The outlook for radio in 2008 is bleak
 

On Nov 9, 6:08 am, IBOCcrock wrote:
"Radio's New Litmus Test"

"The consolidators inspired by the folks at Clear Channel are cutting
expenses and reducing their staffs in anticipation of more trouble
ahead. The outlook for radio in 2008 is bleak. Seven years of erosion
and poor prognostications for the year ahead in audience and billing.
That's not me talking -- it's your few remaining Wall Street analysts
who cover radio."

http://insidemusicmedia.blogspot.com...tmus-test.html

Ha! Ha! Eduardo!

Amazing. They've put basically the same programming on nearly every
radio station in the US. How shocking that this is not a recipe for
success!

Where did they go wrong? I actually think their strategy is good, but
they aren't pushing it far enough. Ratings will only take off when
their stations are actually synchronized with each other. Music
stations should also cut back their playlists to two or three songs,
and more time should be devoted to advertizing. People want lots and
lots of advertising and bland, generic programming. You'd think the
folks at Clear Channel would have learned this lesson by now.

The outlook for radio in 2008 is bleak
 

On Nov 9, 8:39 am, Steve wrote:
On Nov 9, 6:08 am, IBOCcrock wrote:

"Radio's New Litmus Test"

"The consolidators inspired by the folks at Clear Channel are cutting
expenses and reducing their staffs in anticipation of more trouble
ahead. The outlook for radio in 2008 is bleak. Seven years of erosion
and poor prognostications for the year ahead in audience and billing.
That's not me talking -- it's your few remaining Wall Street analysts
who cover radio."

http://insidemusicmedia.blogspot.com...tmus-test.html

Ha! Ha! Eduardo!

Amazing. They've put basically the same programming on nearly every
radio station in the US. How shocking that this is not a recipe for
success!

Where did they go wrong? I actually think their strategy is good, but
they aren't pushing it far enough. Ratings will only take off when
their stations are actually synchronized with each other. Music
stations should also cut back their playlists to two or three songs,
and more time should be devoted to advertizing. People want lots and
lots of advertising and bland, generic programming. You'd think the
folks at Clear Channel would have learned this lesson by now.

Maybe, Eduardo will chime in with all of his GD excuses!

The outlook for radio in 2008 is bleak
 

In article .com,
Steve wrote:

On Nov 9, 6:08 am, IBOCcrock wrote:
"Radio's New Litmus Test"

"The consolidators inspired by the folks at Clear Channel are cutting
expenses and reducing their staffs in anticipation of more trouble
ahead. The outlook for radio in 2008 is bleak. Seven years of erosion
and poor prognostications for the year ahead in audience and billing.
That's not me talking -- it's your few remaining Wall Street analysts
who cover radio."

http://insidemusicmedia.blogspot.com...tmus-test.html

Ha! Ha! Eduardo!

Amazing. They've put basically the same programming on nearly every
radio station in the US. How shocking that this is not a recipe for
success!

Where did they go wrong? I actually think their strategy is good, but
they aren't pushing it far enough. Ratings will only take off when
their stations are actually synchronized with each other. Music
stations should also cut back their playlists to two or three songs,
and more time should be devoted to advertizing. People want lots and
lots of advertising and bland, generic programming. You'd think the
folks at Clear Channel would have learned this lesson by now.


Which three songs?

Do you think "Stairway to Heaven" will make the grade?

"Whatsamatter? You don't dig Zep?" -- Brock Sampson

:-) -j