• 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

Long awaited Bob vs. Jack analysis

  • Thread starter JohnnyMorganWXJX
  • Start date

J

JohnnyMorganWXJX

Guest
I'm back from a LONG weekend (Thurs PM to Mon AM) in SW Pennsylvania. First taste of 100.5 JACK-FM and 96.9 Bob-FM. I was within range of both of them the entire stay (I was in Washington Co. the entire stationary time, and in transit up and down I-79 otherwise).

As I listened, I tried to be a passive radio listener, and not an active radio geek. Hope I succeeded.

I shall state the good and bad according to station, and give my overalls at the end.

Bob-FM:

Stronger signal in the metro, but that's neither here nor there--Jack is out of Wheeling, as we all know.

Somewhat obscure musical selections--not just placement, but choice of stuff. All the right artists, but some real misses when it comes to "hits".

Definitely researched, but I wonder if a whole test was done before the format debuted. Not unheard of, especially if the "quickness" factor was a concern--beating Infinity to the draw. But I'd expect the music to change over the next couple weeks as the results of a test are read and interpreted.

Liners were weak. The two voice thing sounds distant. The guy (is it Dan Deely, from Cleveland?) and the girl (who is she?) sound like they were recorded in separate studios--which is likely. Writing was expected; little cheesy but not over the top. In line with some Jack stuff. But needs to be tightened up. We play anything.

I liked the "explanation" liner--the "Bob" voice "explaining" what the format was all about. Not a permanent thing, but a necessity when dealing/selling with this new thing to (a) the existing WRRK audience, and (b) to new listeners.

Female lean--definitely.

I could tell it was locally programmed, and locally board op-ed or auto-animated. Tightness that isn't seen with satellite delivery.

Commercial load was OK--no more than 4 in a row, if I remember right. Maybe dayparted, not completely sure.

The TOH ID is out-of-place. Same voice(s) doing liners should do the ID.

Jack-FM:

More male friendly, in my opinion.

Mainstream music mix--not as obscure as some Bob stuff.

Can tell it's off the bird--not as tight, moments before/after commercials where there's a bit of "air".

Liners are tighter, more hardened, and more "present" (cf. distant). Same general idea--we play what we want--but single male voice. No explanation liner--which may lead people who stumble across the station to wonder what's going on. (In my small survey of friends, no one knew about Jack or Bob. And one of them is a former station OM.)

Also, definitely researched. All the biggies, big artists, and some minor but not obscure hits. I'd heard everything they played on the radio before somewhere.

Not so much "local flavor" being satellite. Spots were national--some local stuff, but not like Bob.

Overall:

Thumbs up to Jack on music. Bob may be working out the kinks--and I'm willing to give them a short time to re-examine the music. In early stages, probably uber-watched by MD and PD. But for now, Jack's got the edge to average radio listener.

Thumbs up to Bob on being local. That's a key ingredient, even if auto-animated, that will show through shortly.

Thumbs up to Jack on the liners. It's a small point, but stuck out in my mind.

Thumbs up to Bob on the "explanation". That was an important thing that most people forget. KHJ essentially had an "explanation" in 1965--and Boss Radio/Drake format was the greatest phenomenon of the 1960s and early 1970s.

*****
Now, a side issue: this "thousands of songs" thing (the figure I always saw was 1200) has always been speculation by us radio geeks--especially on this board. Jack/Bob/Infinity, etc. have never come out and said it one way or the other. We just assumed.

But it was ALWAYS stated that Jack/Bob formats were highly and tightly researched. They probably don't have a tired 300 song playlist. But core artists (like Stefani, et al.) will be repeated; and even songs may be repeated. But you won't hear the same song in the same place always--necessarily. That's something that can't always be said for 3WS.

But Jack/Bob is still based on and playing by the same radio rules as Wish, DVE, 3WS, and Kiss: listeners want to hear their favorite songs when they turn on the radio. All Jack/Bob do is (a) put all those multi-format songs in one place, and (b) make it seem like it's a jukebox.

It is a highly intricate format that is to us radio geeks just liners and hodge-podge trainwrecks; to listeners, it's what they want to hear, all in one place.

I'm still not sold on it totally, but I'm warming to it.

<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Johnny Morgan on 11/08/05 05:03 PM.</FONT></P>
 
Considering that you are, like me, someone who left radio but who still maintains a strong interest, perhaps you can give me an answer to a few questions regarding what you've said in your posts other than "It is so because I say it is so because I work in radio. So there."

> But Jack/Bob is still based on and playing by the same radio
> rules as Wish, DVE, 3WS, and Kiss: listeners want to hear
> their favorite songs when they turn on the radio. All
> Jack/Bob do is (a) put all those multi-format songs in one
> place, and (b) make it seem like it's a jukebox.

But is that premise really and truly accurate? Specifically, when talking about aging Baby Boomers (which I realize is probably your parents and not you), isn't a more accurate description of their tastes that they want to hear their favorite ARTISTS when they turn on the radio? When targeting that particular demographic, is the song more important than the artist?

Since they started playing WDVE at work, and I hear it all day long, I've noticed that whenever they play a recording of a listener makine a request, it's usually "Can you play some Springsteen?" or "Would you play some Skynyrd?". Would the majority of listeners who were teenagers during the 60's, 70's, and early 80's who tuned in to hear classic rock really prefer hearing "Tell Me Something Good" by Rufus over hearing a lesser hit from one of Bruce Springsteen's early album?

> It is a highly intricate format that is to us radio geeks
> just liners and hodge-podge trainwrecks; to listeners, it's
> what they want to hear, all in one place.

Do you really believe that all listeners want to hear such a hodge-podge off music? Even if songs are well tested, none of them will ever test out at 100%. Wasn't the reason that all of the narrowly focused formats evolved in the first place was because research and testing proved that the mythical "mass audience" who liked everything was proven to not really exist?

Was the earlier research and testing wrong? Were the progamming experts who created narrowly focused formats all wrong?

Or was there a change in the testing and research methods?

Or was there a change in public taste, and what was proven by the programming experts in the 70's, 80's, and 90's to be key to success -- focused formats -- has become invalid because all of the listeners changed their minds?

How could the experts who created all of the focused formats have been so wrong for so long, and why is it that so many of the radio industry professional who swore by that conventional wisdom have turned 180 degrees to embrace the opposite concept?
 
Listeners are more "song" oriented than "artist" oriented.
A 25 year old may like "Louie Louie" but probably doesn't know who sang it.

A radio station needs to fill a "mood".

Ask a female what kind of music she likes, and more times than not, she'll say
"all kinds, depends on my mood".

The Jack/Bob station fills the "surprise me, let me have some fun mood".

Oldies stations should fill the "fun" mood. Rock - energize me mood.
Jazz a mellow mood etc..

A well programmed station fills a "mood", exhibits a "vibe". The music, imaging, dj's all contribute to the "mood".

Programming is simple if you look for, and fill, a "mood" listeners desire.
Of course that includes music researched and tested for that purpose.
 
> Considering that you are, like me, someone who left radio
> but who still maintains a strong interest, perhaps you can
> give me an answer to a few questions regarding what you've
> said in your posts other than "It is so because I say it is
> so because I work in radio. So there."

I appreciate the kind comments. I hope I succeed in being logical and explanatory.

> > But Jack/Bob is still based on and playing by the same
> radio
> > rules as Wish, DVE, 3WS, and Kiss: listeners want to hear
> > their favorite songs when they turn on the radio. All
> > Jack/Bob do is (a) put all those multi-format songs in one
>
> > place, and (b) make it seem like it's a jukebox.
>
> But is that premise really and truly accurate? Specifically,
> when talking about aging Baby Boomers (which I realize is
> probably your parents and not you), isn't a more accurate
> description of their tastes that they want to hear their
> favorite ARTISTS when they turn on the radio? When targeting
> that particular demographic, is the song more important than
> the artist?

I think that may be right in general. Notice I mention this exact point--that Bob seemed to have all the key artists, but sometimes were hit-or-miss with the songs. Asap makes a good point too, about "Louie Louie," but that's a song that transgressed the artist because the artist was minimal there (Kingsmen had only three "hits," and the other two wouldn't be caught dead on anything above 91.9--unless you're WJPA!).

Artists are key; and certain songs are key. The Beatles are a great (N.B. The Greatest) band, and a staple of many formats (oldies, classic rock, and probably even Bob). But given the choice of "Hey Jude" or "For You Blue"--you gotta go with the bigger hit. "For You Blue" is every bit as good, but "Hey Jude" tests better, and is more socially acceptable.

Every key artist will have certain songs that are megas--and the rest are flops (Springsteen's "I'm Going Down" won't be played when "Glory Days" is available). There are certain songs that will be mega hits, while the artist is a flop (think "Come On Eileen").

> Since they started playing WDVE at work, and I hear it all
> day long, I've noticed that whenever they play a recording
> of a listener makine a request, it's usually "Can you play
> some Springsteen?" or "Would you play some Skynyrd?". Would
> the majority of listeners who were teenagers during the
> 60's, 70's, and early 80's who tuned in to hear classic rock
> really prefer hearing "Tell Me Something Good" by Rufus over
> hearing a lesser hit from one of Bruce Springsteen's early
> album?

Well, the problem with this theory is that Bob isn't going after the people who tuned in to hear classic rock. They'd like to keep them, sure, but aren't focused on them. To keep some converts around who liked 97/RRK's classic rock stuff, they have a dose or two of Van Halen, or Springsteen for sure.

But "Tell Me Something Good" is a major hit--and it really can fit in with some pop/AC stuff. It's all about placement here. Trainwreck is fine...but derailment and spills are to be avoided.

> > It is a highly intricate format that is to us radio geeks
> > just liners and hodge-podge trainwrecks; to listeners,
> it's
> > what they want to hear, all in one place.
>
> Do you really believe that all listeners want to hear such a
> hodge-podge off music? Even if songs are well tested, none
> of them will ever test out at 100%. Wasn't the reason that
> all of the narrowly focused formats evolved in the first
> place was because research and testing proved that the
> mythical "mass audience" who liked everything was proven to
> not really exist?

I really do think that the hodge-podge can work. Sorry to be brief here, but I explain below, I hope.

> Was the earlier research and testing wrong? Were the
> progamming experts who created narrowly focused formats all
> wrong?

They may be. I think oldies, classic rock, AC were fine. But when we started getting into lite AC, modern rock, alternative, active rock, etc. we started getting hung up in details. Research can go only so far, and too far. 300 songs is too little: see, e.g., KRTH Los Angeles (a great station that has been at burn-out mode for the past 4 years because the playlist has been smoldering); and Jammin' Oldies, the primary example of narrowcasting with disasterous results.

> Or was there a change in the testing and research methods?
>
> Or was there a change in public taste, and what was proven
> by the programming experts in the 70's, 80's, and 90's to be
> key to success -- focused formats -- has become invalid
> because all of the listeners changed their minds?

That's a distinct possibility. Now, don't get me wrong, formats still work. But mega-researched, small, tired playlist formats are wearing thin. 300 is too small, but normally 1200 is too big. Some stations are realizing this, and settling in the 600-700 range. Slowly but surely.

This is where Jack/Bob makes its mark. It's a "big playlist" format that isn't.

> How could the experts who created all of the focused formats
> have been so wrong for so long, and why is it that so many
> of the radio industry professional who swore by that
> conventional wisdom have turned 180 degrees to embrace the
> opposite concept?

Well, it's not that experts were wrong--it's that they went overboard. As I said, research can only go so far and too far. Reading data resulted in narrowcasting, which was an idiotic thing to do. Every PD and consultant needs a "seventh sense" of what will work and what won't outside the Excel spreadsheet, so to speak. It was when some PDs decided to go full data and forget the human element that we got stupid ideas like Jammin' Oldies.

Jack/Bob is a rectification of that. We'll see if it works. Where Jammin' Oldies was too hot, Jack/Bob may be too cold. Or it may be just right.
 
Part of the "mood" is set by the DJ.

That's the weakness--and opportunity--of the Jack/Bob variety formats.
 
> Well, the problem with this theory is that Bob isn't going
> after the people who tuned in to hear classic rock. They'd
> like to keep them, sure, but aren't focused on them. To
> keep some converts around who liked 97/RRK's classic rock
> stuff, they have a dose or two of Van Halen, or Springsteen
> for sure.

If I am reading you correctly, is it accurate to say that Steel City Media's strategy is to gain a larger net share of total listeners by a two-part combination of (1) chasing away a portion of their former listeners and (2) replacing those chased away with an even larger number of new listeners? Are they hoping for some sort of "two new listeners gained for every old one lost" strategy?

If that is an accurate description of their strategy, how do they plan to reach those new listeners to persuade them to tune in and sample the new Bob format?
 
> > Well, the problem with this theory is that Bob isn't going
>
> > after the people who tuned in to hear classic rock.
> They'd
> > like to keep them, sure, but aren't focused on them. To
> > keep some converts around who liked 97/RRK's classic rock
> > stuff, they have a dose or two of Van Halen, or
> Springsteen
> > for sure.
>
> If I am reading you correctly, is it accurate to say that
> Steel City Media's strategy is to gain a larger net share of
> total listeners by a two-part combination of (1) chasing
> away a portion of their former listeners and (2) replacing
> those chased away with an even larger number of new
> listeners? Are they hoping for some sort of "two new
> listeners gained for every old one lost" strategy?
>
> If that is an accurate description of their strategy, how do
> they plan to reach those new listeners to persuade them to
> tune in and sample the new Bob format?

Well, I cannot speak for Steel City Media's plans.

But if what we read on this board is representative of the feelings of former Channel 97 listeners, most of the classic rock audience is gone.

But that's OK because Bob isn't catering to them anyway--much like, for example, if DVE was to go Hot AC, the rock fans wouldn't stick around, but DVE would be catering to a different set anyway.

Steel City's plan, in the aggregate, is surely to attract new listeners to Bob-FM. They'll keep some of the classic rock crowd--though Channel 97, while great musically, was a really small niche format that super-served the classic rock crowd. They got decent numbers, but stagnant growth.

The Bob-FM audience is, from what I can gather from the music and from trade reports on the whole "variety hits" trend, decidedly female. For the most part, Channel 97 wasn't getting the gals. So, in that sense, then yes, Bob will be seeking new audiences to replace the old classic rock crowd.

Is it 2 for 1? I dunno. We'll see about that.

But the interesting point is that Bob will be seeking to pull females from Star, Wish, 3WS, those that listen to K-Rock, even co-owned Lite Rock (though not as much). It's essentially trading audiences.

Should be interesting to see if it works.
 
It was when some PDs
> decided to go full data and forget the human element that we
> got stupid ideas like Jammin' Oldies.
>
Jammin Oldies was great until they started playing crap like "Believe" by Cher.

Or to not put too fine a point on it (and to not lay all the blame on Cher) Jammin Oldies was great until it got too white. I think that's an issue beyond radio programming, at least around here.
 
Jammin' Oldies

> It was when some PDs
> > decided to go full data and forget the human element that
> we
> > got stupid ideas like Jammin' Oldies.
> >
> Jammin Oldies was great until they started playing crap like
> "Believe" by Cher.
>
> Or to not put too fine a point on it (and to not lay all the
> blame on Cher) Jammin Oldies was great until it got too
> white. I think that's an issue beyond radio programming, at
> least around here.
>

It wasn't just in Pittsburgh. The format was a dud almost from the start (albeit an initially successful dud).

Take the best of Motown, add disco and other mid-70s soul (including blue-eyed), and some 80s R&B hits (also including blue-eyed stuff). Sounds good.

It wasn't.

The execution was perfect--Clarke Ingram's WJJJ was excellent, but as a concept Jammin' Oldies was just too narrow. It tried to compete against established oldies stations (like 3WS and WMJI) and failed, yet wasn't urban enough to get the urban AC crowd (ala WZAK in Cleveland--Pittsburgh now has (Majic), but didn't then have, an urban AC).

And adding things like Cher's "Believe" (which failed to be an "oldie" seeing as how it was a current!) just further showed how tough a format it was to program and keep lively.

And I know the problem with Cleveland's Jammin' Oldies station was a severely limited playlist (300 songs, maybe even less). It was uber-researched to the bone. Kool and the Gang, Earth Wind and Fire, and Chic gets old real quick when that's all you hear.

And, not to start race riots, but realistically it sure seemed like Jammin' Oldies was a misguided attempt to showcase black music to a white crowd. Because, remember, the disco fans were predominantly white (though EVERYONE of both races has now forsaken ever attending a discotechque or liking disco--unlike those great numbers of yinzers who claim they were at Roberto Clemente's last game).
 
VH analysis

What "weakness" are you talking about? Most of these stations are totally on- fire ratings-wise and their listeners are very vocal that the lack of typical DJ clutter is a POSITIVE, not a weakness.

The challenge for these stations will be in how they begin to weave personalities into the presentation. They'll fail miserably if it's "business as usual" in their approach with jocks.

>
> That's the weakness--and opportunity--of the Jack/Bob
> variety formats.> Part of the "mood" is set by the DJ.
>
 
> Steel City's plan, in the aggregate, is surely to attract
> new listeners to Bob-FM. They'll keep some of the classic
> rock crowd--though Channel 97, while great musically, was a
> really small niche format that super-served the classic rock
> crowd. They got decent numbers, but stagnant growth.

I don't think everyone working in radio realizes that the niche audience that WRRK did superserve was an extremely attractive niche for advertisers. Aging Baby Boomers are a great market to sell products to.


> The Bob-FM audience is, from what I can gather from the
> music and from trade reports on the whole "variety hits"
> trend, decidedly female. For the most part, Channel 97
> wasn't getting the gals. So, in that sense, then yes, Bob
> will be seeking new audiences to replace the old classic
> rock crowd.
>
> Is it 2 for 1? I dunno. We'll see about that.
>
> But the interesting point is that Bob will be seeking to
> pull females from Star, Wish, 3WS, those that listen to
> K-Rock, even co-owned Lite Rock (though not as much). It's
> essentially trading audiences.
>
> Should be interesting to see if it works.

Should be even more interesting to see how much WRRK now pulls away from WLTJ. It appeared that Steel City's former strategy was to use WRRK to reach old Baby Boomer males, and WLTJ to reach the wives of the WRRK listeners. Now it appears that they have two stations chasing the women.

And before anyone takes me too literally, by "wives" I simple meant Baby Boomer women, aka "Boomerettes".
 
Jack analysis

Because listeners and the technology used to deliver entertainment have both changed dramatically. Radio experts haven't been wrong- just slow to get a clue that most radio listeners were tired of the music repetition and cookie- cutter approach to music, jocks, imaging, etc. They just got fed up with the same old/same old and have been seeking out alternatives (Internet, Satellite, iPods) and those technologies have been swift to embrace these frustrated listeners.


>
> How could the experts who created all of the focused formats
> have been so wrong for so long, and why is it that so many
> of the radio industry professional who swore by that
> conventional wisdom have turned 180 degrees to embrace the
> opposite concept?
>
 
Re: VH analysis

> What "weakness" are you talking about? Most of these
> stations are totally on- fire ratings-wise and their
> listeners are very vocal that the lack of typical DJ clutter
> is a POSITIVE, not a weakness.

He has a point that DJs are but one factor that set the "mood". But Jack/Bob is proving that a mood can be successful without constant patter.

> The challenge for these stations will be in how they begin
> to weave personalities into the presentation. They'll fail
> miserably if it's "business as usual" in their approach with
> jocks.

*IF* they weave them in. I have no doubt that it can be done--but will many stations try it?

It's gonna take a very talented jock, and a very talented PD to make it work. It's not a matter of just opening the mike and back-announcing and reading slogans, it's gotta be done in the mold of the liners.

Now, that may sound easy. It isn't. It's an attitude, presentment, vocal styling that may need to be learned. Any DVE jock would fail if they did their 21st century underground jock thing on Bob.

I'm interested to see how jocks are woven into the presentation--and if listeners get attached to the jockless thing, if they will revolt against DJs.
 
Jammin' Oldies

Important point you make. Most in radio don't realize the genesis of Jammin' Oldies was a "big idea" by Steve Rivers, a sort of "radio-manufactured" format.

The Variety Hits format is a RESPONSE to growing listener frustration with repetition and narrow format concepts. Radio listeners were beginning to seek out alternatives and the whole V.H. approach was derived from what radio listeners told radio operators, which was mostly, "why should I put up with the same old thing every day when I can make a CD or download songs onto my iPod with all the songs I like most". What a concept.

>
> It wasn't just in Pittsburgh. The format was a dud almost
> from the start (albeit an initially successful dud).
>
> Take the best of Motown, add disco and other mid-70s soul
> (including blue-eyed), and some 80s R&B hits (also including
> blue-eyed stuff). Sounds good.
>
> It wasn't.
>
> The execution was perfect--Clarke Ingram's WJJJ was
> excellent, but as a concept Jammin' Oldies was just too
> narrow. It tried to compete against established oldies
> stations (like 3WS and WMJI) and failed, yet wasn't urban
> enough to get the urban AC crowd (ala WZAK in
> Cleveland--Pittsburgh now has (Majic), but didn't then have,
> an urban AC).
>
> And adding things like Cher's "Believe" (which failed to be
> an "oldie" seeing as how it was a current!) just further
> showed how tough a format it was to program and keep lively.
>
>
> And I know the problem with Cleveland's Jammin' Oldies
> station was a severely limited playlist (300 songs, maybe
> even less). It was uber-researched to the bone. Kool and
> the Gang, Earth Wind and Fire, and Chic gets old real quick
> when that's all you hear.
>
> And, not to start race riots, but realistically it sure
> seemed like Jammin' Oldies was a misguided attempt to
> showcase black music to a white crowd. Because, remember,
> the disco fans were predominantly white (though EVERYONE of
> both races has now forsaken ever attending a discotechque or
> liking disco--unlike those great numbers of yinzers who
> claim they were at Roberto Clemente's last game).
>
 
Re: VH analysis

And, most of the Jack/VH haters are disc jockeys who are scared to death of the concept that radio listeners might actually enjoy stations without all the useless jock interruptions. The best talent need not fear this- it's the marginal jocks who should be a clue.

You are also right-on about what it'll take to make personality work on these stations. But, it should be that same challenge for every station in every format. It SHOULDN'T be easy, it definitely SHOULD BE a challenge- it is how great radio is always done. Too many programmers have forgotten this.


>
> *IF* they weave them in. I have no doubt that it can be
> done--but will many stations try it?
>
> It's gonna take a very talented jock, and a very talented PD
> to make it work. It's not a matter of just opening the mike
> and back-announcing and reading slogans, it's gotta be done
> in the mold of the liners.
>
> Now, that may sound easy. It isn't. It's an attitude,
> presentment, vocal styling that may need to be learned. Any
> DVE jock would fail if they did their 21st century
> underground jock thing on Bob.
>
> I'm interested to see how jocks are woven into the
> presentation--and if listeners get attached to the jockless
> thing, if they will revolt against DJs.
>
 
Here's another way to look at it. Radio was right and still is right about focused formats. Even if the great majority of listeners will gravitate towards focus, there is a minority that wants variety. Even if stations like Bob appear as they don't have a niche, you could look at the lack of focus as a niche in itself.

Don't forget, in radio if you are getting a 6,7,or 8 share in your demo that is considered doing well. 90% of listeners could dislike the concept of Variety Hits, but if 10% love it, you will be looking at a successful radio station.




Considering that you are, like me, someone who left radio
> but who still maintains a strong interest, perhaps you can
> give me an answer to a few questions regarding what you've
> said in your posts other than "It is so because I say it is
> so because I work in radio. So there."
>
> > But Jack/Bob is still based on and playing by the same
> radio
> > rules as Wish, DVE, 3WS, and Kiss: listeners want to hear
> > their favorite songs when they turn on the radio. All
> > Jack/Bob do is (a) put all those multi-format songs in one
>
> > place, and (b) make it seem like it's a jukebox.
>
> But is that premise really and truly accurate? Specifically,
> when talking about aging Baby Boomers (which I realize is
> probably your parents and not you), isn't a more accurate
> description of their tastes that they want to hear their
> favorite ARTISTS when they turn on the radio? When targeting
> that particular demographic, is the song more important than
> the artist?
>
> Since they started playing WDVE at work, and I hear it all
> day long, I've noticed that whenever they play a recording
> of a listener makine a request, it's usually "Can you play
> some Springsteen?" or "Would you play some Skynyrd?". Would
> the majority of listeners who were teenagers during the
> 60's, 70's, and early 80's who tuned in to hear classic rock
> really prefer hearing "Tell Me Something Good" by Rufus over
> hearing a lesser hit from one of Bruce Springsteen's early
> album?
>
> > It is a highly intricate format that is to us radio geeks
> > just liners and hodge-podge trainwrecks; to listeners,
> it's
> > what they want to hear, all in one place.
>
> Do you really believe that all listeners want to hear such a
> hodge-podge off music? Even if songs are well tested, none
> of them will ever test out at 100%. Wasn't the reason that
> all of the narrowly focused formats evolved in the first
> place was because research and testing proved that the
> mythical "mass audience" who liked everything was proven to
> not really exist?
>
> Was the earlier research and testing wrong? Were the
> progamming experts who created narrowly focused formats all
> wrong?
>
> Or was there a change in the testing and research methods?
>
> Or was there a change in public taste, and what was proven
> by the programming experts in the 70's, 80's, and 90's to be
> key to success -- focused formats -- has become invalid
> because all of the listeners changed their minds?
>
> How could the experts who created all of the focused formats
> have been so wrong for so long, and why is it that so many
> of the radio industry professional who swore by that
> conventional wisdom have turned 180 degrees to embrace the
> opposite concept?
>
 
Re: VH analysis

> And, most of the Jack/VH haters are disc jockeys who are
> scared to death of the concept that radio listeners might
> actually enjoy stations without all the useless jock
> interruptions. The best talent need not fear this- it's the
> marginal jocks who should be a clue.

And I suppose you've conducted careful scientific research that supports your observation, right? It couldn't possibly be that some listeners just don't like having a mish-mash of musical styles slammed together, could it? It couldn't be that some of us fans of classic rock just don't like that disco crap, we didn't like it in the 70's, and we still don't like it now, and we hate to have to hit the station button every time a station plays one of those songs we've hated for over three decades, could it?

No, none of those things could possibly explain why we listeners really hate a music format. The only reason anyone could possibly dislike music is because they're former disck jockey.

You, sir, are full of sheep dip!
 
Re: VH analysis

I haven't individually done this research- this is the result of what radio listeners are telling radio operators who've carefully constructed this format, based on what listeners tell us they want.

It may be a "mish-mash" to you and other closed-minded "I hate anything that's not inside my little box of what radio should be" thinkers.

If we don't want radio to die in favor of the alternatives, radio MUST think outside the box and (this is critical) actually LISTEN TO THEIR AUDIENCE. Jack isn't a radio concoction- it is a response to what listeners are saying they want.

If you want classic rock, go to the classic rock station. If you like AC, go to the AC station. Not EVERYBODY only likes one narrow type of music. It is possible (hope you're sitting down) that not everybody thinks like you.
>
> And I suppose you've conducted careful scientific research
> that supports your observation, right? It couldn't possibly
> be that some listeners just don't like having a mish-mash of
> musical styles slammed together, could it? It couldn't be
> that some of us fans of classic rock just don't like that
> disco crap, we didn't like it in the 70's, and we still
> don't like it now, and we hate to have to hit the station
> button every time a station plays one of those songs we've
> hated for over three decades, could it?
>
> No, none of those things could possibly explain why we
> listeners really hate a music format. The only reason anyone
> could possibly dislike music is because they're former disck
> jockey.
>
> You, sir, are full of sheep dip!
>
 
Jack analysis

Great observation. And, in most markets, these stations are VERY successful.

You do realize most of the anti-Jack club are the same people who bitch and moan about "cookie-cutter" and "corporate" radio. When something unusual and different DOES become successful, they cry about that because it doesn't measure up to their limited view of what radio is supposed to be.


>
> Don't forget, in radio if you are getting a 6,7,or 8 share
> in your demo that is considered doing well. 90% of listeners
> could dislike the concept of Variety Hits, but if 10% love
> it, you will be looking at a successful radio station.
>
>
>
>
> Considering that you are, like me, someone who left radio
> > but who still maintains a strong interest, perhaps you can
>
> > give me an answer to a few questions regarding what you've
>
> > said in your posts other than "It is so because I say it
> is
> > so because I work in radio. So there."
> >
> > > But Jack/Bob is still based on and playing by the same
> > radio
> > > rules as Wish, DVE, 3WS, and Kiss: listeners want to
> hear
> > > their favorite songs when they turn on the radio. All
> > > Jack/Bob do is (a) put all those multi-format songs in
> one
> >
> > > place, and (b) make it seem like it's a jukebox.
> >
> > But is that premise really and truly accurate?
> Specifically,
> > when talking about aging Baby Boomers (which I realize is
> > probably your parents and not you), isn't a more accurate
> > description of their tastes that they want to hear their
> > favorite ARTISTS when they turn on the radio? When
> targeting
> > that particular demographic, is the song more important
> than
> > the artist?
> >
> > Since they started playing WDVE at work, and I hear it all
>
> > day long, I've noticed that whenever they play a recording
>
> > of a listener makine a request, it's usually "Can you play
>
> > some Springsteen?" or "Would you play some Skynyrd?".
> Would
> > the majority of listeners who were teenagers during the
> > 60's, 70's, and early 80's who tuned in to hear classic
> rock
> > really prefer hearing "Tell Me Something Good" by Rufus
> over
> > hearing a lesser hit from one of Bruce Springsteen's early
>
> > album?
> >
> > > It is a highly intricate format that is to us radio
> geeks
> > > just liners and hodge-podge trainwrecks; to listeners,
> > it's
> > > what they want to hear, all in one place.
> >
> > Do you really believe that all listeners want to hear such
> a
> > hodge-podge off music? Even if songs are well tested, none
>
> > of them will ever test out at 100%. Wasn't the reason that
>
> > all of the narrowly focused formats evolved in the first
> > place was because research and testing proved that the
> > mythical "mass audience" who liked everything was proven
> to
> > not really exist?
> >
> > Was the earlier research and testing wrong? Were the
> > progamming experts who created narrowly focused formats
> all
> > wrong?
> >
> > Or was there a change in the testing and research methods?
>
> >
> > Or was there a change in public taste, and what was proven
>
> > by the programming experts in the 70's, 80's, and 90's to
> be
> > key to success -- focused formats -- has become invalid
> > because all of the listeners changed their minds?
> >
> > How could the experts who created all of the focused
> formats
> > have been so wrong for so long, and why is it that so many
>
> > of the radio industry professional who swore by that
> > conventional wisdom have turned 180 degrees to embrace the
>
> > opposite concept?
> >
>
 
Re: Jack analysis

> Great observation. And, in most markets, these stations are
> VERY successful.

Yes, especially the fact that even "VERY successful" means that nine out of ten listeners do NOT like your station.

> You do realize most of the anti-Jack club are the same
> people who bitch and moan about "cookie-cutter" and
> "corporate" radio. When something unusual and different
> DOES become successful, they cry about that because it
> doesn't measure up to their limited view of what radio is
> supposed to be.

Yeah, like your limited view that when nine out of ten people dislike a particular format, it must because all of them are failed ex-disc jockeys.

> > Don't forget, in radio if you are getting a 6,7,or 8 share
>
> > in your demo that is considered doing well. 90% of
> listeners
> > could dislike the concept of Variety Hits, but if 10% love
>
> > it, you will be looking at a successful radio station.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Considering that you are, like me, someone who left radio
> > > but who still maintains a strong interest, perhaps you
> can
> >
> > > give me an answer to a few questions regarding what
> you've
> >
> > > said in your posts other than "It is so because I say it
>
> > is
> > > so because I work in radio. So there."
> > >
> > > > But Jack/Bob is still based on and playing by the same
>
> > > radio
> > > > rules as Wish, DVE, 3WS, and Kiss: listeners want to
> > hear
> > > > their favorite songs when they turn on the radio. All
>
> > > > Jack/Bob do is (a) put all those multi-format songs in
>
> > one
> > >
> > > > place, and (b) make it seem like it's a jukebox.
> > >
> > > But is that premise really and truly accurate?
> > Specifically,
> > > when talking about aging Baby Boomers (which I realize
> is
> > > probably your parents and not you), isn't a more
> accurate
> > > description of their tastes that they want to hear their
>
> > > favorite ARTISTS when they turn on the radio? When
> > targeting
> > > that particular demographic, is the song more important
> > than
> > > the artist?
> > >
> > > Since they started playing WDVE at work, and I hear it
> all
> >
> > > day long, I've noticed that whenever they play a
> recording
> >
> > > of a listener makine a request, it's usually "Can you
> play
> >
> > > some Springsteen?" or "Would you play some Skynyrd?".
> > Would
> > > the majority of listeners who were teenagers during the
> > > 60's, 70's, and early 80's who tuned in to hear classic
> > rock
> > > really prefer hearing "Tell Me Something Good" by Rufus
> > over
> > > hearing a lesser hit from one of Bruce Springsteen's
> early
> >
> > > album?
> > >
> > > > It is a highly intricate format that is to us radio
> > geeks
> > > > just liners and hodge-podge trainwrecks; to listeners,
>
> > > it's
> > > > what they want to hear, all in one place.
> > >
> > > Do you really believe that all listeners want to hear
> such
> > a
> > > hodge-podge off music? Even if songs are well tested,
> none
> >
> > > of them will ever test out at 100%. Wasn't the reason
> that
> >
> > > all of the narrowly focused formats evolved in the first
>
> > > place was because research and testing proved that the
> > > mythical "mass audience" who liked everything was proven
>
> > to
> > > not really exist?
> > >
> > > Was the earlier research and testing wrong? Were the
> > > progamming experts who created narrowly focused formats
> > all
> > > wrong?
> > >
> > > Or was there a change in the testing and research
> methods?
> >
> > >
> > > Or was there a change in public taste, and what was
> proven
> >
> > > by the programming experts in the 70's, 80's, and 90's
> to
> > be
> > > key to success -- focused formats -- has become invalid
> > > because all of the listeners changed their minds?
> > >
> > > How could the experts who created all of the focused
> > formats
> > > have been so wrong for so long, and why is it that so
> many
> >
> > > of the radio industry professional who swore by that
> > > conventional wisdom have turned 180 degrees to embrace
> the
> >
> > > opposite concept?
> > >
> >
>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom