wrote in message
ups.com...

Frank Dresser wrote:
wrote in message

Guess I caught you in a lie. The Arbitron ratings don't support your
claim, but you're not willing to admit you got caught in alie.

I overstated my arguement when I said:
"In most markets most listeners are listening to a few stations."
I'm sure we can agree on:
"Many people listen to a few top rated stations, and a
few people listen to many bottom rated stations."
Is there really an important difference between the two statements?



Yeah it's false. The ratings show there are at least 20 channels with
near-identical numbers of listeners. That's more than a "few"



I thought I've heard every possible claim about the Arbitron numbers here,
but this is the first time I've heard that a 5.8 share is nearly identical
to a 1.9 share.

And that supports your arguement as well as it can be supported.

It's all a matter of semantics, I suppose. What do words such as many, top
rated, bottom rated and few mean?

By the way, Chicago's a big market. At least a few stations didn't make the
list. And those stations really do have "near identical numbers".

Frank Dresser

I don't believe HD radio is going much of anywhere.It's a dieing
Alligator.

y'all,,,,,,, www.devilfinder.com Hog Corn Mississippi

Enjoy!
cuhulin

One time, when I worked for Ingles Appliances store back in the 1960's,
I was driving a delivery truck, KBO449 Unit 6, where arrre
youuuuuuu,,,????) One of them Ingles Appliances dudes had a glfriend who
lived on Beechnut Street, about three (tree) miles from doggys couch.If
y'all get me driff?
cuhulin

Frank Dresser wrote:
wrote in message

Yeah it's false. The ratings show there are at least 20 channels with
near-identical numbers of listeners. That's more than a "few"



I thought I've heard every possible claim about the Arbitron numbers here,
but this is the first time I've heard that a 5.8 share is nearly identical
to a 1.9 share.

That's not a big difference. 6 months ago the 5.8 station had dropped
to 4-something, and the 1.9 station had almost 3. There really is not
a huge different between ~5% and ~2% of an audience.

Now contrast that with:

YOU stated that "the top 2 stations have 90% of the listeners" (or
something like that) which is so wrong, it's a borderline lie.

wrote in message
s.com...

Frank Dresser wrote:
wrote in message

Yeah it's false. The ratings show there are at least 20 channels with
near-identical numbers of listeners. That's more than a "few"



I thought I've heard every possible claim about the Arbitron numbers
here,
but this is the first time I've heard that a 5.8 share is nearly
identical
to a 1.9 share.

That's not a big difference. 6 months ago the 5.8 station had dropped
to 4-something, and the 1.9 station had almost 3. There really is not
a huge different between ~5% and ~2% of an audience.

A 5.8 that moves to a 4.0 has lost nearly a third of its audience. You
measure each station over time against itself, first. Like TV shows, some
radio stations go up, others bomb or go down.

In a market like Chicago, every share point is worth about $7 million on the
average. A 25-54 share is probably worth close to $9 million, so a
difference of a single share is huge.

YOU stated that "the top 2 stations have 90% of the listeners" (or
something like that) which is so wrong, it's a borderline lie.

He said the top two alone have 10%, which is absolutely true. Frank's point
here is totally valid.