PPM ratings are the talk of the music stations

As the latest set of monthly radio ratings come out for the larger markets being measured by the PPM system, the reaction to the changes in trends across the country is becoming more widespread. Many within and outside of the industry are putting blame on the new audience measurement system (devices worn by participants which automatically detect signals and length of time listened compared with writing down stations listened to in a diary). The other school of thought is that this method is “righting a wrong” and the differences may have been the real case all along.

Having been a broadcaster, radio advertiser, and radio ad salesman over the years, along with having worked for a radio research service for a couple years, I’m going to weigh in somewhere in the middle on this one.

Music stations are way up across the country, while talk and news/talk stations have generally dropped. Based on observation, my feeling is that talk (including news and sports) stations may no longer be getting the ratings status they used to enjoy, but probably remain the better buy for advertisers seeking that audience. Even if or as talk stations show a reduced audience in comparison, they remain more aggressively listened to than music stations.

If you are listening for news headlines, an interview, or a live report, chances are that station will have your full attention more often than when music is playing. It is human nature. Talk is less likely to be a background. On the other hand, music stations are often playing while people are talking with each other, working, doing household chores, walking, driving, or some form of activity requiring at least a portion of their attention.

My theory on this goes as follows. When people (participating in the ratings via whichever method) are listening to news, talk, or sports, they are paying close attention, even if for 5 to 15 minutes. The commercials they hear stand a better chance of reaching an attentive listener. But when those same people switch back to a music station, they stop listening as attentively (or aggressively, as I call it) and may sing along to a good song while doing the task at hand.

With a ratings diary, they are/were more apt to remember listening to 15 minutes of news. But they may have written down they listened to ½ hour of music when in fact a radio station playing music within their range might have been on around them for 2 hours. With the PPM measurement, that 15 minutes of aggressive listening to the news counts as a negative toward the news station compared with the 2 hours of the music station on nearby showing up on the PPM measurements.

Los Angeles provides the best example of this point. AMP 97.1 FM dropped its talk format (after its ratings had doubled since the first of THIS year) and went to a Contemporary Top 40 format a few weeks ago to compete with KIIS-FM among others. The just announced May ratings for Los Angeles, using the PPM measurement, show the new AMP 97.1 as 4th overall in the market with ratings well above anything the previous KLSX got in years. KIIS-FM came in at number 1 in the market.

The same ratings report shows all-news (for more than 35 years) KNX-AM at 17th overall, and it easily beat out sister news station KFWB overall. KNX used to be a regular in the top 10 in its target audience during most dayparts. Struggling sports radio KLAC has now doubled its ratings from 1 year ago – when it was still diary measurement.

No, it is not just Los Angeles. Chicago’s WGN Radio, which has ranked no lower than 3rd for something like 25 years under the diary system, now fails to make the Top 10 in some dayparts and is in the process of shuffling its entire morning and midday lineup. It’s afternoon shift changed earlier this year.

I may be one of the few who does understand how the change to PPM measurements are impacting the radio marketplace. But what I don’t understand is how the radio stations that play music continue to focus on “the same 500 songs” and 5 minute and longer commercial clusters all day and all week long. They should be focused on getting the listeners to listen more closely. THAT is when the PPM measurement will make a difference for advertisers.

I'm supposed to pay for what??

Orbitcast has reported that Sirius XM Satellite subscribers may be asked to pay an additional $2 per month due to the proposed royalty rate increase. Say what?

The story went on to claim that the FCC allowed Sirius XM to pass these royalty fees along to the consumer as part of last year's merger.

Let me get this straight. First the merger wasn't supposed to raise the fees for subscribers yet offer additional combined programming. Yet, as a Sirius subscriber for more than 3 years, I now would have to pay additional to get baseball and other XM programming. Even though I personally was looking forward to having the baseball broadcasts available, I'm not paying anything extra for it. It was not my understanding that I would have had to, or I would have written in opposition of the merger from which I am not benefitting.

Now, I may be FORCED to pay additional for music royalties? I rarely listen to their music channels. Even if I did, I don't listen to all of them. I doubt that people who enjoy classical music also listen to heavy metal. But they expect me to pay so they can play songs I don't like? After they have eliminated channels because of the merger and some duplication?

Yet some people wonder why satellite radio has been struggling the past few months. It is not because of the drop in new car sales. If the offering was good enough, and was what was promised to us consumers, new subscriptions would be happening. Hardly anyone is buying HD Radios, which even with a few recent improvements, doesn't offer enough of an incentive even to those who understand what HD Radio is and does.

Now I might be "forced" to pay for music that I don't even like????

Yes, I agree that performers should be compensated for their music being played in a public forum. But if I am supposed to pay for it, I should have the choice over which songs and artists I hear.

Come to think of it, I already do. Looks like my MP3 player will get an even longer daily use before too long.

If only AM and FM stations would have kept up quality live and local programming like they used to do. We wouldn't know HD or satellite radio because we wouldn't have needed it.

hough Sirius XM is unable to officially raise its rates yet, as a condition of the satellite radio merger, Orbitcast reports that subscribers could see some additionally fees starting this summer. Subscribers will likely see their bill go up approximately $2 a month, as satellite radio music royalty rate increases will be passed along to the consumer.

According to Orbitcast's sources, the increase in costs will take effect on July 29 and according to a leaked document, Sirius XM "can no longer absorb these increased costs" in performance royalties. In 2007, the Copyright Royalty Board instituted increased performance royalty rates for satellite radio, which have gone up every year and will continue to increase into 2012. The rate increased from six percent of gross revenue in '07 and '08 to 6.5 percent this year. It will reach seven percent in 2010, 7.5 percent in 2011 and eight percent in 2012.

As part of the Sirius and XM merger, the FCC allowed the combined satcaster to pass along the royalty fees, effective July 29, 2009, whereas the company was required to absorb the fees itself before this date. According to Orbitcast's information, most subscribers will be charged an extra $1.98/month, while those with multiple radio plans with be charged another 97 cents/month and "Mostly Music" subscribers will pay $1.53/month. However, "Best Of Sirius" and "Best Of XM" subscribers are exempt, as are subscribers who renew a long-term plan before July 29.

Talk stations go to FM - what a waste

I don't even like hip-hop, but I'm all for it in this instance. It is becoming more commonplace within the past few weeks for "non-music" formats to move to or start up on the FM side.

Now comes word from San Antonio that KPWT 106.7 FM has let go of its air personalities and is abandoning its hip-hop format. And for what, you ask?

KPWT just became that city's only FM talk station. And with mostly syndicated shows. And this serves the local market how????

It's all about money. Syndicated shows don't cost nearly as much as local personalities. Pretty soon, not playing music will likely save stations money by not having to pay performance royalties.

My http://MajorLeaguePrograms.blogspot.com blog gives a few more examples of sports stations going to FM.

Sure, save a few bucks here and there. But what about the audience?

Here are station executives sitting there getting paid to wonder why their audience isn't as large as it once was, so they change to a cheaper method.

I've been saying this for months, but it bears saying again. During the course of my day I listen to satellite radio and to my MP3 player. In both cases, it is to hear something that I USED TO easily get, and "free" on my AM/FM Radio. (That being Howard Stern and my favorite music, respectively.)

Now, I pay a monthly fee for satellite radio, and have spent over a hundred dollars on an MP3 player plus the time involved with getting my favorite music on there.

The music stations I used to love hour after hour have narrowed their playlists down to a few hundred songs. I own more songs that I like than they play, including the ones they program that I don't like. So why bother listening to their music programming?

Now some AM/FM stations respond by taking away music.

The audience and the advertisers suffer because of it.