Jump to content

Sinclair...Again


A3N

Recommended Posts

What do you mean by the following statement "the only thing that is done in the channel 8 and channel 23 office is making sure they are still on the air." are they planning on going off the air if they don't generate any advertisements to keep the station alive? if so elaborate please!

No, no... I'm just saying they don't do anything there. They're a bad affiliate... local programming-wise. They used to be decent when 23 still had a newscast. The quality of 8's newscasts are slowly dwindling away. It's just sad. It's hard to explain the Altoona/Johnstown/State College/DuBois, PA market if you haven't seen it yourself. It's all separated because Johnstown/DuBois, State College, and Altoona were all in different markets at one point until they were just smashed together. Now all the different towns have a lead on their favorite stations. That just killed off some of the other stations. WWCP was just Johnstown's Fox affiliate and then sent across to Altoona on a repeater. But WATM was added soon after because when the markets were crammed together, there was no ABC affiliate. ABC programming was just served in on de facto affiliates halfway across the different directions. It's an interesting read if you go to either WWCP and WATM's Wikipedia pages.
  • Replies 2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
No, no... I'm just saying they don't do anything there. They're a bad affiliates... local programming-wise. They used to be decent when 23 still had a newscast. The quality of 8's newscasts are slowly dwindling away. It's just sad. It's hard to explain the Altoona/Johnstown/State College/DuBois, PA market if you haven't seen it yourself. It's all separated because Johnstown/DuBois, State College, and Altoona were all in different markets at one point until they were just smashed together. Now all the different towns have a lead on their favorite stations. That just killed off some of the other stations. WWCP was just Johnstown's Fox affiliate and then sent across to Altoona on a repeater. But WATM was added soon after because when the markets were crammed together, there was no ABC affiliate. ABC programming was just served in on de facto affiliates halfway across the different directions. It's an interesting read if you go to either WWCP and WATM's Wikipedia pages.

I have read the Wikipedia pages before hand and both of these stations have began aired newscasts in 1992 and ended up closing WATM's news department in 2002 after registering nothing against it two competitors and merging it with WWCP and the shared newscasts continued onward even failing once and then in 2007 they had to shut down the shared news operations.

 

Might I still remind people why an LMA is need in this Johnson/State College market, because if those two were to operate separately as individually owned and or operated stations, the two of them are going to be dark unless an station group could buy the two TV Stations.

 

Lets look at the Topeka, Kansas ABC affilate, it air newscasts after it signed on in 1983, the ABC affiliate however could not gain any ratings and or attract advertisers over the years. It stopped producing newscasts in 2002 and then producing the newscasts in 2006 until the Summer of 2011 when it was bought by a shell corporation that was being used by the company that legally owned the NBC and FOX affiliates.

 

So brazenly speaking, The Topeka, Kansas situation was legal because one of the three TV stations that are owned/operated by LIN Media (minus the CBS Affiliate) is an Class A Low Power digital station and in this case it would be (KTMJ-CD FOX43), However, LIN Television used the 'Vaughan Media' Card to keep KTKA-TV since Topeka has less than eight voices in the market.

 

I believe in you realizing that your concept of the Johnson/Altoona+ market has been less than local programming wise and they are bad affilates are true.

Tom Taylor's NOW newsletter today reports on the Sinclair-Fisher union, explaining in detail about the 'early termination' deal.

 

The waiting period is required by the FCC per the Hart-Scott-Rodino anti-trust act. They saw no overlap of station ownership whatsoever, which is the ONLY thing the FCC cares about. Thus, the early termination waiver.

 

It literally was as I predicted. The FCC will not intervene to stop the growth of a broadcaster. Clear Channel and Cumulus have proven that on the radio end.

From this article from the El Paso Times, KFOX ND Elizabeth O'Hara stated they are at a process of acquiring KDBC and they will both move into a new building in 2014. I hope that holds true. But that doesn't explain about the current JSA/SSA agreement between KDBC & Soon-to-be Nexstar owned KTSM.

 

Should KFOX/KDBC move to is own building, will KTSM move to its own building or keep the same building they already have? Some unanswered questions.

 

http://www.elpasoinc.com/columns/whispers/article_e477eff4-c09c-11e2-8659-0019bb30f31a.html

According to this article, the agreement with Nexstar will expire in the next 18 months.

