Randy Kabrich Addresses A Question About Voltair's Affect On Radio's AQH Rating Stability
July 28, 2015 at 5:19 AM (PT)
The ongoing discussion regarding VOLTAIR's affect on NIELSEN ratings continues -- with RANDY KABRICH blogging that RAIN's KURT HANSON, "proves he is smarter than a 5th grader."
The remark followed a question posed by HANSEN, who asked, "has radio's AQH rating been stable over the 12 months (i.e., reversing a long-term trend) due to increased listener satisfaction... or due to the effects of adding hundreds of Voltairs?"
KABRICH addresses that question in a new blog post TODAY (7/28).
Background On This Discussion
As background, last week (NET NEWS 7/21), NIELSEN's decision to finally comment on VOLTAIR -- ruling that the ratings service will not support it, but would make improvements on the PPM instead -- didn't surprise RANDY KABRICH, who considers this entire brouhaha as much ado about very little, if anything. What's worse, VOLTAIR's presence is getting both credit and blame it doesn't deserve. "So NIELSEN has told you that VOLTAIR does not turn the radio rating world upside down as you know it," he wrote on his blog. "In their testing, they only found the unit to be of some benefit when the background noise was equal or greater to the loudness of the source (your radio station)."
Later that week, KABRICH was back with some numbers (NET NEWS 7/23), noting, "After my last blog entry, combined with the NIELSEN PPM Webinar, a surprising number of people continue to state in the trades they remain upset by the lack of facts. I find that quite confusing in and of itself, but upon reflection, I realize what good programmers have known for years ... listen to the people – and they want facts!"
YESTERDAY (NET NEWS 7/27), KABRICH was back, blogging, "People want facts. People want data. I am still dumbfounded how many continue to believe there are 'magic beans' that can increase your ratings. And I find a failure with myself for not being able to clearly get across the data I have assembled. So, for the later part of the week, I thought, how can I get this down to the least common denominator where it was simple for everyone to see what I have seen? Then it hit me. Could I give just two numbers from NIELSEN data and make it clear?"
In the latest update to this discussion, KABRICH blogs, "In response to KURT HANSON’s RAIN response to this blog post here, I really do not have any disagreement with what KURT has posted. There are several points I would like to make, though. I did try to make a reference to declining numbers in the statement, 'I also wish there was some way radio could to get back the ratings we had pre-2007 before smartphones, tablets and other distractions'. I even went so far as to spell it out in greater detail in an early version, but decided I did not wish to get sidetracked into another radio issue in this post. I possibly should have left it in instead of watering it down."
KABRICH continues, "I am hoping that Radio has found a floor in the declines and to me, it does not appear that VOLTAIR would be adding this drop back in," and asks, "Why are the majority of up markets (and biggest gains in the markets) in markets 26-52 and not 1-25? If you were a major group and could not afford to put a $15k VOLTAIR in all markets, would you not first put a VOLTAIR in NYC, CHICAGO or DALLAS -- instead of SAN ANTONIO, CLEVELAND or WEST PALM BEACH? Is a rating point not much more valuable in NEW YORK than in MEMPHIS?"
Read TODAY's full post here.