Radio...it's a business

[ohioradio]

So many times I see on here "W--- is like 10th in the ratings, time for them to change format!" or "W--- hasn't cracked the top 5 in the ratings since 1981 when they played rock, are they stupid! Go back to playing rock!" Ever look at a ranking of top BILLING stations? We all think radio is there for our entertainment...it is, but the companies that run them do so to make money.

I don't know, but I'd bet Sunny 95 does well for Saga, despite not being #1 in ratings. I heard at one time they were tops in billing in Columbus. I'd imagine NCI and TVN do well too. I have to wonder about Power 107 though. Great ratings, but I'd be interested to see where they rank in billing.

Bottom line is that just because stations like Ted FM don't seem to do well in the monthly numbers, they might be doing well in the numbers that count.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by ohioradio on 07/31/05 05:18 AM.</FONT></P>

 

[wscx200]

> So many times I see on here "W--- is like 10th in the
> ratings, time for them to change format!" or "W--- hasn't
> cracked the top 5 in the ratings since 1981 when they played
> rock, are they stupid! Go back to playing rock!" Ever look
> at a ranking of top BILLING stations? We all think radio is
> there for our entertainment...it is, but the companies that
> run them do so to make money.
>
> I don't know, but I'd bet Sunny 95 does well for Saga,
> despite not being #1 in ratings. I heard at one time they
> were tops in billing in Columbus. I'd imagine NCI and TVN do
> well too. I have to wonder about Power 107 though. Great
> ratings, but I'd be interested to see where they rank in
> billing.
>
> Bottom line is that just because stations like Ted FM don't
> seem to do well in the monthly numbers, they might be doing
> well in the numbers that count.
>

I agree. However, it is in the operator's best interest to get an audience and keep them happy. Some people might not like it, but the masses need to be considered.
That 12+ share number is a raw number that means almost nothing. If you don't have an Arbitron book, you may want to consider not making any comments about ratings and that is what people buy on, ratings. Not a 12+ share number.

When you break out the ratings you will see who is top in P25-54, 25-49, 25-34, 18-34 and 18-49 and even 35-64, then things change if you break it male or female. The stations that are top in those demos are the ones that get bought (except WCKX and sometimes WCOL.) Some companies don't advertise on Urban or country. But if yur station is good in a demo, you can make money. Listen to the advertisers on the Blitz, then listen to Sunny 95. They are and should be different. That's what makes radio such a good medium to advertise on. Specific audiences that listen to their stations for 6 or more hours per week. If I was selling trucks and motorcyles I'd be on WFJX, WBZX, WBNS-AM, WLVQ, maybe WHOK and WTVN if I could afford it. I wouldn't run on the #1 12+ share station...WNCI or Sunny 95 or WXMG. (not to mention that these stations are priced according to ratings) Unless you can throw 25-30k at the market per month, you need to look at cheaper stations like (and they are there) like the Fox, Oldies, Smooth Jazz, Ted-FM and CD101 and even WBNS-AM.

Now with ratings aside, therre are stations that produce results for local, smaller companies for an affordable price. That is how they make their money. Stations like Ted-FM or WBNS-AM are probably some of the better examples. If you listen, you will notice they have a lot of advertisers, more than many stations with higher 12+ shares. That is because if the audience is right and the stations are affordable, people will contunie to support the station if it is giving them results.

 

[jakej]

> Unless you can throw 25-30k at the market per month, you
> need to look at cheaper stations like (and they are there)
> like the Fox, Oldies, Smooth Jazz, Ted-FM and CD101 and even
> WBNS-AM.

> Now with ratings aside, therre are stations that produce
> results for local, smaller companies for an affordable
> price. That is how they make their money. Stations like
> Ted-FM or WBNS-AM are probably some of the better examples.
> If you listen, you will notice they have a lot of
> advertisers, more than many stations with higher 12+ shares.


Yeah, I've called and found out some of those ad rates, and they're unbelievably low! So I guess the less popular stations have no choice but to rack up a lot of advertisers if they want to try and pull their own weight and pay their fair share of the bills. Of course, running so many more spots than everybody else has the effect of turning off a lot of listeners and helps to insure that the ratings stay low, so it's a can't-win situation. Better to make changes and work to get better than sacrifice your rate schedules and continue to hang on by your fingernails, I'd say.

 

[xiradiodotcom]

>
> Yeah, I've called and found out some of those ad rates,
> and they're unbelievably low! So I guess the less popular
> stations have no choice but to rack up a lot of advertisers
> if they want to try and pull their own weight and pay their
> fair share of the bills. Of course, running so many more
> spots than everybody else has the effect of turning off a
> lot of listeners and helps to insure that the ratings stay
> low, so it's a can't-win situation. Better to make changes
> and work to get better than sacrifice your rate schedules
> and continue to hang on by your fingernails, I'd say.
>
I think he meant more clients, and more local ones. I don't think they play any more minutes of commercials per hour than the top billers. It's actually usually the opposite with the smaller guys.<P ID="signature">______________
Chris
Energy X - Modern & Alternative Rock
energyradio.fm</P>

 

[jakej]

> I think he meant more clients, and more local ones. I don't
> think they play any more minutes of commercials per hour
> than the top billers. It's actually usually the opposite
> with the smaller guys.

If that's the case, then the billing charts must be tremendously lopsided.