Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 77

Thread: Holy cow, KROQ...

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBigA View Post
    I don't see it exactly that way. The larger radio corporations recognize the limitations of broadcast radio, and it's why they all are actively investing in other platforms. Platforms that have no limits, that have no regulations or restrictions, and platforms where they can at some point operate as subscription services rather than ad-supported operations.
    We have just seen some good examples of basic stagnation or mediocre attempts to improve the ratings and revenue. WPLJ would be a textbook case. We've talked about WKDF in Nashville having decades of fairly low numbers compared to what it could have been. Right now, they are on a temporary uptick. Revenues are good, but not great. I also understand that ratings vs. format don't always really matter when the right market is being served and bringing in more revenue than a hotter format that overall bills less my nit's nature.

    I may well be wrong, but when radio markets had more owners that took swings at each other, formats changed more often because single owners could not bury their losses in hundreds of stations and had to be proactive to survive. There have been few format changes in the Nashville market in a decade. But, I am not saying it is even a dramatic difference in today's radio world verses the 1980's or 1990's. But, I seem to recall some pretty amazing head-to-head fights that often had dramatic winners and beat up losers. Agree with you on the limitations and platforms. Again, I don't disagree, with where you see radio and other platforms trending.

    David - it's fun to read what you created. Seems like just yesterday!

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Tibbs4 View Post
    I seem to recall some pretty amazing head-to-head fights that often had dramatic winners and beat up losers.
    You don't think Cumulus & iHeart battle each other pretty hard for country share? Or Cumulus vs. Cromwell for sports?

    What I keep hearing is how the local ad market is shrinking compared to 30 years ago. That's where the problem is.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBigA View Post
    You don't think Cumulus & iHeart battle each other pretty hard for country share? Or Cumulus vs. Cromwell for sports?

    What I keep hearing is how the local ad market is shrinking compared to 30 years ago. That's where the problem is.
    Or maybe radio doesn't deliver the buyers (not to be confused with the listeners) the same way it did 30 years ago. Radio executives keep telling us how radio still has over 90% (or whatever percentage they are using these days) population usage. I won't deny their studied percentage, but I will say that people use radio much differently now than thirty years ago. Thirty years ago, radio was perceived as an entertainment source, similar to TV, movies, and live events. Now radio does not have that kind of usage. It is used as a background jukebox by young people and as for old people - STOP! Of course radio doesn't care about old people, Silly. You thought I was going to go there, didn't ya?

    But getting back to the kids, do you really think they are paying the same kind of attention to the radio as they are their devices? Have you seen any young people lately? It only makes sense that an ad that comes up on their device that they are paying attention to is going to have more of an effect than that background stuff they are not. This thread is about format, but formats come and go and evolve. What hasn't evolved is the radio itself. There is a reason that radio sticks now are only worth about half what they were a generation ago.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by ChannelFlipper View Post
    Or maybe radio doesn't deliver the buyers (not to be confused with the listeners) the same way it did 30 years ago.
    Depends on the format and demo. It's hard to generalize. People pay attention to what they want to pay attention to. That applies to other people as well as devices. Attention span is shorter, there's less fascination with the device of radio, more about the specific communication. So that's why radio stations have returned to hiring air talent. Every sales meeting is about getting the talent to talk about products. Then after a while, the listeners tune out. So its all much more complicated.

    As for station prices, the other side of that is conventional wisdom was stations were over-priced a generation ago. Buyers were fools to pay those prices. So you might say things are back to normal now.

  5. #25
    KROQ (and Los Angeles) was (and should be) cutting edge for alternative rock radio. To have stations in St. Louis and Kansas City show up as more progressive in this realm is fairly eye-opening. It would be interesting to dissect KROQ's programming logic and understand the hesitancy to not be more cutting edge.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBigA View Post
    Depends on the format and demo. It's hard to generalize. People pay attention to what they want to pay attention to. That applies to other people as well as devices. Attention span is shorter, there's less fascination with the device of radio, more about the specific communication. So that's why radio stations have returned to hiring air talent. Every sales meeting is about getting the talent to talk about products. Then after a while, the listeners tune out. So its all much more complicated.

    As for station prices, the other side of that is conventional wisdom was stations were over-priced a generation ago. Buyers were fools to pay those prices. So you might say things are back to normal now.
    But some of the generalization is the way that radio measures itself. I think the meter is a much better measure than the diary, but its weakness is that it treats all listening as equal. Whether one is in the car, where they probably are actively listening, or whether they hear a local station that they would otherwise not listen to simply because it is in the background when the meter-wearer walks into the local Subway to pick up a sub, the meter counts it all the same. It is not, no matter what they say, like (and I have seen this before) "subliminally, it doesn't matter, the brain hears what it hears". Sure it doesn't.

    Measure active listening more accurately, report those results to your commercial buyers, and then you will start getting at the root of the problem. But of course, established radio execs will never go for it - they got there on this system of smoke and mirrors and they aren't about to let something closer to the truth ruin their revenue model.

  7. #27
    Moderator/Co-Administrator
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    38,566
    Quote Originally Posted by adradio View Post
    KROQ (and Los Angeles) was (and should be) cutting edge for alternative rock radio. To have stations in St. Louis and Kansas City show up as more progressive in this realm is fairly eye-opening. It would be interesting to dissect KROQ's programming logic and understand the hesitancy to not be more cutting edge.
    First, being in LA is definitely not being in Kansas (City) any more. Ditto for St. Louis.

    LA is 60% ethnic, even more in the 18-49 demographics. Add in another 10% or so of first generation immigrants from places like Persia, Armenia and Russia and the Middle East and you have a huge group that significantly under-indexes in usage of rock and, particularly, alternative rock.

    Kansas City and St. Louis are barely 25% ethnic by comparison.

    Just those market facts should show why you can not expect the same kind of alternative rock performance in LA as you find in Missouri.
    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.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by ChannelFlipper View Post
    But some of the generalization is the way that radio measures itself.
    Keep in mind that the meter is just one way radio measures itself. I wouldn't put so much emphasis on it. Advertisers are ALWAYS measuring the ROI for the spots, and radio stations are active participants in that research, and that research goes beyond PPM. Advertisers don't spend millions based on someone else's metrics.

  9. #29
    Moderator/Co-Administrator
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    38,566
    Quote Originally Posted by ChannelFlipper View Post

    Measure active listening more accurately, report those results to your commercial buyers, and then you will start getting at the root of the problem. But of course, established radio execs will never go for it - they got there on this system of smoke and mirrors and they aren't about to let something closer to the truth ruin their revenue model.
    Advertisers count impressions, not engagement.

    While there is much discussion of activations and the like... measuring media and its relationship to purchase and usage... this is still a long way off and expensive, too!

    I was on an Arbitron-formed committee of radio and ad agency executives back around 2010 following the introduction of the PPM. The objective was to develop an "engagement metric" based on statistical evidence of passion for a radio station such as use in multiple dayparts, length and frequency of listening, weekend listening, etc. After all was done and tests were conducted, both radio and agencies decided we did not need or want a new metric.

    Agencies and buyers said they did not need yet another set of data to analyze as it slowed down buys and increased the cost. Radio did not want to give agencies yet another reason to cut rates or to negotiate. The idea died.

    But the principal objection came from agencies, clients and buying services... not radio.
    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.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBigA View Post
    Keep in mind that the meter is just one way radio measures itself. I wouldn't put so much emphasis on it. Advertisers are ALWAYS measuring the ROI for the spots, and radio stations are active participants in that research, and that research goes beyond PPM. Advertisers don't spend millions based on someone else's metrics.
    I agree with that; I have a similar situation. I have an SEO contract for my business, and they provide me reports about my monthly website usage, clicks, references, etc. I hardly read them. I tell them there is only one metric that counts, and I calculate it. It is very simple - how many times a month does my business get new phone calls based on website usage? That number varies. It is funny, when the number goes down, I lean on them for better performance, and lo and behold, the next month my unsolicited phone inquiries based on website goes up. Amazing.

Page 3 of 8 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
  •  

     
Useful Contacts
Community


123