hathawaynson2 39 Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 The oversight of WFLI/WDSI is somewhat head-scratching....but it could be the start of YET ANOTHER deal that the Boys from Baltimore (or the Honchos of Hunt Valley) are scheming.... As for Gainesville and Tallahassee, could they a part of the new Chesapeake subsidiary, should it ever get off the ground and Barrington ever get sold? If the FCC starts restricting ownership, you know that they are going to pull this card, in effect, starting an "entirely different" company with "different" management...that could also shell out stations on their own! This whole New Age deal seems like an excuse to prop up WTWC, which has suffered for years and was even rumored to be for sale a few years back. Question about WTWC-TV: was WTWC up for sale back then and when? and about Chesapeake Television: Last I heard the Barrington Stations group transfers reached the six month mark since the filings back in march. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-89995 Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyrannical bastard 3953 Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 Question about WTWC-TV: was WTWC up for sale back then and when? and about Chesapeake Television: Last I heard the Barrington Stations group transfers reached the six month mark since the filings back in march. http://flnewscenter.com/?s=tallahassee+fire+sale Back in 2010, Florida News Center posted an article that "sources" claim that Sinclair was desperately trying to dump them. Of course, this was not too long after Cunningham was in danger of defaulting, WTWC was their only NBC affiliate at the time (and a lousy one, at best), and NBC itself was in disaster mode from the Jay Leno / Conan O'Brien debacle... Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90020 Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyHarry 727 Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 Living in a Sinclair market, they've managed to make it work. Sinclair LOVES standardization, not just in news sets, graphics, voiceovers, and music. Most of their stations (particularly their CW/Mynet stations) air "Thursday Night Lights". While I'm not in the position to question Sinclair's business strategy because I have nothing to do with them, personally I think 162 is a little much. No, I don't want to pressure the FCC to stop them or whatever. Sinclair can figure out on their own when enough's enough, and I'm betting the end result won't be pretty... I don't know that I agree. Kroger has almost 3,000 stores, Sears over 2,000, Walmart and Target have zillions. Okay, so maybe running a TV Station is more complicated with all the technology involved. What would the analogy be? Banking maybe? Chase has a zillion branches and a zillion data centers. Wait, I think I've found the perfect analogy: Cable. Comcast and Time Warner have pretty complicated plants to run and they are in more than 162 different markets. They also do the same things TV stations do, but on a far grander scale. They sell ads and do traffic for hundreds of channels. In other words, 162 is small potatoes. I'm sure they can handle it. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90031 Share on other sites More sharing options...
effseesee 101 Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 http://flnewscenter.com/?s=tallahassee+fire+sale Back in 2010, Florida News Center posted an article that "sources" claim that Sinclair was desperately trying to dump them. Of course, this was not too long after Cunningham was in danger of defaulting, WTWC was their only NBC affiliate at the time (and a lousy one, at best), and NBC itself was in disaster mode from the Jay Leno / Conan O'Brien debacle... There was no love loss between the GE-run NBC and Sinclair. NBC had no interest in renewing its affiliations in Springfield, IL and Dayton and moved them to WAND and WDTN. If they could have found a new partner in Tallahassee, they would have moved the affiliation there too. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90042 Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTVNews 1377 Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 FCC considering rule that could keep big media companies from getting bigger Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/324927-fcc-considering-rule-that-could-keep-big-media-companies-from-getting-bigger Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90046 Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanewsguy 511 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 I don't know that I agree. Kroger has almost 3,000 stores, Sears over 2,000, Walmart and Target have zillions. Okay, so maybe running a TV Station is more complicated with all the technology involved. What would the analogy be? Banking maybe? Chase has a zillion branches and a zillion data centers. Wait, I think I've found the perfect analogy: Cable. Comcast and Time Warner have pretty complicated plants to run and they are in more than 162 different markets. They also do the same things TV stations do, but on a far grander scale. They sell ads and do traffic for hundreds of channels. In other words, 162 is small potatoes. I'm sure they can handle it. Really? You're comparing TV stations to stores now? In the entire country, there are 1,774 full power TV stations. Sears has more stores than there are TV stations in the country. You have like maybe three or four choices for local news in a market (or newspapers, but those are dying). In the same large city, there are hundreds of stores you can shop at and in most places, at least three places to buy groceries at, but most times more. You don't get the same choice with local news. I wouldn't want to own 162 stations if I ran a company because I couldn't keep up with it. Again, I'll let Sinclair judge for themselves how many stations they should own. Then again I wouldn't want to own thousands of stores either (yeah, because Walmart treats their employees extremely well, sarcasm of course). I also stay away from Chase and those huge banks because the fees are outrageous because they are greedy. I prefer credit unions. And now you're comparing TV stations to cable operators? Time Warner and Comcast are awful (especially in terms of customer service provided). You must not subscribe to either... I try not to give my money to Sears, Target or Walmart (quality of the products sucks, quality of the customer service is awful). Sears/Kmart is dying anyways. And Kroger was driven out of town 20 years ago, so HA! Your analogy sounds almost like something that Cieloha would come up with, except it wasn't written in essay form. Sorry, I usually agree with you but this time I don't. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90065 Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyHarry 727 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Really? You're comparing TV stations to stores now? In the entire country, there are 1,774 full power TV stations. Sears has more stores than there are TV stations in the country. You have like maybe three or four choices for local news in a market (or newspapers, but those are dying). In the same large city, there are hundreds of stores you can shop at and in most places, at least three places to buy groceries at, but most times more. You don't get the same choice with local news. I wouldn't want to own 162 stations if I ran a company because I couldn't keep up with it. Again, I'll let Sinclair judge for themselves how many stations they should own. Then again I wouldn't want to own thousands of stores either (yeah, because Walmart treats their employees extremely well, sarcasm of course). I also stay away from Chase and those huge banks because the fees are outrageous because they are greedy. I prefer credit unions. And now you're comparing TV stations to cable operators? Time Warner and Comcast are awful (especially in terms of customer service provided). You must not subscribe to either... I try not to give my money to Sears, Target or Walmart (quality of the products sucks, quality of the customer service is awful). Sears/Kmart is dying anyways. And Kroger was driven out of town 20 years ago, so HA! Your analogy sounds almost like something that Cieloha would come up with, except it wasn't written in essay form. Sorry, I usually agree with you but this time I don't. Another hater? 1. People need to get one thing straight. Although Sinclair may operate 162 stations, they are in half the number of markets--80-90 markets (someone else can do the count). Time Warner, Comcast you may think suck but they run a successful business, make a lot of money and run operations that are far more complicated than most TV stations. They have to sell time, insert commercials, sell to subscribers, send out bills every month, operate web portals AND they run news operations in many markets. Yes, TW and Comcast are the perfect analogies. 2. You want another analogy? Gannett. Printing newspapers is not any easy business and they do fine in about the same number of markets. Yes, its a shrinking industry, but the point is whether someone can run a media company on such a scale and Gannett has proven the answer is yes. 3. As sanewsguy previously mentioned, Sinclair is heavy on CW and MyTV stations. Does does it really matter how many junker 1,000 watt AM stations someone in a market owns? They are all pretty worthless. Likewise, who cares how many of those they own as nobody really watches them (comparatively speaking) anyway? Sinclair seems to be one of the few large operators that seems to know how to run CW/MyTV stations as standalones (Both CBS and LIN bailed out of WWHO, for example). 4. The fact of the matter is that all mature industries consolidate because that's the only way to stay in business. There used to be three or four newspapers in every market, now barely one. Likewise with department stores, discount stores, grocery stores and just about every other kind of business out there. 5. The haters will hate, but the fact is that Sinclair was smart, creative and aggressive. Aggressive not only when it comes to purchasing stations, but also aggressive when it comes to their signals. While other operators were too cheap to blow a lot of money on their signals, Sinclair has 1,000 kw UHF sticks in every conceivable place where one was available. In Columbus, LIN and CBS stuck the tower 30 miles south of the city, and they were too cheap or perhaps not creative enough or didn't care enough to put them in the city. One of THE first things Sinclair did was apply to move it to the WSYX Tower. Our capitalist system rewards creativity and action. And if Sinclair can't handle all these stations? Our system has answers for that, too. 6. Sinclair owns 162 out of 1,774 full power TV Stations. Again they are heavy on CW/MyTV stations (worthless) AND control less than 10% of TV stations. At one time General Motors controlled 50% of automobile sales, now they control roughly 20% ... Ford, Chrysler also have larger shares of automobile stations than Sinclair has of all TV stations. Lets not forget the hundreds of cable TV channels today, making that a miniscule percentage. In a shrinking industry, not a big deal. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90067 Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanewsguy 511 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Another hater? 1. People need to get one thing straight. Although Sinclair may operate 162 stations, they are in half the number of markets--80-90 markets (someone else can do the count). Time Warner, Comcast you may think suck but they run a successful business, make a lot of money and run operations that are far more complicated than most TV stations. They have to sell time, insert commercials, sell to subscribers, send out bills every month, operate web portals AND they run news operations in many markets. Yes, TW and Comcast are the perfect analogies. 2. You want another analogy? Gannett. Printing newspapers is not any easy business and they do fine in about the same number of markets. Yes, its a shrinking industry, but the point is whether someone can run a media company on such a scale and Gannett has proven the answer is yes. 3. As sanewsguy previously mentioned, Sinclair is heavy on CW and MyTV stations. Does does it really matter how many junker 1,000 watt AM stations someone in a market owns? They are all pretty worthless. Likewise, who cares how many of those they own as nobody really watches them (comparatively speaking) anyway? Sinclair seems to be one of the few large operators that seems to know how to run CW/MyTV stations as standalones (Both CBS and LIN bailed out of WWHO, for example). 4. The fact of the matter is that all mature industries consolidate because that's the only way to stay in business. There used to be three or four newspapers in every market, now barely one. Likewise with department stores, discount stores, grocery stores and just about every other kind of business out there. 5. The haters will hate, but the fact is that Sinclair was smart, creative and aggressive. Aggressive not only when it comes to purchasing stations, but also aggressive when it comes to their signals. While other operators were too cheap to blow a lot of money on their signals, Sinclair has 1,000 kw UHF sticks in every conceivable place where one was available. In Columbus, LIN and CBS stuck the tower 30 miles south of the city, and they were too cheap or perhaps not creative enough or didn't care enough to put them in the city. One of THE first things Sinclair did was apply to move it to the WSYX Tower. Our capitalist system rewards creativity and action. And if Sinclair can't handle all these stations? Our system has answers for that, too. 6. Sinclair owns 162 out of 1,774 full power TV Stations. Again they are heavy on CW/MyTV stations (worthless) AND control less than 10% of TV stations. At one time General Motors controlled 50% of automobile sales, now they control roughly 20% ... Ford, Chrysler also have larger shares of automobile stations than Sinclair has of all TV stations. Lets not forget the hundreds of cable TV channels today, making that a miniscule percentage. In a shrinking industry, not a big deal. I don't hate Sinclair, but I'm not a big fan of them either. But I'm willing to point out their faults when I need to. You defend them quite a bit, you must be employed by them (or an ex-employee who left on good terms)... Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90069 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leavellebrett 85 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 :drool: I smell a debate. :thatshot: Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90072 Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenShine9 1513 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Nexstar is next highest with 95; after that, I don't think anyone else even has 50. At least not yet. But the big names would run into cap problems if they got as aggressive as Sinclair as they have a lot of stations in top-20 markets and most of their assets in top-50 markets, which is where the 39% adds up quickly. Having a station in every market below 100 won't even get you close to the cap. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90073 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrtraveler01 738 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 I wouldn't want to own 162 stations if I ran a company because I couldn't keep up with it. And considering the fact that Sinclair has a fixation to micromanage all of their stations, I'll be amazed if they managed to force all 162 stations to adopt the "Sinclair philosophy" without any conflicts or issues. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90074 Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanewsguy 511 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Nexstar is next highest with 95; after that, I don't think anyone else even has 50. At least not yet. But the big names would run into cap problems if they got as aggressive as Sinclair as they have a lot of stations in top-20 markets and most of their assets in top-50 markets, which is where the 39% adds up quickly. Having a station in every market below 100 won't even get you close to the cap. But Nexstar isn't gobbling up every single station that comes up for sale. They're carefully examining the stations/markets they're acquiring and how they would fit in to Nexstar's business strategy. The JSAs/SSAs they sign mostly make sense (Little Rock whiffs of greed) and are necessary for station survival (Lubbock and Joplin are good examples). Thank god for Nexstar. They've actually been putting money in their stations unlike Sinclair. And considering the fact that Sinclair has a fixation to micromanage all of their stations, I'll be amazed if they managed to force all 162 stations to adopt the "Sinclair philosophy" without any conflicts or issues. Again it all comes down to how good the individual GMs/NDs are. They are truly the ones who run the stations... Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90075 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrtraveler01 738 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 But Nexstar isn't gobbling up every single station that comes up for sale. They're carefully examining the stations/markets they're acquiring and how they would fit in to Nexstar's business strategy. The JSAs/SSAs they sign mostly make sense (Little Rock whiffs of greed) and are necessary for station survival (Lubbock and Joplin are good examples). Thank god for Nexstar. They've actually been putting money in their stations unlike Sinclair. I like Nexstar too because of the fact that they do invest in their station and minus the usual standardization (graphics, music, website, etc.), they let the stations run on their own. Again it all comes down to how good the individual GMs/NDs are. They are truly the ones who run the stations... True. There were clashes between station GM/ND's and Sinclair corporate when they wanted all their stations to air those political programs. Unless Sinclair tones down the political rhetoric (which I'm doubtful of), I imagine that the newly acquired stations are also going to have some clashes between them and Sinclair management. The micromanagement techniques that Sinclair runs these stations is probably what drives me nuts the most. That's why I think it's absurd that they think they can run all 162 stations from Hunt Valley without any issues. Hopefully Sinclair surprises me and just lets these stations run on their own minus typical standardization. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90081 Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanewsguy 511 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 True. There were clashes between station GM/ND's and Sinclair corporate when they wanted all their stations to air those political programs. Unless Sinclair tones down the political rhetoric (which I'm doubtful of), I imagine that the newly acquired stations are also going to have some clashes between them and Sinclair management. Then Sinclair can just fire the old GM/ND and bring in their own people. Happened in Cincinnati, and San Antonio. They fired Les Vann and Jackie Rutledge and brought in their own people (already in the market) Jon Lawhead and John Seabers. These people are familiar with and are willing to play Sinclair's hardball game. I'm sure a lot of GMs will be out of jobs soon once Sinclair takes over their station. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90082 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrtraveler01 738 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Then Sinclair can just fire the old GM/ND and bring in their own people. Happened in Cincinnati, and San Antonio. They fired Les Vann and Jackie Rutledge and brought in their own people (already in the market) Jon Lawhead and John Seabers. These people are familiar with and are willing to play Sinclair's hardball game. I'm sure a lot of GMs will be out of jobs soon once Sinclair takes over their station. I know. That's the sad part. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90084 Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenShine9 1513 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 I like Nexstar too because of the fact that they do invest in their station and minus the usual standardization (graphics, music, website, etc.), they let the stations run on their own. True. There were clashes between station GM/ND's and Sinclair corporate when they wanted all their stations to air those political programs. Unless Sinclair tones down the political rhetoric (which I'm doubtful of), I imagine that the newly acquired stations are also going to have some clashes between them and Sinclair management. The micromanagement techniques that Sinclair runs these stations is probably what drives me nuts the most. That's why I think it's absurd that they think they can run all 162 stations from Hunt Valley without any issues. Hopefully Sinclair surprises me and just lets these stations run on their own minus typical standardization. Agreed re: Nexstar, most of their stations are in small markets; apparently they weren't even contenders in the big deals, as they cannot afford to get too aggressive. For comparison, after the Belo purchase, Gannett will have 42; after the Local TV LLC purchase (a rare miss for Sinclair), Tribune will have 43. If those mentioned companies (such as Gannett and Tribune and others like Hearst) tried to get too aggressive and even approached 95 stations (forget 162), they would hit the cap long before they got there. Top-50 markets add up a lot faster than sub-100 and especially sub-150 markets. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90086 Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenShine9 1513 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Eventually though there would be a point that it becomes too hard for Sinclair to control everything if trying to micromanage. It could be 200, 250 or so stations. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90087 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rusty Muck 4374 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Eventually though there would be a point that it becomes too hard for Sinclair to control everything if trying to micromanage. It could be 200, 250 or so stations. Saw it with Clear Channel in radio when they maxed out at 1,200 stations. Cumulus Media is now just as bad as Clear Channel was, and they keep buying and buying at a rapid clip. CC long ago became a severely toxic asset that Bain Capital just cannot let go of, and Cumulus will meet the same fate. I really won't have any sympathies for S!nclair if this M&A binge results in them going under. They did this to themselves. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90089 Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyHarry 727 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 I don't hate Sinclair, but I'm not a big fan of them either. But I'm willing to point out their faults when I need to. You defend them quite a bit, you must be employed by them (or an ex-employee who left on good terms)... Nope and I don't care either way. I just don't think all the bashing going on is justified. Sinclair may be cheap when it comes to content and talent, but they do a pretty good job when it comes to engineering. As I mentioned before, while the likes of ABC and others were tripping all over themselves to get VHF allocations, Sinclair was all about UHF from the get go and I mean they were aggressive about getting UHF wherever they could and they didn't cheap out on the wattage or the power consumption either (they are at 1,000kw even in the smallest markets). And stations like WSYX, for example, run both a horizontal and vertical ERP (one of their engineers said that doubles the power bill). WWHO's application to move to the WSYX tower also has both horizontal and vertical ERPs, though it doesn't look like they're adding a vertical ERP to the WTTE antenna. While everybody else was asleep, they grew and I like success stories. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90090 Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyHarry 727 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Saw it with Clear Channel in radio when they maxed out at 1,200 stations. Cumulus Media is now just as bad as Clear Channel was, and they keep buying and buying at a rapid clip. CC long ago became a severely toxic asset that Bain Capital just cannot let go of, and Cumulus will meet the same fate. I really won't have any sympathies for S!nclair if this M&A binge results in them going under. They did this to themselves. Different scenario. Clear Channel is a toxic company trying to run everything by server, voice tracking and autopilot. They simply decided they don't want to have a lot of local talent because they have a huge debt service to pay. With Sinclair, local talent (news) is what generates revenue and pays the bills. Without it, you have talk shows all day and other syndicated crap. Sinclair may very well go under at some point, but as long as the Smiths are involved I doubt it. Mark my words, News Channel 8 is going to be a very big deal for them. It will be a credible news source they will be able to throw on their local subchannels. It will cost them next to nothing to take it national (I think most of the subchannels pay to lease the bandwidth), and people like me who primarily have cable so we can get news programs (sports and movies are nice, but I can live without them) are going to be very tempted to go OTA only once this comes about. What is Fox News worth to Rupert? Billions? A national News Channel 8 in 80 markets and on cable TV could potentially be huge. (P.S. I thought I was responding to someone else since you changed your thumbnail. I know you're not a Sinclair hater.) Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90091 Share on other sites More sharing options...
cg41386 132 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Another hater? 1. People need to get one thing straight. Although Sinclair may operate 162 stations, they are in half the number of markets--80-90 markets (someone else can do the count). Time Warner, Comcast you may think suck but they run a successful business, make a lot of money and run operations that are far more complicated than most TV stations. They have to sell time, insert commercials, sell to subscribers, send out bills every month, operate web portals AND they run news operations in many markets. Yes, TW and Comcast are the perfect analogies. 2. You want another analogy? Gannett. Printing newspapers is not any easy business and they do fine in about the same number of markets. Yes, its a shrinking industry, but the point is whether someone can run a media company on such a scale and Gannett has proven the answer is yes. 3. As sanewsguy previously mentioned, Sinclair is heavy on CW and MyTV stations. Does does it really matter how many junker 1,000 watt AM stations someone in a market owns? They are all pretty worthless. Likewise, who cares how many of those they own as nobody really watches them (comparatively speaking) anyway? Sinclair seems to be one of the few large operators that seems to know how to run CW/MyTV stations as standalones (Both CBS and LIN bailed out of WWHO, for example). 4. The fact of the matter is that all mature industries consolidate because that's the only way to stay in business. There used to be three or four newspapers in every market, now barely one. Likewise with department stores, discount stores, grocery stores and just about every other kind of business out there. 5. The haters will hate, but the fact is that Sinclair was smart, creative and aggressive. Aggressive not only when it comes to purchasing stations, but also aggressive when it comes to their signals. While other operators were too cheap to blow a lot of money on their signals, Sinclair has 1,000 kw UHF sticks in every conceivable place where one was available. In Columbus, LIN and CBS stuck the tower 30 miles south of the city, and they were too cheap or perhaps not creative enough or didn't care enough to put them in the city. One of THE first things Sinclair did was apply to move it to the WSYX Tower. Our capitalist system rewards creativity and action. And if Sinclair can't handle all these stations? Our system has answers for that, too. 6. Sinclair owns 162 out of 1,774 full power TV Stations. Again they are heavy on CW/MyTV stations (worthless) AND control less than 10% of TV stations. At one time General Motors controlled 50% of automobile sales, now they control roughly 20% ... Ford, Chrysler also have larger shares of automobile stations than Sinclair has of all TV stations. Lets not forget the hundreds of cable TV channels today, making that a miniscule percentage. In a shrinking industry, not a big deal. If you're referring to WWHO in #5, they are licensed to Chillicothe, which is a bit of a distance from acolumbus, IIRC. WBNS has had their tower in Columbus for a long time. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90095 Share on other sites More sharing options...
TVIntheDesert 183 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 And considering the fact that Sinclair has a fixation to micromanage all of their stations, I'll be amazed if they managed to force all 162 stations to adopt the "Sinclair philosophy" without any conflicts or issues. Even companies that have let their stations run autonomously in the past have started to micromanage news and programming. Scripps is a good example of this. The same is true (to a lesser extent, especially with subchannel programming) with Raycom. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90098 Share on other sites More sharing options...
TVIntheDesert 183 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Sinclair may be cheap when it comes to content and talent, but they do a pretty good job when it comes to engineering. As I mentioned before, while the likes of ABC and others were tripping all over themselves to get VHF allocations, Sinclair was all about UHF from the get go and I mean they were aggressive about getting UHF wherever they could and they didn't cheap out on the wattage or the power consumption either (they are at 1,000kw even in the smallest markets). And stations like WSYX, for example, run both a horizontal and vertical ERP (one of their engineers said that doubles the power bill). WWHO's application to move to the WSYX tower also has both horizontal and vertical ERPs, though it doesn't look like they're adding a vertical ERP to the WTTE antenna. Sinclair was founded by engineers (note that their original name was "Commercial Radio Institute") and have been involved in the manufacture of TV transmitters (Comark, Acrodyne), and now own Dielectric (the leading antenna manufacturer). Acrodyne was known to make solid transmitters, until they shut them down after the DTV transition was over, and they've done a lot in trying to improve DTV reception. I'm not a big fan of the company, but I do commend them for their engineering side. True. There were clashes between station GM/ND's and Sinclair corporate when they wanted all their stations to air those political programs. Unless Sinclair tones down the political rhetoric (which I'm doubtful of), I imagine that the newly acquired stations are also going to have some clashes between them and Sinclair management. It might be the "tin foil hat" coming out in me, but I feel that Sinclair is buying these stations in strategic "swing states" to help forward their political agenda in future elections. I know it will be a hard sell in Portland and Seattle, but everywhere else, their strategy makes a lot of sense. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90099 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samantha 2895 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Some news of a different sort: Sinclair board member Basil A. Thomas has died at 98 (press release). This year he had been awarded the Baltimore Business Journal's Outstanding Directors Award. Prior to Sinclair he worked in Baltimore City courts and then served as counsel to Thomas & Libowitz from 1982 to 2007. (Thomas & Libowitz, which is also counsel to Sinclair, was founded by Basil's son, Steven A. Thomas, a senior attorney.) Apparently Thomas had a long-running relationship with Sinclair, serving on its board for 20 years and advising the Smith family, including Julian Smith, founder of the company. Our condolences to Basil's family. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90105 Share on other sites More sharing options...
CircleSeven 1955 Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Let me post the paperwork. I know I'm late but better late than never. On this ninth media company acquisition by the Sinclair Broadcast Group, two years and over three weeks after the announced of the Four Points Media acquisition, the paperwork was posted on Thursday morning, hours after the announcement of the sale. Sinclair will be paying New Age Media $90M. Sinclair will properly own WOLF, WQMY (they're treating this as a satellite of WOLF) & WGFL, while assigning WSWB, WTLH & WNBW to Michael Anderson's Cunningham Broadcasting, and WTLF to Stephen Mumblow's Deerfield Media. Anderson will pay Sinclair $5.722M ($4.184M for WTLH, $1.09M for WSWB & $448K for WNBW), while Mumblow will pay Sinclair $472K for WTLF. _____________________________________________ Also it appears that last Monday, the FCC has greenlighted the TOC of KDBC from Cunningham to Sinclair proper. So it looks like, KDBC could be joining the other Titan stations in Omaha, Sioux City & Fresno on the consummation chain, should that occur in the days ahead. ______________________________________________ I also want to make a correction. On my last post I stated that WTVC produce its 10pm news for WFLI. I meant its sister-station WDSI. So my error on that. I don't know whatelse they're planning on swallowing, since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on eliminating the UHF Discount has now happened, and it would likely get the Report & Order, when its all said and done. But like I stated earlier, these devils will find some sort of slick-ass way to acquire more stations, Discount or not. I still can't get over that they haven't made a deal with the Chattanooga spread. I assumed that the next takeover would've been the Milt Grant stations. But after their unsuccessful bid of the Local TV, the only market Sinclair could grab from the Grant pool is their flagships WFXR/WWCW. Since they will acquire WSET. They could acquire the Davenport duo (KLJB/KGCW), probably the same way like getting the New Age flagships in NEPA, but those (like the New Age ones) don't have an in-house news op. The Huntsville & Eau Claire ones might not be under their radars, since it's only a single station, and neither of those have in-house news ops. Since Gray lighted up Excalibur, maybe they might have some chump change to acquire WEUX/WLAX and maybe WFXS in Wausau, since Gray owns WEAU & WSAW in those Wisconsin Markets. I also had this on my mind for the longest. What was it if Sinclair didn't get the Allbritton stations. What would've happened if Hearst and Tribune would've gotten the Western chunk. Hearst already owned KHBS/KHOG in NW Arkansas & KOCO in OKC. Should Hearst acquired KTUL & KATV, it would've Fit Like A GLOVE. Tribune could've also benefit, since Local TV was already in NW AR and OKC, getting Tulsa & LR would've also fit like a glove too. The eastern part would've been more challenging, but the west would've made tons of sense. According to the FCC database, the licensee names for the Fisher stations have changed to reflect Sinclair's ownership, but they apparently decided not to go with the Sinclair standard "KXXX Licensee, LLC" name, instead opting to use names like "Sinclair Media of (city/state), LLC". Also, it doesn't appear that there were any applications filed with the FCC for this. Examples: KOMO is now using "Sinclair Media of Seattle, LLC" KATU is now using "Sinclair Television of Portland, LLC" KUNS is now using "Sinclair Broadcasting of Seattle, LLC" The radio stations are now using "Sinclair Radio of Seattle, LLC" Although I wasn't shocked that they changed the licensee titles, because I've say it happening with Scripps. Back prior to February 2010, almost all of them were "Scripps Howard Broadcasting Company", and after that, it was "Scripps Media, LLC". Also Univision changed the licensee names of the UniMas affils too from Telefutura to UniMas (i.e. WXFT is "UniMas Chicago LLC"). No applications were made to change the names of those licensee titles. But I was shocked that they'd decided to not follow their "WXXX Licensee, LLC" standard and went with something different. They even rename the KIDK/KXPI licensee titles too, despite being sold to another entity, and that could probably get the greenlight soon. They'll probably do this should the Allbritton ones get the greenlight and finalized. So right now, Sinclair still waits for the Anderson proper Cunningham transfers (unwinding that trust), WWCP, the Barrington & Allbritton applications. October is fast approaching. Could the Barrington stations finally get the greenlight on that month. I wouldn't hold my breath. Link to comment https://localnewstalk.net/topic/12568-sinclairagain/page/32/#findComment-90138 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.