Sinclair...Again

[Thundershock MN 169]

 

On the technical side, WABM and WCFT/WJSU are both 720p stations, since MyNetworkTV and ABC both broadcast their programming in 720p. 720p is much better to use for a dual-HD stream, and would make switching from one frequency to another relatively easy.

 

Same goes for WMMP and WCIV.

 

Technically WTTO is a 720p station, but the CW is natively 1080i. They only have ZUUS Country as a subchannel, since WABM's is silent since Sinclair dropped TheCoolTV.

 

WMMP may have issues with a dual-stream because they already have ZUUS on 36.3 and WCIV has MeTV on 4.2. MyNetworkTV programming could be relegated to SD on 36.2 giving 36.1 the slot for ABC and WCIV's programming. WTAT may have to take on a subchannel if one is dropped.

 

Branding-wise, however could pose a problem since WCFT/WJSU has been branded as ABC 33/40 for their entire existence as a shared entity. This route would necessitate a branding change since the PSIP channels would be lost if the 33/40 channels go away. I could see "ABC Alabama" or "ABC Birmingham"....heck even "SPANN TV" might even work! "ABC 68" would be a disaster, seeing the stigma of what's happened with WBMG/WIAT over the years.

 

WCIV's branding could live on since it's channel 4, a low channel number that carries over well to cable TV prime real-estate.

 

WTAT is sub-channel free. ZUUS & MeTV could easily land there or, vice-versa. WTAT/Fox with MNT on ".2" and WMMP/ABC with MeTV on ".2" and ZUUS on ".3". Either way they have room.

[Mrtraveler01 738]

Another wrinkle in this deal could be if Allbritton insists that the licenses of WCFT/WJSU and WCIV exist as going concerns....there goes Sinclair's latest attempt at this deal...

That and how ABC would react to their affiliates changing frequencies without their approval. ABC would get a big signal down grade if it moves from WCIV to WMMP.

[Thundershock MN 169]

 

Another wrinkle in this deal could be if Allbritton insists that the licenses of WCFT/WJSU and WCIV exist as going concerns....there goes Sinclair's latest attempt at this deal...

 

Not if they revise the asset purchase agreement. Sinclair offers to pay the exact same price to Allbritton for everything minus the licenses being "surrendered." In turn Allbritton agrees not to resell the "surrendered" licenses and immediately surrender them to the FCC upon closing. Sinclair to FCC: "BOOM...done...checkmate!"

 

 

As for the demise of the deal, the wording in all of Sinclair's press releases suggest that July 27 is a hard date for the deal in their minds and they are rushing. They must have at least indication that Allbritton is ready to walk away and they want a quick deal to keep the contract right now in force.

 

Agreed, something like ABC Alabama would need to be the branding (and I see James Spann being released or leaving). That scenario looks like it will raise the value of WVTM or WIAT in the forced pending sale (obviously not to Sinclair) since it would seriously weaken the ABC station in the market no matter what with much poorer coverage. This has implications in the LIN-Media General sale as well:

 

1) If Sinclair gets away with this, the ABC station will be very weak and lose a lot of ratings, just on coverage alone. The divested LIN-MG station (and the kept station) would have an opportunity to move up big time. Most seem to believe Meredith is the frontrunner in the market for the divested station (I'd say Gannett is up there too, as long as there are no newspaper conflicts), and they would have an opportunity right away.

 

2) If the Sinclair-Allbritton deal dies, there are suddenly two stations on the market in central Alabama. That creates a lot of decisions and two openings. Whoever takes Allbritton then is suddenly out of the running for the divested MG-LIN station. Since Sinclair could not bid for either of them, it leaves very few in the race - Hearst, Scripps, Gannett, Meredith and Tribune are the only ones I can think of able to both bid and enter a top-50 market. And TWO of them would enter.

 

They view it as a hard date because they are in the drivers seat until that date. After July 29th they are no longer in control as they can be removed from "the drivers seat" by simple notification that the other party is out.

 

Unfortunately, given the FCC still hasn't acted on the UHF discount NPRM leaving it in perpetual limbo. Gannett & Tribune both currently close to (or, over) the cap without the discount. The NPRM only proposed to grandfather groups over the cap as of the issuing of the NPRM. They likely don't want to risk having to sell stations down the road to get under the cap because they might not be grandfathered anymore if the NPRM goes through as proposed. So, Gannett & Tribune are likely out.

[Rusty Muck 4374]

That and how ABC would react to their affiliates changing frequencies without their approval. ABC would get a big signal down grade if it moves from WCIV to WMMP.

We don't know if this proposal is a shocking swerve at ABC.

 

It is very possible that S!nclair waited until now to make this proposal because they asked for ABC's consent first, and just received ABC's blessing.

 

But if it isn't, and ABC raises holy hell over the proposal, then the lawyers and brain trust at S!nclair could have suffered the mother of all brain cramps and engaged in something stupefyingly reckless and desperate.

 

Only I don't think that's the case. The more I think of it, ABC probably is in on this proposal.

[bobvick 9]

 

Branding-wise, however could pose a problem since WCFT/WJSU has been branded as ABC 33/40 for their entire existence as a shared entity. This route would necessitate a branding change since the PSIP channels would be lost if the 33/40 channels go away. I could see "ABC Alabama" or "ABC Birmingham"....heck even "SPANN TV" might even work! "ABC 68" would be a disaster, seeing the stigma of what's happened with WBMG/WIAT over the years.

I suppose they could go with their actual RF channel number of 36, I know that some stations have did that (KAIL Fresno for instance) and become ABC 36. Being on 68 is not going to help them any even with a branding such as ABC Alabama or ABC Birmingham, just look at WWJ 62 in Detroit. If they were going to do a any of this WTTO 21 would be the obvious choice. I still think it would serve Sinclair right (if the FCC lets them by with this) if ABC ended up on WUOA 23.

[bobvick 9]

If Sinclair gets away with this, the ABC station will be very weak and lose a lot of ratings, just on coverage alone.

I don't know off the tip of my head, but I think that the Birmingham market is pretty high in cable/DBS penetration to the point that the coverage will probably not make THAT much of a difference. The problem will lie in the branding that is going to be lost and the fact that ABC will end up on channel 68, which is a joke.

[Breaking News 829]

ABC affiliation has done well in Birmingham with WBRC 6 & with 33/40, and not keeping ABC on WBMA and moving it up to another station signal would be a colossal mistake. It been almost 20 years after this switch, and I'm sure 33/40 rakes in some serious dough. Sinclair just give it up and focus on your other 400 stations you owned.

[Rusty Muck 4374]

I don't know off the tip of my head, but I think that the Birmingham market is pretty high in cable/DBS penetration to the point that the coverage will probably not make THAT much of a difference. The problem will lie in the branding that is going to be lost and the fact that ABC will end up on channel 68, which is a joke.

Who says branding will matter? Because the market is highly cabled, there's nothing to stop S!nclair from keeping the "ABC 33/40" branding if they want to (it would be silly and impractical because of PSIP, but not impossible). Or it can be branded with the cable channel position.

 

TV channel positions aren't as important as we think they are. (Think about the time wasted arguing about KRON's channel 4 PSIP mapping and how many people somehow think that matters.)

[bobvick 9]

Who says branding will matter? Because the market is highly cabled, there's nothing to stop S!nclair from keeping the "ABC 33/40" branding if they want to (it would be silly and impractical because of PSIP, but not impossible). Or it can be branded with the cable channel position.

TV channel positions aren't as important as we think they are. (Think about the time wasted arguing about KRON's channel 4 PSIP mapping and how many people somehow think that matters.)

I understand what your saying, and with cable that would work, however, on DBS (DirecTV, Dish) they would map that channel to 68, and if it were still branded 33/40, that would lead to mass confusion.

[Thundershock MN 169]

 

That and how ABC would react to their affiliates changing frequencies without their approval. ABC would get a big signal down grade if it moves from WCIV to WMMP.

 

The signals in Charleston are negligible. If you want to get picky looking at the contour maps WMMP's signal is slightly better than WCIV's signal. I used Trip's maps from rabbitears.info as they are the same as the FCC maps. But, they are easier to read and show the slight differences between the two in the outer reaches better.

 

 

We don't know if this proposal is a shocking swerve at ABC.

 

It is very possible that S!nclair waited until now to make this proposal because they asked for ABC's consent first, and just received ABC's blessing.

 

But if it isn't, and ABC raises holy hell over the proposal, then the lawyers and brain trust at S!nclair could have suffered the mother of all brain cramps and engaged in something stupefyingly reckless and desperate.

 

Only I don't think that's the case. The more I think of it, ABC probably is in on this proposal.

 

I agree. ABC has likely been consulted. They are likely fine with it or don't care either way. They would likely get an "upgrade" in Birmingham moving from an LP and two rimshots. And, Charleston is a really "trade-off" save for the higher virtual channel number.

 

 

I suppose they could go with their actual RF channel number of 36, I know that some stations have did that (KAIL Fresno for instance) and become ABC 36. Being on 68 is not going to help them any even with a branding such as ABC Alabama or ABC Birmingham, just look at WWJ 62 in Detroit. If they were going to do a any of this WTTO 21 would be the obvious choice. I still think it would serve Sinclair right (if the FCC lets them by with this) if ABC ended up on WUOA 23.

 

Unlikely, there are specific rules governing PISP and Virtual Channel Numbers. A Virtual Channel Waiver can be requested from the FCC but, they are rarely granted.

[tyrannical bastard 3951]

So why is WHTM being left out of such an arrangement? They're the ones with an inferior signal that could easily be surrendered to the FCC. WLYH could easily pickup ABC and WHTM's non-license assets and send the CW packing to 15.2 or 21.2.

 

And if WHTM is "sold off", wouldn't this defeat the whole purpose of Allbritton selling off ALL of their stations to Sinclair in one transaction?

[Rusty Muck 4374]

I suppose they could go with their actual RF channel number of 36, I know that some stations have did that (KAIL Fresno for instance) and become ABC 36. Being on 68 is not going to help them any even with a branding such as ABC Alabama or ABC Birmingham, just look at WWJ 62 in Detroit. If they were going to do a any of this WTTO 21 would be the obvious choice. I still think it would serve Sinclair right (if the FCC lets them by with this) if ABC ended up on WUOA 23.

WWJ/62 is an extreme case where a nonexistent UHF with a poor signal and no identity had to become the CBS affiliate in a major market. CBS had nothing to build from, and pretty much gave up right out of the gate.

 

This proposal is asking to move the intellectual property of ABC 33/40 onto a signal that, even with a high PSIP, is still full-market and in a highly-cabled market. Few will really notice any difference besides branding concerns, and quite frankly, a rebrand to their cable position is not that out of the question. Look at KSWB/69 in San Diego, otherwise known as "Fox 5".

[elfuego35 90]

 

So why is WHTM being left out of such an arrangement? They're the ones with an inferior signal that could easily be surrendered to the FCC. WLYH could easily pickup ABC and WHTM's non-license assets and send the CW packing to 15.2 or 21.2.

 

And if WHTM is "sold off", wouldn't this defeat the whole purpose of Allbritton selling off ALL of their stations to Sinclair in one transaction?

 

Simple, WLYH is owned by Nexstar, and not Deerfield or Cunningham. Being independent of Sinclair, they are the ones who need to negotiate with ABC, and not Sinclair.

 

It wouldn't defeat the purpose of selling the stations in one pop because Sinclair, and not Allbritton would absorb the tax liabilities of an individual WHTM sale.

[rkolsen 1684]

On the technical side, WABM and WCFT/WJSU are both 720p stations, since MyNetworkTV and ABC both broadcast their programming in 720p. 720p is much better to use for a dual-HD stream, and would make switching from one frequency to another relatively easy.

 

Same goes for WMMP and WCIV.

 

Technically WTTO is a 720p station, but the CW is natively 1080i. They only have ZUUS Country as a subchannel, since WABM's is silent since Sinclair dropped TheCoolTV.

 

WMMP may have issues with a dual-stream because they already have ZUUS on 36.3 and WCIV has MeTV on 4.2. MyNetworkTV programming could be relegated to SD on 36.2 giving 36.1 the slot for ABC and WCIV's programming. WTAT may have to take on a subchannel if one is dropped.

 

Branding-wise, however could pose a problem since WCFT/WJSU has been branded as ABC 33/40 for their entire existence as a shared entity. This route would necessitate a branding change since the PSIP channels would be lost if the 33/40 channels go away. I could see "ABC Alabama" or "ABC Birmingham"....heck even "SPANN TV" might even work! "ABC 68" would be a disaster, seeing the stigma of what's happened with WBMG/WIAT over the years.

 

WCIV's branding could live on since it's channel 4, a low channel number that carries over well to cable TV prime real-estate.

This is a bit off topic and I thought of it because you brought up the prospects of carrying a dual stream 720p I thought I'd add my 2¢:

 

Sinclair's triopoly here in Baltimore (WBFF, WNUV and WUTB) all currently broadcast their main channel programming at 720p despite the fact that The CW and MyNetwork provide programming at 1080i. 720p seems to be the defacto standard resolution for Sinclair similar to the way several Hearst ABC affiliates were initially 1080i (KETV &KMBC still do 1080i, WTAE & WCVB used to until January). Then again I think when they updated WBFFs master control I think they only were planning to do 720p for two stations let alone three HD feeds and I think six SD feeds.

 

Since 720p requires a lot less bandwidth than 1080i they could do dual HD 720p streams for their locations where they have duopolies. This makes me think that Sinclair would be willing to sell off their "sidecar" stations to make money on the spectrum auction with out the public really noticing any difference through the PSIP channel mapping. And since they never really have been one to care about HD picture quality (at least here anyway either through Comcast or OTA) combining the channels wouldn't be that noticeable. Another option that David Smith talked about briefly in a TVNewsChdck interview was using their spectrum for other services or separate feeds based on a users demographics for targeted advertising.

 

Again I know this is a separate conversation than the current one that's going but the prospects of dual stream HD suddenly made me think of what they could do with all the extra spectrum they have lying around. Despite all the grief we give them for their mergers and acquisition and news operations they do a lot of research on the technology side. I mean they saved Dielectric - it may have been for selfish purposes but they are the manufacturers of most tv antennas in the country and a lot of stations wouldn't have any support. Plus they have done/are doing prospective research on the next generation broadcast standard that's already in use in Europe and Japan, DVB-T2 which doubles the bandwidth to 40Mbps from the current 19.3.

[GoldenShine9 1513]

Free Press has spoken:

 

Lauren Wilson, policy counsel for consolidation critic Free Press, saw the Sinclair move as a victory.

 

"We commend the FCC for closing loopholes in its ownership policies, clearly signaling to Sinclair that the agency would no longer tolerate its dodging of the rules. Apparently, the message was received, and that's good news.

 

"In a statement on Thursday, FCC Commissioners Pai and O'Reilly tried to paint these events as a blow to ownership diversity. However, the Sinclair shell company -- Armstrong Williams' Howard Stirk Holdings -- was slated to become a licensee in name only, and not a truly independent owner. Sinclair's overarching goal as always was to prevent competition and increase its stranglehold on media markets across the country, not to find actual buyers for and users of these public airwaves in the affected communities.

 

"HSH itself was never a viable buyer, but a shell corporation through which Sinclair could expand its influence over local broadcasting. Sinclair's change of heart signals nothing more than its eagerness to close its deal with Allbritton. It also shows that Sinclair can make the same programming available by using digital multicasting technology to air more than one network on its existing stations without the shell company ruse."

No mention of the fact that they would be closing stations without giving others a chance to acquire them though...

http://broadcastingcable.com/news/washington/sinclair-proposes-surrendering-three-licenses-get-allbritton-deal-done/131458

[mre29 1522]

So, Sinclair couldn't simply use the broadcast facilities of their MNTV station and the Allbritton stations' licenses? Is it technically impossible for them to borrow a page from WFOR and WTVJ?

[ColumbusNewsFan 217]

With this latest move from sinclair, I know we are trying to put logic and reason to stupid and as much as we can try... stupid defy logic and reason because there is no logic or reason there in the first place.

 

I would be clowning the hell of this... if Sinclair wasn't so damn serious with this plan.

 

At this point, they are saying with this move... We got nothing and we are desperate. This just seem like a move from Fantasy TV and it would get them laughed off as fast as well.

 

I'm sorry I'm even dignifying this joke by Sinclair. Excuse me... :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:

[GoldenShine9 1513]

I can't see how this can pass the FCC's muster AND get consummated in 58 days with such dramatic changes that are worth docketing. I think Sinclair is running scared right now. They feel they will lose "their" WJLA which they think they are "entitled" to.

[Mrtraveler01 738]

 

With this latest move from sinclair, I know we are trying to put logic and reason to stupid and as much as we can try... stupid defy logic and reason because there is no logic or reason there in the first place.

 

I would be clowning the hell of this... if Sinclair wasn't so damn serious with this plan.

 

At this point, they are saying with this move... We got nothing and we are desperate. This just seem like a move from Fantasy TV and it would get them laughed off as fast as well.

 

I'm sorry I'm even dignifying this joke by Sinclair. Excuse me... :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:

 

This proposal makes as much sense as one of James Cieloha's posts.

 

I still can't grasp the logic that because they couldn't find a buyer for WMMP and WBMA, they have to shut down WCIV and WCFT/WJSU. If anyone can explain the logic behind that statement, feel free, because I'm stumped.

[Mrtraveler01 738]

 

I can't see how this can pass the FCC's muster AND get consummated in 58 days with such dramatic changes that are worth docketing. I think Sinclair is running scared right now. They feel they will lose "their" WJLA which they think they are "entitled" to.

 

All they have to do is sell off WHTM, WCIV, and WCFT/WJSU and the deal probably would've been consummated already. The fact that Sinclair is being so stubborn with this makes me think that they deserve to have this deal fall apart.

[sctvhound 27]

Talking about Channel 4, the station generally has been #3 in the market, but it has been making strides in the past few years. WMMP though has never had a newscast, and it doesn't have a large amount of viewers. Birmingham though has James Spann, the best weather coverage in the market, and good ratings.

[Samantha 2895]

 

All they have to do is sell off WHTM, WCIV, and WCFT/WJSU and the deal probably would've been consummated already. The fact that Sinclair is being so stubborn with this makes me think that they deserve to have this deal fall apart.

 

Sinclair got greedy. Had they acted rationally and sold off the conflicting stations, they'd have their DC prize.

 

From the WBMA copy of the ABC affiliation agreement, this may help answer some questions on ABC's role in this:

 

———

 

Section H. Assignment.

 

1. This Affiliation Agreement with ABC cannot be assigned or transferred without timely written notice to ABC as provided below and (except for pro-forma assignments or transfers of control that require “short form” FCC approval on FCC Form 316) without the consent of ABC, which consent may be withheld only in the following three circumstances: (a) if the assignee or transferee controls or is controlled by or is under common control with an entity that distributes ten (10) or more hours of Primetime television Programming per week to at least twenty-five (25) affiliated television licensees in ten (10) or more states; (b_) if the assignee or transferee is not reasonably qualified to own and operate the Station; or (c_) on the basis of reasonable business concerns that arise from prior commercial dealings of ABC with the assignee or transferee; provided, however, ABC shall not unreasonably withhold its consent to an assignment or transfer in the case of (b_) or (c_).

 

You shall provide written notice by mail or facsimile to ABC within thirty (30) days following the earlier of the execution of a binding agreement to assign or transfer control of the Station's broadcast license, or the filing of an application to the FCC to approve a transfer of control, which notice shall include the name of the proposed assignee or transferee. ABC shall have the unilateral right to terminate the Affiliation Agreement if you fail to provide notice of an assignment, transfer or application as provided in this Section.

 

2. Unless we exercise our right to withhold our consent to an assignment or transfer of your Affiliation Agreement as provided above, and notify you in writing thereof within thirty (30) days of the date on which you give us written notice of the proposed assignment or transfer, the Affiliation Agreement may be assigned as provided for in your written notice to us and shall be binding on any assignee or transferee of your Station's license, and you agree that you shall not consummate such assignment or transfer of control of your Station's license until you have procured and delivered to us, in form as may reasonably be requested by us, the acknowledgement of the proposed assignee or transferee that, upon consummation of the assignment or transfer of control of your Station's license, the assignee or transferee will assume and perform the Affiliation Agreement in its entirety without any limitation of any kind. Upon receipt of said acknowledgement, you shall be released from any liability or obligation that WBMA-LD Birmingham, AL thereafter accrues under the Affiliation Agreement.

 

3. ABC may assign this Agreement and all rights herein to any party acquiring all or any portion of our network television business or to any entity controlling us, controlled by us, or under common control with us.

 

———

 

Translation: Sinclair is already assuming the ABC affiliation agreement anyway under the original sale, so ABC was notified and Allbritton does not have to provide further notice to ABC. That said, the language does not cover the case I just described, though it should be noted the only other time that this sort of multicast slide happened—the 2012 closure of WKDH, Tupelo, MS, and conversion of ABC to a digital subchannel of WTVA (which operated WKDH)—happened to ABC.

 

There's also some slightly different language on newscast minimums in this agreement: the evening newscast can be "adjacent" to the ABC evening newscast and does not have to come before it. (For a potential KDNL news operation, that means that KDNL has the option to air a 5pm or 6pm evening news.)

[montydavis 7]

I just don't see this going through. Is Sinclair that desperate?! I live in the Charleston area. No one watches WMMP!

[sanewsguy 511]

I've waited awhile to review this. I'm going to be the lone person to defend them. It's not their fault. It's one person's fault only: Tom Wheeler. If he's out to destroy broadcast television he's certainly accomplishing his goal. Which wouldn't surprise me because he has ties to the cable industry.

 

To Tom Wheeler's fans, I've said it before, be careful what you wish for, because you'll be seeing more of this soon.

 

Surprised Nexstar hasn't done anything with ComCorp. They need to hire Sinclair's law firm to get them those stations quickly.

 

The proposal itself is stupid, yes, but Sinclair is using logic and legal loopholes. They have to to save their business.

 

If push comes to shove, I recommend Sinclair just buy the non-license assets of all stations from Allbritton only since the FCC is being greedy with this. Wait three years and then buy.

 

Oh BTW, almost everybody commenting against this proposal does not live in the Birmingham or Charleston DMAs therefore would not be affected by this proposal. Your life will still go on if Sinclair shuts down a station hundreds of miles from you. Just saying...

 

:rant:

[Rusty Muck 4374]

Free Press has spoken: No mention of the fact that they would be closing stations without giving others a chance to acquire them though...http://broadcastingcable.com/news/washington/sinclair-proposes-surrendering-three-licenses-get-allbritton-deal-done/131458

Good to see that they are for the consolidation of intellectual property and the surrendering of TV licenses. The Free Press is as disingenuous as the corrupt Tom Wheeler is, and Wheeler is up to his eyeballs in corruption.

 

Quite frankly, they just need to shut up regarding any future station deals if they consider this a 'victory.'