• 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

new ratings out

raccoonradio

raccoonradio

<font color="RED">[CANNOT LINK]</FONT>

Show All Markets, then Boston

the AAR stations each go up very slightly. Mike stays the same. 'RKO and 'TKK
both go down. 'BOQ up a very small tick--Red Sox?
Oldies 103 up by a very small tick--what would have happened if 93.7 hadn't
switched to Mike, and O-103.3 had gone Jack instead?<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by cabradio on 09/20/05 09:27 PM.</FONT></P>
 
Raccoon,

Oldies 103 has proven to be one of the most consistent stations in the market. Starz had its audience, but Oldies never lost to Starz 93.7, did it?

96.9 was doing well when it was - what? smooth jazz or something? They just didn't want to compete with their own MAGIC, and BOS continues to rake in the advertising dollars despite having no ratings to speak of.

The entertainment value of radio has been flat for the past couple of years, so in the bigger scheme of things, nothing much has changed for the Corporations that hold all the cards. That's the real pity of it all. Radio was somewhat fun, now it's just no fun at all. I'm not name-calling here - the whole thing - radio - needs a good overhaul.



>
> Show All Markets, then Boston
>
> the AAR stations each go up very slightly. Mike stays the
> same. 'RKO and 'TKK
> both go down. 'BOQ up a very small tick--Red Sox?
> Oldies 103 up by a very small tick--what would have happened
> if 93.7 hadn't
> switched to Mike, and O-103.3 had gone Jack instead?
>
 
> 96.9 was doing well when it was - what? smooth jazz or
> something? They just didn't want to compete with their own
> MAGIC...

Do you think a 2.0 or a 2.3 is "doing well"?
 
> the AAR stations each go up very slightly.

Why is WXKS-AM still listed as Adult Standards, and why aren't they and WKOX rated together as a simulcast?
 
> [CANNOT LINK]
>
> Show All Markets, then Boston
>
> the AAR stations each go up very slightly. Mike stays the
> same. 'RKO and 'TKK
> both go down. 'BOQ up a very small tick--Red Sox?
> Oldies 103 up by a very small tick--what would have happened
> if 93.7 hadn't
> switched to Mike, and O-103.3 had gone Jack instead?
>


Mike isn't doing as well as some other Variety Hits stations are across the U.S. This fits the pattern I have noticed that Variety Hits stations are doing better in Midwestern and Midsouthern cities such as St Louis and Nashville than large coastal markets.

WROR could be another factor. WROR is the only Classic Hits station I know of that actually plays some classic soul/R&B. Yes, they are all big crossover songs and artists, but it's still a genre of music other Classic Hits stations across the country won't touch. This helps give WROR a perception of variety and makes them less vulnerable to a station like Mike. In fact, I noticed WROR is actually slowly trending up, while in many other markets the pre-existing Classic Hits station trends down once a Variety Hits station enters the scene.

I noticed that WBCN trended down to one of their lower levels. I checked out a recent sample hour (I'm not in Boston) and was rather upset to see that they played "Girls Girls Girls" by Motley Crue. I knew they shifted more rock and less alternative, but I was surprised they would play 80s hair metal. My brother attended Boston University the exact year "Girls Girls Girls" came out and he would send me tapes of WBCN. I thought they were the coolest station ever. One of the reasons I liked them so much was that they didn't play dumbed down hair/tattoo bands like Motley Crue. WBCN was so much more "civilized" than that. I would never have guessed close to 20 years latter BCN would be playing "Girls Girls Girls". Isn't there any other way they could have evolved through the years without going in that direction?
 
Well, the choice was between the jazzy 96.9 and WBOS, and look at WBOS' #s.
Down there with WFNX. But FNX doesn't have the signal. Give WFNX the WBOS
50,000 watts and WBCN is in serious trouble.

2.0 and 2.3 were not the consistent #s, if I recall. Weren't they higher than that in some books? You tell us, you appear to be the expert without giving years, time frames, and other hard data that you could provide without (up to the limit) infringing on Arbitron's copyright.

>
> Do you think a 2.0 or a 2.3 is "doing well"?
>
> > 96.9 was doing well when it was - what? smooth jazz or
> > something? They just didn't want to compete with their
> own
> > MAGIC...
 
> Well, the choice was between the jazzy 96.9 and WBOS, and
> look at WBOS' #s.
> Down there with WFNX.

I was told by a former GM employee that despite the low numbers, WBOS is the second highest biller in their five-station cluster (second to WMJX) due to the affluence of it's target demo. It bills higher than WROR, WTKK, or WKLB.

> Give WFNX the WBOS 50,000 watts and WBCN is in serious trouble.

I don't believe that at all. WFNX's signal isn't all that bad in metro Boston, not bad enough to be fully responsible for it's low ratings. WFNX used to rate somewhat better in years past than it has lately with the same signal. Then again, some argue that WFNX's audience may consist largely of college students who may fall through the Arbitron cracks. If they show any improvement after getting their new transmitter on the State Street Bank building on the air, that will show whether their signal is actually a factor.

On a signal related note, I noticed that WBOT ticked up a bit, which may have been due to their new antenna on Blue Hill improving their signal in town.
 
I also noted that WJMN-94.5 and WXKS-107.9 both got a very slight "Summer Bounce", but I don't think it's as much of a bounce that one would normally expect during the Summer months from young-leaning formats like CHR/Top-40 and Rhythmic CHR. Traditionally, young-leaning formats have their best book in the Summer, due to the fact that young people are out of school and have more time to listen to the radio than during the rest of the year.

Or did WBOT's rise (likely due to their new improved signal) draw away listeners who might otherwise have listened to Jammin' and Kiss??

To answer questions about whether WFNX-101.7 would have gotten higher ratings if it had the signal of the "big" FM stations??

Five years ago, I would have answered "Yes!!!".

Today, I'd have to answer "No".

Rock radio is in a serious decline. It's not cyclical. Rap and hip-hop have become quite popular with young adult males, the traditional target audience of rock stations. And rock radio has suffered.

If WFNX today had the same signal as WBOS-92.9 (or any of Greater Media's local FM stations) does, it might do one-tenth of a point better in 12-plus and maybe two-tenths better in the station's target demo. In overall audience, 'FNX would still be under a one. Five to ten years ago, 'FNX on a big signal would have gotten a share of to four in 12-plus.

'FNX should throw in the towel and change formats (Mr. Mindich, there's a HUGE hole in Boston for a Spanish-language format!). But as long as Steve Mindich is owner, it won't change formats, even if it starts failing to show up in Arbitron books and begins to lose money. The way things are going, both could happen to 'FNX within the next year.
 
Boston Ratings is Boring back then , and boring right now.
 
fccfight said:
Raccoon,

Oldies 103 has proven to be one of the most consistent stations in the market. Starz had its audience, but Oldies never lost to Starz 93.7, did it?

96.9 was doing well when it was - what? smooth jazz or something? They just didn't want to compete with their own MAGIC, and BOS continues to rake in the advertising dollars despite having no ratings to speak of.

The entertainment value of radio has been flat for the past couple of years, so in the bigger scheme of things, nothing much has changed for the Corporations that hold all the cards. That's the real pity of it all. Radio was somewhat fun, now it's just no fun at all. I'm not name-calling here - the whole thing - radio - needs a good overhaul.



>
> Show All Markets, then Boston
>
> the AAR stations each go up very slightly. Mike stays the
> same. 'RKO and 'TKK
> both go down. 'BOQ up a very small tick--Red Sox?
> Oldies 103 up by a very small tick--what would have happened
> if 93.7 hadn't
> switched to Mike, and O-103.3 had gone Jack instead?
>
Click to expand...

Actually just FYI, Greater Media was all set to blow up WBOS back in the Fall of '99 when they suddenly had a ratings uptick. They decided in a 5 minute meeting to blow up WSJZ instead!
 
Are these 25-54 ratings? Or should I ignore this entire posting?

Those are the only two options.
 
Jay_F said:
> [CANNOT LINK]
>


I noticed that WBCN trended down to one of their lower levels. I checked out a recent sample hour (I'm not in Boston) and was rather upset to see that they played "Girls Girls Girls" by Motley Crue. I knew they shifted more rock and less alternative, but I was surprised they would play 80s hair metal. My brother attended Boston University the exact year "Girls Girls Girls" came out and he would send me tapes of WBCN. I thought they were the coolest station ever. One of the reasons I liked them so much was that they didn't play dumbed down hair/tattoo bands like Motley Crue. WBCN was so much more "civilized" than that. I would never have guessed close to 20 years latter BCN would be playing "Girls Girls Girls". Isn't there any other way they could have evolved through the years without going in that direction?
Click to expand...

Much of the great rock music these days is out of the British Isles. If they dropped Motley Crue and spun Bell X1's "Rocky Takes a Lover", well, then I'd listen. British/Irish music is more melodic and has more sophisticated song structure. The angry moping stuff often on US rock stations can have only limited appeal.
 
bjohns said:
Are these 25-54 ratings? Or should I ignore this entire posting?

Those are the only two options.
Click to expand...

12+ rarings are better than no ratings at all.

And they show generral overall trends...that more often than not mirror what is happening in 25-54.
 

12+ rarings are better than no ratings at all.

And they show generral overall trends...that more often than not mirror what is happening in 25-54.


[/quote]

Really? I thought 12+ numbers had lots of old people. That's why AM news stations tend to do better in 12+ but not nearly so well 25-54.
 
Retro said:
fccfight said:
Raccoon,

Oldies 103 has proven to be one of the most consistent stations in the market. Starz had its audience, but Oldies never lost to Starz 93.7, did it?

96.9 was doing well when it was - what? smooth jazz or something? They just didn't want to compete with their own MAGIC, and BOS continues to rake in the advertising dollars despite having no ratings to speak of.

The entertainment value of radio has been flat for the past couple of years, so in the bigger scheme of things, nothing much has changed for the Corporations that hold all the cards. That's the real pity of it all. Radio was somewhat fun, now it's just no fun at all. I'm not name-calling here - the whole thing - radio - needs a good overhaul.



>
> Show All Markets, then Boston
>
> the AAR stations each go up very slightly. Mike stays the
> same. 'RKO and 'TKK
> both go down. 'BOQ up a very small tick--Red Sox?
> Oldies 103 up by a very small tick--what would have happened
> if 93.7 hadn't
> switched to Mike, and O-103.3 had gone Jack instead?
>
Click to expand...

Actually just FYI, Greater Media was all set to blow up WBOS back in the Fall of '99 when they suddenly had a ratings uptick. They decided in a 5 minute meeting to blow up WSJZ instead!
Click to expand...

that's what you were fed in the newspaper....
 
Well that may very well be the case, however being in the know, the switch was very surprising to all those who worked there.
 
bjohns said:
Keith321 said:
12+ ratings are better than no ratings at all.

And they show generral overall trends...that more often than not mirror what is happening in 25-54.
Click to expand...

Really? I thought 12+ numbers had lots of old people. That's why AM news stations tend to do better in 12+ but not nearly so well 25-54.
Click to expand...

Well they do, the include 55+'s......but they also include young people too...under 25's.

However, 12+ does include all the 25-54's too. So take it with a grain of salt, it may inflate some stations that cater to older demo's....or that cater to teens.

But overall if thats the only numbers you can work with...it does show overall trends....and trends. If a station is losing a muck of listeners in the 12+ numbers....usually they are losing them 25-54 as well.
 
with no access to the ratings, who showed up on the " honorable mention" bottom end of the list....you know, stations that are on the fringe, etc.?
 
faderraider said:
with no access to the ratings, who showed up on the " honorable mention" bottom end of the list....you know, stations that are on the fringe, etc.?
Click to expand...

You have access to the 12+ (only) ratings right here on Radio-Info. Scroll up to the top of the page, click the "Ratings" link, and see for yourself.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom