O
OldiesCat
Guest
Number 3 ranking adults 25-54 - on one of their best month-to-month rolls of the past year.
-
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
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
J
JohnnyMorganWXJX
Guest
> Number 3 ranking adults 25-54 - on one of their best
> month-to-month rolls of the past year.
>
PLEASE, gentlemen (and ladies)--let's leave it at that. Gillespie's last full book was good.
We can debate each other's attendant qualifications in email. BUT the ratings say good job.
On-air quality/art is up for debate. But success is proven.
> month-to-month rolls of the past year.
>
PLEASE, gentlemen (and ladies)--let's leave it at that. Gillespie's last full book was good.
We can debate each other's attendant qualifications in email. BUT the ratings say good job.
On-air quality/art is up for debate. But success is proven.
M
Mrmusic
Guest
> > Number 3 ranking adults 25-54 - on one of their best
> > month-to-month rolls of the past year.
> >
>
> PLEASE, gentlemen (and ladies)--let's leave it at that.
> Gillespie's last full book was good.
>
> We can debate each other's attendant qualifications in
> email. BUT the ratings say good job.
>
> On-air quality/art is up for debate. But success is proven.
>
The ratings say good job for the staff of 3WS.
EVERYONE in the radio community knows it is not a true reflection on the job Gillispie did. His track record shows what little success he has had. That IS proven and known by Clear Channel higher-ups.
Mr. Music
> > month-to-month rolls of the past year.
> >
>
> PLEASE, gentlemen (and ladies)--let's leave it at that.
> Gillespie's last full book was good.
>
> We can debate each other's attendant qualifications in
> email. BUT the ratings say good job.
>
> On-air quality/art is up for debate. But success is proven.
>
The ratings say good job for the staff of 3WS.
EVERYONE in the radio community knows it is not a true reflection on the job Gillispie did. His track record shows what little success he has had. That IS proven and known by Clear Channel higher-ups.
Mr. Music
O
OldiesCat
Guest
www.denialexpress.com
You are sooooooooooo easy. Hole available- crawl back in.
*LMAO*
> The ratings say good job for the staff of 3WS.
> EVERYONE in the radio community knows it is not a true
> reflection on the job Gillispie did. His track record shows
> what little success he has had. That IS proven and known by
> Clear Channel higher-ups.
>
> Mr. Music
>
You are sooooooooooo easy. Hole available- crawl back in.
*LMAO*
> The ratings say good job for the staff of 3WS.
> EVERYONE in the radio community knows it is not a true
> reflection on the job Gillispie did. His track record shows
> what little success he has had. That IS proven and known by
> Clear Channel higher-ups.
>
> Mr. Music
>
R
Radio_Realist
Guest
We're wasting our time on Dr. Detroit
> EVERYONE in the radio community knows it is not a true
> reflection on the job Gillispie did. His track record shows
> what little success he has had. That IS proven and known by
> Clear Channel higher-ups.
>
> Mr. Music
Two problems.
First, Oldiescat doesn't know diddly squat about Pittsburgh, including the people here.
Second, in his 25 years at that little 1,00 watt daytimer, Oldiescat has never learned anything about any industry other than radio. So, any attempts to educate him about focus group testing (except for determining playlists), psycographics, ad response testing, marketing synergy, message awareness testing, or any of the secondary criteria that go into selecting media for advertising and marketing campaigns are doomed to failure. He will never, ever accept that those who decide where to spend advertising dollars use many other criteria in addition to Arbitron ratings.
For example, he'll never be convinced Arbitron ratings are only a factor in convincing advertisers which radio station to use, IF THEY HAVE DECIDED TO USE RADIO AT ALL. If there's anyone in Pittsburgh who should send Gillespie a "thank you" card, its the salesmen who work for the local cable companies. I know of at least two large accounts who decided that buying time on 3WS was a waste of money, regardless of the Arbitrons, and who switched their buys over to Comcast Cable.
And one of the main factors that convinced them was the fact that fewer and fewer people LISTEN to 3WS, even though they continue to check the boxes in their diaries. Even those who keep their radios tuned in to 3WS don't LISTEN to it anymore, they just leave it on as background noise. I've seen some focus group test results that indicate that 3WS listeners are among the worst at recalling what was played on that station, even though they always had it turned on. That loss of quality of listenership cost 3WS advertising dollars, even though they didn't lose any measures quantity of listeners.
But some people who've never worked outside radio just can't grasp the concept that radio staions only compete with other radio stations for advertising dollars, they are also competing with other media.
> EVERYONE in the radio community knows it is not a true
> reflection on the job Gillispie did. His track record shows
> what little success he has had. That IS proven and known by
> Clear Channel higher-ups.
>
> Mr. Music
Two problems.
First, Oldiescat doesn't know diddly squat about Pittsburgh, including the people here.
Second, in his 25 years at that little 1,00 watt daytimer, Oldiescat has never learned anything about any industry other than radio. So, any attempts to educate him about focus group testing (except for determining playlists), psycographics, ad response testing, marketing synergy, message awareness testing, or any of the secondary criteria that go into selecting media for advertising and marketing campaigns are doomed to failure. He will never, ever accept that those who decide where to spend advertising dollars use many other criteria in addition to Arbitron ratings.
For example, he'll never be convinced Arbitron ratings are only a factor in convincing advertisers which radio station to use, IF THEY HAVE DECIDED TO USE RADIO AT ALL. If there's anyone in Pittsburgh who should send Gillespie a "thank you" card, its the salesmen who work for the local cable companies. I know of at least two large accounts who decided that buying time on 3WS was a waste of money, regardless of the Arbitrons, and who switched their buys over to Comcast Cable.
And one of the main factors that convinced them was the fact that fewer and fewer people LISTEN to 3WS, even though they continue to check the boxes in their diaries. Even those who keep their radios tuned in to 3WS don't LISTEN to it anymore, they just leave it on as background noise. I've seen some focus group test results that indicate that 3WS listeners are among the worst at recalling what was played on that station, even though they always had it turned on. That loss of quality of listenership cost 3WS advertising dollars, even though they didn't lose any measures quantity of listeners.
But some people who've never worked outside radio just can't grasp the concept that radio staions only compete with other radio stations for advertising dollars, they are also competing with other media.
J
JohnnyMorganWXJX
Guest
Re: We're wasting our time on Dr. Detroit
> Two problems.
>
> First, Oldiescat doesn't know diddly squat about Pittsburgh,
> including the people here.
>
> Second, in his 25 years at that little 1,00 watt daytimer,
> Oldiescat has never learned anything about any industry
> other than radio.
Let's say, just for the sake of argument mind you--JUST FOR THIS ARGUMENT--that Cat does work for "that little 1,00 [sic] daytimer" (I assume you mean WPON).
It does not then follow that Cat doesn't know anything about Pittsburgh. WPON is owned by Birach Broadcasting--the same people who own WWCS 540AM. You know, the Radio Disney outfit. They've been in the city for a good number of years.
Just saying, IF Cat worked for WPON (which I don't think he does).
> Two problems.
>
> First, Oldiescat doesn't know diddly squat about Pittsburgh,
> including the people here.
>
> Second, in his 25 years at that little 1,00 watt daytimer,
> Oldiescat has never learned anything about any industry
> other than radio.
Let's say, just for the sake of argument mind you--JUST FOR THIS ARGUMENT--that Cat does work for "that little 1,00 [sic] daytimer" (I assume you mean WPON).
It does not then follow that Cat doesn't know anything about Pittsburgh. WPON is owned by Birach Broadcasting--the same people who own WWCS 540AM. You know, the Radio Disney outfit. They've been in the city for a good number of years.
Just saying, IF Cat worked for WPON (which I don't think he does).
O
OldiesCat
Guest
Dr. Detroit
Never did- never would. My first radio job was at a much bigger, more influential station.
That whole "he works for a 1kw daytimer" is fantasy-land, wishful thinking from two frustrated, bitter ex-radio hacks. As always, their idea of radio station performance is a show of hands with their buddies (vs. using actual real-time Arbitron data). So, instead of actually discussing ratings data (which they started, though erroneously), they try to spin their way out by demeaning others, including referring to those of us in the biz as "stuck in radio", as if the radio industry is an embarrasment vs. being in TV or movies. Sad and pathetic.
(but hasn't it been fun watching them both implode time after time on this board?)
>
> Let's say, just for the sake of argument mind you--JUST FOR
> THIS ARGUMENT--that Cat does work for "that little 1,00
> [sic] daytimer" (I assume you mean WPON).
>
> It does not then follow that Cat doesn't know anything about
> Pittsburgh. WPON is owned by Birach Broadcasting--the same
> people who own WWCS 540AM. You know, the Radio Disney
> outfit. They've been in the city for a good number of years.
Never did- never would. My first radio job was at a much bigger, more influential station.
That whole "he works for a 1kw daytimer" is fantasy-land, wishful thinking from two frustrated, bitter ex-radio hacks. As always, their idea of radio station performance is a show of hands with their buddies (vs. using actual real-time Arbitron data). So, instead of actually discussing ratings data (which they started, though erroneously), they try to spin their way out by demeaning others, including referring to those of us in the biz as "stuck in radio", as if the radio industry is an embarrasment vs. being in TV or movies. Sad and pathetic.
(but hasn't it been fun watching them both implode time after time on this board?)
>
> Let's say, just for the sake of argument mind you--JUST FOR
> THIS ARGUMENT--that Cat does work for "that little 1,00
> [sic] daytimer" (I assume you mean WPON).
>
> It does not then follow that Cat doesn't know anything about
> Pittsburgh. WPON is owned by Birach Broadcasting--the same
> people who own WWCS 540AM. You know, the Radio Disney
> outfit. They've been in the city for a good number of years.
Aw, just give up, will you? You don't have a bit of credibility. You started out adamantly saying the station's ratings were terrible and it was Gillespie's fault. Then when that ratings information was disproven, you switched to, OK, they had good ratings, but that was in spite of Gillespie.
So if the ratings were bad, he was fully responsible, but if they were good, he had nothing at all to do with it.
Just for laughs, let's take a look at some of the neck-breaking turns you made in the other thread:
1. Gillispie IS responsible for the lowest ratings in 3WS'history. That is why he was FIRED!
--10/14/05 10:29 PM
2. IF 3WS was ranked #3 overall (while Gillispie was there) it was a fluke, or right after the Christmas format. 3WS was #3 when Dave Labrozzi was at the helm.
