• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Big Four May Sit Out Station Consolidation

An editorial by Tv Newscheck over TV station consolidation

Many FCC-watchers expect deregulatory minded FCC Chairman Ajit Pai will raise the station ownership limits, and station groups like Sinclair, Nexstar, Gray and Tegna are good bets to be buying. But what about the Big Four networks? With the possible exception of CBS, I don't see them as ready to pounce on the shopping opportunity that Pai may hand them.
By Harry A. Jessell
TVNewsCheck, March 17, 2017 3:51 PM EDT
Everybody in and around broadcasting believes that there will be another wave of consolidation over this year and next triggered by FCC Chairman Ajit Pai loosening the ownership restrictions. I've talked about it several times here since Donald Trump's election.

But who will be the buyers? And who will be the sellers?

Story continues after the ad

Atop the seller column is Tribune. A year ago, the troubled company began a top-to-bottom "strategic review." So far, that has led to the spinoff of real estate and some non-broadcast assets like Gracenote.

Now, the expectation is that it will take advantage of the Trump-inspired deregulation to start selling its vast collection of TV assets that include news-producing stations in seven of the top eight markets, although none are Big Four affiliates.

On the buy side, most of the talk has focused on Sinclair, Nexstar and Gray. They led the last round of consolidation that ran from 2011 until the FCC shut down the station trading market early last year so it could conduct the incentive auction.

The only thing holding back Sinclair and Nexstar right now are the ownership rules that have effectively limited them to a household reach of 39%. Speculation is running high that Sinclair will make a play for as many of the Tribune stations as the rules and its finances allow.

Gray has plenty of headroom under the rules, but targets top stations in smaller markets.

In a note to her clients this week, Wells Fargo analyst Marci Ryvicker also includes Tegna on the list of possible buyers.

But what about the Big Four networks?

With the possible exception of CBS, I don't see them as ready to pounce on the shopping opportunity that Pai may hand them.

When ABC passed on buying Allbritton's WJLA Washington and its other ABC affiliates in 2013, it effectively declared to the world that it wasn't interested in expanding in broadcasting anymore. Unlike CBS, NBC and Fox, ABC has had plenty of room under the FCC cap to grow if it wanted to. It just doesn't want to.

NBC has shown few signs that it wants to buy.

It did push into Boston in January, stripping Ed Ansin's WHDH of its affiliation. But it did so out of whole cloth. Because there was no full-power station available in the market (the combative Ansin surely wasn't going to sell), NBC created an O&O by stitching together its regional cable channel with a couple of low-power stations. It's going to be a while before we can gauge the wisdom of the move.

21st Century Fox CEO James Murdoch told analysts last month that Fox was not interested in more stations. "We really like the shape of our station business right now."

But he also gave the company a little wiggle room. "There always may be affiliation swaps or other little bits and pieces around the edges."

I wonder if that is enough wiggle room for Fox Televisions Stations President Jack Abernethy to try for some of Tribune's large-market Fox affiliates. Those in Seattle and Milwaukee would be particularly appealing.

Over the past few years, Abernethy has gone after markets with teams in the NFL's National Football Conference so that he can take full advantage of the Fox network rights to those teams' Sunday games. Seattle and Milwaukee (Green Bay Packers) are two of the three AFC markets he doesn't have.

So maybe Fox picks up "little bits and pieces around the edges."

That leaves CBS.

When I interviewed CEO Les Moonves just before NAB last year, he reconfirmed his interest in expanding the CBS station portfolio.

"I think the station business is a terrific business," he said. "We believe in it. We like running our owned-and-operated stations that are doing extremely well. If there wasn’t a limit by the FCC, we would own more stations.

"Frankly, it’s sort of ironic that a number of our station owners who were against us getting bigger are now sort of running up against some of the same [regulatory] walls as we did."

I once thought such pronouncements were Moonves' way of telling analysts he loves his TV stations and that they should, too.

But I have heard them so often now that I am beginning to think Moonves actually means it.

If we presume that he does, the question becomes what stations.

As much as Moonves talks about his love of TV stations, he talks about his love of the NFL and how vital it is to the well-being of his network. CBS holds the rights to the Sunday games of the NFL's American Football Conference as well as Thursday night games.



http://www.tvnewscheck.com/article/102412/big-four-may-sit-out-station-consolidation

http://www.tvnewscheck.com/article/102412/big-four-may-sit-out-station-consolidation/page/2
 
An editorial by Tv Newscheck over TV station consolidation

The TV networks see themselves in the content business, not the towers & transmitters business. TV stations are very expensive to buy and own. Lots of annoying regulations, like ownership limits. Their only revenue source is advertising, which isn't a growth area. Why spend money on over-the-air TV when most people watch it on cable or the internet? Makes no sense. The companies that own the Big 4 are diversified media companies that all own movie studios, cable channels, and other more profitable ways to distribute content. This is why the Big 4 don't own any radio stations. Some day, they will also not own any TV stations. Let someone else pay the cost and deal with all the regulations.
 
How much does a typical TV station make from the cable carry fees?

Depends on the market. It's really only an issue in major markets, where the networks own affiliates. So it mainly becomes a network fee, not a station fee. That may be why the networks haven't sold their stations yet. But since it's only about $1 per subscriber, and the number of subscribers are dropping, it may not be an issue for long. Especially if consumers can get the same content from other places.
 
The TV networks see themselves in the content business, not the towers & transmitters business. TV stations are very expensive to buy and own. Lots of annoying regulations, like ownership limits. Their only revenue source is advertising, which isn't a growth area. Why spend money on over-the-air TV when most people watch it on cable or the internet? Makes no sense. The companies that own the Big 4 are diversified media companies that all own movie studios, cable channels, and other more profitable ways to distribute content. This is why the Big 4 don't own any radio stations. Some day, they will also not own any TV stations. Let someone else pay the cost and deal with all the regulations.


True also the big 4 have argued that we should go after Netflix, Negotiate with Hulu and MVPD's to adapt to the current demos too.
 
I think FOX would want Seattle they bought a low power station a few years ago if Tribune & FOX couldn't agree but Tribune and Fox did. I think Fox only wants to be in NFL markets they want Seattle for Seahawk games just like CBS interests in buying AFC market team station wouldn't be surprise if they buy Indy's local CBS. As I believe Tribune is getting out of the TV business.
 
I think FOX would want Seattle they bought a low power station a few years ago if Tribune & FOX couldn't agree but Tribune and Fox did. I think Fox only wants to be in NFL markets they want Seattle for Seahawk games just like CBS interests in buying AFC market team station wouldn't be surprise if they buy Indy's local CBS. As I believe Tribune is getting out of the TV business.

True. I think Fox O&O would be a good bidder here, if indeed Tribune is forced to sell. That remains to be seen. Stay tuned.
 
I think FOX would want Seattle they bought a low power station a few years ago if Tribune & FOX couldn't agree but Tribune and Fox did. I think Fox only wants to be in NFL markets they want Seattle for Seahawk games just like CBS interests in buying AFC market team station wouldn't be surprise if they buy Indy's local CBS. As I believe Tribune is getting out of the TV business.

That may be True for now though for the next few years but Facebook and Twitter has been mentioned in recent years as the place to watch and talk about sports. Also there's been talks for Hulu and Facebook live division to get contracts for certain leagues to air live sports in recent years. But will current demos still worry about looking for a game on Local TV or will they run to league pass App and website to get the game in the next few years?



https://newrepublic.com/article/127237/nba-twitter-changing-way-watch-sports

https://www.forbes.com/sites/greats...book-is-focusing-on-live-sports/#6fbb27d2dc6e

http://www.businessinsider.com/hulu-live-tv-will-be-sports-centric-2017-1
 
Also there's been talks for Hulu and Facebook live division to get contracts for certain leagues to air live sports in recent years.

There was a thread here recently that Facebook Live doesn't want to pay content providers any more. If that's the case, they won't be getting any live sports. Facebook seems stuck on just being a platform for user-created content, rather than competition for something like Netflix or Hulu.
 
That may be True for now though for the next few years but Facebook and Twitter has been mentioned in recent years as the place to watch and talk about sports. Also there's been talks for Hulu and Facebook live division to get contracts for certain leagues to air live sports in recent years. But will current demos still worry about looking for a game on Local TV or will they run to league pass App and website to get the game in the next few years?



https://newrepublic.com/article/127237/nba-twitter-changing-way-watch-sports

https://www.forbes.com/sites/greats...book-is-focusing-on-live-sports/#6fbb27d2dc6e

http://www.businessinsider.com/hulu-live-tv-will-be-sports-centric-2017-1

would these be streaming exclusive or would a local station simulcast these games?
 
I wonder if cord-cutting/cord-shaving and a slowly growing renaissance for over-the-air TV are factors. On one end, you're trying to chase subscription money wherever it goes. On the other, if you've got the free subchannel networks to get affiliates for (AND advertisers to buy time on them), maybe being owning the station in the metro you need helps that effort too.

Can weirdly see why CBS and Sinclair might would want to buy more stations, and why ABC/NBC might be just fine getting the retrans fees wherever they may come from.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom