The way I read the statement makes me think that they are looking to "associate" with another TV operator to achieve the degree of scale needed to prevail in today's highly concentrated TV environment. Only if such an avenue is not found will they sell.
That seems logical, too. A like kind exchange of shares keeps the tax burden for the surviving heirs to a minimum. The family holds the chairmanship of the board, but operations are predominantly not family businesses. So the major goal is asset preservation and income, so a merger or similar arrangement avoids huge tax liabilities.
The Wall Street Journal says,
"The Atlanta-based company said Tuesday it is looking into options for the broadcast stations, part of Cox Media Group, which could include a partnership or merger into a larger television company."
That sounds to me like they are looking at low-tax or no-tax options, not outright sales. Because all the stations were acquired at low or no cost, the capital gains taxes would reduce the proceeds significantly, while a merger preserves all or nearly all the capital.