Once again, he sunk the radio station to its lowest levels, both musically, and ratings-wise. That is the truth. You can look at ANY Arbitron book and see the numbers for yourself, so stop sugar-coating it here on this board.
If you continue to contradict me and the others on this thread, and as I see from all your other posts you are supporing Gillispie, I would have to conclude that you ARE Gillispie.
10/15/05 06:06 AM
3. So, you are going on one book, albeit the latest, and not on sound, all the other low books since this man started? I will have to check out the Arbitron numbers myself. I really do not rememember that they were #3. That seems odd to me. If indeed 3WS is #3, then all the credit goes to the airstaff, not Gillispie. He just happened to be in the pd chair, but certainly not responsible for those good numbers.
Greg Gillispie is responsible for bringing 3WS to its lowest period with a lot of low books. (I know, you're going to say they had a #3). Bottom line, and this is the truth, he sunk that radio station and killed it.
10/16/05 05:16 AM
So if the ratings were bad, he was fully responsible, but if they were good, he had nothing at all to do with it.
Just for laughs, let's take a look at some of the neck-breaking turns you made in the other thread:
1. Gillispie IS responsible for the lowest ratings in 3WS'history. That is why he was FIRED!
--10/14/05 10:29 PM
2. IF 3WS was ranked #3 overall (while Gillispie was there) it was a fluke, or right after the Christmas format. 3WS was #3 when Dave Labrozzi was at the helm.
Once again, he sunk the radio station to its lowest levels, both musically, and ratings-wise. That is the truth. You can look at ANY Arbitron book and see the numbers for yourself, so stop sugar-coating it here on this board.
If you continue to contradict me and the others on this thread, and as I see from all your other posts you are supporing Gillispie, I would have to conclude that you ARE Gillispie.
10/15/05 06:06 AM
3. So, you are going on one book, albeit the latest, and not on sound, all the other low books since this man started? I will have to check out the Arbitron numbers myself. I really do not rememember that they were #3. That seems odd to me. If indeed 3WS is #3, then all the credit goes to the airstaff, not Gillispie. He just happened to be in the pd chair, but certainly not responsible for those good numbers.
Greg Gillispie is responsible for bringing 3WS to its lowest period with a lot of low books. (I know, you're going to say they had a #3). Bottom line, and this is the truth, he sunk that radio station and killed it.
10/16/05 05:16 AM
R
Radio_Realist
Guest
Re: We're wasting our time on Dr. Detroit
> Let's say, just for the sake of argument mind you--JUST FOR
> THIS ARGUMENT--that Cat does work for "that little 1,00
> [sic] daytimer" (I assume you mean WPON).
>
> It does not then follow that Cat doesn't know anything about
> Pittsburgh. WPON is owned by Birach Broadcasting--the same
> people who own WWCS 540AM. You know, the Radio Disney
> outfit. They've been in the city for a good number of
> years.
>
> Just saying, IF Cat worked for WPON (which I don't think he
> does).
Why would some cat who plays oldies on one station know anything about what hapens on the other stations his employer owns in other markets? Does the guy who flips burgers for a McDonalds in Detroit automatically know about Pittsburgh just because McDonalds also has restaurants here?
> Let's say, just for the sake of argument mind you--JUST FOR
> THIS ARGUMENT--that Cat does work for "that little 1,00
> [sic] daytimer" (I assume you mean WPON).
>
> It does not then follow that Cat doesn't know anything about
> Pittsburgh. WPON is owned by Birach Broadcasting--the same
> people who own WWCS 540AM. You know, the Radio Disney
> outfit. They've been in the city for a good number of
> years.
>
> Just saying, IF Cat worked for WPON (which I don't think he
> does).
Why would some cat who plays oldies on one station know anything about what hapens on the other stations his employer owns in other markets? Does the guy who flips burgers for a McDonalds in Detroit automatically know about Pittsburgh just because McDonalds also has restaurants here?
J
JohnnyMorganWXJX
Guest
Re: We're wasting our time on Dr. Detroit
> > Let's say, just for the sake of argument mind you--JUST
> FOR
> > THIS ARGUMENT--that Cat does work for "that little 1,00
> > [sic] daytimer" (I assume you mean WPON).
> >
> > It does not then follow that Cat doesn't know anything
> about
> > Pittsburgh. WPON is owned by Birach Broadcasting--the
> same
> > people who own WWCS 540AM. You know, the Radio Disney
> > outfit. They've been in the city for a good number of
> > years.
> >
> > Just saying, IF Cat worked for WPON (which I don't think
> he
> > does).
>
> Why would some cat who plays oldies on one station know
> anything about what hapens on the other stations his
> employer owns in other markets? Does the guy who flips
> burgers for a McDonalds in Detroit automatically know about
> Pittsburgh just because McDonalds also has restaurants here?
>
No, but Birach Broadcasting is not McDonald's. It's a small, family run operation. Ergo, it's more likely that the vagarities of each market are known.
And radio is not hamburgers (unless you're Clear Channel).
> > Let's say, just for the sake of argument mind you--JUST
> FOR
> > THIS ARGUMENT--that Cat does work for "that little 1,00
> > [sic] daytimer" (I assume you mean WPON).
> >
> > It does not then follow that Cat doesn't know anything
> about
> > Pittsburgh. WPON is owned by Birach Broadcasting--the
> same
> > people who own WWCS 540AM. You know, the Radio Disney
> > outfit. They've been in the city for a good number of
> > years.
> >
> > Just saying, IF Cat worked for WPON (which I don't think
> he
> > does).
>
> Why would some cat who plays oldies on one station know
> anything about what hapens on the other stations his
> employer owns in other markets? Does the guy who flips
> burgers for a McDonalds in Detroit automatically know about
> Pittsburgh just because McDonalds also has restaurants here?
>
No, but Birach Broadcasting is not McDonald's. It's a small, family run operation. Ergo, it's more likely that the vagarities of each market are known.
And radio is not hamburgers (unless you're Clear Channel).
M
Mrmusic
Guest
> Aw, just give up, will you? You don't have a bit of
> credibility. You started out adamantly saying the station's
> ratings were terrible and it was Gillespie's fault. Then
> when that ratings information was disproven, you switched
> to, OK, they had good ratings, but that was in spite of
> Gillespie.
>
> So if the ratings were bad, he was fully responsible, but if
> they were good, he had nothing at all to do with it.
>
Radio Rancher-
I think you and OldiesCat should give it up! For God's Sake! BOTH of you will be noted to taking the side of a useless, bore who is no longer in radio and who has a really bad repution. Not company I'd like to be associated with, but those who may figure out who you are will certainly leak it to the radio grapevine.
In that whole thread, you two totally missed out on the reasons Greg Gillispie should not have been credited for whatever the "success" of 3WS. The bottom line, was "the bottom line" of the radio station, and their overall sound. In both cases, Gillispie sunk 3WS. Ratings-wise, who knew why they are up? I point out to you, the ever popular "diary fluke" and "diary distribution". Both of which I did put in a post. Gee, can you note that one, too?
Thank you for taking the time out to note what you think are my inconsistencies. Must be nice to have that time on your hands! Sure wish I had the time to do that regarding the crap you and OldiesCat write.
Listen, I may be working at an ad agency, but I can tell you, this guy was the worst thing that happend to 3WS in its history. (now, this time, did I say ratings wise? Do you and OldiesCat know of the internal strife he caused). I know first-hand (sat in a few meetings with the guy) and have a working relationship with a couple of the senior sales reps.
Oh, did I tell you I lunch with a very senior director from the Clear Channel cluster quite regularly?
Stop your assanine accusations and please grow up. Words that I also direct to OldiesCat.
Mr. Music
> credibility. You started out adamantly saying the station's
> ratings were terrible and it was Gillespie's fault. Then
> when that ratings information was disproven, you switched
> to, OK, they had good ratings, but that was in spite of
> Gillespie.
>
> So if the ratings were bad, he was fully responsible, but if
> they were good, he had nothing at all to do with it.
>
Radio Rancher-
I think you and OldiesCat should give it up! For God's Sake! BOTH of you will be noted to taking the side of a useless, bore who is no longer in radio and who has a really bad repution. Not company I'd like to be associated with, but those who may figure out who you are will certainly leak it to the radio grapevine.
In that whole thread, you two totally missed out on the reasons Greg Gillispie should not have been credited for whatever the "success" of 3WS. The bottom line, was "the bottom line" of the radio station, and their overall sound. In both cases, Gillispie sunk 3WS. Ratings-wise, who knew why they are up? I point out to you, the ever popular "diary fluke" and "diary distribution". Both of which I did put in a post. Gee, can you note that one, too?
Thank you for taking the time out to note what you think are my inconsistencies. Must be nice to have that time on your hands! Sure wish I had the time to do that regarding the crap you and OldiesCat write.
Listen, I may be working at an ad agency, but I can tell you, this guy was the worst thing that happend to 3WS in its history. (now, this time, did I say ratings wise? Do you and OldiesCat know of the internal strife he caused). I know first-hand (sat in a few meetings with the guy) and have a working relationship with a couple of the senior sales reps.
Oh, did I tell you I lunch with a very senior director from the Clear Channel cluster quite regularly?
Stop your assanine accusations and please grow up. Words that I also direct to OldiesCat.
Mr. Music
A
am-fm
Guest
Re: We're wasting our time on Dr. Detroit
> Two problems.
>
> First, Oldiescat doesn't know diddly squat about Pittsburgh,
> including the people here.
>
> Second, in his 25 years at that little 1,00 watt daytimer,
> Oldiescat has never learned anything about any industry
> other than radio. So, any attempts to educate him about
> focus group testing (except for determining playlists),
> psycographics, ad response testing, marketing synergy,
> message awareness testing, or any of the secondary criteria
> that go into selecting media for advertising and marketing
> campaigns are doomed to failure. He will never, ever accept
> that those who decide where to spend advertising dollars use
> many other criteria in addition to Arbitron ratings.
>
> But some people who've never worked outside radio just can't
> grasp the concept that radio staions only compete with other
> radio stations for advertising dollars, they are also
> competing with other media.
>
Accually, Oldiescat used to work at Clear Channel in Florida. He's just trying to be professional and not insult somebody.
<P ID="signature">______________
AOL IM: wnjoldies or jamminoldies105
CBS-FM lives at http://67.83.125.155:8010
Oldies Board co-moderator</P>
> Two problems.
>
> First, Oldiescat doesn't know diddly squat about Pittsburgh,
> including the people here.
>
> Second, in his 25 years at that little 1,00 watt daytimer,
> Oldiescat has never learned anything about any industry
> other than radio. So, any attempts to educate him about
> focus group testing (except for determining playlists),
> psycographics, ad response testing, marketing synergy,
> message awareness testing, or any of the secondary criteria
> that go into selecting media for advertising and marketing
> campaigns are doomed to failure. He will never, ever accept
> that those who decide where to spend advertising dollars use
> many other criteria in addition to Arbitron ratings.
>
> But some people who've never worked outside radio just can't
> grasp the concept that radio staions only compete with other
> radio stations for advertising dollars, they are also
> competing with other media.
>
Accually, Oldiescat used to work at Clear Channel in Florida. He's just trying to be professional and not insult somebody.
<P ID="signature">______________
AOL IM: wnjoldies or jamminoldies105
CBS-FM lives at http://67.83.125.155:8010
Oldies Board co-moderator</P>
R
Radio_Realist
Guest
Maybe you should check your facts
> Number 3 ranking adults 25-54 - on one of their best
> month-to-month rolls of the past year.
Not about the ratings, but about what Mrmusic and I have been trying to tell you. Below is Mrmusic's original reply to your original thread about 3WS, the reply that started this whole flap, and the one in which you claim that he said 3WS had bad ratings because of Gillespie. I challenge you to find the word "ratings" anywhere in that post.
Begin quoted material:
> anybody got any inside info on the sudden PD change at 3WS?
The "sudden PD change" was because Gillispie was fired. My sales contacts over there told me that on Monday AFTERNOON. So, it really wasn't so sudden. (especially since a few of the salespeople knew Monday morning). Why has this news taken so long to hit this board?
> Gillespe seemed to be doing a great job with the station.
What drugs are you on? Haven't heard the station this past year? Or, the comments everyone wrote about how the music sucks, they sound like DVE Light, the repetitious Elton John and Billy Joel hours, the Rod Stewart Catalog, and the 80's songs that don't fit? Gillispie was doing anything but a fine job.
One of my sales clients over there is overjoyed that he's gone. She says he made sales meetings extremely long with diatribe and dribble that had nothing to do with the presentation of new business. He has even DETERRED new business. And, he has been able to sever ongoing business. Thanks to his arrogance has lost quite a few places of business that were always a staple on 3WS (one of which is one of my other clients, so I know firsthand) You call that doing a great job with the station?
I used to hear horror stories from both my reps. Sad part is, they weren't working with this guy on a regular, day to day basis. I feel bad for what the airstaff had to go through.
My best wishes to new program directress, Sheri Van Dyke. I hope a lot more of my clients will be on the air there (after being shot out of the water from her predecessor). I am a longtime fan of the station and if her leadership skills are anything like her airwork, she will be very good for 3WS. She has her work cut out for her digging the station out of the abyss that Gillispie sank them.
Mr. Music
End quoted material.
To summarize. You said "Gillespe seemed to be doing a great job with the station.", referring ONLY TO RATINGS. Mrmusic then went on to explain that a "great job" requires more than just ratings, it requires making a profit from the sales of airtime. And he explained, from an insider perspective, that thanks to Gillespie, 3WS was NOT increasing profits as he was expected to.
Go back and look at Mrmusic's original reply to verify that I copied it exactly as he posted it.
You keep claiming that he first said the ratings were bad, and then changed his story. Yet the record of posts indicate that he first said that "He has even DETERRED new business. And, he has been able to sever ongoing business. Thanks to his arrogance has lost quite a few places of business that were always a staple on 3WS (one of which is one of my other clients, so I know firsthand) You call that doing a great job with the station?"
That's not a 'change of tune', that was the song he was singing from his very first note! And, later on in the thread, I joining him, singing harmony.
You're the one who couldn't grasp some simple facts. You were the one who asked for "inside info", and you got some "inside info". But, since it's not what you wanted to hear, you attack the people who provided the information that you asked for in the first place.
> Number 3 ranking adults 25-54 - on one of their best
> month-to-month rolls of the past year.
Not about the ratings, but about what Mrmusic and I have been trying to tell you. Below is Mrmusic's original reply to your original thread about 3WS, the reply that started this whole flap, and the one in which you claim that he said 3WS had bad ratings because of Gillespie. I challenge you to find the word "ratings" anywhere in that post.
Begin quoted material:
> anybody got any inside info on the sudden PD change at 3WS?
The "sudden PD change" was because Gillispie was fired. My sales contacts over there told me that on Monday AFTERNOON. So, it really wasn't so sudden. (especially since a few of the salespeople knew Monday morning). Why has this news taken so long to hit this board?
> Gillespe seemed to be doing a great job with the station.
What drugs are you on? Haven't heard the station this past year? Or, the comments everyone wrote about how the music sucks, they sound like DVE Light, the repetitious Elton John and Billy Joel hours, the Rod Stewart Catalog, and the 80's songs that don't fit? Gillispie was doing anything but a fine job.
One of my sales clients over there is overjoyed that he's gone. She says he made sales meetings extremely long with diatribe and dribble that had nothing to do with the presentation of new business. He has even DETERRED new business. And, he has been able to sever ongoing business. Thanks to his arrogance has lost quite a few places of business that were always a staple on 3WS (one of which is one of my other clients, so I know firsthand) You call that doing a great job with the station?
I used to hear horror stories from both my reps. Sad part is, they weren't working with this guy on a regular, day to day basis. I feel bad for what the airstaff had to go through.
My best wishes to new program directress, Sheri Van Dyke. I hope a lot more of my clients will be on the air there (after being shot out of the water from her predecessor). I am a longtime fan of the station and if her leadership skills are anything like her airwork, she will be very good for 3WS. She has her work cut out for her digging the station out of the abyss that Gillispie sank them.
Mr. Music
End quoted material.
To summarize. You said "Gillespe seemed to be doing a great job with the station.", referring ONLY TO RATINGS. Mrmusic then went on to explain that a "great job" requires more than just ratings, it requires making a profit from the sales of airtime. And he explained, from an insider perspective, that thanks to Gillespie, 3WS was NOT increasing profits as he was expected to.
Go back and look at Mrmusic's original reply to verify that I copied it exactly as he posted it.
You keep claiming that he first said the ratings were bad, and then changed his story. Yet the record of posts indicate that he first said that "He has even DETERRED new business. And, he has been able to sever ongoing business. Thanks to his arrogance has lost quite a few places of business that were always a staple on 3WS (one of which is one of my other clients, so I know firsthand) You call that doing a great job with the station?"
That's not a 'change of tune', that was the song he was singing from his very first note! And, later on in the thread, I joining him, singing harmony.
You're the one who couldn't grasp some simple facts. You were the one who asked for "inside info", and you got some "inside info". But, since it's not what you wanted to hear, you attack the people who provided the information that you asked for in the first place.
O
OldiesCat
Guest
facts
P-L-E-A-S-E R-E-A-D C-A-R-E-F-U-L-L-Y:
My only, ONLY point of contention with you and mrmusic was 3WS' ratings performance. It's you and he keep dragging other things into it in a desperate attempt to keep from looking like uninformed idiots.
You've failed.
P-L-E-A-S-E R-E-A-D C-A-R-E-F-U-L-L-Y:
My only, ONLY point of contention with you and mrmusic was 3WS' ratings performance. It's you and he keep dragging other things into it in a desperate attempt to keep from looking like uninformed idiots.
You've failed.
O
OldiesCat
Guest
wasting time
Thanks for the "D", am-fm.
Note below this new, secret, high-tech way they must do ratings in Pittsburgh- it's the "show of hands" method, the new successor to the diary and PPM. How HAVE they kept it a secret from the rest of the radio industry this long? <LOL>
("I've seen 'some' focus group test results"- OK, sure. The desperation continues).
> fewer and fewer people LISTEN to 3WS, even though
> they continue to check the boxes in their diaries. Even those
> who keep their radios tuned in to 3WS don't LISTEN to it
> anymore, they just leave it on as background noise. I've
> seen some focus group test results that indicate that 3WS
> listeners are among the worst at recalling what was played
> on that station, even though they always had it turned on.
Thanks for the "D", am-fm.
Note below this new, secret, high-tech way they must do ratings in Pittsburgh- it's the "show of hands" method, the new successor to the diary and PPM. How HAVE they kept it a secret from the rest of the radio industry this long? <LOL>
("I've seen 'some' focus group test results"- OK, sure. The desperation continues).
> fewer and fewer people LISTEN to 3WS, even though
> they continue to check the boxes in their diaries. Even those
> who keep their radios tuned in to 3WS don't LISTEN to it
> anymore, they just leave it on as background noise. I've
> seen some focus group test results that indicate that 3WS
> listeners are among the worst at recalling what was played
> on that station, even though they always had it turned on.
O
OldiesCat
Guest
we chuckle at thee
WELL, now! That changes EVERYTHING. Now, nobody thinks you're really a clueless boor who must be sour and bitter because you never really made it in radio (bet his "very senior director" is really RadioUnRealist).
You know, if you didn't constantly put such a huge target on yourself, it wouldn't be any fun dangling the sugar cube in front of your nose so often.
> Oh, did I tell you I lunch with a very senior director from
> the Clear Channel cluster quite regularly?
> Mr. Music
>
WELL, now! That changes EVERYTHING. Now, nobody thinks you're really a clueless boor who must be sour and bitter because you never really made it in radio (bet his "very senior director" is really RadioUnRealist).
You know, if you didn't constantly put such a huge target on yourself, it wouldn't be any fun dangling the sugar cube in front of your nose so often.
> Oh, did I tell you I lunch with a very senior director from
> the Clear Channel cluster quite regularly?
> Mr. Music
>
M
Mrmusic
Guest
Re: we chuckle at thee
> WELL, now! That changes EVERYTHING. Now, nobody thinks
> you're really a clueless boor who must be sour and bitter
> because you never really made it in radio (bet his "very
> senior director" is really RadioUnRealist).
>
> You know, if you didn't constantly put such a huge target on
> yourself, it wouldn't be any fun dangling the sugar cube in
> front of your nose so often.
>
OldiesCat-
It's posts like this that make you so uncredible and immature.
Can't you take the truth and understand it without twisting everyone's words just because you are always on the attack? If you don't want to hear truth and really what goes on in Pittsburgh, then don't even bother reading our posts. Be a man, and move on.
Better yet,please move on to someone else's forum. You're immaturity is really old now and you have contributed NOTHING to this forum but your assanine comments and attacks.
Mr. Music
> WELL, now! That changes EVERYTHING. Now, nobody thinks
> you're really a clueless boor who must be sour and bitter
> because you never really made it in radio (bet his "very
> senior director" is really RadioUnRealist).
>
> You know, if you didn't constantly put such a huge target on
> yourself, it wouldn't be any fun dangling the sugar cube in
> front of your nose so often.
>
OldiesCat-
It's posts like this that make you so uncredible and immature.
Can't you take the truth and understand it without twisting everyone's words just because you are always on the attack? If you don't want to hear truth and really what goes on in Pittsburgh, then don't even bother reading our posts. Be a man, and move on.
Better yet,please move on to someone else's forum. You're immaturity is really old now and you have contributed NOTHING to this forum but your assanine comments and attacks.
Mr. Music
R
Radio_Realist
Guest
Re: wasting time
> Thanks for the "D", am-fm.
>
Not that I owe you any explanations about how market testing works, but for everyone else, this is one of the methods marketers use for testing.
A large group of people is brought into a test facility with the understanding they'll be participating in a compensated marketing test. This isn't all that much different from the auditorium testing you radio folks use to test songs.
The test subjects are asked to fill out a questionaire, and then to remain in the room until they are called for. The questionaire only takes a few minutes, but the subjects are left waiting for as long as 45 minutes. A recording of programming from the station being tested is played in the room as background music, at a level comfortable to listen to. The subjects are video taped, and the tapes studied to tell from body language and other cues how intently the subjects are listening to the recording of the radio station. Do they unconsciously tap their feet to the music. Do they hum along. Do they pause in what they're doing when the DJ starts talking.
In the recorded sample, some of the real commercials are replaced with test commercials. After the first segment of the test is done, the subjects then fill out a questionaire that includes references to the commericals and songs played during the tests. On these tests, some radio stations prompt very high retention of what is played, others prompt very low recall. 3WS was one of the worst for audience recall.
Another method is to video tape crowds at events like home and garden shows. A different radio station is played for about an hour, and all people walking past a certain point are taped. Then, these tapes are also studied for body language cues to see how intently people are listening.
These are not the only means of testing. But they are two of them. Those of you who defend 300 song playlists because those songs "tested well" have no leg to stand on if you wish to complain about your stations being tested in a similar manner.
These testing methods are not new, or secret, or high-tech. But they do work.
> Note below this new, secret, high-tech way they must do
> ratings in Pittsburgh- it's the "show of hands" method, the
> new successor to the diary and PPM. How HAVE they kept it a
> secret from the rest of the radio industry this long?
>
> ("I've seen 'some' focus group test results"- OK, sure. The
> desperation continues).
>
>
> > fewer and fewer people LISTEN to 3WS, even though
> > they continue to check the boxes in their diaries. Even
> those
> > who keep their radios tuned in to 3WS don't LISTEN to it
> > anymore, they just leave it on as background noise. I've
> > seen some focus group test results that indicate that 3WS
> > listeners are among the worst at recalling what was played
>
> > on that station, even though they always had it turned on.
>
> Thanks for the "D", am-fm.
>
Not that I owe you any explanations about how market testing works, but for everyone else, this is one of the methods marketers use for testing.
A large group of people is brought into a test facility with the understanding they'll be participating in a compensated marketing test. This isn't all that much different from the auditorium testing you radio folks use to test songs.
The test subjects are asked to fill out a questionaire, and then to remain in the room until they are called for. The questionaire only takes a few minutes, but the subjects are left waiting for as long as 45 minutes. A recording of programming from the station being tested is played in the room as background music, at a level comfortable to listen to. The subjects are video taped, and the tapes studied to tell from body language and other cues how intently the subjects are listening to the recording of the radio station. Do they unconsciously tap their feet to the music. Do they hum along. Do they pause in what they're doing when the DJ starts talking.
In the recorded sample, some of the real commercials are replaced with test commercials. After the first segment of the test is done, the subjects then fill out a questionaire that includes references to the commericals and songs played during the tests. On these tests, some radio stations prompt very high retention of what is played, others prompt very low recall. 3WS was one of the worst for audience recall.
Another method is to video tape crowds at events like home and garden shows. A different radio station is played for about an hour, and all people walking past a certain point are taped. Then, these tapes are also studied for body language cues to see how intently people are listening.
These are not the only means of testing. But they are two of them. Those of you who defend 300 song playlists because those songs "tested well" have no leg to stand on if you wish to complain about your stations being tested in a similar manner.
These testing methods are not new, or secret, or high-tech. But they do work.
> Note below this new, secret, high-tech way they must do
> ratings in Pittsburgh- it's the "show of hands" method, the
> new successor to the diary and PPM. How HAVE they kept it a
> secret from the rest of the radio industry this long?
>
> ("I've seen 'some' focus group test results"- OK, sure. The
> desperation continues).
>
>
> > fewer and fewer people LISTEN to 3WS, even though
> > they continue to check the boxes in their diaries. Even
> those
> > who keep their radios tuned in to 3WS don't LISTEN to it
> > anymore, they just leave it on as background noise. I've
> > seen some focus group test results that indicate that 3WS
> > listeners are among the worst at recalling what was played
>
> > on that station, even though they always had it turned on.
>
O
OldiesCat
Guest
time
What the heck is "market testing"?
There's:
* music testing (via phone or in auditorium settings)
* focus groups
* audience measurement (Arbitron)
Only the last one is used for determining how many people listen to what radio station.
And THAT is the sole subject I've been attempting to discuss. But it's OK if you want to continue to flail away aimlessly, hoping something will stick.
What the heck is "market testing"?
There's:
* music testing (via phone or in auditorium settings)
* focus groups
* audience measurement (Arbitron)
Only the last one is used for determining how many people listen to what radio station.
And THAT is the sole subject I've been attempting to discuss. But it's OK if you want to continue to flail away aimlessly, hoping something will stick.
R
Radio_Realist
Guest
Re: time
> What the heck is "market testing"?
It is testing the elements of a marketing campaign, including the message (ad content and "creative" elements), the offer (special price points, etc.), the best target market for the product (demographic, psycographics, lifestyle issues, etc.), and everything else that goes into a successful marketing campaign. Choosing which radio station to use (or whether to use radio or something else) is one little part of the entire process.
> There's:
>
> * music testing (via phone or in auditorium settings)
> * focus groups
> * audience measurement (Arbitron)
>
> Only the last one is used for determining how many people
> listen to what radio station.
>
> And THAT is the sole subject I've been attempting to
> discuss. But it's OK if you want to continue to flail away
> aimlessly, hoping something will stick.
Then why did you launch this thread with these words?
"anybody got any inside info on the sudden PD change at 3WS? Gillespe seemed to be doing a great job with the station."
That is the ENTIRE text of your launch post that started your original thread. YOU DIDN'T ASK ABOUT RATINGS. YOU DIDN'T EVEN MENTION RATINGS.
All you said was that "Gillespe seemed to be doing a great job". I know that I am not a psychic. I presume that Mrmusic isn't, either. Therefore, how in hell were we supposed to know that your question that referred only to "doing a great job" was only limited to ratings, and was supposed to exclude all other factors that anyone who knew diddly-squat about business would properly include under the general heading "doing a great job".
If you only wanted to talk about ratings, then you should have said so in your original thread launch post. And even if you only wanted to talk about ratings, you're not the administrator or moderator or grand Poobah of the Pittsburgh radio discussion forum, so if those of us who are actually active in Pittsburgh media want to expand the scope of the discussion to include those other factors in a discussion of whether or not a Pittsburgh PD was "doing a great job" at a Pittsburgh radio station, it's not your place to tell us we aren't allowed.
You asked for inside information about Gillespie, and you got it. It wasn't what you wanted to hear, so you made an ass out of yourself. Why don't you find someplace to discuss topics that you DO know something about, and stop making a pest of yourself in the Pittsburgh forum?
I'm still waiting for you to back up your claim that radio is "the original form of show business", which means that you don't consider playing a musical instrument or singing for a living part of "show business", nor is the theatre, or movies, or vaudeville, or any of the other forms of entertainment that the rest of the world considers "show business".
You made that claim in your post: "Re: true wannabe [re: Radio Realist]".
So, care to explain that one to us all?
> What the heck is "market testing"?
It is testing the elements of a marketing campaign, including the message (ad content and "creative" elements), the offer (special price points, etc.), the best target market for the product (demographic, psycographics, lifestyle issues, etc.), and everything else that goes into a successful marketing campaign. Choosing which radio station to use (or whether to use radio or something else) is one little part of the entire process.
> There's:
>
> * music testing (via phone or in auditorium settings)
> * focus groups
> * audience measurement (Arbitron)
>
> Only the last one is used for determining how many people
> listen to what radio station.
>
> And THAT is the sole subject I've been attempting to
> discuss. But it's OK if you want to continue to flail away
> aimlessly, hoping something will stick.
Then why did you launch this thread with these words?
"anybody got any inside info on the sudden PD change at 3WS? Gillespe seemed to be doing a great job with the station."
That is the ENTIRE text of your launch post that started your original thread. YOU DIDN'T ASK ABOUT RATINGS. YOU DIDN'T EVEN MENTION RATINGS.
All you said was that "Gillespe seemed to be doing a great job". I know that I am not a psychic. I presume that Mrmusic isn't, either. Therefore, how in hell were we supposed to know that your question that referred only to "doing a great job" was only limited to ratings, and was supposed to exclude all other factors that anyone who knew diddly-squat about business would properly include under the general heading "doing a great job".
If you only wanted to talk about ratings, then you should have said so in your original thread launch post. And even if you only wanted to talk about ratings, you're not the administrator or moderator or grand Poobah of the Pittsburgh radio discussion forum, so if those of us who are actually active in Pittsburgh media want to expand the scope of the discussion to include those other factors in a discussion of whether or not a Pittsburgh PD was "doing a great job" at a Pittsburgh radio station, it's not your place to tell us we aren't allowed.
You asked for inside information about Gillespie, and you got it. It wasn't what you wanted to hear, so you made an ass out of yourself. Why don't you find someplace to discuss topics that you DO know something about, and stop making a pest of yourself in the Pittsburgh forum?
I'm still waiting for you to back up your claim that radio is "the original form of show business", which means that you don't consider playing a musical instrument or singing for a living part of "show business", nor is the theatre, or movies, or vaudeville, or any of the other forms of entertainment that the rest of the world considers "show business".
You made that claim in your post: "Re: true wannabe [re: Radio Realist]".
So, care to explain that one to us all?
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.