[BC] When formats are changed

[Mark Humphrey]

On 8/30/06, RokprtMike at aol.com <RokprtMike at aol.com> wrote:

>It makes little sense to me. Who is it HD is supposed to appeal to? The
>people that actually listen to the primary feeds of a station are 
>being forced  to
>go out and purchase an HD radio and how many will?

It just doesn't appear that Clear Channel thought this through very
well.  WJJZ had a substantial audience with smooth jazz (4.0 share 12+
in the most recent trend) but rumor has it they decided to "blow it
up" because it wasn't generating "enough" revenue from media buyers.
What a perfect format for a secondary service -- aren't the HD2
channels supposed to be commercial-free for a couple of years?   Over
the past 15 years, the station built an older (but loyal) audience
with money to spend on receivers.  Right now, the big task is to
increase HD receiver penetration, isn't it?  Shouldn't we give these
people an alternative to satellite?  Inform them that, if they buy the
new radio, they will continue to receive the music they like, but it
will be "digital" with no commercials (at least for a while) and no
subscription fee.

As an afterthought, the smooth jazz format was moved to 106.1's HD-2
channel three weeks after the format change.  However, the wjjz.com
website has been taken down and now redirects to the new "Philly's
106.1" splash homepage.  Wouldn't it make more sense to maintain the
"smooth jazz" website and continue to treat it like a real service?

>Why not try to program the HD channels to the younger generation  similar to
>FM in the very early days?
>
>Why aren't there any "Underground Radio" channels on HD? They have it
>backwards.

This approach should be tried as well.  Reach out to the "LPFM"
community, offer them a couple of HD2 channels in large markets (where
nothing else is available) and see what happens.

Mark