nomadcowatbk 144 Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 Just a thought.... Could Fox be pursuing the AFC rights any time soon? Having both conferences on the same network probably wouldn't work too well, especially in markets like New York and Los Angeles. They have some major holes and mistakes to rectify though....like casting off WFXT to Cox when it could be the home of the Patriots... After all, CBS was the longtime home of the NFC, only to have FOX snatch it away in 1994. They grabbed the AFC away from NBC 4 years later. Like I said before....just a thought. The NFL could always throw a wrench in things for their own benefit... Doesn't the NFC have more of the bigger market teams? or does Fox expect more cross flexing of AFC games from CBS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kruejac 9 Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 The only stations I could see Fox buying are KCPQ and WITI. They are both NFC markets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomadcowatbk 144 Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 I don’t see the win-loss record of a team factoring into this whatsoever. I mean, the Browns haven’t existed as an NFL team since 1995, and it’s still home to a fervent and loyal fan base. Cleveland is probably a better NFL market than LA in terms of fan support and attention, just lacks the population and $ of LA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrad 113 Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 Fox expanding to more markets only based on football. This is weird, but not as weird as the name TEGNA or Tronc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonDonP1 113 Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 What about KCPQ (Seahwaks)? I, myself, have been hoping that 21CF would buy not only KCPQ, but KZJO as well. Of course, that is another discussion for the Speculation forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rusty Muck 4167 Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 Fox expanding to more markets only based on football. This is weird, but not as weird as the name TEGNA or Tronc. Fox owes its relevance as a “big four” network to the NFL. It’s not that weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Kissel 280 Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 WBFF likely would never be sold because yes, it is the flagship station for Sinclair. However, WPGH is definitely fair game. Look at what FOX did in Charlotte with WJZY, they're known for creating ground-up news departments. Pittsburgh Steelers have a DEDICATED fan base, which means more eyes on the station, with means more revenue. It makes logical sense for FOX to pursue WPGH. I would LOVE to see FOX get WPGH (FOX) and WPNT (MyNetworkTV), The Steelers are a Huge draw here and would be a huge benefit to the duopoly's success. Sinclair has run both stations into the ground and is in dire need of a complete makeover and FOX can do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mre29 1340 Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 Don't forget after all of this mess we'll have TegnaXNexstar and then possibly GrayXRaycom. Let's just cut out the extra characters and call it Graycom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mre29 1340 Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 The problem with that theory though in this day and age is that channel numbers don't really matter. It's the WWJ and WGCL argument all over again. Why doesn't CBS try to move from channel 62 to 50? Why doesn't CBS try to move from 46 to 17? The placement of the channel position doesn't mean anything. Historical value also doesn't mean anything to advertisers. At the end of the day, people will tune into whatever channel their show is on no matter what channel it is. As much as I hate channel 6's newscasts here in Augusta, if I want to watch The Good Doctor (great show by the way) I am watching channel 6. This. Besides, if Fox really wanted a Fox 2 in Denver, they'd work out a deal with Sinclair that included the stations swapping channels a la Miami. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEOMatrix 1295 Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 If Fox does get KDVR but lets Sinclair keep KWGN, I wouldn't be surprised if KWGN keeps its news but it's still produced by Fox 31. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrad 113 Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 If Fox does get KDVR but lets Sinclair keep KWGN, I wouldn't be surprised if KWGN keeps its news but it's still produced by Fox 31. KDVR is a former Fox O&O. How can the duopoly be broken up, news-wise? For example, could you evenly split the talent and build new studios? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomadcowatbk 144 Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 If Fox does get KDVR but lets Sinclair keep KWGN, I wouldn't be surprised if KWGN keeps its news but it's still produced by Fox 31. do the stations that outsource their news to other stations do the must runs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NowBergen 486 Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 Honestly, living in DMA 1, I do not understand the excitement of having a Fox O&O. Fox5 News has gone way down hill despite the excitement of Lori Stokes joining GDNY. And they have operated WWOR into the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Kissel 280 Posted November 29, 2017 Share Posted November 29, 2017 Honestly, living in DMA 1, I do not understand the excitement of having a Fox O&O. Fox5 News has gone way down hill despite the excitement of Lori Stokes joining GDNY. And they have operated WWOR into the ground. Simple, FOX is 1 million times better then Sinclair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TennTV1983 743 Posted November 29, 2017 Share Posted November 29, 2017 Honestly, living in DMA 1, I do not understand the excitement of having a Fox O&O. Fox5 News has gone way down hill despite the excitement of Lori Stokes joining GDNY. And they have operated WWOR into the ground. At least Fox doesn't force feed one-sided propaganda on its O&Os like Sinclair does (even though there is some slant in their news coverage). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEOMatrix 1295 Posted November 29, 2017 Share Posted November 29, 2017 KDVR is a former Fox O&O. How can the duopoly be broken up, news-wise? For example, could you evenly split the talent and build new studios? It can be done. All Sinclair has to do is build a small building for KWGN. Meanwhile, KWGN's news department can be kept as is at KDVR and problem solved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoFloTVClassics 905 Posted November 29, 2017 Share Posted November 29, 2017 This could make things interesting in Indy at WTTV/WXIN. Sinclair could keep CBS4 and sell FOX59 to FOX. Or FOX could by WISH 8 more suited on a VHF dial, another sell WXIN to FOX but move to channel 8 and WISH to 59. Just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoFloTVClassics 905 Posted November 29, 2017 Share Posted November 29, 2017 The problem with that theory though in this day and age is that channel numbers don't really matter. It's the WWJ and WGCL argument all over again. Why doesn't CBS try to move from channel 62 to 50? Why doesn't CBS try to move from 46 to 17? The placement of the channel position doesn't mean anything. Historical value also doesn't mean anything to advertisers. At the end of the day, people will tune into whatever channel their show is on no matter what channel it is. As much as I hate channel 6's newscasts here in Augusta, if I want to watch The Good Doctor (great show by the way) I am watching channel 6. KWGN may historically be stronger than KDVR, but it's not the senior partner in the duopoly. KDVR is. The same with WXIN and WTTV, despite WTTV being a CBS affiliate and on channel 4 and having a stronger history than WXIN, WXIN is the senior partner in the duopoly. At the station I work at here in Augusta, WRDW is the senior partner in the duopoly with WAGT, and it's run that way. WAGT has virtually no assets to its name (though it doesn't have the storied histories of KWGN or WTTV) because its the junior partner in the duopoly and if it were sold tomorrow, the new owner would get basically nothing but the tower/transmitter, and the station's programming aside from newscasts. Otherwise, the staff and resources that WRDW provides for WAGT stays with WRDW. It was the same thing that happened when WJBF controlled WAGT, all of the WAGT people and resources that were retained and not thrown out when the duopoly was formed became WJBF personnel and WJBF resources. This is why when Gray took over WAGT, those previously employed at WAGT that were still with the station didn't come with the sale because now they're WJBF people. Here's my point-- KWGN and WTTV do not have much in the way of resources and personnel themselves because those resources and personnel are actually provided by KDVR and WXIN respectively, they just do the work for KWGN and WTTV. So splitting the two, there will be some contractual issues and some resource issues unless those under contract with KDVR and WXIN who work for KWGN and WTTV are allowed to separate and go to their new employer, should Sinclair keep KWGN and WTTV and sell KDVR and WXIN to FOX and should those resources be allowed to be separated. I hear ya about wwj and wkbd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rusty Muck 4167 Posted November 29, 2017 Share Posted November 29, 2017 At least Fox doesn't force feed one-sided propaganda on its O&Os like Sinclair does (even though there is some slant in their news coverage). Assuming this really has legs, I see it as Fox trying to defend their network from one affiliate ownership group dominating the rest, and less so about Sinclair's obvious political views. Sinclair is already the largest owner of Fox affiliates as it is, and Tribune owns the highest-profile Fox affiliates not named WFXT. It's not that hard to see why Fox would want to buy more than just KCPQ, but repurchase most of the previously divested New World O&Os. They don't want another Baton Broadcasting/CTV scenario where the affiliates wind up buying the network (and Baton began their own BBS program service not long before buying CTV). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cna247 173 Posted November 29, 2017 Share Posted November 29, 2017 The problem with that theory though in this day and age is that channel numbers don't really matter. It's the WWJ and WGCL argument all over again. Why doesn't CBS try to move from channel 62 to 50? Why doesn't CBS try to move from 46 to 17? The placement of the channel position doesn't mean anything. Historical value also doesn't mean anything to advertisers. At the end of the day, people will tune into whatever channel their show is on no matter what channel it is. As much as I hate channel 6's newscasts here in Augusta, if I want to watch The Good Doctor (great show by the way) I am watching channel 6. KWGN may historically be stronger than KDVR, but it's not the senior partner in the duopoly. KDVR is. The same with WXIN and WTTV, despite WTTV being a CBS affiliate and on channel 4 and having a stronger history than WXIN, WXIN is the senior partner in the duopoly. At the station I work at here in Augusta, WRDW is the senior partner in the duopoly with WAGT, and it's run that way. WAGT has virtually no assets to its name (though it doesn't have the storied histories of KWGN or WTTV) because its the junior partner in the duopoly and if it were sold tomorrow, the new owner would get basically nothing but the tower/transmitter, and the station's programming aside from newscasts. Otherwise, the staff and resources that WRDW provides for WAGT stays with WRDW. It was the same thing that happened when WJBF controlled WAGT, all of the WAGT people and resources that were retained and not thrown out when the duopoly was formed became WJBF personnel and WJBF resources. This is why when Gray took over WAGT, those previously employed at WAGT that were still with the station didn't come with the sale because now they're WJBF people. Here's my point-- KWGN and WTTV do not have much in the way of resources and personnel themselves because those resources and personnel are actually provided by KDVR and WXIN respectively, they just do the work for KWGN and WTTV. So splitting the two, there will be some contractual issues and some resource issues unless those under contract with KDVR and WXIN who work for KWGN and WTTV are allowed to separate and go to their new employer, should Sinclair keep KWGN and WTTV and sell KDVR and WXIN to FOX and should those resources be allowed to be separated. You're half right. I still believe channel numbers do matter because of their history and their branding. In Detroit, not only was 50 a lower number than 62, it had a news division and higher ratings. Reason it didn't get CBS was because 50 and 62 were not both owned by CBS's parent corporation at the time. Only years after 62 became CBS did they come under common ownership with 50, and I believe 50 had shed their news division by that point. Also, attaching a number to the station let's you know where to find it on the dial. If you ask anyone what channel WBZ-4, WCVB-5, and WHDH-7 are on in Boston, you'll likely get the answer on 4, 5, and 7. If you ask people what channel NBC Boston is on, you will either get an "I don't know" or a plethora of answers including 8, 10, or some other number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoFloTVClassics 905 Posted November 29, 2017 Share Posted November 29, 2017 You're half right. I still believe channel numbers do matter because of their history and their branding. In Detroit, not only was 50 a lower number than 62, it had a news division and higher ratings. Reason it didn't get CBS was because 50 and 62 were not both owned by CBS's parent corporation at the time. Only years after 62 became CBS did they come under common ownership with 50, and I believe 50 had shed their news division by that point. Also, attaching a number to the station let's you know where to find it on the dial. If you ask anyone what channel WBZ-4, WCVB-5, and WHDH-7 are on in Boston, you'll likely get the answer on 4, 5, and 7. If you ask people what channel NBC Boston is on, you will either get an "I don't know" or a plethora of answers including 8, 10, or some other number. It's happened with south Florida obviously 22 years ago. And we turned out just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rusty Muck 4167 Posted November 29, 2017 Share Posted November 29, 2017 Also, attaching a number to the station let's you know where to find it on the dial. If you ask anyone what channel WBZ-4, WCVB-5, and WHDH-7 are on in Boston, you'll likely get the answer on 4, 5, and 7. If you ask people what channel NBC Boston is on, you will either get an "I don't know" or a plethora of answers including 8, 10, or some other number. It's why, in the end, Comcast is moving NBC Boston to WYCN and their PSIP of 13. That will give them a unique dial position to cover the market that the patchwork quilt of 8.1, 60.5 and 60.2 simply cannot bring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rusty Muck 4167 Posted November 29, 2017 Share Posted November 29, 2017 It's happened with south Florida obviously 22 years ago. And we turned out just fine. WTVJ being able to move their digital signal back on the erstwhile channel 4 tower helped. The channel 6 analog signal was at a serious competitive disadvantage being in Homestead as opposed to every other major signal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoFloTVClassics 905 Posted November 29, 2017 Share Posted November 29, 2017 WTVJ being able to move their digital signal back on the erstwhile channel 4 tower helped. The channel 6 analog signal was at a serious competitive disadvantage being in Homestead as opposed to every other major signal. *erstwhile? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rusty Muck 4167 Posted November 29, 2017 Share Posted November 29, 2017 *erstwhile? Former. It was the channel 4 analog tower but is now hosting multiple TV stations including WFOR and WTVJ (does CBS still own the tower or was it sold off)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.