Jump to content

FCC Approves Sales of Allbritton to Sinclair


Breaking News

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 250
  • Created
  • Last Reply

 

Could ABC get so restless if they get stuck at 68.2 that they shop a new home? When do the other affiliation agreements end?

 

The kicker with that is that this will be bundled in with the other Sinclair ABC affiliates agreements. ABC is going to have their hands tied with this one and be stuck with a not so desirable situation just like they are in St. Louis.

 

This is a shame. Even KDNL isn't on a subchannel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

68.2? They couldn't have put them on .1 and then the MyNet feed on .2?

Yes, they could have. And, of course have the assumption among most of us (myself included) was that they'd do that.

 

Really, what appears to be happening is that WBMA-LD is loosing it's full power satellites (WCFT/WJSU) and replacing them with simulcasts on the multicast channel(s) of WABM (and WDBB.) So, in a technical sense the ABC programming didn't "move" to WABM it simply picked up a simulcast of WBMA-LD. It least that's what it's looking like to me.

 

And, It's possible they could end up shuffling things around at a later date.

 

And aren't they supposed to also air the feed on WDBB .2? Because there is a viewer who posted this comment:

"VERY DISSAPPOINTED! When does this change take place. I live in rural Jefferson County and the only channels I get are abc 33 and cw 17, now because of this change I will loose 33. I have rescanned and cannot pick up the new 68.2 channel. I am, to say the least, very frustrated!"

 

And wouldn't adding the feed on 17.2 abate their concerns?

Yes, according to the application they plan to also simulcast via a multicast channel on WDBB.

 

I bet ABC would demand it move to 68.1.

Could ABC get so restless if they get stuck at 68.2 that they shop a new home? When do the other affiliation agreements end?

No, ABC doesn't care. You guys are forgetting that ABC was consulted and agreed to it. They lonely really care that the programming is cleared and the reverse compensation payments are deposited.

 

The kicker with that is that this will be bundled in with the other Sinclair ABC affiliates agreements. ABC is going to have their hands tied with this one and be stuck with a not so desirable situation just like they are in St. Louis.

 

This is a shame. Even KDNL isn't on a subchannel.

It appears to me as though "ABC 33/40" will remain on WBMA-LD. And, WABM will be simulcasting WBMA-LD via a multicast channel (68.2.) So, it's not really originating on a subchannel.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It appears to me as though "ABC 33/40" will remain on WBMA-LD. And, WABM will be simulcasting WBMA-LD via a multicast channel (68.2.) So, it's not really originating on a subchannel.

 

Fair point. But Low-Powered Digital isn't that much better. That's why I mentioned KDNL, because even though they have no news department, at least they're on a full-power station.

 

ABC is getting a raw deal from this but as I mentioned, I think they're stuck with this like they're stuck with KDNL here in St. Louis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have thought they would have at least put it in 68.1. Wonder why they can't use PSIP to make it 40 or 33? I read where they are making WCIV/WWMP show as 4.1 and 4.2.

I don't guess it really matters a whole lot though. Around 95% of the market is cable/DBS.

Still, it doesn't look good for the ABC affiliate in the 43rd largest market to be on a .2 channel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I would have thought they would have at least put it in 68.1. Wonder why they can't use PSIP to make it 40 or 33? I read where they are making WCIV/WWMP show as 4.1 and 4.2.

I don't guess it really matters a whole lot though. Around 95% of the market is cable/DBS.

Still, it doesn't look good for the ABC affiliate in the 43rd largest market to be on a .2 channel.

 

I suspect they will eventually flip 68.1 and 68.2. I'd really need to see the affiliation agreement as modified but I know that the ABC one does typically have a "main subchannel" clause in it.

 

They can't use PSIP to 40 or 33 because those allocations are lost with the licenses. I thought the same thing and was told that it would not be permitted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I would have thought they would have at least put it in 68.1. Wonder why they can't use PSIP to make it 40 or 33? I read where they are making WCIV/WWMP show as 4.1 and 4.2.

I don't guess it really matters a whole lot though. Around 95% of the market is cable/DBS.

Still, it doesn't look good for the ABC affiliate in the 43rd largest market to be on a .2 channel.

 

I've brought this up God knows how many times before but, there are rules surrounding virtual channel numbers.

 

The Code of Federal Regulations (47 CFR73.682) explicitly states: "digital broadcast television (DTV) signals shall comply with the standards for such transmissions set forth in...ATSC A/65C: “ATSC Program and System Information Protocol for Terrestrial Broadcast and Cable, Revision C With Amendment No. 1 dated May 9, 2006.” The ASTC standard is very clear....you don't get to make up your Virtual Channel Number. There are two very limited exceptions. First, the ATSC standard allows for commonly owned stations with overlapping contours to be aligned under the "Major Channel Number" of one of the commonly owned stations...provided it doesn't create a PSIP conflict. For Example, Meredith aligns WSHM-LD's Virtual Channel under WFSB's "Major Channel Number" And, I have three duopolies in my market that align this way KTCA/KTCI, KSTP/KSTC and KMSP/WFTC aligning all their channels under 2, 5 and 9 respectively. The other exception is the FCC allows Virtual Channel Waivers. These are rarely granted outside of solving a PSIP conflict.

 

So, under federal code Sinclair can't map to whatever channel number they want. And, Virtual Channels 33 and 40 are gone with the WCFT/WJSU licenses. In Birmingham if they wanted to neighborhood their channels and use "common mapping" like the examples above they could map under VC numbers 21, 58 or 68 as those are commonly owned...that's it. No mapping to 33 or 40. The only VC number they can use in Charleston is 36. So, absent a wavier I question the validity of the claim that the current WMMP facility will change it's OTA virtual channel number to 4.

 

And, ABC isn't "moving" to a .2 subchannel. It's remaining on a low-power channel (WBMA-LD) with simulcast(s) being picked up on WABM (and WDBB.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect they will eventually flip 68.1 and 68.2. I'd really need to see the affiliation agreement as modified but I know that the ABC one does typically have a "main subchannel" clause in it.

 

They can't use PSIP to 40 or 33 because those allocations are lost with the licenses. I thought the same thing and was told that it would not be permitted.

There old agreement with Allbritton did specify that they be on the major channel now that you mention it. Of course it has been amended as you say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've brought this up God knows how many times before but, there are rules surrounding virtual channel numbers.

 

The Code of Federal Regulations (47 CFR73.682) explicitly states: "digital broadcast television (DTV) signals shall comply with the standards for such transmissions set forth in...ATSC A/65C: “ATSC Program and System Information Protocol for Terrestrial Broadcast and Cable, Revision C With Amendment No. 1 dated May 9, 2006.” The ASTC standard is very clear....you don't get to make up your Virtual Channel Number. There are two very limited exceptions. First, the ATSC standard allows for commonly owned stations with overlapping contours to be aligned under the "Major Channel Number" of one of the commonly owned stations...provided it doesn't create a PSIP conflict. For Example, Meredith aligns WSHM-LD's Virtual Channel under WFSB's "Major Channel Number" And, I have three duopolies in my market that align this way KTCA/KTCI, KSTP/KSTC and KMSP/WFTC aligning all their channels under 2, 5 and 9 respectively. The other exception is the FCC allows Virtual Channel Waivers. These are rarely granted outside of solving a PSIP conflict.

 

So, under federal code Sinclair can't map to whatever channel number they want. And, Virtual Channels 33 and 40 are gone with the WCFT/WJSU licenses. In Birmingham if they wanted to neighborhood their channels and use "common mapping" like the examples above they could map under VC numbers 21, 58 or 68 as those are commonly owned...that's it. No mapping to 33 or 40. The only VC number they can use in Charleston is 36. So, absent a wavier I question the validity of the claim that the current WMMP facility will change it's OTA virtual channel number to 4.

 

And, ABC isn't "moving" to a .2 subchannel. It's remaining on a low-power channel (WBMA-LD) with simulcast(s) being picked up on WABM (and WDBB.)

 

You don't have to get all huffy about the virtual channels. I was just telling what I read about WWMP, time will tell I guess.

As for them not "moving" for all intents and purposes they are as only parts of 2 counties in the 21 county DMA can receive WBMA-LD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

As for them not "moving" for all intents and purposes they are as only parts of 2 counties in the 21 county DMA can receive WBMA-LD.

 

As long as WBMA-LD 58.1 airs ABC programming, they will not be in breach of the ABC agreement, as that station is considered the ABC affiliate in the market, and not WABM.2 or WCFT/WJSU, as they are considered satelites of WBMA-LD.

 

Could this be a case of WABM testing the .2 signal, and see if the station's equipment can handle two HD feeds prior to the deadline?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You don't have to get all huffy about the virtual channels. I was just telling what I read about WWMP, time will tell I guess.

As for them not "moving" for all intents and purposes they are as only parts of 2 counties in the 21 county DMA can receive WBMA-LD.

 

I promise you I'm not trying to be huffy. I'm just trying to share my knowledge with others in the community. I was attempting to acknowledge the fact that I've made several posts on the topic with subtle variations on the boards. Rereading my post I can see how it would come off as huffy or snippy. Please accept my apologies as that was not my intent.

 

 

I As long as WBMA-LD 58.1 airs ABC programming, they will not be in breach of the ABC agreement, as that station is considered the ABC affiliate in the market, and not WABM.2 or WCFT/WJSU, as they are considered satelites of WBMA-LD.

 

Could this be a case of WABM testing the .2 signal, and see if the station's equipment can handle two HD feeds prior to the deadline?

 

Exactly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

As long as WBMA-LD 58.1 airs ABC programming, they will not be in breach of the ABC agreement, as that station is considered the ABC affiliate in the market, and not WABM.2 or WCFT/WJSU, as they are considered satelites of WBMA-LD.

 

Could this be a case of WABM testing the .2 signal, and see if the station's equipment can handle two HD feeds prior to the deadline?

 

...and if they can't, expect Armstrong Williams to swoop in and buy WCFT and WJSU at the last second...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be awesome to give the WABM license to an educational entity...much like Raycom / American Spirit did in Jackson when they donated WUFX (now WLOO) to Tougaloo College and used it as a tool for their students to learn the ropes of the industry. Even though Alabama has WVUA / WUOA, there's also UAB, Samford, and other schools like Stillman in Tuscaloosa or Gadsden State in Anniston that could benefit....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You don't have to get all huffy about the virtual channels. I was just telling what I read about WWMP, time will tell I guess.

As for them not "moving" for all intents and purposes they are as only parts of 2 counties in the 21 county DMA can receive WBMA-LD.

 

I concur. It's not that serious!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It would be awesome to give the WABM license to an educational entity...much like Raycom / American Spirit did in Jackson when they donated WUFX (now WLOO) to Tougaloo College and used it as a tool for their students to learn the ropes of the industry. Even though Alabama has WVUA / WUOA, there's also UAB, Samford, and other schools like Stillman in Tuscaloosa or Gadsden State in Anniston that could benefit....

 

Or Jacksonville State, where the WJSU calls came from!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And now HSH wants WCFT for $50K.

 

Don't know how they'll going to get the greenlight and the license turn in is this Monday.

 

They likely bought some more time. From the "Description of Transaction" attachment submitted with the application: "Given the requirement for a thirty day public notice period prior to Commission action on assignment applications, it is not possible for the Commission to grant this application prior to the September 29, 2014 Surrender Date. Accordingly, HSH Birmingham and STG respectfully request that the Commission issue an Order deferring the date upon which STG must surrender the license for the Station so as to permit consideration of this application. If the Commission does not timely indicate its consent to deferral of the Surrender Date pending action on the instant application, STG will be required to surrender the licenses for the Station on or before the Surrender Date as set forth in the Order. In order to permit a thoughtful review of the public interest benefits of this application, therefore, the parties urgently request that the Commission give its consent to the deferral of the Surrender Date until the earlier of ten (10) business days after the Commission has finally acted on this application or the consummation of the transactions contemplated by this application." They made the same request with WCIV as well.

 

I still am curious what the end game is here with HSH, WCIV and WCFT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see. Perhaps they will end up doing something along the lines of what Sinclair and HSH do in Flint with WEYI.

Like the WCIV application, the application for WCFT states "While HSH maintains shared services agreements with STG in its operation of WWMB and WEYI, no such sharing or similar agreements are proposed here in connection with the proposed assignment of WCFT. HSH Birmingham will independently staff and program WCFT." So, IDK.

 

Myron Falwell said it best on the last page of this thread:

Essentially, Howard Stirk has offered to buy what amounts to a piece a paper for $50K. Lucky him.

I am just puzzled at what the end game is. So far HSH spending 100k to buy stations with no staff, no programming, etc. Is HSH planning to squat on the license(s) and flip it in the auction or to another buyer? Will Sinclair sell/gift HSH some programming...like say the MNT programming? Or, will HSH truly attempt to start a new station from scratch either independent or affiliated with some other network?

 

Also, can we just go ahead pencil HSH in for whatever license will be jettisoned in Las Vegas?

 

Then how about WJSU? Will they surrender them? Also will WCFT sign off?

The application states "STG also committed that it would surrender the license of WJSU-TV, Anniston, Alabama, by the Surrender Date. That commitment is unaffected by this application." So, It looks like WJSU will still be surrendered.

 

According to their websites it looks like all three stations (WCIV, WCFT & WJSU) will be taken silent on Monday night. Barring a last minute change WJSU will then be surrendered. WCIV and WCFT will likely remain silent pending the outcome of the applications submitted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm honestly confused by this whole WCIV thing. Are they still going to be branded as channel 4, or what? And why exactly are they doing this?

I see that ABC is on .2, I wonder how they are getting by with that with a ABC? I can't imagine that the affiliate agreement didn't specify it be on the major channel. I can see how they can get by with .2 in Birmingham having WBMA 58.1, but not in Charleston.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

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.