The "Bay" is now "Frank"

[Peter Murray]

Doug Drown wrote:

>Interesting.  I wonder how many broadcasting management people there are out
>there who recognize that the U.S. has an aging demographic.  There are more
>and more "seniors" out there who, it would seem, are being ignored --- the
>Sinatra listeners.  A lot of them are retiring to Hancock County (and are
>wealthy.  Advertisers, take note).  How many "Classic Hits" stations does
>the Down East area need, anyway?
>
>All of this goes to buttress a long-held contention of mine: there are too
>damn many radio stations.  Anyone want to take on my argument?
>
>Doug
>  
>
I would agree (as several others here will as well) that the older 
populations are not given the same attention as are those under 55. That 
would fly in the face of your next argument, however - if there were 
fewer stations, those remaining would go where they perceive the money 
to be - the younger demographics. Fewer stations would have even less 
chance of surviving as long as the current terrestrial broadcasters 
will, because fewer stations = less choice for the listeners (in any 
given market), which then leads to the adoption of alternatives that 
fill that void.

Too many classic hits stations? Probably. The market will shake that out 
(as it has all the other 'too many on the bandwagon' situations, whether 
Dutch tulips, Fiber optic cabling or Jammin' Oldies)...

Of course, if you're making the technical argument that there are too 
many radio stations... then you're probably right, and wrong at the same 
time. Much depends on to which part of the RF spectrum you refer - if 
AM, then yes. If FM, then perhaps no, as the third-adjacent rules have 
been proven to be too strict. In theory, we could have 25% more FM 
stations on the dial today! :)

-Peter

Peter Murray (N3IXY)
Vienna, VA