Oldies gone at noon!

[bellenseb]

It's depressing that this is driven by age. In that, the prime demographic grew up when the Eagles and Journey were big, and therefore they'd rather hear that then Motown and the Monkees. Some tunes are more timeless than others..

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by bellenseb:
  It's depressing that this is driven by age. In that, the prime demographic grew up when the Eagles and Journey were big, and therefore they'd rather hear that then Motown and the Monkees. Some tunes are more timeless than others..

I fully agree!!!
 
 Not that I'm into it but I sometimes feel sorry for much older generations who have absolutely nothing to find on the radio. Unless they are into Classical or Jazz, that is. There are a whole lot of older folks out there who would love to hear some of their prefered music and Pop tunes of their time. Hell, there are a lot of younger people who love Big Band music and the like.
 
 Our selections are so limited to demographics purely based on the consumerism of what sells air time to the advertisers. Yet, they are totally deaf to the iPod generation who would listen if they actually played something worthwhile.    :roll:

[bellenseb]

I was in Florida a few years ago, and the airwaves were full of lots of great old music you never ever hear anymore. It still makes sense "demographically" down there at least...sigh.

[Guiny]

Originally posted by bellenseb:
 Eagles, Fleetwood Mac, Billy Joel, Journey, etc. Yech. [/QB]

Sounds good to me.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by Rob_Gee:
   

Originally posted by bellenseb:
 Eagles, Fleetwood Mac, Billy Joel, Journey, etc. Yech. [/b]

Sounds good to me. [/QB]

And yet you have the nerve to knock every and any band that someone else here likes!   :roll:  
 
 GGW, please file this away somewhere for future reminders.

[Bombay Chutney]

Originally posted by Jaguar:
  Not that I'm into it but I sometimes feel sorry for much older generations who have absolutely nothing to find on the radio. Unless they are into Classical or Jazz, that is. There are a whole lot of older folks out there who would love to hear some of their prefered music and Pop tunes of their time. Hell, there are a lot of younger people who love Big Band music and the like.  

That's where satellite radio comes in.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by Bombay Chutney:
   

Originally posted by Jaguar:
  Not that I'm into it but I sometimes feel sorry for much older generations who have absolutely nothing to find on the radio. Unless they are into Classical or Jazz, that is. There are a whole lot of older folks out there who would love to hear some of their prefered music and Pop tunes of their time. Hell, there are a lot of younger people who love Big Band music and the like.  

That's where satellite radio comes in. [/b]

On a fixed income?

[Charlie Nakatestes, Japanese Golfer]

There used to be an AM station like you describe (big band, etc) that was in Baltimore 10+ years ago when I lived there that was my main source of radio listening. Don't know if it exists anymore.
 
 

Originally posted by Jaguar:
   

Originally posted by Bombay Chutney:
   

Originally posted by Jaguar:
  Not that I'm into it but I sometimes feel sorry for much older generations who have absolutely nothing to find on the radio. Unless they are into Classical or Jazz, that is. There are a whole lot of older folks out there who would love to hear some of their prefered music and Pop tunes of their time. Hell, there are a lot of younger people who love Big Band music and the like.  

That's where satellite radio comes in. [/b]

On a fixed income? [/b]

[Bombay Chutney]

Originally posted by Jaguar:
   

Originally posted by Bombay Chutney:
   That's where satellite radio comes in.

On a fixed income? [/b]

You didn't say anything about them being broke.  You just said they were old and had nothing to listen to on the radio.  And you also mentioned young people who liked Big Band music.

[Bags]

Originally posted by Jaguar:
  On a fixed income?

Most boomers have WAY more to worry about than $12/month for satellite radio.  Was in the doctor's office this afternoon and saw a story on a report just released by the Employee Benefit Research Institute.  It's BEYOND FRIGHTENING.
 
 

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) â?? Cognitive Dissonance 101 might be a fitting title for the findings from the 2006 retirement confidence survey released Tuesday by the Employee Benefit Research Institute.
 
 Here's just one example: A quarter of workers participating in the survey said they were very confident about their prospects for financial security in retirement, and another 44 percent said they were somewhat confident.
 
 But among those in the very confident group, 22 percent said they aren't currently saving for retirement and 39 percent said they have less than $50,000 in savings.
 
 Of course, low savings aren't the exclusive domain of the overconfident. Sixty-five percent of all workers said they had less than $50,000 in total savings and investments, not including the value of their home or any defined-benefit pension they may receive.
 
 While older workers tend to have more assets than younger workers, the EBRI survey found that 58 percent of workers between ages 45 and 54, and 56 percent of those age 55 and older had less than $50,000 in savings.
 
 High expectations...Nevertheless, 59 percent of all workers say they'd like to enjoy a standard of living in retirement that is the same or better than the standard of living they have in their working years.
 
 But half the respondents think they can manage that on 70 percent or less of their pre-retirement income.
 
 That doesn't square with financial experts' recommendation that you should plan to live on at least 70 percent of your pre-retirement income. Nor does it square with the 55 percent of present-day retirees surveyed who said they live on 95 percent or more of their pre-retirement income.
 
 Healthcare and pensions...Then there's the disconnect between what workers expect to receive in terms of pension and healthcare benefits and the fact that companies increasingly are freezing their pension plans and modifying or eliminating healthcare benefits.
 
