• 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

Whither CW in Wisconsin?

DrBear

DrBear

In some cases, the station that will carry the newly-merged CW network is obvious; in others, not so. The situations in Milwaukee and Green Bay should be interesting, so I'll start with those.

Milwaukee - Both WVTV-18 and WCGV-24 are owned by Sinclair. I guess this will be a case of "which is the favored child." I always thought it was 24, which got UPN and Brewers/Bucks games; but then Sinclair put its news on 18. It's an internal decision. (Then again, might Weigel decide to make a run for the CW with WMKE-41? It would unite the two CBS properties under one roof...)

Green Bay - The only market with separately-owned full-power affils for the two networks, WACY-32 (UPN, controlled and to be owned by Journal, which owns WGBA-26) and WIWB-14 (WB, owned by Jamie Kellner's Acme Communications). Advantages and disadvantages:
WACY - Stronger signal, especially in the southern half of the market. Journal provides solid ownership, possible news links if network affiliation calls for that. Lower overhead could mean Journal wins a bidding war if it comes to that. WACY has had Fox, UPN affiliations.
WIWB - Big advantage here is the Acme connection; Kellner, I believe, still has a stake in the WB and won't want to let the new network get off his chain. That may be enough, depending on who at the CW makes the decisions. Station could enter into LMA with CBS-owned WFRV-5, saving overhead and uniting the CBS properties. Big disadvantage is that the channel's transmitter is located well north of Green Bay (the station is licensed to Suring, a hangover from when it was a religious station that went dark) and is mostly seen on cable in the key - and rich - Fox Cities market. Oh, and it would probably have to change its call letters (WCWG? WGCW?).

Elsewhere, the situation is simpler.
Madison - WBUW-57 takes over; UPN wasn't a factor in its cable-only arrangement.
La Crosse/Eau Claire - as King Daevid has reported, the low-power UPN affil is dropping its affiliation at week's end. No word on if it might pick up the CW.
Wausau - UPN had been carried in off hours on WFXS-55, the Fox affiliate; that might remain the same, or WSAU-7, the CBS station, might pick up the shows. There is a WBWA low-power station but the new network might not stay there.

Corrections and comments welcome...
 
> In some cases, the station that will carry the newly-merged
> CW network is obvious; in others, not so. The situations in
> Milwaukee and Green Bay should be interesting, so I'll start
> with those.
>
> Milwaukee - Both WVTV-18 and WCGV-24 are owned by Sinclair.
> I guess this will be a case of "which is the favored child."
> I always thought it was 24, which got UPN and Brewers/Bucks
> games; but then Sinclair put its news on 18. It's an
> internal decision. (Then again, might Weigel decide to make
> a run for the CW with WMKE-41? It would unite the two CBS
> properties under one roof...)
>
> Green Bay - The only market with separately-owned full-power
> affils for the two networks, WACY-32 (UPN, controlled and to
> be owned by Journal, which owns WGBA-26) and WIWB-14 (WB,
> owned by Jamie Kellner's Acme Communications). Advantages
> and disadvantages:
> WACY - Stronger signal, especially in the southern half of
> the market. Journal provides solid ownership, possible news
> links if network affiliation calls for that. Lower overhead
> could mean Journal wins a bidding war if it comes to that.
> WACY has had Fox, UPN affiliations.
> WIWB - Big advantage here is the Acme connection; Kellner, I
> believe, still has a stake in the WB and won't want to let
> the new network get off his chain. That may be enough,
> depending on who at the CW makes the decisions. Station
> could enter into LMA with CBS-owned WFRV-5, saving overhead
> and uniting the CBS properties. Big disadvantage is that the
> channel's transmitter is located well north of Green Bay
> (the station is licensed to Suring, a hangover from when it
> was a religious station that went dark) and is mostly seen
> on cable in the key - and rich - Fox Cities market. Oh, and
> it would probably have to change its call letters (WCWG?
> WGCW?).
>
> Elsewhere, the situation is simpler.
> Madison - WBUW-57 takes over; UPN wasn't a factor in its
> cable-only arrangement.
> La Crosse/Eau Claire - as King Daevid has reported, the
> low-power UPN affil is dropping its affiliation at week's
> end. No word on if it might pick up the CW.
> Wausau - UPN had been carried in off hours on WFXS-55, the
> Fox affiliate; that might remain the same, or WSAU-7, the
> CBS station, might pick up the shows. There is a WBWA
> low-power station but the new network might not stay there.

WBWA is acually cable only, and that is what SUCKS! I can't get the WB, even on DISH network which carries our locals. I WISH that WBWA acually transmitter, but currently it is running from WAOW's studios (ABC).

>
>
> Corrections and comments welcome...
>
<P ID="signature">______________


Moderator, Community Radio board</P>
 
> WBWA is acually cable only, and that is what SUCKS! I can't
> get the WB, even on DISH network which carries our locals. I
> WISH that WBWA acually transmitter, but currently it is
> running from WAOW's studios (ABC).

I believe La Crosse/Eau Claire also has a cable-only WB outlet (it's moniker and calls escape me), so I'm sure if Channel 23 decides to pass on CW, the merged network will still have a cable-only home in the market (though I'm sure CW would hope for something--anything--over the air).

As for the suggestions for Green Bay, WACY sounds good with its signal and its partnership with WGBA, but ACME owns Channel 14, and has always seemed to be a faithful affiliate partner with WB. Lest we forget, ACME also owns Channel 57 in Madison, the likely home for CW there, so I bet ACME would want a package deal with both 14 and 57 (and its other WB affiliates across the country).
 
> In some cases, the station that will carry the newly-merged
> CW network is obvious; in others, not so. The situations in
> Milwaukee and Green Bay should be interesting, so I'll start
> with those.
>
> Milwaukee - Both WVTV-18 and WCGV-24 are owned by Sinclair.
> I guess this will be a case of "which is the favored child."
> I always thought it was 24, which got UPN and Brewers/Bucks
> games; but then Sinclair put its news on 18. It's an
> internal decision. (Then again, might Weigel decide to make
> a run for the CW with WMKE-41? It would unite the two CBS
> properties under one roof...)
>
I believe WCGV runs Fox Kids.

So:

WVTV=CW
WCGV=IND

thats my guess<P ID="signature">______________

</P>
 
> So:
>
> WVTV=CW
> WCGV=IND
>
> thats my guess
>

I will have to agree with Jeremy on this one. I believe WVTV will become the CW affilaite because they are equipped to carry programs in High Definition from the network. WCGV has yet to get equipped for HDTV. But if they are going independent they may find that they will no longer need to worry about going HD and stick with SD.

Obviously then WCGV will have the freedom to carry Bucks games. Unfortunately the Brewers don't want OTA broadcasts right now. Hopefully they will consider it again.

-John L.
 
> La Crosse/Eau Claire - as King Daevid has reported, the
> low-power UPN affil is dropping its affiliation at week's
> end. No word on if it might pick up the CW.

...they won't; the current WB is carried locally on a cable channel operated by WXOW/19 and WQOW/18, the ABC affiliates in the market. Although KQEG has a similar regional cable setup, the visual quality is atrocious...<P ID="signature">______________
King Daevid MacKenzie
WLSU Wisconsin Public Radio, La Crosse
heard weekly on http://www.radio4all.net/
"Kill Ugly Radio." FRANK ZAPPA</P>
 
> > WBWA is acually cable only, and that is what SUCKS! I
> can't
> > get the WB, even on DISH network which carries our locals.
> I
> > WISH that WBWA acually transmitter, but currently it is
> > running from WAOW's studios (ABC).
>
> I believe La Crosse/Eau Claire also has a cable-only WB
> outlet (it's moniker and calls escape me), so I'm sure if
> Channel 23 decides to pass on CW, the merged network will
> still have a cable-only home in the market (though I'm sure
> CW would hope for something--anything--over the air).
>
> As for the suggestions for Green Bay, WACY sounds good with
> its signal and its partnership with WGBA, but ACME owns
> Channel 14, and has always seemed to be a faithful affiliate
> partner with WB. Lest we forget, ACME also owns Channel 57
> in Madison, the likely home for CW there, so I bet ACME
> would want a package deal with both 14 and 57 (and its other
> WB affiliates across the country).

WB+UPN=???
 
> There is a WBWA
> low-power station but the new network might not stay there.

WBWA is cable only, part of WB 100+

-A<P ID="signature">______________

</P>
 
> > There is a WBWA
> > low-power station but the new network might not stay
> there.
>
> WBWA is cable only, part of WB 100+
>
> -A
>

Yep, I posted that below :p.. I hate it too, not being able to get cable where we live and everything...<P ID="signature">______________


Moderator, Community Radio board</P>
 
> > > WBWA is acually cable only, and that is what SUCKS! I> > can't> > > get the WB, even on DISH network which carries our> locals.> > I> > > WISH that WBWA acually transmitter, but currently it is> > > running from WAOW's studios (ABC).> > > > I believe La Crosse/Eau Claire also has a cable-only WB> > outlet (it's moniker and calls escape me), so I'm sure if> > Channel 23 decides to pass on CW, the merged network will> > still have a cable-only home in the market (though I'm> sure> > CW would hope for something--anything--over the air).> > > > As for the suggestions for Green Bay, WACY sounds good> with> > its signal and its partnership with WGBA, but ACME owns> > Channel 14, and has always seemed to be a faithful> affiliate> > partner with WB. Lest we forget, ACME also owns Channel> 57> > in Madison, the likely home for CW there, so I bet ACME> > would want a package deal with both 14 and 57 (and its> other> > WB affiliates across the country).> > WB+UPN=???> When will ch.18, and 24 change to CW?WMKE is on ch.7, not 41.
 
> across the country).> > WB+UPN=???> When will ch.18, and 24
> change to CW?WMKE is on ch.7, not 41.
>

WMKE is on the air over ch. 41, but carried on Time Warner Cable on ch. 7.

-John L.
 
> WMKE is on the air over ch. 41, but carried on Time Warner
> Cable on ch. 7.
>
> -John L.
>


Actually, WMKE is on ch. 7 OTA, and not carried on cable, it is the low power staiton on top of the Hilton. I belive he ment to say WMLW, ch. 41 ota and cable 7..<P ID="signature">______________
Bob Colon
www.bobs-world.net
"Dream as if you'll live forever, live as if you'll die today"-James Dean</P>
 
> > WMKE is on the air over ch. 41, but carried on Time Warner
>
> > Cable on ch. 7.
> >
> > -John L.
> >
>
>
> Actually, WMKE is on ch. 7 OTA, and not carried on cable, it
> is the low power staiton on top of the Hilton. I belive he
> ment to say WMLW, ch. 41 ota and cable 7..
>
Sorry about the screw up on call letters. That's right ch. 41 is WMLW. As for ch. 7 I keep forgetting we have such a station. I can't pick them up hardly in Muskego. I used to thou years ago, especially when they were on ch. 8. But with WMVS-DT on the air over ch. 8 I think it bleeds over to ch. 7 making WMKE hard to receive. Besides I am not crazy about Music Videos, providing WMKE, ch. 7 still carries that.

This is what happens to your brain when its on eBay 12 hours a day, 8 hours at work, 4 hours at home.

-John L.
 
UPDATE: CW on La Crosse cable

WXOW in La Crosse, which had shown the WB as a cable-only station under the WBCZ label, is expected to do the same with the new CW merged network, the La Crosse Tribune says.

KQEG-TV, which had been showing UPN, is dropping the affiliation at the end of this week. It also shows FamilyNet programming.
 
> In some cases, the station that will carry the newly-merged
> CW network is obvious; in others, not so. The situations in
> Milwaukee and Green Bay should be interesting, so I'll start
> with those.
>
> Milwaukee - Both WVTV-18 and WCGV-24 are owned by Sinclair.
> I guess this will be a case of "which is the favored child."
> I always thought it was 24, which got UPN and Brewers/Bucks
> games; but then Sinclair put its news on 18. It's an
> internal decision. (Then again, might Weigel decide to make
> a run for the CW with WMKE-41? It would unite the two CBS
> properties under one roof...)
>
> Green Bay - The only market with separately-owned full-power
> affils for the two networks, WACY-32 (UPN, controlled and to
> be owned by Journal, which owns WGBA-26) and WIWB-14 (WB,
> owned by Jamie Kellner's Acme Communications). Advantages
> and disadvantages:
> WACY - Stronger signal, especially in the southern half of
> the market. Journal provides solid ownership, possible news
> links if network affiliation calls for that. Lower overhead
> could mean Journal wins a bidding war if it comes to that.
> WACY has had Fox, UPN affiliations.
> WIWB - Big advantage here is the Acme connection; Kellner, I
> believe, still has a stake in the WB and won't want to let
> the new network get off his chain. That may be enough,
> depending on who at the CW makes the decisions. Station
> could enter into LMA with CBS-owned WFRV-5, saving overhead
> and uniting the CBS properties. Big disadvantage is that the
> channel's transmitter is located well north of Green Bay
> (the station is licensed to Suring, a hangover from when it
> was a religious station that went dark) and is mostly seen
> on cable in the key - and rich - Fox Cities market. Oh, and
> it would probably have to change its call letters (WCWG?
> WGCW?).
>
> Elsewhere, the situation is simpler.
> Madison - WBUW-57 takes over; UPN wasn't a factor in its
> cable-only arrangement.
> La Crosse/Eau Claire - as King Daevid has reported, the
> low-power UPN affil is dropping its affiliation at week's
> end. No word on if it might pick up the CW.
> Wausau - UPN had been carried in off hours on WFXS-55, the
> Fox affiliate; that might remain the same, or WSAU-7, the
> CBS station, might pick up the shows. There is a WBWA
> low-power station but the new network might not stay there.
>
>
> Corrections and comments welcome...
>
WIWB has their tower for digital on the tower farm in Green Bay. The signal is full power on 21-1. So for people with HD receivers, the signal comes in just as strong as the other locals. My signal meter has them close to 100.
 
Re: UPDATE: CW on La Crosse cable

> WXOW in La Crosse, which had shown the WB as a cable-only
> station under the WBCZ label, is expected to do the same
> with the new CW merged network, the La Crosse Tribune says.
>
> KQEG-TV, which had been showing UPN, is dropping the
> affiliation at the end of this week. It also shows FamilyNet
> programming.
>

And that may change yet too.... as WKBT is picking up UPN on it's digital subchannel. WKBT, a CBS affiliate, may compete for this too. I probably would prefer WKBT-HD2 over the cable only WBCZ, as some people can't get cable (me included, can't get WBWA). <P ID="signature">______________


Moderator, Community Radio board</P>
 
Re: UPDATE: CW on La Crosse cable

> And that may change yet too.... as WKBT is picking up UPN on
> it's digital subchannel. WKBT, a CBS affiliate, may compete
> for this too. I probably would prefer WKBT-HD2 over the
> cable only WBCZ, as some people can't get cable (me
> included, can't get WBWA).

Don't hold your breath... We were told Friday that WB 100+ is getting the affiliation.

-A<P ID="signature">______________

</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom