Oldies PD o-u-t

[tibbs]

Re: 97.1

> > >not drastically different than most Oldies stations in
> > America today.
> >
> > that says it all!
> > It does? How do YOU know what MOST Oldies stations do?
> Fact is, the format is still viable and if executed well..it
> can get great numbers. Some companies that bailed on the
> format had sales issues..not ratings issues. There are many
> mediocre Oldies stations, but that can be said for all
> formats.
> Norman is checking O-U-T!!
>

So you and I disagree on what items here, Norman???

 

[OldiesCat]

97.1

I have nothing at all against 97.1- I call 'em as I see 'em and they're an only OK station. Your buddy who works there, an OK jock. I'm not exactly in the market to work for Cumulus in Nashville (a great city but a mediocre company).

Oldies 97.1 came out with a bang for their listeners because they basically "rescued" the Oldies format for Nashville. However, I'm not alone in my assertion that they've put the format on alright but not taken it to the next level to go from being on-the-air to doing consistently exciting, great radio. And, the ratings are reflecting this. Mind you, I don't have any control over the ratings, I just report what's in black and white for all to see. It's one of the major barometers of success- how many listners you have.
And, according to the Arbitron ratings, they're losing listeners since their sign-on.

(and I stand by my statement on consultants- YOU seem to have had it in for consultants almost since Day One. Gee, sounds sort of familiar, doesn't it?)

>
> An aside--I stand by what I sad about consultants. In all my
> years in this business, I've met one or two who were
> credible and actually knew something about broadcasting; in
> the case of news consultants, journalism. But I've also seen
> how some of them are snakes and don't care who they smear or
> ruin just to justify themselves.
>

 

[OldiesCat]

97.1

Absolutely right that can be said about all formats.

How do WE know what MOST oldies stations do? WE DO OUR HOMEWORK, cat (Norman). It's a format many of us love and we follow stations in the format very closely. Whaddaya think, we're just making this stuff up?


> > There are many mediocre Oldies stations, but that can be said for all
> > formats.

>
> So you and I disagree on what items here, Norman???
>

 

[Evangelist]

Re: 97.1

> I have nothing at all against 97.1- I call 'em as I see 'em
> and they're an only OK station. Your buddy who works there,
> an OK jock. I'm not exactly in the market to work for
> Cumulus in Nashville (a great city but a mediocre company).
>
> Oldies 97.1 came out with a bang for their listeners because
> they basically "rescued" the Oldies format for Nashville.
> However, I'm not alone in my assertion that they've put the
> format on alright but not taken it to the next level to go
> from being on-the-air to doing consistently exciting, great
> radio. And, the ratings are reflecting this. Mind you, I
> don't have any control over the ratings, I just report
> what's in black and white for all to see. It's one of the
> major barometers of success- how many listners you have.
> And, according to the Arbitron ratings, they're losing
> listeners since their sign-on.
>
> (and I stand by my statement on consultants- YOU seem to
> have had it in for consultants almost since Day One. Gee,
> sounds sort of familiar, doesn't it?)
>
> >
> > An aside--I stand by what I sad about consultants. In all
> my
> > years in this business, I've met one or two who were
> > credible and actually knew something about broadcasting;
> in
> > the case of news consultants, journalism. But I've also
> seen
> > how some of them are snakes and don't care who they smear
> or
> > ruin just to justify themselves.
> >
>

Your comments about him were a personal attack. Deny it all you want, but that is what it was.

If you don't like a particular station or air personality, don't listen. Stick to airchecks of yourself and tell yourself how great you are and how you are at the "next level" and other mumbo-jumbo that means nothing.

Yeah, maybe I do have it in for consultants. But the vast majority of the ones I've known or known of deserve it. They don't care whose lives and reputations they have to ruin simply to justify their existence. You seem to think that kind of behavior is OK.

 

[OldiesCat]

97.1

Well, since I don't know him personally nor know any personal details about him, there's no way I made a "personal attack" on him. I expressed my OPINION about him as a radio personality. Just because he may be your buddy is obviously causing you to take something personally that isn't at all.

As far as liking or not liking stations or personalities, now you're telling me I shouldn't listen to jocks or stations that don't light my fire? How am I supposed to know that before I tune in? The only way I can form an opinion is to LISTEN. I'm in the radio business- I listen to the radio. Some is really good and much is really average. You may not like what I say or agree with me and that's perfectly OK. Just don't pretend you can tell me how to listen to the radio or how to think about what I hear.

As far as consultants, you are assuming an awful lot to say something like "they don't care whose lives and reputations they have to ruin, etc. etc. etc.". Such a statement suggests you are inside the minds and motives of all radio consultants and you clearly are not. I could accuse you of "attacking" consultants the way you accuse me of attacking a jock- you just can't have it both ways.


> Your comments about him were a personal attack. Deny it all
> you want, but that is what it was.
>
> If you don't like a particular station or air personality,
> don't listen. Stick to airchecks of yourself and tell
> yourself how great you are and how you are at the "next
> level" and other mumbo-jumbo that means nothing.
>
> Yeah, maybe I do have it in for consultants. But the vast
> majority of the ones I've known or known of deserve it. They
> don't care whose lives and reputations they have to ruin
> simply to justify their existence. You seem to think that
> kind of behavior is OK.
>