 Sixty-one percent of workers said they expect to receive pension benefits in retirement, even though 40 percent say they don't currently have a pension plan. Thirty-seven percent, meanwhile, said they think their employers will provide health benefits in retirement.
 
 More troubling, though, is that regardless of whether a worker expects to receive healthcare benefits, there is no difference in the amount of income he expects to need in retirement. Yet Fidelity estimates that the average couple retiring this year will need $200,000 to cover their healthcare costs alone for 20 years in retirement. And that doesn't include long-term care costs.
 
 Part of the problem, for Baby Boomers anyway, is that the reality of retirement's price tag hasn't hit them yet because they see their parents with adequate funds in retirement thanks to pensions and employer-provided health coverage, said EBRI fellow Jack Vanderhei. And they may figure that because they make more than Mom and Dad ever did, that they'll be fine, too, he said. But Vanderhei's research suggests that some Boomers will burn through a significant portion of their savings within 10 to 15 years of retirement as they try to maintain their current lifestyle.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by Bombay Chutney:
   

Originally posted by Jaguar:
   

Originally posted by Bombay Chutney:
   That's where satellite radio comes in.

On a fixed income? [/b]

You didn't say anything about them being broke.  You just said they were old and had nothing to listen to on the radio.  And you also mentioned young people who liked Big Band music. [/b]

No, I didn't but a lot of older people and even a lot of us not quite that old yet just don't have enough discretionary income to support every for pay radio and tv station, etc, coming down the pike. I know there are at least a dozen different online stations that I'd love to help out that I play around with every now and then but it would cost me well over $150/month that I do not have just to support them all.
 
 In this respect, I do think that some of the satellite stations have the advantage though neither of them appeal to me personally. I find everything I need and want online. My broadband is my habit. It's just that it limits me to where and when I can listen. Same issues would be true for satellite.
 
 The thing is, terrestrial radio is so myopic that it only caters to about 3 or 4 different types of people and be damned with everyone else.
 
 Rhett, that station you mentioned went off the air a couple years ago. It was very good for that sort of music. My mother use to listen to it all of the time. Now she's just as frustrated with terrestial radio choices as we are even though we're all looking for something much different than is offered.

[kosmo vinyl]

the story over at dcist on the switch is worth checking out... this quote from Clear Channel shows just how out of touch they are with what listeners of all ages might want out of a radio station.
 
 "The audience [for oldies] is getting older and going away, it's hard to attain new audience [with the format]. We have to make the music more accessible to more people. We think this is a natural evolution."
 
 DCist
 
 The fact of the matter is that as the commenters are  pointing out people of all ages can like oldies...   Beatles, Beach Boys, Motown, etc are at this point timeless.  If Clear Channel would only program something other than a very limited number of oldies then they could create a viable station.  Little Steven plays "oldies" and he has a popular show.  
 
 It's a shame Rhino Records hasn't gotten into the radio programming business, they could come up with interesting playlists oldies or otherwise and use it sell their products.
 
 One could hope that at some point after the big corps have squeezed out every ounce of creativity and still not covering their huge debts, a fire sale of radio stations takes place and savvy local business people can snap them up and bring back to the airwaves the creative programming  that made radio interesting in the past.  WNTY has a nice ring to it...

[nanj]

My teenage girls love 100.3 and they love Build Me Up Buttercup, but whoever said they play the same songs over and over again is correct. That song is on at least 50 times a day. But it is nice to flip through and finally recognize a song. Radio in this area in general sucks so bad, the only thing I listen to kind of regularly (like if I'm forced to be in the car during his show) is Elliott in the Morning, and even he is grasping at straws most days. It sure is nice to have a 6 cd changer in the car now, that will get me just about anywhere.

[kosmo vinyl]

my old foggie father and uncle have different takes on XM... my uncle enjoys listening to the big band and pop vocal stations, however my dad can't stand them.  he much prefers to listen to the local jazz shows with actual hosts selecting the music and not some computer.  my parents also listen to alot of CBC radio which outshines US radio.  i see now that even the public radio station in detroit has dropped much of it's music programming for yack...
 
 oh well i'll stick to my cds, emusic, yourmusic and lala for sonic entertainment for the meantime

[Bombay Chutney]

Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:
  the story over at dcist on the switch is worth checking out... this quote from Clear Channel shows just how out of touch they are with what listeners of all ages might want out of a radio station.
 
 "The audience [for oldies] is getting older and going away, it's hard to attain new audience [with the format]. We have to make the music more accessible to more people. We think this is a natural evolution."
 

I don't really disagree with this.  I mean...the traditional "oldies" audience is quite literally dying off.  This was a fairly logical step to bring in the next generation of the oldies market without completely throwing out the concept for a new genre.
 
 Yes, Little Steven's show is cool, but it's not really aimed at a large market.  It's aimed at music geeks that love finding lost treasures.  It's a good show, but I find it hard to believe it would be a very profitable full-time radio station.  Same for the Rhino idea.
 
 The folks who listen to "oldies" want to hear the hits from their youth.  They're not looking to discover anything new.  They want familiar songs they grew up with that they can listen to at work, while doing the dishes, while driving the kids to school.  The kids from the 50s and early 60s are fading away.  It's time to move to the kids of the late 60s and 70s and early 80s.  
 
 Of course, that's a direct hit against the classic rock market.  But there's lots of other music from  this era that doesn't get covered under the "classic rock" genre.  Maybe this station will fill that gap.