According to ARB PPM results and perhaps for the very first time :

In the 3rd week of february, CBS O&O WWFS-FM ( Fresh 102.7 ) online stream BEAT is own FM Broadcast in both adult 18-34 (a 3.2 vs a 3.0)and Women 18-34.They were also ahead of competitor WLTW. Overall, both numbers together would put Fresh 102.7 at something like #4 in NYC in Men and Women.

Comming soon to the beloved Market near you ???

Other than the fact that they can not combine the numbers since they have different spots on the stream than those on the air due to voice talent union concerns.

What this points out to CBS is probably that the rate for ad insertions on the stream are way lower than they really should be.

PPM is heavily flawed. Several lawsuits (State Of NY, State Of NJ) have been filed over its use. It also has failed to gain accreditation.

"PPM is now currency in fourteen markets. While all currency markets have been audited, in all but two of those markets, Arbitron's PPM service has failed to receive accreditation from the Media Rating Council (MRC)."

http://www.industryears.com/pressread.php?subaction=showfull&id=1236825852&archi ve=&start_from=&ucat=2&

http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2009/03/arbitron-bargains-with-fcc-on-audien ce-metrics-device.ars

http://www.nj.gov/oag/newsreleases08/pr20081010b.html

what are the raw numbers? a 3.2 doesn't tell me anything. How many people have to be listening to the station to get a 3.0?

A 3 share would be 3% of the total of people listening to the radio at a given time in a given demo whereas a 3 rating would be 3% of the total population in a given demo. The actual amount would depend on the number of people listening or the total population.

Stations in Portland are in the process of signing agreements with Arbitron for installation of PPM encoders (KBPS-AM included). The last diary based ratings in Portland will be the summer book with PPM data out in the fall. Let the games begin!!

PPM is no more heavily flawed than the diary method employed by Arbitron.

Those filing suits are "concerned" because the PPM takes the "American Idol" quotient out of the diary where the panelist thinks they are "voting" for their favorite station so they "enhance" their listening time.

The major flaw with Arbitron whether it be diary or PPM is cell phone only households. This is being addressed now.

PPM will be a much more honest barometer of what radio the panelist is listening to or exposed to.

Asking someone to "recall" what they have listened to over a one week period is about as accurate as Vote By Mail.

An entire industry is just "trusting" that the panelist is honestly representing actual listening habits.

With PPM, you dont have to just close your eyes and ears and hope for honest panelists.

As Jay-Zie said on this board before, certain groups tend to try to "hype" their favorite stations out of loyalty to things like culture and heritage.

The lawsuits were filed because certain groups saw actual accurate ratings as a threat to their revenue.

The addition of cell phone only households to the panelist pool will address most of the actual problems with both methods.

Where can a person get details on the encoder end of things?

try the Arbitron website:

http://www.arbitron.com/downloads/ppm_encoding_handbook.pdf

That's a good start!

What actually is added to the audio?

That is what I am interested in.

perceptually encoded data interlaced with the regular audio. which means subaudible...

It is added to a side chain after a split in the audio, then re added to the main chain at a low level.

...and we'll just have to put a phone in front of a speaker for Arbitron to verify that the encoder is working. Therefore, no problem with AM, as the encoding is between 1 and 3 kHz.

Then, there's their headphone/earbud adapter, which I haven't seen yet.

Analog and HD1 are encoded together, HD2 and the streams each get their own encoder.

Gotta have a main and backup encoder, so Entercom-Portland will end up with 40 encoders and 20 monitors.

The data actually includes station information and time/date.

Notalent: "What this points out to CBS is probably that the rate for ad insertions on the stream are way lower than they really should be."

I'm not disagreeing with you, believe me, but... the important part of your comment are the last two words: "Should be." What is 30 seconds of time worth? The sad truth is that it's only worth what advertisers are willing to pay for it. I'm just not sure advertisers are there for streams yet, in terms of paying for what they get. It's ironic, actually, because it's relatively easy to track the exact number of people tuned in to a stream. Unlike terrestrial radio, online streams are connected in both directions. Listeners don't tune-in online streams. Via a link, they go get them.


Andy Brown: "PPM is heavily flawed. Several lawsuits (State Of NY, State Of NJ) have been filed over its use. It also has failed to gain accreditation."

Absolutely. And it always will be. Our radios are only receivers, so there's no real way to know how many people are tuned in (and then, whether they're listening becomes another issue entirely... but I digress).

Any ratings system has to compensate for terrestrial radio being only one direction, which means, it'll require the listener to "do something." Write it down... carry a gadget to detect listening... etc. My ex used to forget her glasses when she'd leave home. She'd realize her mistake when she got to work and couldn't read her computer screen. She'd be GREAT with PPM (he says, sarcastically). Also, how many people moaned and groaned that iPods should have radios? Even if they had them, PPM+headphones=not counted as listening.

The diary method is even worse crap. It's based on what people remember listening to rather than what they did, which is why we all manipulated the system every way we could. Contests on Thursdays, for example. Any way you look at it, the numbers were skewed.

PPM numbers are skewed too, but it's only really a problem for minority broadcasters. I mean, let's be honest here. If PPM showed that the most listened to format was Swedish Rap, Clear Channel and CBS would be flipping stations to that format in every PPM market. Minority broadcasters, on the other hand, are - or obvious reasons - tied to their minority. That's why, when diaries say the market leader is urban but PPM says it's alternative (seriously, the numbers in Houston are a mess)... clearly one of the two is wrong. And who is to say they're not both wrong?

Fool me once: shame on you.
Fool me twice: shame on me.

I think both sets of numbers are wrong - each in different ways - but the numbers advertisers buy are the numbers we'll have to work with, whether we think they're credible or not.

Frankly, I think metrics run on the part of the advertisers can value that air time too. And a station could help with that, for an extra value add.

How about auto insert promo code, every unique spot? It's a bitch the first time, but once worked out, a very nice value add, right? You get a response over time metric that might prove useful for profiling when and where the time makes sense, for example.

I would break that service out, along with consulting on a granular level.

And if it were my dollars being spent, I would be running numbers and utilizing every means I had to encode responses.

That extra service might prove totally worth the price bump, as the amount of time -vs- quality time / presentation all factor together for return on investment. If I've got some additional data options, I'm highly likely to spend for them.

And that's based on marketing I've been a part of over the years --data is gold. In fact, buying the top rated time, with few to no data add-ons, probably has a lower value perception than a second tier time with data add-ons.

The content can be used to encode responses. Special 800 number, promo code, variable product name, and other goodies I can think of. Then there are times of day, production values, and what the placement is that can be indexed with these things.

Given that, doesn't it make sense for a station, or cluster or whatever (you know what I mean), to try to close the loop both ways?

Take the best that Arby can come up with --or more likely, just what they come up with, couple that with offerings aimed at obtaining data, and make it a two way conversation! And not a one time deal either.

It's more work, but regular feedback between the buyer and seller, perhaps every campaign, would reinforce the value perception, and yield metrics that might just help improve the return on the whole thing.

It's a consultative / relationship based sell, and those have lots of value add potential over the longer term. At the least, there is a solid value perception bump just in the relationship itself!

The Arby data is the data. No getting around that. But, the scope of "the value proposition" is larger than the Arby data, meaning their stuff just can't justify rates in and of itself. (Or, at least let's say I think I would have a solid shot at selling on that basis, given some data offerings to position with.)

So, why not just incorporate that and have some other metrics, besides theirs to sell with?

A little de-coupling from their metric is only a good thing. Well, maybe the top runners might be a bit upset about that because that expectation lends them the easier sell. But, nobody is on top all the time, so the smart move is to make the most of the upper range and sell the same way, not depending on that book to close at a given rate as often.

If anything, it would prove a nice incentive for the Arby guys to keep working on it the best they can. Marginalize that top score a bit. Won't hurt them at all. It's a clear challenge for them. Might as well make them earn that subscription money, right?

Notalent: How often? 30 seconds, minute, streaming?

I'm just wondering if I walk through a busy area with a PPM, just what does it snag?

The PPM hears every exposure to an encoded piece of audio you may be exposed to.

However just like the diary, for it to count in a rating you have to have a sustained exposure, like a quarter hour. I cant remember the exact number of minutes.

The PPM unit also has motion sensors so it would know if you took it off and set it near a radio all day.

If you want to read a good article about the PPM and the Engineer who is directing the Arbitron roll-out of the system, check this week's Radio World. I was impressed by the thorough methodology they're using to implement the system.

The Diary has been a "vote" for station listening. The PPM measures actual listening. Whether that "listening" is on purpose or incidental can be debated and there was a post PPM study in one of the early adopting markets where Arbitron actually released names of former participants so the Radio industry could get some input from them. In that study they found some of both.

Even though the PPM will probably go through some developmental headaches, to me it is much better than having someone sit at the kitchen table after a hard day of living their life, trying to remember and write down what Radio stations they listened to, and when. More than a few people I know have lost jobs thanks to that methodology.

I have a friend in another market who participated in a PPM survey, they pretended to not be in the radio business. They found the PPM unit a pain to deal with. Not that the old diary method isn't without problems.

You need 5 minutes of listening to get credit for that quarter hour. They allow gaps for leaving the room and coming back in, etc.

I thought you always needed 5 minutes to get credit for a quarter hour.