You're admitting to have listened very little or not at all for the best part of 3 months...of course that invalidates your opinion. You base your view on the opinion of serial detractors who themselves say they've stopped listening.

Maybe you would like to tell me what significant differences there now are compared to 3 months ago on Smooth Radio then? What would I now notice in February that sets it apart from November/December?

It's a catch 22 situation. If I listen to something I dislike and make critical comment I, and anyone similar is likely to be asked why they bother to continue doing so. If, like I have done, stop listening for a period, yet decide to comment, it is considered invalid.

So they've shuffled a couple of their continuity announcers, but the playlist looks the same from what the website describes, having browsed it. Plenty of good music on it of course, that has never been an issue in itself, but no individual show has any meaningful identity on Smooth and I don't expect that is likely to change much, regardless of who they shuffle around in their game of musical chairs.

I'm waiting for the next major announcement after the cull of presenters, and that is the name change of the station itself. It almost sounds the logical next step for its rebranding exercise.

I've been listening to Smooth for last couple of days prompted by much of the negativity here. Have to admit though I'm liking what I hear. Some great tracks and minimal chat. It sounds a bit like the "Go with the flow days" just after the Jazz Fm rebrand to Smooth FM. Suspect Smooth could be a success story going forward.

Interesting comment from Roy Martin of Radiotoday in his eradio newsletter
http://mad.ly/9c3984

The next challenge is getting Gold AM listeners who find Smooth has relaced it to stay, DAB listeners to rescan from D1 and new TV ads?

Well for a start I never hear 'continuity links' anymore. They just talk succinctly and less often. You're confusing quantity with quality.

Listening to Smooth this morning there were almost 7 minutes between the last track of Simon Bates' programme and the first one played by Lynn Parsons. Is this huge gap accceptable on a music station - clearly it isn't.

More music, less chat? Clearly that is no longer a matter of opinion or of Global spin, its factually incorrect.

The word 'quality' is something that should never be included in any sentence containing Global. The two are contradictions.

Those ads, before the 10am news, just seemed to go on forever, didn't they?

Certainly not with Smooth I would never consider any radio station that just wants to imitate my ipod by playing six or so tracks in a row with no presenter interaction quality radio. This is just cheaply put together bland radio. Even the usual if Global does it then it must be good posters on here have been quieter since the latest changes have been announced.

As for anything improving in the last few weeks I am no longer an avid listener but I do give it a listen just to check and I can assure you it hasn't improved, there are as stated far too many adverts and it is just as boring as ever. I am sure many of its old listeners have tuned away and it will take more than a few so called TV stars to get them back.

I really don't see how this so called relaunch is going to improve things. Global have ruined Smooth full stop.

The ads upto the news after the travel during breakfast do run for about 5 minutes. Maybe they need to get as much revenue in to pay for Smooth.

When RAJAR goes up maybe you will quit the moaning finally.

Why should I stop moaning just because RAJAR goes up. I don't care about RAJAR I don't work for Global. Its up to them if they don't do something to make me want to listen to Smooth again then its a lost listener.

I really don't see how replacing radio pros with TV has beens is going to improve RAJAR anyway. Smooth sounds just drab bland music, advert after advert & boring links.

Worst thing to me about all of this is that the powers to be at Global want to take away Gold from AM which I do listen to in the car and replace it with Smooth which I have no intention at present of tuning back to.

Unfortunately having to resort to listening to Gold via my mobile phone dropping out in the car is no replacement for a strong AM signal. I lose out on both counts so yes I am mad with Global.

Now that really is confusing quality with quantity.

More listeners (quantity) doesn't automatically indicate an improved (quality) product!

There is such a thing as the lowest common denominator. Global, and their apologists / sycophants ought to be well acquainted with that.

Give it time. Two days and most would likely enjoy the music. Give it 2 months and you will soon change your opinion when you've heard the same oldie for the umpteenth time. Even if you actually like the tunes it actually starts to grate.


It all makes one wonder why they make such a fuss over a new presenting team, who must be seen but mostly not heard. Great for radio that one!

How do you suggest they judge their success? Is a falling audience OK if it gets critical acclaim?

If critical acclaim can pay the bills then fine, but I suspect it won't. Imagine BBC Radio 3 as a commercial station, with high costs and a relatively small audience. It would be dead in the water if it were ad-supported.

When will you get it into your head that listeners actually want that? Not everybody wants to hear B-Sides from The Wurzels or songs they aren't familiar with...

Maybe, but it's a lot better than being 22nd in the London market place (behind Radio 3) and making a loss of £2 million a year.

Absolute is another station which has a quality product but hasn't made a profit in the last five years - they made a loss of £2.5 million last year.

Of course it's possible to have a wide playlist, be successful and make a profit. Wave 105 does it every year. The issue is that GMG's Smooth just wasn't successful in any sense of the word.

If you dig that hole a bit bigger, you'll fall down it!

I bet even the "yes men" are embarrassed by your feeble attempts

But having more listeners and hours bring in better paid ads, when the station is making a healthy profit more money will help to improve quality, sadly more often better quiz prizes which helps bring in more listeners?

On the other hand how do you know that they don't also like a decent sized playlist?
Suggesting that a larger playlist means hearing B-sides must be one of the most ridiculous things you have ever posted on here.

They do research.

When you see the figures I deal with on a daily basis you will understand.

With practice figures can be manipulated to say anything you like. I should know I used to prepare enough of them.

Is this the same as your media consultant career?

Realistically what would be the point of them spending money on conducting research and then manipulating the figures? Given the research could have a direct effect on audience figures and therefore revenue?

Its a interesting argument but one that i personally think Smooth have got right, theres 2 ways of playing it. More junctions e.g. Adds, Two songs then news or longer breaks but less junctions (Like smooth is doing now) By cramming it all in they can get a good music sweep going from XX:02 till around XX:20/XX:25.

The stations PD, Dick Stone actually had a great format when he was PD of Leicester Sound.

NEWS
Break
Music Sweep
Break
Two Songs
Break
NEWS

In the first music sweep it was pretty much 40 mins commercial free.