Could ABC Jump to a New Affiliate in Birmingham?

[DirtyHarry 721]

 

Sinclair would have to be pretty stupid if they did that. Because if they did shut down the news operation at ABC 33/40, that will just give ABC another excuse to terminate their contract and find an affiliate elsewhere.

 

ABC doesn't want to have another KDNL on their hands.

 

I don't think you guys have wrapped your brains around what's going on here, so let me illustrate.

 

In Columbus, WWCD was an alternative station on 101.1 FM, a Class A station with a 6,000 watt ERP and a tower southwest of Downtown. The owner sold it to The Ohio State University and now it is a Classical Music station. At roughly the same time, Southeastern Ohio Broadcasting moved WHIZ 102.5 FM from Zanesville to the greater Columbus area. (They had to downgrade from Class B and 50,000 watts to Class B1 and 25,000 watts.)

 

Once the WWCD signal sold, the station manager bought the remainder of the WWCD operation - The computers, the servers, the DJ's, the call letters, etc., basically buying a radio station without a signal. He then leased the 102.5 signal from the WHIZ people (who still own it), giving them a signal and WWCD is doing better than ever in the ratings, especially with their new stronger signal. WWCD branded itself as CD101, then CD101 @ 102.5, and finally evolved to CD102.5. Point being, WWCD isn't really required to have a signal to be a "radio station". They can just sit in their building and spin records all day and do everything they do as a radio station but broadcast it over a loudspeaker if they want. (Of course, this is not a sustainable business model, but there is nothing stopping them from doing this if they wanted to.)

 

This is analogous to what is going on here. Sinclair can just hang a new sign up on the ABC 33/40 building that says ABC 68, and they can point the studio-transmitter link to the Channel 68 tower. Done deal. (I know, it's all fiber these days.) These may not be the actual steps Sinclair takes, but I used this example to illustrate because essentially the same thing is going on here regardless of what building the ABC 33/40 operations end up being at.

 

The only reason ABC 33/40 has value is because they have an ABC affiliation and a news operation. That translates to higher ratings and more revenues. Sinclair isn't going to "feces" can that. They are going to keep everything ABC 33/40 has, they are just going change the transmitter and the branding.

[Rusty Muck 4309]

I don't think you guys have wrapped your brains around what's going on here, so let me illustrate.

 

In Columbus, WWCD was an alternative station on 101.1 FM, a Class A station with a 6,000 watt ERP and a tower southwest of Downtown. The owner sold it to The Ohio State University and now it is a Classical Music station. At roughty the same time, Southeastern Ohio Broadcasting moved WHIZ 102.5 FM from Zanesville to the greater Columbus area. (They had to downgrade from Class B and 50,000 watts to Class B1 and 25,000 watts.)

 

Once the WWCD signal sold, the station manager bought the remainder of the WWCD operation - The computers, the servers, the DJ's, the call letters, etc., basically buying a radio station without a signal. He then leased the 102.5 signal from the WHIZ people (who still own it), giving them a signal and WWCD is doing better than ever in the ratings, especially with their new stronger signal. WWCD branded itself as CD101, then CD101 @ 102.5, and finally evolved to CD102.5. Point being, WWCD isn't really required to have a signal to be a "radio station". They can just sit in their building and spin records all day and do everything they do as a radio station but broadcast it over a loudspeaker if they want. (Of course, this is not a sustainable business model, but there is nothing stopping them from doing this if they wanted to.)

 

This is analogous to what is going on here. Sinclair can just hang a new sign up on the ABC 33/40 building that says ABC 68, and they can point the studio-transmitter link to the Channel 68 tower. Done deal. (I know, it's all fiber these days.) These may not be the actual steps Sinclair takes, but I used this example to illustrate because essentially the same thing is going on here regardless of what building the ABC 33/40 operations end up being at.

 

The only reason ABC 33/40 has value is because they have an ABC affiliation and a news operation. That translates to higher ratings and more revenues. Sinclair isn't going to "feces" can that. They are going to keep everything ABC 33/40 has, they are just going change the transmitter and the branding.

Fred, I brought this up earlier in the thread, but this is also analogous to the transmitter and license swap CBS and NBC engineered in 1995 in Miami to consummate the Group W/CBS merger. The licenses for NBC O&O WTVJ and CBS O&O WCIX changed hands, and WTVJ and WCIX exchanged STL links at 1:00 am on a Sunday morning in 1995. But the stations never actually changed, except for obvious rebranding (WTVJ became 'NBC 6' while WCIX took the WFOR call letters as 'News 4', later 'CBS 4').

 

Same thing here. The news department will still be intact, save for inevitable downsizing that takes place after any merger. Everything about WBMA+ will remain the same.

 

(And it's funny you mention WWCD, as they inexplicably stuck by their original "CD 101" brand for close to two years after the move to 102.5, in spite of the obvious obsolesce. Only in 2012 did it finally become "CD 102.5".)

[Thundershock MN 169]

So if ABC were to overlook over-the-air issues with WUOA because of the high cable/dbs penetration, why wouldn't they do the same thing with WABM?

I'm sorry, but there is no way that ABC is going to cancel an affiliation because people here hate S!nclair and are hoping for some magical way that the Allbritton deal gets canceled. This thread is pretty much a denial of a cold, hard reality.

Thank you for being voices of reason and injecting some doses of reality into this thread.

 

The affiliation deals with WBRC and the other former Fox O&Os spun off to LocalTV run until 2017. So there's no way in hell that Raycom is going to cancel that deal without serious repercussions by Fox on their end. (If you recall, the Group W/CBS merger came about because Group W was ticked off over ABC's group-wide affiliation deal with Scripps and WMAR, which spurred WJZ-TV after being an ABC affiliate for 47 years. These actions are not simple, unilateral solutions but can affect markets all across the country.)

 

Sure, WBRC **could** launch a subchannel for ABC programming, but that option is no different from what S!nclair proposed (moving the current intellectual property of WBMA+ to a subchannel of another station) and would certainly be considered a downgrade by ABC. Same thing applies for WIAT and WVTM... they aren't leaving their affiliations anytime soon, and would have to create a subchannel. And then you're stuck with S!nclair by process of elimination.

Still, WBRC is locked with Fox for at least three more years. Even if WBRC and Raycom are unhappy with how the network is faring, they cannot cancel the affiliation and switch to ABC. They just can't.

They're also not going to cancel the current affiliation agreement because it's probably a better deal than what's currently being offered by networks to affiliates today.

It IS a better deal than what is currently being offered by networks to affiliates today. The 10 year affiliation agreements between Fox and LocalTv called for no reverse compensation to be paid to Fox. They pay ZERO...Zip...Zilch...nada in reverse compensation to Fox. So, yeah they currently have a better deal....a waaayy better deal with Fox. They aren't giving that deal up.

 

Has Sinclair made a definite statement and commitment that they are keeping news? If they are willing to turn in licenses in markets where they have overlapping stations in their no holds barred quest to gain control of WJLA, why not have a major cost cutting move as well, just dump the news, take the ABC affiliation and stick it on 68.2.

While their news is not yet on par with the other stations in the market, WUOA is in the process of making a major effort to become competitive.

Also, as far as it being a college training ground, I don't see where that makes a huge difference or is necessarily a bad thing.

KOMU in Columbia, MO a college owned station and "training ground" is the dominate station in that market. Granted it has been on the air since 1953 and was the first station in the market.

They are buying the non-license assets meaning they are acquiring the newsroom as part of the deal. So, I see no reason they would shutdown the newsroom. The whole deal isn't just about WJLA. Yes, it's the "crown jewel" but, they also want the ABC affiliates/affiliations. It allows them to enter several new markets. And, They want to pair their CW/MNT stations with "big 4" affiliates. Hence, why they want to keep the ABC affiliation in Birmingham. If ABC was to go through the hassle of moving their affiliation wouldn't think they'd want to "upgrade" or, at best at least make a lateral move? I don't see how moving from a station with an established newsroom to a station with a newsroom comprised of mostly college students would be an "upgrade" vs. simply maintaining status quo.

[skbl17 188]

Honestly, I don't understand the need to change the branding. I mean, "ABC 33/40" has that name (and not "ABC 58") because of its two outlying full-powered transmitters, WCFT-DT (33.1) and WJSU-DT (40.1), not because of its low-powered transmitter in Birmingham, WBMA-LD (58.1). In fact, most area cable systems use either channel 33 or channel 40 for ABC, not channel 58. Even if Sinclair was to move operations to channel 68, that wouldn't affect WCFT and WJSU's channel assignments.

 

In fact, the only reason why there's a "WBMA-LD" in the first place is because the new station needed a low-powered transmitter in Birmingham proper in order to appear on Birmingham ratings books (Tuscaloosa [WCFT] and Anniston [WJSU] were separate markets until 1997 or so).

 

If I'm missing something here or if something I typed is incorrect, feel free to point this out, I'm willing to keep an open mind.

[DirtyHarry 721]

 

Honestly, I don't understand the need to change the branding. I mean, "ABC 33/40" has that name (and not "ABC 58") because of its two outlying full-powered transmitters, WCFT-DT (33.1) and WJSU-DT (40.1), not because of its low-powered transmitter in Birmingham, WBMA-LD (58.1). In fact, most area cable systems use either channel 33 or channel 40 for ABC, not channel 58. Even if Sinclair was to move operations to channel 68, that wouldn't affect WCFT and WJSU's channel assignments.

 

In fact, the only reason why there's a "WBMA-LD" in the first place is because the new station needed a low-powered transmitter in Birmingham proper in order to appear on Birmingham ratings books (Tuscaloosa [WCFT] and Anniston [WJSU] were separate markets until 1997 or so).

 

If I'm missing something here or if something I typed is incorrect, feel free to point this out, I'm willing to keep an open mind.

 

 

Fred, I brought this up earlier in the thread, but this is also analogous to the transmitter and license swap CBS and NBC engineered in 1995 in Miami to consummate the Group W/CBS merger. The licenses for NBC O&O WTVJ and CBS O&O WCIX changed hands, and WTVJ and WCIX exchanged STL links at 1:00 am on a Sunday morning in 1995. But the stations never actually changed, except for obvious rebranding (WTVJ became 'NBC 6' while WCIX took the WFOR call letters as 'News 4', later 'CBS 4').

 

Same thing here. The news department will still be intact, save for inevitable downsizing that takes place after any merger. Everything about WBMA+ will remain the same.

 

(And it's funny you mention WWCD, as they inexplicably stuck by their original "CD 101" brand for close to two years after the move to 102.5, in spite of the obvious obsolesce. Only in 2012 did it finally become "CD 102.5".)

 

 

Actually, I bet if Sinclair wanted to they could resurrect both 33 and 40 as LPTV stations in Tuscaloosa and Anniston.

 

And you are correct with your WCIX (now WFOR) / WTVJ swap. WTVJ kept their building, call letters, staff, typewriters, computers, news set, etc. and just traded their tower to WCIX, taking the WCIX signal (and WCAU) in return. The FCC has no say in what goes on inside the building, they only have a say on what goes over the signal.

 

Finally, the anti-Sinclair bias shows once again. People can't seem to grasp that just because Sinclair chopped off a lot of low-rated news operations, that does not mean they are going to chop it off in every market where they have a TV station. If they were going to do that, they would have cut the ABC 22/Fox 45 news operation in Dayton.

 

But, you see, they want news. News gives them a local identity and local presence. News gets advertising dollars. They like news - they just are not going to lose money on it like they did at stations like WSTR, WPGH and KDNL!

[DirtyHarry 721]

 

 

They are buying the non-license assets meaning they are acquiring the newsroom as part of the deal. So, I see no reason they would shutdown the newsroom. The whole deal isn't just about WJLA. Yes, it's the "crown jewel" but, they also want the ABC affiliates/affiliations. It allows them to enter several new markets. And, They want to pair their CW/MNT stations with "big 4" affiliates. Hence, why they want to keep the ABC affiliation in Birmingham. If ABC was to go through the hassle of moving their affiliation wouldn't think they'd want to "upgrade" or, at best at least make a lateral move? I don't see how moving from a station with an established newsroom to a station with a newsroom comprised of mostly college students would be an "upgrade" vs. simply maintaining status quo.

 

This is a major upgrade for ABC. Instead of being on two rimshot signals and an LPTV, they get on a full power signal at 1,000 kw right in the middle of Birmingham proper. They have parity with the other stations which is very important to OTA viewers who now can have their antennas pointed in the same direction instead of fiddling with a rotor if they have an outside antenna. Furthermore, ABC will remain on an established station instead of ending up on a low-rated start-up. There is no way ABC should complain about this.

 

Charleston might be another issue, but only because they are losing virtual Channel 4. Otherwise, same difference. ABC ends up on a better signal there too.

 

I know this is a confusing concept for people, but the signal and what goes on at the studios are two entirely separate things. Think of the studio as a football stadium. The football game is fed to a TV station and then to a TV signal. It doesn't matter if it;s ABC, NBC or CBS, the football game is still going to go on regardless of what channel it's on.

 

Likewise when they talk about the intellectual property component of television. What goes on inside the building is essentially the same thing as the football game. It still goes on regardless of which transmitter they feed it too.

 

ABC 33/40 is not going anywhere. They are just changing channels.

 

 

 

 

 

(And it's funny you mention WWCD, as they inexplicably stuck by their original "CD 101" brand for close to two years after the move to 102.5, in spite of the obvious obsolesce. Only in 2012 did it finally become "CD 102.5".)

 

 

 

Great idea! "ABC 33/40 on Channel 68". Now isn't that a mouthful?

 

 

 

 

Honestly, I don't understand the need to change the branding. I mean, "ABC 33/40" has that name (and not "ABC 58") because of its two outlying full-powered transmitters, WCFT-DT (33.1) and WJSU-DT (40.1), not because of its low-powered transmitter in Birmingham, WBMA-LD (58.1). In fact, most area cable systems use either channel 33 or channel 40 for ABC, not channel 58. Even if Sinclair was to move operations to channel 68, that wouldn't affect WCFT and WJSU's channel assignments.

 

 

 

That's not a bad point, like the CD101 example Myron pointed out. The fact that they were on 102.5 and still called themselves CD101 became something of a joke around here. But then again, "The New WCOL" was "new" for almost 20 years.

 

Since ABC 33/40 has the channel 58 position in Birmingham, they could just continue to just call it ABC 33/40 if they wanted to with the channel 68 postion.

[Thundershock MN 169]

They are buying the non-license assets meaning they are acquiring the newsroom as part of the deal. So, I see no reason they would shutdown the newsroom. The whole deal isn't just about WJLA. Yes, it's the "crown jewel" but, they also want the ABC affiliates/affiliations. It allows them to enter several new markets. And, They want to pair their CW/MNT stations with "big 4" affiliates. Hence, why they want to keep the ABC affiliation in Birmingham. If ABC was to go through the hassle of moving their affiliation wouldn't think they'd want to "upgrade" or, at best at least make a lateral move? I don't see how moving from a station with an established newsroom to a station with a newsroom comprised of mostly college students would be an "upgrade" vs. simply maintaining status quo.

