I honestly think this station has improved since the format change. The ratings are also improving as well. Why do you think WZLX and WBOS both have better ratings than WAAF
-
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
WBOS
- Thread starter CassChopper96
- Start date
The transmitters for both WZLX and WBOS are on top of the Pru in Boston. WAAF's transmitter is in West Boylston. That's why they have better ratings in Boston.
Apologies if that sounded snarky. Perhaps the question should be more like why are WAAF's ratings so low in recent books? They've been able to get at least double the ratings that they currently have in the Boston book. I think it comes down to stability. There's been several line-up changes over the last couple of years, and musically they've been inconsistent. They were playing a lot of 80s/90s/2000s with very few currents up until earlier this year. They recently hired a new PD and they've upped their current product, but given the last few listens I've had, they seems to be steering away from that, perhaps with their diminishing ratings and more direct competition from WBOS. We'll see what happens. I'd love for 'AAF to take an approach similar to what WMMR/Philadelphia or WIYY/Baltimore has been in their music selection and try to stick with it for a while. Perhaps get the next up-and-coming morning show, local, which isn't some 40 or 50-something has been trying to keep 'AAF on life support, but a new morning show that can grow and actually be in touch with its audience. Just a wish...
Apologies if that sounded snarky. Perhaps the question should be more like why are WAAF's ratings so low in recent books? They've been able to get at least double the ratings that they currently have in the Boston book. I think it comes down to stability. There's been several line-up changes over the last couple of years, and musically they've been inconsistent. They were playing a lot of 80s/90s/2000s with very few currents up until earlier this year. They recently hired a new PD and they've upped their current product, but given the last few listens I've had, they seems to be steering away from that, perhaps with their diminishing ratings and more direct competition from WBOS. We'll see what happens. I'd love for 'AAF to take an approach similar to what WMMR/Philadelphia or WIYY/Baltimore has been in their music selection and try to stick with it for a while. Perhaps get the next up-and-coming morning show, local, which isn't some 40 or 50-something has been trying to keep 'AAF on life support, but a new morning show that can grow and actually be in touch with its audience. Just a wish...
It could be the new music hasn't been very exciting lately. However I noticed they added the new Weezer and Green Day this week, plus they're trying out several other new releases.
That might be a reason why WAAF isn't doing as well as they should be, but it's not the whole reason.
It's tough for rock stations these days that want to play a significant amount of current music. So much of the audience, even for the more hard-edged rock stations, want to hear what is familiar.
Nearby WGIR-FM in Manchester and WHEB in Portsmouth act and sound like they are current rock stations, not classic rock. But they only sometimes play something from the 2000s. I don't think I've ever heard anything from the 2000s on WHJY in Providence. These stations don't want to use the words "classic rock" for fear advertisers will think their audiences are old. And maybe they want the freedom to add more current material in the future if they see their audiences want to start hearing newly released titles.
Nearby WGIR-FM in Manchester and WHEB in Portsmouth act and sound like they are current rock stations, not classic rock. But they only sometimes play something from the 2000s. I don't think I've ever heard anything from the 2000s on WHJY in Providence. These stations don't want to use the words "classic rock" for fear advertisers will think their audiences are old. And maybe they want the freedom to add more current material in the future if they see their audiences want to start hearing newly released titles.
Correct, but it also depends on the time of day. WAAF plays most of its current rock between 6PM and 6AM. So if you listen during that stretch you hear a lot of new music.
100.3 WHEB uses a really lame Premium Choice playlist developed by iHeart. The exact same songs play at the exact same time on a host of mostly medium & small market iHeart owned rock stations, including WHEB, WZZO in Allentown, PA, WVBZ in Greensboro, NC, WBFX in Grand Rapids, MI, and many others. There are zero currents and recurrents and virtually all music is at least a decade old. Songs from the 80's, 90's receive the brunt of the airplay; some 70's and 00's titles are included in the mix, too. The station's approach is not terribly different from Rock 92.9, except WHEB plays quite a bit more warmed over alt rock from the 90's (Blink 182, Weezer, Green Day, etc.).
Rock 101 and WHJY are slow when it comes to adding new music, but it's there nonetheless. There are also some recurrents in rotation.
Rock 101 has most contemporary/edgy sound of the three stations. WHEB is the most conservative. (WHEB used to sound a lot more like Rock 101 music wise.)
Rock 101 and WHJY are slow when it comes to adding new music, but it's there nonetheless. There are also some recurrents in rotation.
Rock 101 has most contemporary/edgy sound of the three stations. WHEB is the most conservative. (WHEB used to sound a lot more like Rock 101 music wise.)
BTW WZZO is among the most listened-to stations in Allentown, so the locals don't seem to mind. WVBZ is Top 10 in Greensboro. Unless you listen online, it doesn't matter that they play the same songs at the same time. If you listen to Sirius, you hear the same songs coast to coast.
Didn't they (WHEB/GIR-FM) even used to simulcast some dayparts/weekends, etc?
In the last pre-CDM book in 25-54, WZZO, WAEB and WODE are all in a statistical tie. The "real" number for WODE is 0.5 above WZZO, and all 3 have over a 9 share. There is no crushing going on.
Where WODE leads is in revenue, being nearly double WZZO and even behind WCTO. Cumulus seems to have the better sales organization there.
It’s most of the reason though. WAAF is essentially a Worcester station whereas WZLX and WBOS cover the entire market clearly, but active rock as a whole isn’t the hottest format.
I've noticed this trend with a lot of rock and alt stations. Unless it's an established artist most new music winds up in lunar rotation, approximately 5-6 PM to 6 AM. Though if the station is really conservative they won't even do that.
This is called dayparting--a common practice at rock stations years ago. It seemed to go away, but apparently WAAF is trying it out. In the 90s, WAAF was more straight-head mainstream rock during the day, but played more newer and heavier music at night.
They still simulcast in mornings — WGIR is the flagship the Morning Buzz show, which is simulcast on WHEB (along with some other rock stations in smaller Northern New England markets)
The Morning Buzz broadcast originates from the WHEB studios at 815 Lafayette Road in Portsmouth and has since it began in 1997.
Is the above still true?
ZZO's 6+ share has tanked over the past couples surveys. Similar results at 105.7 "Man Up!" in Greensboro, which uses the same awful premium choice (I call it "poor choice") central playlist from iHM corporate; their numbers are at or near a record low for the current brand.
Much of the rock audience does NOT want to hear Journey and Nine Inch Nails on the same station! The PC playlist is an unmitigated trainwreck.
Those in New England can hear that terrible playlist in action at 100.3 WHEB.
Which sits comfortably at the top of the Portsmouth-Dover "beauty pageant numbers" ratings. Maybe if everyone listening is either 55+ or under 12, that's not a success, but from where I sit, it looks like that "terrible playlist" works very well in a market that it would figure to, demographically.
They own the rock format. And sure they play a lot of classic rock, but they have no competition there either.
I read a lot of comments about "trainwreck playlists," and if you examine a typical millennial personal playlist, that's likely what you'll see. They like what they like, and it's not always organized in some perfect way. As long as you're playing their favorites, it's OK. Looking at their playlist, it looks like a consensus list to me.
It's an awful playlist that is a mile wide and super shallow, doesn't see titles move in & out of rotation nearly frequently enough, avoids currents and even recurrents, and mashes together music styles that sound absolutely nothing alike in roughly equal proportion.
Radio should not try to sound like someone's personal iPod. Gigantic mistake. It's called BROADcasting for a reason.
Radio should not try to sound like someone's personal iPod. Gigantic mistake. It's called BROADcasting for a reason.
- Status