As the piece points out, at this rate, satellite radio would not make the Top 20 in cume in most markets. In “Left Coast” markets like Seattle and Portland, satellite radio penetration is especially poor, as it is in Chicago, where under 3% of the market cumes satellite radio stations.
But take this analysis one step further: even in the highest market of satellite radio penetration – Philadelphia at around 7% - that cume level is split between XM and Sirius. And it’s divided up among 200+ channels, many of which don’t carry commercials. And this is a good deal for a media buyer?
This is why it’s difficult for satellite radio personalities to gain any traction, as listener choices are sliced and diced among a myriad of options. But it also underscores the importance of major broadcasters getting the word out about why smart advertisers should stay with the 800 pound media gorilla – terrestrial radio.
Hats off to Katz for getting this information out, and connecting the dots. These are stories that should go beyond email boxes and even this blog. The RAB and other industry organizations need to get this information to the advertising community, as well as media outlets like The New York Times, many of whom would likely be surprised by the data. When is terrestrial radio going to start effectively and emphatically telling its story?