THIS JUST IN:::: UPN & WB to merge

[desertv]

> > > So they're dumping the 100+ stations group?
> >
> > In some areas, yes. In other areas, it will continue. It
> may
> > depend on which stations in smaller markets are now
> > affiliates with the WB and UPN networks.
> >
>
> Wonder what that means here (WB is a 100+ controlled by us &
> UPN is on a digital sub-channel/cable of the ABC station)...
> Guess I'll find out when I go into work tonight.
>
> -A
>
OK, now for the real questions...

1.What is the new logo?
2.What happens to the Frog?

 

[RockManAC]

> 2.What happens to the Frog?

Michigan J. Frog retired over the summer.

-A<P ID="signature">______________

</P>

 

[karaokelegend]

In Charlotte, WJZY channel 46, the UPN affiliate, has a 10:00 news produced by WBTV so I'd expect them to get CW over WWWB 55, and also WWWB carries some ACC basketball in prime-time, but that's just my guess. Both are owned by Capitol Broadcasting, and operate from the exact same building just off Interstate 85 outside of Belmont. I guess if CW went to WWWB they could move the news there. WJZY does have the Bobcats 16 times a year. No telling who gets CW.

 

[Joseph_Gallant]

Many WB affiliates changed their call letters to a combination that includes the letters "WB" after joining the network.

With the UPN/WB merger, I would think any WB affiliates with call letters including "WB" that won't be joining the merged CW network will be changing their call letters.

I also would think that some stations that will be affiliated with the combined network might consider changing their call letters to some combitation that includes the letters "CW".

I don't think WPIX-11 New York; KTLA-5 Los Angeles or WGN-9 Chicago would dare change their call letters, but I think quite a few other CW stations would.

 

[raccoonradio]

Re: Tribune-owned WB stations will get CW

> > I wonder just how many stations will suddenly find
> > themselves independent with a net loss of one network.
>
> According to the Chicago Sun-Times, Tribune-owned WB
> stations will be affiliates of the new CW network.

Yes, and I've heard in Boston that means Tribune-owned WLVI/56 gets the
new net while CBS-owned WSBK/38 will be an indie again. These days
Ch 38 bills themself as "The U" (yes, just like Chicago's WCIU/26)
as in "UPN-38" but come next fall, I'm sure that will be dropped.
Unless they want to do ads saying "television for U" or something.
(U isn't even in their call letters, just in their network affiliation)<P ID="signature">______________

</P>

 

[dampier]

Re: The Return of Actual (Ind.) Stations in US Markets

> The million dollar question now is... What happenes to the
> WB 100+ group.

I have a feeling that in a lot of markets, we're going to see the return of the designator (Ind.) as the station losing affiliation with either WB or UPN resumes fully independent status.

Now we can get Matlock or Good Times at 9:30pm again.

In markets like Rochester, NY we have a low power station serving as the UPN affiliate and paying their way onto TW's cable system and a TW-operated "fake" WB16 channel that serves as the local "WB affiliate."

Call me corporatist, but I have a feeling low power WBGT (UPN) is about to be dealt out of the game, and I suspect that is going to happen in a lot of markets.

In markets with a full power UPN or WB affiliate they'll probably adopt the new CW network. In markets with both affiliates operating at full power (or nearby from a rimshot market), at least one of them is probably going to resume independent status, unless they want to go Spanish, religious, or home shopping.

 

[DrBear]

> > 2.What happens to the Frog?
>
> Michigan J. Frog retired over the summer.
>
> -A
>
They oughta bring him back for this - Michigan J. with big CBS eyes...

 

[clichemoth]

> Looking at it in market 69...
>
> In Green Bay, the affected stations are: WACY 32 (Ace TV,
> but Journal Broadcast Group, which owns WGBA(NBC), has a
> local marketing agreement and will buy WACY when the FCC
> gives its OK) and WIWB 14 (Jamie Kellner's Acme
> Communications).
>
> It'll be interesting to see if Kellner goes along with the
> new CW network for his stations (in which case WACY has to
> go independent) or not. In addition, CBS (which owns WFRV in
> the market) could go after WIWB from Acme to have a duopoly.
>
>
> I wonder just how many stations will suddenly find
> themselves independent with a net loss of one network.
>
In Birmingham, both affiliates are part of a Sinclair duopoly. WTTO-21(currently WB) has the stronger OTA signal, better cable channel positions on most systems, and has always been treated as the primary station of the two, so it'd be more likely to end up with the new network than WABM-68, I think. The question is what WABM would become. Would it possibly go back to the A1 affiliation it had before UPN started, become a full-fledged indie, or just run infomercials, preachers, and dog track results?

 

[RobertMoore]

> The original problem the poster as trying to get at is the
> few markets with both a Tribune-owned WB and a CBS-owned UPN
> -- who will get which?

That depends on who'll be part of the CW, but it is expected that Tribune will benefit from this.

 

[fybush]

Before we go too far speculating - READ THE ORIGINAL POST, please...

It's long, yes, but it answers some of the questions being asked downthread as though the answer weren't already known:

> The 16 Tribune affiliated stations will include New
> York, Los Angeles,
> Chicago, Boston, Dallas, Washington, D.C., Houston, Miami,
> Denver, St. Louis,
> Portland, Indianapolis, San Diego, Hartford, New Orleans and
> Albany. The 12
> CBS Station Group television markets will include
> Philadelphia, San Francisco,
> Atlanta, Detroit, Tampa, Seattle, Sacramento, Pittsburgh,
> West Palm Beach,
> Norfolk, Oklahoma City and Providence. Together, these top
> two station groups
> cover the top 13 television markets, 20 of the top 25
> television markets and
> have a total coverage area of more than 48% of the country.

So we know EXACTLY where The CW is going in each of those markets. It means Tribune goes indie on WPHL (ex-WB) in Philadelphia, WATL (ex-WB) in Atlanta and KTWB (ex-WB) in Seattle, while CBS goes indie on WSBK (ex-UPN) in Boston, WBFS (ex-UPN) in Miami, KTXA (ex-UPN) in Dallas and KTXH (ex-UPN) in Houston, as well as on its WTCN-CA operation in West Palm.

Other groups that get shut out of the running are, of course, Fox's UPN affiliates in NYC (WWOR), Chicago (WPWR), Washington (WDCA) and LA (KCOP); Granite's suddenly-not-so-valuable KBWB San Francisco and WDWB Detroit; Sinclair's WTTA (ex-WB) Tampa, KOCB (ex-WB) in OKC and WCWB (ex-WB) Pittsburgh; Belo's WUPL (ex-UPN) New Orleans; LIN's WCTX (ex-UPN) and WNDY (ex-UPN) in Hartford/New Haven and Indianapolis, respectively; Gannett's newly-purchased KTVD (ex-UPN) Denver; Hearst-Argyle's KQCA (ex-WB) in Sacramento and Entravision's XHUPN (ex-UPN) in San Diego.

And please note, before we go too far in speculating, that the release says NOTHING at all about the fate of the WB 100+ group. My guess is that most of those operations will segue neatly over to the CW, even if there's a UPN LPTV or a weak full-power operation in the market. They're making good money for Time Warner, aren't they?<P ID="signature">______________
Tower Site Calendar 2006 JUST RELEASED! - <a target="_blank" href=http://www.fybush.com/nerw.html#calendar>www.fybush.com</a></P>

 

[KMRichards]

Re: The Return of Actual (Ind.) Stations in US Markets

> In markets with a full power UPN or WB affiliate they'll
> probably adopt the new CW network. In markets with both
> affiliates operating at full power (or nearby from a rimshot
> market), at least one of them is probably going to resume
> independent status, unless they want to go Spanish,
> religious, or home shopping.

What is interesting is that suddenly Fox loses its leverage in the top three markets.

Even though CBS owns a duopoly in Los Angeles (KCBS/2 and KCAL/9) UPN has remained on Fox-owned KCOP/13. Every time CBS has rattled its sabres about moving the affiliation, Fox has threatened to de-affiliate the New York (WWOR/9) and Chicago (WPWR/50) stations, which it owns. Now that the agreement is to have Tribune's KTLA/5 be the CW affiliate for those three markets, Fox has little choice but to program those three stations as traditional independents. (I can't see them doing the other options.)

Of course, what this likely means is a prime-time movie on all three.<P ID="signature">______________


</P>

 

[crisisbroadcast]

Re: Tribune-owned WB stations will get CW

> > > I wonder just how many stations will suddenly find
> > > themselves independent with a net loss of one network.
> >
> > According to the Chicago Sun-Times, Tribune-owned WB
> > stations will be affiliates of the new CW network.
>
> Yes, and I've heard in Boston that means Tribune-owned
> WLVI/56 gets the
> new net while CBS-owned WSBK/38 will be an indie again.
> These days
> Ch 38 bills themself as "The U" (yes, just like Chicago's
> WCIU/26)
> as in "UPN-38" but come next fall, I'm sure that will be
> dropped.
> Unless they want to do ads saying "television for U" or
> something.
> (U isn't even in their call letters, just in their network
> affiliation)

Maybe they'll go back to the days of "TV-38" and "Ask the Manager."
<P ID="signature">______________
FPXMedia: TV, Radio, and Anything Else
FPX Radio - Coming Soon!
Be Mused...</P>

 

[KMRichards]

Re: Tribune-owned WB stations will get CW

> > With alot of "orphaned" Fox-owned stations, I wonder if
> this
> > will create an opportunity for Fox to establish a second
> > network?
>
> A mini-network? Quite possible. Many of Fox's UPN-affiliated
> stations fall in large markets. FOX2? FX2? Definitely an
> interesting possibility to fill up with syndicated
> programming such as those carried on USA network or with
> movies. This will be interested to watch.

I should think it will be obvious. Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, and Washington DC will see the return of the prime-time movie (probably with "limited commercial interruptions").<P ID="signature">______________


</P>

 

[KMRichards]

> The original problem the poster as trying to get at is the
> few markets with both a Tribune-owned WB and a CBS-owned UPN
> -- who will get which?

As Scott Fybush said, read the entire press release.

Tribune-owned WB affiliates have the "seniority" over CBS-owned UPN stations.

All this speculation and asking of questions which were already answered <u>in the original post</u> are making my job harder as the lone moderator of this board, putting an extra strain on the R-I servers (as I post this, we have over 40 people on this board, which is a new record), and generally causing a lot of meaningless babble.<P ID="signature">______________


</P>

 

[zman]

Re: Tribune-owned WB stations will get CW

> > I'm kind of wondering if Trib wouldn't make some sort of
> > deal with Fox for Chicago. Take WGN back to an indie and
> > put CW on 50.
> >



Nope, WGN TV announced on their noon news that they will be carrying the CW programming. No word on what will happen to WPWR TV 50. Hopefully not another all infomercail/religous station. We already have one of those WJYS TV 62. We don't need two of them.

 

[OldAkronite]

UPN/WB/CW In Cleveland?

We have a situation in this market where the UPN and WB affiliates are both full-power stations owned by two companies other than CBS and Tribune...

* Long-time established independent WUAB/43 has become "UPN 43", a sister in a duopoly with CBS affiliate WOIO/19. Owned by Raycom.

* Newer WBNX/55 is "Cleveland's WB", an actually well-run WB Network affiliate solo. Owned by local Winston Broadcasting...the corporate arm of infamous TV televangelist Rev. Ernest Angley.

While WBNX has indeed actually been run like a major market WB affiliate (aside from an occasional "censoring" of mild curse words on syndicated programming, and the owner's own religious talk show at 10 PM ET weeknights), the dynamics of group ownership may shut it out of a shot at taking the CW programming.

Raycom owns 7 UPN/WB affiliates (6 UPN, 1 WB). That may win out in the end.

There's been some speculation on the Cleveland board that Raycom sees WUAB as its "redheaded stepchild", whatever that means...but they recently reestablished the "UPN 43" branding, and run Cleveland Cavaliers games on 43. The station's news director is quoted in recent news articles as saying they want to beef up the 10 PM newscast on UPN 43, produced by the "19 Action News" newsroom.

-OA<P ID="signature">______________
Ohio Media Watch - <a target="_blank" href=http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com>http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com</a></P>

 

[KMRichards]

> Here in the Seattle area UPN is KSTW channel 11(owned by
> Paramount Stations Group) and the WB is KTWB Channel
> 22(owned by Tribune). It's going to be interesting to see
> who gets the affilation for the new network up here but if i
> had to guess i would say KSTW because they're owned by
> Paramount Stations Group

This is another question that was already answered in the press release that started this thread.

Seattle is a market where the CBS-owned station gets CW, so it will be KSTW.<P ID="signature">______________


</P>

 

[RobertMoore]

Speaking of Sinclair, here are some other scenarios...

Buffalo: WNYO-49 would lose out if LIN's WNLO-23 goes from UPN to CW.

Greensboro: WTWB-20 would end up with CW if WUPN-48 loses.

Nashville: WNAB-58 could be the CW's new home

Las Vegas: Personally KVWB-21 is a safe bet for CW. But low-powered KTUD-25's luck is about to run out.

 

[KMRichards]

The Moderator Repeats: READ THE ORIGINAL POST, please...

Thank you, Scott.

The tendency for people to post without reading the entire post they are responding to has never been more evident than it is for this thread. And those of you who asked questions which were already answered in the original press release, hang your heads in shame because you have helped create an unnecessarily high load on the R-I servers with your extra (and meaningless) posts.

Now, one more thing, which I alluded to as a reply to one post further down, but which I will repeat here in hopes that people will be reading this before posting.

In most markets where there are orphaned UPN or WB affiliates, there is only going to be a two- or three-hour nightly prime-time block to cover. There aren't going to be a lot of wholesale conversions to all-infomercial, Spanish, religious, or the like because those stations have already been traditional independents outside of prime.

What is most likely is the return of the prime-time movie. Which should make the Hollywood studios very happy.<P ID="signature">______________


</P>

 

[DougBroda]

Re: Tribune-owned WB stations will get CW

> According to the Chicago Sun-Times, Tribune-owned WB
> stations will be affiliates of the new CW network. This
> means Fox-owned UPN stations will be left out in the cold in
> areas where both companies are in the same market.

The Top 30 markets up for grabs are:
#14 Phoenix KUTP (UPN/Fox); KASW (WB/Belo)
#15 Minneapolis WFTC (UPN/Fox); KMWB (WB/Sinclair)
#16 Cleveland WUAB (UPN/Raycom), WBNX (WB/local ownership)
#20 Orlando WRBW (UPN/Fox); WKCF (WB/Emmis)
#24 Baltimore WUTB (UPN/Fox); WNUV (WB/Sinclair)
#27 Charlotte WJZY (UPN) and WWWB (WB) are co-owned by Capital Broadcasting
#29 Raleigh-Durham WRDC (UPN) and WLFL (WB) are co-owned by Sinclair
#30 Nashville WUXP (UPN) and WNAB (WB)are co-owned by Sinclair