WMBC no longer carried on DirecTV

[6tothebronx]

I was just flipping through the channels a little while ago and when I came across WMBC-63 there is a message saying "Our rights to carry the station expired on December 31, 2005."

 

[toby]

> I was just flipping through the channels a little while ago
> and when I came across WMBC-63 there is a message saying
> "Our rights to carry the station expired on December 31, 2005."

I am amazed that the people who run WMBC let that happen.
My understanding is that they really want to be carried on as many delivery vehicles as possible in New York City due to their paid ethnic programming.
Not that the loss of WMBC is anything to care about.
<P ID="signature">______________
<a href=http://blog.spotteddogs.org/blog/>Random Observations on Life, the Universe and Television</a></P>

 

[Harold]

> > I was just flipping through the channels a little while
> ago
> > and when I came across WMBC-63 there is a message saying
> > "Our rights to carry the station expired on December 31,
> 2005."
>
> I am amazed that the people who run WMBC let that happen.
> My understanding is that they really want to be carried on
> as many delivery vehicles as possible in New York City due
> to their paid ethnic programming.
> Not that the loss of WMBC is anything to care about.
>

I agree Toby. WMBC-TV, Channel 63, is a waste of
air-space. Its small niche programming belongs on
cable, if any cable system wants to carry it. The
station doesn't belong on the broadcast airwaves
taking up a channel assignment that is supposed to
be used to provide general television coverage of
northwestern New Jersey.

DirecTV would better serve its customers by providing
more significant programming.

 

[r566]

> > I was just flipping through the channels a little while
> ago
> > and when I came across WMBC-63 there is a message saying
> > "Our rights to carry the station expired on December 31,
> 2005."
>
> I am amazed that the people who run WMBC let that happen.
> My understanding is that they really want to be carried on
> as many delivery vehicles as possible in New York City due
> to their paid ethnic programming.
> Not that the loss of WMBC is anything to care about.
>

It would seem unusual that WMBC (and WWSI for Phila.) would must-carry to Dish Net., but forget to or error for DirecTV. I would think any TV station engineer would, when thinking of one sat company, think of the other.

 

[r566]

> > > I was just flipping through the channels a little while
> > ago
> > > and when I came across WMBC-63 there is a message saying
>
> > > "Our rights to carry the station expired on December 31,
>
> > 2005."
> >
> > I am amazed that the people who run WMBC let that happen.
> > My understanding is that they really want to be carried on
>
> > as many delivery vehicles as possible in New York City due
>
> > to their paid ethnic programming.
> > Not that the loss of WMBC is anything to care about.
> >
>
> I agree Toby. WMBC-TV, Channel 63, is a waste of
> air-space. Its small niche programming belongs on
> cable, if any cable system wants to carry it. The
> station doesn't belong on the broadcast airwaves
> taking up a channel assignment that is supposed to
> be used to provide general television coverage of
> northwestern New Jersey.
>
> DirecTV would better serve its customers by providing
> more significant programming.
>

DirecTV's international offerings are ancillary.

Dish Net. has always outperformed them here. It would be a loss moreso for Dish Net. subscribers, who most likely watch WMBC, if in the NY DMA, and subscribe to an international package also. Though, I can't see Dish really caring for WMBC, as they don't profit from it directly.