Tag Archives: Mark Ramsey

Will we see “local” radio again?

Posted on by

So Clear Channel is going to sell 400+ radio stations. Will these stations become more local? Mark Ramsey says it depends on who buys the stations and the “models of success” they try to follow:

1. Quality local talent with local connection and high entertainment value
2. Quality syndicated talent with high entertainment value
3. Low cost or no talent – regardless of its source (i.e., nothing matters but the music)

He concludes his post with the question: “Of those, which do you think is the toughest to achieve? And which is the cheapest?”

When I started in radio (1972), a lot of radio stations were still trying for #1. Not all of the local talent was “quality” and I’m not sure how “entertaining” we were. But syndicated programs were still a few years away and most communties weren’t ready to let you get away with juke box-ing the station.

But I think Ramsey sums up the options accurately and we’d see more station owners try #1 if #2 and #3 weren’t such attactive (short-term) options.

Website: Expense or investment?

Posted on by

Mark Ramsey poses the following questions to broadcasters:

1. Is the purpose of your website just to put online what is already on the air, or is it something else?
2. Are we investing the necessary resources and talent in the development of our website, or are we having an intern update stuff in his spare time?
3. Are we giving people what they go to our station for in all its shapes and sizes on the web? Or are we offering one stream and a bunch of photos of our personalities?
4. If the content described in this article (Fast Company) can generate considerable traffic, can we convert that traffic to revenue? If so, why aren’t we investing for traffic instead of seeing our websites as expensive necessities?
5. If we keep crowing about how “local” our radio station is, exactly how does our website express that or service that?

Chicken LittleA couple of days ago, a broadcaster called me for advice on possible speakers/topics for an association meeting next spring. She wanted someone to come talk to them about “new media.” I asked her why?

“Uh, we need to figure out how to make some more money.” Or words to that effect.

I imagined thirsty villagers taking buckets and empty containers to a nearby well in hopes of finding water for their thirsty families.

I suggested that before you’d have anything to sell (to advertisers), you’d need to build an audience and that would take time and money. An investment.

“No, our owners won’t let us spend any money. We need to find some more money. That’s why we were thinking about the Internet.”

To completely exhaust the metaphor… if you don’t have the will or the resources to drill a new well… pray for rain.

More stations, same content

Posted on by

Mark Ramsey on the transitional nature of technology and what it means for broadcastsers: “In a shockingly short span of time – perhaps five to ten years – the Internet and/or other wireless-based audio entertainment and information channels will be widely distributed substitutes for radio as we know it today. And your content will either be there or it will not be. … If you think all you need is a website and some podcasts and a frequent listener club, you’re wrong.”

How to ruin a podcast

Posted on by

Mark Ramsey points to a classic example of MSM cluelessness (CBS in this instance). His post makes me uncomfortable because our networks produce a lot of programs (newscasts and sports reports) that are comprised of 3 minutes of programming and one minute of commercial.

What if we were only podcasting that program. Would listeners swallow that? I’m thinking not.

Back in the dark old days, when one of our networks was oversold, we’d just jam in more spots and ask stations to air programs that had more commercial content than programming. Shudder.

Mark sums it up nicely:

“In our zeal to monetize our online content, remember that podcasts are downloaded and played voluntarily. It’s because we like you and want more of you. Yes, we’ll tolerate advertising in podcasts – but not 30 out of 90 seconds!”

What new Arbitron rules mean for radio stations

Posted on by

“When listening is defined as broader than “radio” alone, then you are no longer in the “radio business.” You’re in the business of audio entertainment and information, regardless of distribution channel. That little home-grown Internet radio station from Zimbabwe is now your competitor. When “Listening” is defined according to things that do not require a radio, you are no longer in the “radio business.” Get it?” — Mark Ramsey

Radio listeners don’t mind ads

Posted on by

Mark Ramsey points to this Arbitron study that concludes radio listeners don’t tune out when commercials come on. And wonders about the implications:

“If listeners don’t mind spots then why should they mind mediocre songs? And what ARE they listening through the spots for?”

The whizzing sound you hear is thousands of radio sales reps emailing the Arbitron study back and forth.

989 people out of 1,000 listen to radio

Posted on by
Reply

Regular readers know I’m a fan of Mark Ramsey’s blog, Hear 2.0. Mark is the president of San Diego-based Mercury Radio Research, which recently conducted a 1,000-person national study of radio listening habits of people ages 12 through 54. Just 11 people said they didn’t listen to radio.

Mark spoke at one of the sessions at the NAB Radio Show, underway this week in Dallas and the Dallas Morning News covered:

“One of the key things that makes radio different from all these others (iPods, satellite radio, Internet radio, etc) and makes it stand out, and valuable, is the fact that there’s stuff between the songs that people value. In fact, the loyalty to the stations, preference for those stations, is driven very much by what’s between those songs. It’s about connecting with other people.”

Here’s Mark’s take on commercials:

“…there’s one group that hates commercials and another that can tolerate them. The issue with commercials seems to be, ‘Look, if you’re a zealot about commercials, well, of course you’re going to listen to an iPod.’ People inherently understand that commercials are a tax that you pay. The issue for radio is whether we demonstrate to them what that tax is buying them. … ‘Are we giving people something that’s worth the price they’re paying in commercials?’

That wasn’t such a scary question when there were no alternatives to the radio.

Note to self: Record a couple of hours of morning drive on one of the local radio stations and edit out everyhing except the “stuff between the songs that people value.”

Comment from Jim M:

“It seems to me the ratio between commercial time and music / content is way out of whack compared to what it used to be. I wonder if there are some statistics on how this ratio has evolved over time? I was thinking about this today, again, when a drive to the store and back treated me to 100% advertising. I like commercial radio for the fact that I can pick up on new music and the variety, but finding music these days seems to be truly hit and miss.”

Blended media

Posted on by
Reply

“What if the notion of a single medium doesn’t exist anymore? When media buyers start thinking more about audiences and less about distribution channels – as they are definitely doing now – the advantage will go to the media that leverage their content across platforms. This places a premium on content – that is, it will be expensive and worth it. And it means that there will be two kinds of radio broadcasters: Those who are in the content business and those who are only in the radio business. The value will flow to the former. It’s not about the “device” – it’s not about ownership of the pipes. In the media business, those days are ending fast.”

— Jim Nail on the blending of media

Podcasting audience to hit 50 million

Posted on by

Mark Ramsey asks: How much are you investing in podcasting vs. HD radio? And points to research comparing the two. As near as I can tell, the radio guys are putting the same old shit on their HD channels while podcasters are doing a million different things. At work they keep telling me, “It’s not about blogging and podcasting.” Uh huh. [via Tod Maffin]

Buy the content, not the channel

Posted on by
Reply

In the future, listeners will buy the content, not the channel. They’ll be more apt to listen to what’s ON your station, not your (radio) station itself. … Talk to the TV networks and they’ll tell you that creating content is a risky, expensive business. But a handful of hits make all the risks worthwhile. The radio industry will have to awaken to new market realities: Investment, trial, failure, success. More programs, less programming. There will be no free lunches and no shortcuts. It will not be possible to operate multi-million dollar franchises like an FCC-licensed CD player.

Once again, Mark Ramsey demonstrates real insight into what’s happening in/to the “radio business”