Riverside-San Bernardino Market orphan?

[Pattern.Guru]

My question is about the area named by Arbitron as
San Bernardino County West Outer.

It seems to be approximately a bit more than the "panhandle" of San Bernardino County bounded by the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, and Riverside. I cannot tell the precise northern boundary with the Victor Valley market, but this San Bernardino County West Outer area seems like it may contain roughly the Ontario, Chino, Chino Hills areas.

San Bernardino County West Outer is surrounded by 3 markets
Los Angeles
Riverside-San Bernardino
Victor Valley

San Bernardino County West Outer is colored white on the Arbitron map, meaning not included in any Arbitron market.
This agrees with the Market Definitions of the 3 neighboring markets, which do not include it in either the Metro or TSA.

It seems quite peculiar that such an urban/suburban area would not currently be measured at all as part of any Arbitron market.

I'm guessing that it may have been included as a sub-county area in one or more of the neighboring markets (either Metro or TSA) at some time in the past, but has fallen into a black hole lately.

Or is there some more sensible explanation?

Does anyone have memory of the history of this orphan area?

 

[ChannelFlipper]

There are a few people on this board such as David E. and Radioresearcher who can give you a more detailed answer, but the correct answer is... you are right! This area (which I lived in for many years) is Arbitron diary/PPM no-mans land. It is not measured for the LA Metro, nor for the IE metro. Part of the reasoning, is that people who live in these areas can pick up listenable quality signals from both markets and thus may not be listening to any of the stations in the measured market, which dilute (some may even say "contaminate") the sample by not giving a real apples to apples comparison (everyone has access to more or less the same listenable signals) for each specific market. This is especially true for the IE sample, which of course is much smaller than the LA sample, and is thus more subject to this form of variability, which they are trying to exclude.

 

[davideduardo]

.
I'm guessing that it may have been included as a sub-county area in one or more of the neighboring markets (either Metro or TSA) at some time in the past, but has fallen into a black hole lately.

Or is there some more sensible explanation?

Does anyone have memory of the history of this orphan area?

The foothill area of San Bernardino County from the LA County border through Fontana and Rancho Cucamonga and to Rialto is unmeasured.

If you open the Arbitron map and do many successive zooms, either with your PDF viewer's "+" tool or successive double clicking you can see the exact areas of each survey.

Arbitron Metropolitan Survey Areas sometimes use the OMB Metropolitan Statistical Area definitions, but are principally defined by usage of radio stations that are "home" to various cities. OMB definitions are based on what used to be called trade zones... radio MSA´s are listening-based with an element of heritage and also a portion of station / advertiser needs.

The MSAs often have definitions going back to when AM was the dominant medium. Most LA AMs did not cover the IE, and there were local stations. Way, way back Riverside and San Bernardino were separate markets... so there was great fragmentation of geography.

Riverside and San Bernardino Counties have a lot of desert, and three non-overlapping AM radio markets... in fact, very little FM overlapping, either: Victor Valley, Palm Springs and Riverside/San Bernardino.

Apparently, since the counties were chopped into pieces, they used very specific towns and areas to define the markets. As was explained to me, LA did not want the area as the IE stations would dilute their shares, and the IE did not want the area as the LA station would dilute the shares. So nobody got the area.

It was part of the LA TSA, but most PPM markets don't have TSA's any more.

 

[Pattern.Guru]

There are a few people on this board such as David E. and Radioresearcher who can give you a more detailed answer, but the correct answer is... you are right! This area (which I lived in for many years) is Arbitron diary/PPM no-mans land. It is not measured for the LA Metro, nor for the IE metro. Part of the reasoning, is that people who live in these areas can pick up listenable quality signals from both markets and thus may not be listening to any of the stations in the measured market, which dilute (some may even say "contaminate") the sample by not giving a real apples to apples comparison (everyone has access to more or less the same listenable signals) for each specific market. This is especially true for the IE sample, which of course is much smaller than the LA sample, and is thus more subject to this form of variability, which they are trying to exclude.

The foothill area of San Bernardino County from the LA County border through Fontana and Rancho Cucamonga and to Rialto is unmeasured.

As was explained to me, LA did not want the area as the IE stations would dilute their shares, and the IE did not want the area as the LA station would dilute the shares. So nobody got the area.

It was part of the LA TSA, but most PPM markets don't have TSA's any more.

Would you elaborate on industry thinking regarding excluding the huge number of listeners in the San Bernardino County West Outer area from any measurement whatsoever so that it does not "dilute" or "contaminate" the ratings? I'm having trouble grasping the concept.

Among the Top 70 (arbitrary number, I just stopped at that point) Arbitron markets, I can find no other example of a "Donut Hole" where an urbanized area with a large population is part of no market, either Metro or TSA.

Question: If this San Bernardino County West Outer area was its own separate market, how high would it rank?

If you open the Arbitron map and do many successive zooms, either with your PDF viewer's "+" tool or successive double clicking you can see the exact areas of each survey.

David, I have zoomed that Arbitron map and zoomed it ALL the way up until the bright red of the Los Angeles market is giving me a sunburn.

Yes, I can see the shape and size of this San Bernardino County West Outer area. But as you will notice, this map shows nothing except county boundaries and intra-county Arbitron market boundaries.

There is nothing else: no city names, no roads, absolutely nothing else. Just colors of the areas based on market rank (or the brilliant white of areas which are in no market at all).

Now I am sure that for those familiar with that portion of San Bernardino County one can guess where the boundaries are.

The western boundary with Los Angeles County, the southern boundary with Orange County, and the eastern boundary with Riverside County are trivial.

Even for a person such as myself, who is familiar with San Bernardino County from visiting occasionally and looking at maps, the two sections of boundary within the county
1. with the Victor Valley Market
2. with the Riverside-San Bernardino Market
are not at all obvious.

Maybe they have used freeway(s).
Maybe they are city limits.
Maybe they are zip code boundaries.
Maybe some combination of these, and some witches brew thrown in for good measure.

That was the reason for my earlier related post about these intra-county boundaries.

 

[davideduardo]

Would you elaborate on industry thinking regarding excluding the huge number of listeners in the San Bernardino County West Outer area from any measurement whatsoever so that it does not "dilute" or "contaminate" the ratings? I'm having trouble grasping the concept.

You are an LA station with a 5 share. Add a zone where audience is split with the IE stations, and where you have a 3 share. It could bring your LA numbers down by 0.3 to 0.4 share points, or nearly a whole tenth of a rating point.

If you are an IE station, and you get an 8 share, when you add the additional geography, you might be down to a 5.5 to 6 share. And it makes the LA stations look stronger, overall. This is where the "I don't need to buy the IE" thinking of advertisers creeps in, and they skip the market because they get great partial (and free) coverage from the LA stations. (Free, because pricing of LA stations is based on LA MSA cost per point, and the IE coverage is a bonus and not monetized).

Among the Top 70 (arbitrary number, I just stopped at that point) Arbitron markets, I can find no other example of a "Donut Hole" where an urbanized area with a large population is part of no market, either Metro or TSA.

There is another piece in SW Riverside County, IIRC, and one on the Ventura /LA county line. Again, this is an issue of Arbitron Metros being radio-usage defined. And radio usage is affected by geography, particularly in areas with rough terrain.

Question: If this San Bernardino County West Outer area was its own separate market, how high would it rank?

I believe the area has about 800,000 persons. It only has two Home stations, the dreadful little 1510 AM and 93.5 FM, so there would be no ad support. Were population at the range I am guessing, the 12+ population would rank it around 70th, the size of El Paso or Albuquerque. Again, there would be nobody to pay for it, so it would never be created.

Maybe they have used freeway(s).
Maybe they are city limits.
Maybe they are zip code boundaries.

After counties, ZIP codes are the units used to construct the sample, based on population. The Census... through Claritas... provides ZIP Code level data to Arbitron. Sampling is done, in a perfect sample, to achieve proportional samples in all geographic areas of a market, which is why Arbitron recently created GeoZones to create subsets of areas of each county so that proportionality could be applied at a more granular level.

HDHAs and HDBAs are embedded in larger units, whether whole counties or portions of counties, and are used to try to get a more proportional sample.

In most markets, boundaries are based on county lines and are simple to follow. It's just a few counties that get chopped up. Fairfield County, CT, is another example of a split county.

 

[Pattern.Guru]

This is where the "I don't need to buy the IE" thinking of advertisers creeps in, and they skip the market because they get great partial (and free) coverage from the LA stations. (Free, because pricing of LA stations is based on LA MSA cost per point, and the IE coverage is a bonus and not monetized).

This "free coverage" is really fascinating to me.

There is another piece in SW Riverside County, IIRC, and one on the Ventura /LA county line.

1. Yes, according to the Arbitron zoomable map, there is a quite large area in SouthWestern Riverside County, running from the Orange County line just about to the Imperial County line which is part of no market. Arbitron calls it Riverside County West Outer.

2. The one that you mention on the Ventura/LA county line is not in any Metro, but Arbitron names it Ventura County East and it is included in the TSA of the Oxnard-Ventura market (and shown in gray on the Arbitron zoomable map).

I believe the area has about 800,000 persons. It only has two Home stations, the dreadful little 1510 AM and 93.5 FM, so there would be no ad support. Were population at the range I am guessing, the 12+ population would rank it around 70th, the size of El Paso or Albuquerque. Again, there would be nobody to pay for it, so it would never be created.

Thanks for this analysis. I imagine the advertisers in El Paso or Albuquerque would be jealous if they knew about the "free coverage" in SoCal!

In most markets, boundaries are based on county lines and are simple to follow. It's just a few counties that get chopped up. Fairfield County, CT, is another example of a split county.

Split counties are actually quite common in New England, such as York, ME, Hillsborough, NH, Grafton, VT, Worcester, MA, and many in CT.

They seem to be more rare outside of New England, except in Southern California.

 

[davideduardo]

This "free coverage" is really fascinating to me.

Radio ad buys that are based on ratings are usually done on a market by market basis. The advertiser establishes a price goal for ratings delivery, called cost per point, and evaluates the stations in the market based on CPP delivery. Usually, an agency starts with the highest rated stations and buys a few to many stations deep. Stations that don't meet the price goal... often because they target a different audience than what the advertiser wants... do not get on the buy.

When, and if, the IE gets a buy (the percentage of revenue from national and regional agencies going to larger markets is much higher than that which flows to smaller markets, which may be mostly local-direct business based), agencies may say, "we get enough spillage from LA. We don't need to buy this market" or they may only buy a couple of local stations, just to supplement the free coverage by the LA stations.

Generally, stations from LA that are in the top 10 in the IE don't contemplate the IE delivery in their rates to agencies, and they can't sell local business there, either. So the IE delivery is a bonus to the regular advertisers.

 

[Pattern.Guru]

Radio ad buys that are based on ratings are usually done on a market by market basis. The advertiser establishes a price goal for ratings delivery, called cost per point, and evaluates the stations in the market based on CPP delivery. Usually, an agency starts with the highest rated stations and buys a few to many stations deep. Stations that don't meet the price goal... often because they target a different audience than what the advertiser wants... do not get on the buy.

When, and if, the IE gets a buy (the percentage of revenue from national and regional agencies going to larger markets is much higher than that which flows to smaller markets, which may be mostly local-direct business based), agencies may say, "we get enough spillage from LA. We don't need to buy this market" or they may only buy a couple of local stations, just to supplement the free coverage by the LA stations.

Generally, stations from LA that are in the top 10 in the IE don't contemplate the IE delivery in their rates to agencies, and they can't sell local business there, either. So the IE delivery is a bonus to the regular advertisers.

Is it true that each station owner must pay Arbitron separately for each market in which they want to be rated?

Using the most recent ratings period, there are 47 stations rated in the L.A. market, and (excluding the dupe for KCXX) 26 stations rated for the Riverside_San Bernardino market.

My manual matching found 12 stations rated in both:
9 L.A. County stations: 8 FM, plus KTNQ-AM
1 Orange County station: KWIZ-FM Santa Ana
1 Riverside County station: KLYY-FM Riverside
1 Baja station: XEWW-AM Rosarito

Some of these are Top 10 and some are Bottom 10; I don't see a pattern.

So, these 12 station owners apparently believe it is worth paying Arbitron good money to be rated in two markets, but they really are getting no additional revenue?

If there is this much overlap between these 2 markets, it makes it that much more curious that the foothill area of San Bernardino County from the LA County border through Fontana and Rancho Cucamonga and to Rialto is unmeasured, because it is outside of any market.

Something just doesn't add up. The rule that works is "Follow the Money". Why would so many stations pay extra money to be rated in another market, but not gain any additional revenue?
These are not sentimental people running these radio groups. They must see a rate of return for the expense, don't you think?

 

[davideduardo]

Is it true that each station owner must pay Arbitron separately for each market in which they want to be rated?

All stations are rated, whether subscribed or not. All subscribers and all agency accounts see all the results. Only subscribed stations can use the data to make sales presentations.

Using the most recent ratings period, there are 47 stations rated in the L.A. market, and (excluding the dupe for KCXX) 26 stations rated for the Riverside_San Bernardino market.

Only subscribed stations show in the data Arbitron releases to the press.

Some of these are Top 10 and some are Bottom 10; I don't see a pattern.

Subscribers have their individual reasons. KTNQ, for example, would be part of the Univision contract, even though KTNQ has no usable signal in the IE. Contracts are by group, not by station.

So, these 12 station owners apparently believe it is worth paying Arbitron good money to be rated in two markets, but they really are getting no additional revenue?

In some cases, because a group is subscribed, their stations will show in any market they have a station. For example, CBS might have KFRG subscribed, in the IE, and that might blanket-cover all CBS stations.

KWIZ in the LA market (OC is not a separate market) would possibly appear in the IE market because Liberman has a station there...and has 4 FM signals and one AM in the LA market.

If there is this much overlap between these 2 markets, it makes it that much more curious that the foothill area of San Bernardino County from the LA County border through Fontana and Rancho Cucamonga and to Rialto is unmeasured, because it is outside of any market.

The subscribers in each market do not want that to happen. Just as, decades ago, the LA and IE market subscribers voted against combining the IE with LA.

Something just doesn't add up. The rule that works is "Follow the Money". Why would so many stations pay extra money to be rated in another market, but not gain any additional revenue?

They probably do not pay anything extra... I find it likely that the corporate deals for various companies with stations in both markets simply include all stations of that company.

The exception would be XEWW... they thought they could win in the LA market, the IE and in SD and apparently subscribed in all three places (the even had billboards in all three markets when they launched) and it appears their contract is still running. The project failed, and I doubt we will see them on the public lists in the future.

These are not sentimental people running these radio groups. They must see a rate of return for the expense, don't you think?

There is essentially no money to be made by an LA station from its IE ratings. And an IE station can't, due to coverage, make money in LA (the exception is KLYY, which has classified with Arbitron as an LA station in a procedure unique to Arbitron going back to "below the line" listing for out of market stations....)

 

[Pattern.Guru]

Thanks, David, for the background detail.

I did not know that there are group contracts, covering multiple stations and/or multiple markets. Well, what I really mean to say is that I assumed there are corporate contracts, but it never occurred to me that Arbitron would price it such that some additional stations and/or additional markets are included at no extra charge. Seems odd, but I'll take your word for it.

That is why I try my best not to assume, but it bit me in the butt again.

The subscribers in each market do not want that to happen. Just as, decades ago, the LA and IE market subscribers voted against combining the IE with LA.

Can you direct me to any history of the Southern California Arbitron market geography? Specifically,
1. the vote you mention above, against combining the IE with LA. When? How? And all the lurid details? Just once, or multiple votes?
2. It was mentioned earlier in this thread that Riverside and San Bernardino were separate markets at one time. When did that change, how, and why?
3. Is it a fact that the foothill area of San Bernardino County from the LA County border through Fontana and Rancho Cucamonga and to Rialto, which Arbitron labels San Bernardino County West Outer was once part of the TSA of the LA market? Was it also part of the TSA of the IE market? When did it become an orphan?

If you know a source for this type of info, please let me know. If not, anything that anyone can pass along will be greatly appreciated.

 

[davideduardo]

...it never occurred to me that Arbitron would price it such that some additional stations and/or additional markets are included at no extra charge.

It's not that there is no extra charge. It is just a blanket contract. Essentially, what happens is that if a subscriber who has stations in both LA and the IE will get the market reports for each market. Arbitron knows that they will share data, so that fact is built into the contract. Remember, subscribers see all stations... in LA around 60 stations show with some kind of numbers in the PPM.

Can you direct me to any history of the Southern California Arbitron market geography? Specifically,
1. the vote you mention above, against combining the IE with LA. When? How? And all the lurid details? Just once, or multiple votes?

It was before I lived in LA, meaning in the 80's sometime. I don't know anyone who remembers... perhaps a reader here may have the story.

But I can give you the process: in 1981, when I was a GM of a Miami station for Metroplex, the proposal to consolidate the Miami and Ft. Lauderdale survey areas was presented. A meeting was held, and each subscribed station had one vote. While all the AMs voted against, the FMs outnumbered them and the markets were combined after that. One single vote.

2. It was mentioned earlier in this thread that Riverside and San Bernardino were separate markets at one time. When did that change, how, and why?

That was back in the Pulse and Hooper days. I believe Arbitron has always had an IE metro that includes Riverside and San Bernardino.

3. Is it a fact that the foothill area of San Bernardino County from the LA County border through Fontana and Rancho Cucamonga and to Rialto, which Arbitron labels San Bernardino County West Outer was once part of the TSA of the LA market?

The LA TSA ended when diary measurement ended. The TSA was Kern East, Inyo, LA, Orange, all of Riverside and all of San Bernardino Counties, San Diego County North, Ventura County and Santa Barbara South.

Was it also part of the TSA of the IE market?

I believe the MSA and the TSA were the same.

 

[Huff]

It was before I lived in LA, meaning in the 80's sometime. I don't know anyone who remembers... perhaps a reader here may have the story.

2. It was mentioned earlier in this thread that Riverside and San Bernardino were separate markets at one time. When did that change, how, and why?

That was back in the Pulse and Hooper days. I believe Arbitron has always had an IE metro that includes Riverside and San Bernardino.

My historical research indicates that the LA radio metro has comprised more or less the same area during the entire Arbitron era (1966 to present)

The Riverside-San Bernardino markets have always been combined under Arbitron's measurement (though in its earliest days the market was labeled as San Bernardino-Riverside-Ontario.)

Oxnard-Ventura was not created as a separate metro until 1982, and Victor Valley is a much more recent creation with its first survey taking place in 2002.

Also, don't forget that Anaheim-Santa Ana (Orange County) was once a separate embedded two-book per year market (from 1976 to 1987). Stations like KEZY/1190 and KWIZ/1480 were able to show how they stood out against LA stations in their home county, but eventually the significance of the OC stations deteriorated to such a point that there was no longer any justification to support the area as a separate market.

 

[Pattern.Guru]

There is essentially no money to be made by an LA station from its IE ratings. And an IE station can't, due to coverage, make money in LA (the exception is KLYY, which has classified with Arbitron as an LA station in a procedure unique to Arbitron going back to "below the line" listing for out of market stations....)

Could you elaborate on
the exception is KLYY, which has classified with Arbitron as an LA station in a procedure unique to Arbitron going back to "below the line" listing for out of market stations....

 

[davideduardo]

Also, don't forget that Anaheim-Santa Ana (Orange County) was once a separate embedded two-book per year market (from 1976 to 1987). Stations like KEZY/1190 and KWIZ/1480 were able to show how they stood out against LA stations in their home county, but eventually the significance of the OC stations deteriorated to such a point that there was no longer any justification to support the area as a separate market.

That brings up a good counterpoint to the way rated markets are combined. If a market, embedded or otherwise, loses enough station support for Arbitron to consider it unprofitable both in the present or in the future, the market will be dropped.

In OC, few subscribing stations were left after several became ethnic or brokered or religious, and Arbitron bailed out.

There have been plenty of canceled stand-alone markets, but the only other embedded market I can think of offhand that has been dropped due to lack of support is Riverhead / The Hamptons.

 

[davideduardo]

the exception is KLYY, which has classified with Arbitron as an LA station in a procedure unique to Arbitron going back to "below the line" listing for out of market stations....[/b]

I have never gone through the process, but here is what happened:

KLYY (dating back to when it was KVAR) intended to primarily serve the Los Angeles MSA.

While for license purposes, they are a Riverside station, and must comply with FCC rules in that respect, we are talking about a marketing procedure.

When ratings books were printed, stations that got "numbers" that were not home to the market were listed "below the line" and not alphabetically among the home stations. They were below a black line in the report.

Stations wanting to appear among "local" stations had to petition Arbitron to get their primary market designated as a different one from their physical home market. As I said, I do not know the procedure and I don't even know how many of these there are nationally.

KLYY is considered by Arbitron to be Home to the LA MSA and "below the line" for the IE. Since there are no printed reports any more, I am not quite sure what good this does, other than appearing in any station lists from Arbitron as an LA station.

The reason, though, is simple: LA is a $780 million dollar radio market, while the IE is a $43 million market. LA is #1 in radio revenues, while the IE is 53rd in total market gross radio billing.

 

[davideduardo]

The Riverside-San Bernardino markets have always been combined under Arbitron's measurement (though in its earliest days the market was labeled as San Bernardino-Riverside-Ontario.)

Is my recollection correct of their being separate Hooper or Pulse books for Riverside and San Berdoo?

 

[Huff]

The Riverside-San Bernardino markets have always been combined under Arbitron's measurement (though in its earliest days the market was labeled as San Bernardino-Riverside-Ontario.)

Is my recollection correct of their being separate Hooper or Pulse books for Riverside and San Berdoo?

I've not found any direct evidence one way or the other. An ad for KFXM in the 9/15/47 issue of Broadcasting (pg. 60) references Hooper ratings and only mentions San Bernardino. However, surveys from KFXM and KMEN in the late 50s and 60s included references to both cities.

Also, one other short-lived embedded market: San Diego County North

 

[Pattern.Guru]

My historical research indicates that the LA radio metro has comprised more or less the same area during the entire Arbitron era (1966 to present)

I don't go back to ARB, Pulse, Hooper, and possibly others.

When you refer to the "Arbitron Era" as 1966 to present, would you say that applies nationwide?

In other words, has Arbitron been completely dominant in Radio ratings in the larger markets across the USA for nearly 50 years, even though there is Eastlan now, and maybe others through the years?

 

[Pattern.Guru]

The reason, though, is simple: LA is a $780 million dollar radio market, while the IE is a $43 million market. LA is #1 in radio revenues, while the IE is 53rd in total market gross radio billing.

So, comparing Metro 12+ population with revenue (total market gross radio billing)
New York ranks #1 with 15.87 m (approx 43% larger than LA) but is not #1 in revenues
Los Angeles is #2 with 11.04 m, but is #1 in revenues
Riverside-San Bernardino ranks #26 with 1.99 m, but only #53 in revenues

First, what would account for these great disparities between population and revenues?

Second, I have Googled looking for total radio market gross billing with no luck. Do you know if that is publicly available online?

 

[Huff]

My historical research indicates that the LA radio metro has comprised more or less the same area during the entire Arbitron era (1966 to present)

I don't go back to ARB, Pulse, Hooper, and possibly others.

When you refer to the "Arbitron Era" as 1966 to present, would you say that applies nationwide?

In other words, has Arbitron been completely dominant in Radio ratings in the larger markets across the USA for nearly 50 years, even though there is Eastlan now, and maybe others through the years?

Short answer: Yes

The American Research Bureau rolled out its first radio ratings in two test markets in 1964. In 1966, ARB rolled out to the top 30 or so markets and by virtue of its superior reports (detailed dayparts and demographics) as compared to Hooper and Pulse, it quickly became the lingua franca of radio ratings among agencies. Hooper and Pulse both lasted into the 70s, holding on to some relevance by A) more reports per year than ARB (monthly in major markets vs. 4 or 2 per year by ARB), and B) measurement of smaller markets in which ARB had yet to expand.

After the demise of Hooper and Pulse, Arbitron (as it had been re-christened in 1973) held a virtual monopoly on radio measurement, while still being locked in a head-to-head battle with Nieslen in TV ratings. Several competitors came and went... the most notable being Birch, which originated in 1978 and rose to levels of high acceptance among agencies during the 80s until it was bought out and shuttered in 1991. It remains the most successful company to date to have challenged Arbitron on the ratings front.