You've reached our premium or archival content
To access this page, and more great content just like it, you need to become a paid subscriber.
If you already have an account, please login.
Otherwise, registration is quick and you'll have access instantly after payment.
I agree.... it's the same old stuff in every market. Announcers who don't use their names? Probably some tired hack programmer wanting them to use some stupid nick name like sparky or dewey....Half the announcers have names similar to the teletubbies. (some of them sound like teletubbies) It takes more than a "trendy" nick to sell the ads. Why are there so many jobs available? Could it be that the talent has decided it's not worth the trouble. Somebody better fix this quick before the announcer goes the way of the Tassie Tiger.
If I made half as much money as the teletubbies....I'd be happy.
Where has the creativity gone.... Sydney Radio giving away a million for the bloody birthday wheel?... How long are we going to be stuck in this rut. I suppose when promo budgets shrink to just cover the insurance payments that's what you get. Why is Aussie radio so bland at the moment. it's the same old stuff. The talk guys are leading the way. It takes balls to talk. You high paid programmers don't deserve your salaries if this is as good as it gets.
Greetings,
Having read the last few comments, I'm just wondering if it's because not everyone is back in their regular gigs yet for the year. Come next monday it'll change. Plus anyone would tell you it's a little hard getting out of holiday mode the first couple of days but once you slide into your regular routine, it's a breeze - same for radio..it's been in holiday mode, and now it's time to get back into a routine, and things'll be just fine.
Also wanna convey my thanks to Brian Carlton who's been filling the gap left by Brian Wilshire on 2GB the last four weeks. Thanks Brian for all the fun, hope to see you back on air again shortly!
Although I wish the SEN team the best of British luck, here's an interesting fiscal exercise for those with a better head for budgets than me - see if you come up with the same figures.
My very rough/conservative estimate (based on what I'd pay on-air talent and production staff) I estimate it will cost SEN's Danny Staffieri per week:
Talent fees - $35,000
Support staff (sales and admin) - $7500 (based on 15 people @ an average of $500.00 each)
Lease of licence - $19,000
Telstra bill - say $2500
Let's not forget Ronnie Pots 'n Pans two and a half percent share of any revenue over $5million which is just too hard to work out and probably won't happen.
So let's go to the checkout:
$35,000
$ 7,500
$19,000
$ 2,500
= $64,000 PER WEEK
Have I left anything out - like promotion and marketing?
Would appreciate any feedback.
Observation on the comments about the new SEN. Unfortunately they continue to reveal formularised or stalled thinking abnout the medium and what its potentials are. If radio is going to survive at all, it's got to get out of the box a lot of operators seem to be in, and have an open look at what consumers might appreciate as a fresh product offering. Yes - radio is a consumer product, and we still have a lot of Henry Fords in the business (lots of capital, dictatorial manufacturing processes).
SEN 1116 is sounding great after only two days. When it all settles down it should be a great radio station. I just hope that listeners can drag themselves away from the tired AW, racing radio and MMM. Also that costs don't become prohibitive. To the previous poster, the official language of Australia is English, therefore most radio stations broadcast in English. Is there a narrowcast English station in Athens?
SEN 1116 have been out at the Australian Open tennis handing out SEN branded 'autograph' cards so that some people will effectively souvenir their advertising once tennis players sign it. This sort of smart marketing tells me that SEN 1116 ain't no 3AK.
Keeping in mind that SEN 1116 is the regeneration of old 3AK, allow me to quote Barry Hill, former radio columnist from The Age Green Guide, published on 14 June 1990, when 3AK switched to an Italian-English bi-lingual format:
"In general, the problem for the station is its unresolved conception of an audience. A survey of Italian listeners is pending, as is a decent influx of advertising".
Hasn't the above problems been carried over many failed 3AK formats?
I really think SEN 1116 may be the exception. Their conception of an audience is far more resolute. A firm understanding of the sports spectating public and sports sponsorship may be all that is needed to form an equation that adds up to profits. Also, they are outsourcing news and even media sales - perhaps the sign of a more savvy and smart station.
3AK was a me-too product, while SEN is a unique concept - 'all sport, all day'. Sure there will be downtime when fewer people will listen........like there's downtime on every station in Australia.
However, will the station burn through too much cash to pay its stars and still be profitable?
But then, as they say in sport, 'no guts, no glory'.
From Justin Christie.
Hey here's a good topic- lets wrire editorials on things that're going on- then can borrow bits from each other - eg Janet Jackson and J Timberlake- its all detracting away from the Michael Jackson stuff anyway sort of stuff. Best editorial wins a free years subscription to radiowise- what do you say guys? Ruth and Kenny Woodhams, Lismore
Fine with us. That's what the Forum's for - ed
i have run a radio school for the last 25 years , and during that time i have helped not only people into our great industry but also corporate leaders, politicians,and even recently 2 catholic priests to improve their presentation.so what did leon byner do wrong? the answer is nothing except make a living for himself.ps i didnt charge the catholic priests.(after life guarantee for comment)grant goldman
The 9% myth.
I attended the Sydney radio forum on March 22. Lot of wheels reinvented that day. I can't believe that all the great and significant radio effectiveness research that FARB / ARAB did over a thirty year period has been lost (or not presented, or not updated). The findings would be no less significant today as they were then.
Amongst other wheels - the 9% myth. If the industry and the investment community can get away from the convenience of this weighted average share of ad spend, it will become much more apparent where the growth sources may be (apart from the very real possibility that the current radio market would not be able to physically accomodate more than 9% anyway). This 'gross' figure represents a sigificant share of retail/small business (possibly up around the 15% mark or better); and a minor share of agency (probably around 5-6%). If it can be accomodated, the latter is where the growth potential is. And the media it has to be dragged from is television, not other minor players. Go back to some of the old research, such as Les Hay's "ARMS Study" which demonstrated in some detail the reach increase, and boost in frequency distribution that radio can provide.
And for god's sake, what's wrong with the tv script adapted for radio - it's the best reinforcement a brand can have in a cluttered environment!