Nexstar Acquires 75% of The CW

[tyrannical bastard 3534]

6 minutes ago, Rusty Muck said:

It's in a deep red market in a permanently uncompetitive state politically that almost got wiped off the face of the earth by a devastating hurricane. There is no way that it was worth $200 million, or even $100 million. It should have been $75 million, and I'm being awfully generous here.

 

Yes, it absolutely was a waste of money. Yes, they foolishly overpaid for an asset that can only decline with time.

 

And I have no problem saying any of this because I don't have this weird romanticized vision of Hearst the fandom inexplicably has.

Hearst being the same company that created "yellow journalism" by it's founder, William Randolph Hearst.

 

And another pillar of early journalism, Scripps being a pioneer in ways that can be respected or reviled....

 

If Sinclair is still around next century, will they be a respected company?

 

And Nexstar compared to these is an upstart company that was founded in 1996.  Perry Sook worked menial roles at stations like WOWK and WPXI during the late 70s and early 80s.

Edited May 24 by tyrannical bastard

[mer764KCTV5 97]

1 hour ago, Rusty Muck said:

It's in a deep red market in a permanently uncompetitive state politically that almost got wiped off the face of the earth by a devastating hurricane. There is no way that it was worth $200 million, or even $100 million. It should have been $75 million, and I'm being awfully generous here.

 

Bold of you to think that the WBBH and WZVN should've been sold for $75 million. It's an vital path to the safety of the market. Its in 2nd Place like what I've previously mentioned. Like, without the television stations and the radio station in the Fort Myers/Naples/Cape Coral, Florida market, the hurricane damage could've gotten way, way, worse. I mean, it made sense why Hearst would aquire the station given the fact of the respectively of the company. Also, the fact it's located in Florida, an deep red state doesn't really matter in this case, KMBC-TV in Kansas City, Missouri serves Eastern Kansas and Western Missouri, both Kasnas and Missouri are considered Deep-Red uncompetitive states and yet, it's not an big deal. 

 

1 hour ago, Rusty Muck said:

Yes, it absolutely was a waste of money. Yes, they foolishly overpaid for an asset that can only decline with time.

 

And I have no problem saying any of this because I don't have this weird romanticized vision of Hearst the fandom inexplicably has.

 

What? They generally revamped WZVN from an joke in the market as WEVU to an respectable station, and you're saying they OVERPAID for the station and WBBH? Edith Waterman if she looks at this is probably going to be disappointed that you're saying it was/is an declining asset.

 

1 hour ago, tyrannical bastard said:

Hearst being the same company that created "yellow journalism" by it's founder, William Randolph Hearst.

 

And another pillar of early journalism, Scripps being a pioneer in ways that can be respected or reviled....

 

The E. W. Scripps Company, as much as people HATE them, have been and still in a way, is considered an pioneer. And for the Hearst Corporation, it could be again, be considered an pioneer for its time in the early 20th century with the yellow journalism, which is now used on stories almost everywhere now in the 21st century thanks to Bill Applegate (who once worked for WEWS) and WSVN (which isn't owned by Hearst but the idea of yellow journalism is there left right and center since 1989)

 

1 hour ago, tyrannical bastard said:

If Sinclair is still around next century, will they be a respected company?

 

And Nexstar compared to these is an upstart company that was founded in 1996.  Perry Sook worked menial roles at stations like WOWK and WPXI during the late 70s and early 80s.

 

Sinclair isn't right now really is an respected company due to the amount of BS it does (See KTUL in Tusla, WNWO in Toledo, and literally almost all stations they own, including former stations like KSMO-TV.)

 

While Nexstar, it was created in 1996 with the first being owned/operated being WYOU in Scranton, Pennsylvania. It's an upstart company, yes, and Perry Sook, worked for WPXI in Pittsburgh and WOWK in Huntington–Charleston, West Virginia before the 1980s ended. I think he would end up owning WDKY in Danville–Lexington, Kentucky and KOCB in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma in the Mid-1990s before he sold them off to Sinclair. So Sook does have broadcast experience. 

 

I'm actually more confused on how and why y'all hate Nexstar, like I haven't seen that much changes on my Fox Station owned by them, so it's kinda like somehow someone on an curtain blog that I won't and can't mention caused all the hate on Nexstar. That and Tegna as well, but that's an whole different story. 

[Weeters 1838]

Things are getting a little off track here... Hearst rarely buys stations, and just blew $220 million on a station in a market where $220 million is a... questionable amount to pay for a TV station. I'm not so sure they'd still be in a buying mood, and I'm also not sure why people see this as the golden opportunity for Hearst to enter the market... This company has had operations in New York City since long before anyone even thought of the concept of television. I feel like they have had numerous better opportunities in much better market conditions to make that happen.

 

In all likelihood, a forced sale of WPIX would probably result in Nexstar dumping some underperforming stations (I'm sure they have a few) to get them back under the cap to own WPIX outright. They've invested far too much in WPIX to let it go elsewhere. 

[channel2 891]

The entire McGraw-Hill group sold for $212 million in 2011. I don't understand how prices are determined.

[ABC 7 Denver 1587]

On 5/23/2024 at 8:53 PM, Rusty Muck said:

]Uncle Perry's nepo baby who plays make-believe sportscaster will need to update his resume.

 

Perry Jr. doesn't have a resume. Dur. 

 

7 hours ago, tyrannical bastard said:

Perry Sook worked menial roles at stations like WOWK and WPXI during the late 70s and early 80s.

 

Perry Sook is menial.

5 hours ago, mer764KCTV5 said:

I'm actually more confused on how and why y'all hate Nexstar, like I haven't seen that much changes on my Fox Station owned by them, so it's kinda like somehow someone on an curtain blog that I won't and can't mention caused all the hate on Nexstar. That and Tegna as well, but that's an whole different story. 

 

Would you like me to county the ways?! I have laundry list.

 

4 hours ago, Weeters said:

In all likelihood, a forced sale of WPIX would probably result in Nexstar dumping some underperforming stations (I'm sure they have a few) to get them back under the cap to own WPIX outright. They've invested far too much in WPIX to let it go elsewhere. 

 

Exactly my expectations. WPIX means little to any other organization as it does to Nexstar, who runs a significant portion of their miserable cable channel out of it.

Edited May 25 by ABC 7 Denver

[NowBergen 503]

5 hours ago, ABC 7 Denver said:

Exactly my expectations. WPIX means little to any other organization as it does to Nexstar, who runs a significant portion of their miserable cable channel out of it.

 

New York DMA represents 6.3% of TV homes.  WPIX is on VHF so no UHF discount applies.  That is a lot of stations to get to that number.  Is Nexstar/Sook willing to give up so many stations needed to stay under the cap if he did buy WPIX outright?  How does his vision of owning all CW affiliates play in this scenario?  I would also think other top 20 stations would not be considered for divestment.

[The Frog 398]

The list of stations preempting LIV Golf is getting smaller. Erie, PA was removed from the list. Nexstar/Mission has WJET and WFXP in the market, the latter of which was airing it on their Antenna TV subchannel. Lilly Broadcasting's WSEE-DT2 is the current CW affiliate and is presumably clearing it.

 

[channel2 891]

2 hours ago, NowBergen said:

 

New York DMA represents 6.3% of TV homes.  WPIX is on VHF so no UHF discount applies.  That is a lot of stations to get to that number.  Is Nexstar/Sook willing to give up so many stations needed to stay under the cap if he did buy WPIX outright?  How does his vision of owning all CW affiliates play in this scenario?  I would also think other top 20 stations would not be considered for divestment.

 

Not even Pax TV got to own all its affiliates. The dream of the CW being all O&Os doesn't sound feasible to me.

 

Again, I point to UPN. After Viacom bought Paramount, they dumped all their NBC and CBS affiliates to make room for more UPN affiliates. If you want to own a network you had better go all-in on it.

[Big Rollo Smokes 200]

11 hours ago, channel2 said:

The entire McGraw-Hill group sold for $212 million in 2011. I don't understand how prices are determined.

 

Well, there are the basics–physical plant (studio/office and transmitter facilities), usual maintenance costs, lease contracts, appraised equipment, employee contracts and salaries, program inventory, advertising revenue...did I miss anything?

 

The only thing that is supposed to have no price tag on it is the FCC-issued broadcast license itself.

 

As far as how prices get inflated, someone with better background can answer that.

[Recovering Producer 126]

3 hours ago, NowBergen said:

 

New York DMA represents 6.3% of TV homes.  WPIX is on VHF so no UHF discount applies.  That is a lot of stations to get to that number.  Is Nexstar/Sook willing to give up so many stations needed to stay under the cap if he did buy WPIX outright?  How does his vision of owning all CW affiliates play in this scenario?  I would also think other top 20 stations would not be considered for divestment.

 

I think any serious discussion of whether Mission has to sell WPIX needs to be put on the back burner of everyone's minds until after the election, and I'm guessing "get past the election" is their legal strategy as well. A shift in partisan control of the FCC or Congress passing a law that loosens or eliminates ownership caps could make this all moot. And even if things remain the same, the backup plan is certainly to extend the appeals process as long as possible in hopes the regulatory environment shifts. 

[GraphicsMan 36]

3 hours ago, Recovering Producer said:

 

I think any serious discussion of whether Mission has to sell WPIX needs to be put on the back burner of everyone's minds until after the election, and I'm guessing "get past the election" is their legal strategy as well. A shift in partisan control of the FCC or Congress passing a law that loosens or eliminates ownership caps could make this all moot. And even if things remain the same, the backup plan is certainly to extend the appeals process as long as possible in hopes the regulatory environment shifts. 

Well it's unlikely Trump is getting elected so, (despite polls being in his favor, which I don't believe) and Biden is strict with television ownership, Trump's FCC allowed Nexstar to get away for all these years. I wouldn't hold your breath on that

[Weeters 1838]

I'm just gonna put this in the most blunt way possible: I do not expect "the cap" to survive under any political regime for much longer. It is a dinosaur. You can make a convincing case to either "side" as to why it needs to go away. It's been 20 years since Congress last meddled with it, it's just going to take one of the not-Sinclair groups to make a stink about it to the right people. It's a dated method of calculating "reach" in a world where everyone is connected to everything. 

 

I've theorized before that this isn't going to start from a company wanting to buy more stations, but a company trying to sell stations and not finding a buyer. Sinclair begging to raise the cap so they can buy more hits a lot differently than, say, Disney saying they can't sell the O&O group because nobody who wants to buy it can because of the cap.

 

The ownership cap on television stations is the least of Biden's worries. I really don't think the general public cares all that much. 

 

 

[mer764KCTV5 97]

1 hour ago, Weeters said:

The ownership cap on television stations is the least of Biden's worries. I really don't think the general public cares all that much. 

 

 

Exactly. With all of the stuff going on in the world right now, I don't think in any way, Joe Biden is going to focus on the ownership caps.

[Rusty Muck 4301]

5 hours ago, Weeters said:

I'm just gonna put this in the most blunt way possible: I do not expect "the cap" to survive under any political regime for much longer. It is a dinosaur. You can make a convincing case to either "side" as to why it needs to go away. It's been 20 years since Congress last meddled with it, it's just going to take one of the not-Sinclair groups to make a stink about it to the right people. It's a dated method of calculating "reach" in a world where everyone is connected to everything. 

 

I've theorized before that this isn't going to start from a company wanting to buy more stations, but a company trying to sell stations and not finding a buyer. Sinclair begging to raise the cap so they can buy more hits a lot differently than, say, Disney saying they can't sell the O&O group because nobody who wants to buy it can because of the cap.

 

The ownership cap on television stations is the least of Biden's worries. I really don't think the general public cares all that much. 

All the dead malls can merge together and you'd still wind up with a dead mall, just much larger and needing a bailout from the federal government when the entire system comes crashing down.

[Recovering Producer 126]

8 hours ago, mer764KCTV5 said:

Exactly. With all of the stuff going on in the world right now, I don't think in any way, Joe Biden is going to focus on the ownership caps.

 

Agreed. Should it happen, it will likely be part of a larger bill related to FCC rules and regulations.

 

I'd compare it to the FAA reauthorization law that passed earlier this month, where lawmakers added five daily long-distance flights out of slot/perimeter restricted National Airport just outside DC. A small piece of a must-pass bill that got more noise than more consequential parts of the law, and was heavily lobbied for by an industry with a few big players. (In this case, most airlines that aren't named United, which wanted to protect its hub at nearby Dulles airport.)  

[doublejman69 117]

Hearst buying WBBH is a unique one off, if you look at the demographics of SW Florida it’s very old, it’s the only demo that’s watches tv news and subscribe to cable in large numbers. Ft Myers is still a fast growing area. Just going by news ratings and how many people are watching in the market it’s likely far larger than its 55 ranking, possibly 5-10 rankings higher. Local news pay is really bad and in ft Myers for all stations especially WBBH it’s even worse. There is a bunch of injury lawyers and shady home remodelers in SW florida that purchases ads that make WBBH very profitable. 

 

Hearst isn’t going to buy your guys pet stations from owners that you don’t like.
 

There is no one that’s going to purchase tv stations and “invest” in tv news in 2024 we are long past that point. 

Edited May 26 by doublejman69

[ABC 7 Denver 1587]

11 hours ago, doublejman69 said:

Hearst buying WBBH is a unique one off, if you look at the demographics of SW Florida it’s very old, it’s the only demo that’s watches tv news and subscribe to cable in large numbers. Ft Myers is still a fast growing area. Just going by news ratings and how many people are watching in the market it’s likely far larger than its 55 ranking, possibly 5-10 rankings higher. Local news pay is really bad and in ft Myers for all stations especially WBBH it’s even worse. There is a bunch of injury lawyers and shady home remodelers in SW florida that purchases ads that make WBBH very profitable. 

 

Hearst isn’t going to buy your guys pet stations from owners that you don’t like.
 

There is no one that’s going to purchase tv stations and “invest” in tv news in 2024 we are long past that point. 

 

We're going to see more stations folding!

[Rusty Muck 4301]

12 hours ago, doublejman69 said:

There is no one that’s going to purchase tv stations and “invest” in tv news in 2024 we are long past that point. 

This exactly, and it's why I do disagree, to an extent, with @Weeters on having the elimination of all ownership limits being the solution to the problem. What good will it do when NexstarTegnaSinclairGrayScripps owns every channel when viewership for linear television across-the-board is vanishing and the networks will have already pulled stakes and fled OTA?

 

What happens then? You'd wind up with another Penn Central, a massive conglomerate that merged in a survival attempt and yet went bankrupt within two years of the consummation in disastrous fashion.

 

39 minutes ago, ABC 7 Denver said:

We're going to see more stations folding!

Is this a bad thing? You might as well get something for the spectrum if compensated accordingly by the FCC, especially if the transmitter land becomes more valuable than the station itself.

Edited May 27 by Rusty Muck

[Weeters 1838]

5 minutes ago, Rusty Muck said:

This exactly, and it's why I do disagree, to an extent, with @Weeters on having the elimination of all ownership limits being the solution to the problem. What good will it do when NexstarTegnaSinclairGrayScripps owns every channel when viewership for linear television across-the-board is vanishing and the networks will have already pulled stakes and fled OTA?

 

What happens then? You'd wind up with another Penn Central, a massive conglomerate that merged in a survival attempt and yet went bankrupt within months of the consummation in disastrous fashion.

 

Is this a bad thing? You might as well get something for the spectrum if compensated accordingly by the FCC, especially if the transmitter land becomes more valuable than the station itself.

For what it's worth, I don't necessarily think it's the solution as much as I think it is the likely outcome. We, and the FCC, can continue to dream that all these local investors are going to come out of the woodwork to buy up these stations, but we continue to see the opposite of that happening as the small, local owners continue to sell out (i.e. WBBH).

 

Some of these stations have already sold off their towers, and I really wonder how long it will be until you start seeing companies wanting to sell off the transmitter itself... Setting up something similar to the UK's broadcasting system where the transmission is contracted out to Arqiva. Especially as the bean counters at these groups love not owning things, and nobody seems particularly interested in doing anything useful with ATSC 3.0... It might be more "economical" to go through another round of spectrum auctions with the caveat that some will remain for television, and Crown Castle or whoever can buy that up and rent out the space to everyone else. We're already kind of seeing this with the post-repack channel shares out there, and ATSC 3 is primed to consolidate much of a market into a handful of frequencies.

[mer764KCTV5 97]

21 hours ago, doublejman69 said:

Hearst isn’t going to buy your guys pet stations from owners that you don’t like.

I don't hate Nexstar per se. They could've been better but I haven't seen an lot of negative changes on WDAF-TV or on the Topeka stations (KSNT, KTMJ-CD, and KTKA)

I just think it would be funny if Hearst decided to aquire WPIX. It's not realistic, but it would be interesting.

 

8 hours ago, Rusty Muck said:

Is this a bad thing? You might as well get something for the spectrum if compensated accordingly by the FCC, especially if the transmitter land becomes more valuable than the station itself.

I think the problem isn't the transmitter land but more about where would the affiliations go to after the stations folded. And in 2016-2018, television companies would sell of spectrum but it'll make almost no sense sometimes.

 

For example, The full-power WAGT, Media General (then-owner of WJBF) and Gray Television (owners of WRDW-TV) was having this battle over who would control WAGT after Gray aquired most of the television properties of Schutz Communications which Gray won. Then for no reason other than spectrum reasons, they shutted down THE FULL POWER STATION, putted the programing on a LPTV and somehow got people in outer parts of Augusta, Georgia the inability to see NBC and The CW programming unless you were looking at it on 12.3. (and made The CW stuck on an low-power without any reason.)

Edited May 27 by mer764KCTV5
Thank you Big Rollo Smokes for noticing the error.

[mrschimpf 2090]

On 5/25/2024 at 7:09 PM, Weeters said:

The ownership cap on television stations is the least of Biden's worries. I really don't think the general public cares all that much. 

Compared to radio, where Townsquare and Alpha are actively winding down stations and refusing to seek buyers (thus tossing them into the years-long auction process) and Audacy's coldly vicious and sudden centralcasting, the television cap is a smaller problem for the FCC. At least you still have some buyers in the TV market; you're down to EMF and other god groups in the radio industry as active buyers.

[mer764KCTV5 97]

8 minutes ago, mrschimpf said:

Compared to radio, where Townsquare and Alpha are actively winding down stations and refusing to seek buyers (thus tossing them into the years-long auction process) and Audacy's coldly vicious and sudden centralcasting, the television cap is a smaller problem for the FCC. At least you still have some buyers in the TV market; you're down to EMF and other god groups in the radio industry as active buyers.

It's less funnier for me as an Missourian to see Alpha Media do these changes because they could change WIBW-AM in nearby Kansas at any moment and how they are literally erasing anything local to their stations in Missouri. That and Townsquare literally turning in radio stations to the FCC and/or shutting then down.

 

So yea, I'd expect the FCC to do nothing about the ownership caps for TV but will for radio even if it might be controversial. And again, at least some buyers exists for Television that isn't God-Broadcasters. Radio however, not so much. 

[Big Rollo Smokes 200]

2 hours ago, mer764KCTV5 said:

For example, The full-power WAGT, Media General (then-owner of WJBF) and Gray Television (owners of WRDW-TV) was having this battle over who would control WAGT after Gray aquired most of the television properties of Schultz Communications which Gray won.

 

That was SCHURZ Communications.

[mer764KCTV5 97]

4 hours ago, Big Rollo Smokes said:

 

That was SCHURZ Communications.

Whoops.

I think I made an calculation error.

[mrschimpf 2090]

Harry doing some more Nexstar/Mission stanning about WADL this morning. Unlike Harry Styles though, the broadcasting industry is no longer 'as it was'.

 

Come on man, this is the worst station in Detroit outside the HC2 signals that seem to exist to give electric companies dependable cash for nothing. It'll still be the worst station in Detroit under Nexstar/Mission, AND we all forget that they won't have carriage on DirecTV once their current Adell contract ends because Mission's RTC people think they can charge a fortune for a CW+ or Foxnet schedule. Kevin Adell, Perry Sook, and Nancie Smith all deserve what they've reaped here.