Networks and Small-Market Affiliates

[dhett]

In the current Fox/Boise/Evansville thread, and in other threads, it's been suggested that networks might not want to affiliate with stations not in the top 100 markets. Not being in the business, perhaps I'm missing something here: why not? If I have an opportunity to have a presence in a market I'm not currently in, even if it's - say - Glendive, why wouldn't I? What would I be losing affiliating with a small-market station?

Just curious.

 

[w9wi]

In the current Fox/Boise/Evansville thread, and in other threads, it's been suggested that networks might not want to affiliate with stations not in the top 100 markets. Not being in the business, perhaps I'm missing something here: why not? If I have an opportunity to have a presence in a market I'm not currently in, even if it's - say - Glendive, why wouldn't I? What would I be losing affiliating with a small-market station?

I suppose there is some modest expense to the network in servicing an affiliate -- clerical costs, if nothing else. Seems to me it'd be pretty modest.

Might a network that's having trouble obtaining national OTA clearance find it easier/cheaper to get slots on cable in places where no OTA affiliate is possible, if they agree their network will be exclusively cable-delivered in other markets served by the same MSO where an OTA affiliate might be possible?

Just speculating.

 

[travisl5678]

MyNet and The CW have gone the Cable-Only route in some small markets. I dont know if any of the big four should though

 

[Mainedude2007]

MyNet and The CW have gone the Cable-Only route in some small markets. I dont know if any of the big four should though

The CW 100+ group still exists, but with digital subchannels I think most 100+ stations are now OTA subchannels and very few are left as cable only

 

[Markxxx]

A lot of times ads are sold in market blocks.

For instance, an ad company might buy time in the top ten markets only.

This is important, because there may be little difference between the actual numbers in the tenth market and the eleventh market.

But if ad agencies are going to cut off the eleventh market, it will hurt number 11.

So you can see if the market is small enough, say under #100 ad agencies may not be interested at all. It is by taking all these under #100 markets together that they can be sold as one.

 

[ding12]

In some cases, it's to enlarge or preserve the enlarged viewing area of another market station.

In the case of Monterey-Salinas, ABC could collect the retransmission revenue via KGO with cable companies, so there was little incentive to offer one of the Monterey area Low power stations the affiliation. Recently, KSBW picked up the affiliation on a subchannel, but note KSBW is owned by Hearst, which is one of ABC's biggest station group and co-partners on many JV including ESPN and Lifetime.

Similarly in Salisbury, MD, NBC could affiliate to WRDE-LP, but hasn't. The likely reason is WBAL, owned by Hearst, is a good partner with NBC. Hearst chooses to renew its network affiliation with NBC in Baltimore, rather than switching to ABC.

Likely, Hearst wants a mix of NBC and ABC affiliates in its top market stations, which helps hedge against if either were to nose dive to the CW status level.

 

[travisl5678]

In Monterey/Salinas, I'm surprised none of the LPTVs picked up ABC. Did it cost too much?

 

[ding12]

In Monterey/Salinas, I'm surprised none of the LPTVs picked up ABC. Did it cost too much?

KGO could collect retrans money from Comcast in that region.

ABC didn't want to give that up, but is willing to give it up for Hearst KSBW, which now has the rights, since Hearst is a valued affiliate member.

 

[KeithE4]

A lot of times ads are sold in market blocks.

For instance, an ad company might buy time in the top ten markets only.

This is important, because there may be little difference between the actual numbers in the tenth market and the eleventh market.

But if ad agencies are going to cut off the eleventh market, it will hurt number 11.

So you can see if the market is small enough, say under #100 ad agencies may not be interested at all. It is by taking all these under #100 markets together that they can be sold as one.

Markets #101-210 together have about the same number of viewers as #1-3 (NY, LA, Chicago) combined - about 15% of the total.

But how many advertisers court the small towns? Makers of pickup trucks, farm equipment, Blue Bell ice cream, and maybe a few others, but not many in comparison to those who actively seek the young, affluent, urban/suburban folks in and near the big cities - especially those on the coasts. The only important markets in Flyover Country are Chicago, Dallas/Ft. Worth, Houston, and Atlanta since they are in the Top 10.

It goes back in the early '70s, when shows like The Beverly Hillbillies, Green Acres, Ed Sullivan, and Lawrence Welk were cancelled due to being too old- and rural-oriented. From what I remember from those days, the advertisers and their agencies didn't care about that audience. They wanted young, wealthy, and hip, not old, poor, and decrepit. That wasn't and isn't exactly true (I'm sure there are/were some young millionaires in Grand Junction, Wausau, and Bangor), but perception is reality.

That's why I've said for years - and I hope I'm wrong - that NBC and Fox will be the first networks to throw in the small-market OTA sponge. This isn't the 1960s or earlier. It's not important that their programming "plays in Peoria" - it has to play in midtown Manhattan, and Beverly Hills. The national advertisers and their agencies don't care about Peoria. Peoria's along for the ride.

At least, this is the impression that I've gotten during my adult life (almost 40 years), based on watching, reading, and having the occasional conversations with advertising-agency folks that I ran into during my years in Chicago. I haven't seen anything to make me change my mind, although I really hope to.

 

[BRNout]

Keith, you keep banging that drum in the face of documented evidence to the contrary. Ever since the big digital switch, more and more little markets are being served by local affiliates of ALL networks. The trend is in that direction and not contrary.

That's just how it is, no matter how you think it "should" be.

 

[recto101]

In the current Fox/Boise/Evansville thread, and in other threads, it's been suggested that networks might not want to affiliate with stations not in the top 100 markets. Not being in the business, perhaps I'm missing something here: why not? If I have an opportunity to have a presence in a market I'm not currently in, even if it's - say - Glendive, why wouldn't I? What would I be losing affiliating with a small-market station?

Just curious.

Look at most big websites they tend to skew the marketing towards Seattle and San Jose like Google, Facebook and Craigslist. but in TV if a satellite provider like Dish and Directv does not get the rights to air the Local Small market stations Dish would provide Local Tv Station from San Francisco or NYC to be in its tv package like KTVU, KGO ,KPIX and KNTV. For Directv its from LA and NYC like KABC, KTTV, KNBC and KCBS or WNYW,WABC, WNBC and WCBS. Also Dish airs KTLA, and WPIX for areas without A CW station.

 

[Sammi Brie]

A lot of times ads are sold in market blocks.

For instance, an ad company might buy time in the top ten markets only.

This is important, because there may be little difference between the actual numbers in the tenth market and the eleventh market.

But if ad agencies are going to cut off the eleventh market, it will hurt number 11.

So you can see if the market is small enough, say under #100 ad agencies may not be interested at all. It is by taking all these under #100 markets together that they can be sold as one.

There's not much space between #11 (Detroit) and #12 (Phoenix) – and the latter is pretty much guaranteed a promotion – but there's a lot of room between those two and #10 (Houston).

 

[bpatrick]

In some cases, it's to enlarge or preserve the enlarged viewing area of another market station.

In the case of Monterey-Salinas, ABC could collect the retransmission revenue via KGO with cable companies, so there was little incentive to offer one of the Monterey area Low power stations the affiliation. Recently, KSBW picked up the affiliation on a subchannel, but note KSBW is owned by Hearst, which is one of ABC's biggest station group and co-partners on many JV including ESPN and Lifetime.

Similarly in Salisbury, MD, NBC could affiliate to WRDE-LP, but hasn't. The likely reason is WBAL, owned by Hearst, is a good partner with NBC. Hearst chooses to renew its network affiliation with NBC in Baltimore, rather than switching to ABC.

Likely, Hearst wants a mix of NBC and ABC affiliates in its top market stations, which helps hedge against if either were to nose dive to the CW status level.

Salisbury already has an ABC affiliate, WMDT. There are two reasons WBAL is an NBC affiliate: (1) it lost CBS to WJZ when Group W bought the Eye Network; (2) WMAR, which was the NBC affiliate, switched to ABC as part of a deal to keep WEWS and WXYZ in the Alphabet Network fold--Scripps-Howard switched it and three other stations (WCPO from CBS, WFTS and KNXV from Fox). So if ABC wants to keep the Scripps-Howard stations in Cleveland and Detroit in the fold, it has to make sure WMAR and the other three don't leave the network. Thus WBAL does not get ABC (and while I'm on the subject Salisbury also has a CBS affiliate, WBOC).

One thing Hearst does not have: a major-market CBS affiliate; its largest market with CBS is Louisville.

 

[Ultimajock]

One thing Hearst does not have: a major-market CBS affiliate; its largest market with CBS is Louisville.

...and before that, you have to go back to 1977 and WISN-TV/12 Milwaukee dumping CBS to go back to ABC...

 

[ding12]

Salisbury already has an ABC affiliate, WMDT. There are two reasons WBAL is an NBC affiliate: (1) it lost CBS to WJZ when Group W bought the Eye Network; (2) WMAR, which was the NBC affiliate, switched to ABC as part of a deal to keep WEWS and WXYZ in the Alphabet Network fold--Scripps-Howard switched it and three other stations (WCPO from CBS, WFTS and KNXV from Fox). So if ABC wants to keep the Scripps-Howard stations in Cleveland and Detroit in the fold, it has to make sure WMAR and the other three don't leave the network. Thus WBAL does not get ABC (and while I'm on the subject Salisbury also has a CBS affiliate, WBOC).

One thing Hearst does not have: a major-market CBS affiliate; its largest market with CBS is Louisville.

Hearst is more relevant to Disney than Scripps. Hearst has Boston (trumps Detroit), JVs with Disney for ESPN and Lifetime, and the stations it operates are generally #1 or #2 respectively. Detroit is large, but not as significant as in the past, and even less so for Cleveland, which is in decline, and the DMA is compromised of Cleveland (decline) and Akron-Canton.

