In article ,
David Eduardo wrote:
It has about 7 to 10 years of life as it is, since the remaining salable
demos in 35-54 will be over 55 in that time period, and there will be no
advertisers. Just paid religion, infomecials and stuff like that.

Or non-commercial. KUOW (Seattle, NPR) just started up an AM simulcast
60 miles to the south, in Tumwater. 1340 kHz?

Mark Zenier
Googleproofaddress(account:mzenier provider:eskimo domain:com)

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


I think that may be a bit optimistic. Given the rate at which radio
use in general is declining, (and this has been a fairly recently
documented phenomenon...even as late as last year, the numbers suggested
that things were only off slightly..

The decline in cume is very small. 2% since '65. The listening time is
off 2 hours off a base of 21 for the average listener, and that is since
1988. So we have nearly 10% or a rate of nearly a percent a year.
However, the erosion is mostly in non-servable demos, teens and 55+ with
some 18-24, but far less. There are so many reasons for all this that it
is not easily analyzed.


When you and I began these discussions, what 5 years ago, now, your
contention was that Radio usage was and had been essentially constant for
the last 30 years, with only slight losses in share. A definite shift in
the balance between AM and FM, to be sure, but overall, Radio was stable,
with a very bright future. IIRC, you said something like, Radio has never
been more profitable. I recall my comment was to be guardedly
optimistic....that just about the time you think things are good, someone
comes along with something new, something unexpected, and steals the food
off your table. Which comment has been met with varying skepticism, not
only from yourself, but others here and on other USENet newsgroups.

And here we are talking about AM's survivability, and the stemming of
FM erosion in the face of the rising number of alternative choices.

But the lack of probable surviability of AM is not based on new technology.
It is based on an ageing listener base and the reality of radi time buys.
What will kill AM is not its technical issues per se, but the fact that AM
is no longer acceptable to most anyone under 40 and that cutoff point is
rising each year.

AM may survive if it enters the digital world. I wonder if this is like AM
steeo which could have helped AM a lot in 1978, but by the time it arrived,
years later, it was too late.

WGN revenues are off again, according to a figures released by Tribune:

This is because in 25-54, WGN is 15th in the market. It is near-death as a
viable money machine, and sustained mostly by sports play by play. It's not
the technology, it is the fact that it has no salable listener base.

This is yet AGAIN, another such report by Tribune, with particular
interest in WGN-A shortfalls in revenue. Suggesting that the future is not
so bright for WGN. And by extension as one of the nation's most successful
AM radio stations, AM Radio in general.

Yet KFI in LA, which tries to get more 25-54 appeal, and is the #5 25-54 (#2
in English in this 42% Hispanic market). The problem is WGN which has aged
with its listeners.

Note that revenues are off. Last trends for WGN are up. How is it,
then, that the industry's most respected army of trained assassins are
unable to convert share at a stable rate?

The salable ratings are down, horribly. Since the kind of rates WGN charges
are not accessable to most direct advertisers, and agency accounts seldom go
55+, here is the reason.

It would have to do with the people who are calling the shots, the
advertisers, and their ability to spend money more efficiently in both
local media, and it's alternatives.

They get the demos they are after in more quantity on 14 other stations. #1
25-54 is WOJO, by the way. And WOJO's sales have doubled in two years.

Loss in revenue does horrible things to well established radio
stations. In fact, a heritage radio station can be blown off the dial by
an upstart with no budget, simply by bleeding off a fraction of the
heritage station's share. Especially in today's over leveraged radio
ownership environment, a minor loss in share, means numbers don't get
hit....And a well established radio station has a pretty heavy budget in
order to hit the numbers expected by the home office.

I have mentioned this in the past, but most broadcasters are minimally
leveraged in the category of 30 station or more owners. The consolidation of
the post 1996 radio world was mostly equity and merger financed.

Once revenues begin to fall, focus becomes intensified on the revenues.
To the degree that everything else suffers through neglect. Radio in the
US is ALWAYS about the money, but when things are good, at the very least,
lip service is paid to content, public service and programming effort. Let
revenues fall, and the sales ducks start selling everything that's not
nailed down, and many times things that are. Clutter spikes. Units go up.
And everything on the air has a sales/promotional angle to it.

For the first time, as revenues have been flat or off, there has been an
inventory tightening, mostly lead by Clear Channel. Average spot loads are
below 11 minutes now, a new low.

Clear Channel's Less is More program, where :60s are discouraged and
:30's encouraged, with over all fewer units, took a cruel twist when two
quarters into the program, in house said that the audience was responding,
while external perceptuals showed that the audience thought there were
more spots on the air than ever.

I have not seen this. In fact, I have seen a very good "less commercials"
from the listeners to CCU's Spanish and Hispanic tageted stations.


My point is, that though share appears to be slightly off, revenues are
starting to fall, and when revenues start to fall, the balance of focus
and effort shifts to revenue from programming. Now, you yourself have
said on a number of occasions that the sharp GM's and owners realize that
the big win goes to the stations that present the best content. Or at
least the most popular content. But good content costs. And when revenues
are off, the first thing that's sacrificed is the content.

I've not noticed this, either. What I see is a more critical analysis of
whether high priced talent is deliveing good revenue... with the Mancow
decision in Chicago an example of a costly show that did not deliver a good
margin. I think we will see more networked radio... the same model that
allows Rush to be in Tallahassee.

Yes, most stations were not profitable before consolidation. I got
that. And I actually understand that. And I actually see and understand
that since consolidation many of those unprofitable stations are now
viable with a black bottom line. I've seen it for myself at several
stations I have regular contact with. But with consolidation also came
enormous debt load.

See the above. The Cleaar Channel debt to equity ratio is better than that
of General Electric!


And advertisers follow the trends into their buys. Radio revenues are
declining. And the burden is on Radio to withstand the shrinking revenue
share.

Right now, all traditional media are in a flat or declining revenue postion,
with newspapers and local TV staitions the worst off. Radio is up in some
markets, off in ohters. This may, in part, be a reaction to severzal big
growth years, where radio finally broke into getting over 8% of ad
expenditures... something it never did.

CBS Radio just cut loose how many of it's well established and
historically significant staff? Because of declining revenue.

Not really. They are bvieng punished on the street for lackluster
performance, and did a housecleaning. Revenues are pretty much flat, with
the real mistakes in NY and Chicago offset by huge growth in places like LA.

Here in the Windy, the HD-2 staff at WJMK, the legends of Chicago radio
were severed at once, this week. Because of revenue short falls.

How many halls at CBS stations ran red this week?

ClearChannel is talking about staff cuts. Spinning off properties.
Because of declining revenues.

And Disney is cutting several thousand employees and cutting back form 22 to
8 features a year. This is more about the ongoing demands of investors than
the actual businesses.

Now, we're trying to do the same thing with IBOC/HD, and in the
process, doing what would never have been considered befo trashing the
bands with noise, in the interest of boosting listening.

You're way too close to the bull, David. Take a step back and see who
the horns have really gored.

Fortunately, I am in a sector that is growing hugely, even this year.
Listening is not down, we are spending more on programming than before, and
sales are up. the model of investment in programming still works. Those who
do not follow it are the ones with problems.

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


I think that may be a bit optimistic. Given the rate at which radio
use in general is declining, (and this has been a fairly recently
documented phenomenon...even as late as last year, the numbers suggested
that things were only off slightly..

The decline in cume is very small. 2% since '65. The listening time is
off 2 hours off a base of 21 for the average listener, and that is since
1988. So we have nearly 10% or a rate of nearly a percent a year.
However, the erosion is mostly in non-servable demos, teens and 55+ with
some 18-24, but far less. There are so many reasons for all this that it
is not easily analyzed.


When you and I began these discussions, what 5 years ago, now, your
contention was that Radio usage was and had been essentially constant for
the last 30 years, with only slight losses in share. A definite shift in
the balance between AM and FM, to be sure, but overall, Radio was stable,
with a very bright future. IIRC, you said something like, Radio has never
been more profitable. I recall my comment was to be guardedly
optimistic....that just about the time you think things are good, someone
comes along with something new, something unexpected, and steals the food
off your table. Which comment has been met with varying skepticism, not
only from yourself, but others here and on other USENet newsgroups.

And here we are talking about AM's survivability, and the stemming of
FM erosion in the face of the rising number of alternative choices.

But the lack of probable surviability of AM is not based on new technology.
It is based on an ageing listener base and the reality of radi time buys.
What will kill AM is not its technical issues per se, but the fact that AM
is no longer acceptable to most anyone under 40 and that cutoff point is
rising each year.

AM may survive if it enters the digital world. I wonder if this is like AM
steeo which could have helped AM a lot in 1978, but by the time it arrived,
years later, it was too late.

WGN revenues are off again, according to a figures released by Tribune:

This is because in 25-54, WGN is 15th in the market. It is near-death as a
viable money machine, and sustained mostly by sports play by play. It's not
the technology, it is the fact that it has no salable listener base.

This is yet AGAIN, another such report by Tribune, with particular
interest in WGN-A shortfalls in revenue. Suggesting that the future is not
so bright for WGN. And by extension as one of the nation's most successful
AM radio stations, AM Radio in general.

Yet KFI in LA, which tries to get more 25-54 appeal, and is the #5 25-54 (#2
in English in this 42% Hispanic market). The problem is WGN which has aged
with its listeners.

Note that revenues are off. Last trends for WGN are up. How is it,
then, that the industry's most respected army of trained assassins are
unable to convert share at a stable rate?

The salable ratings are down, horribly. Since the kind of rates WGN charges
are not accessable to most direct advertisers, and agency accounts seldom go
55+, here is the reason.

It would have to do with the people who are calling the shots, the
advertisers, and their ability to spend money more efficiently in both
local media, and it's alternatives.

They get the demos they are after in more quantity on 14 other stations. #1
25-54 is WOJO, by the way. And WOJO's sales have doubled in two years.

Loss in revenue does horrible things to well established radio
stations. In fact, a heritage radio station can be blown off the dial by
an upstart with no budget, simply by bleeding off a fraction of the
heritage station's share. Especially in today's over leveraged radio
ownership environment, a minor loss in share, means numbers don't get
hit....And a well established radio station has a pretty heavy budget in
order to hit the numbers expected by the home office.

I have mentioned this in the past, but most broadcasters are minimally
leveraged in the category of 30 station or more owners. The consolidation of
the post 1996 radio world was mostly equity and merger financed.

Once revenues begin to fall, focus becomes intensified on the revenues.
To the degree that everything else suffers through neglect. Radio in the
US is ALWAYS about the money, but when things are good, at the very least,
lip service is paid to content, public service and programming effort. Let
revenues fall, and the sales ducks start selling everything that's not
nailed down, and many times things that are. Clutter spikes. Units go up.
And everything on the air has a sales/promotional angle to it.

For the first time, as revenues have been flat or off, there has been an
inventory tightening, mostly lead by Clear Channel. Average spot loads are
below 11 minutes now, a new low.

Clear Channel's Less is More program, where :60s are discouraged and
:30's encouraged, with over all fewer units, took a cruel twist when two
quarters into the program, in house said that the audience was responding,
while external perceptuals showed that the audience thought there were
more spots on the air than ever.

I have not seen this. In fact, I have seen a very good "less commercials"
from the listeners to CCU's Spanish and Hispanic tageted stations.


My point is, that though share appears to be slightly off, revenues are
starting to fall, and when revenues start to fall, the balance of focus
and effort shifts to revenue from programming. Now, you yourself have
said on a number of occasions that the sharp GM's and owners realize that
the big win goes to the stations that present the best content. Or at
least the most popular content. But good content costs. And when revenues
are off, the first thing that's sacrificed is the content.

- I've not noticed this, either. What I see is a more critical
analysis of
- whether high priced talent is deliveing good revenue... with the
Mancow
- decision in Chicago an example of a costly show that did not deliver
a good
- margin. I think we will see more networked radio... the same model
that
- allows Rush to be in Tallahassee.

DE,

Erich "Mancow" Muller Seeks New Chicago Station
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2...443.shtml?s=sp

~ RHF

On 15 Jul 2006 00:59:28 -0700, "RHF"
wrote:

The program sucks. The guy is a blowhard.

"Michael Lawson" wrote:

[...] For pete's sake,
128 MB MP3s are no better than cassette quality
(or from what I can judge), [...]


You can do a helluva lot better than cassette quality with 128 kBPS
MP3s, but it requires that you spend some effort in adjusting your MP3
ripper AND that you are willing to let it take some time to do the rip
instead of doing it quick (and dirty). My personal MP3 collection,
ripped from my own CDs, is something of an audio history of learning
how to do it properly.

--
Eric F. Richards,
"It's the Din of iBiquity." -- Frank Dresser

Everything doesn't suck.It is like that wonderfull married (with some
grown married offspring) black Christian woman (Pam Roberts) at the
Goodwill store told me yesterday afternoon,,,, (she said) Larry,there is
good news,,,,, we are here and seeing another day.
cuhulin

I was thinking about ''saying something'',,, nahhhhh,,, I won't say that
one either.But I just know y'all good folks get me driff.cuhulin
.................................................. ............
I was lookinnnnn back to see if you was lookin back to see if I was
lookin back to see if you was lookin back at me,,,,,,, you was cute as
you could beeee,,,,,, standin there lookin back to see if I was lookin
back at youuuu,,,,,, oooo weeeeee,,,,,,,,

Oklahoma, www.drudgereport.com

Retarn to senderrrrrr,,,,,,, adress unknown,,,,,,, no such
numberrrrrrr,,,,,,,, no such phone,,,,,,,,,
cuhulin

www.hometownfreepress.com OKLAHOMA

Ohhhhhh,I Love youuuuuu,,,,,,, OKLAHOMA,,,,,,,,,,,
cuhulin

Watching www.wlbt.news on tv.A lot of prolifers are in Jackson
right now.The Scumbag socalled ''cops'' are arresting them and putting
them on buses and hauling them off,also,the socalled cops (I Literally
Hate most ''cops'',are you a ''cop''? I Hate your guts!!!!!!! DAMN YOU
TO HELL!!!!!!!!!!!) (F..K YOU!!!!!!!!) are taking away their Bibles from
them.I am PRO LIFE.
cuhulin