-
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
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
RUBBER CITY AND CLEAR CHANNEL
- Thread starter ericjbard
- Start date
Considering CBS is trying to get out of Cleveland to focus on their larger markets, Akron is a definite no.CleveFan said:I don't think CBS will enter into Akron and Canton as they are concentrating on larger markets. Cumulus maybe, but we shall see if there are other companies interested, but that's if CC is even going to sell stations in those markets.
Rumor has floated around for years that Cumulus is interested in the CBS Cleveland cluster, so perhaps they can target Akron using the Cleveland cluster. I'm just not sure who would be willing to sell to the Cloud in Akron.
In all seriousness...why would any sane investor want to own music-formatted radio stations in 2012+?
Most music stations are basically juke boxes with spots and sweepers...and there's literally hundreds of thousands of music alternatives on-line....plus MP3 players/music on smart phones, and for the few folks who still have CDs.
And, as much as anything...the consumer who got their music from websites/friends trading files back in the 90's is now as old as 35 or so...and aging every day. These are folks who either not often or rarely listened to radio over the years and probably have carried that habit on to today, as they continue to age.
If it's music a person wants today, why bother turning on the radio? The same-same-same few hundred songs...16-24 minutes of commercials per hour...mindless promos for contests 99% of the population never plays...and little other local, relevant content?
Talk formats...that's different.
If I owned radio stations in a competitive media market, I'd have huge "FOR SALE" signs everywhere, and hope to find a sucker....or a wealthy, nostalgic person who wants a hobby.
Most music stations are basically juke boxes with spots and sweepers...and there's literally hundreds of thousands of music alternatives on-line....plus MP3 players/music on smart phones, and for the few folks who still have CDs.
And, as much as anything...the consumer who got their music from websites/friends trading files back in the 90's is now as old as 35 or so...and aging every day. These are folks who either not often or rarely listened to radio over the years and probably have carried that habit on to today, as they continue to age.
If it's music a person wants today, why bother turning on the radio? The same-same-same few hundred songs...16-24 minutes of commercials per hour...mindless promos for contests 99% of the population never plays...and little other local, relevant content?
Talk formats...that's different.
If I owned radio stations in a competitive media market, I'd have huge "FOR SALE" signs everywhere, and hope to find a sucker....or a wealthy, nostalgic person who wants a hobby.
Tim said:In all seriousness...why would any sane investor want to own music-formatted radio stations in 2012+?
It's still one of the most effective ways to reach the audiences advertisers want to reach. It's also still the most effective way to reach music consumers. The percentage of the population that uses radio today is still what it was 40 years ago.
Most music stations are basically juke boxes with spots and sweepers...and there's literally hundreds of thousands of music alternatives on-line....plus MP3 players/music on smart phones, and for the few folks who still have CDs.
And those jukeboxes are cheap to run. See above. You're still reaching the same number of people you've always reached at a fraction of the cost. Those of us who've worked on the programming side hate it, but it makes good business sense.
And, as much as anything...the consumer who got their music from websites/friends trading files back in the 90's is now as old as 35 or so...and aging every day. These are folks who either not often or rarely listened to radio over the years and probably have carried that habit on to today, as they continue to age.
If it's music a person wants today, why bother turning on the radio? The same-same-same few hundred songs...16-24 minutes of commercials per hour...mindless promos for contests 99% of the population never plays...and little other local, relevant content?
Most of these people still want to discover new music and broaden their collection with older songs they don't have. You're not going to get that by listening to the same songs you've been listening to for over a decade. Radio's still the easiest way to do that. Turn it on, sit down at your desk (or in your car), and the music comes to you. No other effort is required on your part!
If I owned radio stations in a competitive media market, I'd have huge "FOR SALE" signs everywhere, and hope to find a sucker....or a wealthy, nostalgic person who wants a hobby.
Given the state of today's economy, you'd probably lose money on your investment. This would actually be a good time to buy radio as an investment as values, at least for FM stations, will probably go up over the next few years. An entire group was just sold for half the price it paid for a single small market cluster roughly 10 years ago! I can't see any way the new owners can lose money if they hold onto that group for a few years. Stations may not go for 10-12 times cash flow again anytime, but I can't see them staying at 4-5 times forever.
VODood said:The percentage may be the same but the sum is not. Radio may still reach X % but it's not the same total.
The total listening population is, in fact, larger because the population is higher.
The TSL, on the other hand, is down. It's really not a major issue, though, because TSL has never been a sales metric. The "Jack FM" format was based largely on the concept of driving down TSL to raise cume.
Ask any radio sales person who has local clients if their radio ad schedules are "working" as well as they did 10 years ago. If they are being honest, in most medium & larger markets the answer is likely "no".
Could it be that listeners now have many other media alternatives, and 6-spot-clusters of sound-alike, screaming, formula commercials, non-stop station and sales-driven promos and dull programming has hurt AQH?
Radio isn't collapsing in one huge thud....it's death by a thousand cuts. And...the decline was self-inflicted many years ago. New web-based platforms are just taking advantage of that decline to fragment listener media time.
Really, guys...when was the last time you were honestly excited to listen to radio? Everybody I've ever met or worked with in radio...they all mostly privately say the same thing: this is an industry the bean counters have sucked the life and passion out of in order to operate at absolute lowest-cost. They've cheapened the product so much is it any wonder the audience is finding other places to be "entertained"????
Could it be that listeners now have many other media alternatives, and 6-spot-clusters of sound-alike, screaming, formula commercials, non-stop station and sales-driven promos and dull programming has hurt AQH?
Radio isn't collapsing in one huge thud....it's death by a thousand cuts. And...the decline was self-inflicted many years ago. New web-based platforms are just taking advantage of that decline to fragment listener media time.
Really, guys...when was the last time you were honestly excited to listen to radio? Everybody I've ever met or worked with in radio...they all mostly privately say the same thing: this is an industry the bean counters have sucked the life and passion out of in order to operate at absolute lowest-cost. They've cheapened the product so much is it any wonder the audience is finding other places to be "entertained"????
Tim said:Ask any radio sales person who has local clients if their radio ad schedules are "working" as well as they did 10 years ago. If they are being honest, in most medium & larger markets the answer is likely "no".
This is true, but it's not for the reason you're thinking it is.
Could it be that listeners now have many other media alternatives, and 6-spot-clusters of sound-alike, screaming, formula commercials, non-stop station and sales-driven promos and dull programming has hurt AQH?
No. It's because the economy went in the tank 5 years ago. Advertisers started reducing their spending, and some went out of business altogether. Radio had to lower its prices because the demand from advertisers went down. For the industry as a whole, AQH hasn't been significantly affected in the last 20 years. PPM did show an unexpected decrease in TSL but had no serious effect on AQH.
Really, guys...when was the last time you were honestly excited to listen to radio? Everybody I've ever met or worked with in radio...they all mostly privately say the same thing: this is an industry the bean counters have sucked the life and passion out of in order to operate at absolute lowest-cost. They've cheapened the product so much is it any wonder the audience is finding other places to be "entertained"????
Moot point. We're radio people, not average listeners. Every generation of radio person is less enthusiastic about the next generation's product. What's changed is that we're now the "old guard." The average listener has never been excited about listening to the radio. They simply get a different experience than we do.
I buy radio ads, and yes they work. JUST AS GOOD AS BEFORE.
So tired of the negative nellies.
So tired of the negative nellies.
Kent said:VODood said:The percentage may be the same but the sum is not. Radio may still reach X % but it's not the same total.
The total listening population is, in fact, larger because the population is higher.
The TSL, on the other hand, is down. It's really not a major issue, though, because TSL has never been a sales metric. The "Jack FM" format was based largely on the concept of driving down TSL to raise cume.
National population is larger, yes. Cleveland? No.
Interesting note about "JACK" format. Originated in Canada - with on air talent. The originating station still has air talent. U.S. con-sultants took the air talent away. Listen to Canadian and European radio. Much more creative than U.S. radio. Imaging not dumbed down or stripped down and those companies operating there believe in personalities.
VODood said:National population is larger, yes. Cleveland? No.
The city of Cleveland has about half the population it had in 1970. I'm not sure how the metro or the Arbitron markets compare. It's possible both of them are smaller, too, though I wouldn't be surprised if they're up from '70 levels.
Negative nellies or telling it like it is realities?
Wish it wasn't so, but radio's fade is heavily self-inflicted. Among average listeners and radio people.
If you, John Baylor, believe radio's problems are just with people who work in radio and the general public in all age groups love radio as much as always...no offense but: you're dreaming.
Wish it wasn't so, but radio's fade is heavily self-inflicted. Among average listeners and radio people.
If you, John Baylor, believe radio's problems are just with people who work in radio and the general public in all age groups love radio as much as always...no offense but: you're dreaming.
The Cleveland metro population is up com the 70's but part of that reason is that Loraon Co. was added to the metro in the 80's. Akron population is down but not by much.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.