Combine small & mid market affiliations?

[upstate29651]

An idea WAY out of left field, but hear me out:

What if markets that are relatively close to each other combined operations & targeted each other? Use your imagination here.

In my neck of the woods, Savannah is relatively close to Charleston, Augusta to Columbia, Macon to Columbus, etc. Now imagine one city keeping two nets (NBC & FOX) and the other city keeping the other two (CBS & ABC). Now find a midway point to build a new generation of very tall towers, maybe as high as 3000' (pending FCC & FAA approvals). Yes, a tremendous initial outlay of capital, but over time it might pay off.

Many local network affiliates are struggling & the future of some are in doubt. Might this be their saving grace?

Imagine if you will:

Savannah-Charleston:
WCSC
WSAV
WCIV
WTGS

Augusta-Columbia:
WIS
WRDW
WACH
WJBF

Macon-Columbus:
WMAZ
WRBL
WMGT
(whatever the Columbus FOX affiliate is)

Farfetched, I know.

G

 

[tripinva]

You'd introduce huge white areas with no coverage. Terrible idea.

Stations would rather simulcast on two existing transmitters than spend the money on massive towers that the FAA won't approve anyway.

- Trip

 

[jal41]

An idea WAY out of left field, but hear me out:

What if markets that are relatively close to each other combined operations & targeted each other? Use your imagination here.

In my neck of the woods, Savannah is relatively close to Charleston, Augusta to Columbia, Macon to Columbus, etc. Now imagine one city keeping two nets (NBC & FOX) and the other city keeping the other two (CBS & ABC). Now find a midway point to build a new generation of very tall towers, maybe as high as 3000' (pending FCC & FAA approvals). Yes, a tremendous initial outlay of capital, but over time it might pay off.

Many local network affiliates are struggling & the future of some are in doubt. Might this be their saving grace?

Imagine if you will:

Savannah-Charleston:
WCSC
WSAV
WCIV
WTGS

Augusta-Columbia:
WIS
WRDW
WACH
WJBF

Macon-Columbus:
WMAZ
WRBL
WMGT
(whatever the Columbus FOX affiliate is)

Farfetched, I know.

G

No it would not happen. Markets are pretty much grandfathered.

WTOC would be CBS for Savannah/Charleston. WTVM would be ABC for Columbus/Macon.

A better argument for Macon would actually be merging with Atlanta, since Atlanta stations are on cable in Macon (80 miles), WMAZ and WXIA are co-owned, so WMAZ could rebroadcast NBC from Atlanta.

Again...this is pretty farfetched.

 

[w9wi]

In my neck of the woods, Savannah is relatively close to Charleston, Augusta to Columbia, Macon to Columbus, etc. Now imagine one city keeping two nets (NBC & FOX) and the other city keeping the other two (CBS & ABC). Now find a midway point to build a new generation of very tall towers, maybe as high as 3000' (pending FCC & FAA approvals). Yes, a tremendous initial outlay of capital, but over time it might pay off.

I don't know that the higher towers would buy you as much additional coverage as you might think.

A hypothetical 1000kw/600m UHF DTV would provide a 41dBu service contour of 121km. (according to the FCC's "Curves" program, which to be honest is not official for DTV)

If the antenna height could be increased to 900m without reducing power, the service contour would grow to 134km - an increase of about 8 miles.

Stations that are now at least modestly strong in the major cities in their markets would go to more or less fringe strength in the population centers. (and blazingly strong in lightly-populated rural areas!)

 

[ShawnHill1]

I know I mentioned this kind of scenario at ad nausem, but Upstate's idea immediately made me think of Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois. Yeah, I know this would NEVER happen, but it's nice to at least imagine. The central cities of both markets are 55 miles apart, and do share overlapping coverage along the Illinois-Wisconsin border. You could build transmitters along the border, or least in around Beloit or South Beloit depending on preference.

Here's the current set of each market's channel lineups...

Madison
WISC 3 (CBS); 3.2 MyNetworkTV
WMTV 15 (NBC); 15.2 Weather
WHA 21 (PBS); 21.2 Wisconsin Channel; 21.3 Create
WKOW 27 (ABC); 27.2 RTN; 27.3 This TV
WMSN 47 (Fox)
WBUW 57 (The CW)

Rockford
13 WREX (NBC); 13.2 The CW
17 WTVO (ABC); 17.2 MyNetwork
23 WIFR (CBS); 23.2 Weather
39 WQFR (Fox)
51 WCFC (religious)

My combined lineup would be this...

3 WISC (CBS), 3.2 local programming
8 lower-powered TBN affiliate, including subchannels
13 WREX (NBC), 13.2 Universal Sports
15 WMTV (Fox)
17 WTVO (ABC), 17.2 Weather
21 WHA (PBS), 21.2 Wisconsin Channel, 21.3 Create
23 WIFR (or another set of calls; PBS), 23.2 PBS Kids, 23.3 PBS World
27 WKOW (The CW), 27.2 RTN
39 WQRF (My), 39.2 This TV
47 WMSN (Independent)
51 WCFC (religious)
57 "WSPX" (Ion)

I "converted" WIFR into a non-commercial license, to give the Rockford side its own PBS station. Also, with the new set-up, Rockford would have NBC, ABC, PBS, & My, and Madison has CBS, Fox, PBS, The CW, an indie, and Ion. Both cities have a low-powered Channel 8, but I combined it with the low-powered TBN stations that they each have, along with the one in Janesville/Rock County. I know there's near-by Channel 8s in the Quad Cities and in west-central Wisconsin, but I made this Channel 8 with reduced power to protect those other stations.

Of course, I know that a combined market like this would have service losses on Rockford's southern fringes and the northern fringes of the Madison market. Not only that, but it would also affect the near-by markets like Chicago, Milwaukee, La Crosse-Eau Claire, Peoria-Bloomington, and the Quad Cities because it could force channel allocation changes (if needed), and increasing power to cover those underserved areas.

Maybe an interesting idea in theory, but it'll never happen.

 

[arnoldevns]

These are all interesting theoretical ideas, but I'm not sure why the stations would want to do something like this.

Honestly, stations would be thrilled if you told them they'd be on the air 10 years from now with network programming. Managers everywhere are running scared with drops in ad revenue of 30-50% common this year. Thoughts of merging markets with the competition or figuring out how to build 3000' tall towers are not really on their radar screen. Surviving to the end of the year with half their current staff would be a miracle for many of them.

 

[BRNout]

Why would you guys wish to voluntarily opt for a decreased variety of network affiliate options? This is like wishing for a 10% income tax increase and $8 a gallon gas. It doesn't make sense. Each of the communities that you're mentioning would lose dedicated local news and programming services.

If anything, a lot of people wish that there were more markets with network affiliates and not less. What kind of coverage do you think that Rockford would have from stations that would focus primarily on Madison? Because that's where the ad dollars are, so that's where the focus will inevitably be. People in Rockford and Janesville? Even more shut out than before because, aside from the weather report, it's expensive to dedicate much time to those communities when your main priority is up the road in Madison.

Don't kid yourselves, that's how it would evolve. If you had a Madison/Janesville/Rockford market, you'd see a Madison area emphasis on all stations and news about the latest corruption probe (and anything else) in Illinois for those in the Rockford area would disappear.

How about Savannah and Charleston? Two completely distinct markets, again in two separate states. Without a doubt, combining them will result in Savannah getting the shaft. Charleston is where the money is, so that's where the emphasis would inevitably be. Another terrible idea.

Basically, each of these ideas lacks any upside for the average viewer. At the minimum, the viewers lose some variety on NFL Sundays and at worse they lose most (if not all) relevant local news coverage. Sorry guys, but these are bad ideas that I truly hope inspire no one in the industry.

If anything, some places that don't have their own affiliates probably should. One place that comes to mind is Manchester/Concord/Portsmouth, NH (aside from WMUR). Another is Akron/Canton (which used to). Still another (somewhat debatable) potential market is St. George/Cedar City, UT as the area approaches 250,000 residents - their 'local' affiliates in Salt Lake are 250 to 300 miles away. I could go on.

 

[Tim from Springfield IL]

I know I mentioned this kind of scenario at ad nausem, but Upstate's idea immediately made me think of Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois.

I've read before that one reason why Madison and Rockford won't become one market is due to NFL football fanbases/coverage (in the heart of Packers/Bears country). Also the low-powered, proposed channel 8 for Rockford--TBN station WWTO-35 (digital 10) in LaSalle does have a Rockford translator, W25CL (one of WWTO's ten translators serving Decatur, Champaign, Palatine, Galesburg, Peoria, Bloomington, Sterling/Rock Falls, Elgin, and Arlington Heights in addition to Rockford). Perhaps WWTO could move their low-powered Rockford translator to digital channel 8, in the scenario Shawn presented.

Now one could make an argument for the merger of two other Midwestern small markets: Kirksville-Ottumwa and Quincy-Hannibal-Keokuk.

 

[mescutia]

If anything, some places that don't have their own affiliates probably should. One place that comes to mind is Manchester/Concord/Portsmouth, NH (aside from WMUR). Another is Akron/Canton (which used to). Still another (somewhat debatable) potential market is St. George/Cedar City, UT as the area approaches 250,000 residents - their 'local' affiliates in Salt Lake are 250 to 300 miles away. I could go on.

I once checked online and found that St. George is actually closer to Las Vegas than Salt Lake City.

And thanks for the shout-out to southern NH. Those of us who wish the area was its own market appreciate it.

 

[kenrayc]

You'd introduce huge white areas with no coverage. Terrible idea.

Stations would rather simulcast on two existing transmitters than spend the money on massive towers that the FAA won't approve anyway.

- Trip

I agree with Trip it would leave a lot of gray areas. In the Fresno and Bakersfield market they used to share the FOX affiliate KMPH with left gray areas in Merced and south of Bakersfield. KMPH moved there transmitter to a site closer to Fresno and did a Low power station on ch.58, which was taken over by KBAK and is on 29.2 digitally. the only market I can see that would be the Baltimore /Washington DC markets. With Digital signals BAD IDEA.

 

[bpatrick]

An idea WAY out of left field, but hear me out:

What if markets that are relatively close to each other combined operations & targeted each other? Use your imagination here.

In my neck of the woods, Savannah is relatively close to Charleston, Augusta to Columbia, Macon to Columbus, etc. Now imagine one city keeping two nets (NBC & FOX) and the other city keeping the other two (CBS & ABC). Now find a midway point to build a new generation of very tall towers, maybe as high as 3000' (pending FCC & FAA approvals). Yes, a tremendous initial outlay of capital, but over time it might pay off.

Many local network affiliates are struggling & the future of some are in doubt. Might this be their saving grace?

Imagine if you will:

Savannah-Charleston:
WCSC
WSAV
WCIV
WTGS

Augusta-Columbia:
WIS
WRDW
WACH
WJBF

Macon-Columbus:
WMAZ
WRBL
WMGT
(whatever the Columbus FOX affiliate is)

Farfetched, I know.

G

No it would not happen. Markets are pretty much grandfathered.

WTOC would be CBS for Savannah/Charleston. WTVM would be ABC for Columbus/Macon.

A better argument for Macon would actually be merging with Atlanta, since Atlanta stations are on cable in Macon (80 miles), WMAZ and WXIA are co-owned, so WMAZ could rebroadcast NBC from Atlanta.

Again...this is pretty farfetched.

WXTX is Fox in Columbus.

But if WMAZ were to rebroadcast WXIA, what does Macon do for
a CBS affiliate? And why would you need two NBC affiliates for
one market? I don't think much of the idea either.

 

[w9wi]

You'd introduce huge white areas with no coverage. Terrible idea.

There are any number of problems with merging markets this way.

- Beyond any white areas created, in many cases you'd also have far weaker OTA signals in the central cities - where OTA viewers are used to indoor-antenna reception.

Consider the Madison/Rockford case, and presume a merged transmitter site near Orfordville, roughly midway between the two cities.

Using a hypothetical 1000kw/900m (~2,970') UHF facility, a signal of roughly 84dBu would be delivered at the Wisconsin State Capitol downtown. The same figure for downtown Rockford would be 90dBu. (Orfordville is a bit closer to Rockford)

The existing WISC-DT 50 facility is predicted* to deliver more than 20dB more signal (107dBu) to central Madison. (the difference is even greater for areas on the city's West Side and in the Verona and Middleton suburbs near the existing tower) In Rockford, the existing WTVO-DT 16 facility* is predicted to deliver 13dB more signal than the hypothetical Orfordville facility.

(the differences are even more dramatic if you consider a 300m tower which might actually be approved.)

Viewers located in the cities, who are currently used to receiving useful signals on indoor antennas, would in many cases find themselves needing outdoor antennas.

- Intolerable short-spacings would be created. WMTV Madison could never move to a facility that would cover Rockford -- Chicago's WGN is on the same frequency, the short-spacing would be intolerable and WMTV would cause serious interference in the Elgin area.


* despite lower power. WISC-DT is 603kw/466m; WTVO is 196kw/201m.

 

[ding12]

Why would you guys wish to voluntarily opt for a decreased variety of network affiliate options? This is like wishing for a 10% income tax increase and $8 a gallon gas. It doesn't make sense. Each of the communities that you're mentioning would lose dedicated local news and programming services.

If anything, a lot of people wish that there were more markets with network affiliates and not less. What kind of coverage do you think that Rockford would have from stations that would focus primarily on Madison? Because that's where the ad dollars are, so that's where the focus will inevitably be. People in Rockford and Janesville? Even more shut out than before because, aside from the weather report, it's expensive to dedicate much time to those communities when your main priority is up the road in Madison.

Don't kid yourselves, that's how it would evolve. If you had a Madison/Janesville/Rockford market, you'd see a Madison area emphasis on all stations and news about the latest corruption probe (and anything else) in Illinois for those in the Rockford area would disappear.

How about Savannah and Charleston? Two completely distinct markets, again in two separate states. Without a doubt, combining them will result in Savannah getting the shaft. Charleston is where the money is, so that's where the emphasis would inevitably be. Another terrible idea.

Basically, each of these ideas lacks any upside for the average viewer. At the minimum, the viewers lose some variety on NFL Sundays and at worse they lose most (if not all) relevant local news coverage. Sorry guys, but these are bad ideas that I truly hope inspire no one in the industry.

If anything, some places that don't have their own affiliates probably should. One place that comes to mind is Manchester/Concord/Portsmouth, NH (aside from WMUR). Another is Akron/Canton (which used to). Still another (somewhat debatable) potential market is St. George/Cedar City, UT as the area approaches 250,000 residents - their 'local' affiliates in Salt Lake are 250 to 300 miles away. I could go on.

Not always the case. For example, people in Wheeling/Steubenville DMA would like to get Pittsburgh television on DirecTV or Dish Network, but because the Wheeling stations are of its own DMA, the customers won't be able to get Pittsburgh. And Dish Network led by Charlie Ergen is barred from offering distant network television, due to prior abuse, so another entity sells S.F. and NY locals respectively on Dish, if one qualifies. Works out in the Monterey, CA market as customers have to pay another company for the SF ABC. DirecTV can package KGO however in the Monterey CA package.

I'd think Wheeling could be folded, but what would happen to the Wheeling stations, they'd wind up as either repeators, indy stations, or possible one can keep network affiliation and distinct local news - like Atlantic City's WMGM but part of Philadelphia. In market where Hispanic population is considerable, excess stations could flip to UNI and Telemundo and be viable, but probably not in Pittsburgh and Wheeling. Maybe a 95% infomercial station would work.

 

[BRNout]

I'd think Wheeling could be folded, but what would happen to the Wheeling stations, they'd wind up as either repeators, indy stations, or possible one can keep network affiliation and distinct local news - like Atlantic City's WMGM but part of Philadelphia. In market where Hispanic population is considerable, excess stations could flip to UNI and Telemundo and be viable, but probably not in Pittsburgh and Wheeling. Maybe a 95% infomercial station would work.

What makes you so sure that people in Wheeling, Steubenville and the surrounding sections of northern WV would prefer not to have local news coverage and to be required to watch news that focuses on Pennsylvania from Pittsburgh?

Yes, the newscasts from Pittsburgh have FAR better production values. But they also offer very little state news for viewers in West Virginia. Wheeling market stations, on the other hand, do cover statewide news and spend time on the goings-on in Charleston which will directly impact West Virginia residents. Pittsburgh stations rarely do this and even the addition of a few more WV counties to their DMA wouldn't change that. As a percentage, there are almost no ad dollars and few viewers to be gained by taking time away from stories that impact Pittsburghers to serve folks in Wheeling. And, by the way, they lose 1 NFL game on many Steelers home weeks that way. Another negative for Wheeling residents. And, need I address the OTA consequences for those who don't have cable or dish in an economically disadvantaged region? Particularly with the advent of digital-only service?

Do you honestly wish for more stations that waste electricity and cable broadband space to "serve" their area with infomercials? I don't. As for wishing to get stations from a nearby, bigger market: join the club. Personally, I would like cable systems to go back to having to carry all channels that can be received reasonably within their service area. But, that's not going to happen.

Disenfranchising people by lumping culturally and governmentally different areas into a single market has already happened, resulting in unhappy viewers in a lot of places. Why add more to that list? There's nothing to be gained by it.

 

[Tim L]

Someone told me that at one point, CBS tried to buy WSTV-9 in Steubenville in 1953 to move it to Pittsburgh for the CBS Network affiliate before it went on the air but the FCC shot the proposal down..Westinghouse then bought WDTV (KDKA) in late 1954 and it immediately became primary CBS..

I've said this before but I had a proposal for a Akron-Canton TV Market..

17 WJAN NBC Canton
23 WMAC FOX Massillon
29 WTLC CBS Canton
45 WNEO PBS Alliance
49 WAKR-TV ABC Akron
55 WBNX CW Akron
67 WOAC Independent Canton

All these stations, if not on the air, were actual 1950's-60's permits

 

[BRNout]

Someone told me that at one point, CBS tried to buy WSTV-9 in Steubenville in 1953 to move it to Pittsburgh for the CBS Network affiliate before it went on the air but the FCC shot the proposal down..Westinghouse then bought WDTV (KDKA) in late 1954 and it immediately became primary CBS..

I've said this before but I had a proposal for a Akron-Canton TV Market..

17 WJAN NBC Canton
23 WMAC FOX Massillon
29 WTLC CBS Canton
45 WNEO PBS Alliance
49 WAKR-TV ABC Akron
55 WBNX CW Akron
67 WOAC Independent Canton

All these stations, if not on the air, were actual 1950's-60's permits

I have no doubt that Akron/Canton could have been a viable market. And, it would have included the hinterlands that stretch quite far to the south; areas that are not now served directly by anyone. New Philadelphia and Dover come to mind.

 

[ShawnHill1]

You'd introduce huge white areas with no coverage. Terrible idea.

There are any number of problems with merging markets this way.

- Beyond any white areas created, in many cases you'd also have far weaker OTA signals in the central cities - where OTA viewers are used to indoor-antenna reception.

Consider the Madison/Rockford case, and presume a merged transmitter site near Orfordville, roughly midway between the two cities.

Using a hypothetical 1000kw/900m (~2,970') UHF facility, a signal of roughly 84dBu would be delivered at the Wisconsin State Capitol downtown. The same figure for downtown Rockford would be 90dBu. (Orfordville is a bit closer to Rockford)

The existing WISC-DT 50 facility is predicted* to deliver more than 20dB more signal (107dBu) to central Madison. (the difference is even greater for areas on the city's West Side and in the Verona and Middleton suburbs near the existing tower) In Rockford, the existing WTVO-DT 16 facility* is predicted to deliver 13dB more signal than the hypothetical Orfordville facility.

(the differences are even more dramatic if you consider a 300m tower which might actually be approved.)

Viewers located in the cities, who are currently used to receiving useful signals on indoor antennas, would in many cases find themselves needing outdoor antennas.

- Intolerable short-spacings would be created. WMTV Madison could never move to a facility that would cover Rockford -- Chicago's WGN is on the same frequency, the short-spacing would be intolerable and WMTV would cause serious interference in the Elgin area.


* despite lower power. WISC-DT is 603kw/466m; WTVO is 196kw/201m.

I can understand all of these scenarios, and that's why I mentioned that this idea would have no chance of happening, for these reasons, and others already mentioned. I know probably presented the idea in a clumsy manner, but my thinking was more in terms of what should have happened if the two cities were closer than were.

 

[OhioMediaWatch]

I have no doubt that Akron/Canton could have been a viable market. And, it would have included the hinterlands that stretch quite far to the south; areas that are not now served directly by anyone. New Philadelphia and Dover come to mind.

There are three problems preventing an Akron/Canton TV market from happening today:

1) The economy in the area stinks. To high heaven. And it's even worse now than it was, thanks to the deep recession we are now in. Akron's hanging in there, but down somewhat from its peak. Canton...I think they're holding that city together with duct tape or something now.

There has been some growth in the area between the two cities (Green, Jackson Township, Akron/Canton Airport area, etc.), but not enough to offset the losses elsewhere. Even when the economy rebounds, this will still be a problem preventing this from happening.

2) The Cleveland market stations will move heaven and earth to prevent it. As much as they don't pay a lot of attention to the area south of the Ohio Turnpike, they need the viewers in Akron/Canton - badly. Without the southern part of the market, Cleveland drops from market 17 to who knows? Barely top 30?

3) Unlike Youngstown, 40 miles to the east, Akron is well covered (signal-wise ) by the Cleveland market stations.

Why?

The Cleveland TV "antenna farm" is not that far from Akron. It is in the Parma area, just 20 miles from the city of Akron. There are people in the Akron area who get a stronger OTA signal than folks up, say, in Mentor or Willoughby...or Lorain/Elyria.

If all the towers were near downtown Cleveland, it'd be another story, but they aren't.

Reception around here starts getting flaky south of Canton-ish (Tim L would have more on that). And yes, Dover/New Philly is outer fringe, with a difficult time receiving even the strongest Cleveland signal.

Oddly enough, the Steubenville station (WTOV/9) makes some effort to serve that area, and Wheeling's WTRF to a much lesser extent. You even hear the "Severe Weather Team 9 Forecast" on local radio stations in Tuscarawas County.

 

[KML0224]

As for odd placement of transmitters, why is/was the WTOV-TV analog channel 9 transmitter located in far western Pennsylvania, basically placing it in the Pittsburgh DMA?

 

[b344077]

These theoretical manifestations are great but all I am hoping for are consistent signals in Berrien County on June 18th. We have received both South Bend and Chicago signals. DTV has proven to be not very dependable. I have two antennas , each set to the two markets and have found viewing to be and adventure each day.