• 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

Ted is Dead?

Re: speaking of blah blah blah

> > Meanwhile, we get to sit through Kenny
> > Rogers and Barry Manilow ballads.
>
> Seldom played on Sunny. One Kenny title on Lite.

They play lots of Manilow ballads. And those are just two examples. Sometimes they play lots of Bread, which is appropriate for this "Wonder Bread" format. They don't always sound so sleepy, but often do. They aren't as relentless in that regard as they used to be, and at times sound less Xanax-y than Sunny. Sometimes 93.3 is actually listenable, but still pales in comparison to AC or AC-based formats in other markets.

> I'm guessing you don't relate to Lite's target 50-year-old very well.

If you mean I don't relate to 50-year-olds, you guess wrong. My music tastes don't necessarily mesh with the AVERAGE 50 year old female, though (I assume that's 93.3's target based on your comments.) But probably more than you think.

> Then again, the AVERAGE radio listener would
> NEVER read a board like this, and at that age, isn't into
> "new trends."

If you mean the Winter Phase I Arbitrend I discussed (specifically the fact that removing Christmas music produces a January-only extrapolation that headed back South), then I don't get your point. Are you saying we should ignore the Arbitrends because listeners aren't aware of them? That makes no sense. If you mean music trends, I still don't get your point. You'll note that the approaches I tend to praise are all heavily gold-based, in various shade of rock, pop and rhythm, and play music from any or all of five decades. Hardly "new trend" based musically.

I do agree with your title change, though. 93.3 does indeed sound very "blah", especially compared to the great AC-based formats available in so many other markets. (The three blahs says it even better.) And since I'm about to leave town, I'll get to hear some of those great non-Columbus approaches "live" over the next five days, as I travel to exotic places like Cleveland, Dayton, Cincinnati and Indianapolis. Hearing those great approaches always produces enjoyment mixed with some jealousy and frustration over Columbus radio (especially what CC *Columbus* is doing with the stations it didn't inherit from Nationwide). And since CC/Columbus is (amazingly) the only owner with more than one truly big-signal FMs (3, soon to be 4), the Columbus airwaves are at their mercy. <P ID="signature">______________
Nu_Roo_2 formerly Nu__Roo formerly Nu_Roo</P>
 
Re: speaking of blah blah blah

> Sometimes 93.3 is actually
> listenable, but still pales in comparison to AC or AC-based
> formats in other markets.

It's not a cookie-cutter format, AC or otherwise. Think a little outside the box (at the risk of using a tired cliche). It's designing a radio station to fill a specific void, and it's apparently working.

> > Then again, the AVERAGE radio listener would
> > NEVER read a board like this, and at that age, isn't into
> > "new trends."
>
> If you mean the Winter Phase I Arbitrend I discussed
> (specifically the fact that removing Christmas music
> produces a January-only extrapolation that headed back
> South), then I don't get your point. Are you saying we
> should ignore the Arbitrends because listeners aren't aware
> of them?

TRENDS, not ARBItrends. Try to be less of a radio geek!! (I'm one, too, so I don't mean the term in a negative context.)
 
Re: speaking of blah blah blah

> > Sometimes 93.3 is actually
> > listenable, but still pales in comparison to AC or
> AC-based
> > formats in other markets.
>
> It's not a cookie-cutter format, AC or otherwise. Think a
> little outside the box (at the risk of using a tired
> cliche). It's designing a radio station to fill a specific
> void, and it's apparently working.

The fact that it's not cookie cutter is indeed one laudable aspect. And there's no arguing that 93.3 is having some degree of success (with "some degree" being a key part of that statement).

As for thinking outside the box, all the stations I (and others) cited in this thread are all very much out-of-the-box, but would have provided a much more differntiated product for Columbus on its first really big new signal in 40 years. If ratings is the measure, we'll have a better read on whether 93.3 is working and growing in about two months when the Winter quarterly comes out (i.e., no Christmas music included). Even if it stays above a 3 and meets a strategic goal of hurting Sunny some (if that *is* the goal), that does not mean the current approach is the highest-potential or most profitable use of that prize signal. Even something which provides just equal (no better) net profitability implications vs. the current approach, yet serves the market with a more differentiated approach, would be preferable. Or are those rumors about petty vendettas influencing CC/Columbus format decisions true? (E.g., getting back at Saga for contesting CC move-ins)? BTW, I never suggested any such motivation on my own, and was surprised back when other, better-connected posters swore those kinds of vendettas really do drive many local CC decisions.
>

> > > Then again, the AVERAGE radio listener would
> > > NEVER read a board like this, and at that age, isn't
> into
> > > "new trends."
> >
> > If you mean the Winter Phase I Arbitrend I discussed
> > (specifically the fact that removing Christmas music
> > produces a January-only extrapolation that headed back
> > South), then I don't get your point. Are you saying we
> > should ignore the Arbitrends because listeners aren't
> aware
> > of them?
>
> TRENDS, not ARBItrends. Try to be less of a radio geek!!
> (I'm one, too, so I don't mean the term in a negative
> context.)
>
The confusion was driven by the fact that the topic name was "Speaking of New Trends", meaning Arbitrends, until you changed it to "speaking of blah, blah, blah." But as I said, the approaches I've lauded in this thread are anything but trendy musically, and are instead very gold-based.<P ID="signature">______________
Nu_Roo_2 formerly Nu__Roo formerly Nu_Roo</P>
 
> From R&R today:
> What kind of success would TED-FM had if it had the Blitz's
> signal?

I'm proud to say that we did as well as that station was capable of when it was The Eagle.

Paul Marshall
*former annoying morning guy*

:)
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom