Then I apologize for not communicating my opinion properly. I haven't even listened to the Vegas NOW, nor do I have a dog in that hunt. My point was intended to be a couple things:
A) Everything is so fragmented now, and music genres are so mixed/combined/crossed-over that it's practically impossible to shoe-horn any station in any category anymore. What's a CHR/M station? You can barely tell by the music anymore. It could be argued that how a station is presented is better represented of the "category" it belongs in. Meaning, if two well-researched, market-and-audience-focused radio stations play similar music because they're going after the same audience, there can be a vastly different perception of the two stations if the presentations are different. Even though I loathe positioning statements, here's an example: "All the Hits" versus "#1 for Hip-Hop and R&B"...they could share 85% with each other and be perceived as completely different radio stations to the audience. That's a crude example, but hopefully you see what I mean.
B) Regardless of everything in A above, this is another thread in which statements like "how can they call themselves a mainstream CHR" and so forth are the focus. It's disappointing, because it means that we're STILL spending time with our eye off the ball. As programmers, our most important consumer is the listener, and they simply don't look at this stuff like we do. They want their favorite music, and any content between the records to relate to them. They don't use terms like Mainstream, Rhythmic, CHR, AQH, TSL, Cume, and so on. To complain that a station is calling themselves something (in trades, not in content coming out of the speakers) is very misguided.