• 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

Re: VH analysis

> RR ---
>
> You are right for a change:). Instead of 300 as to few and
> 2000
> as to many, take the average and you get:
>
> 1150 songs.
>
> That's just about exactly WHAT JACK'S PLAYLIST IS!
>
> Glad you have finally seen the light.

My objection to Jack is not the QUANTITY of their playlist, it is the QUALITY of the songs on the list, relative to each other. Regardless of what genre of music a station plays, I'd like it more if they had around 1150 really good songs from the same basic genre of popular music. If you read all of my objections to Bob (or Jack) it wasn't the size of their playlist, it was the incompatibility of so many of their songs. And I believe that most people who listen to the radio share my opinion. They might listen to a station that attempts to be all things to all people for a brief period of time, but eventually such a station will become their #6 button on their radio -- the one they only hit if the other five are on commercial breaks.

You yourself noted in a response to one of my other posts that Jack and Bob didn't play stuff like old C&W or Frank Sinatra classics, or the Harmonicats that playing that level of variety wouldn't attract listeners. So, you accept the principle that a line must be drawn regarding just how varied the variety should be. Since you accept that a line should be drawn, then the only thing to debate is where to draw it.

I submit that including old disco tunes with rock and roll is too much variety. You agree that including 1950's country western tunes with 1970's top 40 tunes is too much variety. If we both agree that some genres of music just don't play well together, why must you be so insulting about the fact that my opinion of what genres work together differs from your's?
 
Re: VH analysis

> REVENUE. 7 deadly letters.
>
> Look at successful Urban stations that don't make the money.
>
> Been a double edged sword for some time now. It's just a
> fact of business. You have to connect to enough listeners
> and those listeners have to connect to the products being
> sold and the advertisers have to see solid results.
>

ARRGGHH!!! That is exactly what I said about the fact that Jack or Bob stations are just background noise, and as a result, those who tune them in don't really listen to them enough for them to notice the messages in the commercials. And that's why I don't recommend that my clients waste their money buying airtime on Jack or Bob stations, regardless of their ratings.

That last line of yours should be engraved in stone on every radio professional's desk.

"THE ADVERTISERS HAVE TO SEE SOLID RESULTS".

Savvy advertisers have learned that its not enough that X people will have their radios tuned to a given station when their commercial is aired. It also matters whether or not those listeners ARE REALLY LISTENING. Elevator Muzak stations don't sell products. And Jack & Bob are modern elevator music.
 
VH analysis

No disagreement. Most, however, will not have the courage to do so. You see all the same posts I do, deriding Jack for being "hodge-podge" and "mish mash" and all the other "I don't get it, so I hate it".

> Jack/Bob/Variety Hits is an updated oldies staion with a
> bigger playlist than most oldies stations are allowed to
> have. Shouldnt the success of VH encourage others to climb
> out of that 300 song box that they live in?
>
 
VH analysis

The "quality" refer to is in the ear of the listener.

That being said, radio listeners in markets all over America are overwhelmingly saying "I love it!" to these V.H. stations.

Here's MY objection: radio (and ex-radio) people who are critical of the music approach on Jack & VH stations. You say the songs are incompatible, but real radio listeners don't hear it that way. As always, there's a difference between what radio people think things "should be" and the way it really "is".

You can keep dissing the V.H. music mix, but the listeners we serve like it--
a lot. So, in the end, it doesn't matter whether radio critics like it nor understand it.

>
> My objection to Jack is not the QUANTITY of their playlist,
> it is the QUALITY of the songs on the list, relative to each
> other. Regardless of what genre of music a station plays,
> I'd like it more if they had around 1150 really good songs
> from the same basic genre of popular music. If you read all
> of my objections to Bob (or Jack) it wasn't the size of
> their playlist, it was the incompatibility of so many of
> their songs. And I believe that most people who listen to
> the radio share my opinion. They might listen to a station
> that attempts to be all things to all people for a brief
> period of time, but eventually such a station will become
> their #6 button on their radio -- the one they only hit if
> the other five are on commercial breaks.
>
> You yourself noted in a response to one of my other posts
> that Jack and Bob didn't play stuff like old C&W or Frank
> Sinatra classics, or the Harmonicats that playing that level
> of variety wouldn't attract listeners. So, you accept the
> principle that a line must be drawn regarding just how
> varied the variety should be. Since you accept that a line
> should be drawn, then the only thing to debate is where to
> draw it.
>
> I submit that including old disco tunes with rock and roll
> is too much variety. You agree that including 1950's country
> western tunes with 1970's top 40 tunes is too much variety.
> If we both agree that some genres of music just don't play
> well together, why must you be so insulting about the fact
> that my opinion of what genres work together differs from
> your's?
>
 
Re: VH analysis

You keep missing my point, since you misquote it so blatantly. I DO "get it". That's WHY I hate it. I understand exactly what Jack and Bob seek to accomplish. It is because I understand what they do that makes me dislike it so much. And, that's why I'll never put a commercial for one of my clients on a Jack or Bob station, regardless of what the stations ratings might be.

> No disagreement. Most, however, will not have the courage
> to do so. You see all the same posts I do, deriding Jack
> for being "hodge-podge" and "mish mash" and all the other "I
> don't get it, so I hate it".
>
> > Jack/Bob/Variety Hits is an updated oldies staion with a
> > bigger playlist than most oldies stations are allowed to
> > have. Shouldnt the success of VH encourage others to climb
>
> > out of that 300 song box that they live in?
> >
>
 
VH analysis

I totally get your point. But, it's like you're saying "since I hate the whole approach, it's sure to fail".

If you're so narrow-minded and out-of-touch with radio in 2005 to say (and you said this, I didn't), "well, I know people will listen to this format and like it. It'll get ratings and even if it makes money, because I hate it, I'd refuse to put it on the air, even knowing it would be successful"-- that is truly backward thinking. You are now contradicting the stand you always take, about serving listeners. Heck, if they like Punk Polka and you can make money at it, GIVE IT TO THE PEOPLE. It's pretty simple, really- just like any good business model of supply & demand. If they demand it, you supply it and everybody goes home happy (except, of course, those who refuse to be happy).

> You keep missing my point, since you misquote it so
> blatantly. I DO "get it". That's WHY I hate it. I understand
> exactly what Jack and Bob seek to accomplish. It is because
> I understand what they do that makes me dislike it so much.
> And, that's why I'll never put a commercial for one of my
> clients on a Jack or Bob station, regardless of what the
> stations ratings might be.
>
> > No disagreement. Most, however, will not have the courage
>
> > to do so. You see all the same posts I do, deriding Jack
> > for being "hodge-podge" and "mish mash" and all the other
> "I
> > don't get it, so I hate it".
> >
> > > Jack/Bob/Variety Hits is an updated oldies staion with a
>
> > > bigger playlist than most oldies stations are allowed to
>
> > > have. Shouldnt the success of VH encourage others to
> climb
> >
> > > out of that 300 song box that they live in?
> > >
> >
>
 
Re: VH analysis

Actually, I didn't say that, someone else did. But you need to face two facts. First, the Jack and Bob formats are fairly new. They haven't been around long enough to prove whether they have any sort of legs, or if they are simply the latest flash in the pan fad that will draw today, and be forgotten tomorrow.

Second, the days when advertisers automatically threw money at large ratings numbers are also drawing to a close. Just as the radio industry has grown more sophisticated at testing song popularity, the advertising industry has also grown more sophisticated at testing advertising media effectiveness. This should surprise no one, since the same market research consulting companies have devised the testing procedures used by both industries.

But then, when one refuses to pay attention to any industry but the narrowest segment of the industry one works in, one is often taken by surprise. Anyone who intends to be truly successful in any industry pays close and careful attention to all related industries. Those who insist that anyone who doesn't work in the same narrow industry segment that they work in couldn't possibly know anything are fools.

All industry segments in the media are related. Those who attract audiences to rent out to advertisers and those who select which audiences to rent are two sides of the same coin. If you think that just drawing in huge ratings numbers will guarantee your success in the third millenium the way it used to back in the 20th century, then your experience hasn't made you wiser. It has fossilized your thinking.

Those who refuse to recognize the changes in how advertising decisions are made, yet who depend on the sale of commercial airtime for their bread and butter, are in for a very rude awakening.

Maybe you need to go to an broadcasters' retirement home, and have some conversations with the really old-timers who swore that their years of experience in the days of scripted radio dramas made them immune to the changes in radio that came about because of television. Because you sound like the 2005 equivalent of those who said back in the 1940's that television would never change the face of radio.

> I totally get your point. But, it's like you're saying
> "since I hate the whole approach, it's sure to fail".
>
> If you're so narrow-minded and out-of-touch with radio in
> 2005 to say (and you said this, I didn't), "well, I know
> people will listen to this format and like it. It'll get
> ratings and even if it makes money, because I hate it, I'd
> refuse to put it on the air, even knowing it would be
> successful"-- that is truly backward thinking. You are now
> contradicting the stand you always take, about serving
> listeners. Heck, if they like Punk Polka and you can make
> money at it, GIVE IT TO THE PEOPLE. It's pretty simple,
> really- just like any good business model of supply &
> demand. If they demand it, you supply it and everybody goes
> home happy (except, of course, those who refuse to be
> happy).
>
> > You keep missing my point, since you misquote it so
> > blatantly. I DO "get it". That's WHY I hate it. I
> understand
> > exactly what Jack and Bob seek to accomplish. It is
> because
> > I understand what they do that makes me dislike it so
> much.
> > And, that's why I'll never put a commercial for one of my
> > clients on a Jack or Bob station, regardless of what the
> > stations ratings might be.
> >
> > > No disagreement. Most, however, will not have the
> courage
> >
> > > to do so. You see all the same posts I do, deriding
> Jack
> > > for being "hodge-podge" and "mish mash" and all the
> other
> > "I
> > > don't get it, so I hate it".
> > >
> > > > Jack/Bob/Variety Hits is an updated oldies staion with
> a
> >
> > > > bigger playlist than most oldies stations are allowed
> to
> >
> > > > have. Shouldnt the success of VH encourage others to
> > climb
> > >
> > > > out of that 300 song box that they live in?
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
 
VH analysis

As usual, the following paragraph has NOTHING to do with my point.

>
> Maybe you need to go to an broadcasters' retirement home,
> and have some conversations with the really old-timers who
> swore that their years of experience in the days of scripted
> radio dramas made them immune to the changes in radio that
> came about because of television. Because you sound like the
> 2005 equivalent of those who said back in the 1940's that
> television would never change the face of radio.
>
> > I totally get your point. But, it's like you're saying
> > "since I hate the whole approach, it's sure to fail".
> >
> > If you're so narrow-minded and out-of-touch with radio in
> > 2005 to say (and you said this, I didn't), "well, I know
> > people will listen to this format and like it. It'll get
> > ratings and even if it makes money, because I hate it, I'd
>
> > refuse to put it on the air, even knowing it would be
> > successful"-- that is truly backward thinking. You are
> now
> > contradicting the stand you always take, about serving
> > listeners. Heck, if they like Punk Polka and you can make
>
> > money at it, GIVE IT TO THE PEOPLE. It's pretty simple,
> > really- just like any good business model of supply &
> > demand. If they demand it, you supply it and everybody
> goes
> > home happy (except, of course, those who refuse to be
> > happy).
> >
> > > You keep missing my point, since you misquote it so
> > > blatantly. I DO "get it". That's WHY I hate it. I
> > understand
> > > exactly what Jack and Bob seek to accomplish. It is
> > because
> > > I understand what they do that makes me dislike it so
> > much.
> > > And, that's why I'll never put a commercial for one of
> my
> > > clients on a Jack or Bob station, regardless of what the
>
> > > stations ratings might be.
> > >
> > > > No disagreement. Most, however, will not have the
> > courage
> > >
> > > > to do so. You see all the same posts I do, deriding
> > Jack
> > > > for being "hodge-podge" and "mish mash" and all the
> > other
> > > "I
> > > > don't get it, so I hate it".
> > > >
> > > > > Jack/Bob/Variety Hits is an updated oldies staion
> with
> > a
> > >
> > > > > bigger playlist than most oldies stations are
> allowed
> > to
> > >
> > > > > have. Shouldnt the success of VH encourage others to
>
> > > climb
> > > >
> > > > > out of that 300 song box that they live in?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
 
Re: VH analysis

Exactly and thank you

(of course, if you want to make sure and be formatically proper on this board, you should have filled your point with 5 or 6 paragraphs of "I'm not in radio but I know better" blather, as we've become so accustomed to).



> They didn't have enough listeners. That's why they changed
> the format. Of course they'd have to try to recruit new listeners.
 
Re: VH analysis

> Exactly and thank you
>
> (of course, if you want to make sure and be formatically
> proper on this board, you should have filled your point with
> 5 or 6 paragraphs of "I'm not in radio but I know better"
> blather, as we've become so accustomed to).

>>

Once again, being immature.

I guess that we always try to tell you that because you have a thick skull and refuse to listen to EXPERIENCE. And, nobody writes 5 or 6 paragraphs. Stop your senseless drama.

Why don't you drop the ego and take this forum and try to learn from it?

Mr. Music
 
VH analysis

There are a great many folks on these boards whose perspective I appreciate.
mrmusic, radiorealist and steppenwolf are not even close to being in that circle of accomplished, free-thinking radio pros.

And, please don't lecture me on "experience". Some of us have more real-time, successful radio experience in our pinky finger than a few of you (3) have all together.
>
> I guess that we always try to tell you that because you have
> a thick skull and refuse to listen to EXPERIENCE. And,
> nobody writes 5 or 6 paragraphs. Stop your senseless drama.
>
> Why don't you drop the ego and take this forum and try to learn from it?
>
> Mr. Music
>
 
Re: VH analysis

> There are a great many folks on these boards whose
> perspective I appreciate.
> mrmusic, radiorealist and steppenwolf are not even close to
> being in that circle of accomplished, free-thinking radio
> pros.
>
> And, please don't lecture me on "experience". Some of us
> have more real-time, successful radio experience in our
> pinky finger than a few of you (3) have all together.
> >

That is your narrow minded thinking. Just because the three of us have repeatedly tried to show you another aspect of a certain topic (which doesn't agree with yours) you stoop to childish behavior.

I don't care what your thoughts are about me personally. I do care that you show respect to those who have opposite opinions on issues that you do not agree with or contradict what you say. You are not always right.

I'll lecture you on experience if I feel it is warrented. Like right now. Do not demean my experience. My experience is "real time successful radio", of which I indeed have more than you. And, do not demean anyone else's experience or opinions. You so often take the lowest road, and start attacking. Once again, please read Dahn-nout's original post on the "so let me get this straight thread".

Please, once again I say to you, grow up or pollute another board.

Mr. Music
 
Re: VH analysis

> And, please don't lecture me on "experience". Some of us
> have more real-time, successful radio experience in our
> pinky finger than a few of you (3) have all together.

The point that you keep missing is that if you ONLY have radio experience, if you have no point of reference outside of talking into a mic in a little room, then you need to broaden your perspectives. Anyone with any common sense who works in ANY industry recognizes the need to fresh outlooks and perspectives from those who work in closely related industries.

You remind me of someone who worked in the auto industry for 45 years, bolting left front fenders onto Chevies on the assembly line. That person knew everything one could possibly know about left front fenders. He didn't know squat about motors, transmissions, or any other part of the car. But he was the world's top expert on Chevrolet left front fenders.
 
Re: VH analysis

Very rich. You goofs give me a hard time and tell me about "experience", then in the next post it's BECAUSE I HAVE RADIO EXPERIENCE I don't know what I'm talking about.

Thank GOD you guys are o-u-t of this great business.
 
Re: VH analysis

> Very rich. You goofs give me a hard time and tell me about
> "experience", then in the next post it's BECAUSE I HAVE
> RADIO EXPERIENCE I don't know what I'm talking about.
>
> Thank GOD you guys are o-u-t of this great business.

No, it's because you ONLY have radio experience. It's because you clearly don't know anything about anything OTHER THAN talking into a mic in a little room.

Thank God you aren't in a position to have any impact on anything else in the world other than reading liner cards into a mic in a little room.

It's a good thing you work in music radio instead of talk radio. Your lack of knowledge, experience, or understanding of anything other than music radio would mean you'd have absolutely nothing to say on the air about anything.
 
Re: VH analysis

> Very rich. You goofs give me a hard time and tell me about
> "experience", then in the next post it's BECAUSE I HAVE
> RADIO EXPERIENCE I don't know what I'm talking about.
>
> Thank GOD you guys are o-u-t of this great business.
>
I never said it's because you have radio experience. My whole point is for you to stop your blackballing people just because at the present time, they choose not to be in radio. And, as we pointed out earlier on different posts, we who are all out of radio are living pretty nicely.

Be more open-minded in your responses back to people who KNOW what good radio is albeit their checks are not signed by Clear Channel or Infinity or Susquehanna or whatever other radio group is out there.

Just because you are PRESENTLY working at a radio station, doesn't make you an authority. Nor, does it make your opinion the only one. Nor, whatever you write to be 100% correct.

Now, I'm sure you're going to post something in reply back to me, because just like a child, you always have to have the last word.

Mr. Music
 
VH analysis

OK, should I have manufacturing experience or IT experience to understand radio? Perhaps I should go work at Wal-Mart so I have some retail and that'll help me understand radio?

Burning question, as always, is WHAT THE HECK IS YOUR POINT?

Has it not occoured that between you and mrmusic, you two blokes are so out of your league? That's why you always dodge & weave around the real discussions because you two always throw stuff up w/nothing to support your point, then end up backtracking, changing the subject and personal attacks to weasle your way out of the corner you blabbed yourselves into.



>
> No, it's because you ONLY have radio experience. It's
> because you clearly don't know anything about anything OTHER
> THAN talking into a mic in a little room.
>
> Thank God you aren't in a position to have any impact on
> anything else in the world other than reading liner cards
> into a mic in a little room.
>
> It's a good thing you work in music radio instead of talk
> radio. Your lack of knowledge, experience, or understanding
> of anything other than music radio would mean you'd have
> absolutely nothing to say on the air about anything.
>
 
Re: VH analysis

> OK, should I have manufacturing experience or IT experience
> to understand radio? Perhaps I should go work at Wal-Mart
> so I have some retail and that'll help me understand radio?
>
>
> Burning question, as always, is WHAT THE HECK IS YOUR POINT?
>
>
> Has it not occoured that between you and mrmusic, you two
> blokes are so out of your league? That's why you always
> dodge & weave around the real discussions because you two
> always throw stuff up w/nothing to support your point, then
> end up backtracking, changing the subject and personal
> attacks to weasle your way out of the corner you blabbed
> yourselves into.


Bravo! clap clap clap! Once again, OldiesCat comes out ripping on people for no reason! Really OC, you must pollute another city's board. We are all getting bored with you.

By the way, you must be a liner card jock as my friend RR and others on this board assume. Otherwise, you wouldn't be constantly on this board. You would be focusing yourself on putting on a great show. But, then again, it doesn't take much to push a button!

Mr. Music
 
Peetsberg

same old blather. Very un-creative for an alleged agency hack.

(and, frankly, I frequent the PEETSBERG board just so I can take a break from top-level Programming to watch dumb and dumber duking it out with the rest of the REAL WORLD of radio. It's always good for a chuckle).

>
> Bravo! clap clap clap! Once again, OldiesCat comes out
> ripping on people for no reason! Really OC, you must
> pollute another city's board. We are all getting bored with
> you.
>
> By the way, you must be a liner card jock as my friend RR
> and others on this board assume. Otherwise, you wouldn't be
> constantly on this board. You would be focusing yourself on
> putting on a great show. But, then again, it doesn't take
> much to push a button!
>
> Mr. Music
>
 
Re: Peetsberg

> same old blather. Very un-creative for an alleged agency
> hack.
>
> (and, frankly, I frequent the PEETSBERG board just so I can
> take a break from top-level Programming to watch dumb and
> dumber duking it out with the rest of the REAL WORLD of
> radio. It's always good for a chuckle).
>

Then stay at the Peetsberg board.

Once again, you keep providing your childish behavior and comments to support what I am saying.

Thank you!



Mr. Music
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom