Winter 2018 book

[davideduardo]

Yet, some stations choose not to subscribe to the Winter and Summer ratings reports.

If a station does limited agency selling, and does not need 4 books a year for programming purposes (such as when a station has a niche format or no direct competitor), it's not necessary to spend the added money that two more books would cost.

Agencies already have all the data, so they will know even if a station can't sell with a book they did not buy.

 

[Buddy Shula]

Buddy needs a reality check. WECK has averaged a 2 share over the past year. His wild boasts of a 4 or 5 share is not "reality based". The Lawrence Welk fare that his station offers won't double the ratings. WECK can serve a niche with 60+ demos and get results for certain clients. Some salesmen have a reputation for "over promising & under delivering"...

WECK has averaged a 3.7 share 35 plus over the past 5 books. That is without our new frequency. That is also a 1K AM with a 225 watt translator. WECK is literally a few tenths of a share from 50K watt FM's like WBUF and WMSX. That is 12 plus! That is pretty good. For what these 50K stations are selling for, and for what I paid to have comparable shares in ratings in a great thing.

Dave has it correct...it is all about customer service and results. Which WECK does great at. The ratings are a barometer. But there are many clients and advertisers who want to see how you do in the ratings. In our demo, 50 plus, we are top 5. Again, not bad for a 1K AM station. TBOLT, WECK will have a 4 share 12 plus. or more.

Let us on the front lines do the fighting. You just sit back and Monday Morning Quarterback.

 

[Rusty Bridges]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but nowhere in this thread did any poster opine or imply that winter (or summer) ratings results do not count. Instead, it appears to be the value of the information depending upon the rating period that counts. It seems the results and information derived from the Spring and Fall rating periods have greater value to subscribing stations and advertising agencies than do the Winter and Summer ratings. I've yet to read about radio stations locally or in larger markets subscribing, because of budgetary or programming choices, to the Summer and Winter results rather than subscribing to the Spring and Fall periods.

 

[davideduardo]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but nowhere in this thread did any poster opine or imply that winter (or summer) ratings results do not count. Instead, it appears to be the value of the information depending upon the rating period that counts. It seems the results and information derived from the Spring and Fall rating periods have greater value to subscribing stations and advertising agencies than do the Winter and Summer ratings. I've yet to read about radio stations locally or in larger markets subscribing, because of budgetary or programming choices, to the Summer and Winter results rather than subscribing to the Spring and Fall periods.

There are many diary markets that don't have 4 books a year. Some are smaller ones, and have one book only. But there are a good number of the 51st to 100th ranked markets that only have two books. Obviously, the stations don't have a need for 4 books that overcomes the cost barrier.

Advertisers tend to give lower importance to the Summer book because it is a period where listening habits are somewhat atypical. Winter is of less value as it measures a period that is affected by weather in much of the US and is also somewhat atypical.

Much of this goes back to the earliest Arbitron Ratings, where they first standardized a time period in the middle of spring ("April/May" was the book label) and Fall as the "universal" ratings periods, with some markets getting two more books and some one less.

 

[Rusty Bridges]

Value. The point being, in four-book-per-year markets like Buffalo-Niagara Falls no owner-operator be it Cumulus or Joe Blow, choosing to buy two books rather four, opts for the Winter and Summer books rather than the Fall and Spring books.