Pay For Stream?

Post Reply
taman100
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:02 am

Pay For Stream?

Post by taman100 » Thu Mar 18, 2010 12:39 pm

All Access reported earlier this week (3/15) that KPIG has switched to an in-house subscription model for their stream that eliminates commercials and offers more music. Already they say they are bringing in more income than they were from the advertising. Is this a model that will work only for a unique brand like KPIG, or could this be the begiining of a trend?

--Schoenberger

rowdyron
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 3:48 pm

Re: Pay For Stream?

Post by rowdyron » Mon Apr 12, 2010 2:22 pm

Wow! Would like to see the model for this one. Honestly its hard for me to believe that they are making more money this way.

superadiofan
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 12:47 pm

Re: Pay For Stream?

Post by superadiofan » Tue Apr 20, 2010 9:39 am

KPIG's playlist is way more unique when compared to most "AAA" playlists. They're really Americana and I doubt many would pay for access to their stream. Hard to believe they're making money on it, I agree with rowdyron.

Looking at it another way, most of us "pay" for a stream because we are paying for Internet access.

chexmex
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 2:06 pm

Re: Pay For Stream?

Post by chexmex » Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:56 pm

Good point... but not sure if I'd say Americana when describing their playlist. Triple A would still describe it but again are any of these formats exact??

BillGoldsmith
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:37 am

Re: Pay For Stream?

Post by BillGoldsmith » Wed Aug 18, 2010 1:11 pm

With very few exceptions, no matter what your format is there's someone doing a decent job of offering a free stream online already. So the chances of successfully getting more than a handful of people to pay to listen are very, very small.

KPIG may be an exception, since their programming is really quite unique, but even in their case I doubt that they have more than 100 or so subscribers (they refuse to give out any numbers, so that's just a guess, but I'd be highly surprised if it was very far off the mark). If you want to call that success, that's great. I wouldn't.

When they offered a high quality free stream (prior to 2002), KPIG had peak listener numbers of > 5000. Anything substantially less than that (and believe me their subscription listening can't be any more than a very, very small fraction of that number) would rate as a failure in my book.

To call it a success because there is now a small bit of money trickling in, whereas before there was a small bit of money trickling out, is short-sighted in the extreme. Of course extreme short-sightedness seems to be the norm in the radio biz these days.

Post Reply