• 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

Will 25-54 Myopia Kill Radio? By Fred Jabobs

B

bigwoody

Guest
"Will 25-54 Myopia Kill Radio?"
Fundamental changes are needed to save viable adult formats
By Fred Jacobs


You may feel that’s an extreme headline, but if you think the chief problem facing our business is satellite radio or iPods, think again. So much of what is making terrestrial radio vulner¬able to other media falls under the heading of “self-inflicted wounds.” At the same time that consumers are being bombarded by an array of new media and an incredible variety of choice, terrestrial radio has voluntarily limited its ability to deliver a broad and attractive array of programming options.


True, new formats like Adult Hits or FM Talk Handing Over Oldies Fans are attempting to broaden radio’s appeal, but terrestrial radio comes up short because of it’s long term singular focus on the 25-54 demographic to the exclusion of just about everyone else.

Radio's refusal to embrace youth-targeted programming has serious implications for the industry's ability to appeal to Generation Y's today and in the future. It is also contributing to radio's lack of overall attractiveness to young people.

If you're wondering why there are so few qualified, energetic twentysomethings available for hire at your stations, think about how few truly good programming options we have given them over the years. If they aren't energized by listening to the radio, why would they want to work in this business?

The result is not only declining interest in radio among young adults, but among the advertisers that are attempting to reach them.

For over a decade we've heard "There's no money is teens, " yet turn on MTV or thumb through the myriad of magazines that target teens and young adults, and you'll see that the only place where there's no money in teens is in radio.

We’ve walked away from these consumers, they’ve walked away from us, and advertisers have followed them to other media. But I’ll leave that issue to Steven Strick and Dana Hall to slog through. This is, after all, the Oldies/Classic Rock column.

Handing Over Oldies Fans

So consider the Oldies franchise, and how radio operators are in the process simply handing over these loyal listeners to new media.

For the past several years Oldies stations have frantically added '70s songs (at the expense of the '50s and early '60s) in an effort to down demo these stations. Even though Oldies listeners were happily listening to their favorite stations before this youth movement began, radio companies needed to shed 55+ listeners to stay financially viable.

While some of these moves have worked temporarily, they haven't halted the inevitable. These stations are on life support, waiting to become formats that are more congruent wit 25-54 demands.

Through this process, our industry is send¬ing a strong statement to listeners about who is welcome — and who is not. Radio’s failure to effectively sell audience outside the 25-54 safe zone signals a narrowing of the medium’s overall reach, and it makes us even more vulnerable to new-media predators that are only too eager to provide the programming alternatives that terrestrial radio will not.

Satellite radio, in particular, is attractive to the older demos. In fact, a recent International Demographics study of satellite-radio subscribers showed that nearly half are north of 45.

These listeners are increasingly getting the message that their presence is no longer valued in terrestrial radio, and they are actively seeking entertainment alternatives, even if they have to pay for them.

This phenomenon is occurring in terrestrial radio because the tired assumption is “There’s no money in 50+.” But when you look at the size and wealth of the baby boom generation, it’s clear that this generation of 75 million will be in advertisers’ sights for the next couple of decades.

According to Advertising Age, boomers comprise 39% of the adult population, but they currently account for half of all automobile sales. That number will grow to 53% by the end of the decade. Do you think car companies are simply going to ignore numbers like this, or will they instead allocate significant dollars toward capturing this growing market share?

Whether it's buying cars, homes, electronics or yes, satellite radios, these consumers continue to set the tone. As has been the case since the 1950s, they have the numbers on their side and money to spend.

Yet Oldies stations everywhere are endangered, unable to market 50+ listeners, unable to fire up their sales staffs and unable to get past 25-54 advertiser dictates.

What About Classic Rock?

Why do I care about the Oldies format? Jacobs Media doesn’t have a dog in this hunt. We don’t consult these stations, nor have we ever.

But a couple of times a year, usually in research meetings, someone asks about the future of Classic Rock. The premise is that in a few years Classic Rock may very likely be facing some of the same pressures that have impacted Oldies stations.

The question that is often posed is, how will Classic Rock manage to keep its demos under 55, thus ensuring its long-term marketability to advertisers?

It’s noteworthy that when Jacobs Media introduced Classic Rock in the mid-’80s the target listener was 25-34 years of age. Of course, a gold-based format like Classic Rock functions generationally. It has journeyed with baby boomers over the past 20 years, aging gracefully with them.

Classic Rock has been a darling 25-54 format, consistently scoring solid ratings while generating great power ratios and, in the process, lots of money. It has truly been a cash cow.

I remember making the claim in 1985 that if you grew up with The Rolling Stones and Led Zeppelin, you wouldn’t suddenly wake up at 50 to discover that this music was no longer relevant to you. You never tire of the music you grew up with (pertains to Oldies as well). Classic rockers continue to be passionate about their music and, in fact, turn their kids on to it every chance they get.

And classic rock bands have held up well too. The fact that in 2005 some of the biggest concert dollars were brought in by the Stones, Paul McCartney, The Eagles, Rod Stewart and Elton John underscores the fact that there’s a lot of love and money for classic rock. Only well-healed Baby Boomers can afford to go to these shows.

But at the same time Classic Rock fans are aging, and listenership is now touching the 50-year-old mark. In a few years it will clearly near the older edge of the “sweet spot” demographic. What then?

Will Classic Rock become less viable for radio? Will Classic Rock stations attempt to integrate more ’80s rock (while dropping the Stones and The Who in the process)? Will radio “fix” another unbroken format, handing over more of its audience to XM, Sirius, iPods and AOL Radio? Only if we don’t learn some lessons from the Oldies experience.

A Fundamental Problem


You may be thinking that HD Radio will solve this problem. With all those extra channels, Oldies will triumphantly return to the AM and FM airwaves, Classic Rock will be spared the indignity of having to play Billy Squier songs, and the world will be right again.

That would be convenient, but HD Radio won’t change some of the fundamental flaws that have eroded the commerce of our business. And we are many years away from the day when HD Radio hardware will be commonly found in cars and homes. By then Oldies will have become extinct on terrestrial radio and Classic Rock will be an endangered species.

When is radio going to realize that it has a fundamental sales problem?

Instead of altering and adapting formats that have strong ratings and loyal audiences, radio needs to rethink its overall sales and marketing focus. Salespeople need to be taught the value of Classic Rock, Oldies (and other adult formats) and how to market these passionate, loyal audiences.

Terrestrial radio can’t afford to relinquish its franchise formats to satellite radio — or any other new media. Again, this is where corporate ownership, the RAB and Classic Rock operators need to be working together, or we will see history repeat itself.


Fred Jacobs is President of Jacobs Media, a rock consulting firm based in Detroit.
 
25-54 Myopia

Fred is rarely off target and this is another example- very good questions and thoughts.

Problem is: what is radio going to do about it? How will radio change Ad buyers' minds? Does radio today have the patience (and in some cases the KNOWLEDGE) to educate and groom Sellers about Classic Rock, about Oldies and other 50+ formats AND their respective audiences (who have major influence and a ton of disposable income)?

I don't know the answers to these questions (and don't know anybody who does).


> "Will 25-54 Myopia Kill Radio?"
> Fundamental changes are needed to save viable adult formats
>
> By Fred Jacobs
>
>
> You may feel that’s an extreme headline, but if you think
> the chief problem facing our business is satellite radio or
> iPods, think again. So much of what is making terrestrial
> radio vulner¬able to other media falls under the heading of
> “self-inflicted wounds.” At the same time that consumers are
> being bombarded by an array of new media and an incredible
> variety of choice, terrestrial radio has voluntarily limited
> its ability to deliver a broad and attractive array of
> programming options.
>
>
> True, new formats like Adult Hits or FM Talk Handing Over
> Oldies Fans are attempting to broaden radio’s appeal, but
> terrestrial radio comes up short because of it’s long term
> singular focus on the 25-54 demographic to the exclusion of
> just about everyone else.
>
> Radio's refusal to embrace youth-targeted programming has
> serious implications for the industry's ability to appeal to
> Generation Y's today and in the future. It is also
> contributing to radio's lack of overall attractiveness to
> young people.
>
> If you're wondering why there are so few qualified,
> energetic twentysomethings available for hire at your
> stations, think about how few truly good programming options
> we have given them over the years. If they aren't energized
> by listening to the radio, why would they want to work in
> this business?
>
> The result is not only declining interest in radio among
> young adults, but among the advertisers that are attempting
> to reach them.
>
> For over a decade we've heard "There's no money is teens, "
> yet turn on MTV or thumb through the myriad of magazines
> that target teens and young adults, and you'll see that the
> only place where there's no money in teens is in radio.
>
> We’ve walked away from these consumers, they’ve walked away
> from us, and advertisers have followed them to other media.
> But I’ll leave that issue to Steven Strick and Dana Hall to
> slog through. This is, after all, the Oldies/Classic Rock
> column.
>
> Handing Over Oldies Fans
>
> So consider the Oldies franchise, and how radio operators
> are in the process simply handing over these loyal listeners
> to new media.
>
> For the past several years Oldies stations have frantically
> added '70s songs (at the expense of the '50s and early '60s)
> in an effort to down demo these stations. Even though Oldies
> listeners were happily listening to their favorite stations
> before this youth movement began, radio companies needed to
> shed 55+ listeners to stay financially viable.
>
> While some of these moves have worked temporarily, they
> haven't halted the inevitable. These stations are on life
> support, waiting to become formats that are more congruent
> wit 25-54 demands.
>
> Through this process, our industry is send¬ing a strong
> statement to listeners about who is welcome — and who is
> not. Radio’s failure to effectively sell audience outside
> the 25-54 safe zone signals a narrowing of the medium’s
> overall reach, and it makes us even more vulnerable to
> new-media predators that are only too eager to provide the
> programming alternatives that terrestrial radio will not.
>
> Satellite radio, in particular, is attractive to the older
> demos. In fact, a recent International Demographics study of
> satellite-radio subscribers showed that nearly half are
> north of 45.
>
> These listeners are increasingly getting the message that
> their presence is no longer valued in terrestrial radio, and
> they are actively seeking entertainment alternatives, even
> if they have to pay for them.
>
> This phenomenon is occurring in terrestrial radio because
> the tired assumption is “There’s no money in 50+.” But when
> you look at the size and wealth of the baby boom generation,
> it’s clear that this generation of 75 million will be in
> advertisers’ sights for the next couple of decades.
>
> According to Advertising Age, boomers comprise 39% of the
> adult population, but they currently account for half of all
> automobile sales. That number will grow to 53% by the end of
> the decade. Do you think car companies are simply going to
> ignore numbers like this, or will they instead allocate
> significant dollars toward capturing this growing market
> share?
>
> Whether it's buying cars, homes, electronics or yes,
> satellite radios, these consumers continue to set the tone.
> As has been the case since the 1950s, they have the numbers
> on their side and money to spend.
>
> Yet Oldies stations everywhere are endangered, unable to
> market 50+ listeners, unable to fire up their sales staffs
> and unable to get past 25-54 advertiser dictates.
>
> What About Classic Rock?
>
> Why do I care about the Oldies format? Jacobs Media doesn’t
> have a dog in this hunt. We don’t consult these stations,
> nor have we ever.
>
> But a couple of times a year, usually in research meetings,
> someone asks about the future of Classic Rock. The premise
> is that in a few years Classic Rock may very likely be
> facing some of the same pressures that have impacted Oldies
> stations.
>
> The question that is often posed is, how will Classic Rock
> manage to keep its demos under 55, thus ensuring its
> long-term marketability to advertisers?
>
> It’s noteworthy that when Jacobs Media introduced Classic
> Rock in the mid-’80s the target listener was 25-34 years of
> age. Of course, a gold-based format like Classic Rock
> functions generationally. It has journeyed with baby boomers
> over the past 20 years, aging gracefully with them.
>
> Classic Rock has been a darling 25-54 format, consistently
> scoring solid ratings while generating great power ratios
> and, in the process, lots of money. It has truly been a cash
> cow.
>
> I remember making the claim in 1985 that if you grew up with
> The Rolling Stones and Led Zeppelin, you wouldn’t suddenly
> wake up at 50 to discover that this music was no longer
> relevant to you. You never tire of the music you grew up
> with (pertains to Oldies as well). Classic rockers continue
> to be passionate about their music and, in fact, turn their
> kids on to it every chance they get.
>
> And classic rock bands have held up well too. The fact that
> in 2005 some of the biggest concert dollars were brought in
> by the Stones, Paul McCartney, The Eagles, Rod Stewart and
> Elton John underscores the fact that there’s a lot of love
> and money for classic rock. Only well-healed Baby Boomers
> can afford to go to these shows.
>
> But at the same time Classic Rock fans are aging, and
> listenership is now touching the 50-year-old mark. In a few
> years it will clearly near the older edge of the “sweet
> spot” demographic. What then?
>
> Will Classic Rock become less viable for radio? Will Classic
> Rock stations attempt to integrate more ’80s rock (while
> dropping the Stones and The Who in the process)? Will radio
> “fix” another unbroken format, handing over more of its
> audience to XM, Sirius, iPods and AOL Radio? Only if we
> don’t learn some lessons from the Oldies experience.
>
> A Fundamental Problem
>
>
> You may be thinking that HD Radio will solve this problem.
> With all those extra channels, Oldies will triumphantly
> return to the AM and FM airwaves, Classic Rock will be
> spared the indignity of having to play Billy Squier songs,
> and the world will be right again.
>
> That would be convenient, but HD Radio won’t change some of
> the fundamental flaws that have eroded the commerce of our
> business. And we are many years away from the day when HD
> Radio hardware will be commonly found in cars and homes. By
> then Oldies will have become extinct on terrestrial radio
> and Classic Rock will be an endangered species.
>
> When is radio going to realize that it has a fundamental
> sales problem?
>
> Instead of altering and adapting formats that have strong
> ratings and loyal audiences, radio needs to rethink its
> overall sales and marketing focus. Salespeople need to be
> taught the value of Classic Rock, Oldies (and other adult
> formats) and how to market these passionate, loyal
> audiences.
>
> Terrestrial radio can’t afford to relinquish its franchise
> formats to satellite radio — or any other new media. Again,
> this is where corporate ownership, the RAB and Classic Rock
> operators need to be working together, or we will see
> history repeat itself.
>
>
> Fred Jacobs is President of Jacobs Media, a rock consulting
> firm based in Detroit.
>
 
Re: 25-54 Myopia

> Fred is rarely off target and this is another example- very
> good questions and thoughts.
>
> Problem is: what is radio going to do about it? How will
> radio change Ad buyers' minds? Does radio today have the
> patience (and in some cases the KNOWLEDGE) to educate and
> groom Sellers about Classic Rock, about Oldies and other 50+
> formats AND their respective audiences (who have major
> influence and a ton of disposable income)?
>
> I don't know the answers to these questions (and don't know
> anybody who does).


I dare say that anyone on this board has more experience, or credibility, than Fred Jacobs. I too think he's nailed it.

One answer is for today's Senior Programmers to NOT try to "fix" what isn't broken. Many Senior Programmers (SRVPs, RVPPs) are now dictating programming that they came up thru the ranks with; dead segues, no personality/speed breaks (a child can do that) and so on.

One thing oldies programmers know is "showmanship". Old school top 40 radio, with a contemporary angle. That doesn't mean AC sounding jocks. It's ok to have a "boss jock" if he's REALLY GOOD at it.
 
25-54 Myopia

But, as you know, very few can carry it off (boss jock) without sounding like they're a puker. I think the over-the-top '60s style jock is o-u-t. It's been overdone and it's not believable. Different day and age today.

On dry segues- I actually think they sound OK (occasionally) on Oldies stations. For goodness sake, we ID our stations incessantly and for who? For us, not for our listeners. It's time we allow our stations to flow and breathe a bit.

The old Oldies top 40 presentation model has been cooked for over 20 years- since very few can really pull it off beautifully, it makes no sense to force it on Oldies stations and make them come off as way-back machines. The whole Top 5 at 5, "on this day in rock & roll history" and which group's drummer turned 65 this year are elements that make Oldies stations sound dated.

Unless you want an audience that averages 60 years old and the revenue limitations that go with it, it's time to move past "good times & great oldies" and start doing some topical and relevant (AND FUN) radio.

>
> One answer is for today's Senior Programmers to NOT try to
> "fix" what isn't broken. Many Senior Programmers (SRVPs,
> RVPPs) are now dictating programming that they came up thru
> the ranks with; dead segues, no personality/speed breaks (a
> child can do that) and so on.
>
> One thing oldies programmers know is "showmanship". Old
> school top 40 radio, with a contemporary angle. That doesn't
> mean AC sounding jocks. It's ok to have a "boss jock" if
> he's REALLY GOOD at it.
>
 
Re: 25-54 Myopia

I've always said it would be very tough but I think it's doable. I've said that for many years.

What I would do is get together the GM's, PD's and GSM's of the biggest (in terms of revenue) oldies stations in America and form something like the RAB, just make it the ORAB (Oldies Radio Advertising Beaureau). Maybe get Gary Fries (who just retired from the RAB) to consult you.

And get to work.

Slide shows, movies, ads in ad trades (ad agency).

Stop traffic on Madison Avenue by driving a gold painted Rolls Royce down the streets. Call it a "Rock and Rolls" and throw money out the window on which is imprinted "There's GOLD in the GOLDIES".

Use celebreties who are 55 plus but dont look/act/feel it in ads. Paul McCartney. Paul Simon. Have them give testimonials that say.

"Just because I am over 55 doesn't mean I don't buy things I hear about on the radio".

Consider working together with the AARP on this. They know how to do grass roots campaigns. Have them put something in "Modern Maturity", maybe one of those "no postage required" cards and send it to the American Chamber of Commerce (the word will filter down to companies, trust me).

Hire a PR firm and do publicity stunts.

Don't say it can't be done. It can. With effort.

But of course, the easy way out is the chickenspit way that so many seem to support.
 
Re: 25-54 Myopia

> I've always said it would be very tough but I think it's
> doable. I've said that for many years.
>
> What I would do is get together the GM's, PD's and GSM's of
> the biggest (in terms of revenue) oldies stations in America
> and form something like the RAB, just make it the ORAB
> (Oldies Radio Advertising Beaureau). Maybe get Gary Fries
> (who just retired from the RAB) to consult you.
>
> And get to work.
>
> Slide shows, movies, ads in ad trades (ad agency).
>
> Stop traffic on Madison Avenue by driving a gold painted
> Rolls Royce down the streets. Call it a "Rock and Rolls" and
> throw money out the window on which is imprinted "There's
> GOLD in the GOLDIES".
>
> Use celebreties who are 55 plus but dont look/act/feel it in
> ads. Paul McCartney. Paul Simon. Have them give testimonials
> that say.
>
> "Just because I am over 55 doesn't mean I don't buy things I
> hear about on the radio".
>
> Consider working together with the AARP on this. They know
> how to do grass roots campaigns. Have them put something in
> "Modern Maturity", maybe one of those "no postage required"
> cards and send it to the American Chamber of Commerce (the
> word will filter down to companies, trust me).
>
> Hire a PR firm and do publicity stunts.
>
> Don't say it can't be done. It can. With effort.
>
> But of course, the easy way out is the chickenspit way that
> so many seem to support.
>


ALL GREAT IDEAS!!!
 
Re: 25-54 Myopia

> But, as you know, very few can carry it off (boss jock)
> without sounding like they're a puker. I think the
> over-the-top '60s style jock is o-u-t. It's been overdone
> and it's not believable. Different day and age today.

Scott Howitt, formerly at WMJI, is one who does it well, and w/o puking


>
> On dry segues- I actually think they sound OK (occasionally)
> on Oldies stations. For goodness sake, we ID our stations
> incessantly and for who? For us, not for our listeners.
> It's time we allow our stations to flow and breathe a bit.
>

Actually, no we don't do it for ourselves. We do it to tell those with diaries who we are. And to get them to "write it down". That's why calls and positioners are incessantly said by jocks/produced in Id's, etc.


> The old Oldies top 40 presentation model has been cooked for
> over 20 years- since very few can really pull it off
> beautifully, it makes no sense to force it on Oldies
> stations and make them come off as way-back machines. The
> whole Top 5 at 5, "on this day in rock & roll history" and
> which group's drummer turned 65 this year are elements that
> make Oldies stations sound dated.
>

Marty Thompson, the new WGRR/PD, would disagree. He piloted WGRR to it's biggest ratings in the early/mid 90s. He will get it back on top with entertaining radio. Marty knows how to entertain.

You dont need to be a "way back machine", but it is ok to say "on this date"

Remember the target - 35-64. Just as Fred pointed out, They Oldies P1s) want to hear the music they grew up with, which brings back memories...of 'way back'. It's ok.

No one on this board has more experience, or clout, than Fred Jabobs. I'm siding with him.
 
25-54

***If we're always doing memorable, compelling, exciting, INTERESTING radio, you won't need to jam IDs down their throats. We do it SOLELY for what we believe is our benefit. There's nothing, ZERO benefit to the listener ("so they'll remember the station" doesn't count- I covered that in my first sentance).

