• 67% of 18-64 year olds have heard of HD Radio. This represents a dramatic increase from ‘06, when only 38% had heard of HD Radio.

• Consumers’ understanding of HD Radio has also grown. Now, 21% indicate HD Radio delivers higher quality sound, versus 17% in 2006. Eight percent now volunteer that HD Radio delivers more stations or choices, versus only 1% two years ago.

• We also find continued misconceptions about HD Radio. Now, 7% indicate that HD radio is satellite radio, up from 3% in 2006. And 3% think they receive HD Radio even though they have not purchased an HD-capable receiver.

• 18-44’s, men (and, especially, 18-44 men) have the highest awareness and best understanding of HD Radio. But we do not find major demographic differences on these measures.

The “bottom line” is: HD Radio has made significant progress over the past two years. The biggest jump is in the percentage of consumers who have at least heard of HD Radio.

Of course, now, as in ‘06, not everyone who claims they’ve heard of HD Radio truly “gets it.” Nine percent tell us they’ve just heard of HD Radio and don’t know anything about it. And, no doubt, some of those who say that HD Radio means “higher quality sound” are simply inferring that from their knowledge of HDTV.

Still, the increase in awareness is so dramatic that it’s clear HD Radio is “on the map” in a way it wasn’t two years ago.

Also highly significant: the growth in consumers who tell us HD Radio means “more stations.” These are people who undoubtedly get it. The good news is that there are now more of them — 8% versus just 1% two years ago. But they still represent a “small sliver” of the population.

The consumers who confuse HD Radio with XM or Sirius is a similarly-small group. But they’re joined by another 2% who thing HD Radio is something you subscribe to. And then there are the folks who think they’re getting HD even though they don’t have an HD radio…seriously confused!

So, the industry still has a long way to go educating consumers about HD Radio. But at least most have heard of it, and that’s movement in the right direction.

In its battle with satellite radio and iPods, home court advantage can be an edge for your local radio station as well…

The obvious edge is that it’s local. Too few stations fully exploit this advantage. Many times, friends who aren’t in radio have commented to me that stations they hear in their travels sound pretty much like the ones here in the Detroit metro. Consolidation, syndication, consultants and (yes) even researchers have contributed to this homogenization of radio.

But this article isn’t about that. It’s about creating and exploiting an edge by shifting the home court.

Here’s an example from the world of politics: In 2004, George Bush had a perceived edge on terrorism and national security; John Kerry had a perceived edge on health care and the environment. If the biggest issues in the minds of Americans were health care and the environment, it would be “President Kerry” today. But the Bush campaign, aided by the powers of incumbency, kept voters’ focus on terrorism, and you know the rest.

For most radio stations, “home court” is music…better music, more music, etc. Sure, music consistently tests as the most important programming element for listeners, as a group. But radio certainly can’t compete with satellite radio or iPods for most music. It can’t compete with satellite radio for music variety. And it can’t compete with iPods for best music…what could be better than music listeners choose for themselves?

For the most part, radio is doing a good job with music! But if music is “home court,” that gives satellite radio an iPods an edge. Radio needs to shift home field to a broader construct — local entertainment…

For one thing, satellite radio and (obviously) iPods can’t deliver appealing morning personalities who relate to your market. Unfortunately, many radio stations have a tough time delivering this as well, but yours can and should do it!

And local radio’s personality should go beyond mornings. Whatever happened to killer PM drive jocks? Or charismatic night jocks that have cult followings among younger listeners? I can tell you that it’s a rare occasion when a personality outside morning drive emerges as a top-of-mind favorite in my research.

Personalities aren’t the sole source of entertainment local stations can offer. Contests that capture the imagination and attention of a city take a station way beyond “jukebox” status.

But home court advantage can’t be achieved merely doing these things on the air!!! It’s also about advertising and promoting the elements of your station that competitors cannot deliver, and, in doing so, raising those elements to the level of crucial criteria on which listeners choose from their multiple sources of entertainment.

Of course, emphasizing “local entertainment” isn’t the right strategy for every station. But shifting home field advantage to your strengths (whatever they happen to be) is always the right strategy for your station. And it’s the right strategy for local radio as a whole.

What possesses adults to wait in line for a video game?  Their kids. My daughter has been after me for awhile to get her a Wii. (OK, I’ve got to admit that I’m kind of intrigued with it as well, but let’s blame it on the kid!)

They’re hard to find. The Ann Arbor Target store got 100 in last Sunday and they were gone an hour later. Stores I called all over town said they didn’t have it and didn’t know when they were going to get it. Until I called this one particular Gamestop.

So what’s the attraction? It’s not like Wii is the only game console out there. Wii was launched in ‘06, around the same time Sony’s Playstation 3 and Microsoft’s XBox 360, both with more powerful processors and more sophisticated graphics.

But Wii has a difference. As Forbes magazine reported it:

The feature that sets the Wii apart from both its competitors and its ancestors is the Wii remote, the device’s control pad….it’s equipped with an innovative motion sensor that detects movement and rotation in three dimensions….The Wii remote allows users to get up, move around the room and become part of the game. If you want your character on the screen to swing his sword, you wield the remote and make the thrusts and parries yourself. In a game of baseball, you hold the remote like a bat, and swing for the stands when you want your virtual player to do the same.

By giving players the ability to physically interact with a virtual world, Nintendo has significantly changed the experience of videogaming. It’s suddenly more immersive, more compelling and potentially more appealing to consumers who have never considered buying a videogame console before.

So, Sony and Microsoft gave consumers more of the same — more power, better graphics. They gave consumers MORE…Nitendo gave them something DIFFERENT. As one game developer stated it:

“The PS3 and the Xbox 360 feel like better versions of the last, but pretty much the same game with incremental improvement. But the Wii feels like a major jump.”

The result?  I’m waiting in a line at 7 in the morning. I didn’t see any lines for the Xbox or Playstation there.

In radio, we have to be open to change. We have to be willing to do something different…to be more compelling and exciting. There’s not a whole lot of innovation when it comes to programming. Instead, radio’s banking on a technical fix — HD radio — which is better delivery of the same thing — MORE (much like Playstation’s higher-resolution graphics).

Consolidation thwarted creativity in radio, because owners aren’t desperate anymore. Desperation fueled innovation. Back in the day, if  you owned one 1.0 share FM, you were willing to try something new and different. Now, if your 1.0 share FM is part of a cluster, you’re not going to go hungry.  But radio suffers from this complacency.

Some think that what I do — research — is thwarting innovation. It could, I know, but not if it’s used the right way! Research shouldn’t dictate anything…instead, it should give you insight into how listeners think, what they like and what they don’t. The best programmers can take that information to a higher level…to create fresh, compelling programming. They should be given the chance.

In radio, we needs hot new hits, like Wii. To get there, stop thinking more and open yourself up to DIFFERENT.
.

Well, it could have been a good idea…

I’m not much of a coffee drinker…Diet Coke is my caffeine source of choice.  But I occasionally drink the stuff.  Most often, I’ll get a frozen Mocha Frappuccino at Starbucks (or, as Bill Maher would say, a “that’s not coffee, it’s a milkshake“).  McDonalds doesn’t offer a similar product, so I got the next-closest thing — an iced mocha.

It was horrible.  I still have the bitter aftertaste in my mouth as I write this (and I heard others complain as well).  I threw it out, and I’d never even consider ordering coffee at McDonalds.

“You never get a second chance to make a first impression.”  Trite but true. It is especially true when it comes to food products.  The restaurant business is a tough one, because I suspect most people are like me…one bad experience, and they’ll never return.

Fortunately, we’re not in the business of food and drink.  We sometimes get more than one shot at potential listeners. Still, especially if we’re launching a new format, the initial impression we make is usually a lasting one.

That’s why it is essential to get it right. It means testing positioning lines, to ensure they truly communicate the positioning we’re seeking.  It means testing music, so we’re playing the best cuts with the fewest negatives. It means starting out with the kind of presentation our target listeners want — be it high energy, clean and uncluttered, or whatever.  It means advertising that grabs attention and says what we need to say about the station.

None of this effort is cheap, but it is the most important investment you can ever make in your new format’s future.  At launch is the best opportunity you’ll have to make it successful, so that the listeners you’re seeking come back again and develop a positive image of your station.

Now, back to my Diet coke…

Sgt. Pepper was considered the first “concept album” in the world of pop and rock. It had a coherent theme from beginning to end, unlike the albums that preceded it — collections of hit singles (or worse, one or two hits and the rest throwaway cuts). Sgt. Pepper paved the way for other great concept albums — like the The Who’s Tommy and Pink Floyd’s The Wall – as well as a bunch of not-so-great ones (like Chad & Jeremy’s Of Cabbages & Kings, which, I’m ashamed to admit, I bought!).

News of Sgt. Pepper’s 40-year anniversary grabbed my attention this week. So did two other items which suggest that digital technology has rolled us back to a pre-Pepper mindset, when the hit single was king…

“The convenience of digital music has made sound quality an afterthought” states the article Is hi-fi history? by Ron Harris of the Associated Press. Harris writes about the quality of digital audio files — “noticeably inferior to that of compact disks or even vinyl,” he says — and that fact that most users don’t care. So, sales of CDs and higher-end audio equipment are declining as users rip their current collections to put them on iPods and buy their new music online.

“I really can’t tell the difference between CD, tape and digital,” says one consumer. “I’d even accept a lower quality as long as it’s digital and portable.”

Then there was something I noticed when reading the music reviews in USA Today. Perhaps they’ve been doing it for awhile, but I first noticed yesterday that after each CD review, they suggest cuts to download and others to skip. In other words, selectively buy the best tracks, not the whole collection…

Just like we did when records were seven inches wide and had a big hole in the middle (i.e., the 45)!

This is good advice. We felt ripped off when we bought an album with one or two good cuts and the rest…trash. Sgt Pepper changed this. But 40 years later, he’s a relic of the pre-digital age.

The Pistons drafted Hill in ‘94 after he spent four very successful years at Duke, where his team won back-to-back NCAA championships. He won the NBA Rookie of the Year award and was a perennial All-Star.

Hill played hard and played well for the Pistons, and he did his best to reach out to the community, yet was never embraced by Detroit fans. I think the reason was his “vibe.”  From an article on Duke basketball by Carron Phillips:

Hill has always been the poster child for the upper middle class Black Man with playground basketball skills and a Brooks Brothers wardrobe. Grant Hill was the prototypical Duke BLACK scholar athlete. He came from a wealthy home where his father was an ex NFL football star and his mother was involved in politics. Hill even played the piano and was fluent in different languages, he was Duke University. Smart, handsome, intelligent, athletically talented, well liked, and the child of the AMERICAN DREAM.

Sounds good? Yes. Sounds like Detroit? No. 

Detroit is a gritty, hard-working, underdog town with a chip on its shoulder. Detroit embraced players like Ben Wallace (ironically, who the Pistons got in a sign-and-trade for Hill). Wallace played for a junior college, was undrafted, and had to play in Italy before working his way up to the NBA through sheer determination and hard work. Before Wallace, Detroit embraced Isiah Thomas — the 6′1″ kid who escaped from the bleakest Chicago ghetto neighborhood through talent and an indomitable will.

Every market has its own “vibe.” Thomas and Wallace (among others) resonated with the vibe of their market and were beloved.  Grant Hill – great player and great person that he is — didn’t.

So this got me thinking…What Detroit radio stations resonate with the essence of the city?  Maybe WRIF?  Maybe WJLB? I’m not certain any do.

What is the essence of your market?  Does your station resonate? Or does it just deliver programming that some listeners want?

I’m talking about Stephanie Miller, who’s dad ran for V.P. on Barry Goldwater’s ticket back in 1964.

Somewhere along the line, Miller broke with her family’s politics and has become the best political talker out there, because she’s entertaining. Stephanie was a comedian, and she’s still funny. Her show has drop ins, sound effects, and a killer “voice deity” in impressionist Jim Ward. On the West Coast, Stephanie Miller airs live in morning drive, and it definitely is a “real” morning show. Miller describes it as a mix of highbrow and lowbrow: “Fart joke, Senator, fart joke, Senator.” Etc.

Miller makes her political points, but they come across as satire, holding GOP-ers up to good-natured ridicule rather than venom. This makes her very different from all the angry radio ranters on the right and left, who preach to their respective choirs. Miller’s show could play on any kind of Talk station…it doesn’t have to be part of an all-day liberal talk orgy.

But what about the all-day liberal talk orgy, otherwise known as Air America Radio? It’s gotten a lot of bad rap, and right wing pundits keep talking up its demise, but it’s not a ratings flop…

AAR has overtly successful affiliates — most notably KPOJ in Portland, which pulls around a 4 share 12+. But more of its stations perform like WCPT in Chicago. Here’s a daytimer with an absolutely crap signal in most of the market, yet it pulls a 1 share. That puts it on par with FM Talker WCKG (with Opie & Anthony Steve Dahl, etc.).

Can you think of another format that could deliver a 1 share to a facility as challenged as WCPT? Me neither.

Or, here in Ann Arbor, WLBY has a 1.5, equaling WAAM — the market’s heritage AM with a decent signal, a local morning show, real newscasts and some promotion. WLBY has a poor signal in much of the market, no promotion, no local shows, and it runs the same recorded newscast all day long.

But, even though it’s mainly Air America programming, WLBY does have Stephanie Miller. So does WCPT.

Hmmm…

This didn’t sit well with me. I found myself presenting research with holes in it. I didn’t have enough time to thoroughly analyze it. The work just wasn’t good enough, and I was asked to put my name on it.

That’s why I went off on my own. If I was going to sell, I had to have total confidence in what I was selling. I had to be in control from start to finish. I had to deliver outstanding work…my clients deserved nothing less.

Now, this is no way to build an “organization.” In any given year, there are a limited number of projects that I’m going to be able to invest the time necessary to deliver outstanding work. But it is the way to deliver great research.

Which is a lot more satisfying than “cranking it out”!

Hey, it’s great music. I was listening to Doug FM in the car with my daughter a few weeks ago when Won’t Get Fooled Again came on. I was curious about her reaction to it, so I left it on, and was once again reminded of what a killer cut it is.

And whenever I conduct a Classic Rock music test, I say to myself: “Yeah, that really was great music!”

But if I never hear The Who or The Doors again, it’ll be just fine. I grew up with that music. I lived it. But 40 years later, I never need to hear it again.

Fortunately, I’m not typical. And while I’m not into Classic Rock personally, I am very interested in it professionally.

Because it is amazing.

Back in the late ’80s when the format was emerging and scoring big wins, there were lots of skeptics around. “It’ll burn out,” they said.

Wrong. Classic Rock remains super-strong 20 years later. In most of our strategic research, classic genres are consistently at or near the top. (I guess that’s what makes it “classic.”)

One reason is that the music keeps finding new fans. More often than not, we find that 18-24 men are as enthusiastic about classic genres as their dads. This reminds me of when my (then) 17-year-old stepson said: “Mark, have you ever heard of a group called The Doors? They’re really hot!”

Another reason is that this ‘library” format — unlike Oldies — has been able to evolve. Early on, ’80s music was not a major aspect of the format…now, of course, it is.

If there’s a cloud on the horizon, it’s that the next step in the evolution — integrating early ’90s alternative-based rock (like grunge) — is controversial with listeners. Typically, half think this music is classic; half don’t. I do think this is the move for Classic Rockers, but it must be done cautiously and won’t work in all markets just yet.

Even when it does happen, though, Classic Rock will still bore the s**t out of me.

Not that it matters.

This was in 1990.

Of course, the major network newscasts are very much alive sixteen years later. Katie Couric was just given $15 million a year to anchor CBS Evening news.

True, Couric or Brian Williams are nowhere as big as Cronkite or Huntley and Brinkley were. Still, they dwarf the competition. Bill O’Reilly has the #1 show on cable news, averaging over 2 million viewers. NBC Nightly News consistently delivers four to five times as many.

What’s my point? That the dark predictions about terrestrial radio’s future are similarly overheated.

Sure, we all know about the challenge from satellite radio, iPods and the myriad of other sources of entertainment that have eroded radio’s shares. But what medium hasn’t been eroded? Aside from the Superbowl and American Idol, no TV shows get the kind of numbers that series got in my youth, when we only had three networks to choose from.

The odds remain excellent that a local AM or FM radio station is the established leader in its segment in its community. For example, FAR more Detroiters know about WRIF than know about XM’s Squizz or Sirius’ Octane!

At some point, more becomes less when it comes to competition…the mind just can’t handle all of those choices! When satellite services offer a multitude of rock channels and thousands of rock channels come online, a station like WRIF just stands out more and more.

From the standpoint of competing with other entertainment and information sources, consolidation was the worst thing that could have happened to terrestrial radio. For one thing, stations cut back on advertising themselves, or quit entirely. They felt they no longer need to. Wrong! Advertising is essential to maintaining your station’s top-of-mind status, even if it doesn’t have direct competition.

But despite the industry’s complacent ways, AM’s and FM’s still hold an enormous lead in top-of-mind awareness over any of the alternatives. With compelling programming and consistent advertising, AM’s and FM’s can leverage that edge to remain essential in an environment that offers more and more choices.

That’s why I’m bullish on radio.