David Eduardo wrote:

The standard daypart is 7 to Midnight.

Using the 6th largest city, Houston, as an example, between 7 PM
and midnight...as a percentage of all persons, whether using radio or
not, it is 0.6%. In 18-34 year olds, the share is 0.4% of all
persons in that age group, whether listening or not.




Thank you. That's what I wanted. For comparison, television pulls
over 60% of all persons during 7 to midnight.

- 0.6% listening to AM during primetime
- over 30% watching broadcast TV (fox, cw, ...)
- over 60% watching all tv (including cable)


Is it any wonder the AM stations feel the need to improve the quality
of the sound (digital upgrade), in hopes of bringing in more listeners.

On Oct 3, 5:54 am, SFTV_troy wrote:

Is it any wonder the AM stations feel the need to improve the quality
of the sound (digital upgrade), in hopes of bringing in more listeners.

How will severely curtailing their coverage area and sticking their
heads in the sand bring in more listeners?

THIS DISCUSSION IS OFF-TOPIC FOR REC.AUDIO.TECH
(AND REC.AUDIO.CAR, FOR THAT MATTER)
PLEASE DROP REC.AUDIO.TECH FROM THIS DISCUSSION

On Oct 3, 2:54 am, SFTV_troy wrote:
David Eduardo wrote:

The standard daypart is 7 to Midnight.

Using the 6th largest city, Houston, as an example, between 7 PM
and midnight...as a percentage of all persons, whether using radio or
not, it is 0.6%. In 18-34 year olds, the share is 0.4% of all
persons in that age group, whether listening or not.

Thank you. That's what I wanted. For comparison, television pulls
over 60% of all persons during 7 to midnight.

And has for the last fifty years.


- 0.6% listening to AM during primetime
- over 30% watching broadcast TV (fox, cw, ...)
- over 60% watching all tv (including cable)

Is it any wonder the AM stations feel the need to improve the quality
of the sound (digital upgrade), in hopes of bringing in more listeners.

Do try and take a look at the ratings for those digital upgrades,
dip****, then come back here to apologize.

wrote in message
oups.com...
On Oct 3, 5:54?am, SFTV_troy wrote:
David Eduardo wrote:

The standard daypart is 7 to Midnight.

Using the 6th largest city, Houston, as an example, between 7 PM
and midnight...as a percentage of all persons, whether using radio or
not, it is 0.6%. In 18-34 year olds, the share is 0.4% of all
persons in that age group, whether listening or not.

Thank you. That's what I wanted. For comparison, television pulls
over 60% of all persons during 7 to midnight.

- 0.6% listening to AM during primetime
- over 30% watching broadcast TV (fox, cw, ...)
- over 60% watching all tv (including cable)

Is it any wonder the AM stations feel the need to improve the quality
of the sound (digital upgrade), in hopes of bringing in more listeners.

Listeners do not care about audio quality, but program quality - it
is the music formatted FMs that are screwed from attacks from iPods,
cell phone music streaming, and personalized music services such as
Pandora, Slacker, and Last.FM - news/talk/sports/ AMs are highly
rated. You have it ass-backwards.

Then why have news talk stations all over the US moved totally to FM or are
transitioning with simulcasts? The answer is that they get a big increase in
25-54 listeners when on FM, as the under-55 crowd likes the programming, but
hates the sound quality. When they get it on FM, they listen.

And AM news talkers have about 60% or more of their audience in the 55 and
older demos, which is not an age group with much, if any, sales appeal.

Heck, just this week a 50 kw sports AM in Detroit moved to FM... because
they want to appeal more to younger-than-55 demographic groups.

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...
Then why have news talk stations all over the US moved totally to FM or
are transitioning with simulcasts? The answer is that they get a big
increase in 25-54 listeners when on FM, as the under-55 crowd likes the
programming, but hates the sound quality. When they get it on FM, they
listen.


I'm sure glad that the radio industry can afford to just toss away the
largest segment of the population, with the most disposable income. No
wonder so many businesses are going under, if that's the way they do
business.

On Oct 3, 5:45 pm, dxAce wrote:

Edweenie, it would seem as though 55 is your favourite number.

It would also seem to be the age at which you adopted the 'Eduardo' shtick.

dxAce
Michigan


It's probably also the number of academic degrees he claims to have,
though that part of his website shifts like the sands depending one
what people are saying here.

Steve

"Steve" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Oct 3, 5:45 pm, dxAce wrote:

Edweenie, it would seem as though 55 is your favourite number.

It would also seem to be the age at which you adopted the 'Eduardo'
shtick.

dxAce
Michigan


It's probably also the number of academic degrees he claims to have

I don't claim to have any....

David Eduardo wrote:

"Steve" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Oct 3, 5:45 pm, dxAce wrote:

Edweenie, it would seem as though 55 is your favourite number.

It would also seem to be the age at which you adopted the 'Eduardo'
shtick.

dxAce
Michigan


It's probably also the number of academic degrees he claims to have

I don't claim to have any....

But, you did claim to have enough credits for two degrees, then denying that you
stated such and then flip flopping yet again.

Pathological!

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"Steve" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Oct 3, 5:45 pm, dxAce wrote:

Edweenie, it would seem as though 55 is your favourite number.

It would also seem to be the age at which you adopted the 'Eduardo'
shtick.

dxAce
Michigan


It's probably also the number of academic degrees he claims to have

I don't claim to have any....

But, you did claim to have enough credits for two degrees, then denying
that you
stated such and then flip flopping yet again.

My point is that the credits are not from the same accreditation boards, and
are not combinable...