're doing something that's keeping customers from shopping at your store, changing it won't do you any good unless you aggressively advertise to let your non-customers know you've made the changes. Look at the risk Papa John's Pizza took in admitting that their pizza was bad, but they fixed it and now it's good. Do you think anyone who disliked Papa John's bad old pizza would have tried their new pizza if Papa John's didn't heavily advertise?

If True Oldies (or any other station) makes changes to appeal to a wider or different audience, then they also have to advertise out the wazoo to let people know. Otherwise, they're wasting their time.

I agree with all of the above, but it raises an interesting question: Will 80s music ever be accepted as "oldies" by both those who are nostalgic for that era, as well as those who came before and aren't? Will time continue to march on and accept the inevitable (large 80s playlists on oldies stations), or will it hit a wall like the "nostalgia" format did with the rock era?

It should be noted that the new "GenX" format stations are the "oldies" stations for 90s music. Will 80s be left in some kind of format limbo between traditional oldies stations and these new "GenX" stations?

 

[Talk_Dude]

It should be noted that the new "GenX" format stations are the "oldies" stations for 90s music. Will 80s be left in some kind of format limbo between traditional oldies stations and these new "GenX" stations?

The 1970's saw the beginning of genres of music separating, and radio stations specializing in only one genre. In the 80's, that became even more pronounced. Very few GenX'ers will identify their favorite types of music by decade. They'll identify it by genre. Some will retain their preference for metal music, or punk, or disco, or country, or pop, or soul, or funk, or hip hop. Stations who try to capture audiences by exploiting peoples' desire for the favorite music of their teen years will have to pick a genre, not just throw together a kludge of anything and everything that was a hit between January 1, 1981 and December 31, 1990. Back during the Reagan years, people who listened to a rock station that played mostly metal and hair bands would instantly change the station if they heard a rap or disco or synth-pop song. Now, three decades later, if a station was playing the same metal and hair band songs from the 80's, and they threw in a a rap or disco or synth-pop song from the same era, they'd get the same instant tune-out.

On the other hand, people who like hair bands and metal (or any other genre) back in the 80's liked hearing new hair band and metal songs. No station that played new music could only play the "hits", since no one knew for sure what new songs were going to be hits until they were exposed on the radio. Audiences that liked hair band and metal hits when the hits were new also liked new releases by the same artists, and they liked new releases from new artists that sounded like the hits they liked. When Kiss or Bon Jovi or Metallica or any other 80's band released new album, listeners looked forward to hearing the new songs from their favorite artists, or new songs from new acts in the same genre.

And those people who liked hearing the new songs from their favorite artists and new artists that sounded similar to their favorites will still enjoy new songs from their favorite artists. People who started liking Bruce Springsteen in the 70's, and who also likes his new hits in the 80's as he released them would also like his new music that has been released recently. Fans of Tom Petty, Paul McCartney, and all the other artists whose fans embraced new releases back in the 1980's would also embrace their current new releases, if only some station would play the new songs and give them exposure.

 

[htowler]

The new ratings are out (ratings tab-Atlanta). WSB is now tied with V103 for first place.

94.9 the Bull is having a heyday so far having their best ratings. Meanwhile, True Oldies is continuing its downward dive ranking 16th overall in ratings. I don't know if it's their music or their audience, but no other station has had a continuous downward slide compared to 106.7 FM.

Don't look now but B98.5 will have their Christmas music in a few weeks. It'll become the "listen while you celebrate your holidays station."

No suprise with the Bull Since legends was blown up to simulcast the Groove. Even the Legends site was redirected to the Bull

 

[secondchoice]

As far as True Oldies is concerned: the problem with playing music from the 50's and 60's is not and has never been that there's not an audience for it today. There certainly is. The problem is: the vast majority of that audience is no longer salable to the advertising community. WCBS-FM, though proved you can move the music up about 10 years, include some of the 80's play a few "timeless hits" from the early years as "spice", still get numbers, and still survive financially.

I don't get to listen to True Oldies...but, if they are, in fact playing 5,000 songs that is way too broad. I once helped tank a station, ratings-wise by playing a 2,000 song library...I learned the hard way focused playlists...even those that operate with a bit of a larger universe for "spice" and "oh wow" cuts which are sprinkled in is really the way to go...

There are a lot of posters, who feel that 106.7 could be “healed” by tightening the play list, remember: Fox 97 “Good times and EIGHT oldies.” IIRC Cox bought this successful station and proceeded to “tighten” the play list. A couple of years Fox was gone. Cox has had (and is having) success in the past with tight playlists but it did not work on 97.1 in Atlanta with the oldie format. Radio is “unique” in that some markets have a quirk or two. Example WDVE which is AOR is #1 in Pittsburgh. How many AOR stations are left? San Diego with 27% Hispanic only has 3 non English speaking stations in the top 20. IMHO part of 106.7’s early success is due in part to having a small commercial load. I know commercials equal revenue, but the satellite “break fill” songs is where the real variety is in this format. Except for dive shifts this format is very cheap to run. If Citadel would limit 106.7 to 6 or 7 minutes of commercials an hour, (which is about the same as 97.1 if you add in time used by the liners reminding you of “52 minutes” of commercial free music every hour,) the station would regain it’s “uniqueness”. If True Oldies goes too far into the 70’s and 80’s they will loose their “core” 45+ audience. I can listen to the 70’s and 80’s on 97.1 with out the commercial clutter. BTW I agree that pre “British Invasion” songs should be limited to no more that a one an hour.

 

[jabba17]

The 1970's saw the beginning of genres of music separating, and radio stations specializing in only one genre. In the 80's, that became even more pronounced. Very few GenX'ers will identify their favorite types of music by decade. They'll identify it by genre. Some will retain their preference for metal music, or punk, or disco, or country, or pop, or soul, or funk, or hip hop. Stations who try to capture audiences by exploiting peoples' desire for the favorite music of their teen years will have to pick a genre, not just throw together a kludge of anything and everything that was a hit between January 1, 1981 and December 31, 1990. Back during the Reagan years, people who listened to a rock station that played mostly metal and hair bands would instantly change the station if they heard a rap or disco or synth-pop song. Now, three decades later, if a station was playing the same metal and hair band songs from the 80's, and they threw in a a rap or disco or synth-pop song from the same era, they'd get the same instant tune-out.

On the other hand, people who like hair bands and metal (or any other genre) back in the 80's liked hearing new hair band and metal songs. No station that played new music could only play the "hits", since no one knew for sure what new songs were going to be hits until they were exposed on the radio. Audiences that liked hair band and metal hits when the hits were new also liked new releases by the same artists, and they liked new releases from new artists that sounded like the hits they liked. When Kiss or Bon Jovi or Metallica or any other 80's band released new album, listeners looked forward to hearing the new songs from their favorite artists, or new songs from new acts in the same genre.

And those people who liked hearing the new songs from their favorite artists and new artists that sounded similar to their favorites will still enjoy new songs from their favorite artists. People who started liking Bruce Springsteen in the 70's, and who also likes his new hits in the 80's as he released them would also like his new music that has been released recently. Fans of Tom Petty, Paul McCartney, and all the other artists whose fans embraced new releases back in the 1980's would also embrace their current new releases, if only some station would play the new songs and give them exposure.

And you have a point; back in the 1970s the only major genres (within the scope of this discussion) were pop, AOR, country, and soul/R&B. You didn't have classic AOR, metal/punk/alt, synth pop, New Wave, whitebread dance, rap, etc.

Leaving out the urban and country formats (to limit the scope of this discussion to something manageable), you have "slices" of 80s pop and rock of mainstream pop, proto-alternative (classic MTV stuff that didn't make it in the Top 40), classic/mainstream AOR, and various flavors of metal, and probably others.

Most "80s" stations play mainstream pop and the more popular of the proto-alternative tunes. That has led many of them to become "80s and more" (i.e., 90s). AOR (regardless of decade) still finds a spot on the dial in most places. The odd men out seem to be distinctly 80s metal (i.e., hair bands that didn't chart and therefore don't make it on 80s stations) and classic alt, which tends to get only a token number of spins on "GenX" format stations in favor of more critically acclaimed 90s stuff (i.e., more Nirvana, less Duran Duran).

The real dollars-and-cents question is this: Do enough baby boomers still listen (or would be willing to listen) to radio to make playing 1960s oldies worthwhile through spot sales? If not, wouldn't it be a good move to add 80s pop (defined as music that made the Billboard top 40 of the Hot 100 in the 80s, regardless of genre) to oldies formats, and move the format up a decade?

Nobody seems to want to play hair bands--not classic rock stations, and certainly not any station that bills itself as "alternative". Where might this music fit--not saying it does, and not saying it's worth playing, although classic rock seems to be the best fit. It's certainly enough of a GenX cultural touchstone to make asking the question worthwhile.

Meanwhile, why do "GenX" classic-alt stations have such an aversion to 80s alternative? Most of these stations play very little 80s except for REM, Talking Heads, and U2. The way the media portrays it, GenXers (going up almost to age 50 today!) listened to nothing but classic rock until the 90s hit, ignoring this phenomenon that came and went called MTV (they used to play these things called "music videos"--send me a PM if you want an explanation of what a "music video" was), as well as the influence of 80s college radio. Is this a case of radio being blind then and still being blind today? It almost seems more like an attempt to catch the 90s alt radio lightning in a bottle a second time.

The fact that classic rock radio doesn't break new songs by classic artists is a whole other issue, and one I never understood as well. Classic rock on satellite does a much better job of this.

 

[Talk_Dude]

The real dollars-and-cents question is this: Do enough baby boomers still listen (or would be willing to listen) to radio to make playing 1960s oldies worthwhile through spot sales? If not, wouldn't it be a good move to add 80s pop (defined as music that made the Billboard top 40 of the Hot 100 in the 80s, regardless of genre) to oldies formats, and move the format up a decade?

As a Baby Boomer, I'd start listening to a radio station that played the rock music of the 60's and 70's if they'd also play new music that sounded like the "classic" rock music of the 60's and 70's. If it was just a rehash of old hits, I'll stick to my own record collection, thank you. Back in the 60's and 70's, hearing new good sounding songs was as much a part of the entire radio experience as hearing the hits. There was a constant stream of new songs coming out that still had the same basic genre sound as the stuff we liked. And to be honest, even though many of us bought a lot of albums, none of us could afford to buy all of the albums. There were often "new" songs that were simply the second (or third or fourth) single release off of an existing album.

So, if a station played the rock hits of the 60's and 70's, without the pop junk (like Vickie Carr), and seasoned the mix with a reasonable number of album cuts from the era that might have been hits had they been promoted, and promoted it well to let us know it existed (because I guarantee we'll never stumble across it by accident), it has as good a chance at success as any other format. However, if anyone were to try it (and to the best of my knowledge, no one has), don't be surprised if a lot of younger listeners decide they'd prefer listening to Jimi Hendrix or the Doors to much of the modern rock that's out there.

Nobody seems to want to play hair bands--not classic rock stations, and certainly not any station that bills itself as "alternative". Where might this music fit--not saying it does, and not saying it's worth playing, although classic rock seems to be the best fit. It's certainly enough of a GenX cultural touchstone to make asking the question worthwhile.

That is an accurate and true observation. And yet, in many parts of the country, bar bands that play "hair band" music, either covers or new compositions that sound authentic to the period, seem to have plenty of work playing live gigs. Go figure!

Meanwhile, why do "GenX" classic-alt stations have such an aversion to 80s alternative? Most of these stations play very little 80s except for REM, Talking Heads, and U2. The way the media portrays it, GenXers (going up almost to age 50 today!) listened to nothing but classic rock until the 90s hit, ignoring this phenomenon that came and went called MTV (they used to play these things called "music videos"--send me a PM if you want an explanation of what a "music video" was), as well as the influence of 80s college radio. Is this a case of radio being blind then and still being blind today? It almost seems more like an attempt to catch the 90s alt radio lightning in a bottle a second time.

That's what you'd expect when the decisions are being made by people who only look at labels, and who don't listen to the music. GenX classic music didn't spring into being when the digits on the calendar rolled over. But too many suits act like the changeover of a decade on the calendar has some sort of arcane, mystical significance.

The fact that classic rock radio doesn't break new songs by classic artists is a whole other issue, and one I never understood as well. Classic rock on satellite does a much better job of this.

Perhaps that's why Classic Rock stations are starting to have the same problem that Oldies stations are having.

 

[jabba17]

The fact that classic rock radio doesn't break new songs by classic artists is a whole other issue, and one I never understood as well. Classic rock on satellite does a much better job of this.

Perhaps that's why Classic Rock stations are starting to have the same problem that Oldies stations are having.

If there is something that the record industry should be pushing hard, it's to get new material by old artists on the radio where it fits. People aren't going to buy another copy of Dark Side of the Moon because they heard "Money" for the umpteenth time this week, but they might buy Rockford by Cheap Trick, Corporate America by Boston, or "Not Tonight" by The New Cars if exposed to them.

Digging deeper, is the issue...
--The fact that the Big Four major labels have dropped a lot of old artists, leaving smaller labels (who might not have the promotion staff) to sign them? All three of the examples I mentioned are on small indy labels, despite back catalogs on the majors.
--The fact that new songs by classic artists don't have the familiarity hooks required for classic AOR, whether in a ballroom study or in actual listening (with or without button-pushing), in a PPM world?
--Tight playlists that don't leave room for new, figuratively untested stuff?
--What people expect from classic rock radio (the consistent "McDonald's hamburger")?