Jump to content
  • Create New...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by broadcastfan9751

  1. Sony has a potential problem since it's a Japanese company, and foreign companies can't hold majority ownership of licenses.


    The FCC changed its policies a couple of years ago to allow waivers of that rule, jist like other telecommunications services.

    • Like 1
  2. Cox would probably be the only buyer that would keep the radio stations, if they were to be sold as a unit.


    The radio stations are operated by a separate company (Local Media San Diego) these days. That company would probably get the radio stations in any sale.

  3. Assuming the FCC does allow WYCN to use ch 13, which will now overlap Portland, they might be allowed to change to ch 8, with similar overlap. If they can keep the LD station, it could be used for Telemundo, Cozi, and TeleXo with new calls and another virtual channel.


    WMTW broadcasts from a greater height and has a larger coverage area than WGME, which would result in much greater overlap. As shown on this RabbitEars map, the overlap between WYCN/WGBX and WMTW would extend into Manchester, NH and a part of Northeast Massachusetts.

  4. Here's WGBX's map. And here's a map for all stations using PSIP 3. WCAX won't get in the way, but WFSB will ... especially in Worcester.


    But HERE'S the map for all stations using PSIP 13. Looking at WGBX's map side-by-side, the only overlap I can detect with WGME will be in Portsmouth NH... and that overlap already exists with WYCN in its current form as an LP.


    By my naked eye, Comcast may legitimately have a shot at NBC on a "full-power" OTA signal in Boston by "buying" "into" WGBX. And in time for the Super Bowl.


    Damn. That shark was onto something...


    Looking at the map of WGBX and WGME, the overlap area appears to be relatively small enough that they could get by with it. The overlap also appears to be mostly in the Boston DMA, where it probably wouldn't cause that much of an issue since most probably watch CBS on WBZ.


    However, in the event Sinclair did complain about it, a virtual channel close to VHF (like 14 or 15) could be doable.

    • Like 1
  5. Isn’t WBTS already on one of the major towers in Needham? That’s a lateral move from one low-power signal to another.


    Unless the plan is to somehow convert WYCN-CD to a full-power signal, but is that even doable? I mean, are there any full power stations at RF 13 to even contend with? Or do they go or full-power at, say... 15?


    They're sharing with WGBX, which will give it full-market coverage.

    • Like 6
  6. I already posted this in the "Spectrum Auction Results" thread, but I'm reposting it here because we might have an answer on NBC Boston's OTA home.


    There's a new channel-sharing agreement in Boston, and it looks like it might answer the "NBC Boston" question once and for all.


    OTA sold the spectrum for WYCN-CD in New Hampshire in the incentive auction and OTA has now entered into a CSA with WGBX. But, the agreement states that the shared operations will not begin until NBC acquires the WYCN license from OTA. So it looks like WYCN will be the new home of "NBC Boston".

    • Like 1
  7. There's a new channel-sharing agreement in Boston, and it looks like it might answer the "NBC Boston" question once and for all.


    OTA sold the spectrum for WYCN-CD in New Hampshire in the incentive auction and OTA has now entered into a CSA with WGBX. But, the agreement states that the shared operations will not begin until NBC acquires the WYCN license from OTA. So it looks like WYCN will be the new home of "NBC Boston".

  8. Now, one other question: does WNEU 60.2 have retransmission consent, or is at the very least eligible for it?


    If that’s the case, then that full-power subchannel - despite being on the outer reaches of the market - is acting as a necessary surrogate for WBTS.


    Yes, NBC elected retransmission consent for WNEU for the most recent carriage cycle, so it can negotiate for carriage of subchannels.

    • Like 1
  9. With this deal done, I wonder what happens next, will KRNV and KRXI swap owners so that Sinclair owns the Channel 4 license while Cunningham owns the Channel 11 license; furthermore, with Elko actually in the Salt Lake City market, will KENV become a KUTV satellite and allow KSL to become the sole NBC station for the Nevada side to the market?


    Probably won't happen, because KRNV and KENV are VHF stations, and thus would reduce cap space for Sinclair. Also, KSL doesn't really have coverage of Elko over-the-air.

  10. WBIN's VHF translators are still being listed at the bottom of the screen. Since a spectrum auction was for their main signal on UHF rf 35, are their lp translators still allowed to operate along with the their channel share agreement with WUTF ?


    Yeah, the translators are under separate licenses, so they can still operate.

    • Like 1
  11. Will WGBH have to discontinue mobile TV when they move from rf 19 to rf 5 during the repack?


    Not necessarily, but mobile TV probably won't work very well on low-VHF, so they might have to move it to WGBX (and possibly switch to ATSC 3.0, which has better mobile TV capabilities).

    • Like 4
  12. Weigel making a play in the possibility that Sinclair is not allowed to have a triopoly with KTVI, KPLR and/or KDNL?


    Or maybe they want to try to take FOX away from KTVI if it is kept by Sinclair?

  13. What would WWOR rebrand itself as? Fox 5 Plus? Jersey 9?


    Been wondering this myself. Probably something with a tie-in to New Jersey, so that they don't get more backlash from the NJ politicians.

  14. Between the Nexstar WAVY-WVBT duopoly and whichever stations Sinclair keeps between WTVZ and the WTKR-WGNT duopoly they inherited from Tribune, I think Tegna (nee Gannett and Belo) waited too late to pursue a duopoly with WSKY and WVEC. Can't see another duopoly being allowed for Norfolk.


    Actually, there would be enough stations for TEGNA to form a WSKY/WVEC duopoly if Sinclair sold either WTVZ or WTKR/WGNT.


    2- UNC

    3, 27- Sinclair/Tribune

    4, 13- TEGNA

    10, 43- Nexstar

    15- WHRO

    21- TBN

    33- Sinclair

    49- Ion

    • Like 1
  15. Nexstar can't pick up WHDF - not enough full power stations in the market (unless they can pull a failing station stunt).



    They'd probably have Mission acquire WHDF and then enter into an SSA to operate it.

    • Like 2
  16. Here's something interesting I saw recently. I did a TV query on Parkersburg, WV and found that Gray has a construction permit for what appears to be (on paper, at least) a WDTV translator in Parkersburg. Is Gray trying to replace WIYE with a WDTV translator for the market's CBS affiliate, possibly clearing up WIYE for an ABC affiliation? It's very interesting considering the Parkersburg and Clarksburg markets were supposed to be one large market in the late 50's.


    It won't happen. That's a DTV replacement translator application that was filed back in 2009, long before Gray took over. The permit expired in 2013, although the FCC suspended the permit deadlines for LPTVs due to the incentive auction (although I'm not sure if that also applied to DTV replacement translators). Also, the coverage area for the translator is much smaller than WIYE's, and it's on VHF 2, which means the reception would be bad.

    • Like 1
  17. There's a new sharing agreement in Connecticut, and in a first, it's a three-way share.


    NRJ's WZME (which is technically in the NYC market) sold its spectrum in the auction and will share with Connecticut Public Broadcasting's WEDW. But, Connecticut Public Broadcasting also sold one of its other satellite stations, WEDY in New Haven, and it too will share with WEDW. So three stations on one RF channel.


    Apparently, there was also going to be an additional station sharing with WEDW, but that station was apparently not successful in the auction and was redacted from the version of the CSA submitted with WZME's sharing application.

  18. I'm curious about how stations will handle legal IDs? Will the station have to list the physical channel that they are on in addition to their virtual channel?


    Legally, stations only have to include the call sign and community of license in their legal ID. Including the frequency or channel number is optional.

    • Like 3
  19. Probably because KYES's old owners literally got their digital channel set-up on a shoestring. Their setup worked fine for what it was, but boost it to Gray standards and they have issues (they had a notice on the KTUU site talking about an 'upgrade' last month so something likely ended up not working with that).



    What is the must-carry situation like with a move from a full-power to a low-power, do they stay maintained under a channel share? Though because of where WTBY was, it will lose all coverage in the Hartford market.


    Yeah, the NPRM that CircleSeven linked to above talks about some of KYES' problems, including that they currently use a repurposed analog antenna that the previous owner built himself! If you want an even better idea of what their current facilities are like, just check out this DTV Transition Report that was filed back in 2008 (especially Exhibit 2!).


    As for full-power stations sharing with Class A stations, full-power stations that sold spectrum and choose to share with a Class A station keep all of the benefits of a full-power license (including must-carry), except that they will be limited to Class A/LPTV power limits (15kw UHF, 3kw VHF).

    • Like 1
  20. Here are some interesting CSAs.


    Two TBN owned stations are going to be channel sharing with two Class-A low power stations, with the Class As being the "sharer" or the host station. Both Class As are owned by LocusPoint Networks (Could TBN end up buying these two from them? LocusPoint has been on a selling spree lately).


    WWTO in LaSalle, IL, which took a whopping $304.25M in the auction (the largest amount for a single station), will channel share with Plano, IL's WLPD-CD. WLPD is in the process of moving from RF 35 to RF 32.


    And WTBY in Poughkeepsie, NY, will be channel sharing with Edison, NJ's WDVB-CD. That station is moving from RF 23 to RF 22.


    Keep in mind, both WWTO & WTBY's main signals were so far, it was hard to reach if you lived closer to Chicago or New York City respectively. Now they've made CSAs with Class-As that have in-city coverage, but will no longer have coverage from their respective communities of licenses (LaSalle and Poughkeepsie).


    And because of this, WWTO will be changing its community of license to Naperville, IL, and WTBY will be changing its community of license to Jersey City, NJ.

  21. If it was a failed station waiver involved, they would've stated it on the paperwork.


    In section 5.1(b) of the asset purchase agreement, it says they plan to seek a waiver.


    As for what Gray will do with WFXU, they'll probably use it for WCTV's MNTV subchannel. They really don't have any other option since WTXL certainly will stay with ABC, and WTWC and WTLF are probably bundled in with Sinclair's other Fox, NBC and CW affiliates.

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using TVNewsTalk you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.