RE: New Austin CCM station

[whatzthat]

Re: RE:

"It's supposed to be about radio!
>
> As I've come close to saying before, we're talking about
> principles, not preferences."
>
Yes but as it was pointed out so many times, some on this discussion board are not in radio, they are listeners just stating their opinions. They don't understand the technical stuff. You can abuse me & banter with me because I am in radio but I don't believe the person that was replied to was.

 

[neutral_observer]

Re: RE:

> "It's supposed to be about radio!
> >
> > As I've come close to saying before, we're talking about
> > principles, not preferences."
> >
> Yes but as it was pointed out so many times, some on this
> discussion board are not in radio, they are listeners just
> stating their opinions. They don't understand the technical
> stuff.


Exactly...and that's why we (should) discuss principles, not preferences!

 

[whatzthat]

Re: RE:

>
"Exactly...and that's why we (should) discuss principles, not
> preferences!"

You can't discuss principals with those who are giving you what they prefer as listeners. They don't understand it. Please don't get me in a discussion about this. I was just giving you a heads up about those who don't understand target audiences, Becky and the rest. Come on, even lot of us in radio are puzzled by "Becky"
>

 

[neutral_observer]

Re: RE:

> > "Exactly...and that's why we (should) discuss principles,
> > not preferences!"
>
> You can't discuss principals with those who are giving you
> what they prefer as listeners.

Well, true, the principals are irrelevant to the listener unless the listener actually personally knows them as friends or something, but, sure, you can discuss the principles with them!

Why couldn't you? How hard is it to explain one of the easiest ideas of all -- "We've been blessed by God with the 'talent' (or five...or even ten!) of a signal, and we consider it our responsibility to use it in the way that makes the biggest impact and return for God! It may not be exactly the way you would like it to be, but what you hear is what can and will make that biggest impact. If we were to be blessed with another signal, perhaps we could do something that would be more tailored to your taste, but, with just this one,..."



> They don't understand it.

They can...they're not stupid! If they're smart enough to go beyond "I don't like it," then they're plenty smart enough to understand at least the big parts of why things are done.



> Please don't get me in a discussion about this.

Why? Aren't we here to discuss the principles of radio??



> I was just giving you a heads up about those who don't understand
> target audiences, Becky and the rest.

You've read my posts...do I really seem like someone who would need such a "heads up?" Have you not noticed that I rarely even use the vocabulary or jargon of radio on this board, showing that I'm writing with the recipient in mind?



> Come on, even lot of us in radio are puzzled by "Becky"

Umm...we are?? Good grief! I'm not even in the format yet (email inquiries welcome ), and I feel quite comfortable with it.

What if you had a much more complex target that didn't come with so much in common already built-in?? The format I spent the last 14 or 15 years in had a target that included people that live on government checks and recreate by playing cards to people who own businesses, boats, and personal aircraft! What would you do then??

The only thing that I'm confused about is the pervasiveness of this name -- the purpose of it is obvious, but who originated it?


Oh, and by the way, if you're the guy doing CHR and playing 43 currents, why in the world would you be talking about "Becky" in the first place????

(Hey...on that 43 currents thing -- cut it by half or more and watch beauty happen!)

 

[whatzthat]

Re: RE:

Becky is often joked about, that was just a little programming joke. Most would like to figure exactly who she really is, that seems to be the constant humorous discussion. I don't have to worry about Becky, you are correct. I have Becky's husband and brother, along with her kids.


"Oh, and by the way, if you're the guy doing CHR and playing
43 currents, why in the world would you be talking about
"Becky" in the first place????"
What do you mean by that? What guy am I supposed to be?

 

[radioelizabeth]

Re: BECKY

neutral observer wrote:
"The only thing that I'm confused about is the pervasiveness of this name -- the purpose of it is obvious, but who originated it?"

Good point. Seems "Becky" wouldn't be the best choice. Some stations choose Kathy, Jennifer, Jessica, etc... I've seen a different name on most every profile.

But a search for what her name MOST LIKELY WOULD BE based on popular names her parent's would have picked doesn't even put Rebecca in the top 10. (However, Becky gets in the top 7% for the 90s when many PDs did a profile -which sparks curiosity on exactly how these profiles are defined)

Jennifer actually seems the most likely choice if your target was born 1970+
- Jennifer, Amy, Melissa, Michelle, Kimberly, Lisa, Angela

If she is a little older, Lisa is a better pick:
- Lisa, Mary, Karen, Susan, Kimberly, Patricia, Linda, Donna, Michelle

Seems if your target is a woman 25-54, your attempt at a true profile would be naming her either Lisa or Michelle (as those names increased in popularity)...unless of course, her brothers called her something else.

By the way... odds are, her hubby's name is Mike*

(or she dated a few of them at the very least)

e



*TOP 6 60s & 70s: Michael, David, John, James, Robert & William
<P ID="signature">______________
RADIOELIZABETH
Pleasant, Passionate, Persuasive
www.radioelizabeth.com</P>

 

[neutral_observer]

Re: RE:

> > Oh, and by the way, if you're the guy doing CHR and playing
> > 43 currents, why in the world would you be talking about
> > "Becky" in the first place????
>
> What do you mean by that? What guy am I supposed to be?


I don't remember. I was doing a little sleuthing a few weeks ago and came to the conclusion that you're the guy at a station that lists 43 currents.

 

[neutral_observer]

Re: BECKY

> Good point. Seems "Becky" wouldn't be the best choice. Some
> stations choose Kathy, Jennifer, Jessica, etc... I've seen a
> different name on most every profile...
>
> Jennifer actually seems the most likely choice if your
> target was born 1970+...
>
> If she is a little older, Lisa is a better pick:...


Interesting...

I count as friends both a "Becky" and a "Lisa"...well, several "Lisas," as a matter of fact.

Both are very much within the usual target, but, apart from the most-basic characteristics, two very different people...sort of a wacky idea thinking of talking to them both simultaneously!

You know, though, where they went different ways and became very different people was in the men they married...or, more specifically, the men they believed themselves capable of attracting for marriage.

But that's a whole 'nother topic...mostly....


Anyway, I'm assuming "Becky" was the product of what was, to the attendees, an apparently shockingly revolutionary session at a Brad Burkhart or GMA seminar....

 

[radioelizabeth]

Re: BECKY

neutral_observer wrote:
"Both are very much within the usual target, but, apart from the most-basic characteristics, two very different people...sort of a wacky idea thinking of talking to them both simultaneously!"

Well... they both might be listening...but no good jock talks to more than ONE person at a time.


"You know, though, where they went different ways and became very different people was in the men they married...or, more specifically, the men they believed themselves capable of attracting for marriage."


Well... certainly. That isn't suprising. The man in a woman's life has much to do with how she functions. From an on-air perspective, that must be considered in creating her profile and delivering the break.

It is interesting that statistically, she might be even be single, divorced, widowed, or engaged...or recovering from a broken heart or a tug of war (emotional or physical) with her youngest, 5 months pregnant, or just dealing with day to day to day to day....

In any case...the men, women, and children in her life are areas that should always be incorporated into the content when talking with her...

For the most part...whatever her name...you can bet she is exhausted, overwhelmed, tired, stressed, overworked, & underpaid. She wants to lose about 5-10 pounds, is lonelier than her life projects, hasn't treated herself to ... well...anything...in ages, says "yes" when she really wants to say "no", still hasn't had time to meet her best friend for coffee, and wishes she was working out more. She feels a bit unappreciated, desires to be a better wife, mother, sister, and friend, and is in desperate need of "something" more...

She also wants someone around who isn't demanding a thing from her...like a familiar favorite song she can sing along to and some good company...a friend.

And that is where RADIO gets to be so much more than just a frequency on the dial.


e<P ID="signature">______________
RADIOELIZABETH
Pleasant, Passionate, Persuasive
www.radioelizabeth.com</P>

 

[neutral_observer]

Re: BECKY

> And that is where RADIO gets to be so much more than just a
> frequency on the dial.
>
>
> e


Nice............

 

[smashedcd]

becky bob lisa and lance?

who the heck is becky? lisa? i guess radio has changed. i have no clue what yall are talking about now. but i did get live 365 ..now i can listen to MY music on the radio..ALL of my music!! xm in the truck. live 365 in the house..priceless!!<P ID="signature">______________
note to the NAB..satellite radio..its worth paying for!!</P>

 

[radioelizabeth]

Re: becky bob lisa and lance?

smashed cd wrote:
"who the heck is becky? lisa? i guess radio has changed."


hey smashedcd...

"becky" is the name some Christian AC stations use to identify their target. (the "name" of the "listener")

That is: for marketing purposes, most companies use a target consumer. A complete profile is established of the target's life. It helps to keep all content in advertising, marketing, promotion, and such consistent...because everyone within the company focuses on this "target" and everything is filtered through him/her.

Obviously individuals are not going to fit perfectly into this profile, but most of us, whether we want to believe it or not...can be wrapped up pretty neatly into a ball of statistics.


e


<P ID="signature">______________
RADIOELIZABETH
Pleasant, Passionate, Persuasive
www.radioelizabeth.com</P>

 

[rbrucecarter]

> It's a fact that Hardly any AC's touched it when it was a
> current in the early '90s. AC sounded different then.

I think you hit the nail on the head. Said another way - AC is about 15 years behind the curve.

radioelizabeth always has some good thoughts. I think she also hit the nail on the head when she said 40,000 UT students are not their target demographic. Sad - most Austin stations are fighting over that demographic because of the enormouse disposable income. I wouldn't even think of putting something on the air in Austin that didn't attempt to reach the enormously young profile of residents. Austin is a young city, and if there was ever a city ripe for a HOT-AC, CHR, or Christian rock station it would be the one. Now, if 102.3 wants to program to the sad old demographic that says 25 year old women are exactly the same as 54 year old women, that is their right and I wish them the best. Personally, I don't see any 25 year old women in quilting bees, knitting, going to covered dish dinners, etc. They are a lot more fun than that! And every single woman I know in Dallas under the age of 35 or so listens to Power FM Christian rock, NOT KLTY. Or they listen to secular because KLTY disenfranchises them. They could really use a good focus group of listeners to find out what younger women REALLY listen to. I keep saying it - I keep getting ridiculed, maybe its not scientific - but look in any church. Either older couples are there, or younger couples. Very seldom both. So it is with radio and stations better figure out the difference. And its the younger ones going to the mall and spending money.

 

[radioelizabeth]

Bruce Carter wrote:
"radioelizabeth always has some good thoughts."

Thanks!

"I think she also hit the nail on the head when she said 40,000 UT students are not their target demographic. Sad - most Austin stations are fighting over that demographic because of the enormouse disposable income."

Now, are we talking Christian AC or CHR or Pop?

Disposable income... that is a point...but please show me the stats on WHERE that money is going. Odds are these kids are NOT going to support a non-commercial station...so, show me a support system or that a commercial Christian CHR could survive the expense of targeting them. If the advertisers are there, then a station could be too.

"I wouldn't even think of putting something on the air in Austin that didn't attempt to reach the enormously young profile of residents."

I'm sure the attempt to reach is there, but perhaps not exclusively or as target.


"Austin is a young city, and if there was ever a city ripe for a HOT-AC, CHR, or Christian rock station it would be the one."

Again, radio is not free. So the funding has got to be there. If there are advertisers targeting this demo, then a commercial station could be viable...but it would take a great sales team, amazing marketing, and strong numbers...not to mention diary placement. AND if you are targeting this demo to those clients...are these kids even taking time to fill out diaries that show they listen?

Is the marketing grass roots? Is the goal of the station to give them music? Then show were this demo is using radio more than ipods, cds, etc...

It just needs to make sense to a bottom line (whatever that line is)...if it does, someone will do it.

"Now, if 102.3 wants to program to the sad old demographic that says 25 year old women are exactly the same as 54 year old women, that is their right and I wish them the best."

That isn't the correct principal. It's TARGET and then reach by default...we are all...whether we want to admit it or not... statistics.

"They could really use a good focus group of listeners to find out what younger women REALLY listen to."

I'm certain these stations are using focus groups and heavy research. You don't program a successful station without it. TRUST ME. CC, Cox, Salem (etc) are not going to just "wing it".

Have YOU collected a focus group? Care to share the stats? Not just your circle of friends... a real focus group? Because it's one thing to THINK women like something...it's another thing to hear what they actually say.

"I keep saying it - I keep getting ridiculed, maybe its not scientific - but look in any church."

Not ridiculed...informed. Really. Anecdotal research is dangerous.
Even the church will have demos.

"So it is with radio and stations better figure out the difference."

Do you honestly believe successful ACs haven't figured out what works?


"And its the younger ones going to the mall and spending money."

Dropping $200 on a binge at the mall is NOT the same as spending THOUSANDS in one month on raising a family.


<P ID="signature">______________
RADIOELIZABETH
Pleasant, Passionate, Persuasive
www.radioelizabeth.com</P>

 

[neutral_observer]

> Said another way - AC is about 15 years behind the curve.

Noooo...said a more accurate way, Bruce Carter's perception of Christian AC -- heavily, if not exclusively, defined by KLTY -- is about 15 years behind the curve! Well, probably more like 5-10....but definitely behind.



> I think she
> also hit the nail on the head when she said 40,000 UT
> students are not their target demographic. Sad - most
> Austin stations are fighting over that demographic because
> of the enormouse disposable income.

Bruce, here are the formats of the top 16 stations in Austin:

Country
Country
AC
News/Talk
CHR/Rhythmic
Adult Hits
Urban
Regional Mexican
Regional Mexican
CHR/Pop
Hot AC
Triple A
Rhythmic Oldies
Classic Rock (now the Christian AC)
Classic Rock
Sports

I see, at most, three stations that might be targeting college students...not a single one could be said to be definitely doing it. Active Rock has failed in that city. Alternative is even farther down below the ones I gave you. Where is this "most Austin stations are fighting over that demographic" that you claim?

And, by the way, there's "disposable income," and there's "discretionary income"...and college students generally aren't known for either!


> I wouldn't even think of putting something on the air in Austin that
> didn't attempt to reach the enormously young profile of residents.

Well, Clear Channel, CBS, Emmis, Univision, and Border Media Partners all seem to disagree with you.



> ...program to the sad old demographic that says 25 year old women are
> exactly the same as 54 year old women...

I've never heard anyone say that...except you.



> Personally, I don't see any 25 year old women in
> quilting bees, knitting, going to covered dish dinners, etc.

I'm not sure I see any 54 year-old women doing that, either! Do you??? Do you really see that?? You said you're 51...is that what you and your peers are doing?



> (KLTY) could really use a good focus group of listeners to find out what
> younger women REALLY listen to.

Just one?

Focus groups (plural!) produce questions, not answers! Much broader research is needed to really find out what's going on.



> ...look in any church. Either older couples are there, or younger couples.
> Very seldom both.

By their chosen styles of worship (read: music), churches tend to decide which direction they're going to lean, but I don't think I've seen a church that is in a true "either/or" state!

And that statement mistakenly assumes a church can produce only one or one kind of service. Why? Are you not aware that there are churches that divide out youth and children and do completely different kinds of services for them? Are you not aware that there are churches that offer different services at different times or concurrently in different venues and, sometimes, even on different campusses?

You complain about "stations" and "churches" and "things" being "stuck," but, best I can tell, it's you who are stuck!

Uh...you know...no offense...



> So it is with radio and stations better figure out the difference.

What makes you think they aren't? Is your perspective so limited to KLTY and its special circumstances that you can't see beyond and check out what's going on?

Come on, Bruce...I'm absolutely confident you're more capable than that!

 

[RickRose]

If KLTY does not appeal to women in their mid-20s then how are they in the top 3 for women in that group with a strong push at maybe even hitting number one in that 25-54 demo in the future. If I did that well in key demos I would not be changing my station to be less successful.