The Day The Oldies Died

[PapillionWyngs]

Wyngs,

Someone does understand. I'll buy us both an I-pod. Then we can listen to what we want, when we want.

I'm 57. As far as I'm concerned quality music radio went out the window in the seventies; after I got of the air.

I concur. You are preaching to the choir, but some of the idiots on here just won't get it.

Thanks!

 

[rbrucecarter5]

And radio's overall ratings are heading which direction? When these radio execs PO everybody outside their target demographics, then maybe somebody will realize those target demographics aren't quite as large as they thought, and there are significant portions of the audience not being served. Until then, it is iPod, streaming or satellite for the rest of us. And when significant audiences are continually turned away, we will be habitual users of alternative music sources, and won't be back. Ever.

I've seen this close up here in Houston. KSBJ does not serve teenagers or young familes. They all listen to secular. As in - effectively - ALL. In the mean time, I heard a promo on there about a parent who loves how their kids sing the songs on KSBJ at home. In what alternate version of reality???? After about the age of 7 or 8, or as soon as they figure out radios have a "tune" function and their friends are listening to cooler music on other stations, that audience is GONE for Christian music for good. Probably NEVER to return. What few kids preferentially listen to Christian music at all are downloading stuff on iTunes and listening to it on iPods.

So it is with oldies. Once the audience discovers streaming and it is reliable, they will never be back to over the air radio. Why bother? At the touch of a button, we can get exactly what we want. Why bother "getting used to" The Eagle? Don't like a song on an oldies stream? There are a hundred other oldies presets on the internet radio.

Cookie cutter corporate designed formats? Don't make me laugh. They suck big time, and I'm not the only one saying it.

 

[davideduardo]

And radio's overall ratings are heading which direction? When these radio execs PO everybody outside their target demographics, then maybe somebody will realize those target demographics aren't quite as large as they thought, and there are significant portions of the audience not being served.

First, Bruce, commercial radio can not serve any group which attracts no advertiser interest. There would be no Spanish language radio if advertisers did not see Hispanics as the most attractive marketing growth area in the US. There would be no CHR if 18-34 year old women were not a well-desired market segment. There would be no all-sports were it not that 21-44 year old men are a hot demo.

There is no beautiful music because the frormat became overwhelmingly 55+. The same has occured with smooth jazz in most markets. And 60's based oldies attract mostly 55+ and even 65+, not demos large advertisers have interest in.

Radio listening levels are a totally different issue within the 18 to 55 age range radio does seek... that's an issue of alternative entertainment options, and it's not just folks with some songs on an iPod... it's the 130,000,000 game consoles in the US... DVDs and video on demand... and all kinds of other things that compete for eyes and ears.

Returning to reality, radio executives do not intentionally irritate listeners over 55... many formats have huge appeal above 55, including talk, country, AC, urban AC, gospel, classic rock, etc. 60's oldies was never more than a niche format, so the vast, overwhelming majority of, even, over 55's, don't miss it because they didn't use it or like it.

Once the (oldies) audience discovers streaming and it is reliable, they will never be back to over the air radio. Why bother? At the touch of a button, we can get exactly what we want. Why bother "getting used to" The Eagle? Don't like a song on an oldies stream? There are a hundred other oldies presets on the internet radio.

The Eagle is not targeted at over-55's... in fact, it was created because the prior format was down around 18th in 25-54... Yet that same format, in 55+, 60's oldies was not a mass appeal format in Houston, or anywhere... over-55's make many other choices as most don't have an interest in pop oldies.

Cookie cutter corporate designed formats? Don't make me laugh. They suck big time, and I'm not the only one saying it.

There is nothing "cookie cutter" about every market having an AC station, a country station, an urban station or a CHR station or two. Of course they are going to play very similar music, just as Top 40s all played about the same songs back in the 50's.

 

[stan]

Evidence of the improper formats being provided by stations is confirmed by the poor economic performance of the corporations. The same tired old arguments about not programming for 55+ will be the death of some stations and corporations.

 

[davideduardo]

Evidence of the improper formats being provided by stations is confirmed by the poor economic performance of the corporations. The same tired old arguments about not programming for 55+ will be the death of some stations and corporations.

In the top 10 markets, about 60% to 80% of a station's revenues come from agencies... national, regional and local. Agencies are, in turn, instructed by their clients what demos to buy. There is seldom a 55+ buy out of an agency, as all are clear on the well-studied poor ROI of advertising to that group.

There is no money being left on the table... because there is essentially no 55+ money at all.

And if there is no money, there is no opportunity.

Corporations of all kinds, whether they be tire manufacturers or radio stations, are doing poorly because we are in a near depression, with the highest unemployment since the Great Depression.

 

[bigtom101]

And to clarify further since you're out of the market, David: 107.5 transitioned from oldies to Classic Hits several years ago before it dropped the KLDE calls for KHTC (K-Hits). For its last year or so as K-Hits it played mostly 70's music with the occasional 60's song. As KGLK, it dropped all 60's titles completely (maybe there's one Stones song from '69 in there) and now is 50/50 70's & 80's, with music from 1970 to 1989. It's still a Classic Hits station. Ratings-wise, it has outperformed K-Hits.

For the longest time, 107.5's biggest problem was that the audience was still recalling them as Oldies 94.5. They did a good job of establishing the Oldies 107.5 brand after that - such a good job of it that once it became K-Hits, people still considered it to be Oldies 107.5. It's interesting to note that the station had stopped playing oldies titles for months as K-Hits (not a single Motown hit was heard, but a whole lot of Steely Dan & Led Zepplin), yet it wasn't until the imaging change to the Eagle that people like the above listener finally figured out that this was no longer the station that played You Can't Hurry Love.

And to you, I'm sorry that you don't hear your favorite songs on the radio anymore. Most of my favorite radio stations don't exist anymore either (and those that do, only the call letters remain anyway). But please don't damn me to Hell because I had to put food on my table. It may be fashionable to rip on "Corporate Radio," but there's several hundred people in this town who work for those corporations and live next door to you, and we're all just trying to pay our bills, go to church on Sunday, and raise our families.

The problem with calling KGLK "Classic Hits" is that there is essentially two flavors of it, and one doesn't resemble the other. KGLK, from Yes.net, looks like a Classic Rock station that uses "Classic Hits" as a moniker since KKRW has the Classic Rock brand sewn up. Nassau Broadcasting used "Classic Hits" for some of their stations as a way of saying classic rock without the harder edged tunes. But KGLK has the hard tunes, but no pop/soul from the 70's or 80's. But if it's working & billing better than K-Hits/KLDE, then mazel tov to Cox. Just maybe de-emphasise the "Classic Hits" since, well, its not playing that many "hits".

"Classic Hits" as an evolution of Oldies usually means a 70's focused blend of pop (y'know, the stuff that WABC or KHJ would have played circa 1975). WCBS-FM, WOGL, KRTH, KOOL, and Cox's own KONO have had success evolving their respective brands away from "oldies" - both musically and presentation wise. As a huge oldies fan (thanks to a relative who left WCBS-FM on in the kitchen all the time, and an bedside radio tuned to 94.5 KLDE way after bedtime), I do wish that Dion, Elvis, Sam Cooke, all the great 60's Girl Groups & other pre Beatles rock 'n roll could live on commercial stations. But I still listen to CBS-FM every chance I get - it's the personality and presentation that I love to hear, and they still play enough pop/soul that I can deal with the 70's & 80's tunes I don't like. And when I need some Philly soul or doo-wop that doesnt get played, I have the iPod in the car. If a new one is too expensive, try picking one up used. Or get a HD Radio and tune into 107.5 HD-2 - the Insignia portable is 50 bucks, and the Sony component tuner is 90 on Amazon. I recommend both highly if they are an option for anyone looking.

If anything, the fact that people feel this way on this board (and off) show how powerful the "Oldies KLDE" brand was. Maybe a non-comm station will pick up oldies - one NPR outlet in Michigan did just that. Commercial broadcasters have to turn a profit, and as David Eduardo said, that means having an audience that is attractive to national ad agencies. It's not about any of us personally, but just a business decision. Only a profitable station can be of any service to the community, and that means ringing the cash register.

To johndavis - I quote the Beatles, "we're doing what we can." That about sums up it nicely I think. Hope you're doing well man.

 

[stan]

David, you prove my point. Those of us who are 50+ are fleeing radio because it sucks. My Ipod and XM radio work great. At some point your clueless ad agencies will figure out who the largest segment of the population is and where the wealth is concentrated. And by that time we could care less when terrestial radio dies. RIP.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

David, you prove my point. Those of us who are 50+ are fleeing radio because it sucks. My Ipod and XM radio work great. At some point your clueless ad agencies will figure out who the largest segment of the population is and where the wealth is concentrated. And by that time we could care less when terrestial radio dies. RIP.

This is the old classic "captive audience" mentality. Radio feeds us what they think we ought to like, instead of what we like. I shouldn't complain, it forced me to DX in the 60's, which indirectly led to an engineering career. For those that couldn't DX, it was put up with mediocre content locally. Most did, the radio stations hated DX'ers because we were ratings getting away, but everybody hates people that don't "fit in" to nice little molds anyway.

Flash forward 40 years. There is no more captive audience. It sounds like the iPhone is making the last frontier of streaming - the car - open. No more captive audience, the captives are set free to listen to what they like - and the supposed homogeneous demographics will be very quick to break out of their molds. RIP terrestrial radio - not everybody has to listen to Spanish language, sports, talk, top - 4o, country and the other slop they want us to listen to because it is easy to do and they understand how to do it.

 

[davideduardo]

David, you prove my point. Those of us who are 50+ are fleeing radio because it sucks.

Over-55's who like country are not leaving, nor are those who like talk, or sports or AC or Urban AC or any of a variety of other formats that have what is called "spillage" into 55+. Spillage means that even though an ad medium targets and is bought for a specific demographic, it delivers on either or both sides a number of additional people. CHRs deliver teens as spillage, for example.

Only one small group does not have a station specifically targeted at them... those who live and die for 50's and 60s' or just 60's oldies of the pop/rock type. That is vastly fewer people than your statement, which should be stated as "some of us who are over 55 who only like pop oldies of the 60s are not listening as much to radio." That has better congruance with the ratings reality that show 55´+ listening quite high.

At some point your clueless ad agencies will figure out who the largest segment of the population is and where the wealth is concentrated. And by that time we could care less when terrestial radio dies. RIP.

Again, agencies don't make the decision usually. Clients know where their consumers are, and they tell the agency who to target, often based on enormous volumes of research.

The fact is that the older a consumer is, the harder it is to change brand and product preferences established over many years. That means it takes more repetition of an ad to get a sale... and the cost of that extra advertising may eliminate or reduce the profit on the sale. If there is a negative return on the ad investment, it is not worthwhile.

So there is no point in advertising mass market products for 55+, particularly on radio.

 

[johndavis]

Evidence of the improper formats being provided by stations is confirmed by the poor economic performance of the corporations. The same tired old arguments about not programming for 55+ will be the death of some stations and corporations.

On a national level, advertisers don't tell the agency "buy me the top 40, AC, and AOR stations". They say "buy x% 18-34 and y% 25-54" or they have a target of a gender and age range. The agency then goes out and tries to get the most bang for their buck by buying a mix of stations that deliver the most persons in the target for their money. Sometimes they get so focused on their target that they get themselves in hot water (witness the furor over "no urban" mandates that got Mini Cooper into trouble recently) but for the most part, the advertiser doesn't know or care about the formats they're buying, they're just doing the numbers.

Local buys with big clients are still a numbers game. With someone like HEB, you might as well be a national account. Smaller businesses look at the numbers, but they also buy the stations they like to listen to, and here is about the only time the format falls into consideration.

As was alluded to in last week's Sean Ross newsletter, cluster strategy also comes into play when you wonder why some markets leave format holes unfilled. (No country in New York City, no classic hits in San Francisco.) Once you've built up a stable of stations that cover 18-54, you have to ask yourself if changing one of your stations is going to do any better than what you've got now. If you've going to get the same number of buys and the same rates, there's no incentive to make a change.

But to answer the question about what stations do when the audience greys out of 25-54: they change direction. 790 tried shifting the music younger on KBME before abandoning it for sports (a format which outbills its ratings as the norm).

News Talk is the next format that's going to piss off its base, in my opinion. Rush & company pack 'em in 12+ (or 6+ in PPM) but the core is over 55. Call it the downside of aligning yourself with a political party where the base is around age 60... but talk formats have a really thorny task ahead of them - how do you grow the audience you want to get without irritating the audience you have so much that the revenue drops?

As with the early days of oldies stations trying to get younger (the all 70's formats, Jammin Oldies) the early attempts at growing news/talk younger haven't done so well (Free FM, progressive talk, 950's Mojo lineup) but watch for shifts in the lineup at talk stations as well as more AM stations to move to FM. They all can't flip to sports here... we already have 4 of those in this town.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

On a national level, advertisers don't tell the agency "buy me the top 40, AC, and AOR stations". They say "buy x% 18-34 and y% 25-54" or they have a target of a gender and age range.

What about the steady erosion of radio ratings - your spillage theory probably works to an extent. But as the overall content on radio increasingly is programming to the lowest common denominator, I think my case may be fairly typical. Sure, I DX a bit, but other than that I am probably your typical "late adopter" who is suspicious of new technology. Nevertheless:

I just got satellite this year, and couldn't be happier with my decision. Freed from the constraints of "one size fits all" over the air radio, I now have some real choices. Still, the subscription fee is a hurdle to most people, as is the hassle of either moving one satellite radio from car to car to home, or pay for more than one each month. Satellite is not an optimum solution, particularly since one of my niche formats isn't on it.

I am reading in Radio World with increasing interest about the iPhone and streaming applications. I was suspicious of megabyte download fees - but apparently that is not the case. It is unlimited in the sense of being - really unlimited! So I am salivating at the prospect of KRTH in the car - in Houston traffic - or WAY-FM. If you have to put up with the tailgating / over the posted speed limit scum, at least I might be able to do it with music I like in the car.

I think there is a threshold of disgust - I've been pushed over it already. Many people have not yet. But the "threshold of disgust" is countered by the "ease of doing something about it" factor. Putting satellite in the car and paying for it is difficult, but I was pushed over the threshold by my disgust with an AM translator on FM jamming a good rim shot station in Dallas. Now, after moving to Houston - and finding that KSBJ betrayed its original investors by going PW, and having the oldies station shut down, I'm pushed over that threshold again.

Where is the threshold for everybody? Different for everybody. A lot of people will just be content to be spillage, or turn the radio off. That is my wife - she just shuts the radio off when she drives. Nothing to listen to --- But for other people, if they have an iPhone, and getting a stream is as simple as clicking an icon, I think they will do it.

One thing is for certain - bad local radio may not make DX'ers of everybody, but the decline of local, over the air TV and takeover by cable should be a warning to radio stations - people WILL break out of the box and take charge of their entertainment choices. Radio can either adapt or die. The local TV stations are still on the air, but their ratings declined and continue to decline relative to cable. Somebody will stay on the frequency, but profitability of the occupant will decline as people increasingly defect to streaming. And the trend may well accelerate to the level of cable TV penetration.

Just conjecture on my part, but I've personally had a belly full of the captive audience "one size fits all" model of radio, and I'm doing something about it. I'm preparing a handout for my massive youth group on how they can get real Christian CHR and rock if they have an iPhone. I bet a lot of them give it a try, too! And my wife may not be a satellite adopter, but my sister in law was quick to use that satellite radio when I don't need it for oldies!

I'm solidly on the side of the listener, not the side of the broadcaster. Give us what WE want, not what YOU want!

 

[johndavis]

On a national level, advertisers don't tell the agency "buy me the top 40, AC, and AOR stations". They say "buy x% 18-34 and y% 25-54" or they have a target of a gender and age range.

What about the steady erosion of radio ratings - your spillage theory probably works to an extent. But as the overall content on radio increasingly is programming to the lowest common denominator, I think my case may be fairly typical.

Well, at the end of the day, we're BROADcasters, not narrowcasters. Broadcast radio and broadcast television have always cast as wide of a net as they possibly can. We've seen formats splinter over the years as more signals have been crammed into cities, but if by "lowest common denominator" you mean program to the largest audience available, then radio hasn't changed a bit.

The business will need to evolve to stay relevant as new technologies mature. Most importantly, it needs to find ways to better engage the youth audience who isn't as enamored with radio compared to previous generations so we have them as a consumer as they become an adult. I'm not certain that programming explicitly is driving them away; I think they're growing up in an age where there's more entertainment choices available to them and they can interact with their peers without needing broadcast media. They're not choosing internet streaming over radio; they're spending more time with Facebook and video games than they are trying to be the 12th caller.

Satellite isn't a player, and this is coming from someone who bought one of the first XM radios in 2001. The music channels have become repetitive and are now entirely voicetracked (poorly). The talk channels are either simulcasts of cable TV or syndicated fare you can get elsewhere. It's now FM that you pay for, and most people don't bother to keep paying once the free trial ends. The future of SiriusXM is delivering Dora the Explorer to the backseat of a Tahoe, if it survives at all.

I do think that radio should consider embracing social media, not as a billboard, but as a brand extension. Using Twitter to say "listen tomorrow at 7:20 to win" doesn't engage the audience, but using Twitter & Facebook to interact with the audience and even continue bits and conversations off air is a good thing. Make the radio station a living, breathing thing.

The one thing that new media does really well is break down the wall between the public and the artists - the artists don't need to use radio-TV to interact with the public, they just need a twitter app on their iPhone. One task for radio in particular is to keep the audience as connected to the artists that matter as if they were following the artists themselves.

 

[PapillionWyngs]

On a national level, advertisers don't tell the agency "buy me the top 40, AC, and AOR stations". They say "buy x% 18-34 and y% 25-54" or they have a target of a gender and age range.

What about the steady erosion of radio ratings - your spillage theory probably works to an extent. But as the overall content on radio increasingly is programming to the lowest common denominator, I think my case may be fairly typical.

Well, at the end of the day, we're BROADcasters, not narrowcasters. Broadcast radio and broadcast television have always cast as wide of a net as they possibly can. We've seen formats splinter over the years as more signals have been crammed into cities, but if by "lowest common denominator" you mean program to the largest audience available, then radio hasn't changed a bit.

The business will need to evolve to stay relevant as new technologies mature. Most importantly, it needs to find ways to better engage the youth audience who isn't as enamored with radio compared to previous generations so we have them as a consumer as they become an adult. I'm not certain that programming explicitly is driving them away; I think they're growing up in an age where there's more entertainment choices available to them and they can interact with their peers without needing broadcast media. They're not choosing internet streaming over radio; they're spending more time with Facebook and video games than they are trying to be the 12th caller.

Satellite isn't a player, and this is coming from someone who bought one of the first XM radios in 2001. The music channels have become repetitive and are now entirely voicetracked (poorly). The talk channels are either simulcasts of cable TV or syndicated fare you can get elsewhere. It's now FM that you pay for, and most people don't bother to keep paying once the free trial ends. The future of SiriusXM is delivering Dora the Explorer to the backseat of a Tahoe, if it survives at all.

I do think that radio should consider embracing social media, not as a billboard, but as a brand extension. Using Twitter to say "listen tomorrow at 7:20 to win" doesn't engage the audience, but using Twitter & Facebook to interact with the audience and even continue bits and conversations off air is a good thing. Make the radio station a living, breathing thing.

The one thing that new media does really well is break down the wall between the public and the artists - the artists don't need to use radio-TV to interact with the public, they just need a twitter app on their iPhone. One task for radio in particular is to keep the audience as connected to the artists that matter as if they were following the artists themselves.

We just need to face it. Radio is doomed, dying, and on life support. Once people no longer care about their listeners and start the "casting the net crap, it's over". People like you ran it into the ground. Good job.

 

[careful705]

I'm solidly on the side of the listener, not the side of the broadcaster. Give us what WE want, not what YOU want!

They obviously think I want to hear the same two Aerosmith songs everyday!!!!! Surely they're not paying for market research that came to that conclusion!!?

With all the media choices for the listener nowadays, radio must adapt or die... The corporate playlist days need to be over. Lets get back to the human element that made radio fun and listenable. Time to think outside the bun people. Jack has kinda the right idea but that's not my flavor of rock. The days of cranking your radio up to 11 when a great song you haven't heard in a long time comes on seem to be over.

CJ

 

[rbrucecarter5]

Well, at the end of the day, we're BROADcasters, not narrowcasters. Broadcast radio and broadcast television have always cast as wide of a net as they possibly can. We've seen formats splinter over the years as more signals have been crammed into cities, but if by "lowest common denominator" you mean program to the largest audience available, then radio hasn't changed a bit.

Interesting discussion -

Your concept of BROADcasting has one flaw, and you probably already know it. You can be so broad that the content appears watered down. It is the old classic hit station broadcasting only 300 carefully selected songs. You think it has broad appeal. What the listener actually hears is "Hotel California" every hour on the hour until we get sick of hearing it.

Same with KSBJ. They play it so safe they have lost the original vision - being the station for the kids, since adults already had KHCB. Instead, their net is so broad they don't appeal to their original mission field. The Jacks and Bobs try a different tack - increasing the playlist to such an extent most people hear five clunkers before a song they recognize. Perhaps the answer lies somewhere in the middle, a playlist of 3000 to 4000 songs that were proven winners in their era.

As for satellite being a non-player - I think you are right. The ONLY reason I have it is to get music. Voice tracking to me doesn't matter, if the music is good, who cares about the announcers. The great DJs of the past couldn't even get a gig at today's stations, so that era of radio personalities is gone forever, never to be resurrected in this era of radio content controlled by lawyers. So music radio should concentrate on the music.

Satellite, I think, blew it big time by licensing the radio and not the subscriber. People are used to cable TV with the connection in each room, attach a wire and TV and you get a lot of stations. Along comes satellite radio. Have three cars? Pay three times. Want to have it in the house, pay again for that. NOT attractive to most consumers and one reason why I held off until the radio dial was intolerably bland and saturated with noisy sidebands, country bumpkin, Spanish language, talk, sports or junk religion.

My real goal - all along - was to get reliable streaming in the car. The moment I get it working, GONE is KSBJ's monopoly of praise and worship GARBAGE - replaced with KVRK (yes, I AM 55, but I'm not listening to that PW cr_p, EVER), former oldies stations now playing the worst tracks of the 70's and 80's, etc- replaced with KRTH. The only things worth listening to over the air are things like KRBE, a legacy station that is the best at what it does, and rivals things like KIIS in Los Angeles. It is too bad I missed the last years of another Houston legacy station - KLOL. Now replaced with foreign language and not even on my presets. That is how radio eroded itself - one legacy station at at time, that was really creative and with a loyal following - taken over by people who don't have even the slightest knowledge of the importance of the station's history and contributions to a musical genre. I hope they enjoy their profits, the long term consequences for overall radio's relevance and ratings nationwide will be subtle and gradual.

 

[PapillionWyngs]

Well, at the end of the day, we're BROADcasters, not narrowcasters. Broadcast radio and broadcast television have always cast as wide of a net as they possibly can. We've seen formats splinter over the years as more signals have been crammed into cities, but if by "lowest common denominator" you mean program to the largest audience available, then radio hasn't changed a bit.

Interesting discussion -

Your concept of BROADcasting has one flaw, and you probably already know it. You can be so broad that the content appears watered down. It is the old classic hit station broadcasting only 300 carefully selected songs. You think it has broad appeal. What the listener actually hears is "Hotel California" every hour on the hour until we get sick of hearing it.

Same with KSBJ. They play it so safe they have lost the original vision - being the station for the kids, since adults already had KHCB. Instead, their net is so broad they don't appeal to their original mission field. The Jacks and Bobs try a different tack - increasing the playlist to such an extent most people hear five clunkers before a song they recognize. Perhaps the answer lies somewhere in the middle, a playlist of 3000 to 4000 songs that were proven winners in their era.

As for satellite being a non-player - I think you are right. The ONLY reason I have it is to get music. Voice tracking to me doesn't matter, if the music is good, who cares about the announcers. The great DJs of the past couldn't even get a gig at today's stations, so that era of radio personalities is gone forever, never to be resurrected in this era of radio content controlled by lawyers. So music radio should concentrate on the music.

Satellite, I think, blew it big time by licensing the radio and not the subscriber. People are used to cable TV with the connection in each room, attach a wire and TV and you get a lot of stations. Along comes satellite radio. Have three cars? Pay three times. Want to have it in the house, pay again for that. NOT attractive to most consumers and one reason why I held off until the radio dial was intolerably bland and saturated with noisy sidebands, country bumpkin, Spanish language, talk, sports or junk religion.

My real goal - all along - was to get reliable streaming in the car. The moment I get it working, GONE is KSBJ's monopoly of praise and worship GARBAGE - replaced with KVRK (yes, I AM 55, but I'm not listening to that PW cr_p, EVER), former oldies stations now playing the worst tracks of the 70's and 80's, etc- replaced with KRTH. The only things worth listening to over the air are things like KRBE, a legacy station that is the best at what it does, and rivals things like KIIS in Los Angeles. It is too bad I missed the last years of another Houston legacy station - KLOL. Now replaced with foreign language and not even on my presets. That is how radio eroded itself - one legacy station at at time, that was really creative and with a loyal following - taken over by people who don't have even the slightest knowledge of the importance of the station's history and contributions to a musical genre. I hope they enjoy their profits, the long term consequences for overall radio's relevance and ratings nationwide will be subtle and gradual.

Us - what do you mean by that PW crap?

 

[johndavis]

Well, at the end of the day, we're BROADcasters, not narrowcasters. Broadcast radio and broadcast television have always cast as wide of a net as they possibly can. We've seen formats splinter over the years as more signals have been crammed into cities, but if by "lowest common denominator" you mean program to the largest audience available, then radio hasn't changed a bit.

Interesting discussion -

Your concept of BROADcasting has one flaw, and you probably already know it. You can be so broad that the content appears watered down. It is the old classic hit station broadcasting only 300 carefully selected songs. You think it has broad appeal. What the listener actually hears is "Hotel California" every hour on the hour until we get sick of hearing it.

Same with KSBJ. They play it so safe they have lost the original vision - being the station for the kids, since adults already had KHCB. Instead, their net is so broad they don't appeal to their original mission field. The Jacks and Bobs try a different tack - increasing the playlist to such an extent most people hear five clunkers before a song they recognize. Perhaps the answer lies somewhere in the middle, a playlist of 3000 to 4000 songs that were proven winners in their era.

Yet KSBJ isn't trying to appeal to the kids, or at least that hasn't been their deal since I moved here 8 years ago. They're going after the kids' moms. I know they have a teen-targeted webstream and I wouldn't be surprised to hear it on an HD2 someday (although with their stick halfway to Cleveland, how 'bout that webstream!) but KSBJ is more of a Christian alternative to KODA than it is to KRBE. The music, the jock talk, it's all aimed squarely at a 30-something woman. No wonder you hate it!

If anything, KSBJ is bringing people to Christian radio that would never turn on KHCB... or any other Christian radio station. (and somehow I think that ties into their mission!) It may not be the station that you want it to be, but in August alone they reached over 578,000 people. 20% of the audience was teens, 9% 18-24, 51% 25-54, and 20% over 55. The one thing that stands out for me at KSBJ is other than the soccer-mom focus, they don't turn anyone away on the air. If you have ears and you like the music, you're welcome to stick around. Most Christian stations make me feel like I'm not "good enough" to listen to them and some are downright anti-Catholic, which is my denomination.

There's very few CCM stations that go after 18-24. My guess is that unless you have a congregation or university bankrolling you, you can't live off the pledges of college students. Here we go again, talking about billing, but the light bills don't pay themselves.

You'll get sick of the music channels on satellite soon enough. One day I realized I'd heard "One Toke Over The Line" 4 times over my commute to and from work while punching between 70's, Top Tracks, and Radio Margaritaville. That's when I decided that I'd rather spend the money in my entertainment budget on a nice night out than on 3 months of XM in the car.

But to quote Steely Dan, it's "nothing but blues and Elvis and somebody else's favorite song" anywhere you go.

 

[johndavis]

Us - what do you mean by that PW crap?

He doesn't like the Praise & Worship style of Contemporary Christian Music, therefore he doesn't like KSBJ.

 

[johndavis]

And while on the topic of CCM... thoughts on Air 1 & Radio U?

 

[rbrucecarter5]

And while on the topic of CCM... thoughts on Air 1 & Radio U?

Great stuff - I wish we had it in Houston. If we did - maybe church youth groups could actually recommend Christian music to kids without getting boo'ed off the stage or laughed at.