UK commercial radio – Page 7 – Grant Goddard : radio broadcasting expert : media analyst : writer/author

Radio in the Digital Economy Bill: the tail wagging the dog

The government’s forthcoming Digital Economy Bill will be the most significant legislation for the UK radio industry since the passage of the Communications Bill in 2002. Published at the end of November 2009, the Digital Economy Bill will propose ‘primary’ legislation that sets out a new regime for the licensing and regulation of commercial radio in all its forms – national analogue stations, local analogue stations and local DAB multiplexes.

The main thrust of the new legislation for commercial radio was contained in the Digital Britain final report published in June 2009. According to the Department of Culture Media & Sport, Lord Carter’s almost year-long consultation was intended to set out “the Government’s strategic vision for ensuring that the UK is at the leading edge of the global digital economy” and would introduce “policies to maximise the social and economic benefits from digital technologies”. Indeed, some of the changes proposed for the radio industry are forward-looking and designed to place the sector in a multimedia future in which it could survive and thrive.

However, some of the recommended changes to existing radio legislation are there only because parts of the commercial radio industry have lobbied for them to be there. At the time, these interested parties might have claimed that such changes would be beneficial to the commercial radio industry as a whole. Increasingly, other parts of that industry have realised that some Digital Britain proposals were lobbied for inclusion only because they suit the interests of a particular player, offering little or no benefit to the wider industry.

Worse, one proposal ties the future of the whole industry to a dangerous poker game with the government which commercial radio is unlikely to win. This is the Digital Britain proposal [page 102, paragraph 44] to automatically extend the existing licenses of the three national commercial radio stations for a further seven years. Why is this proposal there, and what does it have to do with the UK’s digital future? What price is the commercial radio industry being forced to pay for its inclusion?

During the Digital Britain consultation period, Global Radio had lobbied intensively to have the licence of its national analogue station, Classic FM, automatically renewed beyond its 2011 expiry date. In January 2009, I had written:

Classic FM’s licence expires on 30 September 2011 and it cannot be automatically renewed. This is a big problem. Whereas local commercial radio licences are still awarded (and re-awarded) by Ofcom under a ‘beauty contest’ system, national commercial radio licences are not. The system for national commercial radio licences is simple. Sealed bids are placed in envelopes. Ofcom opens the envelopes. The bidder willing to pay the highest price wins the licence. That’s it. This system is enshrined in legislation. Even if Ofcom wants a different system, it cannot change it without legislation.

As Classic FM’s new owner, Global Radio definitely wants a different system that will enable it to hang on to this most valuable asset. Global has been busy bending the ears of anybody and everybody who it might be able to persuade to interpret the broadcasting rules in a way that lets it keep Classic FM after 2011. Even Ofcom has had its lawyers busy examining the legislation to see what flexibility it has to interpret the rules in a way that might maintain the status quo.

Unfortunately, the legislation in the Broadcasting Act 1990 is quite specific:
“[Ofcom] shall, after considering all the cash bids submitted by the applicants for a national licence, award the licence to the applicant who submitted the highest bid.”

The solution for Global Radio was to lobby, lobby and lobby some more for the current legislation detailing the licensing system for national commercial radio to be revoked, changed, amended – whatever needed to be done to ensure that Global could hang on to its valuable Classic FM licence. When Digital Britain was published, it was evident that the phone calls and meetings had paid off handsomely. Lord Carter had listened and offered a solution – a significant change to primary legislation that would allow Global Radio to retain its Classic FM licence for a further seven years, replacing the existing legal requirement that it be re-awarded by Ofcom to the highest bidder in an auction in 2010.

Why exactly is Global Radio so desperate to hang on to Classic FM?

Firstly, Classic FM is a ‘cash cow’ and has always been the most successful of the UK’s three national commercial radio stations launched in the early 1990s. It attracts 40m hours listening per week which, at current sector yields, would earn it around £50m per annum revenues. However, its earning power is further enhanced by the affluence of its audience. Of its hours listened, 66% derive from ABC1 adults, 85% from ‘housewives’, and 68% from adults aged 55+, a target age group that very little commercial radio reaches. As a result, Classic FM is likely to be attracting more than 10% of total UK commercial radio revenues, significant for a single player out of 300 commercial stations. [RAJAR, Q3 2009]

Global Radio overpaid to acquire GCap Media for £375m in 2008. The challenge for Global is that the radio business is dominated by fixed costs. In other words, however many listeners an individual station has within its service area, that station’s costs are relatively static. Many of the stations in Global’s portfolio are medium-sized local operations, whereas Classic FM is a ‘giant’ with national coverage. Its profit margin probably far outstrips every other commercial station in the UK. Classic FM alone probably generates more operating profit than all Global’s other radio stations added together.

Classic FM occupies a unique position in the radio market (the only competitor in the classical music format is BBC Radio Three) and its market power has proven relatively stable over time, with a current listening share of 3.7%, only slightly down from 4.1% a decade ago. By comparison, GCap Media’s prime local radio assets also acquired by Global Radio have lost immense market power over the same period – the market share of London’s Capital FM down from 13.0% to 6.2%, and Birmingham’s BRMB down from 17.1% to 4.8%, for example. Thus, Classic FM is very much a ‘rock’ at a time many local commercial stations occupy a ‘hard place’. [RAJAR, Q3 2009 & Q3 1999]

Global Radio desperately does not want to partake in an auction for the Classic FM licence. It might under-bid and lose. It might over-bid and win. Either outcome would be a disaster, the former losing it the ‘crown jewels’, the latter allowing it to keep the licence but at a price that could lose the station its ‘cash cow’ status. Because there has been no auction of a national commercial radio licence auction since the early 1990s, nobody knows what the winning bid price might be. Worse, in the 1990s, the field had been open only to European Union companies. Legislation since then has opened up the bidding to the global market. Thus, a licence auction would be an extremely dangerous game for Global to play and, if it lost, would force it to write off its entire Classic FM balance sheet valuation only two years after it acquired the station.

Global Radio has a bargain on its hands in the current Classic FM licence. Not only does this one radio station attract more than a tenth of all commercial radio revenues, but its Ofcom-issued broadcast licence costs very little by market standards. The present cost is fixed at £50,000 per annum + 6% of revenues, probably amounting to around £3m per annum, not a huge expense for a station that generates around £50m. Why is the licence fee so little?

It is the regulator (initially the Radio Authority, now Ofcom) that sets the price of the licence, in the first instance according to the amount that the applicant has bid in its licence application to win the right to broadcast. The price of the licence is collected by the regulator but remitted directly to the Treasury in payment for the scarce FM radio spectrum used by the station.

In 1991, when it won the licence at auction, Classic FM had bid £670,000 per annum plus 14% of its revenues. In 1999, the Radio Authority increased this to £1m per annum plus 14% of revenues. However, in 2006, Ofcom reviewed the Classic FM licence payment and slashed it to £50,000 per annum plus only 6% of revenues. As the table below shows (using estimated amounts because the advertising revenues generated by Classic FM are not published), Global Radio purchased Classic FM just at the time when its licence started to cost significantly less than in previous years.

Why did Ofcom decide to reduce the cost of Classic FM’s licence so substantially? Because Ofcom believed that the analogue FM spectrum used by Classic FM would become less and less important with time, as listening via digital platforms, mostly DAB, rapidly replaced FM listening. Ofcom’s own forecast, made in November 2006, anticipated that digital platforms would account for 60% of all radio listening by 2011, the date when Classic FM’s licence expires. Quite how this justified a 95% cut in the licence fee, alongside a 57% cut in the revenue charge, was not explained by Ofcom. Essentially, Ofcom offered Classic FM’s owner the bargain analogue radio licence deal of a lifetime.

Ofcom’s forecast of digital radio listening turned out to be wildly over-optimistic, appearing to be based more on wishful thinking than on available evidence. Whilst Ofcom had forecast that digital platforms would account for 42% of radio listening by year-end 2009, industry data show the present outcome to be 21% for all radio and 20% for commercial radio. [RAJAR Q3 2009]

The inaccurate Ofcom forecast for consumer uptake of digital radio (never subsequently updated publicly) merely confirmed the belief within a large part of the radio industry that digital radio was about to exhibit exponential growth. This Ofcom forecast, accompanied by supporting comments from the regulator (for example, six months later, Ofcom director of radio Peter Davies said: “we are potentially at a Freeview moment with digital radio”), proved significant in misleading stakeholders into believing that the death of analogue radio was just around the corner. The regulator could not have got it more wrong.

Ofcom’s inability to forecast the radio market it regulated has resulted in a loss of millions of pounds of potential commercial radio licence fees for the Treasury, not only from Classic FM, but from the other two national commercial stations whose licence fees were also reduced. By Ofcom’s own estimate, under the previous formula the three stations combined had paid £7m per annum, but were now being charged less than £1.5m per annum. Over the four-year period until the three stations’ licences expire in 2011/2, the total revenue foregone to the Treasury will be around £22m. The Digital Britain proposal to extend these national radio licences for a further seven years, if the present licensing payment scheme is continued, would increase the total potential revenue lost to the Treasury to more than £50m.

Neither RAJAR nor Classic FM release data publicly showing the proportion of the station’s listening derived from digital platforms, but it presently seems unlikely that the station would voluntarily give up using FM for broadcasts after 2011 (when the present licence expires), and probably not even after 2018 (the revised expiry date if Digital Britain’s proposed seven-year licence extension were legislated). Effectively, the Digital Economy Bill would merely enable the largest player in the commercial radio sector not only to hang on to its ‘cash cow’, but to continue paying its present low licence payments to the Treasury for the FM radio spectrum it uses.

The losers from this arrangement are:
• taxpayers who, thanks to Ofcom’s poor forecasting, are now effectively subsidising the FM spectrum used by the commercial radio sector’s single most profitable asset
• the rest of the commercial radio sector who will never be able to match Classic FM’s operating margin because their own costs and revenues are considerably more constrained
• new entrants to the radio sector who wish to bid for the Classic FM licence when it expires in 2011 and are willing to pay a realistic, market price for the licence, but will be denied the opportunity by the government’s offer of an automatic licence renewal.

Politically, the proposals in the Digital Britain final report could not have isolated Classic FM as the sole commercial radio station to have its licence automatically renewed through new legislation. So the renewal proposal was extended not only to all three national commercial stations, but also to all local analogue stations that are broadcasting on the DAB platform. In July 2009, I suggested that this Digital Britain proposal was still iniquitous to the remaining local commercial stations that cannot or will not broadcast on DAB. It appears now that the Digital Economy Bill is likely to extend the proposed licence extension to all analogue commercial radio stations (whether or not they simulcast on DAB).

So every analogue commercial radio station will now be offered an automatic licence extension! Is that not a universal ‘good thing’? Well, no, because there is rarely a ‘free lunch’. Lord Carter was determined to extract a price from the entire commercial radio sector for bowing to persistent demands from Global Radio for new legislation to renew its Classic FM licence. The strings he attached are related to the government’s insistence that the whole radio industry use DAB as its main broadcast platform. This is why two entirely unrelated issues – Classic FM’s licence and DAB consumer uptake – have now become so intertwined in the proposed legislation.

In the seven-year renewal offered to every commercial radio licence, the government proposes to insert a clause that will allow it (via Ofcom) to terminate that licence extension with two years’ notice if the radio industry as a whole (commercial radio and the BBC) does not achieve these goals:
• 50% of radio listening to be via digital platforms by 2013
• DAB transmission infrastructure to be upgraded significantly.

It is a ‘carrot and stick’ approach: ‘We the government will give you all a free licence extension if you collectively promise to make DAB work. But, if we find you do not succeed in making DAB work, we will take your licences (and hence your businesses) away altogether’. The problem here is that the buck has been passed on to a wide and varied constituency of 300 commercial radio stations, many of whom have very little or no control over whether DAB can be turned into a successful delivery platform.

It is the entire commercial radio industry that will be expected to potentially pay the price with its own lives in exchange for changes to primary legislation that allow Global Radio to hang on to its ‘cash cow’ Classic FM licence. What seems even more unfair is that the entire DAB platform is owned and controlled by a mere handful of the largest UK commercial radio companies who, between them (and the BBC and transmission company Arqiva), wield the power to make DAB a success or failure.

If the largest commercial radio owner, Global Radio, had demonstrated incredible confidence in the DAB platform, maybe it might instil confidence in the rest of the radio sector that DAB could be made a consumer success by 2013. However, although Global Radio has regularly talked the DAB talk, it has hardly walked the DAB walk. Global had been the largest owner of commercial DAB infrastructure until, in April 2009, it sold its 63% stake in the national DAB multiplex and its wholly owned group of local DAB multiplexes. At the same time, it has sold or closed all but two of its digital-only radio stations, which exist now only as music jukeboxes.

Of course, for Global Radio, none of the DAB ‘strings’ really matter. It thinks it has got exactly what it wanted in the forthcoming Digital Economy Bill – to keep its valuable Classic FM licence. This is its significant short-term goal and may be the only thing that can keep the group afloat financially. Who knows? If the media ownership rules are relaxed, Global might be able to sell its entire radio business to Murdoch or RTL or MTG before the 2013 date of judgement on DAB is even reached.

For a while, many in the industry had seemingly been happy to line up behind Global Radio, uncertain of their own futures and relatively uninformed on these complex regulatory and legislative issues. But the truth is dawning on many – what is good for Global Radio is not necessarily good for the rest of the commercial radio industry. The future of commercial radio should remain in the collective hands of the industry itself, not be determined by one individual owner. And the issue of radio licence renewals should not have to be linked to the future performance of the DAB platform.

Digital Britain and the Digital Economy Bill offer a rare opportunity to update the regulatory regime for the entire commercial radio sector, rather than merely to offer one company a ‘phone a friend’ millionaire lifeline.

[For the purpose of transparency, I contributed sector analysis to two documents that were part of the Digital Britain process – a pre-consultation overview and the regulation of local radio.]

[Note to the table: the estimated costs of the Classic FM licence fee are simplified. Firstly, the cash amount paid increases annually from £1,000,000 in 1999 to £1,161,000 in 2006 and subsequently, in line with the Retail Price Index. The £50,000 cash payment will similarly be adjusted. Secondly, the revenue percentage paid is applied only to “advertising and sponsorship revenue attributable to national analogue listening hours”, but this data is not published, so 100% of estimated revenues have been assumed to derive from the FM platform.]

DAB radio: "let us get on this horse or get off it"

House of Commons Culture, Media & Sport Committee
“The future for local and regional media”
27 October 2009 in the Thatcher Room, Portcullis House

Andrew Harrison, chief executive, RadioCentre
Travis Baxter, managing director, Bauer Radio
Steve Fountain, head of radio, KM Group

[excerpts]

Mr Tom Watson: Can I ask you about Digital Britain and the Digital Britain Report? Do you think the report gave a good way forward for the commercial sector to journey out of its current troubles?

Mr Baxter: Perhaps I could ask Andrew to give an overview on that and then maybe we can give our respective views?

Mr Harrison: To give an overview, I think the short answer to that is “yes”. One of the fundamental issues the sector faces right now is the appalling cost of dual transmission. Ultimately, right now, this is a small sector and very many of our stations are simultaneously paying for the cost of analogue and digital transmission. That clearly does not make any financial sense. What we advocated for in Digital Britain was a pathway for all stations to end up with a very clear plan of what is the single transmission platform for them. That led, as I said in my opening remarks, to three very complementary tiers of the commercial radio offer. The first tier is a strong national offer on digital to compete with the BBC, and that is critical for the sector because the truth is that the FM spectrum is full. I am sure all of you will know from some of the other conversations we have had before that the BBC dominates the gift of analogue spectrum. It has four national FM stations; we only have one with Classic FM. For the sector to compete and capture its share of national advertising revenue, the ability to have a national digital platform I think is critical. As we then had the conversations with Digital Britain, I think it became very clear to all of us that you cannot just migrate national stations to digital and leave all of the large metropolitan local stations, like City in Liverpool for example or Metro in Newcastle, all the BBC’s local stations, as analogue only. The listeners to those stations will want the functionality, experience and benefits that come with digital. It is then very important that we have a second tier of the large local and regional stations which also migrate to digital. Critically, however, that nevertheless leaves an important third tier, which are the smaller or the rural stations for which either DAB coverage is currently not present – there is just not the transmitter build-out in some of the rural areas – or for which it is likely to be prohibitively expensive going forward. That sector equally needs clarity and that sector being able to stay on FM alongside community radio we feel gives a very balanced ecology where the sector has the most opportunity to compete and the lowest cost base because each station can ultimately choose whether it is on one transmission methodology, i.e. digital, or another, analogue. At the moment, we are in limbo where stations are paying for both but the profitability of the sector is fragile and there is not a plan. So we absolutely welcome the beginnings of that plan, which we recognise is the start of what is going to be a long and difficult journey as stations migrate and decide if their future is on digital only or their future is on analogue. The quicker we can move the industry there, clearly the better for the fragile economics of the sector.

Mr Baxter: Perhaps I can encapsulate some of the things we sent in to the Carter Review. Our business view generally is that the future is digital. There is hardly the need for me to make that clear to you. Our view has been for the last ten years that we will look at all platforms as we develop our business. We have successful radio stations, primarily operating for example off the audio channels on the Freeview digital television system. However, within that we think it is of real value for radio to have a bespoke platform and the one that is available to us that is a bespoke broadcast platform is DAB. It has, however, taken 12 to 13 years of very slow development for that platform to get to its current state. Therefore, our proposition to Carter’s Review was: let us get on this horse or get off it. We think we should get on it and put every possible energy we can over the next view years into getting consensus, direction and pace into the whole process of take-up, like there has not been during the last 12 years. If that can be achieved, it will produce a new resonance for commercial radio as a whole, indeed for the whole of radio. It will help position radio more effectively in the fragmenting media landscape we all have to deal with and give us an opportunity, as Andrew said, of clarifying our investment levels around platforms where currently we are having to pay for two when, in a future where either one is successful, we would only have to pay for one, thereby allowing resource to be put into developing content and other things around our business.

Mr Fountain: KM Group does have a digital platform. It is currently costing us over £100,000 a year and we get absolutely nothing back from it. I think the company at the time, six years ago, took the view that they wanted to be a part of the future. Circumstances since have not really helped them to be able to develop that particular medium. I think we too take the view that we would want to be part of a digital platform going forward, but there are a number of issues that would need to be overcome, not least of all the cost of entry and also in our particular case our DAB coverage and the coverage of our FM stations is not mirrored. We have better coverage right now on our FM platforms than we do on our one single DAB coverage. The problem around the coast, if you take that from Medway right the way round perhaps as far down as Rye, around the Kent coast and just touching into Sussex, is such that DAB does not actually reach into large parts of that coastal area.

Mr Watson: Would DAB+?

Mr Fountain: I could not answer that because I do not actually know.

Mr Harrison: No, there is no difference in terms of the coverage for DAB or DAB+. DAB+ is just a different method of compressing the signal so you can actually get more signal down the pipe, if you like; you tend to get more stations, but it does not actually affect the coverage.

Mr Fountain: You can see that in order for us to extend the coverage of DAB, there is clearly a cost involved, and there is also a conversation to be had between Ofcom and the French communication authorities as well.

Mr Watson: Presumably you are all relatively happy with what is quite a demanding timetable outlined in Digital Britain if your view is that we should just get on with it and do it?

Mr Harrison: I think you have expressed it exactly right. The timetable is demanding. I think it is set deliberately as being demanding. Digital Britain does not set a date for switchover. What it sets are two criteria that it says are axiomatic to be hit before switchover can be contemplated: one on listener levels and one on coverage, both of which we support. The aspiration in Digital Britain is to try and hit those two gates, if you like, by the end of 2013. On what Travis was saying earlier on, we think that is absolutely right, that the industry now works terrifically hard together, alongside the BBC and alongside the Government and the regulator to do our very best to hit those criteria. Once we then hit the criteria, the Digital Britain report identifies that it will probably take a couple of years from the criteria being hit before we could actually contemplate switchover. That is aggressive but we think it is appropriately aggressive against the context of an industry that is clearly struggling financially now, and the vast majority of my members are highlighting the cost of dual transmission as the single biggest cost issue that they face and self-evidently one that could be eliminated the quicker we can get to a decision one way or the other.

Mr Watson: May I ask you a bit of a left field question? You are quite confident that we should move to digital radio quite quickly. How confident are you that consumers will want to make that journey and that they will not migrate to internet, radio or choose to listen to live streaming sites like Spotify?

Mr Harrison: There are two different points there. We are quite confident, as you say, about the movement to digital, but purely because what the Digital Britain Report sets up are consumer-led criteria to drive that change. The criteria are absolutely that we will not move until coverage is built out to match FM. It would be absolutely suicidal for the industry to switch people off who currently listen and enjoy radio services, so it is axiomatic that we have to build coverage out. Secondly, the criterion is that listenership to digital has to be that the majority of all listening has to be to digital before you would contemplate switchover. We are not going to rush into this without being led by the consumer. What we are trying to do, as Travis said earlier, is inject some pace, momentum and energy into the process. If we wait for the natural replacement of sets and the natural progression of DAB – it has taken a long time to get to the listener levels we have right now, we still have all of the BBC’s services for example available on analogue – it is going to be very difficult to kick start the progression. We are very comfortable but we are comfortable because it is led by the consumer. The second part of your question is: are we worried about competing services? We are absolutely. I think there is a whole generation of new entrants into the market – Spotify, Last.fm, Pandora – available on-line, all of which are unregulated and against which we are competing for listeners and for advertising revenue. When you have a small, heavily regulated, constrained local radio sector competing with an unregulated world-wide series of music offerings, that is one of the challenges we have to face. We are, however, absolutely committed to the importance of a broadcast transmission methodology for digital. That is not to say that the internet will not be an important complement to that but our business model is based on a broadcast signal of one signal to a wider audience. There is very little evidence so far that on-line music offerings are in themselves profitable business models. For UK citizens and consumers, for our listeners, we think it is absolutely critical that radio remains free at the point of delivery. That has been one of its great strengths ever since the BBC was founded in the 1920s. Of course at the moment, although as I heard this morning the cost of broadband is potentially down to £6 a month, nevertheless, to access any internet-delivered service, you have to pay an ISP connection. That may change but I suspect we are a long way away from that.

[edit]

Mr Watson: Do you think the car industry is sufficiently prepared for the digital revolution?

Mr Baxter: I think we have had some very encouraging conversations with the motor industry over the last six months. The response to Carter’s work during the beginning of this year has helped galvanise interest in that area quite significantly, so I think there is a very different aura around those discussions than there was 12 months ago.

Mr John Whittingdale, Chairman: Just on the cost of the digital upgrade, what is your best estimate of how much it is going to cost?

Mr Harrison: I was on the working party, the Digital Radio Working Group, that was the forerunner for Digital Britain. That working group identified the cost of build-out, the one-off capital cost, as between £100 million and £150 million. That is quite a spread. The reason for the spread ultimately depends on what degree of coverage build-out you get to from equalling FM to universality and at what signal strength. Of course, you get real diminishing returns as you go to the very rural areas. That is the reason for the spread. There has been a lot of debate about that number. In reality, the way we have tended to look at it is that if you take that spread of £100-£150 million over the 12 year period of a licence, which is typically when a radio station is licensed or a multiplex is licensed, and if you said for round figures it is £120 million, that is £10 million a year for the licence period. I think it was £10 million a year that the Secretary of State quoted for example last week. Funding that we have always felt is actually absolutely critical to the build-out and conversation to Digital Britain. The commercial sector is absolutely happy to pay its way to the extent that the build-out is commercially viable but, after that, there is a clear public policy imperative. If the Government and Parliament decide that it is important to have a dedicated transmission structure for radio, that will be a public policy decision and it will need funding. That said, we believe that funding is very affordable. If you take that £100 million number, we believe that, for example, the BBC would save much more than that over the period of the 12-year licence just on what it will save on FM transmission alone, so there is a straightforward business proposition. Another way to think about the £100 million over a 12-year licence with the current Licence Fee settlement for the BBC at around about £3.5-£3.6 billion a year is that over 12 years that is £43 billion. The £100 million infrastructure cost for DAB radio is less than a quarter of one per cent of what the BBC’s income will likely be over the next 12 years. So it is eminently affordable if there is a public policy decision that it is important to do that build-out.

Chairman: Those two arguments suggest that you are looking for the BBC to pay for this.

Mr Harrison: We have said very clearly and very fairly that we are absolutely happy to pay our fair share in our way to what is commercially viable.

Chairman: What does that mean?

Mr Harrison: That means that we have already put our hands in our pockets substantially to build out coverage on a local and a national basis as far as we judge is affordable. I think realistically, given the state of the sector, the vast majority of the cost going forward, which is primarily designed to meet the BBC’s obligations of universality rather than the commercial sector’s obligations of viability, should rest with the BBC.

Chairman: So whilst RadioCentre is keen to move ahead with the digital upgrade, the economics of your sector at the moment means that you cannot really afford to put any more money into it?

Mr Harrison: We believe that transmission coverage build-out is axiomatic; it is one of the criteria to effect switchover. We cannot afford it but we absolutely believe the BBC can.

Philip Davies: Andrew, on this part can I ask you about how representative your view is of the industry as a whole? It was over this issue it seems more than any other that UTV Radio quit the RadioCentre and said that it felt that it was no longer representing the interests of the wider industry and gave too much power to its biggest member.

Mr Harrison: Yes, UTV did say that. Scott Taunton, the UTV Radio managing director, actually represented the commercial radio industry with me on the Digital Radio Working Group through all the per-work that was done for Digital Britain, and so they have been intimately involved. To be fair to UTV’s position, they have a particular reservation over the date and the timing for digital, but to be fair to the Digital Britain Report, and indeed we await the clauses of any potential Bill because it is not yet written, there has never been a formal switchover date actually agreed. Although, for example, I think Scott in his Guardian article yesterday talked about a 2015 date being farcical, that date has never been set. What have been set are two consumer-led criteria that have to be hit and then a transition period after that before we all migrate. As Travis said earlier, the majority of opinion across the sector, and certainly across my members and representing my board, is that we need now to put our foot on the gas and work hard to deliver the criteria. Inevitably, there is going to be a spectrum of views with different businesses in different places in terms of their own business models as to the urgency or not they see behind that. UTV are absolutely right to have their own position. They are more at the tail end of the timing.

Philip Davies: UTV did not just say that they had a different position to you. They said something a bit more fundamental than that that they felt that you were no longer representing the interests of the wider industry. It was not just as if they had a disagreement. They were indicating that there were others in the sector who shared their view. Do you accept that there are many others or some others in the sector that would share their view?

Mr Harrison: I would absolutely accept that we are a broad church and there is a breadth of opinion. I represent large and small stations, local and national, rural and metropolitan, so there is a breadth of opinion. To give you an example of that, our other major national station member that is on AM is Absolute Radio and they believe that the timing for digital should be sooner rather than later. They already have over 50% of their listening on digital platforms, one way or another, so they would move sooner. I have a number of digital-only stations in membership, stations like Jazz and Planet Rock, which clearly are already digital-only and would like to be in the vanguard. Inevitably, there is a spectrum of opinion and we try our best to reflect the overall views. The truth is that it is very unfortunate that UTV have left membership but we continue to represent the vast majority of the sector and its stations and will continue to try to steer a path, helping Government and helping the regulator through this tension.

Digital Radio Upgrade & the Digital Economy Bill

Westminster eForum Parliamentary Reception
Terrace Pavilion, House of Commons, London
28 October 2009 @ 1600

“The informal discussion that takes place can be expected to cross a range of current policy issues but the chosen theme is digital switchover and DAB.”

JOHN WHITTINGDALE MP, Chairman, House of Commons Culture, Media & Sport Select Committee:

The future of radio is very much a topic under debate. My Select Committee is currently conducting an inquiry into the future of local and regional media, of which radio is an absolutely critical part. So yesterday we were hearing evidence from Andrew Harrison of RadioCentre, Travis Baxter [of Bauer Media] who is here somewhere today, and Steve Fountain from KM Group. And we are very much aware of the pressures on commercial radio and the difficulties faced. But, at the same time, there are opportunities. And when Digital Britain came out, much of it had been trailed in advance, a lot of it quite controversial – things like top-slicing and file-sharing legislation – but the one bit which came as something of a surprise, I think, was the announcement of the date for Digital Radio Upgrade. Certainly, when I saw that in the Report, my immediate reaction was rather like the ‘Yes Minister’ Permanent Secretary who said: “That is a very brave decision, Minister”.

It is going to be challenging. It is slightly controversial. Not everybody in the industry is 100% yet signed up to it. Equally, there is a cost attached and we can have interesting debates about who is going to pick up the bill for it. And there will be quite a task to persuade people. In the same way that we had to work hard to persuade people that analogue switch-off of television was going to be beneficial, I think the task to persuade people in the case of radio is going to be even greater, particularly whilst we still have the overwhelming majority of cars with analogue radios in them. So there are challenges, but equally there are going to be benefits.

We heard yesterday about the costs to radio of having to transmit simultaneously in both analogue and digital and, clearly, that is something which would be reduced if we managed to get switchover. So this is a very important debate and I am keen that, when we come to debate the Digital Economy Bill when it is introduced, we should not overlook radio. There is always a danger that everybody focuses on television and there will be a huge argument about whether or not the BBC should be the exclusive recipient of the Licence Fee, and whether or not we should be trying to stop teenagers in bedrooms file-sharing, but it is important we should also debate radio and, certainly, that is something which I will try and do my best to ensure happens. But I think this afternoon is a good start to that and it is good to see so many people from the industry assembled in one room. So that’s enough from me, just to say welcome to the reception this afternoon …..

PAUL EATON, Head of Radio, Arqiva:

I would like to welcome you all as well on behalf of Arqiva and Digital Radio UK. Arqiva is part of Digital Radio UK, with the BBC and commercial radio, and I am very pleased to be joined today by Andrew Harrison, chief executive of RadioCentre, and Tim Davie, director of Audio & Music at the BBC.

Digital Radio UK has been formed by the radio industry to get the UK ready for the Digital Radio Upgrade. That upgrade is vital because radio faces a stark choice – we can either stay in the analogue world or we can move forward into the digital one. Both need considerable investment from all of the players but only one, digital, can give radio that exciting future that listeners deserve. Digital radio will mean more choice, a better quality listening experience and the kind of interactivity that we can only dream about today.

We all know that the road ahead is a difficult one. We know that the coverage is not good enough yet, we know that we haven’t got digital radio in enough cars, and we know that we need to get converters onto the market to turn analogue radios into digital ones – set-top boxes for radio, if you like. We know that there is new content and new services that need to go digital. So there’s a lot to do. But, in creating Digital Radio UK, the radio industry is demonstrating that it is serious about the digital future and is determined to address the issues and, in doing so, give the digital future that listeners deserve.….

SIMON MAYO, Presenter, BBC Five Live:

I had one of those “blimey, you’re old” moments this morning. I was talking about radio with my son – my eldest son is eighteen – and I asked him what he listened to and what his friends listen to. He thought for a moment and then he said “none of my friends have got a radio”. I thought that was quite an astonishing moment. Now, obviously, he is an unrepresentative sample of one, that is true. They kind of know about radio and they might listen online, and it’s on in the kitchen and they hear it in the car and they have an opinion of [BBC Radio One breakfast presenter] Chris Moyles, but that was it. It occurred to me that, really, radio has got a bit of a fight on its hands, which is where the kit here [points to display of DAB radio receivers] comes in, I think.

My parents’ generation didn’t need to be told that radio was fantastic. My father, if he was here, would talk about listening to Richard Dimbleby and Wynford Vaughan-Thomas and The Goons. The Goons generation didn’t need to be told that radio was great. The 60s generation didn’t need to be told that radio was great – they had the pirates, then they had Radio One. My generation fell asleep listening to the Radio Luxembourg Top 40 on a Tuesday night. It finished at 11 o’clock and that was quite daring – I see a few people nodding. That was quite daring staying up to 11 o’clock, and the fact that is was sponsored by Peter Stuyvesant cigarettes was even more dangerous. But we remembered it and we fell in love with radio, and I think there is a job to be done to make future generations fall in love with radio.

So enter digital. Partly that has to be done by the broadcasters in coming up with exciting new stations filling gaps that don’t exist. BBC7 is wonderful. Everybody will have their own particular favourites. Absolute Classic Rock is really rather good. If you want Supertramp and Led Zeppelin any time of the day, that’s the place to go. Really good stuff. There are some really big gaps that need to be filled, but that’s exciting. Analogue is full, so digital is the place to be.

But the kit is really exciting. If you have a radio when you are listening to a piece of music …. and you’re listening to the radio and an Angelic Upstarts track comes on, you press a button and it sends you an e-mail that tells you that they have reformed, you can buy their records and this is where they are playing. Or someone is listening to ‘Yesterday In Parliament’ and they hear a speech from a parliamentarian that they like, and they think “he’s interesting, she’s interesting”, press a button, you get sent an e-mail and it tells you who it is, how you can contact them – this sounds quite exciting. If you are listening to one of [presenter] Mark Kermode’s film reviews on Five Live, and you like the sound of the film, you press a button, and its sends you an e-mail, you go to your in-box and it’s got an e-mail telling you where that film is on, how you can go to see it, maybe a link to the trailer. All of that kind of information means that radio has got an exciting future, but it just means that we have to go out and explain it a bit more because people might not get it the way they used to.

Hopefully, there is still a role for the humble presenter. So you do a little bit as well. Thank you very much indeed for coming…..

[A Digital Radio UK factsheet entitled “A briefing on the digital radio upgrade” was distributed at the event. Click here to view.]

Digital platforms: commercial radio losing share to BBC

Today’s RAJAR data demonstrates that a gulf is opening up between BBC radio and commercial radio in their ability to attract listening to digital platforms. Over the last year, the BBC is accelerating away from commercial radio in its audience’s usage of DAB, digital television and the internet to listen to live radio programmes. The significance of this growing gulf is reinforced when one remembers that the main RAJAR survey, from which the data below is taken, only measures ‘live’ radio listening and does not incorporate listening to either time-shifted, on-demand radio (‘listen again’) or to downloaded podcasts, both forms in which the BBC offers a much greater volume of content than UK commercial radio.

The danger here is that the BBC is poised to dominate listening on digital radio platforms in the long term, exactly as it already dominates listening on analogue radio platforms. One of the main reasons that the commercial radio sector invested so heavily in digital platforms during the last decade was the opportunity it offered to compete more effectively with the BBC for audiences. In the analogue world, the commercial sector has always argued that the BBC (having been there first) was allocated more and better spectrum for its radio stations. ‘Digital’, particularly DAB, seemed to offer the commercial sector a chance to ‘even the score’ with the BBC. The RAJAR data show that this ambition is not succeeding.

Across all digital platforms aggregated, commercial radio is losing ground, with the latest quarter (Q3 2009) reducing its share of listening to 41%, versus the BBC’s 56% share.

Taking each digital platform in turn, commercial radio’s share of listening on the DAB platform fell to 33% in Q3 2009, compared to the BBC’s 65%. This is not surprising because the age profile of DAB purchasers tends to be older listeners who are statistically more likely to listen to BBC stations. However, it does pose a grave question as to the return that commercial radio can expect from its substantial investment to date in DAB infrastructure, if listening on that platform is dominated so much by the BBC.

The digital TV platform is one that commercial radio has long dominated because of the large amount of spectrum it leased in the early days of Freeview. However, the increasing popularity of digital terrestrial television has already substantially increased the cost of spectrum on Freeview for the radio industry when its contracts come up for renewal. Furthermore, the forthcoming re-ordering of the multiplexes to accommodate HD television and new compression codecs is likely to squeeze commercial radio’s access to Freeview spectrum even more so. Before long, it is likely that the BBC will dominate the digital TV platform, just as it already does on DAB. Presently, the BBC has a 45% share, compared to commercial radio’s 51%.

As might be expected, the BBC’s strong online presence has already put it in the commanding position in terms of its share of listening via the internet platform. The integration of BBC radio into the iPlayer has no doubt helped as well, whereas commercial radio’s offerings are relatively more fractured and less heavily marketed, despite the excellent innovation of the RadioCentre Player. The BBC has a 50% share of listening on the internet platform, compared to commercial radio’s 37%.

The significance of commercial radio’s diminishing share of these three digital platforms is demonstrated when we look at the two sectors’ listening shares achieved on the analogue platform alone. Once one removes the digital platforms from the picture, it is evident that the shares of both the BBC and commercial radio have remained relatively stable in recent years. In other words, it is commercial radio’s declining share of listening on digital platforms that is effectively pulling the sector’s total share of listening (analogue + digital) down, particularly as digital platforms are growing as a proportion of total radio listening (21.1% in Q3 2009).

