dalekusa

5 minutes ago, oknewsguy said:

Short answer, no. I would prefer if AT&T did but in reality unless it's legal for them to do so then no they can't sue Sinclair

Going back to an earlier question, why wouldn't Deerfield want to give AT&T a fair deal if they can't tie it into Sinclair, and knowing if they did, they might just drag them into another RKO General situation?

7 minutes ago, oknewsguy said:

1. If Deerfield is trying their deal into those of Sinclair's that could have significant consequences especially given the prior issues Sinclair had that has already been addressed.

2. AT&T can take Deerfield to court but knowing that Deerfield is not the operator of the stations what good would that do to take a company that has no operational control over their own stations? 

Couldn't they sue Sinclair as well, and potentially challenge Sinclair's whole shell company stratagem as well?

38 minutes ago, oknewsguy said:

For one Deerfield is not willing to negotiate a fair deal to restore their stations on the AT&T services such as U-Verse and DIRECTV. 

Secondly, Deerfield is essentially holding AT&T hostage by not willing to negotiate with AT&T

 

That's what I consider to be bad faith negotiations and the longer Deerfield holds AT&T hostage the more of a chance that it'll go against the license qualifications when the license renewal time comes so if Deerfield doesn't want to be forced to liquidate it's assets they need to come to the negotiating table (AT&T should as well) and negotiate a fair deal to restore it's stations to AT&T

Two more questions, then:

1. Why wouldn't Deerfield want to negotiate a fair deal? Are they trying to tie their deal to Sinclair's? If not, it seems very counter-intuitive as they would be losing money out of this whole ordeal.
2. Is there any way to take "bad faith" negotiations to court, or at least to an arbiter of some sort? I would imagine that if this was true, then, say, the Pac-12 conference could complain against or sue AT&T for not carrying their networks.

On 10/20/2019 at 3:18 PM, oknewsguy said:

And all signs point to negotiations being in bad faith which I think we all can agree that this is a bad look for Sinclair itself

Sorry to seem like a noob, but what exactly qualifies as "bad faith negotiations"?

54 minutes ago, TheRolyPoly said:

Speaking of Weigel, we already have a thread about this so go talk about it here but for those who are still living under a rock...

 

WCIU will soon become The CW's newest network affiliate in Chicago, displacing WPWR which will go back to being the main MyTV affiliate and *possibly* rebrand as either FOX 32 Plus or FOX 32 Xtra.

 

https://www.robertfeder.com/2019/04/18/weigel-broadcastings-wciu-become-cw-network-affiliate/

A wee bit surprising to me. With WGN's sports content going exclusive to cable (either on NBC Sports Chicago or Marquee), you'd think that they'd try and get that affiliation back, but I guess the Nexstar merger might have complicated things a bit?