Remember when there used to be radio in LA?

[JohnnyOhJohnny]

I would like to know if this could ever turn around and radio go back to the way it was in the 70's?

 

[flashback]

I would like to know if this could ever turn around and radio go back to the way it was in the 70's?

i would love that myself but i think the geni is out of the bottle.

 

[TheBigA]

I would like to know if this could ever turn around and radio go back to the way it was in the 70's?

Sure. Just pass a law that forces everyone to throw away their computers, their cell phones, their mp3 players, and cable TV. That's all it would take, and radio could be just like it was in the 70s. Of course people would have to wear leasure suits too.

 

[flashback]

I would like to know if this could ever turn around and radio go back to the way it was in the 70's?

Sure. Just pass a law that forces everyone to throw away their computers, their cell phones, their mp3 players, and cable TV. That's all it would take, and radio could be just like it was in the 70s. Of course people would have to wear leasure suits too.

i avoided leasure suits then .i think i could avoid them now.

it would be nice to have good personality music programs though.is that too much to ask?

 

[TheBigA]

it would be nice to have good personality music programs though.is that too much to ask?

It's probably too much to ask in Indiana.

 

[ChannelFlipper]

it would be nice to have good personality music programs though.is that too much to ask?

It's probably too much to ask in Indiana.

Cue "Indiana wants me, Lord I can't go back there..."

 

[GenXRadio]

Hey Big A, just so you know in my 20 years in radio I have worked in just about every capacity one can work and while I have never been a GM I am very well attuned the inner workings of the business so don't try to denegrate my knowledge or experience.
With that out of the way I will say that radio isn't an "all or nothing" proposition, you CAN be strong revenue wise and STILL have great programming that isn't milk toast or homogenized.
What has always brought people to radio is engaging, innovative programming, a dynamic sales dept brings in the revenue to bring in the people to perform that programming but I think that too many in upper management have just gone with the slash & voice track as the way to up revenue and programming be damned so long as they hold their spot in the book or now in the PPM so show their advertisers.
With centralized ownership it's just about the numbers and also more properties = more costs so with a more diverse ownership pool operating costs are spread out.
I know a poster said that he encouraged competition between his stations but TRUE competition comes from different ownership groups opposing one another and until centralized ownership is addressed then we're going to have what we have now which is "safe programming" that's overly researched and is going to seem stale, boring and same old.
Like I said it IS possible to do both

It's amazing how something like ownership rules can affect so many aspects of something but if you think about it I suspect you will come to agree with me.

Sure, of course people who don't know or understand business will agree with you. They think it's all about doing a show. Most people who work in programming have never had to go on sales calls, have never had to raise money, and have never watched as hundreds of thousands of dollars of their own money have gone up in smoke. So it's easy to agree with you when you don't have your own money on the line. It's like being in Las Vegas and playing with "house money."

If it was your personal money on the line, you'd feel very differently. Every programming person who has ever been promoted to GM will tell you that.

 

[TheBigA]

Like I said it IS possible to do both

Tell that to Saul Levine.

In radio, it's ALWAYS about the numbers. It was in 1966, and it is now. Why? Delivering better value to advertisers. It doesn't matter if you own one station or eight, you still need to show advertisers they're getting ROI by using your station. If you can't do that, nothing else matters. It's just one very expensive hobby.

 

[davideduardo]

Hey Big A, just so you know in my 20 years in radio I have worked in just about every capacity one can work and while I have never been a GM I am very well attuned the inner workings of the business so don't try to denegrate my knowledge or experience.

Your further statements show why you have never been a GM. You have a major misunderstanding of the role of the manager in any business: satisfy the customers and make a profit. In radio, keeping the paid customers happy means providing a lot of ears for the clients' messages.

That you did not pick up on this is not surprising; I've known lots of people who have a year's experience in radio, twenty times over. Overcoming this requires becoming an ally of management, not the typical "bitch about everything" adversary.

With that out of the way I will say that radio isn't an "all or nothing" proposition, you CAN be strong revenue wise and STILL have great programming that isn't milk toast(sic) or homogenized.

What is milquetoast to one is passionately sought by another; what seems homogenized to some is simply the momen's favorite hits to another.

What has always brought people to radio is engaging, innovative programming, a dynamic sales dept brings in the revenue to bring in the people to perform that programming...

It's actually the other way around... produce the product that gets ratings and rings the cash register and the revenue will follow.

Of course, to today's audience, "innovative and engaging" is not the same as Teddy Turntable yukking up to the post in the 60's and 70's. Today, talking to listeners reveals that talking over the songs, not commercials, is often the biggest negative. Today's radio requires a new skillset that involves not just on air but involvement with social media and texting and similar things.

but I think that too many in upper management have just gone with the slash & voice track as the way to up revenue and programming be damned so long as they hold their spot in the book or now in the PPM so show their advertisers.

Cutting expenses does not increase revenue. It may increase profit (or BCF) but it does not increase revenue. And "voice tracking" was far more prevalent in the 70's then it is today, so don't march that one out.

With centralized ownership it's just about the numbers and also more properties = more costs so with a more diverse ownership pool operating costs are spread out.

You obviously don't know that, when banks were lending for smaller radio projects, it was easier to finance a 10 station deal in 5 markets than a single station deal in one market? That's because the risk was spread out, and while one market might go bad, not all of them would...

... until the recession. Now, with revenues off by 30% to 40% over 2007 levels, stations have to find a way to cut about that much in costs. This is not bad management... it's preservation of the business, large or small.

I know a poster said that he encouraged competition between his stations but TRUE competition comes from different ownership groups opposing one another

Not necessarily. I challenged and rewarded the staff of each station in my case to take no prisoners. The end result was having 5 of the top 10 in each socioeconomic level, A, B and C, in a market with upwards of 60 stations and no daytimers and no rimshots. It works.

and until centralized ownership is addressed then we're going to have what we have now which is "safe programming" that's overly researched and is going to seem stale, boring and same old.

"Overly resarched" means that the station talks too much to its listeners. How is that a bad thing?

 

[TheBigA]

I know a poster said that he encouraged competition between his stations but TRUE competition comes from different ownership groups opposing one another

Exactly. And CC is doing everything it can to kick the stuffings out of CBS or Citadel or someone else. If they couldn't do it by owning 8 stations, they'd do it by owning something else. There will always be someone bigger, faster, more powerful. All that's changed are the rules to the game, but the game is still the same. RKO couldn't own 8 stations in LA, but they could own stations in other markets and leverage those other stations in various ways to compete against everyone lese. Plus they had resources in other businesses that helped when they needed it. The main difference between radio now and then is that we now have mainly radio-only companies. Back then, we had tire companies, insurance companies, car dealerships, and movie companies owning radio. But there will always be some way to leverage what you have to kick the other guy's tush. It's still happening now, just not as publicly as it used to be.

 

[GenXRadio]

I may have used the wrong word when I said "overly researched" what I mean by that is simply ONLY going by the numbers instead of trusting your programming intuitions.
It's like the baseball manager who only goes by the #'s when managingsituationally in a game, sometimes a guy bucks the numbers he has historically put up against left handed pitching or a righty with 2 men on and 1 out but some managers get hamstrung by those numbers and don't trust their gut and have seen how hard the guy has worked to improve and do themselves a disservice by not letting him prove that he CAN succeed in a situation he hasn't done so in the past.
I think many radio companies do the same thing, sure it is easy to say that when it's not my money but really there is ALWAYS some element of rick in any business venture it's how you manage that risk that seperates those who are successful and those who are not.

As for my comment about innovation and engaging programming no ones saying you need to schmaltzy but there are ways to capture todays audience in a fun,engaging fashion instead of being same old same old, sure the same old has done well in the past but it's just that the PAST and those who don't embrace change are most certain to get passed by.

I think that some of you guys are looking at my userid and think i'm some punk kid who doesn't know anything or because you've been in upper management obviously you know more than I do and I should just be shooed away and while I don't know everything and would never purport to I am confident my points have merit and if radio is to continue to be viable we need people to think outside the box, take some chances that was my main point.

One last thing, if you think that centralized ownership is a "good" thing, if you think that having one massive programming dept determining what the whole country or most of the country hears is a good thing than you've been in upper management WAY too long!
I'm not saying strong national ownership groups are necessarily evil, what I would say is that the cookie cutter radio being imposed around the country by CC and other groups is bad for radio, it may be good for their profit report but bad for the listener and how can that be good?

Hey Big A, just so you know in my 20 years in radio I have worked in just about every capacity one can work and while I have never been a GM I am very well attuned the inner workings of the business so don't try to denegrate my knowledge or experience.

Your further statements show why you have never been a GM. You have a major misunderstanding of the role of the manager in any business: satisfy the customers and make a profit. In radio, keeping the paid customers happy means providing a lot of ears for the clients' messages.

That you did not pick up on this is not surprising; I've known lots of people who have a year's experience in radio, twenty times over. Overcoming this requires becoming an ally of management, not the typical "bitch about everything" adversary.

With that out of the way I will say that radio isn't an "all or nothing" proposition, you CAN be strong revenue wise and STILL have great programming that isn't milk toast(sic) or homogenized.

What is milquetoast to one is passionately sought by another; what seems homogenized to some is simply the momen's favorite hits to another.

What has always brought people to radio is engaging, innovative programming, a dynamic sales dept brings in the revenue to bring in the people to perform that programming...

It's actually the other way around... produce the product that gets ratings and rings the cash register and the revenue will follow.

Of course, to today's audience, "innovative and engaging" is not the same as Teddy Turntable yukking up to the post in the 60's and 70's. Today, talking to listeners reveals that talking over the songs, not commercials, is often the biggest negative. Today's radio requires a new skillset that involves not just on air but involvement with social media and texting and similar things.

but I think that too many in upper management have just gone with the slash & voice track as the way to up revenue and programming be damned so long as they hold their spot in the book or now in the PPM so show their advertisers.

Cutting expenses does not increase revenue. It may increase profit (or BCF) but it does not increase revenue. And "voice tracking" was far more prevalent in the 70's then it is today, so don't march that one out.

With centralized ownership it's just about the numbers and also more properties = more costs so with a more diverse ownership pool operating costs are spread out.

You obviously don't know that, when banks were lending for smaller radio projects, it was easier to finance a 10 station deal in 5 markets than a single station deal in one market? That's because the risk was spread out, and while one market might go bad, not all of them would...

... until the recession. Now, with revenues off by 30% to 40% over 2007 levels, stations have to find a way to cut about that much in costs. This is not bad management... it's preservation of the business, large or small.

I know a poster said that he encouraged competition between his stations but TRUE competition comes from different ownership groups opposing one another

Not necessarily. I challenged and rewarded the staff of each station in my case to take no prisoners. The end result was having 5 of the top 10 in each socioeconomic level, A, B and C, in a market with upwards of 60 stations and no daytimers and no rimshots. It works.

and until centralized ownership is addressed then we're going to have what we have now which is "safe programming" that's overly researched and is going to seem stale, boring and same old.

"Overly resarched" means that the station talks too much to its listeners. How is that a bad thing?

 

[TheBigA]

One last thing, if you think that centralized ownership is a "good" thing, if you think that having one massive programming dept determining what the whole country or most of the country hears is a good thing than you've been in upper management WAY too long!

But that's not what's happening. If anything, we're at a point right now where there's a very concerted effort NOT to do that. Even at Citadel, where they have satellite delivered formats available from Dallas, they can't get their own radio stations to carry them. Ryan Seacrest is losing more CC affiliates than he is gaining. That takes courage, and it's happening. Entercom just fired Alan Kabel, who was doing a company-wide 7-midnight country show. They're replacing him with local hosts in every market.

I would say is that the cookie cutter radio being imposed around the country by CC and other groups is bad for radio, it may be good for their profit report but bad for the listener and how can that be good?

The only thing I'm consistently seeing as being "imposed" is you have to be right. You can take a chance on a song or a format, but you better be right. So how willing are you to take a chance? It's happening every day on songs and formats. But the fact is that McDonald's is still killing the competition, and cookie cutter works. Sure, it leaves out 8% of the population, but they subscribe to satellite anyway, so who cares?

 

[jprg]

Ipod's, satellite, MP3, Internet, etc. No need to regular radio anymore. Sad, yes. I was in the business for 20 years so now I dream of what was but I too listen to my iPod 90% of the time. It's like books are dated, now that the Kindle is out. Again sad. Borders just filed for bankruptcy. Sign of a new generation.

 

[BJordan]

Life Goes On. Radio will never be the same in LA.

 

[TheBigA]

Life Goes On. Radio will never be the same in LA.

Yep. That's what Bob Crane said when he left KNX for TV. He was #1 in morning drive, and left his job as King of the Los Angeles Airwaves to become Col. Robert Hogan, and never looked back. Radio was never the same again.

 

[kenb]

SCHULLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLTTTTTTTTZZZZZZ!!! Even he couldn't fix problems... I prefer MY MUSIC files to listen to, because I have variety and don't have to listen to the same songs over-and-over played-into-the-ground. This seems the way it is and on the radio and the future doesn't look much better. IPOD/MP3 players are the way to go. I've put my library on my ANDROID phone SD card. I purchased an expanded 16mb memory card. Now, wherever I go, I am never disappointed, as I have have my full music library with me.

 

[ChannelFlipper]

Life Goes On. Radio will never be the same in LA.

Yep. That's what Bob Crane said when he left KNX for TV. He was #1 in morning drive, and left his job as King of the Los Angeles Airwaves to become Col. Robert Hogan, and never looked back. Radio was never the same again.

Hogan's Heroes still on Channel 56, KDOC.

 

[LKellerIII]

SCHULLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLTTTTTTTTZZZZZZ!!! Even he couldn't fix problems... I prefer MY MUSIC files to listen to, because I have variety and don't have to listen to the same songs over-and-over played-into-the-ground. This seems the way it is and on the radio and the future doesn't look much better. IPOD/MP3 players are the way to go. I've put my library on my ANDROID phone SD card. I purchased an expanded 16mb memory card. Now, wherever I go, I am never disappointed, as I have have my full music library with me.

IMHO, this is what's going to put the biggest hurt on radio. I've never been an 'early adopter,' but I finally got an iPod about a year ago. It took some months and some work to build a good music library, but now I rarely tune in music radio anymore...just occasionally when I'm curious about some new format or station, then it's back to the iPod.

It's just too cheap and easy to download music. I refuse to pirate music, and I know a buck or $1.29 doesn't seem cheap, but compare it to the 1960s or 70s, when we had to pay a buck for an 45 RPM single, and an album cost $3 at The Wherehouse. Adjusted for inflation, music is much cheaper to buy now - and needless to say - much more portable.

 

[stevations]

Some of decline in radio has to do with the fact that the tattoo and body piercing generation has steered the music into crapola.

 

[kenb]

I'll second that.