• 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

Do "Geezers" Make Terrestrial Radio Look Good?

T

TheFonz

A Bridge Ratings Survey survey done in 2007 seems to suggest that terrestrial radio listeners 55+ have strong loyality and still listen in great numbers. In fact, the survey says, these listeners have compensated for the lack of interest in radio by the 12-21 group (the group advertisers would like to have in a few years). We're told that 55+ doesn't make money for radio. But are they making radio look good by inflating the listening numbers? Here's the survey:

http://www.bridgeratings.com/press.05.16.07.Gaunlet.htm
 
TheFonz said:
A Bridge Ratings Survey survey done in 2007 seems to suggest that terrestrial radio listeners 55+ have strong loyality and still listen in great numbers. In fact, the survey says, these listeners have compensated for the lack of interest in radio by the 12-21 group (the group advertisers would like to have in a few years). We're told that 55+ doesn't make money for radio. But are they making radio look good by inflating the listening numbers?
Click to expand...

The only ratings numbers that radio cares about are those b etween 18 and 54. The doings of the 12-17 or 55+ are not considered by stations, buyers at agencies or clients. So whatever happens outside 18-54 neither makes radio look good nor bad. Your point is irrevant.

Again, the 12+ ratings numbers (which are actually share and not ratings) are so worthless that Arbitron gives them away and the radio stations that pay for the ratings don't care. Nobody at the agency level uses them for anything.
 
DavidEduardo what of the 25-54 set; have they tuned out yet?
kt
 
I'd recommend that everyone in radio management read & digest the research series "The Infinite Dial" produced by Arbitron and Edison Research. The 2008 edition shows 22 percent of the 12-17 demo spending "less time with over-the-air radio specifically due to time spent with iPod/Other portable MP3 player," and 17 percent of the 18-24 demo. That drops to 12 percent in 25-34, and 9 percent in both 35-44 and 45-54. Arbitron also tracks listening trends among specific demos on their arbitron.com website. Track cume rating (percentage of the population using radio) and TSL and you'll see the same thing. The youngest demos show the most erosion; the oldest show the least erosion.

In the short term, radio will most likely focus more attention on the 35-54 demo to stay in the agency buys; smaller markets can focus on 45-64 and still generate good response for direct clients. Focusing on 18-24 and even 18-34/25-34 is risky; 12-24 is a true crapshoot.

In the long term, though, radio absolutely must dedicate at least some of its resources to legitimate market research on younger demos and respond appropriately (give them what they want--whatever that is) or the industry will inevitably continue this "death spiral" it is currently engaged in.
 
ratingsgeek said:
In the short term, radio will most likely focus more attention on the 35-54 demo to stay in the agency buys; smaller markets can focus on 45-64 and still generate good response for direct clients. Focusing on 18-24 and even 18-34/25-34 is risky; 12-24 is a true crapshoot.
Click to expand...

Funny, in LA three of the top in 12+ in the market are pure 18-34 plays, KROQ, KIIS, and KSCA.

12-17 and 12-24 are not common, to say the least, sales demos.
 
Obviously every market is different.

As an example, I've been in college markets where the bulk of stations were focused on 18-24, splitting that slice of humanity to ribbons while allowing the relative handful of 25-54 stations to skate off with the big shares and big money.

And I've been in Southern markets where so many stations were chasing the country and urban audiences--again, slicing them into tiny shares--that so-so rockers and ACs waltzed off with the big shares.

How many of LA's 80 signals are focused 18-34? How many are focused on 25-54 or older? Might make an interesting study...
 
ratingsgeek said:
How many of LA's 80 signals are focused 18-34? How many are focused on 25-54 or older? Might make an interesting study...
Click to expand...

First, there are only a handful of viable stations compared to the 87 licensed to the metro.... maybe 25 to 28 in fact. Of these, only a couple of AMs are viable, and are mostly targeted at 45+ or, at least, that's what they get.

Of the FMs, we have none targeted 12-17 or 12-24.

The main 18-34s are Power, KSCA, KBUE, KSSE, Kiss, KBIG, KROQ, Indie (semi-viable) and KXOL.
In 35-40, the bigest players are Jack, KROQ, KIIS, KOST, KLVE, KSCA, KBIG, KRTH, KÑPS and KTCD

Several of thse are 25-44 plays, like KBIG and KLVE, so they show both places. KROQ is just broad.

55+ winners (they win a hard sell) KFI, KRTH, KUSC, KFWB, KKGO, KTWV, KABC, KOST, KNX.

Since there are 100 shares in each demo, and even the tighter demos I have not mentioned,, there is a tendency to level off with the same number of stations competing in each segment since the low players will eventually move.
 
DavidEduardo said:
ratingsgeek said:
How many of LA's 80 signals are focused 18-34? How many are focused on 25-54 or older? Might make an interesting study...
Click to expand...

First, there are only a handful of viable stations compared to the 87 licensed to the metro.... maybe 25 to 28 in fact. Of these, only a couple of AMs are viable, and are mostly targeted at 45+ or, at least, that's what they get.

Of the FMs, we have none targeted 12-17 or 12-24.

The main 18-34s are Power, KSCA, KBUE, KSSE, Kiss, KBIG, KROQ, Indie (semi-viable) and KXOL.
In 35-40, the bigest players are Jack, KROQ, KIIS, KOST, KLVE, KSCA, KBIG, KRTH, KÑPS and KTCD

Several of thse are 25-44 plays, like KBIG and KLVE, so they show both places. KROQ is just broad.

55+ winners (they win a hard sell) KFI, KRTH, KUSC, KFWB, KKGO, KTWV, KABC, KOST, KNX.

Since there are 100 shares in each demo, and even the tighter demos I have not mentioned,, there is a tendency to level off with the same number of stations competing in each segment since the low players will eventually move.
Click to expand...

Well, it could be that the Edison/Arbitron research is just wrong. Or it could be that the LA market is very different from the rest (or most) of the United States. Or it could be that no matter what anyone says, you will be right.

Maybe all of the above.

Here's a hint, though. That word "viable" is a loaded one. All of those 60+ "unviable" stations have audiences, and collectively they have impact not readily apparent when only "viable" stations are counted.

Just for fun, what is the collective share and/or cume of those 60-or-so stations beyond the Big 27/28?

Wait. I almost forgot #3 on my list. You will be right, no matter what.
 
ratingsgeek said:
First, there are only a handful of viable stations compared to the 87 licensed to the metro.... maybe 25 to 28 in fact. Of these, only a couple of AMs are viable, and are mostly targeted at 45+ or, at least, that's what they get.

Here's a hint, though. That word "viable" is a loaded one. All of those 60+ "unviable" stations have audiences, and collectively they have impact not readily apparent when only "viable" stations are counted.

Just for fun, what is the collective share and/or cume of those 60-or-so stations beyond the Big 27/28?
Click to expand...

There are 87 stations licensed to the LA market. Only 51 show up in the ratings, meaning the others do not meat minimum requirements of a cume of 0.05% of the 12+ population. If you look at the fact that there is one trombo and two simulcast combos, that means 55 stations are "in" the ratings, as combo data is inseparable.

Of the 51 (and simulcasts) I said the significant or viable ones are about 25 to 28, with some of the ones inside this group being flipper candidates if they are a major facility with lousy numbers.

For this purpose, the only measure of the bottom stations from 29 to 51 is share, which is additive. You ought to know, if you are in criticism mode, that raw cume is not additive as nearly every stations shares its cume with dozens or more other stations and is thus duplicated every which way. Share, being the product of each station's cume and TSL, is the best measure of overall performance.

The shares on the stations ranked 29 to 51 are... may I have the envelope, please?... 12.6 % of market 12+ listening for 22 stations. On the other side, there are 15.1 shares among the first three station in share rank, alone.

Outside the top ones, you find stations that need a new format, like Movin, and stations that just made a change in hopes of improvement, like KSWD. Of course, their facility is viable yet their format at present is not.
 
DavidEduardo said:
The shares on the stations ranked 29 to 51 are... may I have the envelope, please?... 12.6 % of market 12+ listening for 22 stations. On the other side, there are 15.1 shares among the first three station in share rank, alone.
Click to expand...

Hey, thanks for taking the time to do the math.

So much of this has to do with perspective. Most radio people--even in LA--would be shocked at the notion that the share for stations #29-#51 is double that of KIIS.
 
Oh I think the short answer is.......YES! Us Geeeezers make Terrestrial Radio Look Good
 
mightymoose said:
Oh I think the short answer is.......YES! Us Geeeezers make Terrestrial Radio Look Good
Click to expand...

No way. Advertising time buyers who look at ratings don't even look at anything that is not inside the 18 to 54 year old spread.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom