I feel like I've asked this before but...

DavidEduardo said:

AFTRA does not understand how much the separate fees for the same programming on different platforms hurts radio.

Click to expand...

As a former member of AFTRA, I can tell you that they don't care how much it hurts radio. They're an advocacy group for their membership, and that's all they care about. They took a stand based on the idea that their membership supports an additional performance right for labels and artists. That's all they care about. This is not negotiable.

DavidEduardo said:

This is not a congressional matter... it is essentially a labor negotiation.

Click to expand...

Of course it's a Congressional matter, because the RIAA has taken their performance right to Congress. They have refused to negotiate as a group with the NAB. But everyone knows where everyone stands here. Radio has made its point clear. But that's what the standoff is all about.

I was thinking about this more last evening.. If one weighs the pros and cons to allowing spots to be heard potentially well outside the intended market, even outside the U.S., then all the cons completely outweigh the pros of a handful of radio hobbyists who would like to hear the spots as if listening to the station locally. For one thing call me greedy, but if I voice a spot that is scheduled to run in certain markets but that spot is carried to many other places, I absolutely want to get paid for all those other markets and places.

I don't think much has changed since back when I did VO's, but it's a tough way to make a living, with lots of rejection and dry spells before landing a spot that runs regionally or in several markets. Unless you're a Mel Blanc or Thom Sharpe who have (had) agencies and studios banging down your door with an agent taking their 15-20% off the top, the vast majority work hard to get that job.

The other consideration is what's included in the buy. For example; Macy's may run a regional buy to sell say.. a certain brand and model of mattresses. Macy's has the stock of mattresses already in a warehouse in Spokane, so the offer at that price is only on sale where they are motivated to sell at that price. However, someone in Fresno is listening to the spot offered in the Seattle-Tacoma market via a stream and trots down to Macy's for that same deal. You can see where things get complicated all the way to the consumer level.

Kelly A said:

For one thing call me greedy, but if I voice a spot that is scheduled to run in certain markets but that spot is carried to many other places, I absolutely want to get paid for all those other markets and places.

Click to expand...

It depends on what you're being paid for. Geography or a service. The service is the same regardless of the geography. If you look at it from the advertiser's point of view, they may not get any sales from your spot airing in outside markets, so why should they pay for it?

While online listening can be anywhere in the world, the vast majority of online listening is to local/area streams versus stations in other areas of the country. You might disagree but that's why you're here. The typical listener tends to be local. To prevent out of market listening, some stations use "geo-fencing" so they don't pay for listeners out of their region. I've asked hundreds of people in the past few years that listen in the office and that listen online with a good 80% or more choosing a local station followed by the personal music library. Less than 1 in 20 listen to distant radio, usually a listener supported station and mostly within the state. When I asked, most say it was the station they listened to driving to work or they wanted to feel 'connected' to the community. (Literally, a jock I used to work with and I decided to ask everyone we came across that we knew worked in an open office if they listened and compare notes...all results from Houston).

The talent fee you are paid is just that. You either agree to the terms or not. If both parties don't agree, there's no deal. No matter what the standard rates are, etc., both parties must agree, so it is less about standard rate and more about both parties being okay with the deal.

I know some national advertisers do regional campaigns but more often than not, it is a national campaign. If you saw an ad on TV on WGN, for example, and were watching via cable TV in Boise, you, as a viewer, would likely understand it might not apply to the Boise market as well (sure some wouldn't have a clue and many of those folks tend not to have a clue about many things). Or the advertiser might have the local ad only air on the over the air TV and the national ad airing via cable. When I was in a small town watching TV stations 150 miles away from me I assumed the price was good only in that city, not locally, feeling I had to drive to that city to get that product at that price.

I doubt many listeners want to hear the commercials online but the lack of only makes monetizing the stream more difficult. I think radio would welcome running commercials even though it might lead to paying more to stream. As my owner once said, it is much easier to spread your money around when you are making it. His point is when you make a dollar pieces of it go somewhere and as long as you make more dollars, the extra portion you shell out is okay because you make more...simply a truism in business.

Yes, VO is a very tough way to make a living and few really can without at least another job to count on. Radio is much the same way. A few rise to the top, some are too stubborn to change careers and stay in the business but most never get past the first few years before doing something else. Many career paths are that way but what seems to make VO work so difficult is it seems to be less about ability as much as what they want at that moment which seems to be a bit of an unknown. That makes it scary because you can't really control your career by learning something new or getting more experience like you can in other lines of work.

b-turner said:

While online listening can be anywhere in the world, the vast majority of online listening is to local/area streams versus stations in other areas of the country. You might disagree but that's why you're here. The typical listener tends to be local.

Click to expand...

You have statistics to back that claim? I've not seen anything that would say any majority of stream listening is associated with their same local OTA radio station. Maybe David has data, but I don't think you can generalize across the board.

b-turner said:

To prevent out of market listening, some stations use "geo-fencing" so they don't pay for listeners out of their region.

Click to expand...

Geo-fencing restricts the entire stream from playing outside a particular geographic area. Streaming providers charge additional fees for geo-fencing. With the high cost and low return on traditional radio stations streaming already, I haven't heard of many stations or groups willing to pay that fee, just to play their spots on the web stream(s). It's cheaper to just cover the spot.

b-turner said:

I've asked hundreds of people in the past few years that listen in the office and that listen online with a good 80% or more choosing a local station followed by the personal music library. Less than 1 in 20 listen to distant radio, usually a listener supported station and mostly within the state. When I asked, most say it was the station they listened to driving to work or they wanted to feel 'connected' to the community. (Literally, a jock I used to work with and I decided to ask everyone we came across that we knew worked in an open office if they listened and compare notes...all results from Houston).

Click to expand...

Individuals doing informal office polls at work is not an indicator of domestic or overseas streamed listening habits.

b-turner said:

The talent fee you are paid is just that. You either agree to the terms or not. If both parties don't agree, there's no deal. No matter what the standard rates are, etc., both parties must agree, so it is less about standard rate and more about both parties being okay with the deal.

Click to expand...

As I mentioned prior, unless you are a major league voice actor there is no negotiation. If you have union representation as a voice over or voice actor, then AFTRA has already established the policy of how and how often you get paid. Royalties for per run are established up front for the geographic zone or markets that spot will air. There typically is no negotiation, you either take the job offered or someone else will and if the spot runs out of the geographic area, you as the talent, are being cheated, but to what gain? So people listening can hear some spots intended for the local market? The juice isn't worth the squeeze.

I explained how I conducted my research. It was informal. I'd be interested to see data on this. I have seen some stats from a few other stations and most all listening is within the state from what I've seen. Out of state and beyond was usually less than 10% and about 1% for one station (an LPFM). I can't say this is the norm but the difficulty it seems for steamers is awareness. There are so many out there and no place to find them all. If only there was a true directory...know of one?

Yes geofencing costs money but so do out of market listeners. The fact you might be able to cover the costs by airing spots may easily offset the cost especially if out of market listening is substantial. Anybody have some numbers? Certainly AFTRA has to be considered with this plan.

You are correct on negotiations. Radio really does need something to happen in this regard. From what I have observed, the trend is moving toward using a listening device other than an over the air radio receiver and that represents an issue for broadcasters to go beyond the commercial to make things work.

Then again, if online in market listening is there, and I would not believe only online listening is out of market, then the advertiser is not getting more, but less by spots not airing online. The rub is if those numbers are substantial enough and it seems not to be the case at this point.

I'm guessing that there are some companies that don't really care like Hubbard and Cox since they run everything. There are some groups that restrict their stream to within the market, most notably Alaska Integrated Media and Americom. What's also interesting is that when I tune into the stream for KHTP, I get the local spots, but they're completely blocked out if I tune into KALC.

b-turner said:

Yes geofencing costs money but so do out of market listeners. The fact you might be able to cover the costs by airing spots may easily offset the cost especially if out of market listening is substantial.

Click to expand...

When stations started streaming, there was the hope that out of market listening would grow quickly and that stations could eventually monetize that with some form of national advertising. So far that assumption hasn't panned out because few stations are so unique that they attract a national audience worth supporting of just the stream. For the rare few advertisers and stations that don't restrict their spots to the market sold-in, the station usually throws in the streamed spot to sweeten the OTA in-market deal. More likely from an advertiser perspective, its a given. This is sort of like the old days of station websites, where banner ads were comped to get the contract.

b-turner said:

Then again, if online in market listening is there, and I would not believe only online listening is out of market, then the advertiser is not getting more, but less by spots not airing online. The rub is if those numbers are substantial enough and it seems not to be the case at this point.

Click to expand...

That's the problem. So far, it isn't there.

Kelly A brings up an excellent point in that stations hoped to build a national audience that never panned out. I wonder if costs versus cost per thousand can make that happen.

Lots of stations do separate breaks from the on air signal. I even know of a few LPFMs that run commercial in their online stream and underwriting over the airwaves. I guess it is fairly common since the FCC has reportedly said complaints with recordings must me made of the over the air signal.

I've noticed a couple of streams where commercials were different, I am assuming, because levels are not the same. We use a $200 program to take care of this and are careful about audio levels.

For what it's worth, I have been surprised by the low numbers listening to the online signal versus the over the air signal. I looked at a few college online only stations figuring I might see a coming trend but found some stations that even aggressively promoted themselves struggled to get more than a .5 among the on campus student body.

Yeah, the levels and breaks being off are my big complaints about this. Why don't stations, if they don't run the main commercials, take care to make the transitions seemless?