 

The same can be said for WHAM/WUHF. Sinclair is likely to take back WUHF since they now own WHAM. This document from WUHF's public file states their agreement with Nexstar will expire on December 31st.

https://stations.fcc.gov/collect/files/413/Joint%20sales%20agreements/Joint%20Sales%20Agreement%20Modification%20(13577615024863).pdf

The same can be said for WHAM/WUHF. Sinclair is likely to take back WUHF since they now own WHAM. This document from WUHF's public file states their agreement with Nexstar will expire on December 31st.

https://stations.fcc.gov/collect/files/413/Joint sales agreements/Joint Sales Agreement Modification (13577615024863).pdf

I said this on the Newport thread, since Sinclair proper owns WUHF and has since acquired WHAM, it would be dumb for Sinclair to not move WUHF to the WHAM facilities. Nexstar will still have work ahead of them since they hub five other Upstate NY markets, and the former Smith Vermont stations. If 31 do move to 13, 8 shouldn't lose any sleep in not producing a 10pm news. They'll probably be the better hand in all of this. Sinclair will have to do the heavy lifting. And I don't think 13 is going to voluntarily give 8 the CW affiliation. And Nexstar aren't to keen (in a heavy degree) to having subchannels (yet they do air Bounce TV on 8.2). If anything, Sinclair can move the CW from to 31, just have more bandwidth bits on 13. And of course, disband the 10pm news & probably the morning news on the CW and move it all to Fox 31, as I also said on that thread.

I said this on the Newport thread, since Sinclair proper owns WUHF and has since acquired WHAM, it would be dumb for Sinclair to not move WUHF to the WHAM facilities. Nexstar will still have work ahead of them since they hub five other Upstate NY markets, and the former Smith Vermont stations. If 31 do move to 13, 8 shouldn't lose any sleep in not producing a 10pm news. They'll probably be the better hand in all of this. Sinclair will have to do the heavy lifting. And I don't think 13 is going to voluntarily give 8 the CW affiliation. And Nexstar aren't to keen (in a heavy degree) to having subchannels (yet they do air Bounce TV on 8.2). If anything, Sinclair can move the CW from to 31, just have more bandwidth bits on 13. And of course, disband the 10pm news & probably the morning news on the CW and move it all to Fox 31, as I also said on that thread.

agreed with your post regarding WUHF and WHAM it would be very bad to merge both of the channels into one facility and it would make complete sense if Nexstar continues to assist with the 10pm report temporary. Remember that WUHF aired its own newscasts (pre-news central and before WROC had to taken over the production of the newscasts at that time.

however, on the PREM14A while I was reading this: "Merger Sub will merge with and into Fisher and will cease to exist, with Fisher continuing as the surviving corporation."

Is that going to affect sinclair and Fisher?

however' date=' on the PREM14A while I was reading this: "Merger Sub will merge with and into Fisher and will cease to exist, with Fisher continuing as the surviving corporation."

Is that going to affect sinclair and Fisher?

The Fisher name will likely live on as a licensee name for those stations under the Sinclair umbrella. Nothing more - it's standard practice for merged companies, usually to maintain trademarks and copyrights.

 

The merger is but a formality at this point.

The Fisher name will likely live on as a licensee name for those stations under the Sinclair umbrella. Nothing more - it's standard practice for merged companies, usually to maintain trademarks and copyrights.

 

The merger is but a formality at this point.

Is it possible for Sinclair to keep Fisher as a company to purchase more stations under than umbrella... like Cunningham or Deerfield?
Is it possible for Sinclair to keep Fisher as a company to purchase more stations under than umbrella... like Cunningham or Deerfield?

I really don't know yet and second of all it will live on as an Licensee name for the stations that Sinclair owns and or operates.
I really don't know yet and second of all it will live on as an Licensee name for the stations that Sinclair owns and or operates.

It would be smart for them if they could... it wouldn't be good for the overall media business, but if it's buying more stations they want, then they can control even more markets totally with one more outlet to buy with.

It won't necessarily live on... Fox transferred all or most of its licenses to "FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INC." a few years back. Previously they had their own individual license names, derived from the preceding ownership. The New World stations were "NW Communications of ", and WTXF's holding company evolved from "TVX of Philadelphia" to "Paramount Stations Group of Philadelphia" to "Fox Television Stations of Philadelphia".

