• 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

NOW, NY vs AMP, LA (curious question)

J

Jeffrey

Star Participant
CBS launched both new CHR's in the 2 biggest markets within several months of eachother to take on their competitor's CHR stations.

As of now AMP is doing quite well and has taken a bite out of KIIS in LA. AMP has good delivery, a standard CHR playlist, albeit rhythmic.

NOW, albeit trending slightly upward has not made much of a dent in the market. The playlist while somewhat more rythmic than Z100 has one of the tightest playlists I've ever heard, has a midmarket sounding delivery and seems to be geared towards the suburbs.

My question would be is why has CBS clearly invested more in AMP than NOW?
 
Jeffrey said:
My question would be is why has CBS clearly invested more in AMP than NOW?
Click to expand...

Simple... LA is a va$tly bigger radio market.
 
Isn't New York market #1?
If CBS invested in NOW like they did with AMP, NOW would be near Z100's ratings.
They should have just called it AMP in New York, and maybe struck a cross promotion deal with PepsiCo and their Amp energy drink brand.
 
One has to wonder if all the Z100 bashing has anything to do with it. Sure, NOW's music is hotter and fresher but when you make a Z100 listener feel stupid for listening to that station, I don't imagine that helps win listeners over. Meantime, the AMP bashing of KIIS-FM's legendary commercial breaks is a different story. No listener will get pissed off that you're bragging about less spots.
 
Nick said:
Isn't New York market #1?
Click to expand...

Not in billings, where it lags LA significantly. And that is why I said LA is "va$tly" bigger.
 
I think some of AMP's success could be attributed to the PD, Kevin Wetherly, who was already successful there with KROQ. He moved established KROQ jock Stryker to afternoon drive on AMP.
 
NY Top 40 historically has 'fans of the brand',more than anywhere else;
Z100 people aren't going anywhere else anytime soon...
 
DavidEduardo said:
Jeffrey said:
My question would be is why has CBS clearly invested more in AMP than NOW?
Click to expand...

Simple... LA is a va$tly bigger radio market.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't a station going directly up against power house Z100 try and actually compete rather than create another CBS train wreck in New York? The playlist is incredibly tight and while they might not be seeking top air talent surely they can do better. Pulse has and they have NO money.
I don't see how anyone listening to NOW could continue for more than an hour...it's that bad in my opinion.
You can practially guess which of the "10" songs in rotation will be playing when you tune in.
 
Jeffrey said:
I don't see how anyone listening to NOW could continue for more than an hour...it's that bad in my opinion.
You can practially guess which of the "10" songs in rotation will be playing when you tune in.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that there are factors Now alone is aware of. So all this is conjecture.

But, launches where a very short list is used for many months have been successful. in the PPM, the average length of a listening (average, not mean or median) is less than a quarter hour. One might consider the possibility that Now believes it can form a base by being where to go for the power hits. CBS certainly called the right play for CBS-FM in the PPM; they may have a strategy with Now.

Or, they may have to push the reset button. In the package good field, 70% or more of new products fail, so P&G is considered the gold standard because only half of all new launches fail for them. Why do we expect success at every turn in radio? Maybe because when there is a failure, we can blame consolidation and suits?
 
Jeffrey said:
DavidEduardo said:
Jeffrey said:
My question would be is why has CBS clearly invested more in AMP than NOW?
Click to expand...

Simple... LA is a va$tly bigger radio market.
Click to expand...
I don't see how anyone listening to NOW could continue for more than an hour...it's that bad in my opinion.
You can practially guess which of the "10" songs in rotation will be playing when you tune in.
Click to expand...
Radio, today, is for the people who listen to it for 10 mins., not 10 hours. Especially Top 40, since it is a format that is set to run on a smaller amount of songs than other formats. Top 40 is set on repetition and market research. So the songs that they find that people like, they'll play. NOW is swearing this by the book.
 
Bad personalities(lisa paige and Chunky) and Z100 bashing doesn't give the first time listener with a good impression. Now:s two biggest misstakes IMO are adding personalities too early and bashing Z100 too much. I know that AMP waited longer until they started to add on-air personalities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom