Jump to content

Sinclair, Tribune Close to Merger Deal


MidwestTV

Recommended Posts

I'd say the six markets where two news operations are affected - Salt Lake City, Seattle, Scranton-Wilkes-Barre, Harrisburg et. al., Grand Rapids-Kalamazoo and Oklahoma City - are the most problematic.

 

Y'know, Sinclair could stick it to Fox by keeping the Fox affiliates and selling off KUTV, KOMO, WNEP, WHP, WWMT, and KFOR (and any sister stations, if need be).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Riiiight, I almost forgot that Sinclair just started a news department at WOLF. It might be a wasted investment now, if Sinclair decides to shell that station -- which it really can't, since Scranton/Wilkes-Barre is their biggest conflict on account of the group already has a virtual triopoly there.

 

Sinclair could sort out the issue by keeping either WQMY or WSWB (with either New Age or MPS Media's approval) to form a new virtual duopoly with WNEP, and selling off the outlier with WOLF. They can't divest the whole trio; the only other group owner in that market, Nexstar Media, already runs WBRE and WYOU, and -- even though Nexstar has gotten around it under Genachowski's FCC leadership, and could try it again now -- could only form a new virtual duop with WQMY or WSWB if it gave up one of the two Big Three outlets it has there. Even in a permissive, pro-consolidation FCC administration like Ajit Pai's is turning out to be, it might be tough for a package sale of WOLF, WSWB and WQMY -- even with LMAs included -- to an outside company to pass muster with the DOJ, even if it gets the FCC's approval.

 

The other big problem with this deal is the fact that it would make Sinclair the Luken Communications of full-power television; it already owns three diginets (Comet, TBD and Charge!, the former of which has some Tribune stations as affiliates), while Tribune owns Antenna TV and 50% of This TV (both of which are already carried on several of Sinclair's stations); also, Sinclair has affiliation agreements with networks such as WeatherNation and MeTV, while Tribune maintains an affiliation agreement with Escape. The launch of their ATSC 3.0 signals is the only way that they could fit all of them onto their stations if they are forced to divest some of its existing stations or select Tribune stations, since the 1.0 signal compression limitations make it impossible for Sinclair to shove all of them onto one or two signals.

 

Selling the three existing Scranton/Wilkes-Barre stations wouldn't cause an issue with the DOJ, as long as Sinclair doesn't retain any intellectual property of the stations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always wanted to see a Fox-Raycom trade: KTBC for WXIX in Cincinnati. Cincinnati is a larger market than Austin. Plus, WXIX is routinely number one at 10pm. I'm sure Fox would love to kill that competition from WKRC (on WSTR.)

Austin is a growing market. No way FOX let's it go.

One court ruling could make this deal DOA unless Congress intervenes.

 

[MEDIA=twitter]861607148962406400[/MEDIA]

I've said it in other threads, but the best course of action is tying this up in the courts. *IF* they can hold it up for another year+ and a democratic majority is able to take the House/Senate, then this deal is dead.

 

For me, it's not about the Sinclair's political leanings as much as the huge cuts that they'll invoke at the Tribune stations. Quite a few of Tribune's stations are bloated with talent, and everyone well knows that Sinclair is chomping at the bit to cut costs left and right.

 

For as much as GOP reiterates creating/keeping jobs in this country, this deal will have the opposite effect. But i'm guessing this kind of hypocrisy is A-OK.

Y'know, Sinclair could stick it to Fox by keeping the Fox affiliates and selling off KUTV, KOMO, WNEP, WHP, WWMT, and KFOR (and any sister stations, if need be).

Well, as has been mentioned before, FOX has to sign off on any ownership/affiliation transfers, so in reality they can always stick it to Sinclair any time they want...

 

Just to keep things chill between FOX and Sinclair, I can see KCPQ being offered to FOX.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Y'know, Sinclair could stick it to Fox by keeping the Fox affiliates and selling off KUTV, KOMO, WNEP, WHP, WWMT, and KFOR (and any sister stations, if need be).

The only sister stations that they'd need to sell are ones where both groups own/operate two stations; for example, in Oklahoma City, they could sell KFOR/KAUT or KOKH/KOCB. But in such a scenario, in Salt Lake City, they could keep KMYU if they wanted, sell KUTV and keep KSTU, since KMYU isn't among the top-4 (not to mention that it only counts as a duopoly on technicality, because of the fact that the SLC market encompasses all of Utah, and KMYU is licensed to St. George in the southern part of the state).

 

Selling the three existing Scranton/Wilkes-Barre stations wouldn't cause an issue with the DOJ, as long as Sinclair doesn't retain any intellectual property of the stations.

I was talking about selling all three existing stations together. They could keep one and retain its intellectual property -- either WSWB's CW affiliation or WQMY's MyNetworkTV affiliation, as well as their syndicated programming inventory -- and transfer its operations to WNEP's facility, but they would have to sell the license and intellectual assets of the two it has to divest (including WOLF).

 

But I get the point I assume you meant: if Sinclair chose to sell WOLF, WWSB and WQMY together, the buyer might make some justification to convince the FCC to transfer the existing LMAs to the new owner, and assure it that Sinclair would wipe its hands clean of the stations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could only imagine KWGN CW2 and KDVR FOX31 using the Sinclair music and graphics package...falling victim to the standardization hoopla. No more FOX31 Denver or Colorado's Own CW2. No more localization. No more using their own theme music: FOX31 with Alan Koshiyama, CW2 with Locals Only by Stephen Arnold.

 

I really like the localized branding and KDVR/KWGN doing their own thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always wanted to see a Fox-Raycom trade: KTBC for WXIX in Cincinnati. Cincinnati is a larger market than Austin. Plus, WXIX is routinely number one at 10pm. I'm sure Fox would love to kill that competition from WKRC (on WSTR.)

 

Could Fox also try and get WOIO in Cleveland along with WXIX? Especially with WJW soon to be owned by Sinclair? If that was to ever happen, that would reverse the CBS-Fox switch that took place in Cleveland in 1994.

 

I can also picture Fox using WOIO to lure away talent from WJW, especially those who don't want to work for Sinclair or potentially might get let go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Selling the three existing Scranton/Wilkes-Barre stations wouldn't cause an issue with the DOJ, as long as Sinclair doesn't retain any intellectual property of the stations.

 

The easiest way out is to leave everything alone and sell WNEP. But if they feel they want (what is now) the #1 station in the market badly, I can see a couple outs:

 

* Sell WOLF (breaking up the existing triopoly) to Nexstar, who in turn sells either WBRE or WYOU to a third owner. That would open up a third news operation, give Nexstar more news producing opportunities and give Sinclair the strongest station.

 

* Sell the current Sinclair triopoly together, but they cannot maintain it in any way, shape or form.

 

In the case of to the south in Harrisburg et. al., it is a similar predicament except Hearst does provide another voice with market-dominant WGAL. They might be able to get away with merging the two with shells there since they are #3 and #4 in ratings. (Had they kept WHTM back in 2014 as they wanted to, there would be no way since they would own everything in the market except WGAL.) Ironically, Hearst does Sinclair a favor there being so strong.

 

Could Fox also try and get WOIO in Cleveland along with WXIX? Especially with WJW soon to be owned by Sinclair? If that was to ever happen, that would reverse the CBS-Fox switch that took place in Cleveland in 1994.

 

Unless Scripps and Raycom merge (the only deal that would involve both markets), that is highly unlikely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Riiiight, I almost forgot that Sinclair just started a news department at WOLF. It might be a wasted investment now, if Sinclair decides to shell that station -- which it really can't, since Scranton/Wilkes-Barre is their biggest conflict on account of the group already has a virtual triopoly there

 

News Department? You mean outsourcing agreement to a station 10,000 miles away?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who is saying "liberal bias" is a good thing? Any kind of bias is bad.

 

You are absolutely correct! But I never see any posts crying about liberal bias, only when there is a conservative slant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they let go of those stations, you can guarantee the new owner will start a real news department.

 

I hope so. WSBT produces the newscasts for both WNWO/Toledo as well as WOLF. It's so pitiful that the woman anchoring the newscast referred to NWO as "Fox 56" while anchoring their newscast. It's almost laughable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This deal is not going to be held up in the courts. The DOJ isn't going to hold it up either. Waiting for the unlikely chance of a Democrat controlled Congress to be sworn in 2019? What difference does that make. The DOJ, FCC are controlled by Trump until January 20, 2021 or 2025.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember, y'all. Meredith Media General didn't happen. Someone MAY still come in and save them. I'm still holding out a small glimmer of hope. Agree to disagree with me if you want to.

God, I hope you're right. The outlook for future journalists like me is grim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any broadcast group, or any politician from Washington going to block/deny this merger?

Hopefully soon. I read that back in 2003, everybody got upseto when the GOP controlled FCC tried to raise the ownership rules or something. Whatever they were trying to do never happened. Democrats in Washington aren't happy. I bet by the end of this week or early next there will be some sort of backlash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I wish Mr. Pai over at the FCC would realize what kind of mistake he's in for, by allowing sh*t like this to happen (through easing of the 39% cap).

 

I honestly don't see WXIN going anywhere. WTTV I could care less about, let that go back to Sinclair, but I can see Sinclair holding onto WXIN and ruining the only decent newscast here (since Scripps ruined WRTV back in the day).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I thought before, I believe they will trade up in their conflict markets if Tribune has a better station. If Sinclair has the better operation, they would likely divest the Tribune operation if there is no way of acquiring it under any current or future regulations.

 

As for any other divestitures, it could be in markets with an already weak presence that would noticeably affect their cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One court ruling could make this deal DOA unless Congress intervenes.

 

[MEDIA=twitter]861607148962406400[/MEDIA]

The GOP-run Congress can't even agree on their own party's key legislation. To call them dysfunctional is an insult to actual dysfunction.

 

That being said, Pai's stupid "UHF discount" reenacting is ridiculously obsolete and was done entirely out of political patronage. If any court upholds it, they either have no clue about how broadcasting works, or they get paid off by the Smith clan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The GOP-run Congress can't even agree on their own party's key legislation. To call them dysfunctional is an insult to actual dysfunction.

 

That being said, Pai's stupid "UHF discount" reenacting is ridiculously obsolete and was done entirely out of political patronage. If any court upholds it, they either have no clue about how broadcasting works, or they get paid off by the Smith clan.

 

That means one lower court ruling anywhere could kill the whole deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know how we can stop this- by heading to Maryland, gathering our riot weapons (torches, pitchforks, swords, crossbows, rocks) and taking the fight to the Heathens of Hunt Valley. Who's with me?!:smash:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know how we can stop this- by heading to Maryland, gathering our riot weapons (torches, pitchforks, swords, crossbows, rocks) and taking the fight to the Heathens of Hunt Valley. Who's with me?!:smash:

 

That's called getting too obsessed (unless you are joking). All that will do is strengthen their cause even more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now 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.