-
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 WOR beat WABC?
- Thread starter jrls4444
- Start date
Some thoughts from 150 miles west of you folks, jrls .....
If that happens, I see it as more of a default on WABC's side than any great advance on WOR's. There is more than a year and a half now before the next major election, and that's a long time to wait for a nibble out there in stagnant waters .....
Neither station seems that concerned about news anymore. Faithful WOR listeners who got their news from 710, though, are apt to be more put out, I think ......
The biggest beneficiary, during this Old-Timers Heavyweight Battle, will be WNYC. And WNYC's FM presence is primed to get those supposed younger demo numbers besides .......
So it might be a glass-half-empty achievement, not a matter of which one will be the bigger 'winner' .......
If that happens, I see it as more of a default on WABC's side than any great advance on WOR's. There is more than a year and a half now before the next major election, and that's a long time to wait for a nibble out there in stagnant waters .....
Neither station seems that concerned about news anymore. Faithful WOR listeners who got their news from 710, though, are apt to be more put out, I think ......
The biggest beneficiary, during this Old-Timers Heavyweight Battle, will be WNYC. And WNYC's FM presence is primed to get those supposed younger demo numbers besides .......
So it might be a glass-half-empty achievement, not a matter of which one will be the bigger 'winner' .......
Well ... maybe.
- Gambling vs. Imus? Gambling is unquestionably the better show, but Imus has followers who haven't yet noticed his downward spiral.
- Simone vs. Geraldo? Simone wins in NY.
- Hamburg vs. Rush? Hamburg is a very competent broadcaster and a money magnet for local advertisers. Rush is a bad habit -- an addiction among dittoheads.
- Ramsey vs. Rush/Hannity? "I'm Debt Free!" vs. "You're a Great American?" Yawn.
- Cosby vs. Hannity? Hannity is boring, predictable, partisan and a broken record -- Cosby is 10 times worse! Hannity has actual fans -- Cosby wastes time gushing about all the people she knows. Hannity clearly wins this round.
- Dean vs. Levin? Awful vs. Dreadful, or vice versa.
- John & Ken vs. Levin/Savage? John & Ken's show is great radio. If I were Clear Channel I wouldn't let the NY audience know what they're missing in PM-Drive. LA has John & Ken -- NY has Rita Cosby. LA gets a new Mercedes -- NY gets a '92 Renault.
- Ghosts or whatever vs. Michael Savage? Savage has a good following but has to compete with John & Ken in the first hour. Still I think he wins the three hours.
- Coast to Coast vs. Diesel Fuel Radio? Thankfully, Jon Grayson is on WNYM and on the Internet.
WOR has the POTENTIAL to beat WABC but so far they're not doing it, IMO.
- Gambling vs. Imus? Gambling is unquestionably the better show, but Imus has followers who haven't yet noticed his downward spiral.
- Simone vs. Geraldo? Simone wins in NY.
- Hamburg vs. Rush? Hamburg is a very competent broadcaster and a money magnet for local advertisers. Rush is a bad habit -- an addiction among dittoheads.
- Ramsey vs. Rush/Hannity? "I'm Debt Free!" vs. "You're a Great American?" Yawn.
- Cosby vs. Hannity? Hannity is boring, predictable, partisan and a broken record -- Cosby is 10 times worse! Hannity has actual fans -- Cosby wastes time gushing about all the people she knows. Hannity clearly wins this round.
- Dean vs. Levin? Awful vs. Dreadful, or vice versa.
- John & Ken vs. Levin/Savage? John & Ken's show is great radio. If I were Clear Channel I wouldn't let the NY audience know what they're missing in PM-Drive. LA has John & Ken -- NY has Rita Cosby. LA gets a new Mercedes -- NY gets a '92 Renault.
- Ghosts or whatever vs. Michael Savage? Savage has a good following but has to compete with John & Ken in the first hour. Still I think he wins the three hours.
- Coast to Coast vs. Diesel Fuel Radio? Thankfully, Jon Grayson is on WNYM and on the Internet.
WOR has the POTENTIAL to beat WABC but so far they're not doing it, IMO.
I think we need to look at what "winning" actually means in this situation. I don't believe it means one station beating the other in ratings and demos. I know that's what we here are all used to seeing. But I think that model is not in play here.
These stations have now become links in national chains of delivering advertising attached to syndicated programing. Clear Channel, I'm sure, purchased WOR for the sake of securing an advertising outlet in New York City for it's syndicated programing currently being heard on a competitive company's property. (Yes, I'm talking Rush).
It's hard to make "Rush Money" if your program (or more importantly, your advertising) isn't heard in Market #1.
Rush knows this better than anybody. It why he agreed to do a local WABC-only show way back when he first started his national show. WABC wouldn't air the syndicated program. Rush agreed to do the local show in which WABC would run his national spots. He couldn't sell the program to national advertisers without New York... not if he and his partners wanted to make any great deal of money.
The same works in Cumulus' favor with Imus, Huckabee, Geraldo, etc. Though I think Rush outbills them, even now.
So, as long as these stations serve their owners in this function, they win. Meaning, they both could win. It has very little do with who is doing a better show on a day-to-day basis. An established national program with a dedicated coast-to-coast listener base will generate a ton of revenue from repeat advertising clientele.
I think Rush fits that description better than most.... so I think Clear Channel will "win" based on overall revenue generated. But I don't think that means Cumulus loses.
These stations have now become links in national chains of delivering advertising attached to syndicated programing. Clear Channel, I'm sure, purchased WOR for the sake of securing an advertising outlet in New York City for it's syndicated programing currently being heard on a competitive company's property. (Yes, I'm talking Rush).
It's hard to make "Rush Money" if your program (or more importantly, your advertising) isn't heard in Market #1.
Rush knows this better than anybody. It why he agreed to do a local WABC-only show way back when he first started his national show. WABC wouldn't air the syndicated program. Rush agreed to do the local show in which WABC would run his national spots. He couldn't sell the program to national advertisers without New York... not if he and his partners wanted to make any great deal of money.
The same works in Cumulus' favor with Imus, Huckabee, Geraldo, etc. Though I think Rush outbills them, even now.
So, as long as these stations serve their owners in this function, they win. Meaning, they both could win. It has very little do with who is doing a better show on a day-to-day basis. An established national program with a dedicated coast-to-coast listener base will generate a ton of revenue from repeat advertising clientele.
I think Rush fits that description better than most.... so I think Clear Channel will "win" based on overall revenue generated. But I don't think that means Cumulus loses.
WOR doesn't have anyone on it as good as Mark Levin and Rush Limbaugh, so WABC is better.
Taking the OP's question at face value, I think the issue here is will WOR's 6+ ratings budge from the approximately 1/2 of WABC's numbers where they've been stuck for at least the last decade?
When Gambling returned to WOR a few years ago the program schedule changed just as dramatically as it has recently -- maybe more so because the morning show was part of that change -- yet WOR's numbers remained virtually the same, relative to WABC's.
While both stations' numbers have declined since then, is there any reason to believe that the 2:1 ratio will change? I can't think of one, especially since the recent program changes are, on the whole, pretty unremarkable.
When Gambling returned to WOR a few years ago the program schedule changed just as dramatically as it has recently -- maybe more so because the morning show was part of that change -- yet WOR's numbers remained virtually the same, relative to WABC's.
While both stations' numbers have declined since then, is there any reason to believe that the 2:1 ratio will change? I can't think of one, especially since the recent program changes are, on the whole, pretty unremarkable.
Both stations are age old dinosaurs - that need to be moved to the FM dial. Both need to hire younger talk personalities. I think Noem Laden has a much younger feel...though WABC does not know what to do with him. Same goes for some of the sidekicks on IMUS - who could probably be hosting their own shows now. WOR still sounds very very old...sleepy old...
B
Bob1370
Guest
Does it matter whether WOR ever catches WABC, if someone else is now catching and may soon be passing them both?
What's more, a move to FM won't help them...without a similar shakeup in programming and talent to reflect a new direction in talk, something they could accomplish without blowing up some other music FM and its separate revenue stream.
It may already be getting too late. On the surface things are looking up a bit for WABC since it's up fractionally in the latest PPMs to a 2.8 (still down from where they were a year ago but up a bit from their all time low in December). But WOR is still wallowing at a 1.3. What may be scarier for both of them is that WNYC-FM is now up to a 2.3; and when you put it together with WNYC-AM's 0.9 and take into account that about 80% of the two stations' schedule is simulcast, you're talking about the noncomm combo pulling a 3.2 and moving into format dominance in the market. Rant radio is past its prime and the latest numbers show it in NYC just like what we've seen as noncomm news/talkers beat commercial competition in towns like Washington, Boston and San Francisco over the last 18 months.
What's more, a move to FM won't help them...without a similar shakeup in programming and talent to reflect a new direction in talk, something they could accomplish without blowing up some other music FM and its separate revenue stream.
It may already be getting too late. On the surface things are looking up a bit for WABC since it's up fractionally in the latest PPMs to a 2.8 (still down from where they were a year ago but up a bit from their all time low in December). But WOR is still wallowing at a 1.3. What may be scarier for both of them is that WNYC-FM is now up to a 2.3; and when you put it together with WNYC-AM's 0.9 and take into account that about 80% of the two stations' schedule is simulcast, you're talking about the noncomm combo pulling a 3.2 and moving into format dominance in the market. Rant radio is past its prime and the latest numbers show it in NYC just like what we've seen as noncomm news/talkers beat commercial competition in towns like Washington, Boston and San Francisco over the last 18 months.
Let's not forget that Clear Channel bought WOR to assure it had an NYC outlet for its Premier talk shows, and when Rush's contract with WABC ends, he will be moving over to WOR.
That takes away, a major plus for WABC, and moves it over to WOR while leaving a possible gaping ratings hole at WABC.
The ratings ratio may be substantially changed by that one move.
That takes away, a major plus for WABC, and moves it over to WOR while leaving a possible gaping ratings hole at WABC.
The ratings ratio may be substantially changed by that one move.
Cumeless doesn't have a good track record of competing in the talk arena (think KGO, KABC, WJR, WMAL... all with ratings heading in the wrong direction. I expect WOR to have better numbers than WABC within the next 6-12 months.
OC3 said:
And there is no way to make "big money" without ratings.
Granted, there are plenty of no-rated or low-rated stations that make money without large audiences, but generally they sell time blocks or do niche ethnic or special interest programming.
In New York City, if you want to bill $10 million or more... up to the highest billing level near $50 million... you need ratings. There is no station without good ratings in some desirable demo that is billing over $10 million, in fact.
In 2011, the 21 stations billing $10 million or over grossed a total of about $560,000,000. The whole market's total commercial AM and FM stations billed $586,000,000. So that's only about $26 million for all the other stations in the market.*
So much for billing without ratings.
Billings are obtained by delivering something of value to advertisers, namely "audience". More audience means greater ad rates and more revenue. Less audience means less revenue.
*(Note: not including the revenues of the embedded markets which, similarly, went to the top rated stations in each embedded market in the same kind of proportion.)
Big companies have been known to make big mistakes.
I understand the corporate strategy of clearing syndicated shows in the #1 market as a tool for selling to smaller markets but, because it's a strategy doesn't mean it's a good one.
K.I.S.S. There's really one thing that defines good talk radio - an interesting host (or hosts.) Whether local, syndicated, live, time-shifted or place-shifted (all of which are also very important,) an interesting host who understands how to use the medium will get an audience -- and keep an audience -- often years beyond when they cease to be entertaining. Good programming includes changing the lineup often enough to keep listeners interested and involved.
The only two new bright spots on WOR are KFI staff: John & Ken 9-11p weekdays and Bill Handel (Handel on the Law) on Sunday afternoons, although that show seems to have been replaced by Mark Simone reruns.
So I don't know what they're doing over there, but it isn't compelling talk radio. WOR was showing some promise in the first couple of weeks of CC's takeover with fill-ins by Ron Kuby, JD Hayworth and others, but the final lineup is a real mixed bag.
Great programming = large audience = high ad rates + heavy demand = solid bottom line. It was once thought to be that simple. The game of trying to pull the wool over the eyes of potential affiliates by placing syndicated shows on a low-rated NY station may or may not be a good one in the long run.
I understand the corporate strategy of clearing syndicated shows in the #1 market as a tool for selling to smaller markets but, because it's a strategy doesn't mean it's a good one.
K.I.S.S. There's really one thing that defines good talk radio - an interesting host (or hosts.) Whether local, syndicated, live, time-shifted or place-shifted (all of which are also very important,) an interesting host who understands how to use the medium will get an audience -- and keep an audience -- often years beyond when they cease to be entertaining. Good programming includes changing the lineup often enough to keep listeners interested and involved.
The only two new bright spots on WOR are KFI staff: John & Ken 9-11p weekdays and Bill Handel (Handel on the Law) on Sunday afternoons, although that show seems to have been replaced by Mark Simone reruns.
So I don't know what they're doing over there, but it isn't compelling talk radio. WOR was showing some promise in the first couple of weeks of CC's takeover with fill-ins by Ron Kuby, JD Hayworth and others, but the final lineup is a real mixed bag.
Great programming = large audience = high ad rates + heavy demand = solid bottom line. It was once thought to be that simple. The game of trying to pull the wool over the eyes of potential affiliates by placing syndicated shows on a low-rated NY station may or may not be a good one in the long run.
Of course, it's about the money. Always has been and always will be. (World without end, Amen.) But... the money generally follows ratings. Having an O&O in market #1 helps Premiere, but I doubt CC would have shelled out $30 Mil if they didn't think they could be a contender. If all they needed to do was clear network spots, they could have bought brokered time on a station like WLIB, WWRL, or WNSW and saved a bundle. Say what you want about CC, but with a few turkeys here and there they have a pretty impressive stable of News/Talk stations, markets including LA, San Diego, Denver, Houston, San Antonio, Omaha, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus, Pittsburgh, Albany, Rochester, Richmond, Miami, Tampa, Omaha, Des Moines, Oklahoma City, Nashville, Birmingham, Louisville, New Haven, Syracuse, Sacramento, and Phoenix to name some off the top of my head.OC3 said:
- Status