purdyum said:
David, didn't mean to, but I obviously struck a nerve.
So that is what you meant. The way it was originally written, I took yoour comment to mean that stations bribed advertisers with cash to get buys. And that is pretty offensive in this day and age.
You mean you were really talking about illegal immigrants? You could have foold me to Morelia and back with the way that was written.
Are you telling me that the Univision audience does not have a larger percentage of it's audience that gats paid in cash for services rendered?
This is not an issue for one company. It is an issue for every company. Nobody is going to sacrifice ratings or focus on LA to serve an immensely smaller market with enormously smaller revenue potential... and one which is in economic crisis.
Since ad sales are based on ratings, stop for a moment and use logic. To be part of the ratings, your family unit is recruited. Generally, you get a recruitment call, although some get a pre-call letter, if you are bing recruited. The family representative has to reveal data including address, family size, ages, and some socioeconomic questions to establish income level, etc. Do you really think a person who is not legally in the US would do that?
Most people believe that, at best, the participation by illegal immigrants in the survey is minimal. At worst, it is "not at all.2
And... one m ight assume illegal immigrants work with unofficial ID papers, meaning either false identities or similar. And most are paid with checks, because only a small percentage get paid cash, such as maids and gardeners. The majority are paid like anyone else, but get no benefit from the tax withholding,etc. Any company that hires illegals is going to want to be able to deduct the cost of wages, or there is no gain... unless the business itself is sub rosa.
Are you also going to tell me that the Univision audience does not have a lower percentage of home owners than the market? If you look at the indicees, you will find that you are incorrect.
Since home ownership is not a factor in most product and service based radio advertising, it's irrelevant. LA indexes very low in total home ownership anyway, because the median cost of homes is so much higher than the median incomes can afford.
That goes to the economics of it. The IE is a faster growing market than the LA Metro,
Growth of population does not, alone, make revenues grow in a market. It is CSI that makes revenues grow. And the CSI in the IE is going to fall brutally this year and for several more years, as unemployment increases (Riverside now 6.6%, up 25% since October). While home builders were never a big radio category, the mortgage crisis has impacted employment, which means less money being spent overall and cutbacks. Mortgage ads, such as refis, were mostly the domain of 45+ radio stations, yet the crisis in banking (how many thousands of Countrywide empoyees are gone?) affects the local economy.
The IE is market 26, but is 47th in billing. It is expected to decline 5% to 7% this year, taking it to about 28th in national billing because a) we are having a recession, like it or not, and, b) the local economy is much worse than the national one.
AND if you look at your stations advertisers, you will find that you do, in fact have IE companies advertising. You will also find that the rates you have booked on your stations range wildly...and you have some low rates closer to that of IE stations (it is a combination of market conditions and management).
No, it's a combination of dayparts and ratings. Big stations bill more than little ones. Big dayparts bill more than less listened to ones. And rates are a function of both demand as well as the value of a rating point, or CPP. In general, LA rates for the same share point level are about 12 times that of the IE, and the spread is increasing.
If an LA station sells a spot for $200, with a 1 share, an IE station would sell the same spot for $15 to $18 dollars as the IE station has about 1/12th the audience for the same share level.
Again, you are totally ignoring the fact that there are 87 stations licensed in the LA MSA, and only a couple get a usable signal into the IE. In our case, only KLVE covers most of the market with a usable signal, while the rest are partial coverage or none at all... just like stations ranging from KYSR to KROQ to KLAX to KJLH have no usable coverage of the IE and yet are competitive in the LA market.
Don't take it so personally, this is a market scenario, and if in fact, Univision is NOT making any attempts at the IE, it will be a decision regretted at some point...just my 2 cents.
I don't know of any broadcaster that does anything market specific (unless it's a paid remote or something occasional) to enhance IE audience. Doing anything programming wise to benefit the IE would also have to benefit the LA market, or you would be trading ratings in market 26 for ratings in market #2. Most anyone would say, if it is good for LA, and we have a signal in other ares, we will pick up some audience" but they are not going to send vans 75 miles from the studios, etc. etc.
The real point is that if programming is good enough to win in LA, it will get some residual audience in the peripheral areas. Since "winning" in the IE adds such a small number of listeners percentage-wise, the philosophy of having a good station for LA will always get audience in surrounding areas. And nobody is going to do a lesser job for the owrld's largest radio revenue market to get some (unsalabble) numbers on the fringes.
You notice that Entravision chose, with Arbitron, to change the denomination of KLYY to LA years ago. They have the IE's biggest signal, yet they have no presence in the IE, and are listed, intentionally, below the line in the IE book and above it in the LA one. This is because with a 1.3 share in LA they can sell much, much more than with a 5 share and top-5 status in the IE, they probably could not make money. And they don't benefit from the IE audience!
