• 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

THE REASONS JACK WON'T WORK LONG-TERM

Re: chart myths

> (I think I've been saying that all along-- it's mostly
> irrellevant).
>
> >
> > Simply put, just because a song was a big hit in it's day
> > doesn't mean it should be played today (Dominque by the
> > Singing Nun for example) and conversely, a song can have
> > charted poorly but have become a big hit as time has gone
> > by. Piano Man is one example. Rock Lobster is another in
> my
> > opinion.
> >
>

And to add one more: the Romantics song "What I Like About You" only made it to #49 on the Billboard chart, but it's a very recognizable song, especially after being used in a commercial a few years ago.<P ID="signature">______________
"...and the countdown continues until the neanderthals that govern college football do something about their pathetic postseason."--Tim Brando, Sporting News Radio</P>
 
Re: zero real facts

> (NOTE: my past reply was to nokidding, not to chrisr).
>
> chrisr- neither you or I "know this will not work
> long-term". None of us in this business has all the answers
> and this whole JACK thing is way too new and it's way too
> early to have any idea whether it'll work or not. I don't
> think ANYBODY believes Jack-type radio is THE answer to what
> ills our industry these days but-- it's also not doomed to
> fail everywhere.
>
> I understand many "wanting" it to fail, I really do. But go
> back and re-read the Email and consider again if it isn't
> "personal" to you.
>

I agree too. Because the variety hits format is still relatively new, we still can't pinpoint whether or not this will work one year, five years or ten years from now. Out of the gate, the numbers are promising.

I will agree, too, that variety hits is not the answer to radio's ills. What would help its cause is for the Clear Channels of the world to let their stations sound local (local jocks--no voicetrackers, decisions made locally, local contests, etc.) and get all these consultants out of the way. <P ID="signature">______________
"...and the countdown continues until the neanderthals that govern college football do something about their pathetic postseason."--Tim Brando, Sporting News Radio</P>
 
variety hits format

agreed.

However, the "consultants" thing is a myth (and really always has been). Today, Regional Programming heads have a definite hand in local Programming strategy but the old and tired "blame the consultants" thing is a non-starter.

The key is having strong local Market Managers and sharp Programmers to be in charge of the ship and enlist their Regional Programmers for perspective and resources.

Besides, any good consultant works FOR their radio stations- this myth needs to go away, permanently.

>
> I agree too. Because the variety hits format is still
> relatively new, we still can't pinpoint whether or not this
> will work one year, five years or ten years from now. Out of
> the gate, the numbers are promising.
>
> I will agree, too, that variety hits is not the answer to
> radio's ills. What would help its cause is for the Clear
> Channels of the world to let their stations sound local
> (local jocks--no voicetrackers, decisions made locally,
> local contests, etc.) and get all these consultants out of
> the way.
>
 
Re: chart myths

I don't even remember U2's "New Years Day" as a current, but its in hot rotation on our local 80s station.


> > (I think I've been saying that all along-- it's mostly
> > irrellevant).
> >
> > >
> > > Simply put, just because a song was a big hit in it's
> day
> > > doesn't mean it should be played today (Dominque by the
> > > Singing Nun for example) and conversely, a song can have
>
> > > charted poorly but have become a big hit as time has
> gone
> > > by. Piano Man is one example. Rock Lobster is another in
>
> > my
> > > opinion.
> > >
> >
>
> And to add one more: the Romantics song "What I Like About
> You" only made it to #49 on the Billboard chart, but it's a
> very recognizable song, especially after being used in a
> commercial a few years ago.
>
<P ID="signature">______________
"There ain't no reason to fight over a woman. There's two more down the street!".."Senisble Don", 700 WLW</P>
 
Re: variety hits format

Simply put, the consultant is the person with the expoertise in programming in a variety of situations, hopefully with the research background to go along with it. That's what a local PD who started on 7-12midnight, went to PM Drive, and became PD simply doesn't have. <P ID="signature">______________
"There ain't no reason to fight over a woman. There's two more down the street!".."Senisble Don", 700 WLW</P>
 
Re: variety hits format

Sorry about the misspell, but no, I wouldn't consider it an oxymoron. I wouldn't question the credentials of Mike McVay or Guy Zapoleon, for example.


> consultant / expoertise (your spelling)
>
> Isn't that considered an oxymoron?
>
<P ID="signature">______________
"There ain't no reason to fight over a woman. There's two more down the street!".."Senisble Don", 700 WLW</P>
 
consultants

You're right in your premise. We know what consultants are for, but the fact is these days fewer and fewer stations (especially in the major markets) even have consultants (much of that a product of consolidation).

And, yet, "the consultants" (on this and other boards) are the root of all evil and, along with "the suits", close to anti-Christs.


> Simply put, the consultant is the person with the expoertise
> in programming in a variety of situations, hopefully with
> the research background to go along with it. That's what a
> local PD who started on 7-12midnight, went to PM Drive, and
> became PD simply doesn't have.
>
 
consultants must be the devil

Yeah, isn't that a bit too easy?

"ha ha ha- I insulted a consultant! Aren't I cute?".

No...

>
> > consultant / expertise (your spelling)
> >
> > Isn't that considered an oxymoron?
> >
>
 
Re: consultants must be the devil

> Yeah, isn't that a bit too easy?
>
> "ha ha ha- I insulted a consultant! Aren't I cute?".
>
> No...
>
> >
> > > consultant / expertise (your spelling)
> > >
> > > Isn't that considered an oxymoron?
> > >
> >
>
Good grief guys, it was meant as a joke.
Something to show the typical reaction
of all of us. Like the Anti-Christ comment.

Then again, I don't use consultants anymore.
 
>
> If JACK is to survive long-term, they must get serious and
> take all the bubblegum titles and unfamiliar songs off and
> focus on a particular listener. JACKS will (and in some
> cases already have) developed an identity crisis. Early
> research already shows it coming apart at the seems. Huge
> cume/low time spent listening. People are curious as to
> what they will play next, but when they hear "what's the
> frequency kenneth by rem into-walking on sunshine by katrina
> and the waves into-maybelene by chuck berry into-turning
> japanese by the vapors into-phsycodelic furs-pretty in pink
> into shakin by eddie money into nothing compares to you by
> sinead o'conner into live and let die by paul mccartney into
> i've been thinking about you-londonbeat into anticipation by
> carly simon into harder to breathe-maroon 5 into dreams by
> van halen into i'm alright by kenny loggings into the
> glamorous life by sheila e, they come to the conclusion that
> this station is not something they can leave on all the time
> and call their favorite radio station. With all those nasty
> titles, the station just becomes plain boring and developes
> it's current low time spent listening problem.
>
Who says that is "nasty"? That is a good mix and good variety.
One nasty mix I like is Rose royce's Wishing on a star into Led Zeppelin's Stairway to Heaven!
 
> One nasty mix I like is Rose royce's Wishing on a star into
> Led Zeppelin's Stairway to Heaven!

OK, I just rolled those songs out of the top-of-hour on jack.fm. Sounded fine. Thanks.

CJ
 
JACK LONG-TERM

"nasty" to most radio heads doesn't even register with normal listeners.
They either like the songs they're hearing or the don't. The concept of "train wrecks" that radio people howl incessantly about is not something normal, everyday radio listeners would even notice. they have LIVES.


> OK, I just rolled those songs out of the top-of-hour on
> jack.fm. Sounded fine. Thanks. CJ


> > One nasty mix I like is Rose royce's Wishing on a star
> into Led Zeppelin's Stairway to Heaven!
 
> Seems like you've given this some thought, Chris. How's
> YOUR format working?
>


jack.fm is my favorite station. period. if i could get it in my truck in loisisana i might would cancel xm. but until then..no way! anyway i wish we had a jack here. instead we have a jack rip off..red station. i would love to hear megadeth and waylon jennings btb. and maybe kenny rogers and marilyn manson. i listen to everything as a lot of people do. and radio people listen up. most people have no idea about formats, trainwrecks and dont even care about the djs. they just like whats on the radio. if its a good song be it death metal or polka they will listen, if it sucks..off it goes!! jack keeps people around because they want to see whats next! and jack i loved that all dead weekend a few weeks ago!! that rocked!<P ID="signature">______________
deep tracks xm 40 for those who arent single minded</P>
 
> > The other problem with JACK-FM's is they play too many
> > "radio pd's favorite songs" that the average listener
> > doesn't know or doesn't like. I'm sorry, but Rock Lobster
>
> > by the B-52's was never a charting hit. You only hear
> that
> > song mostly on low rated 80's stations (look it up and
> match
> > the station, then go to allaccess and look at the
> ratings).
> > I thought we all learned early in our careers that if PD's
>
> > want to hear their favorite songs, go home and put in the
> > cd. Those songs (unless well tested and/or big hit) have
> NO
> > business on a serious radio station trying to get
> > ratings/revenue.
>
> "Rock Lobster" may not have charted, but it's one of those
> songs people remember and love to hear at parties. I'm sure
> it tests well in Jack's demographics. If it didn't, it
> wouldn't be played. This format is not about the radio PD's
> favorites at all. Virtually every song they play is a
> huge-testing hit. A common fallacy of this format is that
> it's random radio... it's not. It's thoroughly researched.
>
> The "80's stations are low rated so 80's music must be bad"
> logic doesn't follow. 80's stations failed because they
> were too narrow and overly repetitive, not because the music
> they played was unpopular. People want to hear 80's music.
> They just don't want to hear ONLY 80's music.
>
they want to hear more than 80 songs from the 80s to be precise. the 80s format usually consisted of about 100 songs. out of the thousands released from 1980-1989. usually leaving out every song from pre 83..and playing mostly 88-89..<P ID="signature">______________
deep tracks xm 40 for those who arent single minded</P>
 
Re: zero real facts

> > (NOTE: my past reply was to nokidding, not to chrisr).
> >
> > chrisr- neither you or I "know this will not work
> > long-term". None of us in this business has all the
> answers
> > and this whole JACK thing is way too new and it's way too
> > early to have any idea whether it'll work or not. I don't
>
> > think ANYBODY believes Jack-type radio is THE answer to
> what
> > ills our industry these days but-- it's also not doomed to
>
> > fail everywhere.
> >
> > I understand many "wanting" it to fail, I really do. But
> go
> > back and re-read the Email and consider again if it isn't
> > "personal" to you.
> >
>
> I agree too. Because the variety hits format is still
> relatively new, we still can't pinpoint whether or not this
> will work one year, five years or ten years from now. Out of
> the gate, the numbers are promising.

uh..in the 50s 60s and 70s most stations were variety hits. its a 40+ year old format...its new to 20 year olds but not to 40 year olds. its a return to radio of yesteryear.
>
<P ID="signature">______________
deep tracks xm 40 for those who arent single minded</P>
 
> they want to hear more than 80 songs from the 80s to be
> precise. the 80s format usually consisted of about 100
> songs. out of the thousands released from 1980-1989. usually
> leaving out every song from pre 83..and playing mostly
> 88-89..
>


For some reason, many 80s stations were very altrock-centric. To listen to them you'd never know Madonna, Wham! or any number of other pop acts existed, let alone were successful. I read about one in R&R that listed the Talking Heads as one of their core artists!
 
Jack-80s

Bobby, I think part of the challenge is avoiding overexposure by the maga-acts who've been burnt to a crisp (though I wouldn't include Wham in there <LOL>).

Most 80s stations aren't working because they tried to be Prince/Madonna formats and much of their music has been roached by airplay and is pretty polarized (OK with women, men hate it). Talking Heads will make a list like that because of their image- frankly, other than a song or two, they weren't that massive with major hits.

I actually think Jack has a better chance- if you're an 80s station and Jack comes to town, you're about toast.


>
> For some reason, many 80s stations were very
> altrock-centric. To listen to them you'd never know
> Madonna, Wham! or any number of other pop acts existed, let
> alone were successful. I read about one in R&R that listed
> the Talking Heads as one of their core artists!
>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom