Radio-Info.com

Radio-Info.com Discussion Boards
Login November 21, 2009, 10:25:22 AM *
Username Password Session Length
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email? Did you forget your password?
:  
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: What anti HD people ignore  (Read 1420 times)
DavidEduardo
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 17024

2009 - 50 years in radio


« Reply #30 on: November 06, 2009, 11:48:18 AM »

Here in Chicago there is still a lot of automobile advertising on the radio. WBBM, WIND and WGN, run a lot
of ads for car dealership's. There are also a large amount of dealership ads running on the FM side as well.
They are run very frequently on some of the top rated FM's such as WDRV, WVAZ and WLS FM, to name a few.

Yes, and automotive, as I said (and which was maliciously edited or "savaged"), is off 80% over the last 2 years, and along with financial institutions is responsible for the bulk of the drop in radio advertising overall.
Logged

“Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it.”  Winston Churchill. The chronicles of radio, www.americanradiohistory.com where you will find an assortment of broadcast publications and magazines from the 20's through the early 80's and ratings data from 1997-2009.
landtuna
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 1716


« Reply #31 on: November 06, 2009, 12:04:20 PM »

It seems that 80% lost to radio has moved to TV.  Car ads predominate here.
Logged
DavidEduardo
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 17024

2009 - 50 years in radio


« Reply #32 on: November 06, 2009, 12:57:00 PM »

It seems that 80% lost to radio has moved to TV.  Car ads predominate here.

It has not gone anywhere. To quote the head of Regent, "We’re selling tons of car commercials to lots of car dealers, but the unit cost is down to the point where that is driving part of the problem with decreased revenues.” Auto advertising was off 40% last quarter helping push Regent revenue down 14%. And that is compared to last year, which was also off by similar amounts... thus, about 80% reduction in auto ad dollars, whether it be radio or TV. 

Nationally, nearly a third of dealers have closed or are in bankruptcy, and floor financing is nearly gone, driving inventories to about a third of traditional levels. Car sales themselves are off, with around 10 million units projected for this year, vs. 17.1 million units as recently as 2005. When sales are off 40%, most dealers are unprofitable and cut ad expenses eiter by getting lower rates or by advertising less.
Logged

“Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it.”  Winston Churchill. The chronicles of radio, www.americanradiohistory.com where you will find an assortment of broadcast publications and magazines from the 20's through the early 80's and ratings data from 1997-2009.
stacker
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 80


« Reply #33 on: November 06, 2009, 11:34:31 PM »

Mr. Gleason/Eduardo.  Refresh me.  Now, just why should we heed your advice?
Logged
DavidEduardo
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 17024

2009 - 50 years in radio


« Reply #34 on: November 07, 2009, 01:38:17 PM »

Mr. Gleason/Eduardo.  Refresh me.  Now, just why should we heed your advice?

I'm not giving any advice in this thread. I am just correcting the mistaken impression that automotive advertising has not suffered in the last two years of recession.

Among the facts that have been subject to contradictory posts are:

1. Auto (dealer and automotive) are down about 80% over 2006.
2. Depending on the area, anywhere between a quarter and a third of dealers have closed.
3. Many dealers are close to bankruptcy, and advertise less
4. Ad rates have tumbled, and car dealers are getting very attractive deals, sometimes less than a third of former rates.
5. Auto ads have not moved to TV as was suggested. TV ad revenue for the category has gone down in similar amounts.

My only advice is to check the facts; the automotive category is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off.
Logged

“Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it.”  Winston Churchill. The chronicles of radio, www.americanradiohistory.com where you will find an assortment of broadcast publications and magazines from the 20's through the early 80's and ratings data from 1997-2009.
KB1OKL
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 1293


« Reply #35 on: November 07, 2009, 04:15:08 PM »

I would have to say that to most people who are not splitting hairs "next to nothing" and "nothing" mean practically the same thing especially when they are used to express an idea not an exact quantity.
Logged

HD radio? 250.00??!! My 20 year old boombox sounds and receives better than that, you know the one with the paint drips on it and clothes hanger antenna that the painters threw into the dumpster?
DavidEduardo
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 17024

2009 - 50 years in radio


« Reply #36 on: November 08, 2009, 04:21:41 AM »

I would have to say that to most people who are not splitting hairs "next to nothing" and "nothing" mean practically the same thing especially when they are used to express an idea not an exact quantity.

I asked a couple of people, and "next to nothing" to all of them meant "a very small amount. " "Nothing" on the other hand means "nothing."

And in this context, what is left of the automotive category is "next to nothing."  One broadcaster, Regent, in its earnings call, said the category was off 77% this year. On top of declines last year, that is truly "next to nothing."
Logged

“Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it.”  Winston Churchill. The chronicles of radio, www.americanradiohistory.com where you will find an assortment of broadcast publications and magazines from the 20's through the early 80's and ratings data from 1997-2009.
Savage
rimember

Online Online

Posts: 1715


« Reply #37 on: November 08, 2009, 11:35:48 AM »

Wow...we're still beating that dead "nothing/next to nothing" horse?  Let's see now: "nothing" would be, by definition...zero.  "Next to nothing" could mean one or two.  It's a distinction without a difference.  Anyway anyone who thinks I quoted you unethically could just scroll up the page and read your initial statement verbatim.  The latter category, by the by, of posters who apparently think this numbers precisely one - who would be, YOU.  Or you might say: "next to NO posters here agree with you."

Now, let's turn to your claim that a 77% decrease in car dealer business at Regent equates to "next to nothing."  That means 23% of the business is still there (atypical, IMHO, compared with this region, but I'm letting that go.)  To keep the math simple, if the group did $5 million in car business in 2008, the most recent period meant $1.15 million.

Could you please send me a check for $1.15 million ASAP?  You'll never miss it.  It's "next to nothing."
Logged
SirRoxalot
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 5092


« Reply #38 on: November 09, 2009, 09:06:21 AM »

Auto advertising was off 40% last quarter helping push Regent revenue down 14%. And that is compared to last year, which was also off by similar amounts... thus, about 80% reduction in auto ad dollars, whether it be radio or TV.

Whoa, sorry to be late to the party, but there's a SERIOUS flaw in your math here, David. You too, Bob.

Auto advertising was down 40% from 2007 to 2008. Let's say that auto was - for convenience sake - $1,000,000 in 2007. That means that it was $600,000 in 2008.

It was down another 40% from 2008 to 2009. 40% of $600,000 is $240,000, which means that Auto brought in $360,000 in 2009. HARDLY "nothing" OR "next to nothing". It's more like 36% of the 2007 numbers.

Hey, isn't this a discussion of HD radio? If so, then couldn't the money dumped into facilities and licensing for HD radio be better spent elsewhere? Obviously, HD isn't bringing in any NEW audience. If anything, it's diluting the existing audience, reducing ad rates even further - all in a flawed technology with NO affordable receivers that reduces the fidelity of existing stations. My guess is that money could be better spent reducing debt, improving programming, or improving on-line capabilities.

BTW - Savage is wrong, too, so please send ME $1.8-Million.
Logged

"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts — for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
DavidEduardo
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 17024

2009 - 50 years in radio


« Reply #39 on: November 09, 2009, 11:54:10 AM »

It was down another 40% from 2008 to 2009. 40% of $600,000 is $240,000, which means that Auto brought in $360,000 in 2009. HARDLY "nothing" OR "next to nothing". It's more like 36% of the 2007 numbers.

RAB is saying 80%, and I think they have a good grasp on the market.

If GE stock were off 80%, I think most people would say you could get the shares for next to nothing... twenty cents on the dollar is pretty thin.

There is an auto dealer magazine that a friend who owns a dealership showed me yesterday... they thing as many as a third of all surviving dealerships are at bankruptcy level now, so we might have a reduction of half of all dealers.
Logged

“Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it.”  Winston Churchill. The chronicles of radio, www.americanradiohistory.com where you will find an assortment of broadcast publications and magazines from the 20's through the early 80's and ratings data from 1997-2009.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP

Postings on Radio-Info.com are the opinions of the people who post them. Views expressed do not necessarily represent the views of Radio-Info.com or its parent in3 media, inc. In fact many of the views expressed here are just plain wrong. But they are opinions and this site allows us all to discuss those opinions. Any reliance on information posted is done so at the user's own risk. For a detailed look at the rules, regulations and uses of Radio-Info.com please see our TERMS OF SERVICE. 14

Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.749 seconds with 20 queries.