• 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

Landover + Mako

Even the LPTV scene is in a feeding frenzy, and this proposed sale involves two prominent players in the LPTV markets. Mako Communications and its other related properties held by the Corpus Christi TX-based Mintz family have reached an agreement to sell out to Landover 5 LLC. Landover 2 LLC has been applying for and is being granted numerous CPs for LPTV stations in rural communities and along major transportation corridors. Mako, the various Mintz owners, Tuck Properties, Nave Communications and Marcia Cohen, the selling entities, have stations in major cities, such as New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Tampa, Dallas, Houston, Austin, San Antonio, Phoenix and Las Vegas.

The proposed sale, pending FCC approval, involves the following:
  • All licensed stations held by Mako Communications, LLC, with the exception of silent station KEGS-LP Las Vegas, an abandoned analog station that was replaced by KEGS-LD, which is included in the sale;
  • Select construction permits held by Mako in Corpus Christi TX, Duluth MN, Key West FL, Lubbock TX and Midland TX;
  • All stations held by Tuck Properties;
  • Both stations held by Marcia Cohen;
  • WKOB-LD New York, held by Nave Communications, LLC;
  • All licensed stations held by Michael Mintz, Howard Mintz (a.k.a. Lawrence Howard Mintz), Sean Mintz and Mintz Broadcasting, with the exception of silent station K49JL-D Amarillo TX.
 
Landover 2 LLC and Landover 5 LLC are related to CTB Spectrum Services (the President of CTB is listed as the contact on all Landover applications), a company with a plan to "cellularize" broadcast architecture. Instead of one tall tower servicing large areas, CTB (Cellular Terrestrial Broadcasting) proposes to use the cellular telephone model, with many low-height towers servicing smaller cells and use signal handover technology similar to that of cellular networks. They make some bold claims, which, if true, could ease the uncertainty facing LPTV due to spectrum repurposing and repacking.

http://rbr.com/high-powered-low-power-tv-deal/

Asset Purchase Agreement from KTVP-LD application

CTB Spectrum Services website
 
dhett said:
Landover 2 LLC and Landover 5 LLC are related to CTB Spectrum Services (the President of CTB is listed as the contact on all Landover applications), a company with a plan to "cellularize" broadcast architecture. Instead of one tall tower servicing large areas, CTB (Cellular Terrestrial Broadcasting) proposes to use the cellular telephone model, with many low-height towers servicing smaller cells and use signal handover technology similar to that of cellular networks. They make some bold claims, which, if true, could ease the uncertainty facing LPTV due to spectrum repurposing and repacking.

http://rbr.com/high-powered-low-power-tv-deal/

Asset Purchase Agreement from KTVP-LD application

CTB Spectrum Services website

Where would they put the towers? Cellphone companies are getting backlash from the NIMBYs of the world. You think they're going to allow for even more ugly towers for another service?
 
I hope this turns out to be a good deal for LPTV as a whole. I've always felt this service was not developed well. It needs someone with a good vision and a reasonable amount of money in each market. I'm not opposed to the network services, but it would sure be great to see more local programming (news and other) across the country.
 
KeithE4 said:
Where would they put the towers? Cellphone companies are getting backlash from the NIMBYs of the world. You think they're going to allow for even more ugly towers for another service?

Obviously, I have no inside information, but in urban areas, they may use the existing towers that Mako uses, or they could use already existing cell towers. Even if they have to go with new towers, they shouldn't need as many as cell phone service requires. These TV stations have ERPs up to 15 kW, which is much stronger than what is put out for cell phone service. They were supposed to be testing in Columbia MO for the past year. This purchase could mean that the testing was successful.

BTW, pages 50-57 of the Asset Purchase Agreement list the stations involved in the sale.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom