• 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

Why doesn't NYC have a solid independent station?

Chicago has UHF WCIU-TV Channel 26 (as well as LP WWME-CA, Channel 23)

LA has KCAL Channel 9

Why doesn't NYC have a good solid independent station from the city or nearby suburbs.

It certainly should be large enough to support one.

NYC has 6.6 percent of total TV households

LA has 5.0

Chicago has 3.1

Click Here ---> <a target="_blank" href=http://www.nielsenmedia.com/DMAs.html>List of Nielsen Markets</a>

<P ID="signature">______________
Once I figured out the meaning of life....Then I forgot to write it down.</P>
 
> Chicago has UHF WCIU-TV Channel 26 (as well as LP WWME-CA,
> Channel 23)
>
> LA has KCAL Channel 9
>
> Why doesn't NYC have a good solid independent station from
> the city or nearby suburbs.

I have been wondering that myself, as I have seen those two Chicago stations line ups and wished they aired here!

Part of the problem is that there is "I" and three Spanish language stations (four if you count the same station broadcasting on another channel).

WLNY would be the best choice right now, as they are part of the way there with programming and market coverage, but need some more classic shows.

WRNN is mostly infomercials, but doesn't have much market coverage.

WMBC has little market coverage and little non-infomercial English programming.

WPXN would be the ideal choice once Bud Paxton's unwatched and unwatchable train wreck finally goes into oblivion. That would be a good choice for Viacom to buy and turn into a NYC version of KCAL after Bud looses his shirt.<P ID="signature">______________
WCBS = We're Crazy Buffoons and Schmucks
<a href=http://chuck.spotteddogs.org/tv/>Spotted Dog TV Talk - for all your non-news TV Talk</a></P>
 
Indy's like KCAL don't really add much to the TV market. I just checked their schedule online and they mainly have the same talk shows, court shows, and news that you would find on any other local station. But an indy with classic shows like WWME would be a great addition to the NYC market. WLNY would probably be the most obvious choice.
 
Also, Los Angeles' KCAL-9 has a heavy schedule of local sports: the Angels, Mighty Ducks, and Lakers. Next year, the Dodgers will be added to that. Once the Dodgers join KCAL, I believe that will boost the station's schedule of local professional sports to 165 games a year (50 each of the Dodgers and Angels, about 40 of the Lakers, and 25 of the Mighty Ducks).

By contrast, most of New York's pro sports teams are locally broadcast only on regional cable sports networks. I believe the only New York pro sports on over-the-air TV are 20 Yankees' games (on WWOR-9), 50 Mets' games (on WPIX-11), two or three preseason games each of the Giants (on WNBC-4) and Jets (on WWOR?), and a handful (10 games??) of the Islanders on WLNY-55. That's a total of about 85 locally-produced games of area teams broadcast on broadcast television in New York; about half of KCAL's output once they begin covering the Dodgers next Spring. There are no locally-produced over-the-air telecasts of the Rangers, Devils, Knicks, or Nets.
 
> > Chicago has UHF WCIU-TV Channel 26 (as well as LP WWME-CA,
>
> > Channel 23)
> >
> > LA has KCAL Channel 9
> >
> > Why doesn't NYC have a good solid independent station from
>
> > the city or nearby suburbs.
>
> I have been wondering that myself, as I have seen those two
> Chicago stations line ups and wished they aired here!
>
> Part of the problem is that there is "I" and three Spanish
> language stations (four if you count the same station
> broadcasting on another channel).
>
> WLNY would be the best choice right now, as they are part of
> the way there with programming and market coverage, but need
> some more classic shows.
>
> WRNN is mostly infomercials, but doesn't have much market
> coverage.
>
> WMBC has little market coverage and little non-infomercial
> English programming.
>
> WPXN would be the ideal choice once Bud Paxton's unwatched
> and unwatchable train wreck finally goes into oblivion. That
> would be a good choice for Viacom to buy and turn into a NYC
> version of KCAL after Bud looses his shirt.
>

You wrote:

"WMBC has little market coverage...."

Channel 63 was dropped into Newton to provide television
coverage of northwestern New Jersey. From its Jefferson
Township transmitter location, the WMBC-TV signal covers
that area very well. Too bad the program content doesn't.
 
RNN is a WASTE of air space!

> WRNN is mostly infomercials, but doesn't have much market
> coverage.

There...I've said it!

What was SUPPOSED to have been the "NY1" for the Hudson Valley turned out to be this huge infomercial flop with occasional political spews they call "news". Getting back to the original thread at hand, they should just rename this station back to WTZA and bring back the classic shows, movies, a half hour LOCAL news (just stick to Ulster, Orange and Dutchess Counties and leave the rest of the area ALONE!)

'TZA back in the 80's was similar to TV55 (when it was WLIG).

TS
 
> There are no locally-produced over-the-air telecasts of the Rangers,
> Devils, Knicks, or Nets.

I recall seeing a few Nets games, on WLNY, but I think they were produced by YES.
Odd choice for a New Jersey team.
<P ID="signature">______________
WCBS = We're Crazy Buffoons and Schmucks
<a href=http://chuck.spotteddogs.org/tv/>Spotted Dog TV Talk - for all your non-news TV Talk</a></P>
 
> Channel 63 was dropped into Newton to provide television
> coverage of northwestern New Jersey. From its Jefferson
> Township transmitter location, the WMBC-TV signal covers
> that area very well. Too bad the program content doesn't.

Remember that WMBC is moving well east of its current location with its digital signal in order to become a metro player. The new transmitter location will be near Patterson.
 
Correct, those Nets games were produced by YES and put on WLNY during the spring on days when both the Yankees and Nets were playing on the same day.
I believe the same thing has happened with some Islanders games when they conflict with other FSNY games.

> > There are no locally-produced over-the-air telecasts of
> the Rangers,
> > Devils, Knicks, or Nets.
>
> I recall seeing a few Nets games, on WLNY, but I think they
> were produced by YES.
> Odd choice for a New Jersey team.
>
 
I Think WFME-TV 66 West Milford Has WRNN Beat

> > WRNN is mostly infomercials, but doesn't have much market
> > coverage.
>
> There...I've said it!
>
> What was SUPPOSED to have been the "NY1" for the Hudson
> Valley turned out to be this huge infomercial flop with
> occasional political spews they call "news". Getting back
> to the original thread at hand, they should just rename this
> station back to WTZA and bring back the classic shows,
> movies, a half hour LOCAL news (just stick to Ulster, Orange
> and Dutchess Counties and leave the rest of the area ALONE!)
>
>
> 'TZA back in the 80's was similar to TV55 (when it was
> WLIG).
>
> TS
>

WFME-TV 66 West Milford, NJ is the biggest waste of TV air space......I live only a few miles from their Mahwah transmitter and I can't even get a trace of their signal with rabbit ears.....Therefore I don't know what's been on there recently but I have heard they are either off the air or just airing their 66 logo with audio from 94.7 WFME-FM.....Do any cable companies even carry WFME-TV?
<P ID="signature">______________
V

NOT NEW YORK....
NOT PHILADELPHIA....
PROUD TO BE NEW JERSEY....</P>
 
Re: I Think WFME-TV 66 West Milford Has WRNN Beat

I checked on the FCC website and according to their coverage map for WFME, their transmitter is located right near I-280 in the area of West Orange. Maybe they are digital only now?


http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/FMTV-service-area?x=DS611605.html




> WFME-TV 66 West Milford, NJ is the biggest waste of TV air
> space......I live only a few miles from their Mahwah
> transmitter and I can't even get a trace of their signal
> with rabbit ears.....Therefore I don't know what's been on
> there recently but I have heard they are either off the air
> or just airing their 66 logo with audio from 94.7
> WFME-FM.....Do any cable companies even carry WFME-TV?
>
 
Re: I Think WFME-TV 66 West Milford Has WRNN Beat

It's also licensed as noncommercial, ruling out it being sold and becoming an indy. Then again, couldn't TBN buy the noncommercial license, moving closer to the center of the market, exchanging or selling off WTBY? I recall Daystar with ability to be on both noncommercial and commercial.

> I checked on the FCC website and according to their coverage
> map for WFME, their transmitter is located right near I-280
> in the area of West Orange. Maybe they are digital only now?
>
>
>
> http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/FMTV-service-area?x=DS611605.html
>
>
>
>
>
> > WFME-TV 66 West Milford, NJ is the biggest waste of TV air
>
> > space......I live only a few miles from their Mahwah
> > transmitter and I can't even get a trace of their signal
> > with rabbit ears.....Therefore I don't know what's been on
>
> > there recently but I have heard they are either off the
> air
> > or just airing their 66 logo with audio from 94.7
> > WFME-FM.....Do any cable companies even carry WFME-TV?
> >
>
 
> Part of the problem is that there is "I" and three Spanish
> language stations (four if you count the same station
> broadcasting on another channel).

Well Chicago has three Spanish stations.

WSNS-TV 44, WGBO-TV 66 and WXFT-TV 60. The last two are licensed to suburbs but have their transmitters in Chicago.

Chicago also has an "I" station WCPX-TV Channel 38

I was just wondering whether NY'ers get more TV from cable? Or is the market just different? Or are NY'ers able to pull in more stations from other markets easier than Chicago. Despite what most sites lists, it's hard to pull in other markets in Chicago, unless you pretty far out.
<P ID="signature">______________
Once I figured out the meaning of life....Then I forgot to write it down.</P>
 
> > Channel 63 was dropped into Newton to provide television
> > coverage of northwestern New Jersey. From its Jefferson
> > Township transmitter location, the WMBC-TV signal covers
> > that area very well. Too bad the program content doesn't.
>
> Remember that WMBC is moving well east of its current
> location with its digital signal in order to become a metro
> player. The new transmitter location will be near
> Patterson.
>


The grant of the license for Channel 63 was contingent
on the station providing a service to northwestern New
Jersey. How can they provide an adequate signal for all
of the northwest from a location near Paterson?

The answer is...they can't. And yes, I know the signal
will be on Channel 18. And no, coverage maps you see on
the Internet are notoriously inaccurate.
 
> The grant of the license for Channel 63 was contingent
> on the station providing a service to northwestern New
> Jersey. How can they provide an adequate signal for all
> of the northwest from a location near Paterson?

Technically they only need to cover Newton.


> The answer is...they can't. And yes, I know the signal
> will be on Channel 18. And no, coverage maps you see on
> the Internet are notoriously inaccurate.

True, but coverage maps don't matter. The theoretical math is what matters. If you want to see that argument in spades, go check out the move of KNTV from San Jose to San Francisco on the Left Coast. NBC tortured the numbers until somebody confessed. I'm not saying it's right, but that's the way the regs are written at the moment. When someone changes the rules, then we can revisit the topic. (And yes, I'm all for changing these silly regs that make no sense in the real world.)
 
> > Part of the problem is that there is "I" and three Spanish
>
> > language stations (four if you count the same station
> > broadcasting on another channel).
>
> Well Chicago has three Spanish stations.
>
> WSNS-TV 44, WGBO-TV 66 and WXFT-TV 60. The last two are
> licensed to suburbs but have their transmitters in Chicago.
>
>
> Chicago also has an "I" station WCPX-TV Channel 38
>
> I was just wondering whether NY'ers get more TV from cable?
> Or is the market just different? Or are NY'ers able to pull
> in more stations from other markets easier than Chicago.
> Despite what most sites lists, it's hard to pull in other
> markets in Chicago, unless you pretty far out.
>

I suspect after Ch.5, 9 and Ch.11 dropped classic reruns like 'Love Boat' from their daytime lineup for Ricki, Montel, Tempesst, Rolonda Watts, Pat Bullard, Jenny Jones, Richard Bey and Jerry Springer, people watched the talk shows new at the time, or found something else to do. Along with network fare, they might watch more cable - probably more takers to HBO, and the premium services, and more viewing of the RSNs for pro-sports. The immigrant population probably leans more to satellite, for ethnic channels, along with the basic channels. Cablevision's rates are amongst the highest; or, atleast they were 10 years ago, but people still kept cable or defected to satellite.

There are also lot of noncommercial licensed stations in the area: WNET on VHF, 3 full power NJN stations on the dial(WNJN, WNJB, WNJT), along with WNYE, WLIW and WFME(not viewable, but still allocated). Maybe the FCC should have allocated one less noncommercial, and one more commercial, or CH.13 should have stayed commercial.

Philly also doesn't have a solid indy. D.C. doesn't either. I don't know of any East coast markets with them, except for the occasional rimshot like WLNY, WFMZ and WNDS/WZMY, that don't exactly count if they air first run programming that is also seen in the main city. Low powered stations don't count in my opinion either.

Along with WLNY, WFMZ might reach some market viewers. With WFMZ-DT being at full power, I suspect some of western Northern NJ can pick up WFMZ also. It reaches Mercer, Burlington and Camden Counties. But, they are more Lehigh Valley/Berks centric, with lot of local news for that region, and are not mustcarry in Northern/Central NJ. They have their mix of sitcoms, two courtroom shows, infomercials, and religious programming.

People in Fairfield Co. might receive New Haven/Hartford networks, and by the Central NJ area, they might get networks from Philadelphia as secondary.

Chicago is on the CST. WCIU and WGN benefit with syndicated selection choice, when the Chicago ABC, NBC, CBS lose an hour of daytime air. The ABC affiliate in Chicago can't run Regis&Kelly, Who Wants to be a Millionaire or Tony Danza, freeing it for the smaller stations.

It does bring a point, though. If NY had a 7th station, with Chicago and LA would already have them, it could lead to more syndicated material for broadcast, and open a viable indy operation in Philly and other major markets. WGTW failed imo, without professional presentation, any sports programming, and given just the scrap-overs of syndication. They didn't have a strong classic rerun lineup. But another indy would probably just be more courtroom shows, Cops reruns, or something not very original.
 
> > The grant of the license for Channel 63 was contingent
> > on the station providing a service to northwestern New
> > Jersey. How can they provide an adequate signal for all
> > of the northwest from a location near Paterson?
>
> Technically they only need to cover Newton.
>
>
> > The answer is...they can't. And yes, I know the signal
> > will be on Channel 18. And no, coverage maps you see on
> > the Internet are notoriously inaccurate.
>
> True, but coverage maps don't matter. The theoretical math
> is what matters. If you want to see that argument in
> spades, go check out the move of KNTV from San Jose to San
> Francisco on the Left Coast. NBC tortured the numbers until
> somebody confessed. I'm not saying it's right, but that's
> the way the regs are written at the moment. When someone
> changes the rules, then we can revisit the topic. (And yes,
> I'm all for changing these silly regs that make no sense in
> the real world.)
>


Let me restate the question: How will WMBC-DT be able
to cover Newton from a transmitter near Paterson?

The answer is...they wouldn't. The owner of WMBC cares
to cover only New York City and other locations where
there are people who speak Chinese and/or Korean. For
the past decade or so he has demonstrated that he couldn't
care less about Sussex County.
 
> > > Part of the problem is that there is "I" and three
> Spanish
> >
> > > language stations (four if you count the same station
> > > broadcasting on another channel).
> >
> > Well Chicago has three Spanish stations.
> >
> > WSNS-TV 44, WGBO-TV 66 and WXFT-TV 60. The last two are
> > licensed to suburbs but have their transmitters in
> Chicago.
> >
> >
> > Chicago also has an "I" station WCPX-TV Channel 38
> >
> > I was just wondering whether NY'ers get more TV from
> cable?
> > Or is the market just different? Or are NY'ers able to
> pull
> > in more stations from other markets easier than Chicago.
> > Despite what most sites lists, it's hard to pull in other
> > markets in Chicago, unless you pretty far out.
> >
>
> I suspect after Ch.5, 9 and Ch.11 dropped classic reruns
> like 'Love Boat' from their daytime lineup for Ricki,
> Montel, Tempesst, Rolonda Watts, Pat Bullard, Jenny Jones,
> Richard Bey and Jerry Springer, people watched the talk
> shows new at the time, or found something else to do.
> Along with network fare, they might watch more cable -
> probably more takers to HBO, and the premium services, and
> more viewing of the RSNs for pro-sports. The immigrant
> population probably leans more to satellite, for ethnic
> channels, along with the basic channels. Cablevision's
> rates are amongst the highest; or, atleast they were 10
> years ago, but people still kept cable or defected to
> satellite.
>
> There are also lot of noncommercial licensed stations in the
> area: WNET on VHF, 3 full power NJN stations on the
> dial(WNJN, WNJB, WNJT), along with WNYE, WLIW and WFME(not
> viewable, but still allocated). Maybe the FCC should have
> allocated one less noncommercial, and one more commercial,
> or CH.13 should have stayed commercial.
>
> Philly also doesn't have a solid indy. D.C. doesn't
> either. I don't know of any East coast markets with them,
> except for the occasional rimshot like WLNY, WFMZ and
> WNDS/WZMY, that don't exactly count if they air first run
> programming that is also seen in the main city. Low
> powered stations don't count in my opinion either.
>
> Along with WLNY, WFMZ might reach some market viewers.
> With WFMZ-DT being at full power, I suspect some of western
> Northern NJ can pick up WFMZ also. It reaches Mercer,
> Burlington and Camden Counties. But, they are more Lehigh
> Valley/Berks centric, with lot of local news for that
> region, and are not mustcarry in Northern/Central NJ. They
> have their mix of sitcoms, two courtroom shows,
> infomercials, and religious programming.
>
> People in Fairfield Co. might receive New Haven/Hartford
> networks, and by the Central NJ area, they might get
> networks from Philadelphia as secondary.
>
> Chicago is on the CST. WCIU and WGN benefit with
> syndicated selection choice, when the Chicago ABC, NBC, CBS
> lose an hour of daytime air. The ABC affiliate in Chicago
> can't run Regis&Kelly, Who Wants to be a Millionaire or Tony
> Danza, freeing it for the smaller stations.
>
> It does bring a point, though. If NY had a 7th station,
> with Chicago and LA would already have them, it could lead
> to more syndicated material for broadcast, and open a viable
> indy operation in Philly and other major markets. WGTW
> failed imo, without professional presentation, any sports
> programming, and given just the scrap-overs of syndication.
> They didn't have a strong classic rerun lineup. But
> another indy would probably just be more courtroom shows,
> Cops reruns, or something not very original.
>

"...or CH.13 should have stayed commercial."

I agree. Channel 13 should never have been allowed
to leave the state. Those who purchased the station
and moved the studios out of state reneged on their
promises to serve northern New Jersey. The last I
looked, the allocation is still commercial.

New Jersey Public Broadcasting operates four UHF
transmitters but the programming is the same on
all four. So they really should be treated as just
one station.
 
Re: I Think WFME-TV 66 West Milford Has WRNN Beat

> It's also licensed as noncommercial, ruling out it being
> sold and becoming an indy. Then again, couldn't TBN buy
> the noncommercial license, moving closer to the center of
> the market, exchanging or selling off WTBY? I recall
> Daystar with ability to be on both noncommercial and
> commercial.
>

For what it's worth, Channel 66 was allocated to West Milford
specifically for the purpose of providing television service
to northern New Jersey that is not being provided by the
New York City TV stations. It was the same requirement imposed
on the reallocation of Channel 63 to Newton. Both UHF drop-ins
are intrisically prohibited from being players in the
New York City scene.
 
Re: I Think WFME-TV 66 West Milford Has WRNN Beat

> WFME-TV 66 West Milford, NJ is the biggest waste of TV air
> space......I live only a few miles from their Mahwah
> transmitter and I can't even get a trace of their signal
> with rabbit ears.....Therefore I don't know what's been on
> there recently but I have heard they are either off the air
> or just airing their 66 logo with audio from 94.7
> WFME-FM.....Do any cable companies even carry WFME-TV?

On my last visit to Fair Lawn, NJ I was able to get a faint signal out of WFME-66 analog and I had a much better signal from WFME-DT 29. WFME-DT is airing actual programming on 29-2 and a test slide that says "we are testing blah blah" on 29-3 that's been there ever since I've been looking for digitals. Then 29-4 through 29-11 are all blank.

No idea what the analog's DOING, as the signal was not strong enough to tell, but it was certainly there.

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


Back
Top Bottom