I'm no longer in radio, and did absolutely zero in sales or traffic ... so I'm wondering, how is the economy affecting ad rates down there, how much is everyone discounting?

I purchased some spots for my business in Coeur d'Alene, and the rate I got blew me away at how affordable it is right now, so it got me wondering.

Radio in this market is absolutely a STEAL. Why anyone would use newspaper or tv is beyond me.
Who reads the newspaper anymore and who wants to pay the OUTRAGEOUS prices they still charge?

I only advertise in a monthly coupon book in the local paper, I most certainly get a good bang for the buck, my response has been really good. I know how well radio advertising works, if done right, and I was shocked at the rates ...

Also, is it just a deal for many, first quarter, the spotload is usually light anyways, the economy's in the cesspool, etc.? Or do you guys see this being a protracted thing?

It's trickled up, as well. Check this from the Washington Post on prime time advertisers.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/26/AR2009012602327. html

Say Rich, did you ever work in Eugene?

Yes he did, for country KEED. Around mid-70's.

Remember, this is January, home of the lowest ad rates of the year.

Anyone want to buy some Ginsu Knives?

Who reads the newspaper anymore and who wants to pay the OUTRAGEOUS prices they still charge?

Comment not based on fact. Quite a few people read the paper. If a circulation is off 25% from 10 years ago at a then high of 400,000 readers, you still have 300,000 readers. The price isn't outrageous -- it reflects market conditions.

Then there's perceived value. I'd pay attention to something that I saw in The Oregonian a bit closer than anything heard on a station that carried Rush or Hannity. And you'd only have to run that ad ONCE! With radio, not so.

Yes, Mike, I am that guy who hung out with you watching the KERG automation overnight back in '73!

Skep: YOU may pay more attention to a newspaper ad, but the listeners to the shows you hate so much, are not YOU. They go into the advertiser's businesses in quite large numbers and specifically tell the business "I heard it on _____ during Rush, Sean, Glenn Etc".
We are seeing this like NEVER before in this area.
So, you are not the norm. You are not in the majority and you are not in THIS area where newspaper is WAY DOWN according to their OWN reports and the way they have pared the newspaper down in sections so much that they are packaging the old sections into one or two.
The listeners to conservative talk radio are the most loyal (other than spanish radio) that I have ever seen in my 25+ years in this biz.

I don't know that it is just conservative talk radio. I think it is talk radio in general. At least it used to be. Around here, some of the most loyal listeners were those listeners to KKEY when they were the only talk station in town. When the hosts would push that store on about 12th and Division with ads they read, not pre-recorded, that generated business for them. There were others, also..... the B-company/annex rings a bell. When loyal listeners hear their favorites push a local business, they would tend to support that sponsor. If they didn't get results, they wouldn't buy the advertising. And the listeners would tell them they heard about it on that show.

C. Crane is a good example. They advertise on KGO during all shows (lib and not lib) with mostly read spots. Same on Coast to Coast. They get results from those.

I remember when KUFO had Howard Stern. They would run commercial breaks that seemed to run for 15 minutes or so. Nothing but solid commercials. You knew it was going to last that long so you flipped the dial. If you didn't, it didn't matter because you wouldn't remember what you heard or you weren't paying attention, either. People who listen to talk radio generally are listening. People who listen to nothing but music, generally have it on as background and may turn it up and listen when they hear a song they really like but turn it down when that one is done and they go back to what they were really doing with it in the background. Or they change to the other music stations looking for something they like.

At least that is my observation and $0.01.

dodger - Skep may not be the "norm" but neither are you!!!

"The majority" (your word) of listeners and readers do not pay attention to ads, they dial away from them. All talk radio -- conservative, liberal, sports, wierd paranormal -- have a lower incidence of active, change station tune-out, because of the contextual thread in talk radio.

And it may be that because many conservative hosts like Rush & Hannity pander to fear "THEY are trying to silence us, THEY are trying to shut us down, THEY are trying to destroy us -- support our advertisers and keep US on the air" that more of their listeners actually do announce their loyalty when visiting an advertiser.

The listeners to conservative talk radio may be extremely loyal, because conservative talk is usually only available on one or two signals, and the listeners tend to be rather rigid zenophobes who want the whole world to look, think and pray just like them. Every year they inch closer and closer to being the true American Taliban.

Ya, and a few radio geeks on a message board are the "norms" I guess then?
Tell ya what, I will stick with the listeners every day of the week.
They are what make my paycheck each week and they are the kind people who call, email and write to give their appreciation for what we do.
Most in radio have forgotten or have been forced out of that mindset of LISTENING to the LISTENERS.
Why does it always have to go political on this board? Why can't we talk RADIO as it says?
"American Taliban". Sheesh. And you wonder why PDX radio is dying a slow death.

Hey, being loyal to the dollar is honest. No worries here.

However, it is entirely appropriate to bring WHY they are loyal into context. That particular WHY has ramifications, and those are actually related to radio, in that entertaining them has the very strong potential to set expectations for the industry.

I've heard plenty of people refer to the term "AM Radio politics". That's the setting of expectations in action.

Sadly, that cannot be anything but political. Given the many things I often here on conservative talk radio, "American Taliban" isn't all that much of a stretch.

Feel good about that, bad about that, doesn't matter. Those people will absolutely be loyal. No question.

Running an ad that would be appropriate for them is a home run. No question there either.

On that note, anyone care to comment about 970 / 620 listeners? Are they exhibiting the same kinds of AD response rates?

I would expect the same thing for the 620 listeners, as the Rush type of listener. IMO.

I guess what I am trying to say is: how are we best serving our audience AND more importantly, our advertisers?
You can love or hate the product, and you can determine it is whatever it is, but if it is bringing in bodies with money to the advertisers and increasing the station's bottom line, then where is the problem?
Music radio is so dead. You all talk about it every day on this board. With all the talk about what format is going where and what station is doing what, meanwhile, conservative talk radio just keeps slogging along making money for all.
Ipods will never kill talk radio, neither will satellite, but it will kill music radio. Rush Limbaugh may be a fat blowhard (my opinion) but he brings the kaysh and that is really all that matters isn't it?
Maybe it's the difference in markets, but when I say "I always buy my ______ from ______'s, you should too", they go in to________'s and tell them they heard it. I recently filled a theater for the SECOND time with our listeners for a movie premiere AND it was not for free tickets! Just show up for fun!

Dodger--A lot of people on this board don't get it. It's all about Ratings and the bottom line. Perfect example. Don Imus. Need I say more.

Well, we are off topic, so I guess that's it. Please accept my sincere apologies if this rant chaps your ass. I mean it in the very best of ways.

(still interested in hearing if the loyalty response rates increases or whatever are similar across all talk)

The problem, for me personally, is I'm not sure we need to support an industry that can only make it doing the easy sleezy sell.

It's one thing to flat out say the hate radio talk programs are entertainment only, frame them as such, and basically don't link any credence to them. It's quite another to blur the lines such that they do have credence, when the material being presented and sold basically is asshole advocacy.

Some find the RR show hateful. I can see that, and have no problem with that, because she absolutely makes it clear it's entertainment, not journalism, she is not an authority, listeners need to be fact checking and thinking about the opinion presented, and that it's absolutely biased toward liberal / progressive ideas.

It doesn't hurt the primary advocacy being done is to promote rights for everybody, in the form of higher tolerance and lower discrimination, for strengthening the economic stability and viability of the middle class, and accountability and transparency in government.

Go down the list. Hartmann, Schultz, others are all about the same kinds of things and are exhibiting the same clarity where bias, opinion and fact is concerned.

You may not agree, but it's extremely difficult to label that as "hate" and very difficult to make the case for it not being valuable in the public interest.

Now, compare Hannity, Limbaugh, et al.

Again, some find the show hateful. Again, I can see that too.

However, the differences are stark from there.

They are not clear at all where entertainment is concerned. Bias, fact, opinion are all mixed together in a way that presents as authoritative and informative, but really isn't.

And if I must, I will absolutely go link the data on that, in terms of how informed listeners really are, after consuming the programs. It's not pretty.

The core advocacy essentially is promoting a corporate ruled society, an assload of discrimination and low tolerance, diminishing of our civil liberties, anti-middle class economic policy, diminishing of the line between church and state, and the list goes on...

Again, you might not agree. However the case for hate is more easily made, and the value of the "entertainment" is very questionable given the overall confusion exhibited by listeners, generally.

Making your numbers doing the first scenario is harder work. And it's a legit sell, in that the information is correctly framed, and offered in such a way as to be clear about it being advocacy. For it to have value, it's absolutely got to be well supported by the facts, and well aligned toward the interests of the average person.

If these things are not in place, it does not work.

On the other hand, doing it the second way I've detailed in this post, not such hard work! Hate, intolerance, bigotry, sexism, racism, are as close to a sure thing as you can get, where those people are concerned! It's lazy, and it's building a business off of the abuse of others, period.

If those views are considered acceptable, then somebody somewhere is getting hosed by a Rush Limbaugh listener, who thinks it's perfectly ok, because they heard it right there on the radio.

I'm not so sure that's all that valuable, and if that's where the future of radio is headed, then perhaps we really don't need radio period.

We have the medium for our greater entertainment and because maintaining it serves the public interest. We ALLOW this, because it all has value that would not otherwise be in play.

What really is happening here is that 23 percent of us have some serious issues. They don't play well with others, generally.

That audience is very well served by a starving and mis-managed radio industry willing to whore itself for any kind of cash it can get, mostly because it's been starved and abused to the point where few choices are left.

Those people, loyal people, will take ANYTHING they can get, because they would feel like complete asses otherwise. This is why they are a cash cow. Easy cheezy. Damn turkey shoot. Lazy sell.

And that's because they are asses for entertaining known bad behaviors. Sexism, racism, bigotry, etc... are known bad. They are not ok. They are never ok.

...unless you listen to parts of the AM dial. Then it's ok, because we allow it to be ok, and that's a net loss for the rest of the "audience" because we have to deal with their crap.

If you let the bigot feel good about being a bigot, don't stand up and say "that's not ok, we don't do that here", then we live in a world filled with bigots.

And to be perfectly clear, there is a difference between being conservative politically and economically, and being just wrong.

A real conservative wouldn't be a bigot or racist anymore than anybody else, who has the self-respect and strength of character to know better and act on that, would.

All this tells me is that a whole lot of the industry doesn't want to do the work and make the investments necessary to provide value, and would much rather survive on what can be made from serving the lowest among us.

I've been in a position to sell shit before. Couldn't do it. Quit. Would do it again too. Pump gas if I have to. I don't know about you guys, but I need to sleep at night.

I suppose everybody has their price. For some people in radio, that price is pretty goddammed low.

Wow, well, I sleep dang well too.
I guess I have higher self esteem.
I can recommend a good shrink, although I've never seen one, I am thinking you have a lot to get off your chest, and I don't mean on a radio message board bucky.
Mama always said, we have two things in life, opinions and ***holes, both are about the same.
Your opinion is noted.
Meanwhile, those of us who don't think what you have stated is correct, and I know there are only about 3 that regularly read here, will stay with our opinion too.

will stay with our opinion too.

Of course you can stay with your opinion, just like stevethedj stays with his opinion that its okay to make stuff up and pass it along here as fact. But the three regular readers here just tune those opinions out.

Hey, it's ok to just come out and call me an asshole.

I'm ok with that.

Bucky is just funny. Might have chapped my ass 30 years ago...

Limbaugh basically expressed the idea that he hopes the current President fails. He supports all the kinds of people I just mentioned up thread. Racists, bigots, sexists, and more.

Essentially, Limbaugh makes the lions share of his money, enabling these people.

He believes ends can justify means --as do the people that sell him every day.

That's you, clearly Dodger.

If you are ok with that, there isn't much I can say about it, other than I was spot on about being loyal to the dollar. To be fair, it's tough not to be, particularly in these times.

Maybe it's higher self esteem, or perhaps it's just ignorance. Maybe it's just serious need. Been there man. Don't know yet.

The result is the same; namely, enabling bad people to feel better about being the people they are.

Puts food on the table though, doesn't it?

That's a tough gig.

Believe me when I say it's honest, and that I respect that, even if I personally wouldn't do it.

I would respect it far more, followed with a response about HOW and WHY I have it wrong. Instead, just like the nut-bag you sell, you take the lazy, easy way out. Nice!

I dare you. Just hammer me right now. Where have I got it wrong? Let's go a round or two, and see if it stands up. I've no worries about that. We can even be friends afterword. No harm, no foul.

Sleep well.

Me thinks Gibbs (KSKD) is going to deck Hannity (Dodger).

Obama's press secretary Robert Gibbs gave Hannity a pretty good whipping on Hannity's own show back in November.

Watch the video here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/08/robert-gibbs-confronts-ha_n_132842.html

No decking here!

Just a difficult question. That's all. Frankly, if I do get hammered, that's as good as not.

What would come out of that is either the greater realization that promoting people like Limbaugh is actually harmful enough to be a concern, or it isn't.

I think it's damn harmful. If it isn't, I want to know why that's ok.

The only way that will actually happen is if somebody steps up, gets after it, and brings the point home.

Implying that I have a problem isn't all that useful. Everybody has their problems. WHY and HOW I have it wrong IS USEFUL. We are better for it.

(waiting)

Edit: This is ugly, but I gotta say it also...

Perhaps people don't want to know. Better to just ignore that and get stuff done, feed the fam, etc...

That's human, and there is a case for that. In this matter, silence isn't a de-facto endorsement of my case presented here, and that's just being fair to Dodger, who I have no beef with personally.

But, I'm still wondering.

How much does a :60 or :30 cost in Portland these days? Anybody know?

How much does a :60 or :30 cost in Portland these days?
I'm going to take a wild guess that it depends on the station, daypart (or ROS), and the individual advertising contract for the individual advertiser.

I owe Dodger an apology. I'm absolutely all for both the good side of a real conversation as well as the downer side. It's all crap, if one can't go both ways.

Sorry Dodger.

In these times, I'm not sure I would bag on a paying gig. In fact, I'm quite sure I wouldn't right about now.

I'm also sure I'm not wrong about how Limbaugh works. The listeners are loyal for a reason, and that loyalty pays the bills.

That's disturbing, but it's also not Dodgers deal.

(and that is wrong on a number of levels, we know the drill, and it's a future discussion maybe)

The whole scenario is not unlike the worker at that factory, no viable jobs available, so it's pollute the river, or starve, or worse!

Been there --am kind of there right now. Lots of us are. When I said I respect that, I absolutely do. The rest, though a worthy discussion, cannot happen in a way that makes good sense, for a lot of reasons.

I'll clear up a coupla more things, and take my lumps down thread. If you feel a few are warranted, by all means have at it! I'll read it all and be better for it.

To be absolutely clear, Dodger is not low. Never meant that, but it's better safe than sorry. I had no personal beef prior, and do not harbor one now.

We had a thread a while back where some ugly stuff was posted up and it was clear that a solid response wasn't going to happen. Couldn't happen.

That is the case right now as well. Not balanced at all, meaning it's not worth it, in the sense I posted about being USEFUL. Can't be.

So that's it for that part of it.

For those having to deal with lousy decisions way up stairs, keep after it. They will absolutely falter. Good things --better things will happen then.

--->Bucky was actually funny.

so how about an example? Afternoon drive on one of the top Portland stations... how much for a :30 or :60... ballpark... just askin'

Just a guess.... maybe $175-$200. I've been out of that loop for a while.

Is there any comp for the PSAs?

Doing the math on the number of those that run fairly often, and am wondering about that very large opportunity cost.

The RAB reported total revenues in radio down 2% in 2007.
The 2008 numbers are not available, yet. However, an intelligent guess would show them down even more. Spot rates are subject to interpretation based on market, demographic served, competitive factors like format, cluster packages, etc. etc. Examining shrinking rates is but a slice of a bigger pie that is diminishing in size as well. Remember, if the total revenues in radio continue to drop, shareholders will be holding CEO's and other corporate types responsible. Earnings on stock will fall and precipitate management changes. But it would be silly to think or extrapolate this condition into an industry changer. The industry is commoditized and it's going to stay that way until technological changes totally obsolete the current model. When WiMax or it's successor in G4 networks brings such a demand for affordable internet in the car, the auto receiver manufacturers will be forced to make inexpensive auto entertainment equipment available and the car manufacturers will equip all cars with this capability. This will cause an unknown paradigm shift in the commodity now known as radio. I'm thinking that the AM band will die first. The standard broadcast frequencies will be consolidated into two or three very wide channels and be used for data delivery with interactive and backhaul handled at UHF in some newly freed up region. FM will live longer, but it too will eventually be redeployed. Companies like Clear Channel and Entercom will be but a footnote in the history of radio, in the last chapter where the ruination and damnation of the broadcast industry is discussed. A fitting end to a mass communications service destroyed by improper regulation and the greed of mankind.

Excerpted from the upcoming book, "Radio Sucks" (Wiley Coyote and Sons) compiled from posts on PDXRadio.com. For a guaranteed copy send $19.99 plus 3.95 S&H to RF Waste Management, P.O. Box 540-1700, Cemetery Rd., Portland, OR. 97212

In the future, you'll be able to stream your own music from home and listen to it just about everywhere you drive. Throw a few CD's in the glove box for those times you're out in the boonies (or pony up for satellite service). Your GPS will be your source of traffic information and you can get news on your smart phone. There will be no need for radio. None. New music? Radio long ago lost its reputation as a standard bearer for the arts. What you hear on the radio today is a corporate manipulated menu of those products that bring benefits back to the company. I know many of you are still enamored with radio, but the days of broadcasters serving the public in any way shape or form are long gone. Long gone. It won't be the first huge industry to outlive its usefulness. Like Wall Street, radio grew too big for its own good and is slowly imploding. You can lay off everyone (as they have done), automate everything (which they've done, too) and trade licenses back and forth with the other behemoth ownership groups for a while (the period we are now in) but eventually everyone is losing money and no one will buy the diseased product or desire to own the license. Someone should note the number of channels that go dark in '09. It's going to be a shocker.

IMHO, that's a good thing!

We have too many stations for the current environment.

Cut the numbers, increase share for each one, focus on highly differentiated niches and content creation, and it will be viable.

I disagree with the idea that broadcasters are done. The core elements that make radio appeal have not changed, only the management of them has.

Treat radio like a venue, forum, and it will have daily relevance, people will connect, and it will all be just fine.

That's the core value add. Until people change, that will always be viable.

(goes for print too)

Meta-programming, where programming about either programming or current events or trends is always in demand. It's always fresh, always relevant, always presents entertainment potential, and intrinsically has drama.

Cutting the number of outlets doesn't change the lack of interest in the product. Less Starbucks making the same supercaffeinated drinks simply creates a conundrum for the addicted, go further to get the fix or settle for something else or nothing. The industry can have less outlets, but it's the same old Big Mac and Whopper. Ultimately, if you make it harder to find, share goes down. It is not a path to revitalization to shut down outlets when you have a stale product that's showing its mold. When I was a kid we all walked around with transistor radios listening to Cousin Brucie. When we got a little older we put FM converters in Mom's Chevy so we could hear Scott Munie and Zacherle and put 8 track players in our first car. These days I see kids with iPods. I see car owners wanting more self originating options in the car. Satellite radio is failing. Broadcast radio has diminishing prospects. The core values are no longer static, rather they are dynamic.

Radio can not be saved under the current rules of ownership. Forcing big companies to break up their assets has been done before and it is, IMHO, the only solution that has a chance of perpetuating the industry long term. You have to impose a reasonable limit on how many licenses one company can hold. LMA's should be eliminated. If you own it, you have to run it. No more than one AM and one FM in a market, period. No more than, say, 25 markets/50 stations. That would produce a more robust landscape and return true competition to the airwaves. Nowadays, it's the same crap in every city. You can't fix it without letting more diversity of ownership. Look at professional sports. Imagine if the Yankees could also own the Royals and the Dodgers could also own the Cardinals. Eventually you'd have a few mega owners owning all the teams, moving players around to suit their needs, virtually eliminating the competitive spirit within the ballplayers. Guess what, that's what radio is today.

Bravo! Andy, Bravo! Well said.

> Eventually you'd have a few mega owners owning all the teams, moving players around to suit their
> needs, virtually eliminating the competitive spirit within the ballplayers. Guess what, that's
> what radio is today.

Even though I am not a sports aficionado, I love this metaphor.

Kick ass. Well done Andy!

Time to add that one to the playbooks when doing advocacy for radio.

Effective. This one would work well with legislators, if the opportunity comes up.

"Local TV Stations Face a Fuzzy Future"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123422910357065971.html?mod=rss_whats_news_us

Thanks for posting that Wall Street Journal article, Steve.

So if this plays out as described, would T.V. follow the path of radio with lots of consolidated ownership and stations broadcasting the exact same thing? Like a terrestrial WGN broadcast locally rather than delivered by cable.

Is broadcasting dead? If the networks all went to wired delivery (via cable or some other system), would there be a need for broadcast TV and for what purpose would the government sell the rights to that public bandwidth?

No... I am not trying to troll here... just curious about what the professionals in the this business think. I am not in the industry -- just an avid listener of radio -- the only musical instrument I play!