Some of the posts on this board suggest that commercial radio has conceded 55+ consumers to satellite radio. 55+ is a large group of consumers, and growing larger every day. Is this really a smart thing to do? Every satellite radio sold has the potential to reach listeners OF ALL AGES. Some younger listeners might actually like what they hear. Why would commercial radio want to encourage that? Wouldn't it be smarter for a company like Clear Channel to create minimum profit 55+ programming just to keep those AM/FM radios turned on? Seems like their other stations would profit in the long run.
-
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
Should Radio Program To 55+?
- Thread starter TheFonz
- Start date
M
mwebster
Guest
No way, Jose
Profit comes from advertisers, not listeners.
Advertisers don't especially want to buy the attention of 55+ listeners.
Therefore, attracting 55+ listeners is not profitable.
> Some of the posts on this board suggest that commercial
> radio has conceded 55+ consumers to satellite radio. 55+ is
> a large group of consumers, and growing larger every day. Is
> this really a smart thing to do? Every satellite radio sold
> has the potential to reach listeners OF ALL AGES. Some
> younger listeners might actually like what they hear. Why
> would commercial radio want to encourage that? Wouldn't it
> be smarter for a company like Clear Channel to create
> minimum profit 55+ programming just to keep those AM/FM
> radios turned on? Seems like their other stations would
> profit in the long run.
>
Profit comes from advertisers, not listeners.
Advertisers don't especially want to buy the attention of 55+ listeners.
Therefore, attracting 55+ listeners is not profitable.
> Some of the posts on this board suggest that commercial
> radio has conceded 55+ consumers to satellite radio. 55+ is
> a large group of consumers, and growing larger every day. Is
> this really a smart thing to do? Every satellite radio sold
> has the potential to reach listeners OF ALL AGES. Some
> younger listeners might actually like what they hear. Why
> would commercial radio want to encourage that? Wouldn't it
> be smarter for a company like Clear Channel to create
> minimum profit 55+ programming just to keep those AM/FM
> radios turned on? Seems like their other stations would
> profit in the long run.
>
Re: NO
> Some of the posts on this board suggest that commercial
> radio has conceded 55+ consumers to satellite radio.
Maybe this was not well enough explained.
Terrestrial radio programs to the audience groups advertisers want to reach. In the larger markets, the advertisers tend to be mostly agencies and in-house ad departments with very specific targets. If they do not want 55+, there is no way to sell it.
In smaller, mostly unrated, markets, advertisers are predominantly local retailers and may be interested in 55+. Most of the big advertisers in big markets are not interested.
Radio can not program to an audience group which has no ad revenue attached to it.
> 55+ is
> a large group of consumers, and growing larger every day.
But, as of this time, this group is not of interest to major advertisers. No matter how big the group, how affluent (an urban legend, by the way) or whatwever, if advertisers do not want to reach it, there is no way commercial radio can serve it.
> Is
> this really a smart thing to do?
How smart is losing money?
> Every satellite radio sold
> has the potential to reach listeners OF ALL AGES. Some
> younger listeners might actually like what they hear. Why
> would commercial radio want to encourage that?
Keywod "commercial." If there is no revenue , we can not do it.
> Wouldn't it
> be smarter for a company like Clear Channel to create
> minimum profit 55+ programming just to keep those AM/FM
> radios turned on? Seems like their other stations would
> profit in the long run.
There is no evidence to support this. If advertisers start to look for 55+, it will mostly be 55-64, as retirees really suck as a market for mass media. In the case that 55-65 increases in ad buys coming up, radio will start to look at programming to this narrow demo. Until then, no way.
>
> Some of the posts on this board suggest that commercial
> radio has conceded 55+ consumers to satellite radio.
Maybe this was not well enough explained.
Terrestrial radio programs to the audience groups advertisers want to reach. In the larger markets, the advertisers tend to be mostly agencies and in-house ad departments with very specific targets. If they do not want 55+, there is no way to sell it.
In smaller, mostly unrated, markets, advertisers are predominantly local retailers and may be interested in 55+. Most of the big advertisers in big markets are not interested.
Radio can not program to an audience group which has no ad revenue attached to it.
> 55+ is
> a large group of consumers, and growing larger every day.
But, as of this time, this group is not of interest to major advertisers. No matter how big the group, how affluent (an urban legend, by the way) or whatwever, if advertisers do not want to reach it, there is no way commercial radio can serve it.
> Is
> this really a smart thing to do?
How smart is losing money?
> Every satellite radio sold
> has the potential to reach listeners OF ALL AGES. Some
> younger listeners might actually like what they hear. Why
> would commercial radio want to encourage that?
Keywod "commercial." If there is no revenue , we can not do it.
> Wouldn't it
> be smarter for a company like Clear Channel to create
> minimum profit 55+ programming just to keep those AM/FM
> radios turned on? Seems like their other stations would
> profit in the long run.
There is no evidence to support this. If advertisers start to look for 55+, it will mostly be 55-64, as retirees really suck as a market for mass media. In the case that 55-65 increases in ad buys coming up, radio will start to look at programming to this narrow demo. Until then, no way.
>
Re: No way, Jose
> [Profit comes from advertisers, not listeners.
> Advertisers don't especially want to buy the attention of
> 55+ listeners.
> Therefore, attracting 55+ listeners is not profitable.]
I understand this. Here's my point: more satellite radios sold (regardless of what age group buys them) = more listeners of ALL AGES having access to satellite = less potential listeners for terrestrial radio = less potential advertising revenue for terrestrial radio.
> [Profit comes from advertisers, not listeners.
> Advertisers don't especially want to buy the attention of
> 55+ listeners.
> Therefore, attracting 55+ listeners is not profitable.]
I understand this. Here's my point: more satellite radios sold (regardless of what age group buys them) = more listeners of ALL AGES having access to satellite = less potential listeners for terrestrial radio = less potential advertising revenue for terrestrial radio.
Re: NO
> [Radio can not program to an audience group which has no ad
> revenue attached to it.]
Isn't NO ad revenue a little strong?
> [How smart is losing money?]
Retailers do it all the time. It's called a "loss-leader".............offering a product at little or no profit in order to sell other products at a greater profit. Anything that keeps that home or car AM/FM (rather than satellite)radio turned on and attracting listeners of ALL ages should help radio in the long run.
> [Radio can not program to an audience group which has no ad
> revenue attached to it.]
Isn't NO ad revenue a little strong?
> [How smart is losing money?]
Retailers do it all the time. It's called a "loss-leader".............offering a product at little or no profit in order to sell other products at a greater profit. Anything that keeps that home or car AM/FM (rather than satellite)radio turned on and attracting listeners of ALL ages should help radio in the long run.
M
MLB
Guest
Re: No way, Jose
Why is everyone always so negative? Guess what, it's not always about the money! Thank goodness some people out there care more about their listening audience, rather than what some Ad group wants.
Why is everyone always so negative? Guess what, it's not always about the money! Thank goodness some people out there care more about their listening audience, rather than what some Ad group wants.
Re: NO
> > [Radio can not program to an audience group which has no
> ad
> > revenue attached to it.]
>
> Isn't NO ad revenue a little strong?
At the agency level, this is a pretty accurate statement.
>
>
> > [How smart is losing money?]
>
>
>
> Retailers do it all the time. It's called a
> "loss-leader".............offering a product at little or no
> profit in order to sell other products at a greater profit.
There is no point in doing this in radio. radio does not want 55+ because advertisers don't want them.
> Anything that keeps that home or car AM/FM (rather than
> satellite)radio turned on and attracting listeners of ALL
> ages should help radio in the long run.
Radio is an ad medium, not a paid by the listener service. This is the perfect fit for radio with satellite and internet radio.
>
> > [Radio can not program to an audience group which has no
> ad
> > revenue attached to it.]
>
> Isn't NO ad revenue a little strong?
At the agency level, this is a pretty accurate statement.
>
>
> > [How smart is losing money?]
>
>
>
> Retailers do it all the time. It's called a
> "loss-leader".............offering a product at little or no
> profit in order to sell other products at a greater profit.
There is no point in doing this in radio. radio does not want 55+ because advertisers don't want them.
> Anything that keeps that home or car AM/FM (rather than
> satellite)radio turned on and attracting listeners of ALL
> ages should help radio in the long run.
Radio is an ad medium, not a paid by the listener service. This is the perfect fit for radio with satellite and internet radio.
>
Re: No way, Jose
> Why is everyone always so negative? Guess what, it's not
> always about the money! Thank goodness some people out
> there care more about their listening audience, rather than
> what some Ad group wants.
>
But the target listening audience was selected because of its appeal to advertisers. After that, a station does everything possible to appeal to the listeners in that group.
> Why is everyone always so negative? Guess what, it's not
> always about the money! Thank goodness some people out
> there care more about their listening audience, rather than
> what some Ad group wants.
>
But the target listening audience was selected because of its appeal to advertisers. After that, a station does everything possible to appeal to the listeners in that group.
> Some of the posts on this board suggest that commercial
> radio has conceded 55+ consumers to satellite radio. 55+ is
> a large group of consumers, and growing larger every day. Is
> this really a smart thing to do? Every satellite radio sold
> has the potential to reach listeners OF ALL AGES. Some
> younger listeners might actually like what they hear. Why
> would commercial radio want to encourage that? Wouldn't it
> be smarter for a company like Clear Channel to create
> minimum profit 55+ programming just to keep those AM/FM
> radios turned on? Seems like their other stations would
> profit in the long run.
>
I didn't see the segment on NBC NEWS, I believe, a couple weeks ago dealing with the baby boomers retiring. The lead in to the segment suggested that we boomers are not the sterotypical sit on the couch retiree. It showed retirees on motorcyles and watercraft. Maybe someone saw the segment and could comment to a greater degree on its content.
> radio has conceded 55+ consumers to satellite radio. 55+ is
> a large group of consumers, and growing larger every day. Is
> this really a smart thing to do? Every satellite radio sold
> has the potential to reach listeners OF ALL AGES. Some
> younger listeners might actually like what they hear. Why
> would commercial radio want to encourage that? Wouldn't it
> be smarter for a company like Clear Channel to create
> minimum profit 55+ programming just to keep those AM/FM
> radios turned on? Seems like their other stations would
> profit in the long run.
>
I didn't see the segment on NBC NEWS, I believe, a couple weeks ago dealing with the baby boomers retiring. The lead in to the segment suggested that we boomers are not the sterotypical sit on the couch retiree. It showed retirees on motorcyles and watercraft. Maybe someone saw the segment and could comment to a greater degree on its content.
Re: NO
> > [Radio is an ad medium, not a paid by the listener
> service.
> > This is the perfect fit for radio with satellite and
> > internet radio.]
>
>
> So the advertiser pays a fixed amount, not related to the
> amount of people who will actually hear his ad?
Huh? I said radio is advertiser supported, not listener supported,
Radio advertising is priced relative to the delivery of desirable demographics. In other wordes, in agency business, the agency sets a Cost Per Point (CPP) goal for each campaign for each market, based on how many people a rating point represents in each market. Each station has to price competitivly with the point pricing goal or not get bought.
So, ad rates are a function of number of listeners in the target age group of the advertiser.
>
> > [Radio is an ad medium, not a paid by the listener
> service.
> > This is the perfect fit for radio with satellite and
> > internet radio.]
>
>
> So the advertiser pays a fixed amount, not related to the
> amount of people who will actually hear his ad?
Huh? I said radio is advertiser supported, not listener supported,
Radio advertising is priced relative to the delivery of desirable demographics. In other wordes, in agency business, the agency sets a Cost Per Point (CPP) goal for each campaign for each market, based on how many people a rating point represents in each market. Each station has to price competitivly with the point pricing goal or not get bought.
So, ad rates are a function of number of listeners in the target age group of the advertiser.
>
Re: NO
> [So, ad rates are a function of number of listeners in the
> target age group of the advertiser.]
O.K. But we're getting a bit off subject. Let me get back. Each satellite radio sold offers satellite programming access to listeners of ALL age groups. As 55+ consumers move from commercial radio to satellite, they will take younger listeners with them. And THAT should be a concern for commercial radio.
> [So, ad rates are a function of number of listeners in the
> target age group of the advertiser.]
O.K. But we're getting a bit off subject. Let me get back. Each satellite radio sold offers satellite programming access to listeners of ALL age groups. As 55+ consumers move from commercial radio to satellite, they will take younger listeners with them. And THAT should be a concern for commercial radio.
Re: NO
> O.K. But we're getting a bit off subject. Let me get back.
> Each satellite radio sold offers satellite programming
> access to listeners of ALL age groups. As 55+ consumers
> move from commercial radio to satellite, they will take
> younger listeners with them. And THAT should be a concern
> for commercial radio.
This is a catch 22 situation where there is no return on investment for the stations that would lose money for a tenuous possible gain.
Most radio is listened to alone. Most satellite is in car, which is also, generally, a single listener at a time. There are better ways of investing money.
> O.K. But we're getting a bit off subject. Let me get back.
> Each satellite radio sold offers satellite programming
> access to listeners of ALL age groups. As 55+ consumers
> move from commercial radio to satellite, they will take
> younger listeners with them. And THAT should be a concern
> for commercial radio.
This is a catch 22 situation where there is no return on investment for the stations that would lose money for a tenuous possible gain.
Most radio is listened to alone. Most satellite is in car, which is also, generally, a single listener at a time. There are better ways of investing money.
T
tj1212
Guest
> Some of the posts on this board suggest that commercial
> radio has conceded 55+ consumers to satellite radio. 55+ is
> a large group of consumers, and growing larger every day. Is
> this really a smart thing to do?
Fonz, you bring up the first interesting post on this board in a while, but it addresses a topic that has been discussed thoroughly for a least a year on this board. David has explained that the advertisers are not calling out for 55+ demo's. Whether we want to agree with this premise, it probably is fact. That's the way it is in 2005. But the entire broadcast and print industry is feeling the effects of satellite and web based services. If you are going at this from a listeners perspective who would like to hear 50's and 60's oldies, get satellite. Just get it. It has what you are searching for if you want to hear oldies. Just let the terrestial world beat it out for their targeted audiences and see who wins. Satellite has approximetely 20 - 30 channels in addition to oldies thatspecifically target hip - hop through the 80's. But while terrestial stations are trying to make money with Jack formats, if I was a 30 year old, I'd just turn my FM radio on. It's free.
> radio has conceded 55+ consumers to satellite radio. 55+ is
> a large group of consumers, and growing larger every day. Is
> this really a smart thing to do?
Fonz, you bring up the first interesting post on this board in a while, but it addresses a topic that has been discussed thoroughly for a least a year on this board. David has explained that the advertisers are not calling out for 55+ demo's. Whether we want to agree with this premise, it probably is fact. That's the way it is in 2005. But the entire broadcast and print industry is feeling the effects of satellite and web based services. If you are going at this from a listeners perspective who would like to hear 50's and 60's oldies, get satellite. Just get it. It has what you are searching for if you want to hear oldies. Just let the terrestial world beat it out for their targeted audiences and see who wins. Satellite has approximetely 20 - 30 channels in addition to oldies thatspecifically target hip - hop through the 80's. But while terrestial stations are trying to make money with Jack formats, if I was a 30 year old, I'd just turn my FM radio on. It's free.
K
KMRichards
Guest
Re: NO
> O.K. But we're getting a bit off subject. Let me get back.
> Each satellite radio sold offers satellite programming
> access to listeners of ALL age groups. As 55+ consumers
> move from commercial radio to satellite, they will take
> younger listeners with them. And THAT should be a concern
> for commercial radio.
Fonz, you SO do not understand. And it would take me pages upon pages to explain it to you.
And that is AFTER it has been explained to you over and over and over.
Go listen to your satellite radio and leave us alone. No more clueless discussions from you, please.
You continue at the risk of my requesting deletion of your posts in the future. (And before you say "I didn't break any rules", note that moderators have the right to delete entire threads if they duplicate currently- or recently-discussed topics, and this topic is one that has been discussed TO DEATH.)
<P ID="signature">______________
</P><P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by KMRichards on 11/13/05 07:34 PM.</FONT></P>
> O.K. But we're getting a bit off subject. Let me get back.
> Each satellite radio sold offers satellite programming
> access to listeners of ALL age groups. As 55+ consumers
> move from commercial radio to satellite, they will take
> younger listeners with them. And THAT should be a concern
> for commercial radio.
Fonz, you SO do not understand. And it would take me pages upon pages to explain it to you.
And that is AFTER it has been explained to you over and over and over.
Go listen to your satellite radio and leave us alone. No more clueless discussions from you, please.
You continue at the risk of my requesting deletion of your posts in the future. (And before you say "I didn't break any rules", note that moderators have the right to delete entire threads if they duplicate currently- or recently-discussed topics, and this topic is one that has been discussed TO DEATH.)
<P ID="signature">______________
</P><P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by KMRichards on 11/13/05 07:34 PM.</FONT></P>
M
MikeDane
Guest
Re: NO
> Fonz, you SO do not understand. And it would take me pages
> upon pages to explain it to you.
isn't that what a discussion board is for? to discuss things
and maybe learn?
>
> And that is AFTER it has been explained to you over and over
> and over.
So then either explain it again or ignore it.
>
> Go listen to your satellite radio and leave us alone. No
> more clueless discussions from you, please.
Then how about no more cluelessness from you, please.
>
> You continue at the risk of my requesting deletion of your
> posts in the future. (And before you say "I didn't break
> any rules", note that moderators have the right to delete
> entire threads if they duplicate currently- or
> recently-discussed topics, and this topic is one that has
> been discussed TO DEATH.)
>
I have already notified the moderators of this board about
you and asked them to straighten you out. this is not your
area, go back to yours and leave people alone that are
trying to discuss things in peace or remember here you're
not the moderator.
Mike Dane
WSTB-FM 88.9
SundayOldiesJukebox.com
> Fonz, you SO do not understand. And it would take me pages
> upon pages to explain it to you.
isn't that what a discussion board is for? to discuss things
and maybe learn?
>
> And that is AFTER it has been explained to you over and over
> and over.
So then either explain it again or ignore it.
>
> Go listen to your satellite radio and leave us alone. No
> more clueless discussions from you, please.
Then how about no more cluelessness from you, please.
>
> You continue at the risk of my requesting deletion of your
> posts in the future. (And before you say "I didn't break
> any rules", note that moderators have the right to delete
> entire threads if they duplicate currently- or
> recently-discussed topics, and this topic is one that has
> been discussed TO DEATH.)
>
I have already notified the moderators of this board about
you and asked them to straighten you out. this is not your
area, go back to yours and leave people alone that are
trying to discuss things in peace or remember here you're
not the moderator.
Mike Dane
WSTB-FM 88.9
SundayOldiesJukebox.com
Re: NO
>
> I have already notified the moderators of this board about
> you and asked them to straighten you out. this is not your
> area, go back to yours and leave people alone that are
> trying to discuss things in peace or remember here you're
> not the moderator.
>
At the risk of deletion of what is now a painfully tedious post, I second K.M's comments and add that you, also, seem to have a need to bring up "asked and answered" issues over and over.
I remind you of the definition of insanity: "trying the same illogical act over and over, always hoping that the results will be different."
The Fonz believes a number of staitons should lose money serving unprofitable sectors to avoid people getting XM or Sirius. He has been told that satellite is not the long term competion to radio, and he keeps asking hoping for a new answer.
Broadband hand held devices that are phones, radios, cameras, message centers and calendars and more are the future threat. Deliver will be on demand, not real time and radio has to change its model of entertainment delivery or, eventually, die. But satellite is not the issue. It is a distraction, like mosquitos on a hike in Minnesota.
Troll posts will not change facts. Calling in the moderator on a well deserved response to a whiny post is uncalled for. You sound like, "I'll take my marbles and go home" from a kid who is losing...
>
> I have already notified the moderators of this board about
> you and asked them to straighten you out. this is not your
> area, go back to yours and leave people alone that are
> trying to discuss things in peace or remember here you're
> not the moderator.
>
At the risk of deletion of what is now a painfully tedious post, I second K.M's comments and add that you, also, seem to have a need to bring up "asked and answered" issues over and over.
I remind you of the definition of insanity: "trying the same illogical act over and over, always hoping that the results will be different."
The Fonz believes a number of staitons should lose money serving unprofitable sectors to avoid people getting XM or Sirius. He has been told that satellite is not the long term competion to radio, and he keeps asking hoping for a new answer.
Broadband hand held devices that are phones, radios, cameras, message centers and calendars and more are the future threat. Deliver will be on demand, not real time and radio has to change its model of entertainment delivery or, eventually, die. But satellite is not the issue. It is a distraction, like mosquitos on a hike in Minnesota.
Troll posts will not change facts. Calling in the moderator on a well deserved response to a whiny post is uncalled for. You sound like, "I'll take my marbles and go home" from a kid who is losing...
A
am-fm
Guest
Re: NO
> I have already notified the moderators of this board about
> you and asked them to straighten you out. this is not your
> area, go back to yours and leave people alone that are
> trying to discuss things in peace or remember here you're
> not the moderator.
>
> Mike Dane
> WSTB-FM 88.9
> SundayOldiesJukebox.com
Thanks for the email, but KM is just expressing his opinion. 55+ isnt a ad demo that most buyers are looking for, for a variety of reasons (some well founded, some completely idiotic).
KM is a moderator, regardless, and while he doesnt mod this board, he still is a mod for Radio Info. The little "M" tag by his s/n shouldnt be target symbol when he expresses his opinion. And complaining about a mod doesnt work too well: we tend to take care of our own to an extent.
And now for something completely different: if there are South Park Conservatives, can there be South Park Liberals?<P ID="signature">______________
AOL IM: wnjoldies or jamminoldies105
CBS-FM lives at http://67.83.118.54:8010
Oldies Board co-moderator</P>
> I have already notified the moderators of this board about
> you and asked them to straighten you out. this is not your
> area, go back to yours and leave people alone that are
> trying to discuss things in peace or remember here you're
> not the moderator.
>
> Mike Dane
> WSTB-FM 88.9
> SundayOldiesJukebox.com
Thanks for the email, but KM is just expressing his opinion. 55+ isnt a ad demo that most buyers are looking for, for a variety of reasons (some well founded, some completely idiotic).
KM is a moderator, regardless, and while he doesnt mod this board, he still is a mod for Radio Info. The little "M" tag by his s/n shouldnt be target symbol when he expresses his opinion. And complaining about a mod doesnt work too well: we tend to take care of our own to an extent.
And now for something completely different: if there are South Park Conservatives, can there be South Park Liberals?<P ID="signature">______________
AOL IM: wnjoldies or jamminoldies105
CBS-FM lives at http://67.83.118.54:8010
Oldies Board co-moderator</P>
Re: No way, Jose
> > Why is everyone always so negative? Guess what, it's not
> > always about the money! Thank goodness some people out
> > there care more about their listening audience, rather
> than what some Ad group wants.
Actually, like any business, it IS always about the money.
If WalMart doesn't sell enough of a product, it drops it. If not enough people buy McDonald's newest sandwich sensation--out it goes--no matter how few love it to death. Same for radio.
> > Why is everyone always so negative? Guess what, it's not
> > always about the money! Thank goodness some people out
> > there care more about their listening audience, rather
> than what some Ad group wants.
Actually, like any business, it IS always about the money.
If WalMart doesn't sell enough of a product, it drops it. If not enough people buy McDonald's newest sandwich sensation--out it goes--no matter how few love it to death. Same for radio.
- Status