Alternative to Long Commercial Breaks

[b-turner]

Radio has a problem: advertisers dictate content on commercials and outside forces like advertising agencies and competition more or less dictate rates charged. Anything radio might do to lower the number of commercials per hour means willingly taking less money than it could. The question becomes of the lower commercial load means more listeners per quarter hour over time to justify a higher rate. The screaming car dealer is still going to demand screaming car dealer ads or he'll go elsewhere.

There have been many ideas tossed around like going back to 4 breaks an hour of no more than 2 commercials per break. Some argue that might bite you on your quarter hour numbers. There were always those that tried to hit stop sets before competitors and be back in music by the time the competitor stop set started. Give and take...I'll give you mine when my commercials play but I'll get them back and some of yours when your stop set starts.

Another possibility is length. A station in a small city analyzed the market. It was a low budget operation initially. There was no cash to have a local news department and high school sports was wrapped up by competitors including college football and pro sports. The station knew the competitors carried network newscasts (one was CNN and one a State News Network). One station was satellite delivered with three 3.5 minute spot breaks hourly. The other station ran 2 lengthy stop sets an hour. This startup was music intensive and to 'feel' local, recorded persons in the community doing station liners (they gave their name). The idea was you likely knew or knew of one of those people you heard each hour.

For commercials, the station centered a package around their website and short commercials. Online you got listed in the station business directory. The business was allowed a picture or two and could have whatever text they chose. On air they got 2 spots a day, 5 to 10 seconds in length. The station did 'stand alone' spots. Although the limit was 7 an hour, there was only 35-70 seconds of commercial time in an hour. The station pushed 'you're never more than 15 seconds away from another song'. The concept was sold on the idea radio was the worm on the fishing pole that hooked the fish (customer) and the business directory at the station website reeled them in. Businesses liked the idea and writing copy went like this: tell me the one most important thing you want everybody to know about your business.

Now, would hearing one 8 second commercial about 7 times an hour be better than, say, 5 to 7 back-to-back commercials at 30 and 60 seconds twice an hour?

Is the length of the commercial break more important than how many times the music is interrupted for a commercial of any length?

 

[b-turner]

What would be ideal for you as far as a commercial load on a music station? Is 7 breaks an hour with an 8 second ad too much?

 

[Kelly A]

Radio has a problem: advertisers dictate content on commercials and outside forces like advertising agencies and competition more or less dictate rates charged. Anything radio might do to lower the number of commercials per hour means willingly taking less money than it could.

I suspect a lot depends on the market size and how many competitors fighting for the same demo/ad buys. For example, a smaller market group who's got the 18-34M's sewn up with just one of their stations have a lot more leeway than a larger group in market #25 and at least three direct competitors.

As I'm sure you're aware, agencies and local advertisers are pulled between buys on cheaper digital or traditional radio. Digital is forcing the dynamic for radio or TV to the digital 'reach'-model and less traditional day-parts or shows with associated rates. If they want reach, they want volume. If you make a change like reducing your number of breaks to increase TSL, guaranteed the competition will either add units to their existing break structure, or add another break in an effort to take those dollars you're leaving on the table. To me, it wouldn't be worth the risk.

Now that said; if your inventory has openings that are being filled with redundant promos, bonus-spots, trade, or PSA's, then I'm all for shrinking the total break length until business starts to pick up again.

 

[TheBigA]

Now that said; if your inventory has openings that are being filled with redundant promos, bonus-spots, trade, or PSA's, then I'm all for shrinking the total break length until business starts to pick up again.

But you can only do that if you're not running outside syndication or VT, because the break length is determined by the syndicator. And let's face it: More and more small indie mom & pop stations are looking at outside syndication as a way to solve their local talent situation. Some stations are dayparting their syndication, so it's hard to generalize how stations will deal with their spots. They might run more local spots in morning drive, because it's local, but are required to run a lot of spots in late night because that time is syndicated. If those fringe times were local, they'd be able to cut the number of positions.

Having said that, if digital is where the growth is, and that's what we keep hearing, then it's possible we'll see some advertising move from on-air to online. Because it's easier to target advertising online. The only issue there is the spot rate is so much lower, so it takes more online spots to equal one on-air spot. It's also going to take time for this to happen in a way that can be seen over 14,000 radio stations. But I think everyone knows how listeners feel about spot lengths, and they know they have to find a way to address it.

 

[DavidEduardo]

But you can only do that if you're not running outside syndication or VT, because the break length is determined by the syndicator. And let's face it: More and more small indie mom & pop stations are looking at outside syndication as a way to solve their local talent situation. Some stations are dayparting their syndication, so it's hard to generalize how stations will deal with their spots. They might run more local spots in morning drive, because it's local, but are required to run a lot of spots in late night because that time is syndicated. If those fringe times were local, they'd be able to cut the number of positions.

Remember that there are syndication products in music formats that allow the station to establish shorter (or longer!) breaks and to incorporate local content and service elements. This is best exemplified by STORQ, the product Westwood One acquired in one of its syndication purchases.

The "syndicated" show is delivered in pieces, and the station's local software assembles it, skipping a song and its intro or adding an extra song.

This, of course, does not work for talk formats as easily although there are workable solutions including having multiple break points where the local station can insert longer local news or content.

 

[DavidEduardo]

What would be ideal for you as far as a commercial load on a music station? Is 7 breaks an hour with an 8 second ad too much?

I think new research would have to be done today to determine the "break points" for how much total and how much per stopset can occur before losing listeners.

Radio is so minute by minute obsessed in the PPM world that little is researched about long term listening... the day, the week, the month. Between the long stopsets and the over-processed PPM encoding, some stations are just unlistenable.

FM won over comparable AM formats in the earlier 70's with 8 minute commercial loads, run generally in 4 x 2' stops. Today, we have to compete with a new challenge which is standing up to streaming which may have either less commercials or none.

I'm guessing, based on decades of actually designing and doing research, that the maximum that would be tolerated successfully today is around 6 minutes... likely in 3 two minute sets every 20 minutes. That requires thinking of the listener, not the mechanics of ratings, though. That is going to be hard for many to do, but it is a necessary change in mindset.

 

[b-turner]

Another factor in the listener's mind is the content of the commercial. Those that are considered irritating or far removed from the 'sound' of the format can be a negative. I recall the Beautiful Music format frequently restricted the sound of the commercial to match the format. Some stations where I worked many years ago refused to sell more than one unit per hour to a client because a client buying 2 or more commercials an hour was considered an irritant.

Back years ago, maybe about 1980, KLBJ FM in Austin, Texas, an album rocker at the time, had a very creative production director. The commercials were so good, they almost exceeded the attraction of the music. Then again, at that point in time, the advertising game was very different but from a listener perspective, the commercials were entertaining and actually listened to as a foreground feature. Just like that favorite song, commercial breaks were cause to crank up the volume. Sadly the run was only for a year or two.

 

[TheBigA]

Another factor in the listener's mind is the content of the commercial. Those that are considered irritating or far removed from the 'sound' of the format can be a negative.

The problem there being that when you sell time to a sponsor, that time becomes theirs. It's not unusual to hear spots produced with CHR or hip hop music, but placed in soft rock or country. Or you hear a lot of medical and drug advertising dealing with erectile dysfunction, irritable bowel syndrome, or other personal issues. Not the subject that might fit in some formats. These tend to be the national spots by advertisers who are buying bulk impressions rather than targeting specific audiences. Not much the station can do with national spots or outside production, other than to turn them down and lose the money.

 

[Mikey Radio]

Didn't Clear Channel make a big deal about this years back, stating that, at least on their stations with live talent, they were reducing the number of breaks, shrinking the length of the breaks but then charging the advertisers a higher rate to balance it out, and also telling the advertisers that with shorter spots they could hold more listeners' attention and reduce the chance of them switching off the station?

There's a classic rock station here where the spot breaks during morning drive can seemingly last upwards of 10 minutes. If they cut to a break while driving to work, I switch to something else as I know it'll will last nearly 1/2 the length of my commute. During at least the last few years he was on terrrestrial radio, Howard Stern was also known for ridiculously long commercial breaks.

 

[b-turner]

You are very correct. Complainers of commercials I talk to that are not in radio get told by me that the radio station has little control. We in radio are at the mercy of the advertiser in that respect and when they buy us, we're just happy to be on the buy sheet. Then I tell them such commercials work or they would not do them that way. I tell them the radio stations are literally selling a 60 second amount of time for the advertiser to advertise as they see fit. To tell them what they can and cannot do with their time is a very good way to get them to take their dollars elsewhere.

 

[DavidEduardo]

The problem there being that when you sell time to a sponsor, that time becomes theirs. It's not unusual to hear spots produced with CHR or hip hop music, but placed in soft rock or country. Or you hear a lot of medical and drug advertising dealing with erectile dysfunction, irritable bowel syndrome, or other personal issues. Not the subject that might fit in some formats. These tend to be the national spots by advertisers who are buying bulk impressions rather than targeting specific audiences. Not much the station can do with national spots or outside production, other than to turn them down and lose the money.

When I had beautiful music stations in Ecuador and Puerto Rico, we refused hard sell voice and rock or salsa jingles. It cost us some sales to specific clients, but the stations were always sold out so we felt the advantages were greater than the losses.

In both places, nearly 100% of clients were agency accounts. We spoke to the major shops, and showed them that they could make more money placing with our FMs because they got to do additional production which was billable. Agencies love opportunities to make "creative" money as it is pure income.

Then when I owned my own Beautiful Music syndication producer in the 80's, we required stations to be similarly restrictive. We even did a "policy for your benefit" statement on diploma-like paper we gave in bulk to each station to put in their sales package showing how the best spots in the best environment enhanced sales and image. It was, loosly translated, "we advertise, but we don't abuse your ears".

 

[TheBigA]

Didn't Clear Channel make a big deal about this years back, stating that, at least on their stations with live talent, they were reducing the number of breaks, shrinking the length of the breaks but then charging the advertisers a higher rate to balance it out, and also telling the advertisers that with shorter spots they could hold more listeners' attention and reduce the chance of them switching off the station?

You may be thinking about Entercom. That was something they talked about, and they're the company with the 2 minute pledge. Advertisers aren't looking to pay a higher rate unless they get something in return. Shorter spots are hard to do when the advertiser is required to include a lot of legal information by the FTC. Shorter spots also mean more of them, and that means clutter.

 

[DavidEduardo]

You are very correct. Complainers of commercials I talk to that are not in radio get told by me that the radio station has little control. We in radio are at the mercy of the advertiser in that respect and when they buy us, we're just happy to be on the buy sheet. Then I tell them such commercials work or they would not do them that way. I tell them the radio stations are literally selling a 60 second amount of time for the advertiser to advertise as they see fit. To tell them what they can and cannot do with their time is a very good way to get them to take their dollars elsewhere.

I'm reminded of Jerry Lee in Philadelphia who had very strict spot content and sound restrictions. That did not stop him from being the market's top biller because clients liked being in that environment... even if they were 1800 miles away at an LA agency,

 

[TheBigA]

When I had beautiful music stations in Ecuador and Puerto Rico, we refused hard sell voice and rock or salsa jingles. It cost us some sales to specific clients, but the stations were always sold out so we felt the advantages were greater than the losses.

WFMT still requires only host read commercials, no produced spots. But they appeal to a very different demo.

 

[DavidEduardo]

You may be thinking about Entercom. That was something they talked about, and they're the company with the 2 minute pledge. Advertisers aren't looking to pay a higher rate unless they get something in return. Shorter spots are hard to do when the advertiser is required to include a lot of legal information by the FTC. Shorter spots also mean more of them, and that means clutter.

What's unusual is that most of the world sells 30's and 15's and even 10's. In Mexico and Latin America, the 60" spot is very rare. In Puerto Rico, there are a few more due to the US influence, but they are still not common.

I find irritating spots are a tune-out when they are 60's, but tolerable if shorter. But that is just my opinion, not a studied finding..

 

[DavidEduardo]

You may be thinking about Entercom. That was something they talked about, and they're the company with the 2 minute pledge. Advertisers aren't looking to pay a higher rate unless they get something in return. Shorter spots are hard to do when the advertiser is required to include a lot of legal information by the FTC. Shorter spots also mean more of them, and that means clutter.

The problem is that they did this only on Alt stations, and there is a wealth of opinion that Entercom does not do that format very well. So it is hard to judge the results when the station sucks so badly anyway...

 

[Theater of My Mind]

You may be thinking about Entercom. That was something they talked about, and they're the company with the 2 minute pledge.

I believe he's thinking of Clear Channel when it was still called that, and their internal "less is more" directive. Stations were ordered to reduce the length of all non-music content, shorten jock breaks and promos, and try to sell shorter spots including some that I believe were 5 or 10 seconds long. This was around the time PPM was being rolled out and research initially showed listeners would tune out for *anything* that interrupted the music. They also assembled an in-house commercial creative team to write and produce spec spots in a failed effort to raise the quality of the advertising content. Those were all great ideas but for some reason they didn't work and then they seem to have disappeared after Clear Channel was sold to private equity and new management took over.

 

[b-turner]

Clear Channel's plan was one I liked. I am a proponent of short spots. I think, however, it was something not understood nor embraced by advertising agencies who were content with 60 second units for their clients.

 

[TheBigA]

I believe he's thinking of Clear Channel when it was still called that, and their internal "less is more" directive.

That was a long time ago. John Hogan was CEO. Here's a financial analysis of the program after about a year. They say ratings were up, but revenues were down.

Will less be more for the media industry? - Aug. 15, 2005

So far, Clear Channel's results have been mixed. The company introduced "Less is More" late last year. And in the company's second quarter, Clear Channel said that ratings were up in most markets. Nonetheless, radio revenues still fell 7 percent from a year ago because of the lower amount of available commercial minutes.

 

[Theater of My Mind]

Maybe they should have stuck with the higher ratings strategy. A 7% decline in revenues looks pretty good compared to what's happened in the meantime.