Figuring out your business’ “unique selling proposition” SHOULD be Marketing 101. Since the current crop of owners aren’t really “radio people,” though, they don’t KNOW what radio is good at.

“The first thing that needs to go out the window is the liner card philosophy of broadcasting. Anybody can read a card and do a talk-over.”

Well, owners, of course, LOVE that philosophy. It justifies paying starvation wages to the “air talent.”

“The second thing that needs to go out, and sorry guys this one hurts, is VOICE-TRACKING. That has killed spontaneity. (Yes, I do recognize that economics sometimes dictate its use.) Remember the days of when the jock actually got tongue-tied and you thought that was GREAT radio? Never happens anymore. It sounds all too robotic.”

Imperfection, instead of being looked at as a problem, COULD be looked at as an asset, as part of PERSONALITY and SPONTANEITY. Short of the jock yelling something that gets the station one of those huge FCC fines, what’s the big deal about a verbal gaffe?

“When somebody can hear a variety of “tunes” on his IPOD as opposed to the same song every 90 minutes followed up by some sophomoric puker reading a liner card, who could blame him?”

Exactly what I’ve been saying for years now. Even the less astute listeners are catching on to the fact that there’s no real “talent” in reading some liner cards. As kids, we all listened to people we thought we might want to grow up to be like. Who would the kids of today feel that way about?

“Another issue mentioned is development of talent. There is no farm league for new broadcasters out there, and frankly it shows. Look at the national scene. Since when did Ryan Seacrest ascend to the same level as Dick Clark, Rick Dees or Scott Shannon.”

I’m still trying to figure out who Seacrest has incriminating photos of. There HAS to be someone for the guy to have reached the level he’s at. What does he put on his tax form where it says “Occupation”? If he writes “Entertainer,” he could be arrested for lying on a federal form.

As for music, perhaps it is time to start thinking out of the box. Maybe we should have more freedom to take requests and take some chances on songs instead of playing it “safe.” Give the jocks an opportunity to play something of their own will. (Look I understand why we don’t , so don’t accuse me of being a small-minded, small market operator. I am trying to create dialogue.) CHR of the 70’s and 80’s had elements from other genres in them that made it more palatable. Not that we will be able to shift the clock back to that time period again, but it behooves us to look at exactly what elements made radio in its golden age so “golden.”

Are we giving our listeners a real reason to tune in? What services can we provide, that they can’t get elsewhere?

The first thing that needs to go out the window is the liner card philosophy of broadcasting. Anybody can read a card and do a talk-over.

The second thing that needs to go out, and sorry guys this one hurts, is VOICE-TRACKING. That has killed spontaneity. (Yes, I do recognize that economics sometimes dictate its use.) Remember the days of when the jock actually got tongue-tied and you thought that was GREAT radio? Never happens anymore. It sounds all too robotic.

I think that corporate radio is afraid of allowing personalities to develop for fear of not being able to rein them in, but such a philosophy is only biting their shareholders in the keyster,

It may not be a popular idea, but maybe requiring more localism from the FCC is a good idea. At least 8-10 hours of local content per day.

That is the key. When somebody can hear a variety of “tunes” on his IPOD as opposed to the same song every 90 minutes followed up by some sophomoric puker reading a liner card, who could blame him?

Another issue mentioned is development of talent. There is no farm league for new broadcasters out there, and frankly it shows. Look at the national scene. Since when did Ryan Seacrest ascend to the same level as Dick Clark, Rick Dees or Scott Shannon. It just ain’t happenin’ baby and it’s worse on the local scene. And the local teens don’t even really want to develop a talent for the industry either. Hell, maybe it’s too late. I hope not!

A lot of effort was put into creating these packages, with the idea of leveraging the results created by one personality into a buy of the entire station. Many of these personalities (Wink Martindale and Gary Owens in Los Angeles and Robert E Lee Hardwick and Jim French in Seattle) were excellent on-air sales people.

Each personality, at least when part of Golden West Broadcasting, was treated as an important part of the success of the station. I would like to see this concept used, today, but I’m not sure it would work as well for national hosts who don’t endorse or even related to local sponsors. I’m sorry to say it but, in spite of Rush’s reputation, I would not buy a used car from him (or his endorsement) even if I knew the dealer. Now, maybe if Paul J promoted the idea, we might have something.

Yup. I just don’t think there’s a logical argument against having to employ REAL personalities and being localized when the competition–the MP3 player–is essentially a perfect jukebox, with only the songs the listener likes and never a commercial.

Stations owners are trying to sell 78’s in an MP3 world. It ain’t gonna fly.

OK…so you ONLY returned 20 percent this year…no biggie…you had a nice house and your car payment was made…

NOW these corporations EXPECT 30 plus percent return…and if they don’t get it…heads roll.

There is no “wiggle room” with the corporate owned and highly leveraged stations…they have HUGE payments to the bank to make. I believe the ones laughing now are the Charlie Wilsons who sold out for a TON of money…and get to watch the new owners squirm…

No audience means no revenue. Not meeting the needs of potential listeners means no audience. Its a simple equation.

With most corporation-owned clusters being highly leveraged, their revenue requirements for debt service and profit are typically orders of magnitude above those of pre-deregulation owners. The only way to satisfy the debt service (which never goes away) and generate a profit in tough times like these is to increase revenue or reduce expenses (Business 101).

The evidence would indicate that for some time now — not just in the past year — managers have been searching for that “sweet spot” level of staffing with which they can maintain at least an illusion of local involvement and keep the ratings at an acceptable level. The evidence would also indicate that virtually all managers woefully overestimate their ability to build or maintain audiences with minimal staffing.

The revenue dilemma is complicated by more stations licensed to outlying communities pumping signals into – and selling in – the Boise Metro. This creates more and smaller “slices” that must come out of the “pie” that represents the market’s capacity to generate radio ad revenue. This is occurring at a time when the “pie” itself is getting smaller.

The challenges described in the P.I. article are real nationwide. It seems more and more that radio owners/managers are distressingly myopic about how their industry works – or should work – and in many cases are in abject denial of the changes taking place around them.

While it may be premature to say we’re seeing the death of the medium, I think it safe to say we will see a significant re-structuring of it if and when those who call the shots find a new way of doing business. Finding that new way will require the ability to see and focus on revenue targets beyond those of the next quarter or the next year.

Unless and until that new way is found, we will continue to see dwindling numbers, diminishing revenues and staff cutbacks.

There is a fair amount of evidence in support of the proposition that radio as presently constituted is more often than not its own worst enemy.

More than anything, this is simply sad.

Yes, for radio to remain relevant in an age of iPods it is going to have to be local and serve local interests. Moving in the opposite direction with robo jocks and syndicated shows isn’t going to do it.

What are the shows that are doing best in this market? They are the ones who are busy doing things for the community – collecting food for the Idaho Foodbank, participating in events that help those less fortunate. If the stations are run with a heart and soul instead of looking only at the bottom line, radio will again succeed. Until then, it’s going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

To compete in an iPod world, radio HAS to have personality and, in many cases, has to be local. Those, as Don quoted, are the two things an MP3 player can’t offer the listener. Radio CANNOT compete by being an inferior juke box.

To revive radio, owners are going to have to spend some of that money they made when things were going well. Yeah, that’s the last thing they want to do but in the absence of putting some money into it, I think we’re looking at the death of the medium.