Boston No Longer In Top Ten

[Dan Strassberg]

Although Worcester and the Merrimac Valley are part of the Boston TV market,
I don't believe that they are part of the Boston radio market.

--
Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg@att.net
eFax 707-215-6367

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill O'Neill" <billo@shoreham.net>
To: "R Trovato" <xtrovato@yahoo.com>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 10:18 AM
Subject: Re: Boston No Longer In Top Ten


> R Trovato wrote:
> > However, I hear that the big four owners in Boston are seeking some kind
of
> > "patch", in an attempt to keep Boston within the top 10 radio markets.
(It
> > was a few years ago that Arbitron added some zip codes noth of Worcester
to
> > keep Boston in the Top 10. )
> >
> >
> Sounds like the Worcester/Merrimack Valley patches have lost their
> medicinal benefit.  What next, Providence? Portland? Manchester?
> <kidding> Even adding Worcester was a stretch. Advantage Boston when you
> consider what market penetration an XLO or SRS can muster out in East
> Boston, contrasted with what XKS or MJX can muster in Worcester.
>
> Boston's drop is far less due to Boston being Boston than it is other
> cities' population explosions due to migration to the South and West to
> more amicable economic climes.
>
> It is hard to feel bad about any of this when you consider the fact that
> those very same "big four" are also the same "big four" in the rest of
> the top 10, all programming them identically without any regional
> consideration. Can you say "Burn another disc with format x, we just
> bought ourselves another 'Frank?"
>
> Bill [don't call me Frank] O'Neill