"Truth" wrote in message ...

No ****. And if you have too many spots, all you have to do is double
the price.
Half of the advertisers will drop, the other half will pay their share,
and you just
cut half of the spots from your station.

Advertising is sold by delivery of audience. If you cut spot load by 50%,
and do not increase listenership, your revenue decreases by half (assuming
you are selling all your inventory).

So simple, yet many are too afraid to
turn down any advertiser to do it. We did it and it works just fine.
Better to
turn away advertisers than listeners! If you have listeners, you will
always have
advertisers, but you don't get listeners from having more advertisers,
you get LESS
listeners.

There are simple metrics applied to the buying of ad time, and they relate
to the cost per listener, experessed as cost per thousand, cost per point,
etc. Simply reducing spot loads does not improve the rate on the remaining
accounts.

This is the problem with those in radio management, they never just ask
themselves
what THEY would listen to. All you had to do is ask the DJs what they
thought, as
they are the ones that listen to the station longer than anyone. If
they get sick
of a song or spot, it means time to drop it!

Actually, a DJ listens far more per week than all but the most agressive
listeners. The best way to find out what listeners want is to ask the
listeners. Which is what most major stations do.

Sometimes stations play the same spot twice during a
single set! How effective can that be to that customer?

I never understood that.

It's researched and very effective in increasing memorability through
repetition. As are bookends.

If I was the advertiser, I would much rather have had the
extra spot play in another hour or on another station than waste two in
the same
break.

Generally, if this happens, the advertiser has paid extra to make it happen.
Because it works so well.