old country geezers out on camel county 107.9 fm hd2

[davideduardo]

I'm not blaming the stations here but the advertisers sure could use some education. And the rest of us could stop using the same old tired "worn out" mantra.

The majority of large advertisers have plenty of research showing why they should not be targeting 55+. It starts with more fully-engrained brand preferences and extends to general skepticism about ads in general. So, to convince anyone in the geezer demos, it takes many more ads.

It's not an issue of how much money seniors have. It is an issue of having to run so many ads so many times to produce a sale that there is no profit in it.

 

[landtuna]

Let me ask a simple question: If your friends don't listen to OTA specifically because of the commercials, why should an advertiser have any reason to think that his advertising will have any impact on your friends? You seem to be saying that advertising is a turn off, and thus is money wasted.

I don't know of anyone who loves radio adverts but what most people tell me is they really hate the long, LONG commercial blocks that have become popular. So popular in fact that the moment a station breaks for a commercial the pre-set is pressed.

It didn't use to be like that. We all realized commercials are necessary in an ad-supported industry and we tolerated them. But from both the advertisers and listener point of view the long commercial block is unfriendly and, I suspect, not very effective.

Advertiser: Your commercial runs with a dozen or more others. Yours is neither the first nor the last. How many people remember your commercial.....or are even still listening to that station after the first 3 have aired?

Listener: A commercial comes on and, because the station favors long commercial blocks, you anticipate the next 7 minutes are going to be nothing but irritating commercials voiced by screaming VO's. What do you do? Hit the pre-set and hope that station isn't on the same stop set schedule.

Long commercial blocks do not work for anyone. And that is why my friends tell me they subscribe to sat radio or they roll their own. It is also why virtually every program I watch on TV is recorded and why I no longer watch network news.

 

[davideduardo]

You're the expert here but my observation is that radio would virtually disappear overnight if it weren't for the drive time shows.

Average percent of the population listening during each daypart across PPM markets:

AM drive 10%
Mid days 11%
PM Drive 12%
Nights 8%

As to location, the PPM shows about 35% of listening in the home, just like the diary does. The PPM does not show in-car and at-work separately, but the diary shows it split rather evenly. 32% in car, 33% at work. Commute time averages in different markets alter this very little, but use of public transportation does: NYC has only 25% of its radio listening in the car, with at-work and at-home higher.

 

[landtuna]

My only use for terrrestrial radio, AM or FM, is for local sports, news and talk. Period!

I think that's more a function of age than programming. My parents stopped listening to music on the radio when they got into their late 50s. It wasn't that their favorite music wasn't available. It was. They just weren't interested any more.

While age is probably part of it the major reason I don't listen is because of long commercial blocks and the type of music my old favorite stations are playing today. Although there are stations in the USA that are doing just great on both issues there are none in my town. Therefore, when I listen it is over the 'Net.

Interestingly, back in my middle 20's my drive time was spent listening mostly to the all-news (not talk) AM's.

 

[landtuna]

The majority of large advertisers have plenty of research showing why they should not be targeting 55+. It starts with more fully-engrained brand preferences and extends to general skepticism about ads in general. So, to convince anyone in the geezer demos, it takes many more ads.

It's not an issue of how much money seniors have. It is an issue of having to run so many ads so many times to produce a sale that there is no profit in it.

I've heard you say this before but I notice that in my market the same ad will be repeated almost endlessly - both high and low-end products, services and directed at all age groups. There is nothing more irritating than watching/hearing the same identical commercial every other break. This is particularly true of political ads.

I do not think you create a desire to buy by beating your potential customer over the head with the same exact message time after time. Parenthetically, I've noticed my kids go ballistic when this happens so it obviously negatively affects them even more than me.

 

[landtuna]

Average percent of the population listening during each daypart across PPM markets:

AM drive 10%
Mid days 11%
PM Drive 12%
Nights 8%

As to location, the PPM shows about 35% of listening in the home, just like the diary does. The PPM does not show in-car and at-work separately, but the diary shows it split rather evenly. 32% in car, 33% at work. Commute time averages in different markets alter this very little, but use of public transportation does: NYC has only 25% of its radio listening in the car, with at-work and at-home higher.

In my working days I used to have a small radio on my desk playing all day long (mostly for white noise so I wouldn't be drawn into my cube neighbor's business). PPM would score that as "listening" even though I wasn't near my desk or was engaged on the computer or phone. This was also a common pattern in my company. We also tended to wear headphones or ear buds so I suspect PPM wouldn't even pick up "listening" at all. Most "shopping type" businesses tend to have music playing but it may or may not be a terrestrial radio station. For those that are I suspect active listening is a very small number. It is also worth noting that I no longer patronize several different types of businesses (typically restaurants) because of the type of music they play. Perhaps that is why Oldies is popular since it tends not to irritate people as do other forms of "music" (you know what I am talking about, I'm sure).

When my sister was an at-home mom she used to have one particular station playing on her stereo all day long even though she wasn't actively listening or, at times, not even at home. She was pretty typical of moms back then. And, of course, PPM cannot tell whether you are actively listening or not so it has faults as does the diary. The same is true of people who turn on the TV when they hit the kitchen in the morning and leave it on all day "for noise". They tend to pay attention only intermittently and probably never watch actively during commercials.

But what your figures show is that radio listening is approximately 10% of the population consistently throughout the day. That isn't a huge percentage and it would be interesting to know how long they listen. In a town like Phoenix where commute times range in the average -30 minutes that is probably the limit of AM drive. In L.A. it would probably be significantly more.

When I was a kid it was common for me and my school mates to jump out of bed in the morning and turn on the radio until it was time to head for school. After getting home in the afternoon we would do the same and would shut it off after homework was done and we were headed to bed. I don't see that in kids today - none of my five did it going back to the early 80's. Their only listening happens in the car for very short intervals and two of them don't listen to terrestrial radio at all.

 

[TheBigA]

It didn't use to be like that.

I think if you study airchecks from the 60s, you'll find the amount of commercial clutter was worse then. They played commercials between every song. Usually four minutes worth. Back then, :60s were more popular than :30s, so it may have seemed like fewer spots. But the actual commercial time was more than you have today. What we've learned is the length of the break isn't as important as the number of breaks. So what most stations try to do is limit commercial breaks to between 2 and 3 an hour. That means each break is about 8 minutes. But then you get more music. What we;ve found is that listener response to commercials is the same regardless of the length of the cluster. If they're going to leave during a break, they're gone the minute the first spot begins. However, studies have shown that the majority will stay with the station through the entire break.

Older audiences have lower tolerances for things they don't like. Younger audiences will sit through longer breaks. Those are the facts. Advertisers know that, and it's why they don't spend as much on older radio formats. They need to have their spots air multiple times in order to have an impact. That kind of advertising requires a huge investment. They're not going to do it with an age group that ignores commercials. They also won't pay more for fewer spots. They don't have more money to spend on advertising. Younger audiences don't have the disposable income to pay for satellite radio. That's why they still listen to OTA radio (although in smaller doses than they used to). The fact that you and others your age have this aversion to advertising is why advertisers prefer younger demos for radio. If you measure spot breaks in TV, you'll find they're similar. But older people will sit through TV commercials. That's why advertisers wanting older demos go to TV.

 

[davideduardo]

In my working days I used to have a small radio on my desk playing all day long (mostly for white noise so I wouldn't be drawn into my cube neighbor's business). PPM would score that as "listening" even though I wasn't near my desk or was engaged on the computer or phone.

Most people turn down a radio or mp3 player if they are on the phone. The PPM will not measure listening when the volume is near inaudible.

And the PPM is generally worn, so if you go to the bathroom or the lunchroom or to somebody else's work area, the PPM leaves the radio location. Yeah, not all people do that... but men will generally put the PPM on their belt, and women usually clip it to their purse, so it goes with them most places.

Most "shopping type" businesses tend to have music playing but it may or may not be a terrestrial radio station. For those that are I suspect active listening is a very small number.

It does not matter; advertisers wanted to have impressions measured, not loyalty or choice of radio station.

When my sister was an at-home mom she used to have one particular station playing on her stereo all day long even though she wasn't actively listening or, at times, not even at home. She was pretty typical of moms back then. And, of course, PPM cannot tell whether you are actively listening or not so it has faults as does the diary.

If your sister remembered having the radio on all day and wrote it that way in the diary, then the defect is 100% on the diary side. The PPM measures impressions, and if she was out of the home with her PPM on her purse, the home radio did not get measured.

But what your figures show is that radio listening is approximately 10% of the population consistently throughout the day. That isn't a huge percentage and it would be interesting to know how long they listen.

In the diary, the figure is higher due to the memory rounding of the method.

Average weekly listening in PPM is around 12 hours, and in the diary it is about 17.

In a town like Phoenix where commute times range in the average -30 minutes that is probably the limit of AM drive. In L.A. it would probably be significantly more.

No, it's only a few minutes more. People generally end up living on the same "side of town" as their work. Commute times are available for all markets at the American Community Survey site (U.S. Census) and you'd be surprised how stereotypes get blown away by looking at different markets.

 

[DrAkbar]

Speaking of geezer formats on HD2...KDKB is running worn out oldies from Lumberyard 14~Forty until they can think of something better (and just as cheap).

"Worn out Oldies?" I think not. Why use that term with Oldies when no other genre gets that same treatment? Is it because Oldies have been on the radio since before they were Oldies? So has Classical. So has Country. So has Standards. None of them are "worn out".

Everything with the exception of the new Nautel xmttr at Lumberyard 14~Forty is worn out! Why they would put it on KDKB HD2 is a mystery to Nurse Jeff and me. We even suggested to catfish that Gumpdusky should LMA the HD2 frequency to KFNN and get some revenue. That would be interesting as at one time KDKB owned 15~Tin!

 

[Groove1670]

No matter what the age of the listener is, it boils to do one thing. It's the programming! The on-air product! Without a good on-air product, you can't sell to any age bracket regardless of income.

Not always true.

You have never traveled to small town. Some of the worst sounding stations I have ever heard are in some of the Southern states (from a program point of view). But they make money with swap shops, funeral notices, farm reports. The Tick and Tack sports show (Sarcasm) etc.

One station I was involved with in a population of about 25,000 billed between 40 to 60K a month. We used Jones Country at the time. It had dead air (usually a second or less, spaces between commercials at times. Local production was awful. I was not a fan of satellite programming. but....the morning show was very popular.

The GM was very stubborn. His take: I'm here to sell spots and make us a livin', I'm not a program person.

My take: Okay, as long as you make your sales numbers, you won't here from me.

It worked out quite well ;D

Everything with the exception of the new Nautel xmttr at Lumberyard 14~Forty is worn out!

I don't know of this lumberyard, but I follow this legend, and are quite impressed on the longjevity of it's postin'

 

[landtuna]

I think if you study airchecks from the 60s, you'll find the amount of commercial clutter was worse then. They played commercials between every song. Usually four minutes worth. Back then, :60s were more popular than :30s, so it may have seemed like fewer spots. But the actual commercial time was more than you have today.

I have two multi-hour airchecks (unscoped) from WOR-FM in NYC (1970) and you are correct that the DJ read a commercial almost every break but it was nowhere near 4 minutes worth and was usually followed by time/temp or a promo for the station. You got basically one, maybe two, commercials.

What we've learned is the length of the break isn't as important as the number of breaks. So what most stations try to do is limit commercial breaks to between 2 and 3 an hour. That means each break is about 8 minutes. But then you get more music. What we;ve found is that listener response to commercials is the same regardless of the length of the cluster. If they're going to leave during a break, they're gone the minute the first spot begins. However, studies have shown that the majority will stay with the station through the entire break.

I don't buy that at all. I've almost had my jaw broken by my kids going for the pre-set the second a commercial begins. I am not as quick but not longer than 10 seconds or so. I know they will be yakking for 8-10 minutes so why stay?

Older audiences have lower tolerances for things they don't like. Younger audiences will sit through longer breaks. Those are the facts.

It seems like you have that exactly backwards. Every young person I've ever watched listening to radio will hit the pre-set immediately the commercial begins. They'll even do it on TV shows that they intend to continue watching.

It may be that oldsters and their formats are less immediate because the commercials tend to be less invasive. When KYOT was Smooth Jazz their commercials didn't yell at you whereas those of other, more youthful genres tend to be loud, fast and irritating to older ears.

Younger audiences don't have the disposable income to pay for satellite radio. That's why they still listen to OTA radio (although in smaller doses than they used to).

Youngsters will go to almost any length to pay for their cell phones of which the cheapest is about $50/month. $12 for sat radio is peanuts to them. Especially if they are still living in the basement not paying for food or rent.

The fact that you and others your age have this aversion to advertising is why advertisers prefer younger demos for radio. If you measure spot breaks in TV, you'll find they're similar. But older people will sit through TV commercials. That's why advertisers wanting older demos go to TV.

The only program I watch on TV which is not DVR'd is my weekday morning show and CBS' Sunday Morning. The morning show (local Fox station) runs the same commercials at the same time every single day and are guilty of back-to-back commercial placement. I tolerate that because it makes no sense to time shift it but I spend commercial time cooking, doing the breakfast dishes or feeding the dogs. Otherwise both the wife and I FF commercials or watch online where there are no, or very limited, commercials. I don't buy products based on advertising so why watch the ads?

 

[TheBigA]

I have two multi-hour airchecks (unscoped) from WOR-FM in NYC (1970) and you are correct that the DJ read a commercial almost every break but it was nowhere near 4 minutes worth and was usually followed by time/temp or a promo for the station.

That's a bad example. Five years later, there were twice as many commercials when that station became 99X. Listen to a WABC aircheck from the late 60s...tell me what you hear.

In the early days of the FM boom, stations kept commercial loads low, as a marketing strategy to differentiate themselves from AM. But as the boom got deeper, it didn't matter, and FM became as inundated as AM.

I don't buy products based on advertising so why watch the ads?

That right there says it all. You don't buy products based on advertising. Lots of people your age say the same thing. Advertisers know this. That's why advertisers ignore older audiences, despite the fact that they have money and are more likely to love OTA radio. It's also why formats targeting older demos are moving to satellite and non-commercial radio.

 

[landtuna]

No, it's only a few minutes more. People generally end up living on the same "side of town" as their work. Commute times are available for all markets at the American Community Survey site (U.S. Census) and you'd be surprised how stereotypes get blown away by looking at different markets.

I know not all cities are layed out like Phoenix but here we have basically four major freeways boxing the urban area on all four sides. Every one of these freeways except the southern most are absolutely clogged at the typical rush hour (roughly 6-9AM and a little more spread out in the evening). This means there are a ton of workers who commute in from the far fringes of town into the central city. I have lived in the far northwest and the near East Valley and commuted into town and it took me approximately 30-35 minutes each way during rush hour. Should there be a single accident on any of these freeways or near a major intersection of these freeways and times will easily double.

I have a friend in the northern 'burbs of L.A. whose drive to work is a bit over six miles. It takes her about 30 minutes on an average day. My brother lives about the same distance from his work which is much closer to downtown and his one-way commute is even longer. A cousin lives in Seattle and doesn't bother to drive as his commute, door-to-door, is about an hour on public transport.

I'm sure every metro area has its specifics but the point I was trying to make was radio listener commuters are captives and if traveling alone are listening for company, information on road conditions and entertainment.

 

[davideduardo]

I don't buy that at all. I've almost had my jaw broken by my kids going for the pre-set the second a commercial begins. I am not as quick but not longer than 10 seconds or so. I know they will be yakking for 8-10 minutes so why stay?

If by "kids" you mean people under 18, it's important to understand that radio regards them the same way radio regards 55+. There is no money in the demo, so radio does things that appeal to some segment of the 18-49 or 25-54 age groups.

And, again, nearly 70% of radio listening is not in the car where changing stations just a hand-movement and finger-stroke away.

Stations with PPM subscriptions and MediaMonitors access can see the effect of stopsets, and what Big A says is correct. The overall attrition is not all that big, but it can be seen that two bigger stops vs. 3 or 4 shorter ones has a smaller sum effect attrition.

MediaMonitors allows us to see very granular data on songs and stopsets and even individual jock bits and segments. Again, Big A's statement is grounded in fact, not the anecdotal experience of one person watching some children or teens.

It may be that oldsters and their formats are less immediate because the commercials tend to be less invasive. When KYOT was Smooth Jazz their commercials didn't yell at you whereas those of other, more youthful genres tend to be loud, fast and irritating to older ears.

It used to be that stations could impose style guidelines on spots. Today, the agency will just say "Go F yourself. We just won't buy you."

I had the first FM in a market of about 1 million. We ran 6 20" spots an hour, one after every three song set. We charged about 4 times the rate of the highest rated AM, and got it. We had a waiting list. Today, in the same market, half the AMs are gone, and the FMs are selling spots for $0.50. It's a totally new world where stations can't sell value propositions.

Younger audiences don't have the disposable income to pay for satellite radio. That's why they still listen to OTA radio (although in smaller doses than they used to).

Youngsters will go to almost any length to pay for their cell phones of which the cheapest is about $50/month. $12 for sat radio is peanuts to them. Especially if they are still living in the basement not paying for food or rent.

As a former programmer of 5 XM Channels, I have some background there. Teens and young adults are not a primary audience for satellite, as so few get new cars with satellite built in.

And when you add up the phone cost, the internet at home, the Netflix subscription, the software for the X Box and so on, $12.95 is significant when it is only for in-car use. Interestingly, the biggest comment I hear and heard from younger demo satellite listeners is that "they play a lot of songs I don't like" which ended up meaning that the playlists had too many weak songs and the big hits did not rotate enough. I experience the same thing with channels I like which play way too many secondary songs... and that's a kiss of death with younger demos.

I don't buy products based on advertising so why watch the ads?

P&G knows that...

 

[johndavis]

As for classic country, the station where I live is a nice flanker to its country sister station, but the bulk of the music is 80's & 90's with the occasional 70's. It doesn't get big numbers, but it gets enough to do what they want it to do.

Nobody blinked an eye when the format got kicked ahead a decade. It probably didn't hurt that the older music on the station was burned to a crisp, so the new titles were received with open arms.

But if you think you can program a better hour of music, bring enough cash to the Circle Jack at 44th & Camelback and the Goldminers will give you 60 whole minutes to do your thing.

 

[landtuna]

That's a bad example. Five years later, there were twice as many commercials when that station became 99X. Listen to a WABC aircheck from the late 60s...tell me what you hear.

I don't have any airchecks from WABC and listened to them only very infrequently. I left NYC in '73 so never heard 99X.

That right there says it all. You don't buy products based on advertising. Lots of people your age say the same thing. Advertisers know this. That's why advertisers ignore older audiences, despite the fact that they have money and are more likely to love OTA radio. It's also why formats targeting older demos are moving to satellite and non-commercial radio.

You are partly correct but it depends (no pun intended) on the product you are selling. Luxury cars, medicines, personal care products such as walk in tubs, dental care (false teeth etc.) and casinos are all directed primarily at the older customer. This seems to be a relatively new phenomenon with the coming of old age to the Boomers but back in the 50's and 60's I can remember similar ads for powders, false teeth glue and all manner of over-the-counter products airing on shows such as Arthur Godfrey and game/quiz shows.

Some ads are incomprehensible. Casino ads here always feature 20 and 30-somethings all glamed up but if you actually visit any of these casinos the only young people you will see are working in the kitchen or toting drinks.

I have NEVER bought anything based upon advertising. And the people I grew up with (who were once young) are mostly like me - both then and now. Advertising is at best half-truths but mostly it is just pap. As youngsters my generation was inundated with advertising and consequently just blocked it out. To this day I have to watch an ad several times before I can remember what they are selling. I have ads blocked out of virtually everything in my life. Should I want to buy something, such as my last new car, I will do research to narrow the field but I pay no attention to ads unless they are entertaining (beer, insurance, some car ads). Given a choice I will watch other English-speaking broadcasts just so I can see different and much more entertaining ads for products I cannot buy.

I've even started a folder of off-air recordings of some really great commercials but in no instance have any of them affected my purchases.

And thinking about the tired old saw that ads work on younger people because they are more likely to try something new.....I have three boys. Not too long after each gained their 21st birthday they already had made their favorite beer brand choice. (I, OTOH, tend to try new beers even to this day despite not being driven by advertising. I love the Bud commercials generally but hate the beer.) If my boys are like most others there is a short, very short, window of opportunity for the beer ads to work. Maybe most people just go with the flow but it has been my personal experience, since my younger days, that even young people have their likes and dislikes and are not driven so much by advertising which is not price-driven.

About the only ads I pay attention to come in the mail every Tuesday - grocery ads. I scan them for what I want to buy and the location of the store with the best price. They don't encourage me to try new food (that would be my wifey). My kids, AFAIK, don't bother with these ads. They just buy what they want while wandering through the store. From this aspect I would say that ads work minimally upon me and only in specific circumstances but not at all on my 20 and 30-something offspring.

 

[landtuna]

As for classic country, the station where I live is a nice flanker to its country sister station, but the bulk of the music is 80's & 90's with the occasional 70's. It doesn't get big numbers, but it gets enough to do what they want it to do.

I don't have any idea as to the revenue or profitability of any radio station other than what I learn on this forum - and I don't really care as there are people getting the big bucks to worry about that. I only comment from a pure listener perspective.

Nobody blinked an eye when the format got kicked ahead a decade. It probably didn't hurt that the older music on the station was burned to a crisp, so the new titles were received with open arms.

What I hear you saying is they updated a short playlist and the listeners either liked the change or at least didn't object too strongly to it. That's normal evolution for stations not tied to a specific time period. But for Oldies, Classic Country, Standards/Big Band etc. it can be a big mistake to move out of those genres (and I submit that adding music which isn't part of the definition of the genre fits that description). I'm guessing in your example that the needle wasn't moved too far, too fast or there would have been some sort of listener disruption (unless, of course, they were aiming for a younger demo who didn't appreciate the old stuff).

But if you think you can program a better hour of music, bring enough cash to the Circle Jack at 44th & Camelback and the Goldminers will give you 60 whole minutes to do your thing.

I certainly have the means to do that but why would I want to spend money and time on a signal that is (1) AM and (2) cannot be heard (or with lots of buzz and hash) over the complete metro area? If I were to do that I'd fire up an Internet radio station and cover the whole world.

 

[TheBigA]

And thinking about the tired old saw that ads work on younger people because they are more likely to try something new.....I have three boys.

Here's the thing you need to understand: The people who spend money on advertising are professionals. They do lots of audience research before they spend their money. They know what works and what doesn't work. I'm speaking specifically about major agencies in NY and Chicago, not mom & pop companies. And they know older people don't buy based on radio ads, and that's why they don't care about radio stations that attract older listeners. And they know younger people are at least OPEN to the idea of trying something new. All they want is a chance, and they feel they have NO chance at older people. Your posts confirm what the agencies know.

Is this new? Not since I've been in the business, but I wasn't around in the Arthur Godfrey days. Radio went through a major change in the 70s, with formats targeted at demographics. That didn't exist before the FM boom. In the 60s, you had "full-service AMs" that were aimed at everyone, and played a broad range of music. The explosion of new stations allowed stations to specialize in format and targets. So now you have radio stations that aim at small niches of the audience. It's all done for one reason: advertising.

 

[michael hagerty]

I think if you study airchecks from the 60s, you'll find the amount of commercial clutter was worse then. They played commercials between every song. Usually four minutes worth. Back then, :60s were more popular than :30s, so it may have seemed like fewer spots. But the actual commercial time was more than you have today.

I've studied airchecks from the 60s for a few decades now, and I can't think of a single example of a station that had four minutes worth of commercials in any single break, much less four minutes between every song.

WABC might have been running four :30s in a stopset, but that's a 2-minute cluster. Total commercial time in an hour was most likely 18 minutes (the NAB standard for the time). What you suggest would result in only 9 records being played per hour and a 32 minute commercial load. Didn't happen.

By contrast the Drake/RKO stations in the 60s had a 14 minute limit per hour and no commercial break could run more than 70 seconds or three units. A :60 and a :10, fine. Two :30s and a :10, fine. Two :60s or three :30s, forbidden.

Even the old-line personality MOR stations (WNEW, KMPC, KSFO) held to the 18 minute limit, though it sounded like more. They'd do a :60 inside the top-of-the hour 5 minute newscast, another between the news and the first record, and then generally 2 minute breaks the rest of the hour, usually with a DJ talk element separating the two spots. They'd do the in-news :60 for the bottom of the hour 5 minute newscast and a spot before the record out of that 'cast, too.

 

[landtuna]

And thinking about the tired old saw that ads work on younger people because they are more likely to try something new.....I have three boys.

Here's the thing you need to understand: The people who spend money on advertising are professionals. They do lots of audience research before they spend their money. They know what works and what doesn't work. I'm speaking specifically about major agencies in NY and Chicago, not mom & pop companies. And they know older people don't buy based on radio ads, and that's why they don't care about radio stations that attract older listeners. And they know younger people are at least OPEN to the idea of trying something new. All they want is a chance, and they feel they have NO chance at older people. Your posts confirm what the agencies know.

Is this new? Not since I've been in the business, but I wasn't around in the Arthur Godfrey days. Radio went through a major change in the 70s, with formats targeted at demographics. That didn't exist before the FM boom. In the 60s, you had "full-service AMs" that were aimed at everyone, and played a broad range of music. The explosion of new stations allowed stations to specialize in format and targets. So now you have radio stations that aim at small niches of the audience. It's all done for one reason: advertising.

I understand everything you said. Thanks to you, The Old Gringo and others on this forum it has been a very educational experience.

All I am saying is that it is not good common sense to ignore the old folks as a group. TV does not. Billboards do not. Newspapers do not. Only radio, it seems, has become a niche advertising medium and tends to suffer as a result.