>
> Actually, no we don't do it for ourselves. We do it to tell
> those with diaries who we are. And to get them to "write it
> down". That's why calls and positioners are incessantly said
> by jocks/produced in Id's, etc.
>

***Right about Marty- but a major swing has occured thanks to technology evolving at a lightning pace with other new choices. I never said "don't be entertaining". I'm saying the mid/late '60s Drake Boss Jock thing had it's day in the sun- it was 1968. There's already enough "noise" on the radio- screaming and hollering at your listeners is no different than those obnoxious car dealer spots- they've run their course.

> Marty Thompson, the new WGRR/PD, would disagree. He piloted
> WGRR to it's biggest ratings in the early/mid 90s. He will
> get it back on top with entertaining radio. Marty knows how
> to entertain.
>

***Actually, the fallacy of 35-64 is just as silly as 25-54. Few 35 year olds have much culturally or values-wise in common with 64 year olds.

I think if you drip nostalgia (outside the flashbacks the music gives), you're running a huge risk of sounding old and wishful "the good ole days" were back.
They aren't. Living In The Past was a great Jethro Tull song, but it's not a way to live one's life (as probably 95% of Oldies listeners would agree).

> Remember the target - 35-64. Just as Fred pointed out, They
> Oldies P1s) want to hear the music they grew up with, which
> brings back memories...of 'way back'. It's ok.

>
 
Re: 25-54

> ***Right about Marty- but a major swing has occured thanks
> to technology evolving at a lightning pace with other new
> choices. I never said "don't be entertaining". I'm saying
> the mid/late '60s Drake Boss Jock thing had it's day in the
> sun- it was 1968. There's already enough "noise" on the
> radio- screaming and hollering at your listeners is no
> different than those obnoxious car dealer spots- they've run
> their course.

Which is funny, considering that the whole Boss Radio approach was designed to offer a more sleek, adult alternative to the cowbell ringers and gimmicky jingles of old school Top 40 radio.

> I think if you drip nostalgia (outside the flashbacks the
> music gives), you're running a huge risk of sounding old and
> wishful "the good ole days" were back.
> They aren't. Living In The Past was a great Jethro Tull
> song, but it's not a way to live one's life (as probably 95%
> of Oldies listeners would agree).

Which is what I find strange about True Oldies Channel--Shannon's doing the attiduinal liners (some of which are direct steals from Jack FM) and the references to "Idol" and "Desperate Housewives"--but he's also doing the "This Day in Music History" and "Top 5" bits that seem out of place with what seems to be an more attitudinal approach. I don't get it.
 
25-54

He's right in talking about Idol and Desperate Housewives. One of McLendon's first rules of radio was "talk about what your listeners are talking about".
Oldies programmers/jocks have a long history of NOT talking about these things, instead filling breaks with chart information and trivia facts. I don't have a problem commemorating the "major" anniversaries (Beatle deaths, Woodstock, JFK assassination, Watergate) but too much of that is info overload.


>
> Which is what I find strange about True Oldies
> Channel--Shannon's doing the attiduinal liners (some of
> which are direct steals from Jack FM) and the references to
> "Idol" and "Desperate Housewives"--but he's also doing the
> "This Day in Music History" and "Top 5" bits that seem out
> of place with what seems to be an more attitudinal approach.
> I don't get it.
>
 
Re: 25-54

> ***Right about Marty- but a major swing has occured thanks
> to technology evolving at a lightning pace with other new
> choices. I never said "don't be entertaining". I'm saying
> the mid/late '60s Drake Boss Jock thing had it's day in the
> sun- it was 1968. There's already enough "noise" on the
> radio- screaming and hollering at your listeners is no
> different than those obnoxious car dealer spots- they've run
> their course.

See, here's where I've disagreed before. No one is the Real Don Steele besides the late great RDS. So those who try to be like him will fail.

But the Drake "boss jock" wasn't a screamer. He was a fast in/out jock who cut the crap and gave the time, temp, and calls if he didn't ahve anything to say. But he was required to do show prep (at least 6 hours for a 3 hour shift) so he'd have something to say.

The screamers were mostly on the fake Drakes, where the jock or the PD thought that Roger Ramjet or Peter Puker was what Drake radio was about. This is why they never got it and why Ron Jacobs gets furious when people tried Drake radio just as the formatics and nothing else.

Taking a 1963 jock (a true screamer, rhymer, mad daddy, etc.) and sticking him in a tight format gave just what you stated: yelling screaming along car dealer lines.

But a true boss jock (think, Steve Hunter or Frank Brodie at CKLW, or Chuck Buell or Kris Erik Stevens at WLS, or Charlie Tuna (midday version) at KHJ)--this is what is needed. Someone who's there for more than just the paycheck, which is what most of the jocks now sound like.
 
Re: 25-54

>


[He's right in talking about Idol and Desperate Housewives.
> One of McLendon's first rules of radio was "talk about what
> your listeners are talking about".]


OR, if you're programming to 50+ maybe you should be talking about Dancing With The Stars, Skating With the Stars, Larry King, and Jay Leno.
 
Re: 25-54

> Oldies programmers/jocks have a long history of NOT talking
> about these things, instead filling breaks with chart
> information and trivia facts. I don't have a problem
> commemorating the "major" anniversaries (Beatle deaths,
> Woodstock, JFK assassination, Watergate) but too much of
> that is info overload.

Not to mention that it makes your listeners feel old. Does anyone want to be reminded that "Eleanor Rigby" came out 40 years ago?
 
Re: 25-54 Myopia

> On dry segues- I actually think they sound OK (occasionally)
> on Oldies stations. For goodness sake, we ID our stations
> incessantly and for who? For us, not for our listeners.
> It's time we allow our stations to flow and breathe a bit.
>

Not sure I agree with that one...maybe ok on a AAA or something along that vein, but not an energetic format like oldies. This is not to say EVERY sweeper has to be :15+ long, and over-produced with celebrity clips, explosions or other such clutter...a simple shotgun "oldies 92" would suffice.
 
Re: 25-54 reality.

>
> What I would do is get together the GM's, PD's and GSM's of
> the biggest (in terms of revenue) oldies stations in America
> and form something like the RAB, just make it the ORAB
> (Oldies Radio Advertising Beaureau). Maybe get Gary Fries
> (who just retired from the RAB) to consult you.

The problem is that we are only talking about a few stations, relatively speaking, and the cost of reaching national and regional and agency advertisers and getting them to change the marketing goals of their porducts and services is probably greater than the gross billing of most of these stations.
>
> Slide shows, movies, ads in ad trades (ad agency).

Unfortunately, ad agencies do not set the marketing targets of goods and services. Corporate marketing departmets do, and the target is often embedded in product design, packaging, etc.
>
> Stop traffic on Madison Avenue by driving a gold painted
> Rolls Royce down the streets. Call it a "Rock and Rolls" and
> throw money out the window on which is imprinted "There's
> GOLD in the GOLDIES".

There are only about 2 ad agencies on Madison any more. Ad agencies are more likely to be in Minneapolis or chicago or LA or Atlanta than in NY these days.

In any case, the ad agencies don't determine demos.
>
> Use celebreties who are 55 plus but dont look/act/feel it in
> ads. Paul McCartney. Paul Simon. Have them give testimonials
> that say.
>
> "Just because I am over 55 doesn't mean I don't buy things I
> hear about on the radio".

Radio is generally a suplement to other media, like TV, outdoor, print. So the target is set by the major medium, and supprted in the secondary media. Radio is a secondary medium 99% of the time.
>
> Consider working together with the AARP on this. They know
> how to do grass roots campaigns. Have them put something in
> "Modern Maturity", maybe one of those "no postage required"
> cards and send it to the American Chamber of Commerce (the
> word will filter down to companies, trust me).

Oldies is generally not even at a 10 share in 55+. It is but one of many formats older listeners like to hear, including AC, talk, sports, country, Uban A/C, Spanish variety, etc. So supporting only one format would be, in a sense, discriminatory.
>
> Hire a PR firm and do publicity stunts.

I think GM has bigger problems than being asked to advertise on oldies stations. In fact, companies are quick to shed most products that are in deep maturation, like the Oldsmobile.
>
> Don't say it can't be done. It can. With effort.

I see no way that is feasable or cost effective that this can happen.
>
> But of course, the easy way out is the chickenspit way that
> so many seem to support.

I am sure buggy whip manufacturers had the same dilemma.
>
 
Re: 25-54 reality, part II

>>
> No one on this board has more experience, or clout, than
> Fred Jabobs. I'm siding with him.

I am not sure that this blanket statement is true.

Fred is simply anticipating his turn at bat, as his consulting firm deals with classic rock mostly, and this format is ageing also.

And Fred, while a good consultant, is just a consultant. And I believe that consolidation has seriously affected his client list in the USA. So he is looking for hope. And he is blaming the wrong people, oddly enough. Agency media buyers do not set targets. In fact, seldom does the agency set the target.

"If wishes were horses, beggars would ride."
 
Re: 25-54

> > ***Right about Marty- but a major swing has occured thanks
>
> > to technology evolving at a lightning pace with other new
> > choices. I never said "don't be entertaining". I'm saying
>
> > the mid/late '60s Drake Boss Jock thing had it's day in
> the
> > sun- it was 1968. There's already enough "noise" on the
> > radio- screaming and hollering at your listeners is no
> > different than those obnoxious car dealer spots- they've
> run
> > their course.
>
> See, here's where I've disagreed before. No one is the Real
> Don Steele besides the late great RDS. So those who try to
> be like him will fail.
>
> But the Drake "boss jock" wasn't a screamer. He was a fast
> in/out jock who cut the crap and gave the time, temp, and
> calls if he didn't ahve anything to say. But he was
> required to do show prep (at least 6 hours for a 3 hour
> shift) so he'd have something to say.
>
> The screamers were mostly on the fake Drakes, where the jock
> or the PD thought that Roger Ramjet or Peter Puker was what
> Drake radio was about. This is why they never got it and
> why Ron Jacobs gets furious when people tried Drake radio
> just as the formatics and nothing else.
>
> Taking a 1963 jock (a true screamer, rhymer, mad daddy,
> etc.) and sticking him in a tight format gave just what you
> stated: yelling screaming along car dealer lines.
>
> But a true boss jock (think, Steve Hunter or Frank Brodie at
> CKLW, or Chuck Buell or Kris Erik Stevens at WLS, or Charlie
> Tuna (midday version) at KHJ)--this is what is needed.
> Someone who's there for more than just the paycheck, which
> is what most of the jocks now sound like.


Try as the AC jocks might try, they will never be close to the greatness of the Real Don Steele.

Thrillseekers, What Do We Know and Believe on a Fractious Friday Afternoon????
 
Re: 25-54

> Try as the AC jocks might try, they will never be close to
> the greatness of the Real Don Steele.
>
> Thrillseekers, What Do We Know and Believe on a Fractious
> Friday Afternoon????
>


Keep in mind that few if any people who didn't grow up in LA in the mid-late 60s have any idea what you're talking about.
 
production

But WHY? Who says a station won't be energetic and entertaining if it has the occasional (2-3x per hour) a dry segue? Why this format-blinders mindset?

It's so ironic- many on these boards are kicking and screaming NOT to do assembly-line, cookie-cutter radio. But, when a new or different concept is floated it's dismissed because of the "we've always done it that way" or the
"but we can't do THAT in THIS format!" cry.

We've beaten listeners up for decades with over-produced radio. To what end?


>
> Not sure I agree with that one...maybe ok on a AAA or
> something along that vein, but not an energetic format like
> oldies. This is not to say EVERY sweeper has to be :15+
> long, and over-produced with celebrity clips, explosions or
> other such clutter...a simple shotgun "oldies 92" would
> suffice.
>
 
25-54

But few can effecively pull off what you're suggesting. Besides, the "fast in & out" is what makes so much radio just "noise".

Do we just want disc jockeys or do we prefer personalities with charisma, character who connect with their listeners? I'd put my dough on the latter.


>
> See, here's where I've disagreed before. No one is the Real
> Don Steele besides the late great RDS. So those who try to
> be like him will fail.
>
> But the Drake "boss jock" wasn't a screamer. He was a fast
> in/out jock who cut the crap and gave the time, temp, and
> calls if he didn't ahve anything to say. But he was
> required to do show prep (at least 6 hours for a 3 hour
> shift) so he'd have something to say.
>
> The screamers were mostly on the fake Drakes, where the jock
> or the PD thought that Roger Ramjet or Peter Puker was what
> Drake radio was about. This is why they never got it and
> why Ron Jacobs gets furious when people tried Drake radio
> just as the formatics and nothing else.
>
> Taking a 1963 jock (a true screamer, rhymer, mad daddy,
> etc.) and sticking him in a tight format gave just what you
> stated: yelling screaming along car dealer lines.
>
> But a true boss jock (think, Steve Hunter or Frank Brodie at
> CKLW, or Chuck Buell or Kris Erik Stevens at WLS, or Charlie
> Tuna (midday version) at KHJ)--this is what is needed.
> Someone who's there for more than just the paycheck, which
> is what most of the jocks now sound like.
>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom