Thursday, April 09, 2009
Monday, October 22, 2007
The Opposite of Thinking
The Big DUH of the Week award goes to...
An unnamed CBS Radio Manager who said they are allocating dollars to the Internet because:
"That's where we think the growth is going to be."
Think?
The web is where you THINK growth is going to be?
I got news for ya, Skippy -- it's where the growth has BEEN for the last three years. Pull your head out of the sand (or maybe outta your rear orifice) and you just might see how the world has changed around you (and passed you by.)
Here's a quote dedicated to our winner:
Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum (I think that I think, therefore I think that I am.) ~ Ambrose Bierce.
An unnamed CBS Radio Manager who said they are allocating dollars to the Internet because:
"That's where we think the growth is going to be."
Think?
The web is where you THINK growth is going to be?
I got news for ya, Skippy -- it's where the growth has BEEN for the last three years. Pull your head out of the sand (or maybe outta your rear orifice) and you just might see how the world has changed around you (and passed you by.)
Here's a quote dedicated to our winner:
Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum (I think that I think, therefore I think that I am.) ~ Ambrose Bierce.
Labels: Duh, Internet, Profits
Monday, August 06, 2007
Slices of Pie
More brilliant insight from InsideRadio.com...
Are :30s destroying radio's pricing power?
One CEO says yes. Cox Radio's Bob Neil says it is teaching buyers they can get the same ratings point and pay 75% of a :60 second rate. Making matters worse he says it's allowed advertisers to take their savings and reinvest it - in other media.
DUH.
Yes, this article is from the 8/2 edition -- but, so what? Is it LESS obvious this week than it was last week than it was how ever many years ago radio geniuses start dividing their inventory into smaller sections and offering it up for a fraction of the price?
Think of it this way guys -- you can sell a whole pie for $20 or you can divide it into slices and sell them for less. BUT, it will take you longer to sell the slices because instead of selling one thing you'll be selling many things. And everyone else in town is selling the same slices of pie for less than your slice of the pie.
If one station would get ballsy enough to say "buy the whole pie or get lost" someone would buy the pie. They would. Simply because it would be the single differentiating factor between all those other guys hawking slices of pie.
And ironically, that means YOU (Radio) would be getting the biggest slice of the media budget pie.
Are :30s destroying radio's pricing power?
One CEO says yes. Cox Radio's Bob Neil says it is teaching buyers they can get the same ratings point and pay 75% of a :60 second rate. Making matters worse he says it's allowed advertisers to take their savings and reinvest it - in other media.
DUH.
Yes, this article is from the 8/2 edition -- but, so what? Is it LESS obvious this week than it was last week than it was how ever many years ago radio geniuses start dividing their inventory into smaller sections and offering it up for a fraction of the price?
Think of it this way guys -- you can sell a whole pie for $20 or you can divide it into slices and sell them for less. BUT, it will take you longer to sell the slices because instead of selling one thing you'll be selling many things. And everyone else in town is selling the same slices of pie for less than your slice of the pie.
If one station would get ballsy enough to say "buy the whole pie or get lost" someone would buy the pie. They would. Simply because it would be the single differentiating factor between all those other guys hawking slices of pie.
And ironically, that means YOU (Radio) would be getting the biggest slice of the media budget pie.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Give 'til it Hurts
The battles over raised streaming fees begins as Chicago radio station 9FM bans free CD giveaways with the stated reason being "In the face of the RIAA’s struggles, it just doesn’t seem fair for us to be giving away CDs (for free) to music fans fully capable of paying for the music themselves."
The station began airing PSA style mentions encouraging listeners to voice their concerns over the latest ruling by the Copyright Royalty Board to raise streaming fees, and offered to 'buy back' any CDs the station had given away by trading it for a t-shirt.
You can read the entire press release here.
The station began airing PSA style mentions encouraging listeners to voice their concerns over the latest ruling by the Copyright Royalty Board to raise streaming fees, and offered to 'buy back' any CDs the station had given away by trading it for a t-shirt.
You can read the entire press release here.
Labels: Fees, Profits, Streaming
Sunday, March 11, 2007
Will User Outcry Result in User Payout?
BusinessWeek offered up decent coverage of how the new web streaming fees will negatively impact the majority of internet broadcasters, but far more interesting were the reader comments.
Many express outrage at the new fees, but not one of them (to-date) said they would be willing to toss in their share of the new fees -- not even for the heavily supported (at least in word if not deed) indie-casters. In ZombieRadio's opinion it is the smaller web streamers who might very well stand the best chance of surviving this last salvo from the RIAA pickpockets.
The new licensing fees are based on individual plays of songs to individual listeners. While this could very well be a nightmare for large webcasters, (does ClearChannel pad its online listeners in order to reap more advertiser cost-per-point or do they bury actual counts in order to decrease their licensing fees?) the smaller webcasters are dealing with tens or maybe hundreds of listeners versus the thousands and thousands of "Big Media."
The indie users also tend to be the most passionate about their products, thus it may not be a hardship for the smaller webcaster to basically put out the proverbial tip jar and ask their listeners to support their online stations not just through word of mouth -- but through word of wallet as well.
Based on the newly released 2007 fees, each play of an individual song to an individual listener is charged at $0.0011 -- this means that if an online station played 16 songs per hour (which is what the Radio And Internet Newsletter is using in their own industry average calculations) it would cost a user $0.0176 to listen for an hour.
For ease of payment and collection, let's say listeners can only opt to purchase 24-hour blocks of consecutive listening time. This means a station listener could pay their own way for only $0.4224/day.
A webcaster charging their listeners $0.50/day would not only cover the new licensing fees, but make a $0.0776 profit -- and that's only if the entire 24-hour block is being used.
If a listener purchased 24-hours but only actually listened for 10 hours ($0.176 in licensing fees) the webcaster's profit would be $0.324 -- not bad considering there is only fractional mark-up in our proposed subscription structure.
A fifty-cent daily listener fee is less money than someone would feed into a jukebox (most jukeboxes start at $1 for only 2 or 3 songs) and the listener receives an average of 384 song performances.
NOW... will the fans of these threatened webcasters step-up and toss a few coins into the hat to keep them alive, online, and on the air -- or will there only be bitching, bashing, and gnashing of teeth?
Make no mistake
I am NOT a fan of the CRB or the RIAA, but neither am I a fan of those who complain about the situation and do nothing to help. This is an opportunity for the public to show their disdain for corporate radio clones and support programming they say they value -- for mere pennies each time they use the product.
Many express outrage at the new fees, but not one of them (to-date) said they would be willing to toss in their share of the new fees -- not even for the heavily supported (at least in word if not deed) indie-casters. In ZombieRadio's opinion it is the smaller web streamers who might very well stand the best chance of surviving this last salvo from the RIAA pickpockets.
The new licensing fees are based on individual plays of songs to individual listeners. While this could very well be a nightmare for large webcasters, (does ClearChannel pad its online listeners in order to reap more advertiser cost-per-point or do they bury actual counts in order to decrease their licensing fees?) the smaller webcasters are dealing with tens or maybe hundreds of listeners versus the thousands and thousands of "Big Media."
The indie users also tend to be the most passionate about their products, thus it may not be a hardship for the smaller webcaster to basically put out the proverbial tip jar and ask their listeners to support their online stations not just through word of mouth -- but through word of wallet as well.
Based on the newly released 2007 fees, each play of an individual song to an individual listener is charged at $0.0011 -- this means that if an online station played 16 songs per hour (which is what the Radio And Internet Newsletter is using in their own industry average calculations) it would cost a user $0.0176 to listen for an hour.
For ease of payment and collection, let's say listeners can only opt to purchase 24-hour blocks of consecutive listening time. This means a station listener could pay their own way for only $0.4224/day.
A webcaster charging their listeners $0.50/day would not only cover the new licensing fees, but make a $0.0776 profit -- and that's only if the entire 24-hour block is being used.
If a listener purchased 24-hours but only actually listened for 10 hours ($0.176 in licensing fees) the webcaster's profit would be $0.324 -- not bad considering there is only fractional mark-up in our proposed subscription structure.
A fifty-cent daily listener fee is less money than someone would feed into a jukebox (most jukeboxes start at $1 for only 2 or 3 songs) and the listener receives an average of 384 song performances.
NOW... will the fans of these threatened webcasters step-up and toss a few coins into the hat to keep them alive, online, and on the air -- or will there only be bitching, bashing, and gnashing of teeth?
Make no mistake
I am NOT a fan of the CRB or the RIAA, but neither am I a fan of those who complain about the situation and do nothing to help. This is an opportunity for the public to show their disdain for corporate radio clones and support programming they say they value -- for mere pennies each time they use the product.
Labels: Fees, Profits, Webcasting
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
The Google Bamboozle
Not that I blame Google for taking Radio up on its tendency to drop their pants...er... I mean PRICE for any advertiser willing to throw a nickel their way, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking the Google's model of buying inventory for pennies on the dollar is going to result in higher rate cards for Radio.
From this morning's Inside Radio:
Google says its entry into radio will raise advertising rates - not lower them.
Google Audio national director of sales Drew Hilles tells Inside Radio "Our main goal is to draw new advertisers to radio" and when they do that'll put pressure on inventory and result in higher rates for all buyers. The onetime CBS Radio exec says one way they help preserve a station's rate card integrity is by allowing buyers to pick markets - but not individual stations.
That's like WalMart saying their low prices are going to help drive traffic to the malls. In what world will an advertiser not realize that they can buy cheaper rates from Google than direct from the Radio station?
My advice to Radio is to simply not particpate in the program. Sell or auction off the inventory to your current collection of loyal advertisers -- Hell, BONUS it to them for being a great advertiser all these years -- or use it for self-promotion, to experiment with alternative programming, music testing, or to play iTune playlists from your listeners.
Do ANYTHING but sell it to the lowest bidder and let them determine the value of the most important thing you have to sell -- inventory.
PS: Just thought of a use for Google RadioAds -- let them buy all the inventory they want on your HD channels.
From this morning's Inside Radio:
Google says its entry into radio will raise advertising rates - not lower them.
Google Audio national director of sales Drew Hilles tells Inside Radio "Our main goal is to draw new advertisers to radio" and when they do that'll put pressure on inventory and result in higher rates for all buyers. The onetime CBS Radio exec says one way they help preserve a station's rate card integrity is by allowing buyers to pick markets - but not individual stations.
That's like WalMart saying their low prices are going to help drive traffic to the malls. In what world will an advertiser not realize that they can buy cheaper rates from Google than direct from the Radio station?
My advice to Radio is to simply not particpate in the program. Sell or auction off the inventory to your current collection of loyal advertisers -- Hell, BONUS it to them for being a great advertiser all these years -- or use it for self-promotion, to experiment with alternative programming, music testing, or to play iTune playlists from your listeners.
Do ANYTHING but sell it to the lowest bidder and let them determine the value of the most important thing you have to sell -- inventory.
PS: Just thought of a use for Google RadioAds -- let them buy all the inventory they want on your HD channels.
Labels: Profits
