Quote Originally Posted by DavidEduardo View Post


This is a math problem where we are missing key data to solve an equation.

In this case, Nielsen does not give us separate AM and translator data... it's all combined and can't be broken out.

So we have a question about how much the translator contributes, but we also have the variables of programming, competition and even the geography of the Nielsen sample. Some of these are specific, but others are very subjective and can't be quantified.

If you try to evaluate the sports situation you described, we need to examine things like how well local teams were doing during the period under evaluation, the changes in each station's talent and focus, and all the resulting nuances, along with the addition of a translator.

And a translator can be used simply to move an existing audience to FM, or to expand listening because of the preference for FM or in cases such as a highly directional AM, a daytime AM or a low-power high-dial AM that actually covers less than the translator.

If you take all those factors into account, you can do your own "was it worth it" evaluation.

Oh, and don't forget that many advertisers will think that it's a "better deal" if there is an FM in the package because most people understand that AM is not used by many, as Mr Turner has well described in a prior post.
Ok, you raise several good points that I'll try my best to break down one by one.
1. In the case of the Portland sports station, I think the only team in question would be the Timbers, though Seattle Seahawks might contribute as well. The last time I looked at Portland's ratings though the Seahawks hadn't started preseason yet, and though I think the Timbers are doing pretty well, I admit I don't follow sports much, except when it comes to baseball, and that's not really a factor here since the Mariners are on Entercom's second sports station.
2. As far as content, I know when Entercom ditched CBS sports for ESPN, KXTG ditched NBC for CBS, and they have made some local changes as well, not sure how well those were doing.
3. I would think with some marketing, even simply pointing out the fm, you'd see some kind of bump in the ratings. Let's say their's a sports station running 300 watts at 1580 that's highly directional. Its average rating over the past year has been a 0.7, then they get a translator and start identifying it on air. Over the next six months, the average rating has bumped up to a 1.3. I would think that bump would be significant enough to attribute to the translator, even if we can't get data directly about how the translator does itself. It is numbers like that that I was hoping for, and that I have not seen since these translators have signed on.