It's like a game of pong at this point. As I pointed out, there are stations in adjacent markets that also cover part of WBOS's coverage area. Financially, doesn't make a difference. I'm speaking from a listener's perspective.
Last edited:
-
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
Makes sense. I'm not familiar at all with any non-English music genres beyond certain types of instruments used. Makes complete sense that people of other nations would have their own cultural preferences in everything, including music. I questioned because I was with an unverified idea that what Rumba played what appealed to more prominent population of people from countries/territories in the area. Such as how North of Boston is more prominently composed of Dominicans and Puerto Ricans.
The same as I would expect an English language station in a foreign country to be focused on what we could consider as Top 40, here. Going to your point, it would be so fragmented that it wouldn't appeal to all. An entire FM band would have to be programmed with multiple Spanish Language formats to cover the wider population of listeners.
Speaking only for myself, I still find Rumba to be unique for a full power Boston area FM station, be it 97.7. As a listener, the more variety across the band, the less I take issue. Rumba doesn't appeal to my taste, but you won't hear me complain about it as it serves an audience that only had low power translators or AM before. It's the same as I don't listen to EDM, but when WEDX was on 101.7 for a cup of coffee, I didn't have an issue. However, I understand that what I view as my preference isn't what is financially sound.
Last edited:
Actually, not every station playing English language music outside of the Anglosphere is top 40. There are also AC, Rock formats etc. (Country isn't very popular) + many stations play both English language music and domestic music.
WBOS doesn't care about adjacent markets. They don't sell to New Hampshire. They only care about Boston and local advertisers. You don't pay for WBOS and therefore what you do is your business, not theirs.
I think least was simply making a point, but especially from a listener perspective.
You mean from his own personal perspective. That doesn't mean he's a WBOS listener. It sounds like the opposite.
We all have opinions. A radio station doesn't base format decisions on the opinion of one person.
Fine, discount opinion of one person, you are completely missing the mark. Usually one persons opinion is representative of several others, that sharing the same view, but don't have demeanor to speak up at all.
So, go ahead with your incomplete and faulty test methods as to which tune or tunes test well or not, using that 30 second clip of a tune, or however you guys all do it..
I myself, think that while not in the industry, but came very close to abutting it for a few years. And I was able to land that job, based on my already extensive knowledge of radio broadcasting.
I especially have a good feel for Boston's radio landscape. Sometimes I make my own predictions that every now and then, actually come to pass!
I will not speak a whole lot about WBOS itself. When they were still Alt 92.9, I suggested that WBOS flip to rock instead! They obviously went with Classic Rock instead, however I still think that I made a fairly good call on that one.
Same thing with Amp Radio. Thoughts, which were discredit by the experts was that it would be nice to bring back a Variety or Adult Hits station to the market also. And sure enough...
But you're the expert though. That is why they must pay you the big bucks!
I'm listening and responding to his opinion and yours with my opinion. We're all in opinion land. My opinions aren't worth any more to the folks at Beasley because I don't work for them. All I bring to it is my understanding of how decisions are made. You can take my views for what they're worth.
Not always true. As I have mentioned, there is a characteristic of some people that makes them, in research terms, an "outlier". Their opinions on music, songs, artists, stations are very different from that of 95% or more of a station's core listeners.
Because no two outliers are the same, they are not addressable via programming and, in fact, serving them will destroy the station for the bulk of its cume.
Actually, it is an 8" piece of the hook. When using dials at an in person test, 90% of respondents in all formats have scored by the 5th second. But today, online testing gives as much as 30" of a song. But nobody listens to 30". They score in the first 4 to 6 seconds and click for the next song.
Please demonstrate some of that knowledge. So far, you are doing a good imitation of a salmon, swimming against the current.
On the other hand, I learned long ago not to trust my feelings of what listeners want, so I ask them... and then try to deliver.
The first time I did a music test nearly 40 years ago, just for fun, I thought I'd score the first 100 songs myself so I could compare. I was over 20% off on over half the songs, and I liked quite a few songs that listeners, quite uniformly, did not. Yet my station was #1 18-49 in a top 20 market despite all my miss-calls on the songs; when we implemented the test the ratings increased from around a 9 share to a 12 share in-demo.
You know that programming decisions are made as much with a vision of sales as of total share? And in many cases, cluster decisions are made to superserve particular demos that are most salable.
No, the listeners are the experts on music. All we do is try to satisfy their wants and taste.
... who have distinctly different music tastes in many areas.
Where are there English language stations in foreign countries? I only know of two, and that was long in the past.
First was WHOA in San Juan, PR, an English language station doing MOR music with lots of stateside news to serve mainlanders working on the Island. In fact, at one point in the 70's the PD was the chap who is now the owner of 740 AM in Boston!
The second station was XEVIP in Mexico City. They served the ex-pat community, and did lots of US network news and the music was a blend of MOR and Instrumental.
In both cases, the ex-pat community shrunk and the need for those stations died about 30 or so years ago.
But the US is rather unique in having such a large population of immigrants who all speak Spanish... at least half of the nearly 50 million Hispanics in the US. In Europe, where there are large immigrant populations, they represent many different languages from many different nations and cultures, so there is no commonality.
Interestingly, in Argentina over 40% of the population has Italian ancestry. However, there was never a radio station in Italian there. The government prohibited it. They even prohibited too many Italians (or Germans or Russians, etc.) to live in the same neighborhood. They wanted to push assimilation, and it worked.
