Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...


When I was Production Director for CBS Radio, in Chicago, I went
with the sales mangler of the Country station, WUSN, to a meeting with the
head of the in-house agency at Pepsico to hopefully get them off their
hard'No Country' bias and buy the station. The meeting didn't go well. The
rep came out with figures, demographic breakdowns and perceptuals that
told us we were ****ing in the wind with Pepsi drinkers.

But that was a format decision, something the agency may have had control
over. Demos are seldom changable at the agency level.

I've frequently, when selling or assisting on sales calls, gotten "no
Spanish" dictates removed... these are usually in place because the agency
has no Hispanic creative staff. And in years before being in LA, I have
gotten "no talk" or "no salsa" dictates removed, sometimes by buying
questions on market omnibus studies that have major credibility at the
agency level. But I don't recall ever getting demos changed... nor can
anyone here in LA at a cluster with 3 stations int he top 10 25-54.

Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...

No, he's not, he's merely nothing more than a sad little pathological SOB
who
will lie at the drop of a sombrero.

You can take that to the bank.

And, I invite him to prove me wrong. He can't do that.


You have never disproved anything I said. Take that to the bank.

Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
news:dWcEi.503618$p47.409927@bgtnsc04-
What I've noticed in the last 48 hours...is that he's not
addressed a single point I've made. Only cut off discussion at a point
where he can fall back on 'the way things have always been.'

That is because your points involve changing the demographic dictate of a
client to an agency. If a client specifies Females 25-44, a station that is
predominantly male 45+ is not going to get on the buy. And the client has
very specific reasons for picking the target demos; they know more about the
consumption than a station does.

Part of successful selling is knowing what you can fight, such as your good
example of getting acceptance for country formats, and what you can not
fight. Changing a demographic target is nearly impossible, although it may
have been done a couple of times... and at smaller local agencies there is
some chance if the station can show the agency that they will make money on
the change. Otherwise, the agency is jeopardizing the client relationship
with absolutely no gain.

It's not uncommon for a PD to take that tack, though. It comes
with the office.


I'm not a PD... although I have programmed on a few occasions. Most of my
career was as manager (and owner) and GSM.

Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Except for the minor fact that dxAss has fabricated a post.

Hogwash, Mr. Gleason, I fabricated nothing. Those are your own words.

You are merely nothing more than a sad little pathological SOB who will
lie at
the drop of a sombrero.

Were I to have worked at WFAB, which in the 60's was generally Miami's #1
radio station, I would have it in my resume. It would have been an honor.
The fact is, I have the visit down as an anecdote about my early experiences
in Spanish language radio.

Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...

No, he's not, he's merely nothing more than a sad little pathological SOB
who
will lie at the drop of a sombrero.

You can take that to the bank.

And, I invite him to prove me wrong. He can't do that.


You have never disproved anything I said. Take that to the bank.

BS. You are a pathological liar!

Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
 

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
news:dWcEi.503618$p47.409927@bgtnsc04-
What I've noticed in the last 48 hours...is that he's not
addressed a single point I've made. Only cut off discussion at a point
where he can fall back on 'the way things have always been.'

That is because your points involve changing the demographic dictate of a
client to an agency. If a client specifies Females 25-44, a station that is
predominantly male 45+ is not going to get on the buy. And the client has
very specific reasons for picking the target demos; they know more about the
consumption than a station does.

Part of successful selling is knowing what you can fight, such as your good
example of getting acceptance for country formats, and what you can not
fight. Changing a demographic target is nearly impossible, although it may
have been done a couple of times... and at smaller local agencies there is
some chance if the station can show the agency that they will make money on
the change. Otherwise, the agency is jeopardizing the client relationship
with absolutely no gain.



That's only a limitation if you believe it. I'm not saying it's
easy, David, but if a station can make an agency/client see a potential
that was not exploited in one vein, then the station has that ability in
other areas. It's only a matter of self limiting beliefs that keep one
from making the pitch.

I'm also not saying that the station should change the client's
target demographic, but rather that the station working through the
agency, can show the client how to expand their market and include a
richer element with more discretionary income.

How many 55 year olds own iPods? BMW's? Chevrolets? How many 55
year olds buy soap? Toothpaste? How many 55 year olds listen to music? I
mean, it's more likely that a 55 year old can afford a home theatre
system from McIntosh Labs than a 24 year old.

Don't tell me we don't watch movies.

The most important part of successful selling is not in knowing
what you can and cannot fight, but how to present to bring a new pitch
to a resistant target. One size doesn't fit all.

You want to capture new sales, you change your pitch to new
targets.

And as the population ages, finding a way to serve 55+ is going
to be the key to survival. For media, and for retail.







It's not uncommon for a PD to take that tack, though. It comes
with the office.


I'm not a PD... although I have programmed on a few occasions. Most of my
career was as manager (and owner) and GSM.


Then you, more than anyone here, would know the resource
potential of a good sales force and how to make a sale 'outside the box.'

You also know that stations make pitches to agencies every
day. Station makes the pitch to the agency. The agency's job is to
present to the client. Expanding a market is never a relationship
jeopardizing thing.

What drives so many people nuts about corporate manglement, is
the mindset that things work according to immutable realities according
to statistics, and 'research.' As I've said, quoting statistics isn't
really useful to someone who's a real person trying to understand why
something cannot be tried. What comes from such conversations is a
question by a listener who is told that what they want cannot be done.
Within the limited view of statistics, it's true, it cannot. From the
wider view of possibilities it becomes apparent that something can't be
done because it will not be tried; because possibilities will not be
exploited.

Most Manglers, and owners, I've worked with, known or had
contact with hide behind walls of research, statistics and historical
experiences, the Third Circle, beyond which they can see, but refuse to
look. They quote figures as though they are immutable laws. Figures are
only a snapshot of what exists through the lens of a moment and a place
and a given set of circumstances. Change the time, the place, or the
circumstances, and the statistics may not apply.

Where you and I have always disagreed, and where so much of
the furor in these groups exists, is that you seem unwilling to
recognize that what exists now, isn't all there is. And what works now
isn't the only viability. You may be right, and there may be no
practical way to achieve what's been suggested here. But that you refuse
to acknowledge the possibility is what's so maddening. That you deflect
questions with statistics rather than provide real answers. And that you
refuse to look outside the Circle for possibilities. These are reasons
you're arguments have been less than effective at convincing those of us
here who use Radio, and who have made it a lifestyle to cut wormholes
through obstacles to listen to what we want, rather than what's given us.

We know, from our own experiences that there are
possibilities. You deny this. Or worse, don't even acknowledge that this
has been presented.

For someone in the business of bringing people to your radio
stations, that would seem to be a self defeating strategy.

Like I said, try it without the numbers. Present a compelling
argument in English and explain why.

I"m not talking about CHANGING a demographic target. I'm
talking about exploiting a demographic that's being ignored, because i's
not easy.

Start looking at and for possibilities. Take your head out of
your statistics and your Third Circle 'experience' and start seeing that
if one obstacle can be overcome by a station to an agency/client, others
can also be overcome.

The reality is that 55+ listeners are a rich resource that
isn't being exploited because they're expensive to pursue. So are
diamonds. But the value of recovered diamonds offsets the cost of mining
them. The value of 55+ listeners is greater than younger, lesser
expensive demographics. More costly to pursue, but much greater value
when harvested.

If you're not successful at selling them, as Pepsi found with
Country Music listeners, change your pitch. Explore possibilities. Every
General Mangler I've ever worked for has told me to never fall into the
trap of 'that's the way it's always been done.' He/she has always told
me to try new things. New ways.

Ironically, yourself included, none has been willing to heed
this counsel.

Explore possibilities. Change the pitch. Pursue the richer
deeper ores.

If you can sell a nation of radio listeners that institutional
interference that robs them of their choices is a good thing, you
certainly have the salesmanship to sell high end SUV's to a 55 year old.

The question is, will you remain unwilling to find a way?

Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
 

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

He does not understand the technical terms he uses either. He will not
answer a simple question on them.

I already gave you a definition of how field strength contours are employed
and how the FCC uses them.

Keep in mind that the FCC's principal technical function is that of
regulating interference. Field strength, calculated or measured, is the
metric the FCC uses to determine if there is interference potential in an
application for a new station or in a change application. We are not
interested in the nature or physics of propagation... we are interested in
HOW MUCH signal there is at specific points removed by specific distances
from an antenna or antenna system.

Further, radio stations use coverage maps to show advertisers where the
signal reaches. Such maps are labeled in mV/m for AM and dBu for FM; these
are the standard measurement units for the radio broadcast industry.

In either case, the data for the FCC or the contours on a coverage map when
based on the measured free space electromagnetic field using a standard or
calibrated antenna to determine the field strength of a station. In many
cases, the AM coverage areas are determined by calculations based on power,
antenna efficiency and ground conductivity to determine contours of specific
and desired intensity. In the FM service few stations ever do measurements
or even have the equipment to do it... it's all calculated and the FCC does
not require measured field strength readings, although stations may submit
measured field strength readings to prove a specific application is viable.

An AM station, when first licensed or when making a significant change in
facility, will do field strength readings on a number of points on a number
of radials at specific distances from the transmitter. A directional AM will
have more radials, as the monitor points must show actual measured field
strength in the nulls, which are there to protect other stations from
interference, must be measured to the sides and at the center of each null.
The location of the directional monitor points are, in fact, part of the
station license.

Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...

No, he's not, he's merely nothing more than a sad little pathological
SOB
who
will lie at the drop of a sombrero.

You can take that to the bank.

And, I invite him to prove me wrong. He can't do that.


You have never disproved anything I said. Take that to the bank.

BS. You are a pathological liar!

As usual, you substitute invective for fact.

Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...

No, he's not, he's merely nothing more than a sad little pathological
SOB
who
will lie at the drop of a sombrero.

You can take that to the bank.

And, I invite him to prove me wrong. He can't do that.


You have never disproved anything I said. Take that to the bank.

BS. You are a pathological liar!

As usual, you substitute invective for fact.

Prove it, 'Tardo... you can't do it!

I guarantee it.

Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
 

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

He does not understand the technical terms he uses either. He will not
answer a simple question on them.

I already gave you a definition of how field strength contours are employed
and how the FCC uses them.

Snip

I'm sure the people employed by the FCC know what those maps mean. It is
you that does not understand.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California