525,600 Minutes

Robotron, not Arbitron.

468,786 diary keepers. My, Arbitron, you keep a lot of people busy. Those diary keepers, though, were the key to figuring out the first patterns in satellite radio listenership, as Arbitron conducted its survey of almost half a million people in the fall of 2006. The survey attempted to discover trends in satellite listenership – the first of its kind – and made some interesting discoveries. But before we get into all of that, let me give you the 411 on Arbitron. They cover the whole spectrum of media analysis, gathering mass amounts of information to sell to companies that could benefit from the knowledge. It’s a nice cycle; Arbitron just has to get people to volunteer (which, at a whopping 500,000 surveyed for the one at hand, doesn’t seem like such a challenge) and probably give them a small form of compensation. In return, they organize the data and make most of it available for the public, with the leftover (or key) figures to be purchased by companies.

Although this satellite radio survey is surely key to their economic well-being, it has much more significance for the subject itself. Let me lay the results down from what I've read: of all radio listening, 3.4% is devoted to satellite radio; satellite listeners tune into all forms of radio much more than non-subscribers, listening for an average of 33 hours a week while the non’s listens for 19 hours; the key figure here, though, is that satellite subscribers listen to terrestrial radio more than they do their satellite programming, tuning into AM/FM frequencies for 14 hours, satellite for almost 11 hours, and internet radio for about 8 hours. In defending themselves, a spokesperson for XM satellite radio said, “Satellite radio is growing. […] However, we still represent a small portion of the overall radio and audio entertainment marketplace.” Oh, good, they knew their size all along.

But this survey says a lot more about the industry than any fact or figure has done before. The actual subscribers – those who pay for the satellite services – don’t even listen to it as much as they do regular terrestrial radio. This comes as a major blow to the industry; the results are really showing that satellite can get a small sliver of people to pay for their services, but those people don’t necessarily care for them as much as they do regular (or, as you will, free) services. Satellite radio cannot manage to keep their listeners interested. Although this is a mega-assertion, it definitely has merit. If those who have subscribed to the services are finding them not as captivating or fulfilling as they thought they were going to be, then how can the satellite services keep their subscribers coming back? Sure, specialized programming is wonderful and all, but listeners can obviously get entertainment and news for free, and they seem to be sticking to what they are used to.

What does this say about the satellite radio industry for the future? XMus will form, which will definitely ring in more listeners (more programming choices = more interest), but if the current state of the industry is that they can’t keep their subscribers tuned in without having their attention drift over to free radio, then the satellite industry will simply not be able to survive. There are adjustments that XMus can make to improve programming, but in the long run, they just can’t compete with what people already know and trust. If people haven’t already jumped at the opportunity to subscribe to a satellite radio provider, then chances are, they’re not going to anytime soon, and if the current subscribers are losing interest, then the future may be looking a bit grim for the conglomerates.