Westwood One adds new 24/7 Good Time Oldies format to replace Scott Shannon's TOC

[TheBigA]

Those of you who are responsible for producing bland and boring product can explain why you choose to make your product bland and boring as long as you want. That won't change the fact that bland and boring is, well, bland and boring.

It's hard to talk about programming without being more specific. What's bland and boring to one person might be perfectly acceptable to someone else. The one thing I've noticed as I've traveled around the country is that you can't generalize about programming based on the station's owner. If you want to talk about centralized corporate programming, the best example is actually Sirius. That is nationalized programming coming mainly from one or two corporate studios either in DC or NY. None of the other companies have anything as structured as that. To me, it's the best example of bland & boring vanilla. Yet, they manage to get 20 million people to pay $15.95 a month to listen.

 

[ok walters]

Sorry, but as I said in a later post, what made that station I referred to so good was the overall sound of the station, not the fact that the DJ's worked at the station. My point was that just because the decision makers and personnel aren't a bunch of corporate suits, that doesn't mean that the station cannot sound good to the listeners. If that station's format was packaged and syndicated to other cities, it would still sound better than the tasteless, homogenized product coming out of corporate studios.

As someone who looks to radio as a source of entertainment, I keep repeating the simply truth that bland, homogenized, vanilla radio is bland and boring. Those of you who are responsible for producing bland and boring product can explain why you choose to make your product bland and boring as long as you want. That won't change the fact that bland and boring is, well, bland and boring.

Can anyone honestly say that to the ordinary listener tuned in to either of the oldies formats being discussed in this thread would be able to find a dime's worth of difference between either of them? Corporate insiders might get excited about a newer version of bland and boring vanilla programming, but do you really think that ordinary listeners would recognize any difference between them?

Of course, someone will surely point to a focus group where 53.2% of those tested gave one of the two formats a 5% higher favorability rating.

And once again personal preference and emotion is all you really have for an argument. Radio is "bland and boring" to you, yet it reaches ever growing numbers of people despite many other choices now being available, so did you ever once think you were in the minority and radio must program to the majority to succeed? You want deep playlists as you repeatedly bash every format for not playing enough songs and you want live talent to get that "overall sound" you are talking about, but as has been explained over and over and over that model won't work in today's broadcast radio.

So keep on posting about "bland and boring" and telling us in the business how to do it and we will keep on doing what has been proven time and time again to work best.

 

[Avid Listener]

What's bland and boring to one person might be perfectly acceptable to someone else.

Bland, boring vanilla ice cream is the #1 best selling flavor of ice cream. That fact that modern radio is bland and boring is not negated by the fact that some people prefer bland and boring.

In broadcast radio, the blandest, most boring aspect of the product is the unimaginative selection of songs to play. Sirius is many things, but in terms of the selection of songs you can hear played, they are not at all bland and boring.

As I've said in more than a few posts in the past, when every station on the dial is broadcasting a terrible product, the one that sucks the least is the one that gets turned on as background music.

 

[oldies76]

Bland, boring vanilla ice cream is the #1 best selling flavor of ice cream. That fact that modern radio is bland and boring is not negated by the fact that some people prefer bland and boring.

In broadcast radio, the blandest, most boring aspect of the product is the unimaginative selection of songs to play. Sirius is many things, but in terms of the selection of songs you can hear played, they are not at all bland and boring.

As I've said in more than a few posts in the past, when every station on the dial is broadcasting a terrible product, the one that sucks the least is the one that gets turned on as background music.

With all due respect Avid (and believe me, I agree with you 110% on these issues) I think we should just shut it down. The radio biz geeks have their way and the music fans have another. No one wins, including them. Sure radio is boring, the playlists suck, it's too repetitive, the weekends suck...etc.....etc..

We know what's right and maybe someday, we'll prove them otherwise. In the meantime, it's a no win.

What's best is probably just for us to listen to our own music collections, free of time-wasting commercials and DJ blabber and endless morning shows. That's the best "radio" we can have, if you think about it. Start a part-15 to get radio satisfaction. The rest.....well, it's for the people who really, could care less about music. They would probably say that disco was most popular in 1972, or that the Beatles landed in 1967 or that Rock and Roll began in 1958.
If they want to drown in Eagles music 5 times a day, that's their problem.

Corporate radio will never please us anymore, guaranteed.

We know better....and always will.

 

[R. F. Burns]

This was originally a response to blatant publicity hype. This is not about jealousy. Now I'll address some of the other things that you wrote that were not valid. A majority of the medium market stations that used any of the Satellite Music Network/ABC 24 hour formats were rim shot stations that didn't put a competitive signal into their particular market. Full signal stations in the medium markets didn't need an automated babysitting service to run their stations. The rim shot stations did because their signal couldn't compete. The next issue is talent or lack of it. When it was still the Satellite Music Network, they specifically moved it from Mokena, Illinois, to Dallas because Texas is a right to work state and they wouldn't have to deal with unions and could pay employees minimally. It wasn't because the Dallas market has or had superior radio talent. It was about saving money and they knew it didn't really matter who they hired and what they paid them as long as they could run the automation, get the tones right and sound adequate for the few times per hour that they had to talk. When ABC took over, they figured out a way to get their operating expenses even lower by getting rid of anybody who made more than a certain amount of money for formats that babysat stations and they wouldn't lose affiliates no matter who they hired. ABC just corrected the hiring mistakes of the previous ownership. Next is the issue of Zippo being a legendary dj. I wouldn't throw around that term so loosely. Legendary djs mean djs like Dan Ingram, Bruce Morrow, Dick Biondi, Dr. Don Rose, Charlie Tuna, Robert W. Morgan, Larry Lujack and others of their ilk. Zippo and anyone else who was ever employed by any of those 24 hour formats is not on the same planet with any of those djs nor in the same solar system. Most of the legendary djs worked full time for an extended amount of time in either New York, Los Angeles or Chicago. In addition, the legendary djs didn't have their wives and girlfriends trying to get publicity for them. Last, but not least, if Westwood One had any faith that the new format would do well, they would have hired more than 3 djs. This means that over half the time, the format will be an automated jukebox. Then there is the issue about the age of an unsaleable audience for a format based on 60s music. Even the crappiest small market stations had to drop playing 60s music because they couldn't sell it because of the age of the audience. My guess is that Westwood One's attitude about this new format is that we're not going to invest much because we don't expect much. For the people who do want to hear 60s music, they have 10,000 other alternatives rather than hearing this format on a bunch of small A. M. daytimers with bad signals which is where this format is headed.

RF- you really don't know what you are talking about. Go find someone else to argue with you. I can see you must have gotten burned and I was a sucker to buy into it. I won't bother to respond to any additional posts. Go pick on someone else, you're obviously just jealous.

 

[firepoint525]

I am from Memphis myself (one of the markets that he has supposedly worked in), and have never heard of Jim Zippo. So much for "legendary."

 

[TheBigA]

As I've said in more than a few posts in the past, when every station on the dial is broadcasting a terrible product, the one that sucks the least is the one that gets turned on as background music.

And as anyone in radio will tell you, you get credit in the ratings regardless of whether the station is on in the background, or the person is paying attention to every word. So being in the background is just fine.

 

[TheBigA]

The rest.....well, it's for the people who really, could care less about music. They would probably say that disco was most popular in 1972, or that the Beatles landed in 1967 or that Rock and Roll began in 1958.

I don't know...they're AS passionate about what they like as you are about what YOU like. Just as classical music fans are very passionate about their music. Or bluegrass fans are passionate about their music. Look around...there is a lot of music in the world besides 60s oldies.

 

[Tibbs4]

The airwaves would truly be silent if you judge talent based upon who has NOT been fired in radio. I used to call my list "endless love." The new talent roster for this is, uh, solid. Jim was also on at an old relic in Nashville...WZKS. Rock on, Jim! Good people.

 

[davideduardo]

. A majority of the medium market stations that used any of the Satellite Music Network/ABC 24 hour formats were rim shot stations that didn't put a competitive signal into their particular market.

Not true as an across the board statement. I used SMN in the late 80's in several North FL markets, including Tallahassee which is definitely a medium market. And we had it on a signal licensed to Tallahassee, not a rimshot. In fact, we picked SMN after looking at successful affiliates in places like Pensacola, Albany, Dothan, etc. And we felt it had a quality we could not match locally at a very good price.

Full signal stations in the medium markets didn't need an automated babysitting service to run their stations. The rim shot stations did because their signal couldn't compete.

Stations in very competitive markets where the dollars were spread too thin used satellite formats as a way of saving money so they could remain viable as Docket 80-90 did its double whammy of dropping in new stations and allowing rimshots to move closer in.

The next issue is talent or lack of it. When it was still the Satellite Music Network, they specifically moved it from Mokena, Illinois, to Dallas because Texas is a right to work state and they wouldn't have to deal with unions and could pay employees minimally. It wasn't because the Dallas market has or had superior radio talent. It was about saving money and they knew it didn't really matter who they hired and what they paid them as long as they could run the automation, get the tones right and sound adequate for the few times per hour that they had to talk.

I never found any of that to be true. The move to Dallas had a lot to do with costs, but also had to do with attracting talent... not as many people want to move to Chicago as to Dallas, due to climate, cost of living, crime, education, etc. And, for a "new technology" company, working without sometimes antiquated union rules was indeed a benefit.

When ABC took over, they figured out a way to get their operating expenses even lower by getting rid of anybody who made more than a certain amount of money for formats that babysat stations and they wouldn't lose affiliates no matter who they hired. ABC just corrected the hiring mistakes of the previous ownership.

No, they adapted to the reality of it being a business. In the mid-90's, stations started installing AudioVault systems and comparable hard disk storage systems and many found they could produce formats that ran unattended locally. And other entrants into the field offered interesting variants on remote delivery... ABC had to tighten up as the business model changed.

Remember, satellite was itself a replacement for tape delivered formats that ran on expensive hardware and which required some attention and lots of maintenance. Satellite was better... until a new "better" came along.

Next is the issue of Zippo being a legendary dj. I wouldn't throw around that term so loosely. Legendary djs mean djs like Dan Ingram, Bruce Morrow, Dick Biondi, Dr. Don Rose, Charlie Tuna, Robert W. Morgan, Larry Lujack and others of their ilk.

You are just totally off base here. You are naming talents from KHJ, KFRC, WLS and WABC... Top 5 market stations from the AM Top 40 days. There are plenty of talents who worked in the next tier of markets, such as Phoenix and Cleveland and Dallas and Houston and Miami who are just as good but who were not in a Top 5 market. Jim Zippo is one of them... and IMHO, every bit as good.

Most of the legendary djs worked full time for an extended amount of time in either New York, Los Angeles or Chicago.

Who says that the talent on WABC was that much better than KELP or KDES or KRIG or KERN or WSAI or WGRD or KENO or WORL or WAPE or WSGN or KLEO.... and dozens more like it in markets like Saginaw and Mobile (the legendary WABB) or Jackson or Oklahoma City or Jamestown, SD, for that matter!

In addition, the legendary djs didn't have their wives and girlfriends trying to get publicity for them.

Now that qualifies for a cheap shot award. I think it is pretty nice that Jim's wife shares his love for his career and helps spread the word. It is hard for radio spouses... constant moves, changes of format, odd shifts, quirky management and all that... and it's really great to see Lori cheering for Jim (Hey, that's what she trained to do!!!!).

Last, but not least, if Westwood One had any faith that the new format would do well, they would have hired more than 3 djs. This means that over half the time, the format will be an automated jukebox.

Morning, mid-days and afternoons, with the same team VTing the rest of the day and weekends. It is the model followed by many major market stations... except that some of those are only live in drives and automate middays, too. Welcome to technology and its ability to, when well done, be better than live.

Remember, when done by less than first rate talent, "live" is just "evil" spelled backwards.

Then there is the issue about the age of an unsaleable audience for a format based on 60s music. Even the crappiest small market stations had to drop playing 60s music because they couldn't sell it because of the age of the audience.

Many classic hits, starting with WCBS-FM, play some 60's. And the press release says that the core will be 70's with some 60's and some 80's... that's the current definition of Classic Hits.

So, even if they are targeting medium and smaller markets or less than full major market signals, there is a client base for 35-64 in markets that are not agency driven. In fact, many successful suburban stations and smaller market signals are much broader in their 60's and 70's coverage because they sell to a different client base... one that often does not have the 25-54 buy restriction in mind.

My guess is that Westwood One's attitude about this new format is that we're not going to invest much because we don't expect much. For the people who do want to hear 60s music, they have 10,000 other alternatives rather than hearing this format on a bunch of small A. M. daytimers with bad signals which is where this format is headed.

This format was developed to replace the Scott Shannon produced TOC. Look at the impressive lineup of stations TOC had, and note that few are "small AM daytimers" (although some are) and the format got well into the top 100 markets or the fringes of that. It's a very viable satellite format and one that appeals to stations that sell direct since the clients are generally right in the target demo.

You do get today's "Misanthrope Award" though, so nice going!

 

[davideduardo]

Of course, someone will surely point to a focus group where 53.2% of those tested gave one of the two formats a 5% higher favorability rating.

That you think that radio is researched this way shows how incredibly little you know about the industry and the business.

You should change your name to "Rabid Listener".

 

[Avid Listener]

With all due respect Avid (and believe me, I agree with you 110% on these issues) I think we should just shut it down. The radio biz geeks have their way and the music fans have another. No one wins, including them. Sure radio is boring, the playlists suck, it's too repetitive, the weekends suck...etc.....etc..

We know what's right and maybe someday, we'll prove them otherwise. In the meantime, it's a no win.

What's best is probably just for us to listen to our own music collections, free of time-wasting commercials and DJ blabber and endless morning shows. That's the best "radio" we can have, if you think about it. Start a part-15 to get radio satisfaction. The rest.....well, it's for the people who really, could care less about music. They would probably say that disco was most popular in 1972, or that the Beatles landed in 1967 or that Rock and Roll began in 1958.
If they want to drown in Eagles music 5 times a day, that's their problem.

Corporate radio will never please us anymore, guaranteed.

We know better....and always will.

Good point. I just bought this new gadget, to replace an older unit. I can pop in a thumb drive or SD card full of MP3s and listen to what I want. The only downside was finding good, new content. One of the reasons I used to be an avid radio listener was to discover new artists. Most of my favorite artists from the 60's, 70's, and 80's were acts whose music I first heard on the radio. That's a memory from yesteryear I am very nostalgic for.

Now, I'm left with watching Palladium network on cable, or surfing through YouTube to find bands recommended when I listen to artists I already know. That has enabled me to discover a large number of artists whose new music has the same classic sound as the hits of the 60s/70s/80s that this forum is supposed to be about.

I guess there's not much for an avid music listener on the radio anymore.

 

[Tibbs4]

As far as the list of talent mentioned on here, I might add that even in the "heyday" of power jocks, the majority of the names were not known outside of their given markets. Sure, they covered a ton of great cities over the years, but it has been other forms of media, such as TV, newspapers or trade publications, etc., that have carried their names beyond the cities and signals. Overall, still a relatively small percentage of the population in the US knew those names back in the good ole days with signa coverage. Whether the listeners know their names or voices is not the major decision for adding them. Once you hear them, you will appreciate their talent!

 

[Lori Pollitt]

Not true as an across the board statement. I used SMN in the late 80's in several North FL markets, including Tallahassee which is definitely a medium market. And we had it on a signal licensed to Tallahassee, not a rimshot. In fact, we picked SMN after looking at successful affiliates in places like Pensacola, Albany, Dothan, etc. And we felt it had a quality we could not match locally at a very good price.



Stations in very competitive markets where the dollars were spread too thin used satellite formats as a way of saving money so they could remain viable as Docket 80-90 did its double whammy of dropping in new stations and allowing rimshots to move closer in.



I never found any of that to be true. The move to Dallas had a lot to do with costs, but also had to do with attracting talent... not as many people want to move to Chicago as to Dallas, due to climate, cost of living, crime, education, etc. And, for a "new technology" company, working without sometimes antiquated union rules was indeed a benefit.



No, they adapted to the reality of it being a business. In the mid-90's, stations started installing AudioVault systems and comparable hard disk storage systems and many found they could produce formats that ran unattended locally. And other entrants into the field offered interesting variants on remote delivery... ABC had to tighten up as the business model changed.

Remember, satellite was itself a replacement for tape delivered formats that ran on expensive hardware and which required some attention and lots of maintenance. Satellite was better... until a new "better" came along.



You are just totally off base here. You are naming talents from KHJ, KFRC, WLS and WABC... Top 5 market stations from the AM Top 40 days. There are plenty of talents who worked in the next tier of markets, such as Phoenix and Cleveland and Dallas and Houston and Miami who are just as good but who were not in a Top 5 market. Jim Zippo is one of them... and IMHO, every bit as good.



Who says that the talent on WABC was that much better than KELP or KDES or KRIG or KERN or WSAI or WGRD or KENO or WORL or WAPE or WSGN or KLEO.... and dozens more like it in markets like Saginaw and Mobile (the legendary WABB) or Jackson or Oklahoma City or Jamestown, SD, for that matter!



Now that qualifies for a cheap shot award. I think it is pretty nice that Jim's wife shares his love for his career and helps spread the word. It is hard for radio spouses... constant moves, changes of format, odd shifts, quirky management and all that... and it's really great to see Lori cheering for Jim (Hey, that's what she trained to do!!!!).



Morning, mid-days and afternoons, with the same team VTing the rest of the day and weekends. It is the model followed by many major market stations... except that some of those are only live in drives and automate middays, too. Welcome to technology and its ability to, when well done, be better than live.

Remember, when done by less than first rate talent, "live" is just "evil" spelled backwards.



Many classic hits, starting with WCBS-FM, play some 60's. And the press release says that the core will be 70's with some 60's and some 80's... that's the current definition of Classic Hits.

So, even if they are targeting medium and smaller markets or less than full major market signals, there is a client base for 35-64 in markets that are not agency driven. In fact, many successful suburban stations and smaller market signals are much broader in their 60's and 70's coverage because they sell to a different client base... one that often does not have the 25-54 buy restriction in mind.



This format was developed to replace the Scott Shannon produced TOC. Look at the impressive lineup of stations TOC had, and note that few are "small AM daytimers" (although some are) and the format got well into the top 100 markets or the fringes of that. It's a very viable satellite format and one that appeals to stations that sell direct since the clients are generally right in the target demo.

You do get today's "Misanthrope Award" though, so nice going!

_______________________
David, we can always count on your expertise. Thank you.

One thing of note that WW1 is promoting in Good Time Oldies that will be different from TOC is " The music is up tempo and the presentation is full of energy, and personality driven."

Scott Shannon is legendary and great, but I truly believe Zippo will bring a lot of FUN back to the format along with the other changes WW1 is incorporating into GTO.

 

[firepoint525]

The airwaves would truly be silent if you judge talent based upon who has NOT been fired in radio. I used to call my list "endless love." The new talent roster for this is, uh, solid. Jim was also on at an old relic in Nashville...WZKS. Rock on, Jim! Good people.

Wasn't that the station that later became Oldies 96.3? If so, that was WELL before I moved here, and might explain why I had never heard of him.

At any rate, Jim is not "legendary."

 

[davideduardo]

Wasn't that the station that later became Oldies 96.3? If so, that was WELL before I moved here, and might explain why I had never heard of him.

At any rate, Jim is not "legendary."

That's like saying that Wally Phillips or Ron Chapman or Bill Tanner are not legendary.

You don't have to have been on WABC or WLS to be "legendary" within the business.

 

[Robert Bass]

At any rate, Jim is not "legendary."

Yes, he is. I first heard of him when he was doing mornings on KTKS in Dallas during the 80s. He has been in the business for decades, and that makes him legendary.

R

 

[firepoint525]

Now that qualifies for a cheap shot award. I think it is pretty nice that Jim's wife shares his love for his career and helps spread the word. It is hard for radio spouses... constant moves, changes of format, odd shifts, quirky management and all that... and it's really great to see Lori cheering for Jim (Hey, that's what she trained to do!!!!).

Not a cheap shot at all. She posted under her maiden name, then did not disclose that Jim is her husband. No one cares about any of that, except that she was being intellectually dishonest.

Jim has had an impressive career, broadcasting from Abbey Road and the Cavern Club (saw that on his website), but I still had not ever heard of him until this thread.

 

[firepoint525]

That's like saying that Wally Phillips or Ron Chapman or Bill Tanner are not legendary.

You don't have to have been on WABC or WLS to be "legendary" within the business.

The three key words, right there.

 

[firepoint525]

Yes, he is. I first heard of him when he was doing mornings on KTKS in Dallas during the 80s. He has been in the business for decades, and that makes him legendary.

If being "in the business for decades" is enough to make you "legendary," then Terry Hailey is "legendary," too.