There is a paradox here. The commercial sector invested heavily in the DAB platform, believing that the new technologies would help it INCREASE its overall share of radio listening versus the BBC. In fact, that investment has recently helped to DIMINISH commercial radio’s overall share of listening. Digital television remains the only platform in which commercial radio dominates, and yet this is the very platform where commercial radio will be forced to cede spectrum and face, once more, losing out to the BBC whose spectrum for radio is guaranteed.

It is important to emphasise that these graphs show only the SHARE of listening on these platforms. The volumes of listening on each of these platforms have demonstrated absolute growth for both commercial radio and for the BBC over the same time period. But, more than any other digital platform, it is significant that the DAB platform is dominated by the BBC which now accounts for almost two-thirds of its usage. Such data is important when making decisions about the potential returns on further investments in DAB infrastructure. Will further investment simply maintain the existing imbalance, or will it really improve commercial radio’s share? Does investment in infrastructure also require parallel investment in new content that will appeal directly to the older age groups who own DAB radios?

Some possible reasons for commercial radio’s diminishing share of listening on digital platforms include:

• Commercial radio’s tendency to invest in DAB infrastructure more significantly than in original digital-only content
• Recent closures of many digital-only radio stations in the commercial sector
• The BBC’s relatively stable resource base, at a time when commercial radio revenues are falling precipitously
• The BBC’s long-held policy to invest simultaneously in multiple platforms, whereas commercial radio has focused on DAB and, to a lesser extent, Freeview
• The BBC’s focus on creating exclusive digital-only content unavailable on the analogue platform
• The BBC’s 360-degree music royalty agreements which allow it to use diverse platforms, whereas commercial radio requires separate (and more restrictive) agreements for time-shifted content and podcasts
• The BBC’s long-term, consistent promotion of content and digital platforms across TV, radio and the internet whereas commercial radio is less willing to cross-promote content or digital platforms that migrate listeners away from its core analogue offerings
• Frequent management changes and ownership changes in some parts of commercial radio, where substantial consolidation has often translated into short-term ‘slash and burn’ rather than ‘invest and build’ policies.

Whatever the reasons, we are not where we were meant to be – that is, we are not where it had been anticipated more than a decade ago commercial radio would be when investment in digital platforms, notably DAB, was expected to produce a beneficial outcome for commercial radio audiences versus the BBC. To put it plainly, the strategy conceived in the 1990’s has not worked. Commercial radio offerings do not dominate digital platforms (yes, they are more numerous, but they do not attract more hours listened than the BBC). DAB has become a largely BBC platform.

So, what can be done? Some of the issues noted above require a more level playing field to be established between commercial radio and the BBC. One such example of a practical solution is the Radio Council plan for a new UK Radio Player that will offer BBC and commercial radio content from a single aggregated access point. Other issues remain mostly in the lap of the gods (revenues, for example). Some issues require the BBC to be less predatory (or more regulated) and for the commercial sector to be more focused on strategic, long-term objectives (such as an online strategy that is more than simulcasting).

There is no single answer to this complex problem, though the commercial radio sector is hobbled by both its present lack of profitability and the regulatory strings that are attached to the majority of its analogue radio licences. What is desperately needed in these difficult times is not minor regulatory tinkering (such as adjusting how many hours of local content a local station is required to broadcast) but a wholesale change in strategy to maintain a commercial radio sector that can thrive in the digital marketplace we now inhabit. Will the imminent Digital Economy Bill prove sufficiently forward-thinking in its radio policy proposals?

[Statistical note: The graphs above to do not sum to 100% because the minimal amount of platform data released by RAJAR is ‘rounded’ (hours listened to 1,000,000; listening shares to 0.1%) and the listening apportioned to the BBC and commercial radio sometimes does not add up to the total for a platform. Some of this shortfall may be accounted for by ‘other’ listening (neither the BBC nor commercial radio) which is not itemised by platform. Data for individual quarters are therefore somewhat inconsistent, though the trend over several quarters is likely to be indicative. Additionally, there is an element of radio listening unattributed to any platform, 12.8% of the total in Q3 2009, but which is roughly equally applicable to BBC radio and commercial radio.]

Culture Secretary speaks about digital radio

The House of Commons Culture, Media & Sport Committee
20 October 2009 @ 1100 in the Thatcher Room, Portcullis House

John Whittingdale MP, Chairman [JW]
Ben Bradshaw MP, Secretary of State, Department for Culture, Media & Sport [BB]

JW: You have announced very ambitious plans to deliver the Digital Radio Upgrade programme by 2015 and have most of the national stations to move off analogue to digital by then. That will require extensive investment in the digital transmission network. What estimate do you have of what it is going to cost to do that?

BB: The current estimate that we are working on is about, I think I’m right in saying, is it £10m per year to build out the DAB multiplexes? Is that the figure that you were interested in?

JW: Actually, the one I’ve heard is rather more than that. Where is that money going to come from?

BB: It will come from a mixture of sources. We expect the BBC to play a significant role in this, commercial radio, and there may be public funds as well.

JW: I think the current state of commercial radio means that their ability to invest any more is almost zero. Do you foresee, therefore, further government investment, maybe from the Licence Fee?

BB: We are not currently intending to spend …. [laughs] That’s one of the things we are not intending to spend a share of the Licence Fee on, but if there is an even bigger underspend in the Digital Switchover Programme than we are currently expecting, who knows, Mr Chairman?

JW: The Digital Switchover Programme appears to be earmarked for quite a large number of purposes.

BB: [laughs] Well, there is quite a significant underspend.

JW: But you are confident that it can be delivered. And what are you going to say to all the people that haven’t bought a new car in the last two years by 2015?

BB: We are working with the motor manufacturers, both to ensure that future new cars do [have DAB radio], but also to ensure that there is this – I can’t remember what it is called – but it is some sort of gadget that you will be able to use in your existing car to make sure that you can pick up digital radio. One of the things we say quite clearly is that we won’t go ahead with this unless, by 2013, certain conditions are reached ie: we have more than 50% digital radio ownership and that [DAB] reception on all of our main roads is not going to be a problem. So we have put conditions down but, at the same time, we felt that it was important to provide market certainty that we specified an end-date by which time this should happen.

[excerpt]

[A further meeting of the Culture, Media & Sport Committee will be held in the same room on Tue 27 October from 1030 to discuss “The future for local and regional media”. Andrew Harrison of RadioCentre, Travis Baxter of Bauer Radio and Steve Fountain of KM Radio will give evidence.]

The demand for DAB radio: where is it?

Most of the current debate on the challenges facing DAB radio seems to be focused on ‘supply side’ issues, such as upgrading existing DAB transmitters, making DAB radio receivers available in cars and the creation of another national DAB multiplex. Surprisingly little of the talk is about the ‘demand side’ issues facing the DAB platform. What are consumers demanding from DAB radio? And how great is that demand?

There are two types of consumer demand for DAB: the demand for content broadcast on the DAB platform, and the demand for DAB radio receiver hardware. The two are inextricably linked. Consumer demand for DAB hardware is largely a function of demand for DAB content. You will only want to buy a DAB radio if you believe there is something interesting enough to listen to on it. Let’s examine some of the available data on these two issues.

Consumer demand for DAB content

Nobody is going to be motivated to spend money on a DAB receiver for listening to the radio if the platform only offers the same content already available to them on analogue receivers. Therefore, it must be the exclusive digital-only content available on DAB (and other digital platforms) that will persuade consumers to both use the DAB platform and to purchase a DAB radio receiver.

So how dissatisfied are consumers by the radio content choices (the range of radio stations) available to them on existing analogue radio receivers? Ofcom research shows that 91% of adults are satisfied with the existing choice of radio stations offered to them (see chart below), a proportion that has risen in recent years. This demonstrates that dissatisfaction with existing radio provision is extremely low, making it very difficult for any new platform to attract a substantial audience by offering content that will gratify consumers’ few unsatisfied demands.

[In case you are wondering if the increasing satisfaction with radio stations might be a direct result of the exclusive digital-only stations already offered on the DAB platform, it is worth noting that only 3.9% of hours listened to radio are attributed to digital-only stations [RAJAR 2009 Q2].]

Ofcom data shows that the average consumer listens to very few radio stations. Two thirds of the population listen to only one or two different radio stations in an average week, and the majority of these two-thirds listen to only one station. So, not only are the overwhelming majority of consumers satisfied with their existing choice of radio stations, but most people listen to a very narrow menu of stations.

These phenomena are not the outcome of consumers only being offered a limited choice of radio stations on the analogue platform. Ofcom data demonstrates that, in addition to the 5 BBC radio stations and 3 commercial radio stations available nationally on analogue radio (with near universal coverage) in the UK, there are a significant number of local radio stations available to consumers in most areas of the UK. The average consumer in the UK has a choice of 8 national radio stations and 6 local radio stations.

This existing wide choice of radio stations makes the plan for migration to digital platforms very different for the radio medium than it is for the television medium. In the UK, only four (five in some areas) TV stations are available via analogue, making the wider choice available on digital platforms seem very attractive to consumers. Whereas, in radio, an average 14 stations are available to consumers on analogue, and these are already satisfying the vast majority of consumer demands. As a result, there is only a very tiny untapped consumer market for radio content not already available via analogue.

This is demonstrated by analysis of the largest UK radio market, London, in which consumer choice is at its greatest. There are 29 licensed radio stations available on the analogue platform in London (excluding community radio and out-of-area stations), but the top 3 stations account for just under a third of all radio listening in London, and the top 6 stations account for almost half of all radio listening. The radio market in London, as in most of the UK, is dominated by a tiny number of mainstream stations, whilst the remaining radio offerings comprise a ‘long tail’ that fulfils more specialist consumer needs.

The dramatic consumer skew towards mainstream radio means that, even in a radio market as developed as London, it proves difficult for incremental, digital-only stations to draw significant amounts of listening. The most listened to exclusively digital radio station in London is BBC 1Xtra, which ranks 22nd and attracts only a 0.5% share of listening in the market [RAJAR 2009 Q2]. 1Xtra’s content (UK black music) is barely duplicated by any other legal radio station available in London, and yet its ‘success’ remains slight in a very multicultural market that is already crowded with myriad radio options for consumers. The recent decision by London station Club Asia to enter administration, combined with the closures earlier this year of South London Radio and Time 106.8, demonstrate the challenge for stations to find a ‘monetisable’ audience in London, even on the analogue platform.

It might be easy to assume that Londoners, offered the widest selection of radio stations on the analogue platform, would be more satisfied with their choice in comparison with consumers in other, less well served parts of the UK. The surprising result from Ofcom research is that Londoners are, in fact, less satisfied with their choice of radio than most other parts of the UK. The chart below (extracted directly from a recent Ofcom report) demonstrates that satisfaction with existing radio provision is almost evenly spread across the whole UK, but consumers in London and Northern Ireland are the least satisfied.

In summary, radio in the UK has been a victim of its own success. The universal availability of a range of both BBC and commercial ‘national’ stations, combined with the extensive choice of local stations available in most markets, mean that consumers are already relatively spoilt for choice on the analogue radio platform. There is very little unsatisfied demand for radio content because the UK already has such a comprehensive choice of radio content on offer. As a result, any new radio platform (DAB, satellite, online, etc) is going to find it hard to compete with the high quality and diverse choice of what is already on offer.

This was always going to make it tough for the DAB platform to entice consumers to purchase DAB receivers as anything other than a ‘replacement’ for their existing analogue radios. Unfortunately, the natural replacement cycle for radio receivers is so slow (maybe ten years or more) that it will never prove sufficient for a complete UK digital switchover to be co-ordinated for radio, as is happening in the television market. The UK has some of the best radio in the world – ironically, this has been our digital downfall.

Consumer demand for DAB radio receivers

As noted earlier, consumer demand for DAB hardware is largely a function of demand for DAB content. You will only want to buy a DAB radio if there is something interesting enough you want to listen to on the DAB platform.

Ofcom research demonstrates clearly the lack of interest amongst consumers in purchasing DAB radio receivers. In this year’s survey, only 16% of consumers (without a DAB radio) say they are likely to purchase a DAB radio within the next 12 months. Two years ago, 19% said they would be likely to purchase a DAB radio within the next 6 months. This is very bad news for manufacturers and retailers of DAB radios. Worse, this year not only do 64% of consumers say they are unlikely to purchase a DAB radio, but 20% say they don’t know – a demonstration that a DAB radio is far from being a ‘must have’ gadget on consumers’ wants lists.

The data for current levels of DAB radio receiver ownership are not very helpful in determining the demand for DAB radio receivers. The quarterly survey by RAJAR found in 2009 Q1 that 32.1% of adult respondents claimed to own a DAB radio. However, the annual Ofcom survey found in the same quarter that 41% of adult respondents claimed to have a DAB radio in their household. This disparity between the results from RAJAR and Ofcom would appear to be widening over time.

The uncertainty in the data regarding ownership levels of DAB receivers is not surprising, given the evident level of consumer confusion. Firstly, many radios on the market have the words “digital” or “digital radio” written on them, meaning that they either incorporate a digital clock (for radio alarm clocks) or that they offer ‘digital’ tuning of analogue wavebands, despite them not offering DAB reception. Secondly, the majority of ‘DAB radios’ presently on sale in the UK offer DAB reception in combination with analogue radio and/or internet radio. When DAB radio receivers were first introduced a decade ago, all the models offered were DAB-only. Nowadays, it is harder to find a DAB-only model in shops. Earlier this year, I surveyed the radio hardware on sale from UK retailers (see chart below) and found that the most common DAB consumer proposition is now an ‘FM + DAB’ radio.

In its latest consumer research on take-up of digital radio, Ofcom said that the result of its survey (see below) “highlights the continued lack of awareness among consumers of ways of accessing digital radio”. Consumers have low awareness of their ability to already access digital radio, and It appears that the words “digital radio”, “digital audio broadcasting” and “DAB” are not yet precisely understood. This uncertainty makes the results of market research about ownership levels of DAB radio hardware somewhat unreliable.

One of the targets set by the Digital Radio Working Group at the end of 2008 for the implementation of digital radio was that DAB radios should reach 50% of radio receiver sales by volume by the end of 2010. However, if the current rate of growth continues, this target is unlikely to be reached until 2016 (see chart below).

Besides, this target is largely irrelevant to digital switchover because it seems to assume that consumers are making a definitive choice between the purchase of a DAB radio or an analogue radio. In fact, as the earlier chart shows, the majority of DAB radios presently offered by retailers also include FM radio. Although the DRDB data states that 22% of radios sold in the UK incorporate DAB, the vast majority of those include FM too. So, for every 100 new radios sold, you are probably adding to the UK’s inventory of receivers between 95 and 98 new FM radios, at the same time as adding 22 new DAB radios. In other words, the household penetration level of analogue radio receivers is barely diminishing at all, a fact that will ensure that FM broadcasting remains as vital to our radio system as it has always been.

In summary, the DAB platform seems to be developing slowly as a supplementary platform to existing analogue radio reception. Far from DAB radios ‘replacing’ analogue radios, the overwhelming majority of new radios purchased in the UK are still analogue-only. The remainder are mostly DAB/analogue combination receivers. In this way, DAB has much in common with ‘Long Wave’ radio, where consumers for a long time were offered a choice of ‘FM+AM’ or FM+AM+Long Wave’ receivers in retail stores. Like Long Wave, for a minority of consumers DAB may be a ‘must have’ when purchasing a new radio, but for the majority it is merely an optional extra whose purchase is likely to be very dependent on the comparative prices of available options.

Conclusion

The publicly available data on the demand for DAB is not particularly encouraging for the platform’s future. Much of the implementation of DAB to date in the UK has focused on ‘supply-side’ issues, without seeming to determine whether there is sufficient demand from consumers for new content, and without determining whether that new content would prove sufficiently attractive to lure consumers into shops to purchase DAB radios. Ironically, it appears that if our existing system of analogue radio broadcasting had been less well developed in terms of both the range of available content and its near universal delivery, DAB might have been better able to address any pent-up demand from consumers. As it is, the majority of consumers seem very content with their existing radio options. Our pursuit of excellence in radio over the last 80 years has created something we can be proud of – but it has also made it hard for it to be bettered by a ‘new’ system such as DAB.

[For more data on the challenges facing digital radio in the UK, check out a presentation I made to the European Broadcasting Union Digital Radio Conference in June 2009]

Digital radio: Parliamentary Question

House of Commons: Written Ministerial Statements: 9 September 2009

Digital Broadcasting: Radio

Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport whether his Department’s proposals for the analogue radio switch-off in 2015 have been submitted for rural proofing to the (a) Commission for Rural Communities and (b) Rural Advocate.

Mr. Simon: The Digital Britain White Paper set out our commitment to a full impact assessment of the Digital Radio Upgrade; including consideration of the rural impact. To inform these assessments we will work closely with the relevant stakeholders, such as the Commission for Rural Communities and the Rural Advocate.

Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what assessment he has made of the merits of providing financial assistance to (a) low-income households and (b) households in hilly rural areas in respect of the analogue radio switch-off in 2015.

Mr. Simon: The Digital Britain White Paper set out our commitment to conduct a full impact assessment, including a cost benefit analysis of DigitalRadio Upgrade. The results of this impact assessment will help determine whether there is a case for a Digital Radio Help Scheme, and if so, what its scope would be. In addition, the Consumer Expert Group, which brought together key consumer representatives to inform the Digital TV switchover process, has been invited to extend its scope to cover radio and will ensure that the Digital Radio Upgrade programme takes account of the wide range of listener needs.

UK Commercial radio revenues Q2 2009

Commercial radio revenue figures for 2009’s second quarter have been published.

Q1 2009 DATA
£119.7m total revenues – lowest since Q3 1999
£34.8m local revenues – lowest since Q1 2001
£60.0m national revenues – lowest since Q1 1998
£24.8m branded content

YEAR-ON-YEAR
Total revenues – down 10.8%
Local revenues – down 6.0%
National revenues – down 16.1%
Branded content – down 3.7%

QUARTER-ON-QUARTER
Total revenues – down 6.9%
Local revenues – down 5.4%
National revenues – down 12.3%
Branded content – up 6.0%

FOUR-QUARTER MOVING AVERAGE DATA
£514.6m total revenues
Down 13.4% year-on-year (last quarter: down 13.1% year-on-year)

Whatever may be going on elsewhere in the economy, it is hard to see any green shoots of recovery in the UK commercial radio …. yet. Total revenues in Q2 2009 fell by 10.8% year-on-year to £119.7m. Initially, this might look mildly positive compared to the 19.5% year-on-year fall experienced last quarter. But remember that the downturn in UK radio first hit in Q2 2008 and had already reduced that quarter’s revenues 10.1% year-on-year. As a result, Q2 revenues in 2009 are now 20% below what they had been two years ago, a decline so significant that it will prove difficult to recapture even when the economy does improve.

National advertisers remain the weak spot for UK commercial radio, with revenues in Q2 2009 down 16.1% year-on-year. But once again, Q2 in 2008 was the start of the downturn and that quarter showed a 15.9% fall year-on-year. National revenues in Q2 2009 are now 29% below what they had been two years ago. It will be a mighty challenge to recoup such losses.

The notion that UK commercial radio is merely experiencing a cyclical blip and will quickly show recovery once the overall economy improves is a great feelgood story, but one that is not supported by the industry’s own data. Long before the ‘credit crunch’ hit us all, UK commercial radio revenues were already showing structural decline, a trend that the current economic cycle has merely exacerbated.

Nothing demonstrates the long-term trend more starkly than a glance at the year-on-year changes to commercial radio’s total revenues in recent quarters. Of the last 20 quarters, only 7 have demonstrated year-on-year revenue growth (one quarter in 2004, one quarter in 2005, one quarter in 2006, three quarters in 2007 and one quarter in 2008). The most recent quarter’s total revenues were 29% below the peak achieved as long ago as Q4 2003. If these comparisons were adjusted for the effects of inflation, the decline would look even more stark.

For the commercial radio industry, business will never be the same again. The ‘goldrush’ 1990s are never going to happen again, at least not without some kind of radio revolution (such as the BBC wilfully destroying Radio Two’s popularity, as they did with Radio One in the early 1990s). As a result, the commercial radio industry will need to change its modus operandi more substantially than ever before, not to thrive, but in order simply to survive. If it doesn’t change, we won’t have much of a commercial radio industry left at all.

The seemingly widely held belief that commercial radio MUST continue to exist in its present form because it is a highly regulated and licensed industry is simply false. If there was one lesson that should have been learnt from the implementation of DAB radio in the UK, it was that ensuring that a small group of commercial interests control a technology and the access to it counts for nothing if there is almost no demand for it. With DAB, radio broadcasting groups got what they wanted – their cartel became the licensed gatekeeper and owner of DAB. But if nobody wants your DAB, you are left being gatekeeper to a field of nothing.

It’s the same with commercial radio. If advertisers and listeners don’t want your product, there is no reason for it to exist, regardless of you waving around your scarce Ofcom licence. Not so long ago, station owners could still foist crappy radio content on the public because listeners were starved of alternatives, but digital audio and the internet have changed that FOREVER. No longer is there any market for second-rate radio. And, in commercial radio, if unwanted or irrelevant content doesn’t attract listeners, it won’t last long.

In this context, the latest Ofcom radio

consultation (“Radio: the implications of Digital Britain for localness regulation”) is a remarkably disappointing document. At a time when commercial radio is at a crossroads in so many senses (profitability, consolidation, platforms, localness, public service, interactivity, CPM, etc), this latest chapter in Ofcom’s many attempts to map out “The Future Of Radio” is no more than tinkering at the edges of existing radio regulation.

What was needed was a full-blown, courageous effort to overhaul the radio regulatory system in order to ensure that commercial radio continues to exist financially and that the diminishing number of licensees genuinely serves the public’s articulated radio needs. Instead, we have an Ofcom consultation that is no more than a grudging reaction to Lord Carter’s Digital Britain proposals, some of which are now adopted as if they were Ofcom’s own, some of which are watered down, and some of which have been ignored altogether.

The reluctance drips from every page. There are 81 uses of the word ‘if’ in this 82-page document. Almost every one of its proposals is tainted with uncertainty – “if and when new legislation is passed” or “if Parliament decides not to take forward”. Rather than seizing the opportunities that arise from the painful ‘crossroads’ when change is an inevitable necessity rather than a nicety, Ofcom seems happy to sit in the back seat and respond “whatever!” to ideas it receives, rather than grabbing at innovation and pushing it forward. It reads very much as if written by nobody who has ever themselves run a commercial business where painful life and death decisions have to be made, sometimes at breakneck speed and often without the aid of a parachute.

Ofcom continues to treat the commercial radio industry like a naughty child who, although 36 years of age now, cannot be trusted with more than a five pound note. Every Ofcom proposal continues to keep its centralised, London-based decision making about local commercial radio firmly within its own control, without trusting licensees to co-regulate in any meaningful way. For example:
· Proposal 1 requires stations to submit a request every occasion they seek a change
· Proposal 2 will lead to “a short consultation upon receipt of such a request”
· Proposal 3 requires stations to submit a request every occasion they seek a change
· Proposal 4 will lead to “a short consultation in most cases”
· Proposal 5 will lead to “short consultations in most cases”.

Only one thing is certain – Ofcom will be drowning in consultations for the foreseeable future. These five proposals alone (out of eight) multiplied by 300 stations plus DAB multiplexes yields a potential 1,000+ new consultations or requests. And yet the document claims that these Ofcom proposals are “broadly deregulatory”.

Sadly, more than anything else, the Ofcom document completely lacks any kind of vision as to what the commercial radio landscape might look like in the future, the antithesis of what the Digital Britain consultation exercise was trying to achieve. This is a missed opportunity for Ofcom. Not just this latest document, but in 2009 when the whole “what is the future of radio?” debate is probably at the most critical point in commercial radio’s history. It appears to many in the industry that Ofcom has simply disengaged from radio. This is a particular irony for an industry that prides itself on its success in one-to-one communication.

It may seem a stupid question……. If Ofcom still sees itself as the party with the skills necessary to make 1,000 potential individual decisions on the future of individual commercial radio stations, how is commercial radio presently in such a sad state of affairs as a result (partly) of previous regulatory decisions? We tend to respect and trust people who can demonstrate a positive track record. Why would I let a doctor operate on me who had killed almost every patient he had ever consulted?

Predicting the radio present, twenty years ago

Whilst looking for some information about the changes wrought by the Broadcasting Act 1990, I happened to find some old press cuttings from that time. What follows are some predictions for the 1990s UK radio industry that I had written in the February 1990 edition of “For The Record” magazine:

RADIO ONE continues to feel the winds of change instituted by the new Head of Music Roger Lewis and a team of younger presenters. It promotes and programmes itself more aggressively now and will continue to lead the way where commercial stations only follow. In the 1990s, it will sever entirely the relationship between its playlist and the current Top 75, thus sounding the death knell for the single as a commercial proposition.

NEEDLETIME RESTRICTIONS, which have held back developments in music radio for so long, will be legislated away, though not without a spirited fight by the record companies. As a result, all-music stations will become the norm in the commercial sector, leaving the BBC as the only producer of serious speech programmes.

MORE STATIONS will fracture the radio market into lots of small pieces, losing forever the kind of huge audiences attracted by the Sunday chart show or “Our Tune”. Record retailers will have to react by stocking a wider range of album releases and developing their specialist sections (a reversal of the 80s trend towards narrower stock). The album chart will increasingly reflect the sum of different sets of fans’ interests, rather than a common pop denominator.

OWNERSHIP of radio will narrow to a handful of large companies, despite the increased number of stations. The 80s saw radio shares treated as profitable propositions for the first time. The existing big boys (Capital Radio, Crown Communications, Trans World Communications) will continue to buy up anything and everything. Publishers (Associated Press, EMAP) will enter the fray, and TV companies will seek lateral integration with radio as a hedge against loss of their franchises. For the first time, radio shares will become an essential part of a media portfolio and change hands rapidly at inflated prices.

FM RADIO will reign supreme. Listeners will remember “medium wave” with the quaint fondness our grandparents reserve for “cats’ whiskers”. Push-button, auto-locate receivers become standard, timeshift recorders are introduced, knob-twiddling disappears, and listeners channel hop endlessly in search of the perfect beat.

SYNDICATED PROGRAMMES already enable David Hamilton to sound as if he works for your very own local station when he is really sat in a London studio. The development of whole syndicated networks in the 1990s means that your favourite rock station in Leeds is actually originated in New York and plays exactly the same records as WLUP Philadelphia.

DISC JOCKEYS will lose their aura as media stars and lose lucrative careers opening supermarkets, hosting TV shows or making their own hit records. Being a radio presenter will carry as much kudos as being a tax inspector.

SHOCK RADIO develops a huge cult following amongst young people, whilst deplored by their parents. The Radio Authority is belatedly forced to curb the phenomenon by introducing a largely ignored “Code of Presentation Conduct”. James Whale makes a film of his life story.

In the December 1989 edition of “For The Record”, I had written:

Asked whether the public service obligations in commercial radio would be abandoned completely, Lord Chalfont [newly appointed chairman of the newly created Radio Authority] has expressed hope that the Broadcasting Act would allow stations to continue with such commitments if they so wished. He added that, in his recent discussions with various MDs of local stations, they had expressed their avowed intent to maintain public service elements. This is a little like a headmaster hearing his class of fourth-formers promise never to drop litter, to always help old ladies across busy roads, and to keep their school uniforms on until they get home.

The issue of public service commitments in radio is important not just from a theoretical point of view, but because it directly affects the listener’s choice. We’re talking about the very things that should differentiate stations from each other.

At the bottom line, commercial radio does not exist to “satisfy” its listeners. It exists to deliver the largest targeted audience possible to the advertisers who pay money to do so. Listeners’ broadcasting needs are irrelevant to the stations’ profitability.

The cheapest form of radio programming is the continual play of well-known pop records linked by young local DJs who aspire to be Tony Blackburn – anything more fanciful than that costs more money and reduces the profit margin. So, in the brave new world where commercial radio is regulated by a “lighter touch”, the cheapest programming appealing to the lowest denominator audience wins hands down. Out go the rock shows, the folk shows, the local band slots and the ethnic language programmes that were necessary to comply with the IBA’s policy of serving all sections of the audience. Out goes anything but a token commitment to local news coverage, information services, off-air activities and social action broadcasting.

Independent Local Radio will increasingly have little that is either “independent” or “local” about it. If a bomb drops on your town at two in the morning, the one place you won’t hear about it is on your local station (unless the story makes the national news). They’ll simply carry on soothing you through the night – probably with a service beamed by satellite from London. ….

We’ll all get to hear more radio in the 1990s. But there are no guarantees to be seen so far that it will be any better for the consumer in its content.

Paying for DAB radio carriage: god only knows

Premier Christian Radio, the London AM station, is planning to broadcast on the national DAB platform from 21 September 2009. In an e-mail to listeners, its chief executive Peter Kerridge explained:

“Beginning in September, we will start to incur the cost to transmit on this digital platform – £650,000 per annum – which is an expense that is over and above our current operating costs. The only way the £650,000 in transmission costs will be covered is through the generosity of friends like you. It is fantastic that God has moved in such an amazing way to provide Premier this national digital licence! Now may you and I be found faithful as we steward this new resource for His glory and for the advancement of His Kingdom!”

DAB carriage remains a costly business. Digital One, the owner of the sole national commercial DAB multiplex, fixes the carriage costs for content providers such as Premier Christian Radio. If £650,000 seems like a lot of money for broadcast on a platform that reaches 33% of adults in the UK and accounts for only 13.1% of radio listening [RAJAR Q1 2009], understand that this is a bargain compared to the expensive contracts some content providers had signed previously. In January 2009, Digital One responded to the government’s Digital Britain initiative by cutting its prices. Acting chief executive Glyn Jones said:

“We’re turning the ideas set out in the Digital Radio Working Group’s report into actions. That includes looking hard at how Digital One can offer lower carriage costs. In turn we’re expecting that stakeholders involved in the Working Group, and other companies with the ambition to launch new national radio stations in 2009, will step up and engage with a view to adding compelling new choice for consumers. We’re expecting that prices will initially be set below Digital One’s 2008 rate card. One reason for that is to help provide an incentive for people to invest in high quality services. But, over time, companies providing new services will be expected to contribute to the costs of a transmitter roll-out plan which was something also identified by the DRWG as important.”

Digital One’s January 2009 press release was ambitiously headlined ‘New National Radio Stations To Launch In 2009’. Seven months later, what stations have stepped forward to take advantage of the Digital One offer? Government-funded BFBS Radio started DAB simulcasting on 20 April 2009, following a three-month trial in 2008. Amazing Radio launched on DAB in June 2009 for a six-month trial period, playing unsigned artists from its music web site. Also in June 2009, Fun Kids, which is normally on DAB only in London, launched a fourteen-week trial simulcast on national DAB. Neither BFBS nor Amazing Radio are participating in RAJAR radio audience research, so it is impossible to know how much listening these services are attracting on the DAB platform.

Have we seen any major media players step forward and put a new mass market radio service on the national DAB platform? Not yet. Why? Because, even at the knockdown rate of £650,000 per annum, it still proves impossible to make a profit from offering radio content on DAB. The table below offers very rough estimates of what digital stations measured in RAJAR (and carried on a mix of broadcast platforms including DAB and digital TV) should and might be earning in revenues. The second column lists the total hours presently listened to each digital station. The third column uses the average commercial radio sector yield (how much revenue was generated from how much radio listening in 2008) to estimate, in theory, what these stations’ revenues should be.

However, the ‘Commercial Radio: The Drive To Digital’ report commissioned from Ingenious Consulting by RadioCentre in January 2009 told us that:

“Incremental revenue from DAB-only stations is negligible at ~£130k per ‘bespoke’ station …”

The list above comprises the 14 digital radio stations that subscribe to RAJAR. Not all of these stations broadcast on DAB (Smash Hits Radio is only on digital TV), not all of them are national (Yorkshire Radio is only on the Yorkshire DAB multiplex, for example), but let us be generous and assume that each station earns revenues of £130,000 per annum. In total, these stations combined would generate £1.82m per annum of revenue. This is substantially less than the £29.7m revenues that would be expected to be generated from them attracting 22.7m hours per week of listening.

The final column in the table estimates how much revenue each station might be earning from the £1.82m total, if revenues were proportionate to hours listened. I must stress again that this only a rough estimate – none of these stations, nor Ofcom, publishes the actual revenues of digital radio stations. What these estimates demonstrate is that, if Planet Rock were (like Premier Christian Radio) paying £650,000 per annum for its carriage on the national DAB multiplex (the financial details of its “long-term” deal with Digital One were not made public), the station is still nowhere near breaking even, not even after ten years on-air.

The Ingenious Consulting report found that DAB-only stations are spending £25m per annum on operating expenses. The above table shows that, if these stations were attracting revenues proportionate to the listening they presently enjoy, collectively they would then be profitable (£29m revenues minus £25m operating expenses). But, in fact, their revenues are presently less than £2m. The Ingenious Consulting report concluded that, as a result, the “annual negative cash flow impact of DAB” on the commercial radio sector is around £27m per annum.

This £27m annual loss attributable to digital radio stations represents around 5% of commercial radio’s revenues, a significant impact on an industry which is only marginally profitable overall at present. The nub of the problem is this: digital radio stations presently account for 5.3% of listening to commercial radio, but digital radio stations attract only 0.3% of commercial radio revenues. Here is a massive economic disconnect that requires much more than a mere increase in productivity or some kind of performance improvement. Doubling or even tripling these stations’ revenues would barely dent the problem.

Maybe DAB is simply not a platform where the traditional commercial radio model can be made to work – the old model of ‘give away free content, pay for it by attracting advertisers to buy on-air spots’. Maybe DAB is not a medium from which traditional UK commercial broadcasters can generate profits from offering content, as they had anticipated in the 1990s. Commercial broadcasters are pushing no commercial product other than their on-air brand (and some music downloads, concert tickets and click-through purchases). Instead, perhaps DAB can only be made to work as a marketing tool to assist companies selling (non-radio) products. So, for example, it would make sense for Universal Music to have a DAB radio station to expose directly to the public the CDs/videos/movies they are currently selling. It would make sense for Amazon to have a DAB radio station to promote all the consumer products it is selling. Then, the £650,000 carriage cost could be considered an additional ‘marketing expense’ for these companies’ core business, rather than a direct operating expense that had to be recouped ON-AIR.

The other possibility is for DAB to be used predominantly by organisations whose objective is something other than breaking even financially. In January 2008, I had written:

“Worryingly, this sudden flowering of ethnic, religious and publicly-funded radio stations on the DAB platform echoes the fate of the ‘AM’ waveband in the 1990s, at a time when the radio industry and the regulator had become convinced that audiences were deserting that platform for the improved audio quality offered by the ‘FM’ waveband. By 2002, declining audiences of ‘AM’ stations had persuaded the regulator to suggest that the platform be used in future “for better serving minority, disadvantaged or currently excluded audience groups, whether defined by their interests, demographics or ethnicity”. The ‘DAB’ platform of 2008, particularly in London, is already starting to resemble the ‘AM’ platform of 1998, suggesting that ‘DAB’ might have already been written off by the sector as a means to reach the ‘mass market’ audiences that national advertisers desire from the medium.”

This trend towards non-commercial content has developed further since then. The national DAB platform has added BFBS Radio (government-funded) and now Premier Christian Radio (religious), but no new permanent digital radio stations operating on a commercial model. Local DAB multiplexes have added Traffic Radio (government-funded), Colourful Radio (ethnic) and UCB (religious). Interestingly, UCB has taken two channels on each of the regional MXR DAB multiplexes, giving it a substantial amount of DAB spectrum. But there have also been ethnic DAB radio casualties since my earlier report – Islam Radio in Bradford closed its DAB service in December 2008, and India’s Zee Radio closed its London DAB service in April 2009. Even for ethnic broadcasters locked out of analogue radio, DAB can prove a struggle.

Premier Christian Radio’s Peter Kerridge hit the DAB nail on the head when Media Week reported:

“Kerridge said Premier Media’s funding meant it was in a better position than other media organisations, as the ‘ad-funded model is smashed’ …..”

The available financial data confirms that, certainly for the DAB platform, an ad-funded model simply is not viable at present. To make DAB work for your content, you need government funding, direct listener financial support, a sugar daddy, or some kind of god smiling benevolently down upon you.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: