What happens to the WABC call letters (and KABC, for that matter) when ABC divests of its radio presence. Although the calls are very important to the station image, I know if I were Disney, I would not want any of the three stooges bidding on my company to tank my image with people thinking I still owned the station bearing my name. Would the FCC let them bring the WJZ calls back? Will anything change, or is this just nitpicking?
-
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
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
WABC call letters post-sale
- Thread starter ajhenderson
- Start date
M
mwebster
Guest
Westinghouse was the original licensee and they took the WJZ calls back for their TV station in Baltimore. Westinghouse Broadcasting acquired CBS and was acquired in turn by Viacom. CBS/Viacom now owns the WJZ calls.
Besides, nobody in the money demos (excluding bona fide radio geeks) has any memory of WJZ in New York (or CBS flagship, WABC). Notice 66 AM never went back to WEAF. And when 1050 went sports talk, they dropped WHN. Formerly used historic calls don't mean much in the real world.
Assuming Disney does not include heritage calls as part of the deal, the new owners can emphasize "talkradio77" in branding the station and play down the call letters; of they can adopt new calls that sound like WABC (if you don't listen too closely - WABD, WABP, etc). Probably call letters other than WABC and KABC would not be a problem and would be transferred.
The only confirmed suitor for ABC radio is Entercom. Emmis and Cumulus were mentioned by Drudge. However, I wouldn't call any of these companies "stooges" - especially compared to Disney, in view of that company's recent performance.
Besides, nobody in the money demos (excluding bona fide radio geeks) has any memory of WJZ in New York (or CBS flagship, WABC). Notice 66 AM never went back to WEAF. And when 1050 went sports talk, they dropped WHN. Formerly used historic calls don't mean much in the real world.
Assuming Disney does not include heritage calls as part of the deal, the new owners can emphasize "talkradio77" in branding the station and play down the call letters; of they can adopt new calls that sound like WABC (if you don't listen too closely - WABD, WABP, etc). Probably call letters other than WABC and KABC would not be a problem and would be transferred.
The only confirmed suitor for ABC radio is Entercom. Emmis and Cumulus were mentioned by Drudge. However, I wouldn't call any of these companies "stooges" - especially compared to Disney, in view of that company's recent performance.
>What happens to the WABC call letters (and KABC, for that matter) when ABC divests of its radio presence.<
Possibly, nothing. FCC rules permit non-commonly-owned stations in the same area to use the same call sign (with the appropriate suffix, if necessary), if the call sign's owner permits it, so ABC could sign an agreement with the buyer to let them keep the call sign. It hasn't happened often, but it has happened.
Possibly, nothing. FCC rules permit non-commonly-owned stations in the same area to use the same call sign (with the appropriate suffix, if necessary), if the call sign's owner permits it, so ABC could sign an agreement with the buyer to let them keep the call sign. It hasn't happened often, but it has happened.
> What happens to the WABC call letters (and KABC, for that
> matter) when ABC divests of its radio presence. Although the
> calls are very important to the station image, I know if I
> were Disney, I would not want any of the three stooges
> bidding on my company to tank my image with people thinking
> I still owned the station bearing my name. Would the FCC let
> them bring the WJZ calls back? Will anything change, or is
> this just nitpicking?
>
KJCB:
*IF* Disney sells off their radio properties, and new ownership wants to retain the WABC call signs WABC radio may have to identify itself as WABC-AM.
Channel 7 here in New York uses WABC TV as their billing.
Thanks,<P ID="signature">______________
Kevin L. Sealy</P>
> matter) when ABC divests of its radio presence. Although the
> calls are very important to the station image, I know if I
> were Disney, I would not want any of the three stooges
> bidding on my company to tank my image with people thinking
> I still owned the station bearing my name. Would the FCC let
> them bring the WJZ calls back? Will anything change, or is
> this just nitpicking?
>
KJCB:
*IF* Disney sells off their radio properties, and new ownership wants to retain the WABC call signs WABC radio may have to identify itself as WABC-AM.
Channel 7 here in New York uses WABC TV as their billing.
Thanks,<P ID="signature">______________
Kevin L. Sealy</P>
Historic Calls - New Owners
> Besides, nobody in the money demos (excluding bona fide
> radio geeks) has any memory of WJZ in New York (or CBS
> flagship, WABC). Notice 66 AM never went back to WEAF. And
> when 1050 went sports talk, they dropped WHN. Formerly used
> historic calls don't mean much in the real world.
In Louisville, there's the historic calls of WHAS. And in 2005, they are owned by different folks...AM 840 by Clear Channel, and WHAS-TV 11 by Belo. There are many other such situations in other markets.
However, none of them, as far as I can remember, involve "network" call letters like WABC. It'll be interesting to see if Disney has any problem with an Entercom-owned or Emmis-owned WABC(AM). If I'm reading speculation about the sale correctly, Disney will still be involved in a minority situation.
-OA<P ID="signature">______________
Ohio Media Watch - <a target="_blank" href=http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com>http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com</a></P>
> Besides, nobody in the money demos (excluding bona fide
> radio geeks) has any memory of WJZ in New York (or CBS
> flagship, WABC). Notice 66 AM never went back to WEAF. And
> when 1050 went sports talk, they dropped WHN. Formerly used
> historic calls don't mean much in the real world.
In Louisville, there's the historic calls of WHAS. And in 2005, they are owned by different folks...AM 840 by Clear Channel, and WHAS-TV 11 by Belo. There are many other such situations in other markets.
However, none of them, as far as I can remember, involve "network" call letters like WABC. It'll be interesting to see if Disney has any problem with an Entercom-owned or Emmis-owned WABC(AM). If I'm reading speculation about the sale correctly, Disney will still be involved in a minority situation.
-OA<P ID="signature">______________
Ohio Media Watch - <a target="_blank" href=http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com>http://ohiomedia.blogspot.com</a></P>
J
Joseph_Gallant
Guest
Re: Historic Calls - New Owners
The rule that now allows TV and radio stations once under the same call letters and owners to both keep the same call letters after the two stations are split into different ownership is known as the "WMAQ Rule".
When NBC spun-off it's radio stations at the end of the 1980's, WMAQ-670 Chicago was sold to Group W/Westinghouse. NBC retained WMAQ-TV (on channel 5).
Group W didn't want to change the call letters of their new acquisition, so they convinced the FCC to let them continue to use "WMAQ" on radio despite the fact NBC was using "WMAQ-TV" in the market.
A few years back, there was a format change at 670 and the WMAQ calls were dropped.
So if ABC indeed sells-off it's radio stations, it's possible 770 will still be known as "WABC" and Channel 7 will still be called "WABC-TV", although they would be under different ownerships.
The rule that now allows TV and radio stations once under the same call letters and owners to both keep the same call letters after the two stations are split into different ownership is known as the "WMAQ Rule".
When NBC spun-off it's radio stations at the end of the 1980's, WMAQ-670 Chicago was sold to Group W/Westinghouse. NBC retained WMAQ-TV (on channel 5).
Group W didn't want to change the call letters of their new acquisition, so they convinced the FCC to let them continue to use "WMAQ" on radio despite the fact NBC was using "WMAQ-TV" in the market.
A few years back, there was a format change at 670 and the WMAQ calls were dropped.
So if ABC indeed sells-off it's radio stations, it's possible 770 will still be known as "WABC" and Channel 7 will still be called "WABC-TV", although they would be under different ownerships.
Re: Oh c'mon....
>What do you mean when? There is nothing but an old rumor that won't die.<
What mound of sand have you had your head buried in for the past several months? Apparently you're the only person who doesn't know that the ABC-owned radio stations are for sale.
>What do you mean when? There is nothing but an old rumor that won't die.<
What mound of sand have you had your head buried in for the past several months? Apparently you're the only person who doesn't know that the ABC-owned radio stations are for sale.
>*IF* Disney sells off their radio properties, and new ownership wants to retain the WABC call signs WABC radio may have to identify itself as WABC-AM.<
Wrong. There is no such thing as a "-AM" call-sign suffix in the FCC rules. If WABC(AM) keeps its call sign, it will legally ID as WABC, just like before.
Wrong. There is no such thing as a "-AM" call-sign suffix in the FCC rules. If WABC(AM) keeps its call sign, it will legally ID as WABC, just like before.
> Assuming Disney does not include heritage calls as part of
> the deal, the new owners can emphasize "talkradio77" in
> branding the station and play down the call letters; of they
> can adopt new calls that sound like WABC (if you don't
> listen too closely - WABD, WABP, etc). Probably call
> letters other than WABC and KABC would not be a problem and
> would be transferred.
I'd vote for WABZ, if Saga could be convinced to make their Abe FM in Illinois WABZ-FM.
> the deal, the new owners can emphasize "talkradio77" in
> branding the station and play down the call letters; of they
> can adopt new calls that sound like WABC (if you don't
> listen too closely - WABD, WABP, etc). Probably call
> letters other than WABC and KABC would not be a problem and
> would be transferred.
I'd vote for WABZ, if Saga could be convinced to make their Abe FM in Illinois WABZ-FM.
Re: Oh c'mon....
> >What do you mean when? There is nothing but an old rumor
> that won't die.<
>
> What mound of sand have you had your head buried in for the
> past several months? Apparently you're the only person who
> doesn't know that the ABC-owned radio stations are for sale.
>
According to which news source?
> >What do you mean when? There is nothing but an old rumor
> that won't die.<
>
> What mound of sand have you had your head buried in for the
> past several months? Apparently you're the only person who
> doesn't know that the ABC-owned radio stations are for sale.
>
According to which news source?
D
DeltaKing
Guest
Re: Historic Calls - New Owners
> In Louisville, there's the historic calls of WHAS. And in
> 2005, they are owned by different folks...AM 840 by Clear
> Channel, and WHAS-TV 11 by Belo. There are many other such
> situations in other markets.
Here in Memphis, we have the same deal with the hertiage call letters WMC. AM,FM,and TV were all co-owned for many years, but when in Infinity bought the radio stations from Raycom, the call letters stayed the same. The AM ID's as "WMC" and the FM and TV each have the proper suffix attached. Expect the same to happen with WABC. The FCC usually regards the AM band as the one that does not need the suffix, regardless of the situation.
> In Louisville, there's the historic calls of WHAS. And in
> 2005, they are owned by different folks...AM 840 by Clear
> Channel, and WHAS-TV 11 by Belo. There are many other such
> situations in other markets.
Here in Memphis, we have the same deal with the hertiage call letters WMC. AM,FM,and TV were all co-owned for many years, but when in Infinity bought the radio stations from Raycom, the call letters stayed the same. The AM ID's as "WMC" and the FM and TV each have the proper suffix attached. Expect the same to happen with WABC. The FCC usually regards the AM band as the one that does not need the suffix, regardless of the situation.
Re: Oh c'mon....
>According to which news source?<
The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Business Week, Forbes...need I continue?
>According to which news source?<
The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Business Week, Forbes...need I continue?
> >*IF* Disney sells off their radio properties, and new
> ownership wants to retain the WABC call signs WABC radio may
> have to identify itself as WABC-AM.<
>
> Wrong. There is no such thing as a "-AM" call-sign suffix
> in the FCC rules. If WABC(AM) keeps its call sign, it will
> legally ID as WABC, just like before.
>
Dumber than a box of air:
Back in 1988 after WNEW 1130 & WNEW-FM were under separate ownership, WNEW 1130 under Westwood One and WNEW-FM 102.7 under Legacy Broadcasting, WNEW 1130 starting using the AM suffix in their legal ID. WNEW-FM always usewd the FM suffix.
Thanks,<P ID="signature">______________
Kevin L. Sealy</P>
> ownership wants to retain the WABC call signs WABC radio may
> have to identify itself as WABC-AM.<
>
> Wrong. There is no such thing as a "-AM" call-sign suffix
> in the FCC rules. If WABC(AM) keeps its call sign, it will
> legally ID as WABC, just like before.
>
Dumber than a box of air:
Back in 1988 after WNEW 1130 & WNEW-FM were under separate ownership, WNEW 1130 under Westwood One and WNEW-FM 102.7 under Legacy Broadcasting, WNEW 1130 starting using the AM suffix in their legal ID. WNEW-FM always usewd the FM suffix.
Thanks,<P ID="signature">______________
Kevin L. Sealy</P>
>>Back in 1988 after WNEW 1130 & WNEW-FM were under separate ownership, WNEW 1130 under Westwood One and WNEW-FM 102.7 under Legacy Broadcasting, WNEW 1130 starting using the AM suffix in their legal ID. WNEW-FM always usewd the FM suffix.<<
Since you obviously didn't read what I wrote, I'll repeat it: There is no such thing as an "-AM" suffix in the FCC rules.
Ergo, WNEW was ID'ing illegally.
Since you obviously didn't read what I wrote, I'll repeat it: There is no such thing as an "-AM" suffix in the FCC rules.
Ergo, WNEW was ID'ing illegally.
R
radiophile
Guest
> >>Back in 1988 after WNEW 1130 & WNEW-FM were under separate
> ownership, WNEW 1130 under Westwood One and WNEW-FM 102.7
> under Legacy Broadcasting, WNEW 1130 starting using the AM
> suffix in their legal ID. WNEW-FM always usewd the FM
> suffix.
>
I think it's in between.
I believe adding AM is OK. However, it is not required.
Just as adding the frequency is OK. In Philadelphia, for example, the LEGAL (and it is absolutely legal) top of the hour ID on the all news station is "KYW 1060, Philadelphia."
Also, I have heard AMs and FMs with the same programming ID themselves as "WXXX AM and FM, city of license."
> ownership, WNEW 1130 under Westwood One and WNEW-FM 102.7
> under Legacy Broadcasting, WNEW 1130 starting using the AM
> suffix in their legal ID. WNEW-FM always usewd the FM
> suffix.
>
I think it's in between.
I believe adding AM is OK. However, it is not required.
Just as adding the frequency is OK. In Philadelphia, for example, the LEGAL (and it is absolutely legal) top of the hour ID on the all news station is "KYW 1060, Philadelphia."
Also, I have heard AMs and FMs with the same programming ID themselves as "WXXX AM and FM, city of license."
Re: Oh c'mon....
> > >According to which news source?<
> >
> > The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Business
> Week,
> > Forbes...need I continue?
> >
>
> Link the actual story, or stories.
> And are they reporting that there's a rumor or that it's
> news?
>
Drudge had a story about it last week. Here's the thread I posted about it:
http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=584569&Board=usa
Personally, I think ABC/Disney divesting it's radio stations is a terrible idea. They own some monster stations that are obviously making obscene amounts of money. It seems the only radio they're interested in these days is their branding products, such as ESPN and Radio Disney. ESPN Radio has gone down the crapper since Kornheiser was blown out (and is currently watching FOX Sports Radio leave them in the dust programming-wise) and Radio Disney is nothing more than a 24/7 infomercial for Disney's product. Never mind that some of their stations (WABC, WLS in Chicago, KQRS in Minneapolis, etc) are nothing but money trees that require little in upkeep while bringing in truckloads of revenue. What are the Disney shareholders and management smoking anyways?
<P ID="signature">______________
The Liberal Talk Radio Update</P>
> > >According to which news source?<
> >
> > The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Business
> Week,
> > Forbes...need I continue?
> >
>
> Link the actual story, or stories.
> And are they reporting that there's a rumor or that it's
> news?
>
Drudge had a story about it last week. Here's the thread I posted about it:
http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=584569&Board=usa
Personally, I think ABC/Disney divesting it's radio stations is a terrible idea. They own some monster stations that are obviously making obscene amounts of money. It seems the only radio they're interested in these days is their branding products, such as ESPN and Radio Disney. ESPN Radio has gone down the crapper since Kornheiser was blown out (and is currently watching FOX Sports Radio leave them in the dust programming-wise) and Radio Disney is nothing more than a 24/7 infomercial for Disney's product. Never mind that some of their stations (WABC, WLS in Chicago, KQRS in Minneapolis, etc) are nothing but money trees that require little in upkeep while bringing in truckloads of revenue. What are the Disney shareholders and management smoking anyways?
<P ID="signature">______________
The Liberal Talk Radio Update</P>
>I believe adding AM is OK. However, it is not required. Just as adding the frequency is OK.<
Then you would be wrong.
The pertinent section of the rules (47 CFR §73.1201) is as follows:
(b) Content. (1) Official station identification shall consist of
the station's call letters immediately followed by the community or
communities specified in its license as the station's location:
Provided, That the name of the licensee or the station's frequency or
channel number, or both, as stated on the station's license may be
inserted between the call letters and station location. No other
insertion is permissible.
(2) A station may include in its official station identification the
name of any additional community or communities, but the community to
which the station is licensed must be named first.
Then you would be wrong.
The pertinent section of the rules (47 CFR §73.1201) is as follows:
(b) Content. (1) Official station identification shall consist of
the station's call letters immediately followed by the community or
communities specified in its license as the station's location:
Provided, That the name of the licensee or the station's frequency or
channel number, or both, as stated on the station's license may be
inserted between the call letters and station location. No other
insertion is permissible.
(2) A station may include in its official station identification the
name of any additional community or communities, but the community to
which the station is licensed must be named first.
Re: Oh c'mon....
I meant a REAL news source, aside from Drudge.
As far as I'm concerned, a Drudge story is just a cut above a rumor.
> Drudge had a story about it last week. Here's the thread I
> posted about it:
>
> http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=584569&Board=usa
>
> Personally, I think ABC/Disney divesting it's radio stations
> is a terrible idea. They own some monster stations that are
> obviously making obscene amounts of money. It seems the
> only radio they're interested in these days is their
> branding products, such as ESPN and Radio Disney. ESPN
> Radio has gone down the crapper since Kornheiser was blown
> out (and is currently watching FOX Sports Radio leave them
> in the dust programming-wise) and Radio Disney is nothing
> more than a 24/7 infomercial for Disney's product. Never
> mind that some of their stations (WABC, WLS in Chicago, KQRS
> in Minneapolis, etc) are nothing but money trees that
> require little in upkeep while bringing in truckloads of
> revenue. What are the Disney shareholders and management
> smoking anyways?
>
I meant a REAL news source, aside from Drudge.
As far as I'm concerned, a Drudge story is just a cut above a rumor.
> Drudge had a story about it last week. Here's the thread I
> posted about it:
>
> http://www.radio-info.com/mods/board?Post=584569&Board=usa
>
> Personally, I think ABC/Disney divesting it's radio stations
> is a terrible idea. They own some monster stations that are
> obviously making obscene amounts of money. It seems the
> only radio they're interested in these days is their
> branding products, such as ESPN and Radio Disney. ESPN
> Radio has gone down the crapper since Kornheiser was blown
> out (and is currently watching FOX Sports Radio leave them
> in the dust programming-wise) and Radio Disney is nothing
> more than a 24/7 infomercial for Disney's product. Never
> mind that some of their stations (WABC, WLS in Chicago, KQRS
> in Minneapolis, etc) are nothing but money trees that
> require little in upkeep while bringing in truckloads of
> revenue. What are the Disney shareholders and management
> smoking anyways?
>
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.