Is it possible for Sinclair to keep Fisher as a company to purchase more stations under than umbrella... like Cunningham or Deerfield?

Highly unlikely IMO. They would have to reassign the current Fisher stations to Sinclair, and have some of their existing shell stations moved to said Fisher shell company in order for it to make any sense. Totally unnecessary bordering on ridiculous.

 

Fisher will only be retained as a licensee name, and nothing more.

It won't necessarily live on... Fox transferred all or most of its licenses to "FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INC." a few years back. Previously they had their own individual license names, derived from the preceding ownership. The New World stations were "NW Communications of ", and WTXF's holding company evolved from "TVX of Philadelphia" to "Paramount Stations Group of Philadelphia" to "Fox Television Stations of Philadelphia".

Several of Gannett's stations still list previous owners as licensees, i.e., Multimedia, Pacific & Southern, Combined, etc.

 

Clear Channel's radio station group actually does this a lot. Many of their licensees are former owners like Citicasters, Jacor, AMFM, Ackerly, Nationwide, Secret, and so on.

As of now, the paperwork for each of the stations is a 315 Transfer of Control. So if Sinclair doesn't do anything to alter it, then most of those licensee names of the Fisher stations won't be changed. If each of those applications were filed under 314 Assignment of License, then each of the license names would be change to assign the license from that one licensee name to a different licensee name of the new owner. It was similar to when Journal bought WTVF last Fall, they still kept its licensee name NewsChannel 5 Network, LLC. and not the licensee name most Journal stations have which is Journal Broadcast Corporation. I'm not too sure how the E.W. Scripps Company changed its licensee names from Scripps Howard Broadcasting Company to Scripps Media, Inc. in 2010 however.

 

But I have a good feeling, each of those Fisher stations will probably be changed to KXXX Licensee, LLC, like many of the other Sinclair stations once its all said in done in the next set of applications.

Some of Gannett's licensee name placements make no sense, though; KUSA and KTVD are licensed to "Multimedia Holdings Corporation", although Multimedia never owned either of them. And I think WGRZ and WZZM have the licensee names that WLWT and KOCO did under Gannett ownership ("Multimedia Entertainment, Inc." and "Combined Communications Corporation of Oklahoma, Inc.").

Myron Falwell, on 20 May 2013 - 23:33, said:

Several of Gannett's stations still list previous owners as licensees, i.e., Multimedia, Pacific & Southern, Combined, etc.

 

Clear Channel's radio station group actually does this a lot. Many of their licensees are former owners like Citicasters, Jacor, AMFM, Ackerly, Nationwide, Secret, and so on.

D'oh! I forgot Gannett and Clear Channel as examples of keeping old corporate names. I think I keep forgetting Gannett because they used "Gannett Co., Inc." in their copyrights until recently. Clear Channel, though, I should have known.

 

And is it me or are some of those names just awesome? I don't know if I like Citicasters because the name is cool or because it's the former Taft Broadcasting. And AMFM I thought was a fantastic name for a radio company - shame that company didn't last long... barely a year, I think? I know all of the CC radio stations in Philly came from AMFM.

 

channel2, on 21 May 2013 - 02:18, said:

Some of Gannett's licensee name placements make no sense, though; KUSA and KTVD are licensed to "Multimedia Holdings Corporation", although Multimedia never owned either of them. And I think WGRZ and WZZM have the licensee names that WLWT and KOCO did under Gannett ownership ("Multimedia Entertainment, Inc." and "Combined Communications Corporation of Oklahoma, Inc.").

Maybe to Joe Viewer they don't make any sense, but to the company those names do. Gannett either switched or merged the WGRZ/WZZM holding companies with the ones that owned WLWT and KOCO. In fact, WUSA, their largest market station, is legally owned by Detroit Free Press, Inc. Why? Because that's the current name of the company that bought the station back in the 70s - Gannett never bothered to change it!

 

And, of course, this brought me down the rabbit hole... I think I'm going to start a thread for this...

D'oh! I forgot Gannett and Clear Channel as examples of keeping old corporate names. I think I keep forgetting Gannett because they used "Gannett Co., Inc." in their copyrights until recently. Clear Channel, though, I should have known.

 

And is it me or are some of those names just awesome? I don't know if I like Citicasters because the name is cool or because it's the former Taft Broadcasting. And AMFM I thought was a fantastic name for a radio company - shame that company didn't last long... barely a year, I think? I know all of the CC radio stations in Philly came from AMFM.

 

Maybe to Joe Viewer they don't make any sense, but to the company those names do. Gannett either switched or merged the WGRZ/WZZM holding companies with the ones that owned WLWT and KOCO. In fact, WUSA, their largest market station, is legally owned by Detroit Free Press, Inc. Why? Because that's the current name of the company that bought the station back in the 70s - Gannett never bothered to change it!

 

And, of course, this brought me down the rabbit hole... I think I'm going to start a thread for this...

Bring it on....
Some of Gannett's licensee name placements make no sense, though; KUSA and KTVD are licensed to "Multimedia Holdings Corporation", although Multimedia never owned either of them. And I think WGRZ and WZZM have the licensee names that WLWT and KOCO did under Gannett ownership ("Multimedia Entertainment, Inc." and "Combined Communications Corporation of Oklahoma, Inc.").

In Gannett's case, it's a matter of keeping the names active for legal purposes.

 

Mostly because of the trades and spinoffs Gannett had to make with Hearst/Argyle upon their merger with Multimedia (and on account of the fact Multimedia only had 51% of WKYC - NBC had the remaining 49% until 1999) the licensee names had to be reassigned.

 

when WDAF-TV was owned by FOX, it had the licensee name of this: New World Communications of Kansas City, until about June of 2009.

As HulkieD said earlier in the thread, it was standard operating procedure for Fox O&Os to credit the licensee on copyright notices. (Wasn't always the case; after Fox took over the station in 1996 until some point in 1999, WJW's copyright credit read "Fox Television Stations of Ohio, Inc.")

 

Those O&Os spun off to LocalTV in 2008 - including WDAF - had their licensee names changed wholesale to "Community Television of [Name of City/State], Inc."

And is it me or are some of those names just awesome? I don't know if I like Citicasters because the name is cool or because it's the former Taft Broadcasting. And AMFM I thought was a fantastic name for a radio company - shame that company didn't last long... barely a year, I think? I know all of the CC radio stations in Philly came from AMFM.

Yup, it lasted less than a year. AMFM came from a 1999 merger between Capstar and Chancellor Media (those longtime listeners to Coast to Coast AM will remember mentions of "The CBC" - as in Chancellor Broadcasting Corporation). CC's five NYC FMs were also AMFM stations, and they - along with WOR (!!) - have AMFM as their licensee.

 

Capstar even survives as a licensee name, and IIRC, Chancellor has as well (possibly as CBC, Inc.).

In Gannett's case, it's a matter of keeping the names active for legal purposes.

 

Mostly because of the trades and spinoffs Gannett had to make with Hearst/Argyle upon their merger with Multimedia (and on account of the fact Multimedia only had 51% of WKYC - NBC had the remaining 49% until 1999) the licensee names had to be reassigned.

 

As HulkieD said earlier in the thread, it was standard operating procedure for Fox O&Os to credit the licensee on copyright notices. (Wasn't always the case; after Fox took over the station in 1996 until some point in 1999, WJW's copyright credit read "Fox Television Stations of Ohio, Inc.")

 

Those O&Os spun off to LocalTV in 2008 - including WDAF - had their licensee names changed wholesale to "Community Television of [Name of City/State], Inc."

Yes, they did change it, however, I remember specificly that WDAF had copyright credit of "New World Communications of Kansas City" and after that it changed from NW Communications of Kansas City to WDAF Licensee,LLC which is now part of Local TV, LLC. I don't know if WDAF had adopted the Fox Television Stations of Missouri at all.
So then is Sinclair still planning to buy the all? I haven't paid attention to this thread for a while now and don't feel like catching up on three or four pages of news.

What do you mean "still planning to buy the all?" If you're talking about the Fisher situation. That is still on. And the FTC cleared it, last week. The WUTB AOL already been greenlighted, and its should be closed soon. And KDBC & KFOX might me sharing a new facility in 2014. So you're not missing much.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using Local News Talk you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.