• 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

Daystar to court: Give us KOCE

K

KMRichards

Guest
Daystar Television Network hs told the 4th District Appellate Court that it should be awarded ownership of KOCE-TV.

"Setting aside the sale to the foundation is simply not an adequate remedy for us," said Daystar attorney Richard Sherman.

<a target="_blank" href=http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-koce9jul09,1,1871729.story>http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-koce9jul09,1,1871729.story</a>

Is it considered Christian behavior to act like a playground bully? Daystar is acting like it has been somehow wronged, yet all that happened was their bid for KOCE was rejected. Exactly what damages occured that they need a "remedy" for?

IMHO, this constitutes abuse of the legal system by Daystar.

Disclaimer: I already have access to their programming via DirecTV, although I choose not to watch it. OTOH, I do watch (and support) KOCE, even though I do not live in Orange County. (I also watch and support KVCR in San Bernardino, but for some odd reason I never watch my local PBS station, KCET.)


<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
> Is it considered Christian behavior to act like a playground
> bully? Daystar is acting like it has been somehow wronged,
> yet all that happened was their bid for KOCE was rejected.
> Exactly what damages occured that they need a "remedy" for?

What's un-Christian about Daystar's behavior? They were wronged. There was, according to the appellate court's presiding judge David Sill, a "statement by one of the district's sales brokers to the effect that the district's trustees were bound and determined from the beginning to 'filter out' any televangelists, whom the trustees foresaw would be making the highest bid." Change the word "televangelists" to "Blacks" or "Hispanics" and everybody would be rightly outraged. Note also that the appellate court judges' decision in favor of overturning the sale to KOCE Foundation was unanimous, 3-0. I think that paints a pretty clear picture of wrongdoing by the sellers.

At the close of bidding, KOCE Foundation had the highest bid, with $8M in cash and $24M to be paid over time, while Daystar's was $25.1M cash (Coast Community College District was right to reject Daystar's late $40M bid). But when the District set the installment payments to be over 30 years at no interest, and then cut $4M off the sale price two months later, that's where they ran afoul of the law. Had they kept the sale price the same and structured the installment payments so that the total value of the sale was $32M, there would have been no case by Daystar.

And as for Daystar, why shouldn't they try to gain the station by having their bid awarded as the highest bid? That's not an abuse of the legal system, nor is it acting like a "playground bully". It's business, plain and simple. The worst that could happen is that the courts could say "no", which they probably will, but hey, nothing ventured, nothing gained.
 
> And as for Daystar, why shouldn't they try to gain the
> station by having their bid awarded as the highest bid?
> That's not an abuse of the legal system, nor is it acting
> like a "playground bully". It's business, plain and simple.
> The worst that could happen is that the courts could say
> "no", which they probably will, but hey, nothing ventured,
> nothing gained.

KOCE's trustees have the right to decide who they will and won't sell to, especially as the station is a PBS affiliate that was owned by an educational institution. Daystar has already said publicly that they would discontinue the PBS affiliation; what makes it "wrong" for the trustees to choose a buyer that would keep the station PBS?

"Business, plain and simple" does not always mean the highest bidder wins or that certain bids will not be considered. The recent MCI/Qwest/Verizon battle proves that, and Daystar's request to the court to force the sale is just plain wrong.


<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
The reason Daystar wants KOCE-50 is simple: They want to get on Southern California's cable television systems.

I suspect that at the moment, Daystar is available on few if any local cable systems in the Los Angeles area.

Thanks to "must-carry", Daystar would gain several million homes for what is basically a cable network that uses broadcast stations and "must carry" to get on cable systems.

Tustin-based TBN also uses this tactic.
 
> KOCE's trustees have the right to decide who they will and
> won't sell to, especially as the station is a PBS affiliate
> that was owned by an educational institution. Daystar has
> already said publicly that they would discontinue the PBS
> affiliation; what makes it "wrong" for the trustees to
> choose a buyer that would keep the station PBS?
>
> "Business, plain and simple" does not always mean the
> highest bidder wins or that certain bids will not be
> considered. The recent MCI/Qwest/Verizon battle proves
> that, and Daystar's request to the court to force the sale
> is just plain wrong.
>

California state law required the trustees to sell to the highest responsible bidder. They didn't. That makes it wrong.

The trustees intended to discriminate against religious broadcasters from the get go. That makes it wrong.

The KOCE Foundation required two deadline extensions just to make the down payment. That's not what I would call a responsible bidder.

The judges' ruling was that the trustees must hold a new sale, or if they're that opposed to televangelists acquiring the station, they can take the station off the market altogether. If they do that, then they'll need to come up with an alternative source of money fast, since they'll need to repay the $8M down payment that the foundation made, and the district has alread spent it.