While the Scripps demands for Cleveland and Detroit had relevancy 15 or so years ago, I doubt it still holds now. I'm sure if Hearst/WBAL wanted ABC, arrangements could be done at a time ABC was up for renewal on WMAR, and Scripps would yield on that front and go with NBC. WMAR is a distant #3 between WBAL and WJZ, and Scripps doesn't put a lot of investment into WMAR anyways to try to make it a #2 atleast.

But, WBAL likely enjoys that NBC is willing not to affiliate with anybody in Salisbury, which lets WBAL collect the retransmission from Comcast and Fios, and Hearst anyways wants a mix of NBC in their portfolio of stations. If NBC were to tank as a network, it'd be another story though.

With Comcast owning NBC, it may change the situation, and Comcast could operate a cable-only NBC feed, perhaps one originated from WRC, like how ABC/KGO operated one for Monterey.

 

[ding12]

Hearst is more relevant to Disney than Scripps. Hearst has Boston (trumps Detroit), JVs with Disney for ESPN and Lifetime, and the stations it operates are generally #1 or #2 respectively. Detroit is large, but not as significant as in the past, and even less so for Cleveland, which is in decline, and the DMA is compromised of Cleveland (decline) and Akron-Canton.

While the Scripps demands for Cleveland and Detroit had relevancy 15 or so years ago, I doubt it still holds now. I'm sure if Hearst/WBAL wanted ABC, arrangements could be done at a time ABC was up for renewal on WMAR, and Scripps would yield on that front and go with NBC. WMAR is a distant #3 between WBAL and WJZ, and Scripps doesn't put a lot of investment into WMAR anyways to try to make it a #2 atleast.

But, WBAL likely enjoys that NBC is willing not to affiliate with anybody in Salisbury, which lets WBAL collect the retransmission from Comcast and Fios, and Hearst anyways wants a mix of NBC in their portfolio of stations. If NBC were to tank as a network, it'd be another story though.

With Comcast owning NBC, it may change the situation, and Comcast could operate a cable-only NBC feed, perhaps one originated from WRC, like how ABC/KGO operated one for Monterey.

To elaborate since I can't modify the post, a cable-only NBC with Delmarva specific advertising with newscasts however from WRC.

DirecTV is providing the Salisbury local stations but provides WCAU from Philadelphia. Lower Delaware naturally receives WCAU on cable with WBAL, while the MD counties receive WRC and WBAL. Comcast and Fios provide WBAL-HD with WBAL as the primary NBC. I think WBAL edges out WRC/WCAU because by distance Baltimore is about 5-20 miles closer as the crow flies to the main cities: Seaford, Salisbury, Ocean City etc. than DC or Philly are to those cities. By all major points, Baltimore is the same distance or less than Philly or DC.

 

[KML0224]

Maybe it's also because you're dealing with the same state in this case...Maryland? (LOL)

 

[pkffrom724]

As I unerstand it, WRC/4 DC and WCAU/10 Philly are NBC O&O's. Another question is does WBAL/11 Baltimore (Hearst) run the entire NBC schedule?

Over a week ago, I found out that WMDT/47 Salisbury (ABC) has added a third subchannel, and it will no doubt become an NBC outlet (WMDT-DT3). As far as I know, the station will probably start up in late May/early June.

Please also keep in mind that WMDT also carries CW on DT2.

 

[bpatrick]

As I unerstand it, WRC/4 DC and WCAU/10 Philly are NBC O&O's. Another question is does WBAL/11 Baltimore (Hearst) run the entire NBC schedule?

Over a week ago, I found out that WMDT/47 Salisbury (ABC) has added a third subchannel, and it will no doubt become an NBC outlet (WMDT-DT3). As far as I know, the station will probably start up in late May/early June.

Please also keep in mind that WMDT also carries CW on DT2.

WMDT 47.3 as an NBC affiliate would certainly simplify this discussion.

Back to WMAR, even in the days before Scripps owned it, it was the poor relation in Baltimore. I know the official reason CBS dropped it in 1981 was its extensive coverage of Orioles games, but I remember seeing numbers in Broadcasting magazine in the 1970s which showed WMAR far behind even WBAL, then (as now) affiliated with a weak NBC (WJZ was way ahead of both, as was ABC at the time). So while I see the logic in ABC's moving to WBAL, I think it would take a lot for NBC to give it up again and wind up back on the weakest of the three.

Interestingly, to me at least, Scripps hasn't really done much in the Sun Belt: Phoenix and Tampa, yes (don't know if they're still in West Palm Beach) but Hearst is in Orlando (WESH), Greenville, SC (WYFF), Winston-Salem, NC (WXII), and I suppose you could count Oklahoma City (KOCO). The two companies which really seem to have a dominance in the Sun Belt, even if not necessarily in the biggest markets (argue with me, guys) are Media General (Tampa, Raleigh, and Greenville/Spartanburg/
Asheville) and Raycom (all over the place, including Charlotte).

 

[azumanga]

Interestingly, to me at least, Scripps hasn't really done much in the Sun Belt: Phoenix and Tampa, yes (don't know if they're still in West Palm Beach) ...

Yes, Scripps still owns WPTV.