This is a major upgrade for ABC. Instead of being on two rimshot signals and an LPTV, they get on a full power signal at 1,000 kw right in the middle of Birmingham proper. They have parity with the other stations which is very important to OTA viewers who now can have their antennas pointed in the same direction instead of fiddling with a rotor if they have an outside antenna. Furthermore, ABC will remain on an established station instead of ending up on a low-rated start-up. There is no way ABC should complain about this.

 

Charleston might be another issue, but only because they are losing virtual Channel 4. Otherwise, same difference. ABC ends up on a better signal there too.

 

I know this is a confusing concept for people, but the signal and what goes on at the studios are two entirely separate things. Think of the studio as a football stadium. The football game is fed to a TV station and then to a TV signal. It doesn't matter if it;s ABC, NBC or CBS, the football game is still going to go on regardless of what channel it's on.

 

Likewise when they talk about the intellectual property component of television. What goes on inside the building is essentially the same thing as the football game. It still goes on regardless of which transmitter they feed it too.

 

ABC 33/40 is not going anywhere. They are just changing channels.

 

Fred, I think you are misunderstanding my post. I was posing a rhetorical question to the poster I was replying to and the board in general. You & I are in total agreement on this one. In fact I made the exact same point about about how leaving the LP & rimshots could easily be seen as an "upgrade" by ABC last week in the Sinclair... Again thread:

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.

The point I was trying to make is if they are going to move the affiliation to another operation in Birmingham, like WUOA, it would need to be an "upgrade" over the current arrangement (or, the proposed arrangement) to really make it worthwhile. And, moving to a college station isn't going to be viewed as an "upgrade" over maintaining the status quo.

[bobvick 9]

 

This is a major upgrade for ABC. Instead of being on two rimshot signals and an LPTV, they get on a full power signal at 1,000 kw right in the middle of Birmingham proper. They have parity with the other stations which is very important to OTA viewers who now can have their antennas pointed in the same direction instead of fiddling with a rotor if they have an outside antenna. Furthermore, ABC will remain on an established station instead of ending up on a low-rated start-up. There is no way ABC should complain about this.

 

Have you been to the FCC and looked at the coverage maps for WCFT 33 and WJSU 9? BOTH of those cover ALL of Jefferson and Shelby counties. I fail to see how this would be an upgrade, when your station can now be seen from Decatur, AL to Selma, AL to Columbus, MS to Columbus, GA.

WABM reaches from Cullman to Clanton to just west of Tuscaloosa to just east of Talladega. It BARELY covers Anniston and Gadsden.

[TennTV1983 767]

Finally, the anti-Sinclair bias shows once again. People can't seem to grasp that just because Sinclair chopped off a lot of low-rated news operations, that does not mean they are going to chop it off in every market where they have a TV station. If they were going to do that, they would have cut the ABC 22/Fox 45 news operation in Dayton.

 

But, you see, they want news. News gives them a local identity and local presence. News gets advertising dollars. They like news - they just are not going to lose money on it like they did at stations like WSTR, WPGH and KDNL!

And WTWC too, which brings me back to a point I made in another thread. In each of those cases, they were competing against well-established news departments in those respective markets. When you don't have an audience that is watching your product, you lose money regardless of how much advertisement you sell (even if a network requires you to have a newscast). Every company, and not just Sinclair, understands that, although it's rare that an entire news operation gets shut down at a Big 4 station. Even today, starting your own news in-house is considered a big gamble to make (which is why Sinclair and other companies will sometimes outsource their news operations from a competitor in some cases).

[DirtyHarry 721]

 

Have you been to the FCC and looked at the coverage maps for WCFT 33 and WJSU 9? BOTH of those cover ALL of Jefferson and Shelby counties. I fail to see how this would be an upgrade, when your station can now be seen from Decatur, AL to Selma, AL to Columbus, MS to Columbus, GA.

WABM reaches from Cullman to Clanton to just west of Tuscaloosa to just east of Talladega. It BARELY covers Anniston and Gadsden.

 

The money is in covering Birmingham proper. Having a tower even 15 or 20 miles out makes a huge difference in reception, especially with people who have rabbit ears of varying degrees of quality. This even holds true when it comes to an outdoor antenna, since it can be pointed in the same direction of that hill in Birmingham where WBRC and WVTM are located instead of having to get up and fool with the rotor to turn it east or west.

 

Using my TV dongle on my laptop, I find that reception sucks when you get about 20-25 miles away from the transmitter. You need an outdoor antenna when you get beyond this range. And that's even out on the open road. When you get into an outlying city, there are far more things going on that can interfere with reception.

 

Another thing about those maps is that they are only estimates. In the real world, you find that those patterns are a lot spottier than they appear especially given Birmingham's hilly terrain being at the foothills of Appalachia.. Furthermore, rimshot signals have to fight obstructions from tall buildings and RF interference whereas a signal in the center of a market just plows right through them.

 

A signal in the center of the market (where the population is most dense) beats two rimshots each and every day of the week.

 

For a real world example, look at WWHO in Columbus. In the analog days, their tower had to be in Williamsport (about 25 miles south of Columbus) in order to cover their COL in Chillicothe. Their signal sucked and they had an LPTV in Columbus which also sucked. CBS later built an 1100 foot tower there and the signal still sucked, In the digital world CBS kept the stick where it was because they didn't want to build a new tower. Although the signal is better, that signal is not as robust as competing signals (except to the cows in Williamsport). I had trouble getting it on my PC at work Downtown whereas I had no problem with the channels with Columbus towers, even some of the LPTV signals. Now that Sinclair controls WWHO, they applied to move it to the WSYX tower for the reasons I stated.

[Rusty Muck 4309]

I know there is a freeze on new station apps, but does this also apply to translators? If not, then - as Fred noted earlier - S!nclair could apply for translator apps for both Anniston and Tuscaloosa to mitigate any loss of coverage area in those two markets.

 

But, unless I'm wrong, I don't think the process would be instantaneous.

[bobvick 9]

I live in the Birmingham market. I work in Birmingham, but live about 70 miles away in NW Alabama. You can pick up WCFT with a coat hanger the signal is so strong. I usually watch on DirecTV, so OTA is not really an issue, but I have a 70' tall tower. It is a directional antenna pointed toward Birmingham. It gets 100% quality on 33 (even though that transmitter is to the SW of Birmingham proper). On WABM, 68, it gets somewhere in the mid 60's for quality. So, no matter how bad anybody wants to make it sound like this is an upgrade and is a good for ABC, they will lose eyeballs. Not to mention, OTA only households in the rural areas of the market might or might not have a 70' tower to be able to receive WABM, and ABC 33/40 serves a VITAL public interest in severe weather. Many lives were saved on April 27 because of the coverage that this station provides. This may be a good business decision for Sinclair, but it is definitely not in the public interest, which is what I thought that the broadcast airwaves were for, and the reason there is an FCC in the first place. I suppose though, that the FCC should put Sinclair shareholder's and the Smith family’s best interest above that of the public at large.

[DirtyHarry 721]

 

I live in the Birmingham market. I work in Birmingham, but live about 70 miles away in NW Alabama. You can pick up WCFT with a coat hanger the signal is so strong. I usually watch on DirecTV, so OTA is not really an issue, but I have a 70' tall tower. It is a directional antenna pointed toward Birmingham. It gets 100% quality on 33 (even though that transmitter is to the SW of Birmingham proper). On WABM, 68, it gets somewhere in the mid 60's for quality. So, no matter how bad anybody wants to make it sound like this is an upgrade and is a good for ABC, they will lose eyeballs. Not to mention, OTA only households in the rural areas of the market might or might not have a 70' tower to be able to receive WABM, and ABC 33/40 serves a VITAL public interest in severe weather. Many lives were saved on April 27 because of the coverage that this station provides. This may be a good business decision for Sinclair, but it is definitely not in the public interest, which is what I thought that the broadcast airwaves were for, and the reason there is an FCC in the first place. I suppose though, that the FCC should put Sinclair shareholder's and the Smith family’s best interest above that of the public at large.

 

With all due respect, there are two or three issues here. First, there aren't too many people I know, even out in the countryside, with 70 foot towers. Second, picking up a signal out in a cornfield or in a small town is a lot different than picking it up in a city because of the obstructions and RF interference. That's why rimshots have trouble penetrating urban areas. Third, the technology behind ATSC is pretty crappy. Moving your tower fifteen feet to the right or left might flip the equation and give you a 60% reading on ABC 33 and 100% on ABC 68.

 

I learned this from a TV engineer in Cincinnati who put up an outdoor antenna for DX-ing purposes. He was trying to get WBNS in Columbus because different football games are often shown, especially when the Bengals get blacked out. He put up an antenna and got nothing. He moved it to the other side of his roof and WBNS comes in reliably and consistently.

 

There are a lot of other factors affecting signal quality such as interference, adjacent channels and whatnot. Another factor is horizontal and vertical polarization. Most TV stations have horizontal polarization, but Sinclair's newest transmitters are running at both horizontal and vertical polarization, which is in effect running two separate transmitters.

 

I'm no expert on these matters, but know enough of the buzzwords to know that Sinclair has a nondirectional Channel 36 signal on a 1300 foot tower at a maximum 1000 kw ERP. On paper this is the better signal to Birmingham proper, which is what matters most.

[DirtyHarry 721]

 

I know there is a freeze on new station apps, but does this also apply to translators? If not, then - as Fred noted earlier - S!nclair could apply for translator apps for both Anniston and Tuscaloosa to mitigate any loss of coverage area in those two markets.

 

But, unless I'm wrong, I don't think the process would be instantaneous.

 

If it matters that much to them, $50,000 or $100,000 might be able to buy a couple of already existing signals.

[bobvick 9]

Acutally, those towers were quite popular where I live, especially back before the ad

 

 

With all due respect, there are two or three issues here. First, there aren't too many people I know, even out in the countryside, with 70 foot towers. Second, picking up a signal out in a cornfield or in a small town is a lot different than picking it up in a city because of the obstructions and RF interference. That's why rimshots have trouble penetrating urban areas. Third, the technology behind ATSC is pretty crappy. Moving your tower fifteen feet to the right or left might flip the equation and give you a 60% reading on ABC 33 and 100% on ABC 68.

 

I learned this from a TV engineer in Cincinnati who put up an outdoor antenna for DX-ing purposes. He was trying to get WBNS in Columbus because different football games are often shown, especially when the Bengals get blacked out. He put up an antenna and got nothing. He moved it to the other side of his roof and WBNS comes in reliably and consistently.

 

There are a lot of other factors affecting signal quality such as interference, adjacent channels and whatnot. Another factor is horizontal and vertical polarization. Most TV stations have horizontal polarization, but Sinclair's newest transmitters are running at both horizontal and vertical polarization, which is in effect running two separate transmitters.

 

I'm no expert on these matters, but know enough of the buzzwords to know that Sinclair has a nondirectional Channel 36 signal on a 1300 foot tower at a maximum 1000 kw ERP. On paper this is the better signal to Birmingham proper, which is what matters most.

 

Actually those towers were quite common where I live. Especially back in the 1970's and 1980's before DBS was available as cable never penetrated much into the country. You still see quite a few of them around. The tower I have was installed back about 1984 or so, I had the antennas upgraded about 2010.

Anyway, when WABM went digital, evidently, Sinclair must have boosted the power quite a bit, or began transmitting from a taller tower, because prior to the DTV transition, you could not get 68 at all where I am located. It was nothing but snow.

So the singal on WABM is now much better than it used to be.