WBAP will be simulcasting on 93.3 FM

[TheBigA]

Why put WBAP on 93.3? I am guessing that, despite its aging demographics, WBAP makes Cumulus a lot of money.

What else are they going to do? They own the country format. iHeart owns the CHR format.

This gives them a sales leg up on Audacy in news/talk. Combined with sports talk, it's a strong package.

 

[TheBigA]

Big Radio is notorious for its addiction to instant gratification and lack of any longterm vision. So, it has spent decades just super-serving the most attractive middle-aged advertising demos, and failing to invest in youthful audiences for the future.

This is a popular view among people who don't like radio companies. The fact of the matter is that radio IS investing in "youthful audiences" by providing what they want on platforms they use. The reality is playing music isn't the attraction is once was. It's hard for boomers to accept that, but it's true. Music has, for the most part, become so balkanized that most formats have very little music that attracts a consensus. Everyone is in their own silo. That's not true for country, which is why you see KSCS doing so well with younger demos. Radio companies know they will have to create exclusive content that they own in order to attract younger audiences, and that requires a lot of investment. People who only listen to broadcast radio won't be aware that this investment is even taking place. But it is.

 

[davideduardo]

It doesn't matter what the format is, no radio station is going to attract younger audiences at this point.

And that is because OTA radio runs lots of commercials and many streams do not.

Big Radio is notorious for its addiction to instant gratification and lack of any longterm vision.

Any business is focused on the very immediate future as only with profits can the business be sustained.

So, it has spent decades just super-serving the most attractive middle-aged advertising demos, and failing to invest in youthful audiences for the future.

The ages that radio stations program to are in the age range that advertisers request. And that is almost entirely in the 18 to 54 range, with most actual buys in more specific ranges, such as “English dominant Hispanic females 25 to 44”.

Stations can’t try to appeal to younger (or older) demos as there is no money at all to be had.

Now those former prime-demo listeners are getting old. Big Radio wants to kick the 56-year-olds to the curb but there's virtually no one coming up behind them who cares about radio.

Radio has nothing to do with this. Advertisers generally buy ads where the big CSI is, and that is neither kids nor empty nest seniors living on Social Security.

The younger audiences have already settled on the new tech that was cool in school, and it's not broadcast radio.

And it can’t be because radio has ads and does not have custom playlists.

 

[jt99]

With no clear format holes in the music space to fill and a small signal to compete with anyways, I think this was an excellent move. Finally puts Hot 93.3 out of its misery and should add some listeners to WBAP.

 

[Deleted member 76036]

I feel that broadcast radio has just gotten stale over the years and introducing a talk format or simulcasting an existing format on an FM frequency is a quick fix. Nobody is willing to put up the money to experiment with new and exciting formats that will capture the younger audience. This is making a lot of formats short term, where the 18-54 demo is more like 45-54. There’s plenty of formats that have never been attempted and plenty of different methods to present those formats, also which have never been attempted.

I’m 41 and it’s been a long, long time since I’ve heard anything on the radio that would make me want to sit through a 6+ minute commercial break to find out whats coming up next. The commercials are even stale nowadays. It seems like the only ones advertising in DFW are injury attorneys.

Many stations are failing to use the tech that’s already there, leading to poor listener experiences. Artist/Title RDS should be a must, especially in this market…but it’s not. Some stations don’t have RDS at all or have a static message. I’ve noticed some stations will show Artist/Title with RDS, but when HD Radio kicks in, the PAD data is blank. Turn off the HD to see what song is playing? That seems like a brilliant, well thought out idea!!! 88.1 KNTU shows weather info in between songs. None of the news/talk or sports stations show weather, traffic or sports info on their RDS or HD and this isn’t hard to do at all. The point is, we say we can’t compete with satellite or other media platforms, but we’re not paying attention to the minor details.

The way things are going, major market FM radio in 20 years will basically be what AM radio is now, but with a clearer signal. That is unless the ones in charge change this destructive way of thinking that these small changes will completely fix their problems and increase their profit. I think the creativity will only be found in small market stations and that’s already starting to happen.

 

[charles1234]

I guess MIX 102.9 will probably pick up where Hot 93.3 left off January 3rd I’m I correct? They should start adding more 90’s music on that station.

 

[victorres43]

Moving to FM hoping to attract a younger audience to take the place of the over-55's. But as you already said, it won't work.

WBAP, like other right-wing talk stations, will still bill well as long as Republican super PAC's bring in the cash for ads.

 

[Deleted member 76036]

I guess MIX 102.9 will probably pick up where Hot 93.3 left off January 3rd I’m I correct? They should start adding more 90’s music on that station.

No, I think Mix is happy where they are right now.

 

[TheBigA]

Nobody is willing to put up the money to experiment with new and exciting formats that will capture the younger audience.

There is no amount of money that can create a format that people who are used to making their own playlists will accept.

These message boards are filled with comments of people who want radio to give them their own personal playlist for free.

The problem isn't the format. The problem is the audience is spoiled.

 

[Theater of My Mind]

There is no amount of money that can create a format that people who are used to making their own playlists will accept.

You're right. It's too late. The time to invest in future audience building was years ago, before the new tech started stealing them away. Instead, the industry consolidated, automated, homogenized, became stale, sanitized and corporate. It failed to anticipate the threat of becoming irrelevant if it didn't foster the next generation of listeners with programming that was relevant to them. So, that generation found new alternatives that served them better.

As we all know, listening habits developed during those formative high school and college years stay with most people for the rest of their lives. Now they are in their 40s and radio lusts after them, but they found what they liked elsewhere in their teens while radio was ignoring them.

 

[davideduardo]

You're right. It's too late. The time to invest in future audience building was years ago, before the new tech started stealing them away. Instead, the industry consolidated, automated, homogenized, became stale, sanitized and corporate.

In the most recent decades, from the 80's onward, radio has done the opposite: it has devoted more and more time and money into finding out what listeners want to hear via research which involves talking with listeners themselves.

Stations began automating in the later 40's with the adoption of tape recording and easier to use disk recording. Then the players of tapes began to run automatically... so the entire history cycle of music radio has involved automation... it is just better done today.

And back to the beginning of professional radio in the mid to late 20's most successful stations were "corporate" so that argument fails on ample historic evidence. Heck, the claimed first licensed station, KDKA, was owned by Westinghouse.... and you can't get more corporate than that!

It failed to anticipate the threat of becoming irrelevant if it didn't foster the next generation of listeners with programming that was relevant to them. So, that generation found new alternatives that served them better.

Yes, they found ways to only hear songs they loved, not songs that nearly everybody liked. Radio is one-for-many, while streams are one-for-one.

As we all know, listening habits developed during those formative high school and college years stay with most people for the rest of their lives. Now they are in their 40s and radio lusts after them, but they found what they liked elsewhere in their teens while radio was ignoring them.

Whether radio had devoted stations that did nothing but lose money with nearly no revenue to cater to youth audiences, it still could not compare with personal libraries that are streamed on-on-one.

 

[TheBigA]

The time to invest in future audience building was years ago, before the new tech started stealing them away.

You don't understand. The new tech is what FM radio was 50 years ago. Once FM was available, people wouldn't listen to music on AM. There was nothing AM could do to keep their audience. They had the best talent, they had the best music, and it wasn't enough. People depended on FM radio to get them music. Radio stations depended on record labels to get them music to play. Ever hear of Radio & Records? That's where the rubber met the road. In 1998, that relationship was shattered by the DMCA. Record labels could bypass radio and get their music directly to people. It took a few years and some lawsuits. Now the record labels get paid by the streaming companies, not radio. So radio was left out of the equation. Nothing they could do.

All those words you use about homogenized, sanitized, and corporate? That's what radio was 60 years ago. You think iHeart is big? RCA and Westinghouse were ten times bigger. Right now Apple and Amazon are even bigger than that. You don't like the music played on Amazon? Try calling them to tell them. You have no idea how big these tech companies are, and how little they care about the automated music services they provide. Automated, homogenized, sanitized, and stale. But they have the money and the technology. You're gonna miss radio when it's gone.

 

[davideduardo]

You don't understand. The new tech is what FM radio was 50 years ago. Once FM was available, people wouldn't listen to music on AM. There was nothing AM could do to keep their audience. They had the best talent, they had the best music, and it wasn't enough. People depended on FM radio to get them music. Radio stations depended on record labels to get them music to play. Ever hear of Radio & Records? That's where the rubber met the road. In 1998, that relationship was shattered by the DMCA. Record labels could bypass radio and get their music directly to people. It took a few years and some lawsuits. Now the record labels get paid by the streaming companies, not radio. So radio was left out of the equation. Nothing they could do.

One added comment: part of the decline of AM radio in the very late 60's and 70's was due to the fact that so few AM stations... and the ones with good signals were mostly licensed in the earlier 1930's... covered the expanded metros caused by both urban sprawl and the extended metro areas allowed by Arbitron's new diary survey method. AM, in a big part, died because listeners could hear nearly all the FMs in their market while maybe there was, on average, only a couple of AMs that could get the same coverage.

And, yeah, it sounded better. And in those early days, nearly all FMs limited themselves to 8 to 10 minutes of spots an hour. Shulke and Marlin Taylor allowed just 8 minutes, in 4 two-minute or two unit breaks. So did the early super FMs like Y-100 and others.

All those words you use about homogenized, sanitized, and corporate? That's what radio was 60 years ago. You think iHeart is big? RCA and Westinghouse were ten times bigger. Right now Apple and Amazon are even bigger than that. You don't like the music played on Amazon? Try calling them to tell them. You have no idea how big these tech companies are, and how little they care about the automated music services they provide. Automated, homogenized, sanitized, and stale. But they have the money and the technology. You're gonna miss radio when it's gone.

Bravo! Well said.

 

[TheBigA]

As we all know, listening habits developed during those formative high school and college years stay with most people for the rest of their lives. Now they are in their 40s and radio lusts after them, but they found what they liked elsewhere in their teens while radio was ignoring them.

You really don't understand. The target audiences radio has now were pretty much the same as they were in the 1960s. Kids listened to AM radio in the 60s even though it wasn't targeted to them. Why? Because it was the ONLY place they could hear The Beatles. They had to sit through adult music from Frank Sinatra, Al Hirt, Louis Armstrong, and Johnny Cash on the same station in order to hear one or two songs they liked. They were willing to do it because they had no other choice. Radio added other formats when FM came along. That segmented the audience. But there was still a lot of music that wasn't getting played. Even then.

But you say radio didn't invest in radio for kids. Did you ever hear of Radio Disney? There was also Radio Ahhs. Two radio networks that created radio for tweens. That's how kids learned about Miley Cyrus and Hanna Montana. That was only 20 years ago. How old are those kids now? In their 30s and 40s. So in truth radio invested in kids in the 2000s. You want radio to invest in college kids? How old are people in college? 18-24. That's the low end of the CHR demo. So yes, there are formats for that demo.

I also dispute this notion that "listening habits developed during high school & college stay with people." My listening habits now are nothing at all like they were then. I like current music, not the music I heard then. And I get it from multiple sources, not the ones I used then. I have grown and adapted to the culture and the technology. I doubt I'm the only one.

 

[Deleted member 76036]

There is no amount of money that can create a format that people who are used to making their own playlists will accept.

I get your point. However, I think a lot of the people that make their own playlists have tuned out of terrestrial radio because we failed to meet their needs. I truly believe that this could have been prevented.

 

[Deleted member 76036]

Making your own playlists on Apple Music and Spotify is interactive. People like to be able to interact. So what do we do? We get rid of interactive features. A couple that come to mind:

The feature that some stations used that would allow you to login to their website and vote for the next song. I can’t remember what this was called, but I think it was introduced at the wrong time, before Apple Music and Spotify existed.

Another feature that was cool (in my opinion) was the Ctrl + Alt + Delete feature that Alt 103.7 had before they added the talk shows and talent from outside DFW. You could text like or dislike to a number and if the song received too many dislikes, it would fade out in the middle of the song and a liner would play that said, “Deeeleted!” They would then take these songs and turn them into a show, which you could vote them back on, from what I remember.

People do like being able to interact and like to feel that they have a say in the radio station, but we seem to be taking the little control they have away. Yet another reason why the younger audience (that will eventually turn into the money demo) is tuning out.

 

[tested]

I think this move is going to have a small, but positive, impact on the station. 820 goes everywhere, but some of the best selling cars are EVs and don't have AM. This makes sure those drivers have access to the station. You'll also find a fair number of others who never flip to AM anyway who will now have access to it. However, a lot of younger folks simply never turn on the radio, but listen to all kinds of things through Apple Car Play or Android Auto. This might help with some of them, but I doubt they'd listen to talk radio anyway.

 

[TheBigA]

I get your point. However, I think a lot of the people that make their own playlists have tuned out of terrestrial radio because we failed to meet their needs. I truly believe that this could have been prevented.

You can believe what you want to believe. There is no way to "meet their needs" when everyone wants something different.

The feature that some stations used that would allow you to login to their website and vote for the next song. I can’t remember what this was called, but I think it was introduced at the wrong time, before Apple Music and Spotify existed.

It's called "Jelli." It still exists. It required listeners to do too much work, so it failed. The company adapted the technology to sell advertising and is now owned by iHeart.

People do like being able to interact and like to feel that they have a say in the radio station, but we seem to be taking the little control they have away. Yet another reason why the younger audience (that will eventually turn into the money demo) is tuning out.

You can't personalize a mass medium. They're two different things. You might delete a song that's my personal favorite. Then what do I do? I change the station because it's not playing my favorites, it's playing yours. People HAVE a say in the station through music testing and the ratings. With 93.3, not enough people liked what they were doing, so it's going away. That's how people have a say. When TuneIn or Spotify want to start a new station, they just start it. They don't have to get a license from thee FCC or meet ownership rules. But when Cumulus wants to do something, they're restricted by the government over how many stations they can own, and the advertisers demand that those stations achieve certain numbers. You make it sound like the stations have all this control, and they don't. The control is in the hands of the government and advertisers,

 

[E-Cam]

Another feature that was cool (in my opinion) was the Ctrl + Alt + Delete feature that Alt 103.7 had before they added the talk shows and talent from outside DFW. You could text like or dislike to a number and if the song received too many dislikes, it would fade out in the middle of the song and a liner would play that said, “Deeeleted!” They would then take these songs and turn them into a show, which you could vote them back on, from what I remember.

I was the opposite. I hated that from Alt because most of the songs that were "deeeleted" were the good 90s/early 2000s alt rock and were replaced by Eminem, Adele, "Lights" by Ellie Goulding, along with some other non-rock/non-alternative/pop-ish songs that were from Kiss FM. Although it was a good-enough feature to radio, people seemed to rig the system instead and the ratings sure did show a dip as well, and this was before the talk radio came to Alt. It was like "lets bring back The Edge, but ohhhh I'm sorry, no Foo Fighters for you. May we suggest Justin Bieber instead? LOL!"

 

[Deleted member 76036]

You can believe what you want to believe. There is no way to "meet their needs" when everyone wants something different.

You don’t need to meet everyone’s needs at the same time. That’s what you’re suggesting, which of course is impossible. If you create a playlist on Apple Music or Spotify and invite a few friends over. That playlist will only be personalized for you. Your friends may not like the songs you picked.

It's called "Jelli." It still exists. It required listeners to do too much work, so it failed. The company adapted the technology to sell advertising and is now owned by iHeart.

I don’t think it was Jelli. It was used on station in Canada well before Jelli was introduced and seemed to work out well. The station went through ownership changes and the interactive feature no longer exists.

You can't personalize a mass medium. They're two different things. You might delete a song that's my personal favorite. Then what do I do? I change the station because it's not playing my favorites, it's playing yours.

Again, you can’t satisfy everyone at the same time. Sometimes you’re not going to like something with a station, but other people will. This doesn’t mean radio shouldn’t try to be creative. Radio is a creative medium and isn’t one-size-fits all.

People HAVE a say in the station through music testing and the ratings. With 93.3, not enough people liked what they were doing, so it's going away.

There’s a lot more that goes into deciding to change the format besides music testing and ratings. Reading a lot of the threads on here, that’s what you all seem to pivot to. If the format change for KLIF-FM happens, which is seems it will, it’s NOT because of music testing and ratings. If it was, Cumulus would’ve dumped the format years ago. There are other unknown factors that we haven’t figured out and probably never will.

That's how people have a say. When TuneIn or Spotify want to start a new station, they just start it. They don't have to get a license from thee FCC or meet ownership rules. But when Cumulus wants to do something, they're restricted by the government over how many stations they can own, and the advertisers demand that those stations achieve certain numbers. You make it sound like the stations have all this control, and they don't. The control is in the hands of the government and advertisers,

I’ve worked on and off in radio for the last 25 years. Of course, I don’t know everything, but I’ve been involved in a lot of decisions and I understand how a lot of decisions are made. Radio stations have a lot more control than you think. It’s what you do with that control that makes all the difference.