The district is considering an appeal to the state Supreme Court, the action their attorney recommends, or taking the case to the federal courts. Is that wrong? Are they wasting the court's time? No, that's just business. No different than Daystar.

Daystar's looking into suing each of the trustees individually, except the one that cast the lone dissenting vote on rejecting Daystar's bid. I hope they do, and I hope they win, because last I checked, discrimination is illegal.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by dhett on 07/11/05 05:35 AM.</FONT></P>
 
> California state law required the trustees to sell to the
> highest responsible bidder. They didn't. That makes it
> wrong.
>
> The trustees intended to discriminate against religious
> broadcasters from the get go. That makes it wrong.

Given that you are making blanket statements without specific legal citations, I cannot evaluate the correctness of your statements.

> The KOCE Foundation required two deadline extensions just to
> make the down payment. That's not what I would call a
> responsible bidder.

That's a poor argument, given that a lot of station sales end up with extensions for various reasons. Look at the sale of the 93.5 signals to Styles Media from SBS; that sale still hasn't closed, and Styles is operating the stations under a LMA at the moment. Are they non-responsible too?

> The judges' ruling was that the trustees must hold a new
> sale, or if they're that opposed to televangelists acquiring
> the station, they can take the station off the market
> altogether. If they do that, then they'll need to come up
> with an alternative source of money fast, since they'll need
> to repay the $8M down payment that the foundation made, and
> the district has alread spent it.
>
> The district is considering an appeal to the state Supreme
> Court, the action their attorney recommends, or taking the
> case to the federal courts. Is that wrong? Are they
> wasting the court's time? No, that's just business. No
> different than Daystar.

Given that the district is considering an appeal, this must not be as clearly defined legally as you previously stated.

> Daystar's looking into suing each of the trustees
> individually, except the one that cast the lone dissenting
> vote on rejecting Daystar's bid. I hope they do, and I hope
> they win, because last I checked, discrimination is illegal.

The mere fact that Daystar wants to "punish" the trustees individually shows me they do not have the Christian ideals themselves that they promote on the air. I am left with less respect for them than I had before.

<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
> > California state law required the trustees to sell to the
> > highest responsible bidder. They didn't. That makes it
> > wrong.
> >
> > The trustees intended to discriminate against religious
> > broadcasters from the get go. That makes it wrong.
>
> Given that you are making blanket statements without
> specific legal citations, I cannot evaluate the correctness
> of your statements.

My legal citation is the ruling by the 4th District panel.

> Given that the district is considering an appeal, this must
> not be as clearly defined legally as you previously stated.

My point was that Daystar is not abusing the legal system, as you accused them of in your orignal post. Daystar is doing what they feel they need to do; the college district is doing what they feel they need to do. It's not right or wrong on either side, but the courts will make the final judgment as to whose argument has the most merit. At what level that decision will be made is unknown.

As to whether or not the law is clearly defined, I'm not sure that that's the top priority for at least one trustee. According to Coast Community College District trustee Jerry Patterson, "(c)omplying with the court 'is the most obnoxious option and I certainly hope the full board will not choose that action.'" (Source: Marisa O'Neill, Daily Pilot - http://www.dailypilot.com/news/story/16939p-23722c.html)

> The mere fact that Daystar wants to "punish" the trustees
> individually shows me they do not have the Christian ideals
> themselves that they promote on the air. I am left with
> less respect for them than I had before.

I'll leave you to stand in judgment over their "Christian ideals". You've called Daystar's ideals into question because they stood up for their legal rights instead of rolling over and taking it in the shorts, so I'm inclined to believe that you never had any respect for them in the first place.

IMO, the trustees conspired to discriminate against religious broadcasters and should be held accountable accordingly. Anti-religious discrimination should not be tolerated any more than racial or sexual discrimination is.
 
So as not to continue this legal debate, I will only respond to one statement.

> I'll leave you to stand in judgment over their "Christian
> ideals". You've called Daystar's ideals into question
> because they stood up for their legal rights instead of
> rolling over and taking it in the shorts, so I'm inclined to
> believe that you never had any respect for them in the first
> place.

I have respect for any broadcaster who respects the wishes of the communities they serve. KOCE's viewers in Orange County have repeately said (source: various articles in the L.A. Times and O.C. Register) they do not want to lose their PBS station. Daystar apparently cares little about that and want to acquire KOCE, drop PBS, and gain must-carry status on cable. That they have gone to court over this tells me they are willing to spend (presumably) money from their faithful to accomplish this.

You tell me how I am supposed to have any respect for them.
<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
> I have respect for any broadcaster who respects the wishes
> of the communities they serve. KOCE's viewers in Orange
> County have repeately said (source: various articles in the
> L.A. Times and O.C. Register) they do not want to lose their
> PBS station. Daystar apparently cares little about that and
> want to acquire KOCE, drop PBS, and gain must-carry status
> on cable. That they have gone to court over this tells me
> they are willing to spend (presumably) money from their
> faithful to accomplish this.
>
> You tell me how I am supposed to have any respect for them.
>

I'm sure KOCE's viewers don't want to lose their PBS station, but they are a biased minority in favor of the KOCE status quo, and they don't speak for all of Orange County. I'm sure one would get a much different opinion if they chose to poll a group with an opposite bias of equal intensity, such as evangelical churchgoers in Orange County. That is the community that Daystar serves, and while you may not acknowledge their existence, they are an integral part of Orange County and deserve to be served as much as anyone else in the county.

I don't care if you respect Daystar or not; I just don't believe that your respect for them a month ago was any greater than it is now.

I guess the college district will decide the next step, as I doubt that the 4th District Appellate Court will grant Daystar their wish.
 
> I don't care if you respect Daystar or not; I just don't
> believe that your respect for them a month ago was any
> greater than it is now.

And it is fairly obvious from your posts that you have a pro-Daystar bias.

I will admit that I had a lot more respect for them before they tried to acquire KOCE. But the greatest drop in the respect I had for them was when they started this court battle.

How about ... "my respect for Daystar has dropped considerably in the past year".
<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
Being from Chicago I don't know anything about LA TV

Can someone fill me in on WHY a PBS station would be needed in Orange County? I understand LA is big but doesn't LA have it's own PBS station

Here in Chicago we have two in the city and one from NW Indiana covering the SE Illinois area.

How many PBS stations do you have? Is the LA PBS stations blocked cause of mountains or something?
<P ID="signature">______________
Once I figured out the meaning of life....Then I forgot to write it down.</P>
 
> And it is fairly obvious from your posts that you have a
> pro-Daystar bias.
>

I suppose that would make things easier for you, but no, I don't have any particular affinity for Daystar, or TBN, or any other Christian broadcast. We have full-service stations for both Daystar and TBN here, but I seldom watch either one, and I've never sent either a red cent, nor plan to.

According to the district appeals court, the KOCE trustees wanted to filter out bids from televangelists when they were required to sell to the highest cash bidder. That's enough right there to make my blood boil. It's clearly discriminatory and what's more, trustee Jerry Patterson didn't even try to deny that that's what they did; instead, he tried to justify it.

I hold Islam in low esteem, but if KOCE had done that to a buyer intending to run Islamic programming, I would be equally outraged, because for me, the point is what they did, not why they did it or who they did it to.
 
> Being from Chicago I don't know anything about LA TV
>
> Can someone fill me in on WHY a PBS station would be needed
> in Orange County? I understand LA is big but doesn't LA have
> it's own PBS station
>
> Here in Chicago we have two in the city and one from NW
> Indiana covering the SE Illinois area.
>
> How many PBS stations do you have? Is the LA PBS stations
> blocked cause of mountains or something?
>

Orange county really doesn't need the PBS station. What they need is an indy either on VHF or low UHF that's willing to broadcast news, local programing and TV shows. There is an indy in Orange County already called KDOC but they are too high on the UHF to get tons of viewers. Some of their programs are decent though, but I digress.

LA has two PBS stations. KCET and KLCS. KLCS has some PBS programs but is owned by the LAUSD. If anyone takes the time to look at the schedule of KLCS, there are some interesting programing being broadcast.

KCET is not blocked by mountains, as their transmitter is on top of Mt. Wilson.<P ID="signature">______________

Member of the Los Angeles, Phoenix Radio, and California TV moderation team</P>
 
These are not Christians but jerks parading as Christians.

As far as I'm concerned there should be a full out investigation of ALL so-called religious broadcasters. These money making machines should be paying full taxes. If they have the money to buy a TV station, hire big attorneys to bully themselves into a buying a TV staiton, they should be taxed just liked Clear Channel, Emmis, and everybody is taxed.


> Daystar Television Network hs told the 4th District
> Appellate Court that it should be awarded ownership of
> KOCE-TV.
>
> "Setting aside the sale to the foundation is simply not an
> adequate remedy for us," said Daystar attorney Richard
> Sherman.
>
http:/> /www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-koce9jul09,1,1871729.story
>
>
> Is it considered Christian behavior to act like a playground
> bully? Daystar is acting like it has been somehow wronged,
> yet all that happened was their bid for KOCE was rejected.
> Exactly what damages occured that they need a "remedy" for?
>
> IMHO, this constitutes abuse of the legal system by Daystar.
>
>
> Disclaimer: I already have access to their programming via
> DirecTV, although I choose not to watch it. OTOH, I do
> watch (and support) KOCE, even though I do not live in
> Orange County. (I also watch and support KVCR in San
> Bernardino, but for some odd reason I never watch my local
> PBS station, KCET.)
>
 
I guess there is little difference between the London and NYC terrorists and religious broadcsters: they both want to push their religious by whatever means possible and Lord help us if we don't accept it.

At least I haven't heard them using a Bible as a flaming projectile.

> The reason Daystar wants KOCE-50 is simple: They want to get
> on Southern California's cable television systems.
>
> I suspect that at the moment, Daystar is available on few if
> any local cable systems in the Los Angeles area.
>
> Thanks to "must-carry", Daystar would gain several million
> homes for what is basically a cable network that uses
> broadcast stations and "must carry" to get on cable systems.
>
>
> Tustin-based TBN also uses this tactic.
>
 
> I guess there is little difference between the London and
> NYC terrorists and religious broadcsters: they both want to
> push their religious by whatever means possible and Lord
> help us if we don't accept it.

I really do not like these religious broadcast groups at all, but this comparisons really is over the top.

There is a HUGE difference when "whatever means possible" means invoking "musst carry" versus bombing subways.
 
> > I guess there is little difference between the London and
> > NYC terrorists and religious broadcsters: they both want
> to
> > push their religious by whatever means possible and Lord
> > help us if we don't accept it.
>
> I really do not like these religious broadcast groups at
> all, but this comparisons really is over the top.
>
> There is a HUGE difference when "whatever means possible"
> means invoking "musst carry" versus bombing subways.
>
Which kinda leads to this question I've pondering since I first saw this thread: out of all the other UHFs in the L.A. market (with a couple exceptions), why does Daystar want KOCE so badly? I mean they are other UHFs, and I mean pretty useless ones like KXLA and KJLA, and the group of LPTV UHFs like KNLA and the like. Why KOCE? I kinda like watching KOCE, it's a great alternate to KCET and KLCS, and I'm starting to watch KVCR from time to time (the only I watch KVCR from where I live is via my DirecTV).
 
> Which kinda leads to this question I've pondering since I
> first saw this thread: out of all the other UHFs in the
> L.A. market (with a couple exceptions), why does Daystar
> want KOCE so badly? I mean they are other UHFs, and I mean
> pretty useless ones like KXLA and KJLA, and the group of
> LPTV UHFs like KNLA and the like. Why KOCE? I kinda like
> watching KOCE, it's a great alternate to KCET and KLCS, and
> I'm starting to watch KVCR from time to time (the only I
> watch KVCR from where I live is via my DirecTV).
>

Someone in an earlier thread had alluded to the cost of a commercial license being much more than a non-comm. Daystar is a non-profit organization and are allowed to hold a non-comm license. Moreover, KOCE is for sale; AFAIK, the others aren't.

Others have said that Daystar wants a full-service station instead of a LPTV so they can have must-carry rights on the cable systems. Nothing wrong with that. Given the anti-religious bias I encounter, I wouldn't be surprised if that's the only way they can get on cable.
 
Dhett comments:

> Others have said that Daystar wants a full-service station
> instead of a LPTV so they can have must-carry rights on the
> cable systems. Nothing wrong with that. Given the
> anti-religious bias I encounter, I wouldn't be surprised if
> that's the only way they can get on cable.

Were it not for must-carry, I don't know if Daystar would even exist. Without must-carry, TBN would only be in a few million cable homes. Both of these networks own TV stations for the sole purpose of getting their networks on local cable television systems.

For example, prior to TBN purchasing WGTW-48 Philadelphia a year ago, the network probably was on very few Philadelphia-area cable-TV systems. With TBN's purchase of WGTW, they're now on all the area cable systems thanks to must-carry, and on the most "basic" level (read: most inexpensive tier, along with other local broadcast stations and public-access channels) of cable service at that.
 
It appears I'm not the only one who thinks this way ...

Another person who thinks Daystar doesn't "win" based on bid size:

<a target="_blank" href=http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/letters/la-le-saturday16.5jul16,0,6151523.story>http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/letters/la-le-saturday16.5jul16,0,6151523.story</a>

(letter to the editor from this morning's Los Angeles Times)<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom