The Day The Oldies Died

[davideduardo]

P.S. Using your same source, HERE is one of the pertinent links you should have noticed:
that number is expected to rise to 50% in 2011, the report said.[/i]

That's exactly what I'm talking about.

The point is that homes with DVRs continue to use live tv... DVR households use more TV just as satellite radio users tend to use more terrestrial radio as well.

There is a newer study from the same entitity as well as several others. The conclusion is that the recession has decelerated the installation of DVRs and increased the use of the lowest priced options.

 

[davideduardo]

Nobody asked you to respond, but since you did, I'm going to have to demand a source that tells you that
people don't pause their live TVs and skip through the commercials.

Of course, that is not what I said. I responded to your anecdotal observation about not watching live TV (or the embedded commercials) since installing a DVR. And I said that your experience is not typical, since studies show that DVR homes continue to use live tv. In many cases the DVR is used to time shift shows that would not normally be seen or those that overlap, and the main use is not to avoid commercials.

Claiming proprietary information does nothing to bolster your argument's credibility: "I know, but how I know is too secret to tell the board!" I call BS. It sounds to me like so much puffery---in other words, another typical post.

Again: there is a vast amount of proprietary material in marketing and media. Isn't it better to know the headlines, as opposed to knowing nothing at all?

Yet recorded viewing is not necessarily the priority in DVR households - 68% of DVR owners say that they usually watch recorded DVR programs when there is nothing on regularly scheduled TV that they want to watch.

That is the key issue... time shifting, not commercial avoidance. Your use represents a benefit, but not necessarily the principal one. And the statement demonstrates that the DVR increases TV usage, and is in addition to live TV usage.

 

[aunti-terrestrial]

Nobody asked you to respond, but since you did, I'm going to have to demand a source that tells you that
people don't pause their live TVs and skip through the commercials.

Of course, that is not what I said. I responded to your anecdotal observation about not watching live TV (or the embedded commercials) since installing a DVR. And I said that your experience is not typical, since studies show that DVR homes continue to use live tv. In many cases the DVR is used to time shift shows that would not normally be seen or those that overlap, and the main use is not to avoid commercials.

Claiming proprietary information does nothing to bolster your argument's credibility: "I know, but how I know is too secret to tell the board!" I call BS. It sounds to me like so much puffery---in other words, another typical post.

Again: there is a vast amount of proprietary material in marketing and media. Isn't it better to know the headlines, as opposed to knowing nothing at all?

Yet recorded viewing is not necessarily the priority in DVR households - 68% of DVR owners say that they usually watch recorded DVR programs when there is nothing on regularly scheduled TV that they want to watch.

That is the key issue... time shifting, not commercial avoidance. Your use represents a benefit, but not necessarily the principal one. And the statement demonstrates that the DVR increases TV usage, and is in addition to live TV usage.

David, what you said was that MY anecdote was "not suppported by fact." That's what I responded to. Despite your lengthy posts, you cannot argue with the fact that this is what you said.

You also said:
"Again, marketers spend billions on research for every aspect of products and services and retail... ranging from packaging to ad response to consumption by different demographic groups."

You've lost the monied demos who can afford better alternatives. Yes, of course DVR installation has slowed during the recession; it's one of the things that separates the haves from the have-nots. Perhaps your industry should "spend billions on research" to figure out how to get the lower economic demos to part with their money in supporting your advertisers; eventually, anyone who can afford those better choices will have no need for your ads. As I cited in the study I linked, by 2011, the projected number of DVR users who skip the ads will be 50%.

Arguing with whether or not there's a genie in the bottle means very little, once the stopper has been removed.

 

[davideduardo]

David, what you said was that MY anecdote was "not suppported by fact." That's what I responded to. Despite your lengthy posts, you cannot argue with the fact that this is what you said.

So you are arguing your point based on my differentiation of "anecdote from personal experience" and "fact" where I meant by "fact" things that are verifiable and broad based, as opposed to unverifiable and limited to a sample size of one.

In that case, I made an assumption that readers of the thread would make the distinction. Obviously, you did not.

You also said:
"Again, marketers spend billions on research for every aspect of products and services and retail... ranging from packaging to ad response to consumption by different demographic groups."

You've lost the monied demos who can afford better alternatives. Yes, of course DVR installation has slowed during the recession; it's one of the things that separates the haves from the have-nots. Perhaps your industry should "spend billions on research" to figure out how to get the lower economic demos to part with their money in supporting your advertisers; eventually, anyone who can afford those better choices will have no need for your ads.

For one, "my industry" is not the one that spends on that degree of consumer research... it's America's marketers, ranging from P&G to Budweiser to Coke and McDonalds and WalMart. Note that all of these are broad-based consumer product marketers sell to people in all economic strata.

As I cited in the study I linked, by 2011, the projected number of DVR users who skip the ads will be 50%.

It would not surprise me to find that there is a decline in DVR usage. In any case, the point is that DVR users also watch a lot of live TV in real time... because most DVR users are heavier users of TV, which is why the cost is justifiable. Everything is a question of perceived value... in my anecdotal experience, I don't find premium tiers and channels of value, so I don't spend on them... and, in fact, I cut back the channels I get. So much for anecdotal experience.

Arguing with whether or not there's a genie in the bottle means very little, once the stopper has been removed.

If, in fact, TV ads are being skipped to that extent, it makes a good case for radio. Or for putting more budget in Spanish language TV, where cable and satellite in some markets have less than 40% penetration.
[/quote]

 

[LibertyNT]

As for oldies, if we all put rim shots like KGBC, KSHN, and KCOL into the ratings, even with the difficulty receiving them, somebody might get the idea that oldies will fly in the Houston market - especially when oldies stations in other markets are doing just fine ---

"Oldies" stations are not doing fine. "Classic Hits" stations are. Oldies is defined as 60's based pop hits, while Classic Hits defines a 70's based format.

70's based formats get pretty decent sales demos; 60's based formats don't.

Of the three stations you mention, two are no-shows in the Houston market ratings, and one occasionally gets a 0.1 to 0.2 share, but usually gets nothing. Those are certainly not evidence that there is a passion for oldies.

Im sure somewhere Oldies Gets some decent ratings.

 

[davideduardo]

Im sure somewhere Oldies Gets some decent ratings.

Oh, it gets good 12+ ratings most anywhere, but most of the listening is persons over 55, which is why they don't make much money... and why most have moved to 70's based classic hits.

 

[PapillionWyngs]

Im sure somewhere Oldies Gets some decent ratings.

Oh, it gets good 12+ ratings most anywhere, but most of the listening is persons over 55, which is why they don't make much money... and why most have moved to 70's based classic hits.

I just find that hard to believe - I'm sorry. Show me where to find research that supports your claim, and I'll believe it. My husband is in his late 40's - and he listened to KHITS exclusively during his two hour commute time. I am only 53, and I could sit here and name various friends and relatives that are lost like me - nowhere to turn for oldies.

So now I listen to talk radio, specifically, AM 1070, KNTH. Best station on the radio.

If you had told me a year ago that I would become a talk radio listener, I would have told you that I had outgrown that stage when in my 30's and 40's. But with the death of oldies in Houston, that is my choice.

There just isn't any good music choice on the radio in Houston anymore. Period.

 

[ChuckTiller]

Papillion. I only play one oldie at 5:20AM. Thanks for listening to KNTH.

 

[davideduardo]

I just find that hard to believe - I'm sorry. Show me where to find research that supports your claim, and I'll believe it. My husband is in his late 40's - and he listened to KHITS exclusively during his two hour commute time. I am only 53, and I could sit here and name various friends and relatives that are lost like me - nowhere to turn for oldies.

First, let's look at the terminology to make sure we are talking about the same thing as one of us is in radio and the other is part of the group that keeps us in business... the listener.

"Oldies" in radio-insider-speak is a 60's music based format, with perhaps a smattering of 50s and a bit of early 70s'. "Classic Hits" is the format that plays the same kind of music, but mostly 70's with even a little 80s thrown in.

Those are terms used inside the industry, while on air, a station that is classic hits may call itself "oldies."

Generally, most former oldies stations have changed to classic hits in the last few years, because the audience for oldies was becoming predominantly over 55, and there is little interest from the larger ad agency type advertisers in this audience.

Classic hits appeals to motly a 40-something core, and is very attractive to advertisers.

I hope that clarifies the "insider terms" for you. And it is surprising that there not be a classic hits station in Houston... given the success of stations like KLUV in Dallas and KOOL in Phonenix, two large markets in the Southwest.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

Generally, most former oldies stations have changed to classic hits in the last few years, because the audience for oldies was becoming predominantly over 55, and there is little interest from the larger ad agency type advertisers in this audience.

Classic hits appeals to motly a 40-something core, and is very attractive to advertisers.

I hope that clarifies the "insider terms" for you. And it is surprising that there not be a classic hits station in Houston... given the success of stations like KLUV in Dallas and KOOL in Phonenix, two large markets in the Southwest.

With that logic - why does Sirius XM bother with "50's on 5" (over 65) and "40's on 4" (over 75)? For that matter, how does KAAM in Dallas make a go of it being targeted at such an elderly demographic?

 

[johndavis]

"Oldies" in radio-insider-speak is a 60's music based format, with perhaps a smattering of 50s and a bit of early 70s'. "Classic Hits" is the format that plays the same kind of music, but mostly 70's with even a little 80s thrown in.

Those are terms used inside the industry, while on air, a station that is classic hits may call itself "oldies."

Generally, most former oldies stations have changed to classic hits in the last few years, because the audience for oldies was becoming predominantly over 55, and there is little interest from the larger ad agency type advertisers in this audience.

Classic hits appeals to motly a 40-something core, and is very attractive to advertisers.

I hope that clarifies the "insider terms" for you. And it is surprising that there not be a classic hits station in Houston... given the success of stations like KLUV in Dallas and KOOL in Phonenix, two large markets in the Southwest.

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.

 

[johndavis]

With that logic - why does Sirius XM bother with "50's on 5" (over 65) and "40's on 4" (over 75)? For that matter, how does KAAM in Dallas make a go of it being targeted at such an elderly demographic?

Sirius XM also has a bluegrass channel and a reggae channel. Neither of those are commercially viable as a broadcast station in the market, either. They don't care what channel you listen do, so long as you pay the monthly fee. For what it's worth, I'm told that the highest cuming channel on XM is 70's on 7.

Today's All Access says SiriusXM is #2 on a "most likely to go bankrupt" list, by the way...

 

[johndavis]

Oh, it gets good 12+ ratings most anywhere, but most of the listening is persons over 55, which is why they don't make much money... and why most have moved to 70's based classic hits.

I just find that hard to believe - I'm sorry. Show me where to find research that supports your claim, and I'll believe it.

This from the New York Daily News explains it better than I can...

If you wonder why radio formats like oldies and adult standards disappear even though they have large numbers of listeners, the main reason is simple.
Radio owners measure success less by listenership than by ad revenue, and if a big audience doesn't translate to big ad dollars, the format may be expendable.

The article goes on to explain the Power Ratio, or the ratio of listeners to ad dollars.

http://www.nydailynews.com/archives.../2006-03-21_oldies_formats_can_t_get_ad-.html

...and for more recent numbers (that article is from 2006), here's 2008 straight from Miller Kaplan. 1.0 and above is good. Under 1 isn't.

Besides oldies, formats that are hard to turn a profit with include gospel, Christian AC, Spanish AC, and Smooth Jazz.

http://www.millerkaplan.com/2008-mmr-power-ratios

Those Smooth Jazz numbers surprised me. I always thought they outbilled their ratings! No wonder they pulled the plug on KHJZ.

 

[davideduardo]

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).

I'm in fact, "in the market" in the sense that I work with one of the local broadcasters on a daily basis.

And KHTC had (and still does as KGLK) the problem of not being a Senior Road tower station, and while not quite a rimshot, it is not a perfect signal, having more or less the coverage of the KOVE CP.

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.

The station, during the 13 books of 2007, averaged about 16th in 25-54 and 18th in the last three non-holiday books of the year. No doubt that caused the switch to the pseudo classic rock approach as the Eagle which has brought it into the top 10 in 25-54.

 

[davideduardo]

With that logic - why does Sirius XM bother with "50's on 5" (over 65) and "40's on 4" (over 75)? For that matter, how does KAAM in Dallas make a go of it being targeted at such an elderly demographic?

Sirius XM is listener / subscriber supported, and they don't depend on advertising revenue (their ad billing is less than that of a single mid-range New York radio station... almost inconsequential). So fomats that can't get advertiser support have a perfect place there.

KAAm can sell to small local businesses that have an interest in older customers. It bills a bit less than $40 k a month, compared to about $1.8 million to $2 million a month for the top 5 stations in the market. They can, frugally run, make money on that.

 

[LibertyNT]

Generally, most former oldies stations have changed to classic hits in the last few years, because the audience for oldies was becoming predominantly over 55, and there is little interest from the larger ad agency type advertisers in this audience.

Classic hits appeals to motly a 40-something core, and is very attractive to advertisers.

I hope that clarifies the "insider terms" for you. And it is surprising that there not be a classic hits station in Houston... given the success of stations like KLUV in Dallas and KOOL in Phonenix, two large markets in the Southwest.

With that logic - why does Sirius XM bother with "50's on 5" (over 65) and "40's on 4" (over 75)? For that matter, how does KAAM in Dallas make a go of it being targeted at such an elderly demographic?

I feel bad for picking this apart but here we go.

Sirius XM gets paid per person.

KAAM barely makes it. I Think The Weekend Infomercials are the only thing keeping it afloat.

 

[PapillionWyngs]

"Oldies" in radio-insider-speak is a 60's music based format, with perhaps a smattering of 50s and a bit of early 70s'. "Classic Hits" is the format that plays the same kind of music, but mostly 70's with even a little 80s thrown in.

Those are terms used inside the industry, while on air, a station that is classic hits may call itself "oldies."

Generally, most former oldies stations have changed to classic hits in the last few years, because the audience for oldies was becoming predominantly over 55, and there is little interest from the larger ad agency type advertisers in this audience.

Classic hits appeals to motly a 40-something core, and is very attractive to advertisers.

I hope that clarifies the "insider terms" for you. And it is surprising that there not be a classic hits station in Houston... given the success of stations like KLUV in Dallas and KOOL in Phonenix, two large markets in the Southwest.

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.

There are several things about me that you need to understand. I am 53 years old. That means that radio played a HUGE role in my life for many decades. Am I asking for 50's songs? No - since I was born in 1956. Am I asking for 80's songs - no. I just want hits of the 60's and 70's.

I have a passion for radio that very few who are not in the industry have. I wanted to be in radio. I studied for the exam required at the time to be a dj (as they called them then) and I even had an audition tape sent out to several small stations outside of Houston. My parents had other plans for me (college) and I gave up my dream. Before you judge me as some "frustrated housewife",etc., maybe this will help you see where I am coming from.

I am a college graduate. I have two adopted sons and one is special needs. I have three debilitating diseases that don't have good outcomes. I spend a great deal of time either in my car or in my room. I do not have, nor can I afford, an ipod, MP3 player. sattelite radio, or an extensive cd collection. I would go the internet streaming route, but I don't have a computer in my room, and of course, don't have one in the car.

These songs calmed my son down, and they calmed me down. They were my past when I had a future. Sorry if that doesn't work for corporate radio, but it is my life, and those songs helped me get through my days. Now they are all filled with talk radio - good talk radio, mind you - but it is not the same.

Maybe now SOMEONE will understand.

 

[foursider]

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.

 

[stan]

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.

 

[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.

You get it! And I know that you get my passion for it, too.

I don't expect you to buy me anything. Getting what I mean is enough.