Williams1402 45 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 well maybe KRXI should start doing KTXL Simulcasts instead of KTVU. they are about 50-100 Mi apart from each other because sinclair may make KTXL join KRNV and KRXI because their going to end up as "Sister Stations". I guess that could work, since it's not like their relations with each other would involve Sinclair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomadcowatbk 144 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 The "citizens" of LA will never notice because they don't even speak English....thus could care less. And as far as KTLA goes... You would think "Hollywood" would save it and preserve it as a living virtual broadcast landmark....but no. The Hollywood elite only care about politics, and themselves....not TV stations. Y'all may want to hit up Byron Allen and see how serious he really is about "minority ownership". Honestly... I would sell WPIX and KTLA right off the top. Why??? The business climate in CA and NY sucks. Taxes are too high...and too much regulation to make a decent profit. Sacrifice (for profit) KTLA and WPIX to make the FCC and activist happy. Take that money saved in CA and NY and put it towards messaging in Ohio,Penn,WI and those other states that Sinclair and the repubs want to keep in 2020. California is a lost cause for Sinclair...so why bother when you can make a much greater impact with the political message. Keep WGN as your "Flagship" and use that station to influence the midwest vote in 2020. ...and if you don't like it... have Harvey Wienstien buy a bunch of TV stations to counter the Sinclair stations messaging. Cuz Hollywoods "got yer back" ...they got all the money in the world...and could "counter" Sinclair in a New York minute. IL is nearly as much of solid blue state as CA and NY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEOMatrix 1295 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 IL is nearly as much of solid blue state as CA and NY Only because of Chicago. South of 80 and west of 39 is basically red as a baboon's ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Williams1402 45 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 IL is nearly as much of solid blue state as CA and NY Not really. It’s like one of those states thar have one of the major cities having a liberal majority, where as the rest of the state is conservative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osman 5 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 Not really. It’s like one of those states thar have one of the major cities having a liberal majority, where as the rest of the state is conservative. NY would be a Red State if it wasnt for NYC and parts of the Hudson Valley tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Williams1402 45 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 NY would be a Red State if it wasnt for NYC and parts of the Hudson Valley tbh The state would’ve been half Democrat, half Republican. New York’s not that conservative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osman 5 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 The state would’ve been half Democrat, half Republican. New York’s not that conservative. Republicans can be just as Liberals as Democrats if they want to and having met New York Republicans they seem more Moderate or Liberal.Eric Ulrich is an example of a Liberal Republican and he is NYC Council Member same for Elise Stefanik the Congresswomen from Upstate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Williams1402 45 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 Republicans can be just as Liberals as Democrats if they want to and having met New York Republicans they seem more Moderate or Liberal.Eric Ulrich is an example of a Liberal Republican and he is NYC Council Member same for Elise Stefanik the Congresswomen from Upstate That could be the case. From what I heard, New York is mostly a liberal state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osman 5 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 That could be the case. From what I heard, New York is mostly a liberal state. If you leave the Hudson Valley its gets more Republican or Conservative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenShine9 1509 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 Can we get back on topic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomadcowatbk 144 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 NY would be a Red State if it wasnt for NYC and parts of the Hudson Valley tbh and CA would be a red state -LA, and most the of Bay Area Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osman 5 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 and CA would be a red state -LA, and most the of Bay Area Pretty Much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColtFromGulfcoast 695 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 Can we get back on topic? Seriously. This is not the place to discuss politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Williams1402 45 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 Seriously. This is not the place to discuss politics. I'm sorry if this post may break the guidelines. I... just joined this site because I liked seeing news logos. So.. I'm not sure if I would continue posting here or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmaxhanson 650 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 Yeah we should. This thread shouldn’t be derailed with politics. Sinclair is just Fox News but if it was a conglomerate for Trump-approved news stations. Shut up! Do you wanna get this thread locked before we hit 100 pages? Anyway, here's salon.com's take on this, also mentioning Trump's impossible threat on NBC: https://www.salon.com/2017/10/11/right-wing-sinclair-broadcast-group-snubs-fcc-gets-away-with-it/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmaxhanson 650 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 Wow! All this talk about Trump, Sinclair, and martial law style censorship has led to me rewatching last year's Daily Show Halloween Special, when we all still thought Trump would lose: http://www.cc.com/episodes/nb3429/the-daily-show-with-trevor-noah-october-31--2016---jeff-ross-season-22-ep-22016 How long do you think it'll be before Fox News merges with Sinclair and makes TNN a reality? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weeters 1811 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 Can we get back on topic? Going to start thread banning people who are derailing this thread. No rants, no speculation, no wacky conspiracy theories. If you can’t say something rational, don’t say anything at all. Politics play an important angle in this story, but please keep it on topic and in the context of this deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osman 5 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 I'm sorry if this post may break the guidelines. I... just joined this site because I liked seeing news logos. So.. I'm not sure if I would continue posting here or not. New to this site will get use to the guidelines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oklahomanewsman 210 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 The FCC could make a decision regarding media ownership rules which could delay any final decision on the merger until sometime next year https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/fcc-sinclair-broadcasting-ownership/2017/10/13/id/819642/ Here's a statement from Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy: “Ajit Pai told me in my meeting that he has not decided to approve the merger first, that he may conduct a review of the ownership cap, I can confirm to you on the record that he told me that he had not decided and that he was open to doing the review first. And I encouraged him to do it." So we don't know if Pai is going to review the media ownership rules first or make a decision on Sinclair/Tribune first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samantha 2878 Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 At the very least that piece makes it clear that Ruddy has a stake in this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Williams1402 45 Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 The FCC could make a decision regarding media ownership rules which could delay any final decision on the merger until sometime next year https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/fcc-sinclair-broadcasting-ownership/2017/10/13/id/819642/ Here's a statement from Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy: “Ajit Pai told me in my meeting that he has not decided to approve the merger first, that he may conduct a review of the ownership cap, I can confirm to you on the record that he told me that he had not decided and that he was open to doing the review first. And I encouraged him to do it." So we don't know if Pai is going to review the media ownership rules first or make a decision on Sinclair/Tribune first. It depends on Sinclair. Who knows if they would be desperate to merge with Tribune to become more corrupt as possible. The media ownership rules on the other hand is fairly important, as it does goes over what Sinclair is doing to their owned news stations and their censorship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Megatron81 181 Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 I really think it isn't going to get approved until 2018 so DOJ & FCC review merger to approve or not to approve. I just want the DOJ to say to Sinclair they have to divest the 10 markets no sidecars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samantha 2878 Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Any intervening FCC action presents the risk of the Outside Date creeping up on the parties if they are not willing to extend that date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mre29 1340 Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Any intervening FCC action presents the risk of the Outside Date creeping up on the parties if they are not willing to extend that date. Remind me what the Outside Date is and what it means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CircleSeven 1944 Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 Remind me what the Outside Date is and what it means. The Outside Date is the date in which both parties can terminate the deal without paying a breakup fee. The initial outside date for this deal is May 8th, 2018 (one year after the deal was announced). But if this deal doesn't get the greenlight from the FCC and/or the DOJ by that time, the parties agreed to extend the outside date by three months, to August 8th, 2018. But the deal has to get the greenlight by the Tribune shareholders by that May 8th date. Should they both want to break up before the outside date, Tribune has to pay Sinclair $135M. About this possible review, Pai did say after he brought back the UHF loophole in April, that he was planning on doing a review on the national ownership cap (including the discount). Whether he does this review before acting on this transaction (or even doing this review), that's pure speculation at least for now. That's why I said earlier on the speculatron that I take this with a huge grain of salt. I'll believe it when I see it. But whether he does this review or not, he still doesn't have the authority to modfiy the ownership cap himself. Both houses of Congress have the authority to do that. And should a review happens and it drags out, there's also that court case about the UHF discount that could start by those outside dates. And let me remind all of you that this possible review of the ownership cap is not the same as the Quadrennial Review, which reviews the local television ownership rules. That review might start next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.