Create is correct. They never have targeted 25-54, that format can't do well in the older demo under any conditions nor with any talent. Not every format is suited to compete in the so-called "money demo." Some advertisers will pay big money (I.E. $1500 a spot) to reach the hard to reach 18-24 year old male demo.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Ratings..how sad.
- Thread starter Starbucks
- Start date
F
fmjockey
Guest
OK Kids. If the 18-34 thing is going to be your argument in the (lack of) success of the Wolf. What are their numbers and share of the market's money pie in the younger demo.
By the way, I never said they shouldn't compete in the 25-54 demo. The point I was making is that they CAN'T compete in most if all demographics. Poor talent and bad decisions. But hey, that seems to be the formula for success.
By the way, I never said they shouldn't compete in the 25-54 demo. The point I was making is that they CAN'T compete in most if all demographics. Poor talent and bad decisions. But hey, that seems to be the formula for success.
fmjockey said:
No station competes in all demographics. Stations choose a target demo, and they sell that demo to advertisers. Next time you're listening to any station, listen through a couple of stopsets and pay close attention to who the advertisers actually are. That will tell you more about the station than anything else you hear, and it will tell you who the target audience is.
F
fmjockey
Guest
No s#@t create! But not always necessarily. Again I ask you for their numbers to prove the Wolf's (lack of) success. I'm waiting... ;D
My point or comment from the beginning of the thread was....it's not about demographics, targeting this or that, or who's making money with a shallow audience.....it's about the overall public ages 1-92, by looking at the overall numbers, it looks smaller all the time for the overall stations.
Baseball attendance or viewers can go down drastically...but at the end of the season, there will still be a division winner, and there will still be a World Series. Even if no one watches or shows up.
Baseball attendance or viewers can go down drastically...but at the end of the season, there will still be a division winner, and there will still be a World Series. Even if no one watches or shows up.
Most country stations in the top markets (the top markets that still have country music!!) all are programmed like a top 40 station. I dont know why that is but you can hear the difference in a succesful smaller market country station very quickly.
I wonder why tehy are programmed differently?
I wonder why tehy are programmed differently?
Starbucks said:
Okay, if you are going to use that logic, then you are looking at the wrong score.
If you look at 12+ to determine the winner, that would be like looking at who hit the most home runs and declaring them the World Series champion. 12+ ratings/home runs are nice stats and you would probably prefer to have them than not, but in the end, meaningless.
If you are going to compare baseball to radio, the equal to the W.S. winner is the top billing station, not the top rated station 12+ (even if they happen to be the same).
I'm not going to by who is the top biller. I'm going by overall listeners from the overall stations. It looks like the listenership is eroding by how many stations that are rated that have a 1 or below share. As much as listeners or rating scores seem to decline...there's still someone on the top of the list, until one day there are no listener's period. But that's still a long way off.
Starbucks said:
Okay, I give up going on with this with you after this post. Let me say again, 12+ ratings are not important to ANY radio station, so they could care less about them. They matter to them about as much as the wallpaper in someone's laundry room does to them. But, it seems like they are important to you.
Just ask yourself this. Why are the 12+ numbers free and available to the general public, but the specific demo breakdowns not (and Arbitron goes fast and heavy legally if someone does ever give them out in a public forum)? Because the 12+ are meaningless to both radio stations and advertisers, so Arbitron gives them away.
Starbucks said:
The numbers released to the press by Arbitron are "shares" which means that each one indicates the percentage of total radio listeners tuned, on average, to each station.
There are 100 shares, and no more and no less. There can not be less than 100 shares, and there can, thus, be no decline "all the time for the overall stations" since "all of something" is always 100%.
This is a bit off-topic: It was always my understanding the Arbitron specifics were confidential too. Why do I see tradespeople in the last couple of months freely sharing specific demographic information on these boards then? Does Arbitron nor really care THAT much, or is it a "you can't catch me" attitude?DougR said:
Again Doug....I don't think your getting it. I'm not discussing finances, mathematics , or a game plan with you. I'm just making a statement noticing the 12 plus or the everyday listener who owns or has owned a radio in their lifetime, by looking at the ratings overall....it looks like listeners are declining according to the scores. I don't give a **** about the billing, or this format caters to only this or that. And again if you state that Arbitron doesn't care about 12 plus or 55 Plus, that's why the many stations and radio is declining. And the numbers show it.
Starbucks said:
Again you don't seem to understand that overall ratings don't count except for boasting. Commercial stations are in the business of providing a certain product to customers. The customers are the advertisers and the product is a particular population of people.
Advertisers couldn't care less if KGO is #1 overall if the audience isn't one that will buy its products.
If the advertiser is puts on hip-hop shows, they're going to advertise on KMEL, not on KGO. If the advertiser sells baby care products, they'll advertise on a station reaching women, such as a KOIT. If they're selling sportcars they'll advertise on a station reaching more men, such as a KNBR. If the advertiser is a mattress company they're not going to be interested in spending their money to reach teenagers. Thus, they're going to advertise on a KGO, not on a KMEL.
DavidKaye said:
Sometimes it is easier to just think of radio stations as narrowcasting, not broadcasting.
KMEL, in fact, does not want a 55 year old listening to their station. They want to show prospective advertisers that they are getting the most "bang for their buck" and not reaching people with no interest in their product. This kind of goes back to whenever there is a possible opening in the mornings, some of their fans immediately come here and say the Doghouse would be the perfect fit, because they bring in the most number of listeners, when, in fact, Movin' (one of the stations where some fans wanted them) knows they would clash with their target demo and hurt them with who they want to listen and who they are telling advertisers are listening, in the long run.
And, if Starbucks claims listening audiences are down because he looks and many stations are below a 1.0, that is just bad math. As was pointed out earlier, those numbers end up at 100% all the time. If he wants to make the case that audiences are down accross the board and fewer people are listening, total audience is CUME, and what you would need to look at, not Arbitron's 12+ free numbers.
In fact, like it or hate it, the fact that many stations can survive with low 12+ numbers shows that narrowcasting and target demos do work.
Correct...but I'm just again reflecting overall listenership. Compared to te arbitron ratings in the 80's for example.....there were few stattions in a large or medium market that had less then a one share. You couldn't touch a top 15 spot with a 1.5 1.2, 1.1, etc....but these days you can. Because there's many of them in a large market like San Fran. 12+, 25+ etc. I 'm not refering to agencies on how they look at numbers for advertising their targeted product. The point is I noticed more an increased in under 1 shares.
Just like Football, there were more teams hunting for a playoff spot at 7-8, 8-8 then usual in the NFC. It means there were a few winning consistant teams then usual in that conference. That's all I'm saying.
Just like Football, there were more teams hunting for a playoff spot at 7-8, 8-8 then usual in the NFC. It means there were a few winning consistant teams then usual in that conference. That's all I'm saying.
sloux said:
Rankers by age or daypart can be presented in limited form, as long as they do not include actual shares.
- Status