Question about 950 AM WPEN

[bsquared11]

Mook said: "Radio listening is alive and well, and should be for decades to come."

Mook, for that comment (assuming you mean terrestrial radio) and link to that "research" alone you should have some dignity and resign your spot as a contributor to these discussion boards.  I mean, come on, keep it real, please.  Terrestrial radio will be kaput before the next decade is even halfway finished.  Now, AUDIO listening will be alive and well for decades to come, NOT terrestrial radio. 

[MikefromDelaware]

Mook, the problem with the article you provided and the reason your position is being questioned, is their sample was only 300 people.  I'd want a much larger sampling from all over the nation, city, suburban, and rural.  All ages from 18-65.  My guess, based on what the experts have been saying, both here and elsewhere, is the radio audience on AM is basically 55+ (that's why there is talk about moving news/talk to FM to try to pull in a younger demo), FM is probably more likely to be 35-50.  The younger folks (below 35)  generally do not listen to radio (AM or FM) unless they are at work in a group environment and one radio is used for the whole area, OR their employer has the employees computers filtered in such a way to prevent listening to music online (radio or on line content) and don't allow IPOD's for safety reasons (wearing a headset is generally frowned upon for safety reasons of hearing a fire alarm or your office phone, etc).

If the below 35 group has any choice, they'll be listening to ipods, MP3's, online music, texting, etc, but not AM or FM radio.  This is a paradox, as the advertisers want those exact people and DO NOT want the baby boomers and greatest generation (those who fought WW II) yet those are the people who DO listen to the radio religiously and generally avoid IPODS, MP3's, online music, and who'd not have a clue how to text someone, much less want to do it.  So even though we radio geeks live radio, its time is running out unless someone figures out how to make money for ad agencies with boomers and geezers and then program radio for that group, which now they don't.  Because those young folks, generally, aren't interested in radio.

There's probably someone here who can even quote actual stats to back basically what I'm saying.  I hate to see it also, but the truth is the turth.

[bsquared11]

Thanks MikefromDelaware for keeping it real.  Towers and transmitters are the opposite of where the world is heading digitally with exact measurement of who is listening in real time.  Not the PPM which is creating havoc for stations and making people upset, while making a lot of money for Arbitron.   We are our own bosses today, we do not need anyone telling us when to tune in, we program our own music and information in our lives personally, for us and others connected to us.  That's simply the way technology is evolving and one can join the fun or choose to sit on the sidelines.  And, the days of using a terrestrial delivery system are also winding down.

[aindik]

Thanks MikefromDelaware for keeping it real.  Towers and transmitters are the opposite of where the world is heading digitally with exact measurement of who is listening in real time.  Not the PPM which is creating havoc for stations and making people upset, while making a lot of money for Arbitron.   We are our own bosses today, we do not need anyone telling us when to tune in, we program our own music and information in our lives personally, for us and others connected to us.  That's simply the way technology is evolving and one can join the fun or choose to sit on the sidelines.  And, the days of using a terrestrial delivery system are also winding down.

That all sounds good from the listener end, but there aren't going to be all those options if someone can't figure out how to make money providing it.  I love Slacker.  It's the only place I go for music.  But I have no idea how, or if, they make money.

And I assume you realize that cell phone towers are a "terrestrial delivery system."

[mook]

I'm still willing to wager that terrestrial radio will be alive, well, and profitable long after all of us are dead. Just look at the ratings page here at Radio-Info, and you'll see that 1,730,100 people check out B-101. That's almost 2 MILLION people in just this little town of Philly, my friends.

More people listen to the radio now than they did fifteen years ago. If you read this board, you probably listened to the radio today. For ten years, I have been hearing that radio would be gone within a decade. Well, it's been a decade, and 4 MILLION people just in this tiny town of Philadelphia listened to terrestrial radio today.

I'll check back here in 10 years. 

[Sam Lit]

I'm still willing to wager that terrestrial radio will be alive, well, and profitable long after all of us are dead. Just look at the ratings page here at Radio-Info, and you'll see that 1,730,100 people check out B-101. That's almost 2 MILLION people in just this little town of Philly, my friends.

Yo dude, I would seriously consider a lesson in wagering and accuracy in media analysis. (not that it would be much help).

Oh yes, and each of those 1,730,100 people that has little secret transmitters in their radios transmitting back exact listening data for that exact data analysis, is that what you are really saying?

Factoid: 1st qtr 2010 bankruptcy filings. (not in chronological order) Citadel, Clear Channel, Cumulus.

Factoid: Average 3rd quarter terrestrial radio media industry revenue growth rate (year to year): -24%

I gather you don't have much luck with lottery tickets. But if you have $.05 you can still buy a share of Citadel stock. It should make for a keeno collectors item.

Happy wagering.

[aindik]

More people listen to the radio now than they did fifteen years ago.

More people do lots of things than did fifteen years ago.  That's easy to say.  There are lots more people than there were fifteen years ago.

And obviously B-101's cume (and everyone else's) isn't just in the "little town of Philadelphia," but in the entire metro area including suburbs, which totals 4,352,800 people (which I think is the 6+ population).

The ratings posted here used to tell us the total cume for the entire market.  (The new tables here don't show that anymore).  IOW, how many people listened to the radio (any station) during the ratings period.  IIRC, the number was usually something like 93% of the market.  That's down, but still very high.  But I think TSL is down substantially.

Also, I think the PPM might be masking a larger decline in listenership.  Counted in cume now are people who walk into a store where a radio is on, but don't otherwise listen to the radio.  Those people, if they were filling out an Arbitron diary, might have left it blank.

[MikefromDelaware]

Mook, as some of the media experts (which I'm not) have said in other posts, the average age of AM & FM listeners has been increasing during the past 20+ years, AM has had the problem even longer so skews even older ( I remember my sister in law who wanted to borrow one of our cars while hers was in the shop, bottom line, when she realized the car has only an AM radio - it was a 61 Chevy impala that was in mint condition, she said she'd find another car, not because the car was old, but because if didn't have an FM radio  - I'm serious I'm not making this up, this was around 1980 - she was in her 20's then).  That trend has continued.  I remember reading how even the CBC and BBC were moving many of their stations to FM back then to try to get younger listeners, so even in "socialistic" (government supported) radio markets they are concious of trying to get and keep the younger listeners.  So even if you have a huge number of boomers (like me) listening, the advertisers don't consider us at all in whether or not they buy ad time.  We aren't even counted as a bonus. 

So essentially radio and TV too have the problem of either finding a way to sell enough ads for older listeners/viewers, or somehow attracting the younger people to turn on their radios and TV's. 

I listen to radio a lot.  I've noticed in my market (Wilmington DE #76) that the spot load on both AM and FM stations is less (AM far worse than FM, but in this economy companies are not spending as much on ads as before the crash).  This also is why newspapers are having such a tough time.  The Wilmington News Journal sells well here, they've not suffered a loss of readership generally, but the ads have fallen off so sharply that they've had to cut staff too and make the paper contain less pages of actual news, etc.  So it isn't just with radio, but the print media too. 

Why do you think almost every radio station now has an online service?  To try to attract younger listeners who will listen to stuff online, but don't bother with radio.  I'm sure the owners of both AM and FM stations will fight tooth and nail to find ways to keep their businesses viable ( or sell to someone else before their station loses too much value), but in the end they will lose.  Today you'll read on these boards about former great AM stations that ruled the roost in their markets today are stuggling to keep afloat and these are flame throwing stations. 

Time marches on my friend, and eventually AM radio will go the way of the Victrolia, player pianos, and gas lights in the house for illumination.  All were great in their day, but eventually newer technology made them obsolute.  FM will follow later. 

What may happen is the today's radio stations may someday turn off the transmitter and broadcast only online.  When we have car radios that can go online, then you'll know that day when the transmitters get turned off is getting near.  My guess is car radios is what's kept radio both AM and FM in business as most folks do listen to the radio in their cars.  So I'd never advise some young person to go into radio, as a career, as what sort of a future will they have? 
   

[imhomerjay]

And of course, the current economy that's hurt darn near every ad-supported media out there would have nothing to do with abnormaly large declines in ad revenue. 

Countering one set of iffy stats with equally iffy stats doesn't make a compelling case one way or another.

[MikefromDelaware]

I said, but in this economy companies are not spending as much on ads as before the crash). 

I did blame part of what's happening on the economy, but the decline of radio/tv/print media has more to do with younger demos not using those sources of news/entertainment and the advertisers not wanting the older demos who do (this economy has only made it worse and may hasten the end in some cases).  Ask any of the folks who have access to the actual numbers, demos, etc, and you'll then understand.  I've talked with numerous people in radio and print journalism and they all are saying the same thing.  So what I'm presenting may to you appear to be iffy stats, but my comments are based on what people in the know in the industry are saying.  Granted I don't have the actual numbers to present here, but as I learned the other day in a discussion with WDEL's PD, Chris Carl, Aribitron has rules against giving out the numbers other than the 12+.  So the best you're going to get here on this board is iffy stats.  It gives me no joy to see radio/tv/printed media be in trouble financially as I use all three, but I'm not an ostrich with my head buried in the sand.  I'm not saying all the old school media will be gone next week, but if they can't get younger demos to attract advertisers (who pay the bills and salaries), then something will have to happen eventually and unfortunately the old 3 sources of media will feel the brunt of that, like it or not.  That's not iffy stats, but a financial reality.