Taking on the Big Dog

by Richard Harker

There is an unspoken belief in radio today that dominant stations within popular formats are too strong to challenge. The argument goes that the strength of these Big Dog stations forces new stations to find uncontested niche formats. We see this manifest itself in the way that most stations approach a Format Search study. When a client commissions us to look at format opportunities in a market, we always suggest looking at popular formats that attract large numbers of listeners. Invariably, these formats are taken. Too often clients respond that we shouldn’t waste our time looking at these formats because there are successful stations already serving these listeners. Instead, we should look elsewhere for options. This line of reasoning too often produces new hybrid or niche formats that rarely produce sufficient shares to justify the change.

Does it make sense to launch a niche format where demand for the format is so low that we can at best achieve (say) a two share, or would we be better off competing in a popular mainstream format where total shares may approach a ten share? Harker Research believes that attracting 20% of a ten-share format is more likely than attracting 100% of a two-share format. On top of that, once a station has attracted the 20%, there are plenty of additional listeners within the format that we can ultimately attract to grow. Once a niche station has attracted 100% of a niche format’s listeners, there are no more listeners to attract.

This fear of radio’s Big Dogs hasn’t always been the case. The format battles of the 1960s and 1970s were not for control of niche formats. The titanic battles of this era were always over dominance of a large format. They were for Top Dog status in hugely successful formats like Beautiful Music, Top 40, and Adult Contemporary. Whether it was WLS versus WCFL, KHJ versus KRLA, WABC versus WMCA, KFOG versus KABL, or WLAK versus WCLR, these were high stakes toe-to-toe street fights. Each station tried to win by out-maneuvering its competitor, but that generally meant competing tactically. Stations tried to play better music, recruit better DJs, create better contests, and whenever possible, spend more in marketing. Competitors of this era didn’t sound all that different from one another.

Fear of the Big Dog grew along side the growth of format differentiation in the 1990s. Broad formats were declared dead, and the new buzz phrase was format fragmentation. Arbitron shares were leveling and pundits declared that we would all have two share radio stations one day. Sure enough, shares are down. Stations that were once separated by share points are now separated by mere tenths. Looking back, one wonders whether the two-share world wasn’t a self-fulfilling prophecy. If we believe declining shares are inevitable, and we plan and budget for declining shares, does a station end up a two share station because it was inevitable, or because of the station’s actions?

Even shares of some of the old Big Dogs are down, so admittedly being a Big Dog hasn’t prevented share erosion. However, it is still the broad mainstream stations that continue to outperform their niche competitors. Did these stations remain on top by evolving into niche stations targeting a small group of listeners? Quite the contrary. The Top Dogs are still winning because they continue to target large groups of listeners within broad formats. More importantly, virtually none of the new hybrid or niche stations has risen to Top Dog status. In truth, it is very difficult to find any niche format launch of the past decade that has produced a highly ranked station. Look at any ranker, and the broad mainstream stations will be towards the top, and the narrow niche stations will be towards the bottom. So despite format fragmentation and share erosion, there is still value in being a Top Dog.

If radio’s big winners are broad-based mainstream radio stations, to become a winner a challenger must also be a broad-based mainstream radio station. You have to run with the Big Dogs. How does one do that? First, you have to believe that it is possible. We see too many broadcasters who are afraid of the Big Dogs. They don’t compete because they are afraid to compete. Secondly, one has to spend like a Big Dog. There are very few stations that can stay on top while refusing to spend money. There are even fewer stations that can get to the top while refusing to spend money. A dollar spent wisely is worth more than a dollar spent foolishly, but if the Big Dog is spending ten dollars wisely, then the challenger must spend ten dollars too. To succeed takes much more than money, but one can’t succeed without money. A Big Dog that starts cutting budgets creates a great opportunity for another station to take them on and win.

Taking on a Big Dog also requires better market knowledge. Stations become Big Dogs because they know their market better than the competition. Sometimes through a change of program director or something else, the Big Dog stumbles — it loses contact with its listeners. This opens the door for challengers. If my competitor knows the market better than I do, I’m in trouble.

Better market knowledge has huge implications in a broad range of areas. A station’s audience is not static. It is a volatile sea of change. A Big Dog must constantly read its audience, and reflect its tastes and attitude. Music, promotions, stationality, the station’s on-line presence, and so much more need to be in constant flux, staying in-synch with the audience.

Commitment is the next requirement. A Big Dog didn’t become a Big Dog overnight. It takes years to reach the top, and no station can hope to challenge a Big Dog in less time. Commitment should not be confused with patience, however. We see too many stations that fool themselves into making half-hearted efforts because they believe growth is going to take time. Big Dogs don’t have patience, and taking on a Big Dog requires a 24/7 commitment to deliver a superior product 24/7. Unless everyone at the station from General Manager to weekend jock is prepared to give 110%, then stay on the porch.

Courage is another important trait of a Big Dog. Big Dogs don’t avoid risks and play it safe. They know that listeners like change and variety. They don’t want the same thing over and over, so Big Dogs experiment. They innovate. They try something new, and if it works they do it some more, and if it doesn’t work, they try something else. Successfully competing with a Big Dog means continually looking for the next big idea and out-innovating the Big Dog.

Money, market knowledge, courage, confidence, and commitment. These five things create a Big Dog, and it takes these five things to take on a Big Dog. So it is easy to see why we see few new Big Dogs—There are few companies that have what it takes. But we can hope there are at least a few broadcasters left who remember those titanic battles of the past and have grown tired of staying on the porch.

Richard Harker is President of Harker Research, a company providing a wide range of research services to radio stations in North America and Europe. Twenty-years of research experience combined with Richard’s 15 years as a programmer and general manager helps Harker Research provide practical actionable solutions to ratings problems. Visit www.harkerresearch or contact Richard at (919) 954-8300.

– See more at: http://www.fmqb.com/article.asp?id=438845#sthash.aCbeFXI7.dpuf