radio was great when there was one owner per station - Page 3
Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 88

Thread: radio was great when there was one owner per station

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidEduardo View Post

    And nobody is really complaining about playlist size.
    Exactly. The facts are very consistent. The formats that are consistently near or at the top of all 6+ ratings lists are the classic hits and classic rock stations. Nobody is complaining. In a world where choices abound, and personal music systems are cheap, people still choose to listen to the radio in very large numbers.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by oldies76 View Post
    Don't need to turn back the clock, just implement retro / old school styles and methods of programming once again. Or do it as a special segment. Not rocket science.
    Yeah....um, no. I understand there will be examples of “retro”businesses here and there, but by and large, modern wins. Times change, tastes change, people change.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    609
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidEduardo View Post


    If you think that going back to the "style" of yesteryear will help stations reach 25-54 year old listeners, you are wrong.

    And nobody is really complaining about playlist size. "They play the same songs over and over" really means "they play too many songs I don't like" and you would discover this within a couple of interviews if you did real market research.

    And in any case, we can go back to the 60's and 70's and find that tight playlists of broadly popular songs always won.

    The perfect example is with the very wide, very personal play habits of progressive rock jocks in the late 60's and early 70's: along came Abrams with Superstars AOR and nearly every one of those stations either tightened up or changed format. The few stations that had carved a niche for progressive rock that did hang on, like KMET, gradually declined and then went away unless they severely tightened the list.
    This reminds me of when I was a kid, at that age when you first discover a radio station that's "your radio station." All my classmates did this around the same time of course and, also of course, our station was WCAU-FM. I can't remember which tagline we used to mock but there was a very generic liner that said something along the lines of "Playing All The Hits" and we super-cool kids would roll our eyes and follow up with "Over and Over and Over!" But you know what? It never occurred to us to change the station.

    People like to complain. We all want more variety until we get it. And then it's like "No, no, no. That's not what I meant!"

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    1,640
    Isn't that the truth Miguelito! That song you hadn't heard in years and that song that I hadn't heard in years that we both would love to hear on the radio are likely songs that would make us change the station if mine played who you listened or yours played while I was listening. Once you reach beyond the the proverbial same old songs, that group of listeners scatter in to hundreds of groups that tend not to like what the other groups like. The deeper the playlist goes, the smaller the audience gets.

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBigA View Post
    Nobody is complaining. In a world where choices abound, and personal music systems are cheap, people still choose to listen to the radio in very large numbers.
    Well yeah, the people you survey from and approve all these songs in auditoriums most likely will not complain. It's the other 99% that will. In other words, average listeners wanting more and music fans craving for different ideas.
    Celebrating 63 Years of Rock & Roll Memories!

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by oldies76 View Post
    Well yeah, the people you survey from and approve all these songs in auditoriums most likely will not complain. It's the other 99% that will. In other words, average listeners wanting more and music fans craving for different ideas.
    What are you talking about? The testing people are not the same people who provide data for ratings. Two very different groups.

    However, if you have actual documented and authoritative studies that support your views, I'd love to see it. As I've said many times, if people crave different songs, all they have to do is change the station. Perhaps sample the music from a different format, or maybe listen to some current hits. That would satisfy their craving. At the same time, if they like rare or unusual songs, there are lots of other places they can go. None of those other places attract the size of audiences the typical classic hits FM station is getting.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    1,640
    I got it Oldies76: the successful business model is to do radio for only 1% because 1% will surely produce the results to warrant businesses to lay down big bucks for commercials over and over. Just think, I've been doing it all wrong for decades. I was trying for the biggest audience I could. Please share the study that shows this.

  8. #28
    Moderator/Co-Administrator
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    37,783
    Quote Originally Posted by oldies76 View Post
    Well yeah, the people you survey from and approve all these songs in auditoriums most likely will not complain. It's the other 99% that will. In other words, average listeners wanting more and music fans craving for different ideas.
    The people who participate in Auditorium Music Tests (which are actually hardly ever done in auditoriums anymore... they often are done online) are a subset of the full 6+ universe that Nielsen samples for the radio ratings.

    A music test sample is made up of people who listen to a particular station, format or segment of the musical spectrum. They are recruited in a very, very similar manner to the recruiting for the ratings, but only the people who listen or might listen are invited to participate. And they are well paid for taking part.

    People with very niche tastes are excluded, as are those who are partisans of other types of music or other stations. There are lots of the latter, but very few who might like a certain genre but not use stations in that format. In any case, only those who listen and who listen quite a bit are asked to participate.

    Radio is not interested in those "outliers"... for example, people who might like classic hits but who don't like the songs "everybody agrees on"... but there really are nearly none of those. We know this because in the recruiting for a music tests, records are kept of both the recruits and the rejects as understanding why certain people don't qualify may be good strategic information. Were there a large opportunity, stations all over would find it. They don't.

    Your idea that there is a huge group of unsatisfied listeners is undocumented because there are no facts to support your idea.
    www.americanradiohistory.com
    Broadcasting Magazine and Yearbooks, Billboard, Cash Box, R&R, Record World, Music & Media, Audio, Television/Radio Age, R&R, Duncan's American Radio, Popular Electronics, Studio Sound, Broadcast Engineering, db, and more.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by oldies76 View Post
    Well yeah, the people you survey from and approve all these songs in auditoriums most likely will not complain. It's the other 99% that will. In other words, average listeners wanting more and music fans craving for different ideas.
    That’s beyond absurd.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    609
    Quote Originally Posted by AbrahamJSimpson View Post
    That’s beyond absurd.
    Boop.

Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




     
Our Conferences
Useful Contacts
Community


Contact Us