GoldenShine9 1509 Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 Bumping this topic back up...it looks as though the Sinclair deal is *probably* dead based on the latest paperwork (how can they get it passed in 59 days with such a destructive proposal?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvjay 6 Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 What paperwork? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenShine9 1509 Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 What paperwork? It's in the other thread with general Sinclair discussion. But if the deal dies, then Sinclair has nothing to do with it anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CircleSeven 1945 Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 It's in the other thread with general Sinclair discussion. But if the deal dies, then Sinclair has nothing to do with it anymore. Yep. And should it be no action, it will be back to the drawing board for Allbritton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrtraveler01 737 Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 Yep. And should it be no action, it will be back to the drawing board for Allbritton. You mean threatening to shut down stations isn't a reasonable bargaining tactic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CircleSeven 1945 Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 You mean threatening to shut down stations isn't a reasonable bargaining tactic? No, what I meant was, should the Sinclair deal falls through, Allbritton will go back and look for new buyers. And the shut down the stations in nothing but the Devils talk and not Allbritton's. But Robert was dumb enough to make a deal with the devil, and fast forward nearly 44 weeks later.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrtraveler01 737 Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 No, what I meant was, should the Sinclair deal falls through, Allbritton will go back and look for new buyers. And the shut down the stations in nothing but the Devils talk and not Allbritton's. But Robert was dumb enough to make a deal with the devil, and fast forward nearly 44 weeks later.... I think this latest tactic is going to sink Sinclair's chances of getting this deal done before July 28. Gotta wonder what Allbritton is thinking about all of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenShine9 1509 Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 I think this latest tactic is going to sink Sinclair's chances of getting this deal done before July 28. Gotta wonder what Allbritton is thinking about all of this. They are probably wondering why they put themselves in such a trap to begin with? Just because of either money or tax issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrtraveler01 737 Posted May 29, 2014 Share Posted May 29, 2014 They are probably wondering why they put themselves in such a trap to begin with? Just because of either money or tax issues. That was a stupid stipulation to have in today's market. Almost every prospective buyer has a conflict in one of the Allbritton markets. The only one that comes to mind is Meredith but I don't think they're interested in having stations in markets as small as Charleston and Birmingham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rusty Muck 4225 Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 Isn't it possible that ABC is in on this proposal, and S!nclair waited until it got the network's blessing beforehand? I find it inconceivable that a major broadcasting firm like S!nclair could be this stupid, this reckless, unless there is another shoe that is set to drop. After all, S!nclair is still retaining the intellectual properties for all affected stations, and moving them onto subchannels of their existing stations. (Something that I said would happen when the FCC started grandstanding on JSAs, mind you.) It's just a simple way of removing the problem and opening up spectrum for the FCC to auction off for bags and bags of cash. Unless ABC responds swiftly with a massive s**tstorm and threatens action against S!nclair, this proposal, while still scary to see, is still a valid one and could go through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrtraveler01 737 Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 Isn't it possible that ABC is in on this proposal, and S!nclair waited until it got the network's blessing beforehand? I find it inconceivable that a major broadcasting firm like S!nclair could be this stupid, this reckless, Seeing how they've handled the WNWO/Buckeye debacle has convinced me otherwise. But what you've said is common sense and it is possible that ABC is begrudgingly ok with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrtraveler01 737 Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 Here is the PDF of the new proposal letter Sinclair sent to the FCC. http://broadcastingcable.com/sites/default/files/public/Sinclair-Allbritton-deal.pdf This bit caught my eye: "In order to permit the public to continue to recieve both ABC and MyNetwork programming, as well as the syndicated news programming carried on WAMB and on WCFT/WJSU throughout the Birmingham market, Sinclair would, subject to obtaining the necessary consents from the networks and the other programmers, use the multicast capability of WABM(TV) to broadcast both the programming carried on WABM as well as the programming currently carried on WCFT/WJSU. Sinclair uses the same verbiage for WCIV and the Charleston market. But based on this letter, Sinclair didn't give ABC any prior warning about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewsMaster 226 Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 I have a HUGE problem with this. Because now, the Bozos are giving something that Wheeler wants. I am holding my breath more than ever now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jero23 105 Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 That was a stupid stipulation to have in today's market. Almost every prospective buyer has a conflict in one of the Allbritton markets. The only one that comes to mind is Meredith but I don't think they're interested in having stations in markets as small as Charleston and Birmingham. Birmingham isn't a small market... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewsMaster 226 Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Birmingham isn't a small market... Plus, Meredith is probably going after WIAT or WVTM and not 33/40, if anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
news89 467 Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samantha 2878 Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 WBMA+ to Gray/Quincy Birmingham is too large for me to see either of them there. I also do not see Quincy expanding into the South. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heller475 0 Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 ABC will not consent to being on Channel 68, unless PSIP. 33/40 will have to rebrand, obviously if their programming is carried on a virtual channel, as the numbers will have no meaning. As much as I've come accustomed to their numbers on air, they need a rebrand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobvick 9 Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 ABC will not consent to being on Channel 68, unless PSIP. 33/40 will have to rebrand, obviously if their programming is carried on a virtual channel, as the numbers will have no meaning. As much as I've come accustomed to their numbers on air, they need a rebrand. I still cannot figure out if they want to elimiate 33 and 40, why they plan to use 68 for ABC rather than 21/17. ABC 21 would be much more palatable than ABC 68. They could move CW to 68 and shoehorn My on the 68.2 subchannel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundershock MN 169 Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 ABC will not consent to being on Channel 68, unless PSIP. 33/40 will have to rebrand, obviously if their programming is carried on a virtual channel, as the numbers will have no meaning. As much as I've come accustomed to their numbers on air, they need a rebrand. ABC has probably already been consulted. It's likely they have agreed to the plan or, don't really care either way. And, where would ABC go anyway? They really don't have much for options. I still cannot figure out if they want to elimiate 33 and 40, why they plan to use 68 for ABC rather than 21/17. ABC 21 would be much more palatable than ABC 68. They could move CW to 68 and shoehorn My on the 68.2 subchannel. They could do that, I suppose. However, The fact that WDDB's license is held by Cunningham likey muddies the waters. Extra agreements/contracts to wade through. Plus, they would likey need to get The CW to play along, too. There is also the "viewer confusion" factor to take into account. Why move all the deck chairs when you only need to move a couple? The current plan provides the path of least resistance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rusty Muck 4225 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 ABC will not consent to being on Channel 68, unless PSIP. 33/40 will have to rebrand, obviously if their programming is carried on a virtual channel, as the numbers will have no meaning. As much as I've come accustomed to their numbers on air, they need a rebrand. What's ABC's option if they don't agree to this? Wind up on a subchannel of WBRC, WVTM or WIAT? Because that's what would happen. Hell, that's why ABC wound up on WBMA+ in the first place. And channel numbers, even in PSIP, don't matter that much to station branding. It wouldn't be inconceivable to see the future WABM 68.2 still use the "ABC 33/40" brand even after it's obsolesce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heller475 0 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 What's ABC's option if they don't agree to this? Wind up on a subchannel of WBRC, WVTM or WIAT? Because that's what would happen. Hell, that's why ABC wound up on WBMA+ in the first place. And channel numbers, even in PSIP, don't matter that much to station branding. It wouldn't be inconceivable to see the future WABM 68.2 still use the "ABC 33/40" brand even after it's obsolesce. Channel numbers are important in this market I think.i.e. The current fail of WIAT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobvick 9 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Living in the Birmingham market all of my life, I can tell you, channel numbers are important, but not detrimental. ABC 33/40 started 18 years ago as basically a "new" station, and in a short amount of time became quite competitive with WBRC and WVTM with their news product. I think a lot of it had to do with the talent that they attracted over from the other more established stations in the market. James Spann being a major coup from WBRC. If he stays, and they keep the news department largely unchanged, I can see them making a go if it no matter what they brand it. However, I can say that ABC 68 would have a stigma attached to it, because that station has ALWAYS since its inception in 1986 been the lowest rated in the market. WIAT has largely rallied in spite of their place on the dial at 42. That goes way back, the station was NEVER competitive for the first 35 years it was on the air. In the 70's and early 80's its news was literally a joke. They didn't even run a newscast from about 1982 through about 1987 or 1988. If Sinclair gets what it wants, and wants to invest the time and money, it can remain competitive. I do however, believe, that the going would be easier if they would use WTTO for the ABC affiliate rather than WABM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heller475 0 Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 Living in the Birmingham market all of my life' date=' I can tell you, channel numbers are important, but not detrimental. ABC 33/40 started 18 years ago as basically a "new" station, and in a short amount of time became quite competitive with WBRC and WVTM with their news product. I think a lot of it had to do with the talent that they attracted over from the other more established stations in the market.[/size'] James Spann being a major coup from WBRC. If he stays, and they keep the news department largely unchanged, I can see them making a go if it no matter what they brand it. However, I can say that ABC 68 would have a stigma attached to it, because that station has ALWAYS since its inception in 1986 been the lowest rated in the market. [/size] WIAT has largely rallied in spite of their place on the dial at 42. That goes way back, the station was NEVER competitive for the first 35 years it was on the air. In the 70's and early 80's its news was literally a joke.[/size] They didn't even run a newscast from about 1982 through about 1987 or 1988. [/size] If Sinclair gets what it wants, and wants to invest the time and money, it can remain competitive.[/size] I do however, believe, that the going would be easier if they would use WTTO for the ABC affiliate rather than WABM.[/size] Yep. ABC21 would be more tasteful for sure than 68... Even though it would remind us of those "Newscentral" and WB21 News at Nine days. Also, don't think anybody has posted this article from The Birmingham News... It regurgitates the same info we've discussing here but at least joe blow knows what's going on. http://www.al.com/business/index.ssf/2014/05/abc_68_birminghams_network_aff.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrtraveler01 737 Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 Yep. ABC21 would be more tasteful for sure than 68... Even though it would remind us of those "Newscentral" and WB21 News at Nine days. Also, don't think anybody has posted this article from The Birmingham News... It regurgitates the same info we've discussing here but at least joe blow knows what's going on. http://www.al.com/business/index.ssf/2014/05/abc_68_birminghams_network_aff.html Still surprised the Post and Courier (the newspaper in Charleston, SC) hasn't said anything about Sinclair's plans for WCIV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.