Eric F. Richards wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:


There is always some one like Eric who knows everything is wrong, but who
can not come up with anything better, either. Of course, the world is full
of bitchers.


Without them, there'd be nothing for manglement to do.


I think manglement will have plenty to do without worrying about my
complaints. Whether I point them out to you or not, events will
unfold to the detriment of radio.

And, of course, I've posted what I think you should do better: Throw
away the model.



Ok...I understand what you're saying. But, you see...it's not
Radio's model to throw away. It comes TO Radio FROM the advertisers. If
you want that to change, it has to start with the advertisers.

That's the point.

The numbers, the listener profiles, the bell curves, the demographic
and psychographic research...it's all done for the benefit of
advertisers, based on THEIR needs, Radio's. Ratings are not for Radio
Stations...they're for advertisers, and the statistical considerations
that define relevant numbers do NOT come from Radio stations...they come
from advertisers.

So, as easy as it is to say that radio should do things better and
throw away the model, things just don't work that way. Because the model
comes from the advertisers. Not within Radio.






Start over. Step one is, what is the density
relationship between listeners and radius/*accurate* coverage maps?
Then, what is the relationship between close-in listeners, further out
listeners, and fringe listeners? What are the percentages of each?
Not per unit area -- that's a different question, stated above -- but
overall.
Final question would be how do I sell to each geographic area? Your
so-called "fringe" listener may commute 30 miles one way across
multiple current marketing ranges, but never changes the dail. How do
you sell to him?

...but you keep ignoring that, with going on with, "butbutbut the
*model* sez..." The model is obsolete. Actually it is worse than
obsolete -- it never had an applicable time.

YOU, Eduardo, are the one who insists the model is right.
Advertisers may "call the shots," but they depend on your model for
their metrics, and you are too myopic to see that it doesn't fit. You
optimize your marketing to the model, and, if your lucky, you'll hit
what we mathemeticians call a "local maximum." But it isn't the
maximum, it's a minor peak.

The rest of the people out there are left wanting. And they'll move
on.

And they'll move on whether I squawk about it or not -- I'm just
telling you what's gonna happen.