| Topic Name: |
KPHO |
| Message Name: |
When Viewers Die.... |
| Date Posted: |
06/09/2005 |
| In Reply To: |
You may not understand why he's "better," and from a technical standpoint, he may be no "better" in some respects than other Phoenix anchors. But the bottom line in this business is the Anchor's "appeal" to viewers. Kent's appeal has been consistently high throughout his career. And Kent's "appeal" has already translated into a measurable and fairly substantial increase in viewership for KPHO.
And because of the recent strong numbers of KPHO's network affiliation, KPHO probably had more money to spend to bring Kent aboard (and less of a financial risk than other stations). Also, the ratings of KPHO's local newscast will likely continue to improve through the snowball effect of the stations overall local and network ratings continuing to support higher advertising dollars, and therefore, more money to spend on its local newscast. |
| Message: |
That's all well and good, but Dana's "longevity" = "elderly" audience. Correct?
What's the "snowball effect" of lousy demographics?
Let's use the Randy Johnson example again. Cy Young candidate last year, middling pitcher this year, who-knows-what next year. See? Is the dough worth the show?
I'm thinking Halsey. Boy will he be popular if/when he's 15-8 come October, huh??
|
|
