Rumba: no ratings, but ad money?

[Eli Polonsky]

> > From: "Bob Nelson" <raccoonradio@mail.com>
> To: "BostonRadio Mailing List"
> <boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org>
> Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 12:48:17 -0500
> Subject: Rumba: no ratings, but ad money?
> 
> It was noted that in the latest 12 plus ratings, Rumba
> 1200 y 1430 didn't show up at all. 
> 
> Why is WWZN still doing sports if it doesn't show up in
> the ratings?

The Boston ratings published to the general public online
only show stations which achieve an 0.4 or better. I've
occasionally seen the further breakdowns right down to
0.0, and stations that people think have "no ratings"
judging by what they see on the public on-line sites
are often actually getting shares from 0.1 to 0.3.

Those are not high enough to be competitive in a major
market in most cases, but it's not true that those 
stations have absolutely "no ratings" just because they
don't show up on the public online sites because they 
haven't gotten an 0.4 or better. Though I've never seen
WWZN appear on the online publishing because they've
always been under 0.4, I've usually seen them at around
0.2 whenever I've had the opportunity to see the entire
breakdowns. This is, of course, severe underperformance
for a 50 kW signal, but there are people listening.

> > From: "Laurence Glavin" <lglavin@mail.com>
> To: "Larry Weil" <kc1ih@mac.com>, "'Bob Nelson'"
> <raccoonradio@mail.com>,	"'BostonRadio Mailing List'"
> 	<boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org>
> Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 13:57:18 -0500
> Subject: RE: Rumba: no ratings, but ad money?
> 
> Two ethic outlets DID show up in the ratings:  WUNR-AM 
> 1600 COL Brookline and WNNW-AM 800 COL Lawrence. ... I 
> think it's a bit strange that WRCA-AM 1330 COL Waltham 
> doesn't appear on the list;  it has a solid signal over
> the urban area it serves.  It's owned by a conglomerate,
> Beasley Broadcasting, that owns mainstream outlets 
> elsewhere.  Do you think it might do better than 
> WXKS-AM/WKOX did if they picked up progressive talk?

WRCA has shown up with a 0.4 a couple of times over the
past few years, so they could be just under the published
ratings with an 0.3 now. I don't think brokered stations
are as concerned about their overall ratings as long as
the programmers still feel that they have listeners, are
getting sponsors for themselves, and continue to pay the
stations for the airtime.

> > From: Sean Smyth <sean.smyth@yahoo.com>
> To: boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org
> Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 12:43:09 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: RE: Rumba: no ratings, but ad money?
> 
> I'm amazed that WUNR cracked the ratings. With the 
> diversity of programs on there, do you know how many 
> ears they need to get to listen to each of those programs 
> to show up in the book? (I'm shocked they even subscribe 
> to Arbitron to begin with.) I'd imagine their TSL isn't
> the best.

Their Spanish programming seems to be pretty solid at 
certain key times on weekdays lately, which is probably 
where the bulk of their ratings are coming from. It is 
listed as "Spanish" in the Arb.

EP