Originally Posted by Black Label:
“Simon 243 raises a fair point about how competitive a market London is and how things like this may work better in more rural markets and he may be right. It is received wisdom that because London is a fast bustling capital city breakfast shows must be live otherwise there is no point.
But what makes this so? It's just people getting out their beds and going to work just like anywhere else.
So what 'need' is there for Neil Fox to be live? What would be the additional benefit to the station, bearing in mind they'd also have to pay him his rate for doing it and pay for a place for him to do it.”
“Simon 243 raises a fair point about how competitive a market London is and how things like this may work better in more rural markets and he may be right. It is received wisdom that because London is a fast bustling capital city breakfast shows must be live otherwise there is no point.
But what makes this so? It's just people getting out their beds and going to work just like anywhere else.
So what 'need' is there for Neil Fox to be live? What would be the additional benefit to the station, bearing in mind they'd also have to pay him his rate for doing it and pay for a place for him to do it.”
There's nothing to say a breakfast show must be live. There are plenty of stations in America, big and small, that have voicetracked breakfast shows.
But my point was because all their competitors ARE live, and thus able to respond to the news and sound like they're "on it", Nation are at a disadvantage. They seem to think their presenters and their playlist are enough of a USP to attract an audience for Thames. That may be the case in rural Wales but in London they're offering nothing that would pull listeners across from the big names and big budgets of Heart, Smooth, Magic or Radio 2.



