atlantaboy said:
If you have access to this expensive data, which no one else on the entire forum has access to (even people in the industry that could log on and back up what you're claiming), it's almost certain that you work or have worked in the industry, most likely for CBS Radio, since they're based out of NYC, and because you've cited that you have "friends who work for Cumulus and Clear Channel"
Actually, I don't believe I said that. But I have friends and acquaintances who work for just about any of the larger radio owners and for lots of the smaller ones. But I don't work for CBS, and have never worked for them. If you had bothered to click the link below (as I have mentioned twice before) you could click on the "bio" section and satisfy your frustrated curiosity and cure your case of misinformation and faulty conclusions.
The only reason I'm bringing this up is because IMO it's extremely difficult to be objective about a situation that you are personally involved in
I'm not involved with it. I am about as far from a decision about alternative as anyone involved in the industry and with radio in NYC can be. OTOH, your passion and deep belief in alternative do, in fact, make you extremely partial and biased.
Even if we assume that the billing data you are providing is correct, and WRFF is near to dead last in billing (which, again, seems very unlikely and which no one else has been able to confirm), that billing issue could have hundreds of causes - there's no evidence that their financial situation is caused by the fact that they are Alternative - especially since the one Alternative station in the country that does have publically accessible billing information, KROQ, just happens to be billing
higher than its share[/quote]
There are 45 commercial stations in the Philly MSA. 18th is nowhere near "dead last".
KROQ is the big exception. It has been around for going on 4 decades as a rock station, and more than two decades as a modern or alternative rocker. It has a powerful morning show, which produces a large percentage of the revenue, and has established buyer credibility over many, many decades. Totally unlike near jockless WRFF, which lives in the shadow of "that other rock station".
Another fact that cannot be disputed is that in Philadelphia, Alternative radio is more popular with the 18-34 demo than CHR/Pop radio, so the grim picture you paint of the Alternative format doesn't at all match publically accessible articles, facts, and trends, especially the article I cited on AllAccess showing that Alternative was among the highest growing formats for this book - if Philadelphia Alternative radio has the potential to attract more youth than CHR/Pop, then many other markets in the country must certainly have this potential
You are projecting ratings into revenue. The whole reason that folks in the business talk about Power Ratios is that there is not a one-to-one conversion of ratings into revenue. Some stations get nearly double their "ratings based share" while some others get far less than their share would seem to indicate.
In order for what you're arguing to be true, there would have to be something inheritantly(sic) more expensive about programming and staffing Alternative radio as opposed to all other formats
Again, expenses have nothing to do with billing. Billing is gross income, before any expenses are applied. So whether WRFF's expenses are higher, lower or the same as comparable stations is totally irrelevant.
f this were true, we wouldn't see Clear Channel flipping new stations to Alternative from Rhythmic/CHR, and over the course of the last decade, Clear Channel would've likely flipped the huge number of major market Alternative stations that they currently own
You have a misunderstanding of how stations decide on format. It's based on evaluation of signal, the competitive array and the market... often after an ATU-based format search research project. But, based on the multiple unsuccessful past and present formats at CC in Atlanta, they don't seem to have the process down to a science, so using that market as a poster child for anything is absurd.
Many posts in this forum, over the last couple years I've been on it, have stated that Alternative bills slightly higher than its share, not lower, because the demo tends to be wealthy and has, on average, more potential income to spend
The 18-34 demo, leaning male, is hardly considered wealthy. It's where the highest unemployment rates in America are to be found.
On average, alternative has below-1 power ratios and it has been this way going back to when revenues began being publicly revealed by publications like Duncan's American Radio (available online, btw).
- I believe the figure was, on average, that Alternative bills 1.4 times its share, but that's from quoting other posters
The average for stations that self describe as alternative is around 0.9. The higher than average ones are KROQ and stations in Grand Rapids, Columbia, San Diego, Tallahassee, Austin, Santa Barbara, Kalamazoo, Sacramento, Rochester. The really low ones are ABQ, Denver, Boston, Champign, Hartford, Knoxville, San Francisco, SLC, Norfolk, Albany, Dallas, Providence, Portland ME, Anchorage, Dayton and KYSR in LA (among others)
- I do know from listening to Radio 105.7 that advertisers flocked to the station extremely quickly, and the amount of advertising is already comparable to stations like Q100 and Star 94
Billing is based on having a good level of sellout at good rates. New stations usually sell dirt cheap since there is no ratings history (agencies don't buy off single books) or they give bonus spots to potential clients until the station either justifies a higher rate or changes format. Counting the number of spots is no way to calculate revenues unless you know the average spot rates for each station.
