In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:
No, I have the proof, as does any other subscriber to Arbitron, that
people will not listen to weak signals that are subject to noise,
interference or difficult to tune in.

That's not proof. That's just advertising marketing BS.

If you don't believe the results of millions and millions of radio listener
7-day diaries of listening over the last decade in market after market, then
you are simply a fool. All the while I thought you were stubborn and
obstinate, but I was wrong.

Yes, I don't believe your story.

That Arbitron data is good enough for advertisers to use it as a base to
invest tens of billions of dollars a year, but you think it is BS.

Yes, I believe your take on it is confused at best and deliberately
wrong at worst.

I take the "fool" thing back. You are really a "silly fool."

You are a lying fool.

Anyway, you are obfuscating. I clearly said that AM stations with any
appreciable ratings are not playing music. You went off on an
unrelated and irrelevant tangent.

I'm not obfuscating. You have a one note point to make and this is just
your way to obscure it.

My point in this thread is that general market AM music stations exist in
limited numbers, and those that do all behave like KVEN... near dead last in
ratings and revenue.

Your only point is to get what you want by any means possible including
lying to people.

I get around 13 stations over S9 where I live 60 miles north of LA
and of course there are another dozen that put in a decent
relatively noise fee signal on a portable most places.

But most of the ones that have a good signal TO YOU do not get
listening by anyone else that is measurable.

Yeah, and you see that you fall back to that marketing crap. It doesn't
get enough market share so it does not exist.

This is the "if a tree falls in a forrest..." argument.

The fact is, while those stations are hearable, they are not listenable to
most radio listeners. For a variety of reasons, including signal strength,
listeners who might be able to hear a station do not listen to those that do
not have very good signals (in the range of 10 mv/m and above in metro
areas) simply do not tune those stations in. For whatever the reason, AMs
don't generate measurable listenership outside their strong signal areas.

Name me ONE non-ethnic AM that plays only music and has salable
ratings (meaning under age 55 listening).

I don't prove the existence of radio stations by what ratings they get.
That's your scam.

I never said any station did not exist. I said stations, outside certain
strong signal areas do not get any significant listening. And, in this
thread, I said that AMs playing music for the general market don't get any,
either.


But nobody else listens to them, even in your specific ZIP code area,
as I explained to you before.

Again, all of this is to divert attention from the fact that you
cited a music AM in your metro area and I gave you the facts that it
is rated poorly (39th in 25-54 in the Ventura / Ornard MSA) and has
plummeting revenue and almost no billing now. That's typical for
music AMs unless they are ones like KIRN that are the only service to
an unserved community... in this case, Persians.

Nope. That is just a part of the fantasy marketing world you live in.
This is just a part of the marketing fantasy you relive every day. Wake
up the reader of this news group know you game.

$20 billion invested in radio advertising based on measurements that are
statistically accurate enough for that purpose yet you are in denial. As I
said, "silly fool."

Your take on the numbers is your invention and a pack of lies.

First it's "The station does not exist."

Next "The station does not have enough signal to be noise free so people
will listen."

Then the final fall back position " The station does not get ratings so
it might as well not exist."

I never said stations do not exist. I said AM music stations get practically
no listening, just as I said stations outside an easily definable signal
strength area similarly don't get listening.

You have in the past. I know where you are going with the argument and
I'm not falling for it.

So now that we are down to 2 stations in a market we can implement HD
with no problems right? What BS!

HD will likely not help AM, since broadcasters are moving the only viable
mass market formats to FM. The band will be reduced to infomercials and
religion and service to small ethnic groups. Mexico has the right idea: they
plan to move nearly all AMs to FM over the next few years, starting with the
states in the Yucatan peninsula! Canada already deleted half or more of it's
AMs, allowing them to move to FM. Even the 50 kw clear channel CBC stations
in Montreal and Toronto were closed in favor of FM because the signals of
the 4 stations in the two metros was not good enough in significant parts of
each metro to give good service in this day of high noise levels and big
buildings and such.

Many people have posted that HD is one of two things depending on the
individual and that is either drive them away from AM or be of no
consequence.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California