-
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.
What's up at 55/The Tube?
- Thread starter Mikedond
- Start date
M
Mediafrog
Guest
> Has anyone noticed the pitiful early evening programming at
> Houston's 55/The Tube? Reruns of sports programs and public
> service programs? What's up with that?
They've cut way back on the syndicated/off network stuff, while the infomercial load has gone up. Chopping programming expenses, while keeping cash flow up--the classic holding pattern for a station on the sales block, presumably as a duopoly with either 2, 11, or 13. Big question is: What will the other eventual duopoly combos be, since 51 is also on the market, and 49 is presumably headed there as well.
> Houston's 55/The Tube? Reruns of sports programs and public
> service programs? What's up with that?
They've cut way back on the syndicated/off network stuff, while the infomercial load has gone up. Chopping programming expenses, while keeping cash flow up--the classic holding pattern for a station on the sales block, presumably as a duopoly with either 2, 11, or 13. Big question is: What will the other eventual duopoly combos be, since 51 is also on the market, and 49 is presumably headed there as well.
C
coolcat713
Guest
> > Has anyone noticed the pitiful early evening programming
> at
> > Houston's 55/The Tube? Reruns of sports programs and
> public
> > service programs? What's up with that?
>
> They've cut way back on the syndicated/off network stuff,
> while the infomercial load has gone up. Chopping
> programming expenses, while keeping cash flow up--the
> classic holding pattern for a station on the sales block,
> presumably as a duopoly with either 2, 11, or 13. Big
> question is: What will the other eventual duopoly combos be,
> since 51 is also on the market, and 49 is presumably headed
> there as well.
>
Ahhh, the good old days , which I miss when KRIV 26 was Indendent and KHTV 39 was as well. The Tube and Channel 51 will never be like 26 and 39 was.
> at
> > Houston's 55/The Tube? Reruns of sports programs and
> public
> > service programs? What's up with that?
>
> They've cut way back on the syndicated/off network stuff,
> while the infomercial load has gone up. Chopping
> programming expenses, while keeping cash flow up--the
> classic holding pattern for a station on the sales block,
> presumably as a duopoly with either 2, 11, or 13. Big
> question is: What will the other eventual duopoly combos be,
> since 51 is also on the market, and 49 is presumably headed
> there as well.
>
Ahhh, the good old days , which I miss when KRIV 26 was Indendent and KHTV 39 was as well. The Tube and Channel 51 will never be like 26 and 39 was.
What will the other eventual duopoly combos be,
> since 51 is also on the market, and 49 is presumably headed
> there as well.
>
51 apparently already has a working relationship with Ch.11...look for Belo to buy them eventually.
> since 51 is also on the market, and 49 is presumably headed
> there as well.
>
51 apparently already has a working relationship with Ch.11...look for Belo to buy them eventually.
S
snoman
Guest
The cost of that old syndicated programming is outrageous, especially for small independent stations that can't recoup the cash on advertising. If you noticed, when you watched those shows, they ran mostly local ads. Those don't pay that much. I think their hands are pretty much tied. They need to do more local shows and utilize that aspect of their programming. You can make decent money on that. If done right, it will attract viewers and you will get some good numbers and you will also get some national advertising from it.
I hate to say this, because Belo is such a bad company these days, but I do wish they would buy 51 from the Johnson family. They could put a lot of much needed money into the presentation of the station, which is hideous. KNWS makes a lot of money off the Rockets and Astros, so it would be a good investment for Belo, who is making money hand over fists with the San Antonio Spurs on KENS in San Antonio. But when 51 is not airing sports, it is just unwatchable.
<P ID="signature">______________
"The Bitterness Of Poor Quality Lingers After The Sweetness of Low Price Is Long Forgotten."</P>
I hate to say this, because Belo is such a bad company these days, but I do wish they would buy 51 from the Johnson family. They could put a lot of much needed money into the presentation of the station, which is hideous. KNWS makes a lot of money off the Rockets and Astros, so it would be a good investment for Belo, who is making money hand over fists with the San Antonio Spurs on KENS in San Antonio. But when 51 is not airing sports, it is just unwatchable.
<P ID="signature">______________
"The Bitterness Of Poor Quality Lingers After The Sweetness of Low Price Is Long Forgotten."</P>
With digital change-over mandated for 2007 (please correct if I'm wrong on that)why would any of the city's big stations want to even both buying any of these three stations? Simply for duopoly purposes? All four of the big stations (2, 11, 13, 26) have multiple digital sub-channels currently broadcasting over Time-Warner Cable an OTA frequency isn't going to benefit them that much.
It doesn't make much sense to outlay the money to purchase a station, then turn around and outlay some more to upgrade it to digital. Then hope that local ad sales produce enough to cover both expenditures.
I really don't know of any truly independent stations that are currently sought after. They would have to be along the lines of a KTVK-3-Phoenix (already owned by Belo) or one of Weigel's Chicago stations to be truly considered "must have/buy" and neither three of these stations are "must haves."
No, I'd imagine all three signals will go dark in the next couple of years if they cannot find buyers or cannot afford the upgrade to HD/digital broadcasting.
It doesn't make much sense to outlay the money to purchase a station, then turn around and outlay some more to upgrade it to digital. Then hope that local ad sales produce enough to cover both expenditures.
I really don't know of any truly independent stations that are currently sought after. They would have to be along the lines of a KTVK-3-Phoenix (already owned by Belo) or one of Weigel's Chicago stations to be truly considered "must have/buy" and neither three of these stations are "must haves."
No, I'd imagine all three signals will go dark in the next couple of years if they cannot find buyers or cannot afford the upgrade to HD/digital broadcasting.
T
Tom_Desmond
Guest
> I hate to say this, because Belo is such a bad company these
> days, but I do wish they would buy 51 from the Johnson
> family. They could put a lot of much needed money into the
> presentation of the station, which is hideous.
Take a look at the job that Belo is doing running another UHF independent in a duopoly -- specifically, KONG/16 in Seattle, which is a duopoly with Belo-owned NBC affiliate KING/5. The daytime programming is mostly infomercials -- and the only shows that get decent ratings on the station are primetime repeats of "Oprah" and "Dr. Phil", along with a 10 PM newscast produced for KONG by the KING-TV news department.
Yeah, it's an improvement over what KNWS is currently doing. But it's not much of an improvement.
> days, but I do wish they would buy 51 from the Johnson
> family. They could put a lot of much needed money into the
> presentation of the station, which is hideous.
Take a look at the job that Belo is doing running another UHF independent in a duopoly -- specifically, KONG/16 in Seattle, which is a duopoly with Belo-owned NBC affiliate KING/5. The daytime programming is mostly infomercials -- and the only shows that get decent ratings on the station are primetime repeats of "Oprah" and "Dr. Phil", along with a 10 PM newscast produced for KONG by the KING-TV news department.
Yeah, it's an improvement over what KNWS is currently doing. But it's not much of an improvement.
C
CW
Guest
> > With digital change-over mandated for 2007 (please correct
> > if I'm wrong on that)
>
> You're right (New Year's Day 2007, to be exact), though
> there's a chance that the feds may end up being wrong.
Not 100% correct..NTSC goes away ONLY if there is 85% penetration of digital rcvrs...that wont happen for YEARS. Right now I would not put money on 2007 being the sunset date of analog
> > if I'm wrong on that)
>
> You're right (New Year's Day 2007, to be exact), though
> there's a chance that the feds may end up being wrong.
Not 100% correct..NTSC goes away ONLY if there is 85% penetration of digital rcvrs...that wont happen for YEARS. Right now I would not put money on 2007 being the sunset date of analog
KNWS and KTBU could very well be dead soon. They're obviously hurting ... and if anyone was interested, they'd have bid by now. The Tube is a shadow of what it once was. Infomercials till noon, then starting back up at 11 p.m. now. They have very few classic syndie shows left: I Love Lucy, Beverly Hillbillies, Quincy, All in the Family and Leave it to Beaver. KNWS has lost almost all its first-run syndication, with the exception of Access Hollywood. Just a few years back they had all the good court shows, including Judge Judy. They've also lost Ellen more recently. Becker, which isn't that great IMHO, has moved from KNWS to 4 a.m. on KPRC. Ouch! The owners of these 2 stations are clearly tiring of spending money.
> > > With digital change-over mandated for 2007 (please
> correct
> > > if I'm wrong on that)
> >
> > You're right (New Year's Day 2007, to be exact), though
> > there's a chance that the feds may end up being wrong.
>
> Not 100% correct..NTSC goes away ONLY if there is 85%
> penetration of digital rcvrs...that wont happen for YEARS.
> Right now I would not put money on 2007 being the sunset
> date of analog
>
> > > With digital change-over mandated for 2007 (please
> correct
> > > if I'm wrong on that)
> >
> > You're right (New Year's Day 2007, to be exact), though
> > there's a chance that the feds may end up being wrong.
>
> Not 100% correct..NTSC goes away ONLY if there is 85%
> penetration of digital rcvrs...that wont happen for YEARS.
> Right now I would not put money on 2007 being the sunset
> date of analog
>
M
Mark_Ericson
Guest
Analog Shutoff
> Not 100% correct..NTSC goes away ONLY if there is 85%
> penetration of digital rcvrs...that wont happen for YEARS.
> Right now I would not put money on 2007 being the sunset
> date of analog
The Senate bill for digital TV has sent April, 2009 as the date.
- Trip<P ID="signature">______________
Visit my website, www.rabbitears.info! It's eventually going to be your one resource for television info! Digital television, histories, and technical information for the entire USA from one source!</P>
> Not 100% correct..NTSC goes away ONLY if there is 85%
> penetration of digital rcvrs...that wont happen for YEARS.
> Right now I would not put money on 2007 being the sunset
> date of analog
The Senate bill for digital TV has sent April, 2009 as the date.
- Trip<P ID="signature">______________
Visit my website, www.rabbitears.info! It's eventually going to be your one resource for television info! Digital television, histories, and technical information for the entire USA from one source!</P>
C
CW
Guest
Re: Analog Shutoff
> > Not 100% correct..NTSC goes away ONLY if there is 85%
> > penetration of digital rcvrs...that wont happen for YEARS.
>
> > Right now I would not put money on 2007 being the sunset
> > date of analog
>
> The Senate bill for digital TV has sent April, 2009 as the
> date.
>
> - Trip
Proposed...it aint a law yet...and it may not make it past the House...
> > Not 100% correct..NTSC goes away ONLY if there is 85%
> > penetration of digital rcvrs...that wont happen for YEARS.
>
> > Right now I would not put money on 2007 being the sunset
> > date of analog
>
> The Senate bill for digital TV has sent April, 2009 as the
> date.
>
> - Trip
Proposed...it aint a law yet...and it may not make it past the House...
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.