Radio Reality Check

[jas2525]

Maybe this reality has already hit you, but I was in a certain BIG box store earlier today, looking for a radio. Just a simple AM/FM portable radio.

After trolling aisle after aisle of MP3 players, IPODS, etc., I finally had to ask the clerk. He looked and looked, and low and behold, how did I miss it, one single hook with a few little radios. There were 4. There are now 3.

You better hurry!

I really left there with a sick feeling in my stomach about the future of this business---and I mean a sicker feeling than I usually get when thinking about this business. Almost nobody is being raised on radio.

I'd like to know what in God's name radio plans on doing about that?

 

[Paul_Warren]

I'd like to know what in God's name radio plans on doing about that?

Plans? Why, the same thing that made radio great for decades....

(1) Finding synergies, (2) right-sizing the enterprise, and (3) strategic leveraging of content across digital platforms.

Isn't that why we all had those pocket radios under our pillows at night back in the day?

We'll know it's really working when "I Heart Radio" changes its name to "I Heart Clear Channel." [/sarcasm]

I note with irony that an ad selling portable radios is appearing across the bottom of this forum as I type!

 

[JustPastBuffalo]

This issue can be viewed from a few different perspectives. First, retailing: Bricks and mortar stores, in many instances, have been supplanted by on-line shopping. Here's a link that came up using a Google search for AM-FM Radios http://www.kmart.com/shc/s/search_10151_10104?keyword=am-fm+radio&i_cntr=1309964260997. Plenty of cool looking radios there. Most of us would like to hear the radio, touch it and check the features before we buy it, but the average Joe and Jane will be only too happy to check the on-line offerings, make their selection and have it shipped.

From the radio perspective, I still have faith in the medium, even as I listen to music on shuffle in my Sansa Clip mp3 player as I write this post. (If it's any consolation, I began the day listening to WNED-AM on a very unglamorous mono radio in the kitchen.) The 2 gig 'Clip allows me to load WAV or mp3 files and also features an outstanding FM tuner with unusually good selectivity. About the size of a cigarette lighter, it does not feature an AM tuner. Yesterday I spent about twenty minutes listening to a "fake Drake" LP-FM near Tampa that streamed. Oh and BTW, I didn't click any of the banner adds while listening, but I'm sure I was "counted" as having seen them.

What's reality for radio? Shake my crystal ball and it says "Future is uncertain." Shake it again and it says "It's not 1992." (Hell, it's not 2008!) The future might be like jas2525's attempt to buy a radio in a retail store, you might have to do a little searching, but I think it will always be out there. The RF platform is the easiest, broadest platform to access and it seems to me a lot of on-line companies would love to have an 24/7/365 FM omni-directional billboard to direct potential customers to their on line apps and products.

 

[TheBigA]

I'd like to know what in God's name radio plans on doing about that?

My grandmother used to call me all the time when she couldn't receive her favorite station. "You're in radio," she'd say, "Fix it."

Sorry grandma, I don't repair radios.

Back in 1926, RCA started NBC to sell radios. Now, RCA doesn't make radios, and NBC is owned by a cable company. And they don't make cables.

You think it's hard to find a radio? Try looking for one that receives HD. Forget it. Then again, perhaps your mistake was going into a department store that specializes in manure and cheap underwear. You should try an electronics store. That's where you're more likely to buy electronics. A few years ago, Radio Shack tossed around the idea of changing its name to The Shack because they sell more than just radios. Hey, and radio companies do more than create content for radio stations.

I go to music conferences where they bemoan the fact that it's hard to find a full-catalog record store any more. Yet it's not like people aren't listening to music. Same with radio. I got one free with my new car! What a deal. I can listen on my laptop or cell phone. Who needs a radio?

 

[Yeziknoradio]

I thought Radio (in Buffalo) was already adapting to the changing times by repeating WBEN on 107.7 FM!
There are some MP3's with FM radios built in, but no AM.

 

[jas2525]

I can listen on my laptop or cell phone. Who needs a radio?

Nothing cool lasts forever.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Budgeting-for-wireless-data-apf-1691527244.html?x=0

 

[Googs0105]

Unless I'm in the car I don't listen on an actual radio.. my phone has FM and most stations have an app for that (iHeart Radio).

No one in the industry is worried that "you can't buy radios" anymore.

It's 2011.

 

[Bob1370]

We're missing the real issue here.

It's not the delivery platform, although there will always be AM, FM, HD and Internet-based wireless transmission systems for it.

The real issue is the supply of compelling programming.

It doesn't matter HOW people listen, as long as they're listening to it and feel the listening experience is worthwhile.

Our problem now is to assure that the listening experience is worthwhile--and it's the degree to which we do that, that'll determine how healthy radio is in the future. Do good radio, and radio will stay alive and well. Let the bean counters rule and creativity and excitement go out the window, and radio will fade to a marginal place in our life and culture.

 

[chas108]

We're missing the real issue here.

It's not the delivery platform, although there will always be AM, FM, HD and Internet-based wireless transmission systems for it.

The real issue is the supply of compelling programming.

It doesn't matter HOW people listen, as long as they're listening to it and feel the listening experience is worthwhile.

Our problem now is to assure that the listening experience is worthwhile--and it's the degree to which we do that, that'll determine how healthy radio is in the future. Do good radio, and radio will stay alive and well. Let the bean counters rule and creativity and excitement go out the window, and radio will fade to a marginal place in our life and culture.

I couldn't have said it better. Thankfully my company recognizes this and is taking concrete steps to make the listening experience worthwhile....and we're already seeing a payoff.

 

[JustPastBuffalo]

We're missing the real issue here. It's not the delivery platform, although there will always be AM, FM, HD and Internet-based wireless transmission systems for it. The real issue is the supply of compelling programming. It doesn't matter HOW people listen, as long as they're listening to it and feel the listening experience is worthwhile. Our problem now is to assure that the listening experience is worthwhile--and it's the degree to which we do that, that'll determine how healthy radio is in the future. Do good radio, and radio will stay alive and well. Let the bean counters rule and creativity and excitement go out the window, and radio will fade to a marginal place in our life and culture.

While I don't disagree with your answer Bob, I think most of us answered the initial question in its literal sense. As to doing "good radio," that's a subjective view that could take this thread into the depths. "Good radio?" It could be NPR to one person and Jack to another. Years ago, some listeners liked KB for the personality while others chose Rock 102 for the wall to wall music. We've come to the point where radio has become homogenized. Talk radio polarized. Who exactly determines what "good" is? When Stern first started, he was viewed by many as awful. Today he's one of the highest profile people on radio along side of Rush Limbaugh, who had trouble getting stations to clear his whole show. Stations would clear an hour, maybe two. Most major markets wouldn't touch him. Now they pay top buck for his three hour rant.

Side Bar: A few Sundays ago, I listened to Lite Favorites 98.1 CHFI and the Sunday Morning Oldies Show with Tish Iceten on Toronto's #1 station. It's a specialty show. CHFI uses the word "Oldies" to describe music that is 30 and 40 years old (America, U2, etc). Pretty bold, but there's clearly a good reason. Every time Liz cracked the mic, she was doing good (PPM) radio. As a listener I liked her shtick. As a radio person, I knew exactly what she was doing and why. No surprise then that CHFI is #1 in a PPM market. The PPM approach to Classic Rock can be heard to a large degree on Q107.

If/when Buffalo becomes a PPM market, there's going to be a learning curve. The days of artist/group/liner-front or back sell will definitely be over (as if they're not over now.) We'll hear a different approach to radio on some stations while others will (continue to) voice track or roll twenty in a row. Based on CHFI's performance in Toronto, the Buffalo stations that learn how to play by the PPM metrics will do better than those that play twenty in a row.

 

[SirRoxalot]

It's simple. Internet radio is here, and it's a more facile jukebox than OTA radio can ever be. If you're simply playing music, you'll die a slow, painful death. If you're providing content that isn't easily available elsewhere, you'll continue as a content creator and you'd better be making that content available on multiple platforms.

OTA radio will survive if the content is compelling, and it remains universally available for free. Internet radio has to figure out how to make money. So far, it hasn't. I doubt that the subscription model will work - particularly with today's youth, who insist on free content. Building fees into delivery services like cable TV does puts a burden on ISPs that most of them are unwilling to accept. So, the advertising model will likely be the answer. With primarily audio content, audio commercials will interrupt the music flow. No other type of content - banners, etc. - will generate enough money to pay the bills.

HD is dead. Internet radio is the new HD. Kill the buzz on both AM & FM, and make analog sound as good as possible. The audio will be better than any digital out there so far. An AM Stereo wideband rebirth would be a breath of fresh air to that band, and sound better than most digital streams or anything on satellite.

 

[TheBigA]

OTA radio will survive if the content is compelling, and it remains universally available for free.

Free is the key, but compelling content isn't enough. Take a look at the most popular TV shows. Do they have compelling content? Depends on who the audience is. That's what it's all about. PBS creates compelling content, and few people care. So just creating compelling content won't be enough to get enough people to tune in, because there's too much hash and interference out there for people to wade through. People don't tune up and down the dial any more, seeking out something interesting to listen to. They have their favorites, and that's where they go. What you need to do is become someone's favorite. That's not about creating compelling content, but building a fan base. Absolutely terrible recording artists get people to show up at concerts because they're fans, not because the content is compelling. Radio needs to do the same thing. And that means getting out of the safe studio, interacting with the listeners, and if you're twice as old as them, you better know their language, their interests, and their lifestyle. Otherwise you're dead, regardless of compelling content.

 

[Paul_Warren]

It's simple. Internet radio is here, and it's a more facile jukebox than OTA radio can ever be...

Rox, not to pick nits, but "Internet Radio" is an oxymoron, and "OTA Radio" is redundant. I only bring it up because if web-based audio content can get away with calling itself "radio," it means broadcasters have squandered their principle strategic advantage in this fight. (I know, I know...like that was in question...)

It's a little ironic that the digital information tools which could be used to make radio more responsive, closer to real-time, and even cheaper to run have instead been allowed to displace radio.

I wonder if any 21st-Century radio owner could afford to reclaim the turf, or dream big enough to try.

 

[Bob1370]

"PBS creates compelling content, and few people care."

Mmmm, I woulldn't say that. PBS is actually an example of how quality builds a strongly loyal audience base that amounts to a whole lot of eyes and ears, and those eyes and ears are well worth reaching. So are the people who'll gravitate to any well-done programming service, whether it's noncomm or it's airing 12 to 15 minutes of spots an hour.

PBS may be a "niche" broadcaster, but that niche is bigger in terms of weekly household cume than any cable channel, even ESPN. Just like niche radio broadcasters--and everyone is to a certain degree, since the age of double-digit AQH shares in the top 60 markets is just about over--nevertheless can and do reach a lot of people and have a lot of impact, IF the programming is good.

What we have to remember is that even a 5 or a 7 share can leave a big, strong footprint in terms of listener impact, advertising reach, revenue, profit and any other metric of success you can choose. Let's not think of how small our niches may be, station by station, but how BIG they are and how much they can do for anyone who chooses to put an ad message or institutional announcement on them if those announcements are in the mix along with strong content.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Rox, not to pick nits, but "Internet Radio" is an oxymoron, and "OTA Radio" is redundant.

Technically, it would depend on the Internet connection. Most Internet audio delivery devices don't plug into anything, except maybe power. The content is delivered wirelessly, via radio signal. Yeah, another nit to pick....

I wonder if any 21st-Century radio owner could afford to reclaim the turf, or dream big enough to try.

21st-Century radio owners need to realize that it's about content, not the delivery system. They need to utilize the Internet as a two-way means of communication with listeners, and as a delivery system. Streaming is only one part of the answer - and only if you can get the stream to make money. What's more important is utilizing the Internet and smart phones to get feedback from listeners, and getting listeners in touch with your advertisers.

In my mind, it's vital to get your stream synched with your OTA product. Yeah, I know about the commercial rights problem. FIX IT. It can't be that hard. They've already fixed the music streaming cost issue. They should be able to fix the commercial content cost issue. Ideally, resolving that could increase revenue while reducing clutter by better utilizing the overall inventory of time slots.

Radio ain't dead. It's rebirth is right around the corner - when the ISPs start ramping up the costs of the bits delivered to your smart phone or router. That's already under way.

 

[Paul_Warren]

In my mind, it's vital to get your stream synched with your OTA product. Yeah, I know about the commercial rights problem. FIX IT. It can't be that hard. They've already fixed the music streaming cost issue...

As far as I know, the commercial clearance problem is still a union deal. The last AFTRA rate card I saw (suspect SAG is similar) charges something like three times the fee for the internet rights as it does for the broadcast rights, I guess based on the premise that the market becomes the world and the term of use becomes forever.

Agencies using union talent won't pay the extra, so they threatened radio stations with loss of the buy if they streamed the spots.

Many national and regional spots are produced by big agencies which only use union talent. Ironically, the internet has also brought advertisers the ability to access decent quality non-union talent. But if you want to use Morgan Freeman or Tim Allen, they won't work for you if you also use non-union talent.

Solving this problem probably won't get much attention until streaming shows the potential to reach more than a handful of listeners to a local radio station.

 

[JustPastBuffalo]

OTA radio will survive if the content is compelling, and it remains universally available for free.

...People don't tune up and down the dial any more, seeking out something interesting to listen to. They have their favorites, and that's where they go. What you need to do is become someone's favorite. That's not about creating compelling content, but building a fan base. Absolutely terrible recording artists get people to show up at concerts because they're fans, not because the content is compelling. Radio needs to do the same thing.

From my perspective in Buffalo, there is a tangible correlation between compelling live, local programming and fan base. The most prominent stations in this market, WYRK, WBEN, 97 Rock, Kiss and the Edge feature personalities that have a strong fan bases. Whether it's Shredd & Ragan or Sandy Beach; Clay Moden or Norton & Lederman (as well as personalities in other dayparts) these people consistently produce compelling local programing. Yes, out of town sat-delivered Delilah has a fan base, but she's on at night when the available audience shrinks considerably. She has a strong AQH Share, but low AQH Persons. I sometimes wonder if her act would fly in another daypart, but her show and her shtick seem to work best in an evening daypart. IMHO, Delilah could be beaten by a local in-format personality using a similar approach, but stations are increasingly loathe to invest in dayparts outside morning and afternoon drive.

 

[SirRoxalot]

IMHO, Delilah could be beaten by a local in-format personality using a similar approach, but stations are increasingly loathe to invest in dayparts outside morning and afternoon drive.

Heh. Yeah, just look at how many stations have gone syndicated or VT in mid-days - a highly rated daypart that often draws more number than PM drive. That daypart used to be entertaining.

 

[TheBigA]

IMHO, Delilah could be beaten by a local in-format personality using a similar approach, but stations are increasingly loathe to invest in dayparts outside morning and afternoon drive.

It depends on if you think talent is unique and distinctive, or something that could easily be duplicated in hundreds of other markets.

 

[SirRoxalot]

IMHO, Delilah could be beaten by a local in-format personality using a similar approach, but stations are increasingly loathe to invest in dayparts outside morning and afternoon drive.

It depends on if you think talent is unique and distinctive, or something that could easily be duplicated in hundreds of other markets.

Well, we apparently have the corporate answer to that...