As I said, it will not get huge shares, but it will be seen as the only reliable station by national and agency accounts that buy "Spanish" and they will get enough buys to be profitable, even without big ratings.
I don't know all the world's markets. I know how to ask listener opinions, and am guided by that.
Example: Emmis had me set up a new FM in Buenos Aires, a market of 18 million and over 200 full and neighborhood stations. I had not been in Bs. As. for two decades, but we did research at various levels, from record stores to perceptuals to a format search. In 30 days the station was #1 with over a 20 share. It stayed there for the 5 years that I worked on the project. The leading newspaper said, "A foreigner had to come and show us that Argentinians like our own national rock music!"
Oh, and the top researching format there was not selected; it's appeal was so concentrated in low-income areas that agencies would not have bought it, even with a 30 share. So decisions are part business, part listener driven.
Last edited:
Preset 2 in my car is WBOS. If we're going with anecdotal and not qualitative observations, might as well make the anecdote as honest as possible. Guess what my Preset 1 is. WGIR.
Because I have a different perspective doesn't make what I say without merit. Sometimes, an outside perspective helps a great deal as insiders are too focused into the process of the established system. Outside perspective can also miss the mark. The problem in this thread is that I point out observations and it leads me to a theory based on observations and sociology. I could be dead wrong, and I could have merit. However, you just talk down and try to diminish my credibility at any chance you have. I don't know why, and I would normally be weak willed and take the bait. But in the end, the fact is that I stand by what I observe and my theory, until I watch the situation change between the playlists and the numbers that your tests present. The playlists change and the numbers plumet even more, then my theory was wrong. The numbers increase, then my theory was right. Better yet, nothing changes in the playlist, then I have no reason to change my theory.
In the end, most viable genres of music have distinction in radio formats that separate older from modern/current. The only place where I see that line faded is with rock (as it is today).
Last edited:
I wrote that as an unverified assumption about international radio. I don't pretend to have any knowledge of the international. I was actually trying to say that I understood your original point about the fragmentation of Spanish language music as formatted on radio in the United States.
I haven't said opinion. I pointed out my observation of similarities in the playlists of comparable stations, one that claims to have a focus on current and one that claims to be next-gen classic rock. That's it. Looking at it in terms of gaining listeners, my theory is that the former hurts the latter within the geographical location of listener numbers due to the following:
1st.) The younger audience doesn't relate to either as we all agree it's "dad's music." Some here argue that it's rock as a whole. My debate is that it isn't just that it's a shift from rock. It's that rock (industry) hasn't been strong at pushing new acts since the late 90s. So the former plays more of what would gain listeners which is what the latter is trying to play. The former has been around longer, so they are legacy. The latter is new in format, so they aren't.
2nd.) Nobody finds a reason to try the new station. The audience that it targets doesn't have a reason to change stations or become loyal to "your" station (meaning WBOS). In the 80s and into the 90s, current rock stations gutted most of the 70s, which made it so that classic rock stations had an identity that gained listeners. If I'm a huge Green Day fan (I'm not, but for this example...), I don't need to say "hey WBOS is playing Green Day and The Offspring, etc." I have that music on what is considered current focused rock stations. In the 90s, if I'm a huge Zep Head, I could say "hey WZLX is playing Zepplin, The Who, etc." Yes, there was overlap, but not to the amount that I observe as playing today in rock as a format.
Whatever you claim me as saying, it isn't opinion. It's theory/hypothesis based on observations. I believe that you continue to misinterpret what I am saying. I'm not saying to program what I want. I'm saying that rock formatted stations are cannibalizing the format in the long run, as it's the only format that doesn't push current acts (whoever is behind doing so in the radio and/or record industries. Quite frankly, I'm fine listening to WBGB.
Last edited:
But if that market takes away from the overall listener numbers, it hurts their numbers, and their advertising, as they don't have the numbers.
Yes, they seem to be filling that hole quite well! Something in which I mentioned in a separate thread almost 2 weeks ago, but no cared to elaborate at all.
The claim is usually that I want a rock station that plays what I like. That's not true. The truth is that I know how to find what I want, with or without a radio. It actually goes to David's point of me being an outlier. It also goes to my point of them not giving me a reason to be loyal.
People bring up how numbers in rock outside legacy stations do poorly, yet these companies apply the same practice over and over again. My theory is that they need to create a distinction between what is current and the 90s hits, as it has now been 20+ years. I hypothesize that by doing so, you open the door for a new younger audience, while providing strength to the stations that are identifying second-gen (next-gen) classic rock.
With WBGB, I thought it would work when I first heard it. I though that Amp was in a saturated family of formats in the area, as many cover current pop. But I understood how Entercom cornered the market on the female audience. However, I remember WMKK (Mike) performing well and really going away to give WEEI a much needed place on FM. When I heard about Amp going to Big, I thought it would do better. Then add it the lower cost as it's jockless.
One of the details a station gets from Nielsen is "share" figures. In other words, what stations share audience. If a station in New Hampshire is taking away audience and affecting sales, it will show up in the report, and they will address it then. My sense is one of the big shares for WBOS listeners is The Sports Hub.
In theory. that was some thing they were planning on doing with the relaunch of WAAF. Then they suddenly sold it in a quick sale instead.
- Status