"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...


He doesn't care... or perhaps more properly, the suits don't care.
He/they don't care that people on the north Oregon coast preferred to
listen to KWJJ in Portland rather than any of the local stations up until
the point were KWJJ changed formats and calls.

Nobody was listening in Portland. The station was losing money. A Portland
station can not make money off listening out of the metro, any more than any
other station can. Economics requred trying a different format.

He/they don't give a rats arse that the two most listened to nighttime
signals in the Northwest are KSL and KGO. (KBOI is right up there, too,
and I personally liked to hear KTWO. Also WWL was good and solid.

While KGO shows up in the Medford book with a 0.4 share, KGO has no measured
listening anywhere else in Oregon or Washington. KSL shows listening nowhere
but the SLC metro. So much for that lie.

But those are DX stations, so they really don't matter... the others are
rimshots that a lot of people listen or listened to, despite whatever
Arbitron might say.

If it gets listening, Arbitron reports it. If it does not, which is what the
case is here, they do not.

The former KRDR (now KMUZ IIRC) in Gresham was a popular country station
in the Portland market, but the city was outside their city grade
contours, so I guess that all those ads for Portland businesses weren't
really there..

KMUZ is licensed to a county that is within the Portland MSA. I would,
therefore, expect to hear Portland area advertisers on it since it is in the
Portland metro and the Portland radio market. Get it? The station is inside
the Portland metro!

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

Do you understand english well? What part of KNX is strong, no noise or
static do you not understand? I'm not tolerating anything in the way of
poor reception. Full quieting no interference on a battery operated
portable indoors. Same good reception in the car.

Obviously, focusing on one station is a bad practice. When you look at
hundreds of staitons in many, many markets and find that nearly uniformly
there is no listening where the signal is below certain parameters, one can
conclude that what may be acceptable to you is not acceptable to the vast
and wide radio listening public, because they seldom can be seen to exhibit
the behaviour you believe they should.

Obviously, if such correlations of signal vs. listening spread across two
bands and all formasts, then there is something different about what you
expect from the radio, not about listening in general.

Since I am a program listener and not a DXer I'm not willing to put up
with noise and interference.

The one example is representative of 7 stations in my list of 11. Only 4
stations are 10mV/m.

3 to 4 mV/m is enough to drive a crystal radio for good reception.

Your assessment of the 10mV/m signal level density puts you at odds
with what is on the V soft page for a strong signal.

If there is no listenership in the city of Ventura I would say it is
because of the programming. Traffic reports during the prim time drive
that does not cover Ventura, Oxnard, and Camarillo.

The market is named Oxnard / Ventura. The fact that all other out of market
stations don't get listening outside the contours I have mentioned makes
your one market / one station example irrelevant. When stations of all
formats in all kinds of markets perform the same way, you can see that there
is nothing format related in this analysis.

The average listener will not tune in an AM signal that is below about 10
mV/m because it does not provide enjoyable listening, irrespective of the
format.

I don't see a problem receiving all 11 stations on my list. The radio
locator and the V soft web pages list them as strong signals. The only
way you don't get them on a portable radio is to put them in the antenna
null.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

On Sep 9, 4:24 pm, Telamon
wrote:
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:





"Telamon" wrote in message
...

Do you understand english well? What part of KNX is strong, no noise or
static do you not understand? I'm not tolerating anything in the way of
poor reception. Full quieting no interference on a battery operated
portable indoors. Same good reception in the car.

Obviously, focusing on one station is a bad practice. When you look at
hundreds of staitons in many, many markets and find that nearly uniformly
there is no listening where the signal is below certain parameters, one can
conclude that what may be acceptable to you is not acceptable to the vast
and wide radio listening public, because they seldom can be seen to exhibit
the behaviour you believe they should.

Obviously, if such correlations of signal vs. listening spread across two
bands and all formasts, then there is something different about what you
expect from the radio, not about listening in general.

Since I am a program listener and not a DXer I'm not willing to put up
with noise and interference.

The one example is representative of 7 stations in my list of 11. Only 4
stations are 10mV/m.

3 to 4 mV/m is enough to drive a crystal radio for good reception.

Your assessment of the 10mV/m signal level density puts you at odds
with what is on the V soft page for a strong signal.

If there is no listenership in the city of Ventura I would say it is
because of the programming. Traffic reports during the prim time drive
that does not cover Ventura, Oxnard, and Camarillo.

The market is named Oxnard / Ventura. The fact that all other out of market
stations don't get listening outside the contours I have mentioned makes
your one market / one station example irrelevant. When stations of all
formats in all kinds of markets perform the same way, you can see that there
is nothing format related in this analysis.

The average listener will not tune in an AM signal that is below about 10
mV/m because it does not provide enjoyable listening, irrespective of the
format.

I don't see a problem receiving all 11 stations on my list. The radio
locator and the V soft web pages list them as strong signals. The only
way you don't get them on a portable radio is to put them in the antenna
null.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Telamon,

The 'implication' of your remarks is that within 3-5 Years
you will not be an AM/MW Radio Listener at all; because
most of what you use to Listen to on the AM/MW Band
will be obscured by IBOC "HD" Radio Digital {Hash} Noise.

And you along with many more former AM/MW Radio
Listeners will find other sources of Listening Entertainment :
FM Radio; XM/Sirius Satellite Radio; Internet Web-Radio;
iPod; Shortwave Radio; etc.

THE DEATH OF AM/MW RADIO MAY BE NEAR :
The Pallbearers Names are "I" "B" "O" "C" "H" "D"

life exists beyond the 10mv/m contour ~ RHF

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
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.

The limitation has several factors. First, save a rare all radio campaign,
radio is 6% to 7% of all ad spending. It makes nearly no money for the
agency, except in commissions. It's hard to buy. Agencies don't spend a lot
of time on radio... and many shops do not buy radio at all, because they
would rather not have the hassle.

So much do agencies dislike buying radio that many farm out the buying
function to buying services. To sell to them, unless you talk rates, you are
shown the door... they have only one criteria and that is to bring in the
desired number of gross ratings points against the target demo at the lowest
price possible, because they share the commission and get a percentage of
any savings below the target CPP.

So to expect agencies to even listen to a request that requires client
consent to implement is simply a waste of time.



See, I disagree with that. While I hear your objections, and have
heard them before, often at the top of someone's lungs, I've been
personally involved in too many meetings where we did, as a radio
station, sell directly to an agency, and we did change the parameters of
a buy. I"m not saying its easy, but it IS possible. And it does bear
fruit...both for the end client and the station, which means it also
bears fruit for the agency.

I understand that agencies are too important to get their hands
dirty with Radio. They're agencies. Radio is...well, the home of disk
jockeys...and perceptually, that's not a positive. One of the many
reasons that agencies do the things they do is to throw up walls between
themselves and media so that the agency can call the shots. And they're
notoriously intractable. And they don't care about anybody's rules. At
the Chicago Addy's Leo Burnett used to submit their national McDonald's
spots in the local station promo category, where they clearly did not
belong. The swept the category.

When threatened with having their submissions denied, in favor of
more appropriate categories, there were some behind the scenes
conversations in which the word 'budget' was used.

Burnett continued to do things their way unmolested.

I have a clear understanding of what you're saying.


However....if you want to get beyond those walls, you have to find
a creative way around them. You can't assault them directly.

We had meetings all over the market with other stations, both in
the group and out, and we compared notes. Then I was called into
meetings with the local sales mangler to hammer out a strategy. It
started with the next cattle call, in which stations were gathered to
present their best and most compelling reasons for being on the buy.
After more than an hour and a half of statistics, demographics, charts,
audio demos, and whatever these stations could bring, our Sales Mangler
was up. Without moving from his chair, he tossed out on the table
colored 3 X 5 cards with words in block letters on them (I think it was
Albertus Bold, actually...one of my personal favorites). Words like
"Passion For Excellence." "Personal Power." "Love of Product." "Love of
Listeners."

As he tossed out the cards, he said, "These are the things we
believe in. We believe in..." out came the card that said 'Results,'

"Results. But above everything else, we believe in no limitations.
No obstacles."

And as he tossed out his last card, he looked around the table and
said, 'And I'll remind everyone here, that it was our Production
Director who singlehandedly stole from everyone in this room, and
serviced all by himself, the Omni Superstore account."

They looked at him like he had nine heads. The rep from the agency
who'd made the cattle call, said 'What are you from Mars?"

At which point the Sales Mangler got up, said, "call me when
you're ready to make some REAL money." And left, to return to the office.

We laughed about that at the station for two days. Until the phone
rang, and the agency wanted to talk.

We got on their buys. Through ups and downs, through manglement
changes, PD changes, music changes, and severe ratings slumps. And we
stayed on the buy.

When the station hit #1, it was converting at 200%+ Sometimes
dramatically higher than that. And almost always including demos NOT
requested by the agencies.

But it all started with that surreal moment in the conference room
of one of the handful of international agencies in Chicago.

We didn't assault the wall directly. That would have been as you
say, futile. What we did was the equivalent of whacking the mule in the
head with a 2 X 4...we got it's attention. And from there, we made our
own pitch.

And we changed the way radio was bought. At least on a limited
scale. But it was a start.

When I stole the Omni Superstore account, I did it against the top
agencies in town, including the multinationals, AND the in-house agency
at Dominick's, which owned Omni. But I got it. Me. Single handedly. With
a single spot written in 20 minutes and produced in 10 at the Radio
station. And the reason I got the deal and the agencies didn't, is that
I was the ONLY one who had ever been in the store. And when I talked to
Gary Benson, who was building the franchise, I was the only one who
understand what it was he was trying to build. Because I'd been there.
And all the figures, all the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on
demos, including having the London Symphony record a jingle, meant
nothing. I'd demonstrated that I could produce the result he was looking
for.

Getting a client's attention, getting an agency's attention, like
getting the attention of a Radio station General Mangler, is often no
more difficult than being different enough that you go around the wall.

That's why I say, if your pitch isn't producing results, change
your pitch.

In the agency context, that means how you deal with, build
relationships with, and how you approach the agency.

In a similar, and related, context, if a spot isn't producing
results with 55+, change the pitch. You CAN sell to higher demos. And I
understand that lower demos are easier, and less costly to assault. But
the higher demos have more ready cash, and they do spend it. Convincing
them may require a different effort. May require more of it....but if
once you break through, you've tapped into a gold mine. Getting over
that hump may require more effort, but once tapped, that reserve of cash
comes with new loyalties, and new willingness to do business.

I understand you can't sell 55+ the way you sell 18-34. I'm not
disuputing that at all. So you don't. But you don't just give up. We
buy. Often the same things. But more often than not, bigger ticket
items. You change the pitch. You find a way to sell us that does work.
If you're unwilling to do that, we'll take our money and spend it with
someone who will. But with an aging population, and declining birth
rates, it's something you may wish to consider.

Immutable Law of Marketing says if you get there second, you'll
only pick up the scraps.




Add to that the fact that radio stations, save a few in very large markets,
don't sell directly to most agencies... we sell via representative firms who
offer dozens and up to hundreds of stations in many, many markets. The
buying funciton is one of price negotiation; a media buyer has no ability to
change buy specs. And most stations due to expense and distance can not call
on higer-ups at an agency because they are hundreds or thousands of miles
away.


I understand exactly what you're saying. But my own experience,
again, says that there are ways of getting beyond that wall. Sometimes
it's a matter of building a relationship with someone at the rep firm.
Sometimes, it's a matter of something so absurd that it gets attention.

You're aware of the Wal-Mart story. Sam Walton asked his stores
to give him a 20% increase in profits. 20% increase in a single year at
discount Retail was, at the time, considered impossible. Millions of
dollars in consumer buying research said so.

So, he vowed to do a hula in a grass skirt on Wall Street if his
stores produced a 20% increase in a single year.

They did. He did. And the story has passed into legend.

'Can't be done' is a state of mind. I do understand how difficult
it can be to get somethings done. How difficult it can be to create new
avenues. How difficult it can be to break through walls created
specifically to keep you at bay. But my whole career has been spent
cutting wormholes through 'it can't be done.' I know better.

I know there is a way. Finding it is one challenge. Doing it is
another.





But the main point is that agencies will not go back to a client to change
an approved media plan because they do not want to seem incompetent. And
they sure will not do it when the client asked for one demo and some station
in Des Moines or Detroit or Denver can't pull off the CPP goals without
asking for a change in demo.


I disagree, here, David. I've been involved. I've seen it done.
I"ve helped do it. And not only in Chicago.

It's not easy. And not every effort is successful. But it can be
done. And it's done every day.



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.

Clients do millions, hundreds of millions, of dollars worth of research.
This is how they come up with demos to give to the agency. P&G, using them
again as an example, creates products, researches them with consumers,
develops packaging and the product name to appeal to a specific group that
will not only buy the product but will buy with the least marketing cost.

Such research shows over and over that the older the consumer is, the more
established brand preferences are. That means that to sell, the advertiser
has to overcome more resistence, and that means more ads... and if they are
going for a different demo, new creative (confusing) and a different
strategy for dealer incentives, point of purchase, and the campaigns on TV,
cable, Internet, outdoor, print and such. If the return on investment is
low, they will not do it because they can't make money... and that is the
reason why there are practically zero campaigns for 55+.



Once again, research is a snapshot of conditions as they exist
pertinent to an array of assumptions. Assumptions that are
scientifically arrived at, perhaps, but assumptions nonetheless. And
assumptions take on an axiomatic inviolability that is accepted as law
within the context of research. However, these assumptions are based on
an average of characteristics applied to individuals, and narrowed
statistically, ignoring wider, and broader variations in human
behaviour, tastes, beliefs, politics and understanding...and a hundred
others.
It's a pretty specific and scientifically arrived at snapshot.
But it's only a snapshot. And like photographs in Life, it's only a
picture of a moment. A product of a myriad of influences that are not
seen, and are not measured in favor of the more easily arrived at
characteristics.

These snapshots are then applied to understand the actions of
the target class and infer the motivations of that class implied by
their actions. This is where the assupmtions get very obvious. Because
no one may know what's in another's heart. What motivates one to take an
action is deeply personal and influenced by things that may not be seen
or measured by research.

Take an example. AM talk formats experience a younger demo
ratings spike after moving to FM. The assumption is that they're
listening now because of the improved audio quality. Which may be true.
Which is likely true. But it's not the only reason.

The new format may be where there was an older, less successful
station, but with some credible ratings. Suddenly there's a new station
there.

Sampling without effort. Some loyalty to the old station.
Hearing something they'd not heard before and enjoying it. Something
they would not have considered listening to but now, enjoy because it's
now where all the with-it listeners are listening. Sampling because
promotion directed their attention, supported by their friends. Hundreds
of reasons.

Whatever they may be, most of them will be based in the
fundaments of FM audio. But that single issue may not be their
motivation. It may be at their core of motivation, in this instance. But
it may not be what moves them to listen.

Research would see this, and infer that if the station on the
AM were to sound better that it would move these listeners to sample the
station on the AM band.

False assumption leads to an incorrect inference. The improved
audio quality, the static free listening, the new content....whatever
they enjoy, is already where they are listening. It's where their radios
already are. It's where, for more than a generation, they've been
conditioned to listen, because AM is history. It's where bad sound and
archaic formats, and their father's Oldsmobile has been tuned for decades.

You talk about being Oldsmobiled? Who listens to AM? The same
people who didn't buy an Alero, even though it was a cleaner, more
stylsh line, with better performance and more comprehensive features.
Those same people are not listening to AM because it's AM. They didn't
buy an Alero precisely because it was an Oldsmobile. And this has been
true of Oldsmobile since the 50's. The same people that didn't buy
Oldsmobiles, bought comparable Pontiacs, Chevrolets. They also bought
Buicks. They wouldn't even consider an Oldsmobile. Even though it was
often a better designed, better built version of the same platform, they
chose the equivalent models in other brands. For more money. For less
money. But always not buying the Oldsmobile.

Changing the Oldsmobile to look like the Pontiac, Buick or
Chevrolet, would not influence the buy. In 1956 Buicks and Oldsmobiles
were identical mechanically, and nearly identical cosmetically (thank
God I went to the car shows all weekend, eh?) but the same person who
bought the Buick wouldn't consider the Oldsmobile. For any reason.
Because it was an Oldsmobile.

Similarly to the analogy of AM radio, there was a time
Oldsmobile was a giant. But those that bought were not willing to
consider another brand. Likewise, non-Olds buyers would not consider an
Oldsmobile.

What motivated buyers to buy or not to buy? That is the
question. Research could say it was style, mechanicals, price, even the
name itself. But it cannot KNOW what really motivates an individual to
do anything. It can only infer, based on an array of assumptions applied
to a snapshot. And like a photograph, what's out of the reach of the
lens is entirely unknown. May only be assumed. But what's out of the
reach of the lens most profoundly influences the nature of that within
the frame.


Research infers that younger demos will listen to AM if the
audio were clearer. Perhaps. But will they sample it? Honestly sample
it? Probably not. "Why" is individually determined, and out of the reach
of the research snapshot. But the ones who will not listen to AM now,
will not listen, simply because you improve the audio (debatable given
IBOC performance I've experienced). It's their father's radio. It's
unhip. It's bad sound. Whatever the reason, there's nothing that will
get them to sample AM.

Now, your argument that with a bandplan change and side by
side AM/FM sampling will be easier, and often unavoidable...Even less
likely they'll move to AM...And even if the FCC mandates a continuous
bandplan for broadcast, they'll still not sample AM because side by side
with FM, even AM HD still sounds less robust, less clean, with more
artifacts, and more reception anomalies.

The research snapshot may suggest and assume a lot of things.
But it's actively in denial of the big Oldsmobile logo stamped across AM
radio.




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.

The point is not about income, etc. The point is that to create a change in
brand preference costs too much and makes the sale undesirable.


The point is exactly about income. It's about sales,
accessing the disposable income of those who have the most of it. If
it's too much work to access that well of disposable cash, then when the
free cash you're scooping up off the ground starts to run thin, where do
you turn for sales?

More importantly, you don't want to be telling the Boomer
generation that they're easily ignored because their inconvenient to
serve. Don't do us any favors.



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

Nearly all film ads are targeted to 15 to 34 year olds. That's because that
group is the overwhelming box office customer. Similarly, 9% of consumers
account for about 90% of beer consumption. The beer companies focus on the
media that deliver the 9%. The rest they get by spillage or they don't even
care about them because they can not make a profit on the sale based on mass
media advertising.


If your pitch doesn't work, change the pitch. You keep
saying what can't be done. Look at possibilities. There's nothing that
can't be done. These things are done every day.


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.

Radio stations do not generally get to pitch the client.


Radio stations pitch clients every day. Every day. That's
what the Sales staff is for. If a station ONLY accepts agency buys, you
telling me you have no Sales staff.


If we have contact,
it is when working with the marketing department after the sale on a
promotion or some kind of support merchandising. Most agency clients have no
interest in talking to someone from a radio station.


So you have said. And yet, you seem unwilling to find the
way to build the relationship that would circumvent that wall between
Radio and the client. And yet, I've seen it done, effectively, most of
my career.

Every Day.



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

There is no money in 55+. No single radio station, and no group can change a
client's attitude if the client is going to say, "I can not get a decent ROI
on that demo" or "my product was designed for 18-34 year olds and I hope we
don't get Oldsmobiled."


That's where your superiour knowledge and experience comes
in. Accepting 'can't' because someone waving a check has said it, isn't
Leadership. It isn't even Management.

Nothing is 'can't.' There are always possibilities. It's
your job as Manglement and Sales to make that pitch. Accepting the
snapshot only guarantees that you'll live within the confines of the
snapshot. The future is finding what's outside the frame.



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

Radio, as it exists today, is not going to be around by the time advertisers
want 55+, if they ever do.

So, you're in this for the quick kill. And the listeners be
damned? That doesn't sound like someone who's dedicated his life to the
business. In this country or others.

Radio as it exists today, is only for today. A future will
be in embracing possibilities instead of seeing only obstacles.

Embracing possibilities happens every day.




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.'

I also know what is a waste of time. In my last sales position, over 8 years
we had 28% average annual sales increases when the market was only
increasing in single digits. I knew where to focus my efforts, and did not
tilt windmills. And it's not just age... you have to know what non-radio
brands are appropriate for radio, and which need the "appetite appeal" of
visuals or product demonstrations to sell. This is why you don't hear
exercise equipment sold on the radio.


Stan Freberg demonstrated three decades ago that you can
sell anything on radio. It's the most visual of electronic media.

Trying new things isn't tilting windmills. Accepting
'can't' on it's face, however, can make it seem that way.



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.

No, radio stations present rates to agencies. They may present the station
occasionally, like once or twice a year, to the media director or the media
planners. If this is through a rep firm, even that seldom happens.


My own experience is directly contrary to this. Radio
stations present to agencies every day. The ones that get on the buys
most consistently create relationships with agencies that transcend the
walls erected to separate them.



When radio buys come out, the budget and the creative have already been
approved by the agency... and in most cases, the media plan by medium and by
market has been approved, Stations are invited to submit rates to get a part
of a pre-existing buy. They get a chance to make up for a high CPP by
supplementing with value added, but demos and cost goals are engraved in
stone.

Nothing is engraved in stone, unless you accept that it is.
Again, I've seen radio stations influence buys every day.


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.

This is really not about research. The agency uses audience data to
determine ratings points deliverys, and tells you how much they will pay per
point. The station either delivers that cost or beats it, or does not get
bought. And with so much radio advertising being placed by buying services,
there is no opportunity to sell much of anything else on most agency calls
for rates.



Mel Karmazin said, and repeatedly, I might add, that
revenues are commonly linked to ratings. They're not. A station can
always outperform it's ratings. Always. And it does so through high
expectations, and retaining control of it's inventory, And by believing
in possibilities instead of obstacles.


The hallmark of a salesperson is the ability to overcome
objections. To overcome obstacles. Accepting the futility of an agency
policy isn't part of that.

That's how Karmazin stations overperformed their ratings,
their markets and converted at 200% and higher.

Living in the Third Circle doesn't get you there.

Accepting 'can't' produces no results. And in an ever
competitive marketplace where there is, after all, only a 100 revenue
share, results matter. Possibilities produce results.




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.

No radio station today has a sales plan for 2012. The business changes so
fast, the competitive array changes so fast, that there is no way to
forecast. But we do know there is no money for 55+ from agencies.


Correction....you BELIEVE there's no money from agenices
for 55+. You just haven't found a way to tap it, yet. Because you accept
that you can't try.



So nobody
is going to program for 55+ in the hopes clients of agencies change their
marketing tactics.

The few instances of buys for 35-64 in the past few years were mostly for
home equity loans, mortgages and such. That market is totally dead, as are
the companies that were using some money in radio.

That you deflect questions with statistics rather than provide real
answers.

No, there are realities.


No, these are perceptions. You've been told this can't be
done. I've seen it not only done, but done every day.



Such as the buying service issue. Such as most
stations using rep firms, not their own sellers for all but local agency
sales. And the fact that agencies practically never change approved budgets
and media allocations. Many have tried... a good example being Cox' WDUV in
Tampa... #1 for over a decade, but 14th in sales because 90% of the audience
is 65+. They have spent nearly 15 years trying, and Cox is a very good
company, and they are billing about what a gospel AM daytimer does. They
have nearly no agency business. Most of the accounts are Senior Specials at
restaurants and such... at very low rates.


Again, perceptions. If you accept them, they become what
you believe to be realities. They do not become realities themselves. If
you're not succeeding at selling this, then change you pitch.


No one's denying that there are more desirable demos. But
to claim that the desireable demos are the only demos is nonsense. Dare
I say, unmotivated.

On Sep 10, 12:50 pm, D Peter Maus wrote:


So, he vowed to do a hula in a grass skirt on Wall Street if his
stores produced a 20% increase in a single year.

They did. He did. And the story has passed into legend.

When I think about Tardo in a grass skirt, it makes me gag a little.

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

See, I disagree with that. While I hear your objections, and have
heard them before, often at the top of someone's lungs, I've been
personally involved in too many meetings where we did, as a radio station,
sell directly to an agency, and we did change the parameters of a buy. I"m
not saying its easy, but it IS possible. And it does bear fruit...both for
the end client and the station, which means it also bears fruit for the
agency.

The cunundrum or Catch 22 is that any station that tries to program for
older demos starts off with no advertising opportunities except local direct
and a few local agencies that are willing to look for some different
solutions. The agency business that makes or breaks stations in larger
metros will, if anything is possible, take years to work on.

I understand that agencies are too important to get their hands dirty
with Radio. They're agencies. Radio is...well, the home of disk
jockeys...and perceptually, that's not a positive.

The big reason is that agencies make money on creative and that means print
and TV production, not on radio spots. In addition, radio is costly to buy
and that means that a buying service is often employed... and that is where
no changes in media specs ever happen.

One of the many reasons that agencies do the things they do is to throw up
walls between themselves and media so that the agency can call the shots.
And they're notoriously intractable. And they don't care about anybody's
rules. At the Chicago Addy's Leo Burnett used to submit their national
McDonald's spots in the local station promo category, where they clearly
did not belong. The swept the category.

But you are addressing creative. The creative is a joint deal with the
client, where the agency does have considerable leeway.
The demos, though, come from the client in most cases. Or are worked out
with the agency as part of designing the campaign.

We got on their buys. Through ups and downs, through manglement
changes, PD changes, music changes, and severe ratings slumps. And we
stayed on the buy.

In this case, you were close enough to effect format acceptance. Try that
with demos, though.

When the station hit #1, it was converting at 200%+ Sometimes
dramatically higher than that. And almost always including demos NOT
requested by the agencies.

As long as you had enough in demo numbers to justify the buy, the agency is
happy. Agencies routinely buy news / talk, but they get a price that is only
for the 25-54 component, and meets the CPP goals. It does not matter that
there may be more 55+... they just want to come in at a price they set for
the demo.

I was the ONLY one who had ever been in the store. And when I talked to
Gary Benson, who was building the franchise, I was the only one who
understand what it was he was trying to build. Because I'd been there. And
all the figures, all the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on demos,
including having the London Symphony record a jingle, meant nothing. I'd
demonstrated that I could produce the result he was looking for.

That was a fortunate and unusual occurance. Most agency business comes from
out of town agencies, visited by the station reps. occasionally, the station
GSM or GM will go on calls in each market, but generally they meet with the
media director at the highest level. The media director has very little demo
changing power.

In a similar, and related, context, if a spot isn't producing results
with 55+, change the pitch. You CAN sell to higher demos. And I understand
that lower demos are easier, and less costly to assault. But the higher
demos have more ready cash, and they do spend it. Convincing them may
require a different effort. May require more of it....but if once you
break through, you've tapped into a gold mine. Getting over that hump may
require more effort, but once tapped, that reserve of cash comes with new
loyalties, and new willingness to do business.

Again, agency accounts (the clients) have done cost of sale evaluations and
the main reason they don't buy is the conversion cost. THis is why 18-34 is
so important. This is why our group is so excited about being the number one
TV net 18-34 in the last Nielsens... that is where the money is... where
brand preferences are formed.

I understand you can't sell 55+ the way you sell 18-34. I'm not
disuputing that at all. So you don't. But you don't just give up. We buy.
Often the same things. But more often than not, bigger ticket items. You
change the pitch. You find a way to sell us that does work. If you're
unwilling to do that, we'll take our money and spend it with someone who
will. But with an aging population, and declining birth rates, it's
something you may wish to consider.

As I said, in my case it does little good. I've been talking in
generalizations for all stationns in all markets, mostly. But for Hispanic,
18-34 and 18-49 are THE demos as this sector is not ageing and, in fact, has
only small population numbers in the over 50 demos.... not enough for a
dedicated 40+ radio station to get any kind of salable numbers.

I understand exactly what you're saying. But my own experience,
again, says that there are ways of getting beyond that wall. Sometimes
it's a matter of building a relationship with someone at the rep firm.
Sometimes, it's a matter of something so absurd that it gets attention.

Absurd works. Years ago, a major textile company had a sign in the
President's office: "It it's about advertising, I am not in." I went to a
hardware store and bought one of those mini doors that lock companies use to
show off knobs and locks. I had "what does it take to open your door" and
our group logo stenciled on it, and sent it by messenger. The next day, I
got a call, an appointment and a sale.

The real issue is that access to clients is dangerous... many agencies view
it as betrayal, and it costs you. And so many clients are in cities you can
not afford to travel to all the time.
I disagree, here, David. I've been involved. I've seen it done. I"ve
helped do it. And not only in Chicago.

It's not easy. And not every effort is successful. But it can be
done. And it's done every day.

Nice if you are in a city where many clients are also located. But
impractical... the real solution is to have groups like the RAB or an ad hoc
group of stations catering to 50 and over do a conserted effort. Most
agencies will not look at one ageing station in one market. Those stations,
particularly oldies, news talk, etc., should do this. But I see no evidence
that they ever do.

Once again, research is a snapshot of conditions as they exist
pertinent to an array of assumptions. Assumptions that are scientifically
arrived at, perhaps, but assumptions nonetheless. And assumptions take on
an axiomatic inviolability that is accepted as law within the context of
research. However, these assumptions are based on an average of
characteristics applied to individuals, and narrowed statistically,
ignoring wider, and broader variations in human behaviour, tastes,
beliefs, politics and understanding...and a hundred others.

Research today is often based on actual observance of families, in the home,
like reality shows. Qustions are asked at the end about why certain things
were done, such as purchases, menu decisions, etc. It is very in depth and
very expensive. But when companies combine this data with sales data, they
spot the correlations and that is how they develop marketing plans for many
consumer products.

It's a pretty specific and scientifically arrived at snapshot. But
it's only a snapshot. And like photographs in Life, it's only a picture of
a moment. A product of a myriad of influences that are not seen, and are
not measured in favor of the more easily arrived at characteristics.

The in-homes overcome most of these objections.

Take an example. AM talk formats experience a younger demo
ratings spike after moving to FM. The assumption is that they're listening
now because of the improved audio quality. Which may be true. Which is
likely true. But it's not the only reason.

The new format may be where there was an older, less successful
station, but with some credible ratings. Suddenly there's a new station
there.

In most cases we are looking at, it's the same station moved to FM... like
KTAR in Phoenix or the KSL situation in SLC or WTOP in DC... or small
markets like WNLS in Talahassee. First book, the 35-54 show up. Neever had
them before, and then they stay. No format change, no competitive influence.

FM is acceptable, FM sounds better. AM does not meet those criteria.

You talk about being Oldsmobiled? Who listens to AM? The same
people who didn't buy an Alero, even though it was a cleaner, more stylsh
line, with better performance and more comprehensive features.

But it was an Olds. The brand had an image of being "the last car you will
ever buy." It was one step away from a hearse. But the Olds was a good car,
as good as many American cars. AM sounds crappy, and did way before NRSC and
such. Whether we blame the receiver manufacturers or the change to FM does
not matter. When the same listeners like the same programming on FM, but
shun it on AM, it means the band is old, decrepit and it sounds bad.

Research infers that younger demos will listen to AM if the audio
were clearer. Perhaps. But will they sample it? Honestly sample it?
Probably not. "Why" is individually determined, and out of the reach of
the research snapshot. But the ones who will not listen to AM now, will
not listen, simply because you improve the audio (debatable given IBOC
performance I've experienced). It's their father's radio. It's unhip. It's
bad sound. Whatever the reason, there's nothing that will get them to
sample AM.

This is the hope of some that promote HD for AM. It is a last-ditch
effort.... I encourage it, because all HD radios will have AM as well and
there is a chance that some decent signal AMs may slow down the erosion.

The point is not about income, etc. The point is that to create a change
in brand preference costs too much and makes the sale undesirable.

Actually, 55+ includes, mostly, retired people. And that is where you see
the scary figures on how many people live only on social security, and about
a million have moved to Mexico because they can not afford to live in the
US. Look at income figures overall for 55+ and only a small percentage have
any significant savings. And most have very little discretionary income.

Radio stations pitch clients every day. Every day. That's what
the Sales staff is for. If a station ONLY accepts agency buys, you
telling me you have no Sales staff.

Direct sellers pitch the client. But most direct money is at lower rastes
and with higher maintenance. Agency accounts are serviced more than they are
sold. But the money is worth it.

I had three sellers for the top billing station in market #13. We tried
direct sales, but we got mostly no pay and slow pay and low rates. The
clients with money went to agencies. We led the market in revenues and power
ratio, because we did not spend on lost causes.

There is no money in 55+. No single radio station, and no group can
change a client's attitude if the client is going to say, "I can not get
a decent ROI on that demo" or "my product was designed for 18-34 year
olds and I hope we don't get Oldsmobiled."


That's where your superiour knowledge and experience comes in.
Accepting 'can't' because someone waving a check has said it, isn't
Leadership. It isn't even Management.

Nothing is 'can't.' There are always possibilities. It's your
job as Manglement and Sales to make that pitch. Accepting the snapshot
only guarantees that you'll live within the confines of the snapshot. The
future is finding what's outside the frame.

Again, this is for someone else to do. We don't have a 55+ population to
serve, and the average age of our sector is in the mid to low 20's. So we
have to deal with getting 18-24 on the general market agency buys, because
we have no 55+ to offer.


Stan Freberg demonstrated three decades ago that you can sell
anything on radio. It's the most visual of electronic media.

I think that is true Urban Legend. Appetite appeal is so critical to come
campaigns that radio, if use, supports recall at POP, not sales.

Mel Karmazin said, and repeatedly, I might add, that revenues
are commonly linked to ratings. They're not. A station can always
outperform it's ratings. Always. And it does so through high expectations,
and retaining control of it's inventory, And by believing in possibilities
instead of obstacles.

Stations that outperform give a specific desirable demo with little
spillage, like all sports. They get the power ratios that are close to 1:1.
CHR gets 0.7 or 0.8 to one because advertisers don't want the teens. And so
on.


Again, perceptions. If you accept them, they become what you
believe to be realities. They do not become realities themselves. If
you're not succeeding at selling this, then change you pitch.

I am pretty sure that in 15 years, WDUV has tried every technique
immaginable. None have worked so far.

On Sep 9, 4:53 pm, RHF wrote:
On Sep 8, 3:22 pm, RHF wrote:





On Aug 31, 2:31 am, dxAce wrote:

David Frackelton Gleason, still posing as 'Eduardo', wrote:

"IBOCcrock" wrote in message
oups.com...
"Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers"

This was documented in another thread.

A "thread" is your documentation? Well, there are "threads" all over the web
about aliens in the US Government, but being in a thread does not make it
so.

The funny thing is that I have neither seen nor heard of a gag order.

Wasn't a gag order imposed on you in Ecuador? Just before they tossed your
prancing ass out of the country at gun point?

IBOC The Great Debate - Message Count is 490
Will We Reach 500 and Go into the Bonus Round ? ? ?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

IBOC The Great Debate - Today's Message Count is 537
.
We Have Reached 500 and Now Go into the Bonus Round ? ? ?
.
Message 750 Will Be the Daily Double !
.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

IBOC The Great Debate - Today's Message Count is 548
* Things were slow today but may be they will pick-up tomorrow. .

We Have Reached 500 and Now Go into the Bonus Round ? ? ?

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

See, I disagree with that. While I hear your objections, and have
heard them before, often at the top of someone's lungs, I've been
personally involved in too many meetings where we did, as a radio station,
sell directly to an agency, and we did change the parameters of a buy. I"m
not saying its easy, but it IS possible. And it does bear fruit...both for
the end client and the station, which means it also bears fruit for the
agency.

The cunundrum or Catch 22 is that any station that tries to program for
older demos starts off with no advertising opportunities except local direct
and a few local agencies that are willing to look for some different
solutions. The agency business that makes or breaks stations in larger
metros will, if anything is possible, take years to work on.


I think you're missing what I'm suggesting....I don't think you
want to overhaul your programming to target older demos. But I do think
it would be wise to include them. For a music station, that wouldn't be
much more than a few carefully selected songs, and a delivery that
acknowledges the listeners with some miles on them. For talk, it may be
no more than simply taking a few mature calls.

When Michael Packer was programmer of WLS, a memo went out that
there were to be no callers who didn't sound under 35. Well,
c'mon...you're talking political content, local controversy and Chicago
related issues, you're going to have people over 35 listening. Still,
they weeded out the calls. A copy of the memo hit Feder's desk at the
Sun-Times and the fit hit the shan. Now it was a public matter, and
there was no end to the reaction.

Now, I know what he was going for. But the fact remains that
there is a segment of the audience, a sizable segment, at that, that was
simply excluded from participation. All it would have taken is a few
calls from older demos. Nothing dramatic. But a good call is a good
call, if it happens to be from an older listener, without changing the
content of the conversation...why make the exclusion if you don't have to.

When Kipper took over, things changed. There is a balance
again. And I'm sure there's a proportion of demographic representation
on the calls, but there's clearly no hard cut-off, and upper demos are
served.

When LeeAnn Lewis was GM of KMBQ, she mandated that no disk
jockeys put callers on the air younger than 25. That didn't, ultimately,
serve, her, either. One of the hottest things for a parent to do was to
put their kid on the phone to the radio station. Getting their kid on
the air was a high for them. Cutting that off, also cut off a lot of
response from their target demo, 25-49, because that's where the young
parents were. The station fell, rapidly, from grace.

Serving out-of-target demos need not be something that requires
dramatic, or even significant program content changes. A little fringe
attention. Widening the niche, as it were. Sometimes, acknowledgement is
all it takes.

Older demos, especially, don't suddenly start listening to
Tommy Dorsey (one of my all time favorites, btw) just because they hit
middle age. And they don't get locked into The Grateful Dead just
because they lived through the Dead's heyday. Older demos are like
everyone else, just more experienced. They still sample new music. They
still see new movies. They still laugh at contemporary commentary. Not
acknowledging that is shortsighted in the extreme.

My G/F and I listen to Tommy Dorsey in the car. Along with
Pink Floyd, Gary Puckett and the Union Gap, Psapp, Rilo Kiley and dozens
of others. I also listen to Classical, and traditional jazz. She also
enjoys standards redone by Robert Downey, light classics and today's hot
hits. So the iPods get quite the eclectic workout. We both get today's
humor. We both follow today's street. We're both politically active.

And we both spend discretionary income on products advertised
by local radio stations. Stations that prefer to ignore us.

Similarly, my friends and colleagues have not stopped living
because we hit 55.

And to service us at Radio takes so little. And requires no
significant change in content. Just because we hit 55 doesn't mean we
overhaul our tastes, start carrying mothballs, or dress like Aunt Pat's
couch.

Presenting that to your stations should be simple. Presenting
it to your advertisers might even be unnecessary.


I understand that agencies are too important to get their hands dirty
with Radio. They're agencies. Radio is...well, the home of disk
jockeys...and perceptually, that's not a positive.

The big reason is that agencies make money on creative and that means print
and TV production, not on radio spots. In addition, radio is costly to buy
and that means that a buying service is often employed... and that is where
no changes in media specs ever happen.


Again, even in that scenario, I've done work that directly
contravenes this station. I"ve seen it done every day. Even with big
agencies, even with media buying services.



One of the many reasons that agencies do the things they do is to throw up
walls between themselves and media so that the agency can call the shots.
And they're notoriously intractable. And they don't care about anybody's
rules. At the Chicago Addy's Leo Burnett used to submit their national
McDonald's spots in the local station promo category, where they clearly
did not belong. The swept the category.

But you are addressing creative. The creative is a joint deal with the
client, where the agency does have considerable leeway.
The demos, though, come from the client in most cases. Or are worked out
with the agency as part of designing the campaign.


In which case, the agency would have influence, and you would
have, through the agency depending on your salesmanship, relationship,
or choice of drinking buddies, influence, as well. Some of the most
important changes in media buys, when I was with Cook Inlet, took place
during the prayer meetings in the Chapel at the bottom of the Hancock.
Two or three sacraments is all it took to get the ecumenicals started.
You had the Sales and General Mangler from the station, you had reps
from two or three agencies, and you had a LOT of tequila. Seeds were
planted (in more ways than would be polite to mention here) and things
got changed.

It happens every day.



We got on their buys. Through ups and downs, through manglement
changes, PD changes, music changes, and severe ratings slumps. And we
stayed on the buy.

In this case, you were close enough to effect format acceptance. Try that
with demos, though.

We did. And we expanded buys targeted below 34 to include up to
55.

We did it all the time. And we commanded premium rates for it
to boot.


When the station hit #1, it was converting at 200%+ Sometimes
dramatically higher than that. And almost always including demos NOT
requested by the agencies.

As long as you had enough in demo numbers to justify the buy, the agency is
happy. Agencies routinely buy news / talk, but they get a price that is only
for the 25-54 component, and meets the CPP goals. It does not matter that
there may be more 55+... they just want to come in at a price they set for
the demo.

Sometimes true, sometimes, not so. But we always converted
high, and we always got them to buy demos that they specifically hadn't
considered. Salesmanship, and relationships. They go a long way toward
changing things.


I was the ONLY one who had ever been in the store. And when I talked to
Gary Benson, who was building the franchise, I was the only one who
understand what it was he was trying to build. Because I'd been there. And
all the figures, all the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on demos,
including having the London Symphony record a jingle, meant nothing. I'd
demonstrated that I could produce the result he was looking for.

That was a fortunate and unusual occurance. Most agency business comes from
out of town agencies, visited by the station reps. occasionally, the station
GSM or GM will go on calls in each market, but generally they meet with the
media director at the highest level. The media director has very little demo
changing power.



It was definitely a rare event, to be sure. And I don't know
that it's happened since. But more than a personal victory, it was quite
the object lesson that you don't just accept what you're handed. There
are always new ways of solving seemingly insurmountable problems that
achieve the desired goals based on old fashioned results.

I know it may be a surprise, to you, but I'm not the kind of
guy who 'fits-in.' I"m not a joiner. And my social circle is very small.
Most of the time, people at work just ignored me. Even the GM forgot I
was there sometimes. But when it came to getting something done that
'couldn't be done,' I was the first one they called. And the given
credit for the win...but that's another story. The reason I lasted so
long through so many PD's, so may GM's and so many sales manglers, is
because I saw solutions that traditional thinking didn't recognize. But
the results produced were traditional results. Usually a bit over the top.

So, what I'm saying is not to abandon your thinking, or abandon
your targets, goals and strategies, but rather, just to expand the
niche, a bit, to include more creative strategies at attacking issues
that are supposed to be unassailable. Create new avenues to include a
wider base of listeners, and a wider target for advertisers. Don't just
take the numbers you're handed and go away. Create a strategy for
getting those numbers, and widening them. Line your pockets with the
extra cash.

There was a movie with Robert Preston,...late 50's, may have
been Kraft Television Theatre, but don't quote me...Preston was a buggy
whip salesman and the automobile had just been invented. With
predictable results for his company. He tried to find new work, but
there was none. Young turks had captured the sales market, and he was a
dinosaur. More importantly, he was associated all over his circuit with
obsolete buggy whips.

In one memorable scene, he was pitching himself to a young
sales mangler who just turned him down flat as too old, too obsolete,
too irrelevant. In a moment of pique, his frustration led him to one of
the most important soliloquies in modern times....in which, and again,
don't quote me, he said these words, among others, "Have you ever in a
farmer's field, helping him to pull a heifer out of a calf that was too
young to have it? Have you ever gotten down knee deep in mud to help him
fix a broke plowshare? Sales isn't about numbers, figures and reports,
it's about relationships....because what you're really selling is
yourself."

It went on for about 2 minutes...but you get the idea. Well,
the young turk doing the hiring, said, "I disagree."

But the speech had gathered the attention of office staff,
including the young turk's father, who said, "I don't." And Preston was
hired into the new business as a salesman.

The rest of the story wasn't so happy. But that moment, that
exchange made quite a point, and that is: Sales is not about your
product. PURCHASE is about your product. SALES is about selling yourself.

That moment also made quite the point that sometimes, being
respectful of the business decorum is precisely the most ineffective
thing to do.

Now, this movie is fiction. It's based on real experiences,
but it's fiction. But it does demonstrate a concept that's all to often
forgotten in today's business climate, where the only things that matter
are numbers, spreadsheets, and research. And that concept is that,
before you get to the money, the numbers, the profits, business is about
the relationship. You have to have one to do business.

And that's true of any business. Of any sales position. Of any
Mangler's position. Even the guy behind the microphone at the radio
station. You have to establish a relationship. You can do it as a matter
of numbers, spreadsheets and research, or you can do some real
selling....selling yourself. Your station, your station's
personality...you can cultivate a real relationship with your listeners,
and your clients.

And in that context, widening the niche becomes not only
possible, but necessary. And the benefits are long term. Because, once
you've sold yourself, you've created a recession resistant relationship
that will weather downturns. Ratings, market forces, economy. And
you'll weather it through the loyalty built by providing results, and
solutions to seemingly unsolvable problems to your clients.

But more importantly, you can now create changes in thinking,
and you can do it from every source. Media directors, producers,
writers, sales, representatives, all can be parts of solutions, instead
of automatons living and dying by scenarios handed to them by third and
fourth party number crunchers.

If you can do this, you create a win-win-win-win. Everyone gets
served from listeners to the station, the agency, and the client. And
above all, you.

Rather than living and dying by numbers over which you have no
control, you can live and die by your own knowledge and experience, and
use those numbers as tools, not lifelines.


In a similar, and related, context, if a spot isn't producing results
with 55+, change the pitch. You CAN sell to higher demos. And I understand
that lower demos are easier, and less costly to assault. But the higher
demos have more ready cash, and they do spend it. Convincing them may
require a different effort. May require more of it....but if once you
break through, you've tapped into a gold mine. Getting over that hump may
require more effort, but once tapped, that reserve of cash comes with new
loyalties, and new willingness to do business.

Again, agency accounts (the clients) have done cost of sale evaluations and
the main reason they don't buy is the conversion cost. THis is why 18-34 is
so important. This is why our group is so excited about being the number one
TV net 18-34 in the last Nielsens... that is where the money is... where
brand preferences are formed.

See above.


I understand exactly what you're saying. But my own experience,
again, says that there are ways of getting beyond that wall. Sometimes
it's a matter of building a relationship with someone at the rep firm.
Sometimes, it's a matter of something so absurd that it gets attention.

Absurd works. Years ago, a major textile company had a sign in the
President's office: "It it's about advertising, I am not in." I went to a
hardware store and bought one of those mini doors that lock companies use to
show off knobs and locks. I had "what does it take to open your door" and
our group logo stenciled on it, and sent it by messenger. The next day, I
got a call, an appointment and a sale.

The real issue is that access to clients is dangerous... many agencies view
it as betrayal, and it costs you. And so many clients are in cities you can
not afford to travel to all the time.


That's why the relationship is SO important. With the correct
relationship, you access clients with willing assistance of the agency.
Because you've sold the agency on the benefits of your creative solutions.

It happens every day.


Once again, research is a snapshot of conditions as they exist
pertinent to an array of assumptions. Assumptions that are scientifically
arrived at, perhaps, but assumptions nonetheless. And assumptions take on
an axiomatic inviolability that is accepted as law within the context of
research. However, these assumptions are based on an average of
characteristics applied to individuals, and narrowed statistically,
ignoring wider, and broader variations in human behaviour, tastes,
beliefs, politics and understanding...and a hundred others.

Research today is often based on actual observance of families, in the home,
like reality shows. Qustions are asked at the end about why certain things
were done, such as purchases, menu decisions, etc. It is very in depth and
very expensive. But when companies combine this data with sales data, they
spot the correlations and that is how they develop marketing plans for many
consumer products.


Correlations between snapshots based on limited observation
and assumptions that serve the correlations. Often they're accurate and
can infer motivations. But they cannot actually determin what motivates
a buyer.

Correlation is not causality. And it's causality that drives
action. Getting buyers, listeners, or investors to take action requires
that you trigger motivations. Correlation cannot determine that.

If you want younger people to move to AM to give a realistic
valid sampling of HD, you have to determine what's REALLY keeping them
from it. Correlation only says that they should, or they may. Causality
says they'll be motivated to.

Big difference. Arrived at differently than correlation.




It's a pretty specific and scientifically arrived at snapshot. But
it's only a snapshot. And like photographs in Life, it's only a picture of
a moment. A product of a myriad of influences that are not seen, and are
not measured in favor of the more easily arrived at characteristics.

The in-homes overcome most of these objections.

I don't believe that. I've seen too many times it didn't.



Take an example. AM talk formats experience a younger demo
ratings spike after moving to FM. The assumption is that they're listening
now because of the improved audio quality. Which may be true. Which is
likely true. But it's not the only reason.

The new format may be where there was an older, less successful
station, but with some credible ratings. Suddenly there's a new station
there.

In most cases we are looking at, it's the same station moved to FM... like
KTAR in Phoenix or the KSL situation in SLC or WTOP in DC... or small
markets like WNLS in Talahassee. First book, the 35-54 show up. Neever had
them before, and then they stay. No format change, no competitive influence.
FM is acceptable, FM sounds better. AM does not meet those criteria.

You missed my point...taking an AM station to FM puts that
content before listeners who have never listened, in a place where there
was another station before. It's a new station to the listeners. May be
the same format, same content, same station, but it's still new to
listeners who never listened to AM. So, yes, new listeners come and
they stay. Because, 1) there's a new station, on the band where they're
already listening, 2) they like the content.

Content drives listening, and no change in audio quality
alone will change the listening habits of a listener if they don't like
the content.

AND, you've hit the nail on the head. FM is acceptable.
Yes, it does sound better. But that's not the entire issue of
acceptability. We're into our second generation of listeners who for
whom Radio IS FM. AM is not acceptable because 'nobody listens,' 'my mom
listens to....' and other reasons I don't need to repeat. The issue is
exactly acceptability. Sound is a part of that. But it's not a
motivator. If it were, every Walkman would be AM Stereo, FM Dolby and
Quad with FMX.

They aren't. Because audio isn't the issue. It's not the
audio, it's perception of unacceptability.

If you want younger demos to talk radio, move it to FM. That
works. But AM HD won't get you there, because they simply will not give
band or anything on it a fair sample.

And especially not with all the interstation hash.

You talk about being Oldsmobiled? Who listens to AM? The same
people who didn't buy an Alero, even though it was a cleaner, more stylsh
line, with better performance and more comprehensive features.

But it was an Olds. The brand had an image of being "the last car you will
ever buy." It was one step away from a hearse. But the Olds was a good car,
as good as many American cars.

Excuse me there was a typo, there....it should have read,
who doesn't listen to AM? the same people who didn't buy an Alero, even
though it was a cleaner more stylish line, with better performance and
more comprehensive features.

It was an Olds. Not interested.


AM sounds crappy, and did way before NRSC and
such. Whether we blame the receiver manufacturers or the change to FM does
not matter. When the same listeners like the same programming on FM, but
shun it on AM, it means the band is old, decrepit and it sounds bad.


No, it means that the band is old, decrepit and sounds bad,
but they shun it because it's not FM. Changing the audio will not
change the perception that AM is not FM. They're not listening to AM
because it's AM...they're not even getting to the audio quality. Because
they're not sampling it. And they won't. It's a foregone conclusion that
AM is undesirable. Most importantly, like Oldsmobile, because it's a
link to age. Changing the audio won't change that perception.


Research infers that younger demos will listen to AM if the audio
were clearer. Perhaps. But will they sample it? Honestly sample it?
Probably not. "Why" is individually determined, and out of the reach of
the research snapshot. But the ones who will not listen to AM now, will
not listen, simply because you improve the audio (debatable given IBOC
performance I've experienced). It's their father's radio. It's unhip. It's
bad sound. Whatever the reason, there's nothing that will get them to
sample AM.

This is the hope of some that promote HD for AM. It is a last-ditch
effort.... I encourage it, because all HD radios will have AM as well and
there is a chance that some decent signal AMs may slow down the erosion.
The point is not about income, etc. The point is that to create a change
in brand preference costs too much and makes the sale undesirable.

Actually, 55+ includes, mostly, retired people. And that is where you see
the scary figures on how many people live only on social security, and about
a million have moved to Mexico because they can not afford to live in the
US. Look at income figures overall for 55+ and only a small percentage have
any significant savings. And most have very little discretionary income.

And it's also where you see the retirees driving
Escalades. Business owners vacationing in Italy. Executives spending
$12,000 on a watch. It's where you seed big screen plasmas in three or
four rooms of a 9000 sq ft home. It's where you see airline pilots
living in $450,000 condos in the city. It's where you see airline
stewardesses living across the hall from them.

There are scary lower income listeners in the lower demos,
too. Welfare moms who can't afford heat in the winter, young couples
with just enough income to pay the rent, but live on Ramen and Wal-mart
bread. C'mon David, you're smarter than this.



Radio stations pitch clients every day. Every day. That's what
the Sales staff is for. If a station ONLY accepts agency buys, you
telling me you have no Sales staff.

Direct sellers pitch the client. But most direct money is at lower rastes
and with higher maintenance. Agency accounts are serviced more than they are
sold. But the money is worth it.

I had three sellers for the top billing station in market #13. We tried
direct sales, but we got mostly no pay and slow pay and low rates. The
clients with money went to agencies. We led the market in revenues and power
ratio, because we did not spend on lost causes.



No one is saying it's easy. But it's about the
relationship, and picking your direct client carefully.



There is no money in 55+. No single radio station, and no group can
change a client's attitude if the client is going to say, "I can not get
a decent ROI on that demo" or "my product was designed for 18-34 year
olds and I hope we don't get Oldsmobiled."


No one is saying to change the niche. Only widening the
niche. Inclusion rather than exclusion. It's all about relationships.




Stan Freberg demonstrated three decades ago that you can sell
anything on radio. It's the most visual of electronic media.

I think that is true Urban Legend.


Call the RAB, they'll dig up a copy of the spots for
you. They were highly visual.

Appetite appeal is so critical to come
campaigns that radio, if use, supports recall at POP, not sales.


No question. But that's not the only application of
radio. And again, widenening the niche. Widening the thinking.

And building relationships. It's not impossible.


Mel Karmazin said, and repeatedly, I might add, that revenues
are commonly linked to ratings. They're not. A station can always
outperform it's ratings. Always. And it does so through high expectations,
and retaining control of it's inventory, And by believing in possibilities
instead of obstacles.

Stations that outperform give a specific desirable demo with little
spillage, like all sports. They get the power ratios that are close to 1:1.
CHR gets 0.7 or 0.8 to one because advertisers don't want the teens. And so
on.



That's not what he was saying. What Karmazin was saying
was that revenue is dependent on demand for your product. Ratings can be
related to that, but not necessarily. If you want to create demand,
field more sales people. Let them compete with each other to get
sponsors on the air. Use a sliding rate card. Drive up the rates.
Waiting for orders to come in based on ratings is one way to do it. But
you live by the book you die by the book. Creating demand on your own
produces results that are recession and ratings proof. WUSN, Chicago
remained sold out even after a 50% slide in ratings when Country Music
slid off the grid. And they held their rates. WDZ, Decatur had fewer
listeners than the police radios, and was sold out. At top market rates.
KWKH, Shreveport didn't show up in the book for years, and held top
market rates, and was sold out 10 months out of the year.

Ratings are one thing. Effective sales are another.


Again, perceptions. If you accept them, they become what you
believe to be realities. They do not become realities themselves. If
you're not succeeding at selling this, then change you pitch.

I am pretty sure that in 15 years, WDUV has tried every technique
immaginable. None have worked so far.

The only failure is quitting the attempt.