Sinclair...Again

[GoldenShine9 1509]

Could the Birmingham situation make the WVTM or WIAT divestment more attractive to buyers, knowing WBMA+ is losing significant coverage, and as a result, ratings? If the divested MG-LIN station's new owner (whoever it may be) decides to put significant investment, they could become a market force. Of course, that is pure speculation, since we don't know who will buy the station on the market.

[tyrannical bastard 3476]

The worst thing Sinclair could ever do is to let James Spann walk. He would easily be snatched up by ANY station in Birmingham or anywhere in Alabama, even WBRC, since FOX isn't quite the racy network it used to be, and using the reasons he posed when he left WBRC in 1996 are a moot point considering ABC's programming these days.

 

Plus, not to get political and all....but some of James Spann's thinking on certain issues (cough...cough....global warming) fit in with the ideology that the Heathens of Hunt Valley are purveying on a daily basis...

[Samantha 2878]

 

The worst thing Sinclair could ever do is to let James Spann walk. He would easily be snatched up by ANY station in Birmingham or anywhere in Alabama, even WBRC, since FOX isn't quite the racy network it used to be, and using the reasons he posed when he left WBRC in 1996 are a moot point considering ABC's programming these days.

 

Plus, not to get political and all....but some of James Spann's thinking on certain issues (cough...cough....global warming) fit in with the ideology that the Heathens of Hunt Valley are purveying on a daily basis...

 

So when Spann left it was because he thought Fox too racy?

 

Throwing out all political/editorial considerations, letting Spann walk would be shooting themselves in the foot in a market where weather forecasting is so important. Spann probably has a higher-than-usual name recognition outside of B'ham, even if he is no Mike Morgan or Gary England.

[NewsMaster 226]

 

WOW! I am so glad this will make end to end coverage of 1/3 of the State of Alabama by a TV Station that offers a VALUEABLE PUBLIC SERVICE easier for you to understand. Maybe if on April 27, 2011, if a few more people in Alabama were killed from F5 tornados and ABC 3340 were on "ABC 68" and it were harder for those with only OTA reception to receive, you could UNDERSTAND the Birmingham market better. I am very saddened that your friends or stock that you hold, or what ever you interest that you have in SBGI would suffer if their precious deal were to falter would not go through. If only the catastrophe happened after SBGI got to yank the licenses, perhaps more poor peasants could have been killed from lack of an early warning by those pesky out of "superior" location stations could have been silenced. Less on the dole for Dave, you and the rest of the shareholders at SBGI, I suppose, need all of that corporate welfare. Goodness me, would you have to skip your afternoon tea or mint julep. To summarize my leanthgy diatribe, I am certainly glad that Sinclair's little shuffle will make life easier for you to "understand" the little ole' Birminham Maaket for you! Of course, all of us folk down heear in Alabama are nothin but a buch of redneck hicks anyway, so we just deserve to die I guess!

 

And I thought I was going on a rant...

[TennTV1983 748]

 

WOW! I am so glad this will make end to end coverage of 1/3 of the State of Alabama by a TV Station that offers a VALUEABLE PUBLIC SERVICE easier for you to understand. Maybe if on April 27, 2011, if a few more people in Alabama were killed from F5 tornados and ABC 3340 were on "ABC 68" and it were harder for those with only OTA reception to receive, you could UNDERSTAND the Birmingham market better. I am very saddened that your friends or stock that you hold, or what ever you interest that you have in SBGI would suffer if their precious deal were to falter would not go through. If only the catastrophe happened after SBGI got to yank the licenses, perhaps more poor peasants could have been killed from lack of an early warning by those pesky out of "superior" location stations could have been silenced. Less on the dole for Dave, you and the rest of the shareholders at SBGI, I suppose, need all of that corporate welfare. Goodness me, would you have to skip your afternoon tea or mint julep. To summarize my leanthgy diatribe, I am certainly glad that Sinclair's little shuffle will make life easier for you to "understand" the little ole' Birminham Maaket for you! Of course, all of us folk down heear in Alabama are nothin but a buch of redneck hicks anyway, so we just deserve to die I guess!

 

Whoa! Slow your role, son, especially on that last point, which is outright offensive and stereotypical of all of the good people in that state.

[montydavis 7]

Question: Do you think that there is a possibility, if this deal goes through, that another group would apply for these licenses?

[TVIntheDesert 183]

I think I know the reason why Sinclair wants to keep its facilities instead of Allbritton's: Acrodyne transmitters. They probably still have a warehouse full of parts for the now-defunct manufacturer they used to own. No need to call Harris (or Gates, or whatever they call themselves today).

[Rusty Muck 4175]

Question: Do you think that there is a possibility, if this deal goes through, that another group would apply for these licenses?

Raymie already answered that question.

 

They'd be surrendered to the FCC and deleted. I don't think with the current freeze on all new station applications or with their signals that someone would want OR could even try to acquire WCFT (RF 33) or WJSU (RF 9).

[Thundershock MN 169]

Whoa. Lots of activity in the last 30+ hours. Hopefully, I don't get to wordy.

 

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.

WHTM is left out to provide a potential buyer in Harrisburg another option. The letter implies they may have had some "luke-warm interest" with regards to a buyer in Harrisburg. If that is the case I get the feeling the potential buyer(s) were turned off by the IP switch. So, any potential buyer(s) now have their choice to make an offer on either WHTM or WHP (+ the LMA w/ WLYH.) IMO, based on this I think they are close to finding a buyers and just need to put the right pieces in place to solidify an agreement with a buyer.

 

Sinclair would still be purchasing all the stations in one pop. Sinclair will then be the one to turn around and sell WHTM upon closing therby incurring the tax liabilities. Basically, the same thing Gannett did with KMOV.

 

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.'

I've said it before and I'll continue to say it. The Free Press is a bunch of idiots.

 

 

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.

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.

They couldn't find a buyer for WMMP and WBMA because who wants a stand-alone MNT affiliate. Let alone one in a mid/low ranked market. Contrary to popular belief there aren't a lot of folks lining up to get into TV station ownership. It would be next to impossible for an independent buyer to make a go of an MNT affiliate like this...it would be a virtual money pit. And, as pointed out in the JSA thread by myself and others the FCC took away a vehicle by which they could "outsource" some of their operations. Most of the big station groups have had their hands tied with the UHF discount NPRM still being in limbo. And, those left likely only want a station like this as part of a duopoly and not stand alone. How many options for buyers are left?

 

They are keeping the licenses they currently hold vs. picking up the Allbritton ones and dumping WMMP and WBMA because it greatly restricts any options the FCC might have to deny the deal. The FCC rules on licenses/facilities. If nothing is being transferred, licenses or facility wise, they have nothing to rule on...and therefore stop the deal from commencing. The FCC can't do squat about Sinclair acquiring the non-license assets that is out of their preveiw. Such a deal is a separate business transaction between two-parties. Go read the posts in this thread I made a couple days ago. I think I laid out what they are trying to do quite well. Although, they are nominally asking to have those 3 licenses transferred in order to close the sale promptly and provide continuity during a transition period.

 

 

I think I know the reason why Sinclair wants to keep its facilities instead of Allbritton's: Acrodyne transmitters. They probably still have a warehouse full of parts for the now-defunct manufacturer they used to own. No need to call Harris (or Gates, or whatever they call themselves today).

Read reply directly above. It's really related more to the fact they own the licenses and limiting (or, eliminating) any options for the FCC to deny the deal.

 

 

What are the odds that the FCC will approve this deal?

Likely at this point. Omitting the Harrisburg conflict (for which they likely have a buyer they need to get finalized) they have eliminated any conflicts. On what grounds would the FCC be able to deny this deal? They are for all intents and purposes handcuffed. And, if they don't approve it you can take it to the bank Sinclair will be at a courthouse in a little less than 2 months time.

 

Question: Do you think that there is a possibility, if this deal goes through, that another group would apply for these licenses?

Those licenses once surrendered are GONE. It is highly unlikely the FCC would put out for applications on new licenses to replace the ones surrendered given the current freeze and pending incentive auction.

[montydavis 7]

How about the call letters? It would be a shame to lose WCIV (Charleston 4).

[Mrtraveler01 737]

 

Whoa. Lots of activity in the last 30+ hours. Hopefully, I don't get to wordy.

 

WHTM is left out to provide a potential buyer in Harrisburg another option. The letter implies they may have had some "luke-warm interest" with regards to a buyer in Harrisburg. If that is the case I get the feeling the potential buyer(s) were turned off by the IP switch. So, any potential buyer(s) now have their choice to make an offer on either WHTM or WHP (+ the LMA w/ WLYH.) IMO, based on this I think they are close to finding a buyers and just need to put the right pieces in place to solidify an agreement with a buyer.

 

Sinclair would still be purchasing all the stations in one pop. Sinclair will then be the one to turn around and sell WHTM upon closing therby incurring the tax liabilities. Basically, the same thing Gannett did with KMOV.

 

I've said it before and I'll continue to say it. The Free Press is a bunch of idiots.

 

 

They couldn't find a buyer for WMMP and WBMA because who wants a stand-alone MNT affiliate. Let alone one in a mid/low ranked market. Contrary to popular belief there aren't a lot of folks lining up to get into TV station ownership. It would be next to impossible for an independent buyer to make a go of an MNT affiliate like this...it would be a virtual money pit. And, as pointed out in the JSA thread by myself and others the FCC took away a vehicle by which they could "outsource" some of their operations. Most of the big station groups have had their hands tied with the UHF discount NPRM still being in limbo. And, those left likely only want a station like this as part of a duopoly and not stand alone. How many options for buyers are left?

 

They are keeping the licenses they currently hold vs. picking up the Allbritton ones and dumping WMMP and WMMP because it greatly restricts any options the FCC might have to deny the deal. The FCC rules on licenses/facilities. If nothing is being transferred, licenses or facility wise, they have nothing to rule on...and therefore stop the deal from commencing. The FCC can't do squat about Sinclair acquiring the non-license assets that is out of their preveiw. Such a deal is a separate business transaction between two-parties. Go read the posts in this thread I made a couple days ago. I think I laid out what they are trying to do quite well. Although, they are nominally asking to have those 3 licenses transferred in order to close the sale promptly and provide continuity during a transition period.

 

 

Read reply directly above. It's really related more to the fact they own the licenses and limiting (or, eliminating) any options for the FCC to deny the deal.

 

 

Likely at this point. Omitting the Harrisburg conflict (for which they likely have a buyer they need to get finalized) they have eliminated any conflicts. On what grounds would the FCC be able to deny this deal? They are for all intents and purposes handcuffed. And, if they don't approve it you can take it to the bank Sinclair will be at a courthouse in a little less than 2 months time.

 

Those licenses once surrendered are GONE. It is highly unlikely the FCC would put out for applications on new licenses to replace the ones surrendered given the current freeze and pending incentive auction.

 

This whole thing makes me hate Sinclair even more.

 

The obvious solution would've been for them to sell off WCIV and WJSU/WCFT and still keep WJLA, WSET, KTUL, and KATV. But that isn't good enough for Sinclair and so they're exploiting more loopholes because they're so greedy.

 

I really do hope their BS catches up to them someday, but this probably isn't going to be it.

[Thundershock MN 169]

A few more comments...

 

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.

I've pointed this out several times over the past year. Although, I view it more as a potential "relief valve" or last resort option.

 

From way back on page 14 of this thread. Here's the first time I brought this up:

Let me preface this by saying i'm not a huge Sinclair fan by any means.

 

I'm not sure why everyone is cheering for the day Sinclair goes bankrupt. That would be potentially catastrophic. It's quite clear to me at least that to some extent they have their bases covered. Yes, they are amassing gobs of debt in order to finance their buying spree. But, the spectrum they currently own is currently valued at 35% above the company’s May 16 closing price of $26.55. It is similar (kinda apples/oranges) to the current Sears Holdings. The physical assets (ie: real estate) Sears Holdings owns are potentially worth more than the business as a whole. Plus, they have already stripped away the IP of their private labels (Kenmore, Craftsman & DieHard) into a separate shell. So, if they make some money on their retail operations, cool. But, if the **bleep** hits the fan they sell the real estate, pocket the cash and walk away, along with the crown jewels of Kenmore, Craftsman & DieHard to boot. Anyway, back to Sinclair a several things could happen here to pay down their debt. First, there are the usual "efficiencies of scale" that are gained in consolidation of operations. Second, they are successful in obtaining considerable increases in ad rates and retrans payments. Third, some of the licences can be offered up in the incentive auction. They could then "repack" the stations offered up on the frequencies of other stations they own. Basically allowing them to have their cake and eat it, too. Also, and the most likely in my mind is a combination of those two options could be used. Lastly, if the **bleep** hits the fan they could offer up all the stations in the incentive auction, pay down thier debt and still potentially walk away with a chuck of change. In turn we would end up with a boatload of stations just disappearing.

Unfortunately, the current marketplace is ripe for some consolidation. The low interest rates makes for obtaining money under favorable conditions. Also, same low interest rates make leaving any cash a company has in a bank unfavorable versus using that money to aquire new assets in order to grow. On top of that you have/had various private equity firms (Four Points, Newport, etc.) looking to cut their losses. The television station groups with strictly terrestrial stations and few other assets generate a good chunk of their cash from advertisers and retrans agreements with cable/sat providers. So, how do you extract higher retrans payments if don't have any any cable channels to leverage? What if you don't have other entities within your company to absorb the losses of another division? How are you going to grow as a company? So, What do you do: Get bigger. By bulking up you can start squeezing advertisers for more cash and leverage massive amounts of local sations at retrans time. It's become get big or go home time. Some groups that most would never think would sell (Fisher, Allbritton, Etc.) have all seen the writing on the wall.

 

It sucks. But, it's reality. I know it's en vogue and most of us here to dispise Sinclair in some form or another. But, instead of rooting for their demise we should be cheering & hoping for their success. Maybe, they will take a page from Nexstar's latest investment in their Memphis operation. Because, i'm afraid and confident that if Sinclair doesn't succeed a majority of these stations will cease to exist. Sinclair is their last hope.

And, that last paragraph is quite prophetic given the past days news.

 

Under current rules the PSIP mapping would only stay the same if they opted of the "Channel Sharing" option at auction meaning: two licenses, one transmitter. See KCLS/KJLA's recent test as an example.

 

 

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:

As Myron has pointed out you really aren't the only one to take a similar stance.

 

And, You don't even need to "defend" them. You simply need to set aside any bias and look at what's going on objectively. Once you do that you can see where the blame (if any) lies if you are so inclined to start assigning blame.

 

 

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.

Meh. Channel numbers have become somewhat irrelevant. Locally, KSTC brands their primary stream as " 45 Tv." OTA it's on 5.2, Cable it's on 12(SD)/238(HD) and DBS it's on 45. So, People can and will figure it out if they want to watch.

 

 

okay, I just thought about this. Essentially Sinclair is probably going to make a switch like this. Channel 36 will become the new ABC affiliate along with MyTv on channel 36.2. according to the article, viewers should not see any difference in what they are receiving right now. Sinclair would probably retire the WMMP call letters and replace channel 36 with the WCIV call letters and then remap that channel 4.1, 4.2 etc. this will in a fact seem as though nothing has happen other than that my network TV has moved to 4.2. Thoughts?

That's what's going to happen with this deal (they did want it to be "seamless"), though I do wonder if they can do the remapping they want (68.1 doesn't make for a good ABC affiliate, they would probably want 33, 40 or 58; similarly, 36 is very different from 4). It's almost like channel sharing, except on one license and with one owner.

Like I said, the channel number may change, but the "seamless" effort is to ensure that the public is not jolted by it. Yes, a full power frequency will be lost, but that frequency may come back through a different owner. The re-mapping and possible call letter retention (for Charleston, at least) will secure a healthy transition. I seriously doubt that Sinclair will start using ABC 68 News or ABC 36 News (LOL). But as you said, Sanewsguy, there is no reason to get worked up. After you think about it, either way Sinclair and Allbritton are ready to close this deal and they will do whatever is necessary to seal it.

No, I really think by "seamless" they meant no interruption of programming. In other words there won't be a period without ABC programming just on date x it will move and therefore be "seamless."

 

I feel like I'm beating this drum all the time around here. But, it's become a pet peeve of mine. There are rules surrounding Virtual Channel Numbers. The Code of Federal Regulations (47 CFR73.682) explicitly states: "digital broadcast television (DTV) signals shall comply with the standards for such transmissions set forth in...ATSC A/65C: “ATSC Program and System Information Protocol for Terrestrial Broadcast and Cable, Revision C With Amendment No. 1 dated May 9, 2006.” The ASTC standard is very clear....you don't get to make up your Virtual Channel Number. There are two very limited exceptions. First, the ATSC standard allows for commonly owned stations in the same market to be aligned under the "Major Channel Number" of one of the commonly owned stations...provided it doesn't create a PSIP conflict. For Example, Meredith aligns WSHM-LD's Virtual Channel under WFSB's "Major Channel Number" And, I have two duopolies in my market that align this way KTCA/KTCI and KSTP/KSTC aligning all their channels under 2 and 5 respectively. And, it's very likely the third duopoly in the market KMSP/WFTC will align this way come fall. They are dropping the "cross-mapped" SD feeds and moving the diginets to RF9. The other exception is the FCC allows Virtual Channel Waivers. These are rarely granted outside of solving a PSIP conflict.

 

So, Sinclair can't map to whatever channel number they want. And, Virtual Channel 4 is gone with the WCIV license. They could change the calls. But, the only way to map to VC 4 vs. VC 36 is to apply for a waiver that would likely be denied.

[tyrannical bastard 3476]

Here's another point to ponder.....

 

If Allbritton's station's go away in Birmingham, the market loses a voice, which brings the total number of full-powered voices in the Birmingham market to 8.

 

Which means, any further duopoly potential is eliminated, which could hamper the sale of WVTM or WIAT. Unless the University of Alabama cashes out on WUOA, the others are ION and TBN, which aren't too likely to sell.

 

Charleston is already under-voiced as it is, which necessitated Sinclair to LMA with Cunningham for WTAT. I'll believe it when I see Cunningham stand alone as a separate company....most likely when pigs fly.

[Samantha 2878]

 

Here's another point to ponder.....

 

If Allbritton's station's go away in Birmingham, the market loses a voice, which brings the total number of full-powered voices in the Birmingham market to 8.

 

Which means, any further duopoly potential is eliminated, which could hamper the sale of WVTM or WIAT. Unless the University of Alabama cashes out on WUOA, the others are ION and TBN, which aren't too likely to sell.

 

Charleston is already under-voiced as it is, which necessitated Sinclair to LMA with Cunningham for WTAT. I'll believe it when I see Cunningham stand alone as a separate company....most likely when pigs fly.

 

This explains why the duopoly potential was ignored. Nobody would be able to file an application for a new duopoly in Birmingham while the Sinclair/Allbritton deal remained in the system, correct?

[GoldenShine9 1509]

Here's another point to ponder.....

 

If Allbritton's station's go away in Birmingham, the market loses a voice, which brings the total number of full-powered voices in the Birmingham market to 8.

 

Which means, any further duopoly potential is eliminated, which could hamper the sale of WVTM or WIAT. Unless the University of Alabama cashes out on WUOA, the others are ION and TBN, which aren't too likely to sell.

 

Charleston is already under-voiced as it is, which necessitated Sinclair to LMA with Cunningham for WTAT. I'll believe it when I see Cunningham stand alone as a separate company....most likely when pigs fly.

That right there could be the situation that could kill the deal. The WTAT-WMMP LMA is not grandfathered? Also I am sure the FCC will be asking Sinclair for more details on how Cunningham can stand alone, which seems highly unlikely right now. Raycom (WCSC) and Media General (WCBD) are the ones that really need to watch, since they could file a complaint on a whim if they feel the promises with WTAT are being ignored.

 

WVTM or WIAT will have to go to someone not currently in the Birmingham market for sure.

[Samantha 2878]

 

That right there could be the situation that could kill the deal. The WTAT-WMMP LMA is not grandfathered? Also I am sure the FCC will be asking Sinclair for more details on how Cunningham can stand alone, which seems highly unlikely right now.

 

Sinclair had been operating WTAT since 1994, but it acquired WMMP in 1998.

[cg41386 131]

n/m

[Breaking News 802]

Sinclair business model is to keep it mean and lean, but buy up as many stations in that market to eliminate as many voices it can.

However they crack me up with doing these JSA or using the competition to produce their content. I know others do it, but for example they used KSDK to produce KDNL news.

 

I've never been a fan of Sinclair, because they've been such a poorly run company, poorly run stations, and however they have some stations they have done well for themselves by default. Now over the last two years they've flourished by getting stations in other markets that have been established by other owners. Of course Sinclair going to parlay those stations into a winning combination.

 

However someone said they use all these loopholes to get what they want, and dirty underhanded business practices have been around since the beginning of time. However my issue is this company want to gobble up all these stations. They will have over 200+ station in their company portfolio. There was a time where FCC said you can only own (1) in the market and no more than 12. However I'm not a fan of duopolies, but some stations do it better than others.

 

I personally hope Sinclair is DENIED everything with Allbritton, and hope the pie is split with Scripps, Hearst and others. Sinclair spending money on KOMO and other stations, but spend sometime on updating the company website, and stations website. Sell some stations, and change your business model not being so cookie cutter. There are times where I would like to support this company, but in my book the negative always outweighs positive.

 

I wish David Smith would get off his fat ass and look to see his company actually wouldn't be so bad, but all they see is the $$$, and I'm sure the Smith Family has the FCC in their back pocket, because I just hope common sense prevail w/ FCC and denied them this deal. This is beyond stupid, but again were talking about Sinclair.

[Samantha 2878]

I personally hope Sinclair is DENIED everything with Allbritton, and hope the pie is split with Scripps, Hearst and others. Sinclair spending money on KOMO and other stations, but spend sometime on updating the company website, and stations website. Sell some stations, and change your business model not being so cookie cutter. There are times where I would like to support this company, but in my book the negative always outweighs positive.

While I personally don't want to see it happen, I don't object to Sinclair entering the markets where it's never been - Little Rock, Tulsa, Roanoke and Washington. I also do not object to the most recent Harrisburg proposal. But I *do* object to Charleston and Birmingham.

[tyrannical bastard 3476]

Since this whole idea is uncharted waters and REDUCES competition and the quality of the signals, I could see the FCC making an exception to re-allocating the affected facilities to any interested qualifying broadcaster as part of this deal.

 

I wonder how far-fetched the idea of MyNetworkTV leaving WABM for WVUA/WUOA is. They're already a ThisTV affiliate, and it could be like WLOO in Jackson, MS, which was the MyNetworkTV station sold to Tougaloo College in order for the college to teach their students about the industry. Interestingly enough, the station there has a JSA with American Spirit Media-owned WDBD, which has an SSA with WLBT and Raycom.

Sinclair was one of the first major groups to affiliate with MyNetwork when it was announced....I wonder if it was a 10 year deal like most CW affiliates agreed to?

[Samantha 2878]

 

Since this whole idea is uncharted waters and REDUCES competition and the quality of the signals, I could see the FCC making an exception to re-allocating the affected facilities to any interested broadcaster as part of this deal.

 

WCFT and WJSU practically have to go together, since they each cover half of the market. Unlike in 1996, they could be rated in the Birmingham market (that was the reason for the acquisition of WBMA: WCFT and WJSU were in separate media markets until 1998!).

 

It's easy enough to see someone put separate programming on WCFT and WJSU and have each multicast the other, not unlike what Nexstar does in Fort Smith/Fayetteville with KFTA and KNWA.

[montydavis 7]

Well for what it's worth I still believe that they will keep their same branding: ABC News 4 and ABC 33/40. :awesome:

[NewsMaster 226]

 

Well for what it's worth I still believe that they will keep their same branding: ABC News 4 and ABC 33/40. :awesome:

 

Also keep in mind that WBMA will stay on the air. It's WCFT and WJSU that will be going away. So here's my proposal:

• WABM switches channel positions with WDBB, with WABM on channel 17 and WDBB on channel 68. WTTO stays on channel 21.
  
• The newscast name becomes ABC 17 News.
  

Sounds good to me.

[news89 467]

I agree if WBMA+ is broke up Birmingham will loose a big voice in that market. I can hear James Spann right now. and no more Newsone V1 or Roger Thompson.

WBMA+ to Gray/Quincy

WCIV/WSET to Gray

WHTM to Meredith

KTUL to Quincy

KATV to Hearst

WJLA/NC8 to Scripps or Hearst

 

Sinclair might as well give up. I believe they should have to divest a lot of stations.

The KOMO deal should have not been approved.

[Jess 1110]

Bob Vick might be ranting like a madman, but he has a point. The Birmingham market needs the ABC 33/40 setup.

 

The super outbreak of 2011 was a major disaster for the area. ABC 33/40 is generally understood to have had the best coverage, and looking at footage on YouTube, I completely agree.

 

 

In a state so prone to severe weather, you need something with as far of a reach as you can get. Relegating it to a point two is a horrible idea.