In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:
.

In the case of AM, the only thing listeners under 45 think is that it
sounds bad. Period.

Where do you get this? How does AM sound worse to these people than FM?

I "get that" by talking to listeners in person, or by having my staff do
that. AM is irrelevant due to sound quality. Under a certain age, you could
be giving away money and they would not listen because it is AM.

This is why the programming of WTOP in DC moved to FM, that of WNLS
in Tallahassee moved to FM, of WTAR in Phoenix now going to simulcast
on FM, KSL in Salt Lake doing the same thing... etc. These stations
believe they have a viable format in, at least, 35-44, which they do
not get, but believe they can get with the better sound quality of
FM.

What we have here is a failure to communicate. People do think about
radio when looking for programming content and when they find what they
like program in the buttons on the radio so they can go right to it.

But they do not ask "why." They just select from a menu of free options.

Who said anything about why? Are you reading what I posted? I understand
that people not into radio spend no time thinking about it. Why do you
think that this is suddenly a problem with a certain age group and AMBCB?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California