F
FredLeonard
Guest
Something like "Monitor?" That was NIS.
To public radio what USA Today is to the Times? That's what Merlin tried.
-
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
Something like "Monitor?" That was NIS.
To public radio what USA Today is to the Times? That's what Merlin tried.
A
Avid Listener
Guest
Who, or what, is "Merlin"?
And, I stand by my frequently posted opinion that an idea executed well can succeed while the same idea executed poorly will fail. The fact that a poorly executed plan fails doesn't prove that the plan is bad, it only proves that the plan was poorly executed.
Before anyone responds with, "But the people who tried and failed were 'experts'", expertise or prior track record doesn't make anyone immune to poorly executing a good plan.
F
FredLeonard
Guest
What's Merlin? You haven't been paying attention. They got a lot of discussion, here and elsewhere. In brief, Merlin Media tried an FM all news format, heavy on features like USA Today, in Chicago and New York about three years ago.
"An idea executed well can succeed." The operative word is "can." No guarantees of success. And some flawed executions have managed to make it. Even more often, a plan will succeed in one instance and fail in others (with the same "execution"). Radio "experts" are always certain but in fact it's often not possible to determine why. Radio is a crap shoot, more than most fields.
What was the gospel station pulling? And more importantly, what was it billing?
According to this article, gospel was cannibalizing their AC audience, and not delivering enough revenue.
http://mikemcguff.blogspot.com/2011/11/why-news-92-is-taking-over-praise-921.html
I've seen reports that Radio One is more encouraged by revenues in the news format, but at greatly increased costs. In the latest earnings conference call, they said the Houston market in particular dragged down the over all performance of the company, with a 9% drop.
A
Avid Listener
Guest
That explains it. I didn't live in Chicago or New York about three years ago, nor did I participate in this forum at that time.
To be a good plan, local considerations must be part of the plan. Executing an identical plan in two different locations means that it's right for one location, but probably not for another. I wouldn't call radio a crap shoot so much as I'd call it blackjack. Luck plays a major role, but a good card counter can adjust the odds in his favor. The trouble is more radio "experts" are simply people who've been lucky more often than others. or who stuck with it longer instead of moving on.
It got up to about a 3 share 12+ in 2008, and then slowly declined to about a 2.5. Billings reached $5 million, and are now around $4 million in news. However, their Urban AC is up a little bit since the Gospel format flipped, making it about even on revenue but with higher expenses.
I liked FM News 101.9. Almost had a gig there as a newswriter right before they flipped. I think that format, done well, could succeed given a proper amount of time.
Last edited:
- Status