• 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

The future of WBGT-TV LP in wake of CW announcement

N

NewsSleuth

Inactive
Inactive User
I read the thread about the potential ramifications of the CW merger in markets like Buffalo and Binghamton, but I am wondering what will happen to WBGT-TV. Since it appears that WRWB will get the CW affiliation, then where does that leave "Big-TV?" They would be a station without an affiliatiom.

Also, since they are a LP, Time Warner has no legal obligation to carry them in their cable package. Without a major network affiliation like UPN, it seems even more less likely that they would do so. They don't need the pithy wage, WBGT-TV pays to lease time on cable.

Also, there is bad blood between the two stations which goes back for years when ex-owners David and Molly Grant tried to strongarm their way onto cable. WRWB doesn't see WBGT as a threat but if they can crush this station, believe me they will!

Anyone have any inside info on this matter?
 
> I read the thread about the potential ramifications of the
> CW merger in markets like Buffalo and Binghamton, but I am
> wondering what will happen to WBGT-TV. Since it appears
> that WRWB will get the CW affiliation, then where does that
> leave "Big-TV?" They would be a station without an
> affiliatiom.

Which is what they were before - no big deal. Back to the syndicated leftovers and home shopping segments that the other stations didn't want, I guess.

> Also, since they are a LP, Time Warner has no legal
> obligation to carry them in their cable package. Without a
> major network affiliation like UPN, it seems even more less
> likely that they would do so. They don't need the pithy
> wage, WBGT-TV pays to lease time on cable.

TW added them because they agreed to pay in cash and avails. If WBGT still does that, I doubt we'll see any change.

> Also, there is bad blood between the two stations which goes
> back for years when ex-owners David and Molly Grant tried to
> strongarm their way onto cable. WRWB doesn't see WBGT as a
> threat but if they can crush this station, believe me they
> will!

They didn't strong arm anything. They did what every other LP station with a network affiliation did who couldn't get carriage - the put online petitions up and got media attention for their plight. There was no bad blood between TW and WBGT that I was ever aware of and I was participating in their petition drive at the time. It was just the usual point-counterpoint affair in the press and having to spend time and energy to fight the fight. But that's business.

It was the same story in places like Watertown. Unless you pay or are a big media concern, you have to fight your way on the cable dial. WB16/TW does not see WBGT as any sort of threat. They largely ignore one another except when they are fighting for the same syndicated scraps. They don't have any interest in crushing the station either - why would they?

The Steel Source and a comics store at the Village Gate will not make or break a station.

When CW fires up, presumably on cable, WBGT will program as an independent and retain carriage on cable if they are willing to continue to pay.

The only wild card here that could be a win-win is if WBGT relayed WB16 as a broadcast outlet for the current cable-only channel in some sort of partnership. The only issue there is TW vaguely promotes WB16 as one of those "only on cable" channels like R News. I wouldn't hold my breath for this scenario, though.
 
> I read the thread about the potential ramifications of the
> CW merger in markets like Buffalo and Binghamton, but I am
> wondering what will happen to WBGT-TV. Since it appears
> that WRWB will get the CW affiliation, then where does that
> leave "Big-TV?" They would be a station without an
> affiliatiom.

Personally if I were the owners of WBGT-TV I would be meeting with executives of the satellite companies real quick because it’s not “if” Time Warner Cable will drop WBGT-TV from their line-up of stations, its more like “when” Time Warner lowers the ax.


>


> Also, since they are a LP, Time Warner has no legal
> obligation to carry them in their cable package. Without a
> major network affiliation like UPN, it seems even more less
> likely that they would do so. They don't need the pithy
> wage, WBGT-TV pays to lease time on cable.

And there are a lot of religious or infomercial operations that would pay Time Warner even more money to be on their cable. So Time Warner isn’t too worried about replacing lost revenue if WBGT-TV is no longer around.
>


> Also, there is bad blood between the two stations which goes
> back for years when ex-owners David and Molly Grant tried to
> strongarm their way onto cable. WRWB doesn't see WBGT as a
> threat but if they can crush this station, believe me they
> will!

Ah the power of the monopoly! It reminds me of that Three Stooges routine where Moe plays Hailstone the Dictator and gives this speech where he tells the masses gathered below his chancellery building: "We will give our neighbors a helping hand; We will give our neighbors two helping hands" Then we will help ourselves to our neighbors."


> Anyone have any inside info on this matter?

I have no inside information, but just an observation. Should WBGT-TV no longer have a network affiliation the only avenue the station will have is to run programming that is already featured on some town cable access stations. So my guess is that Time Warner will drop WBGT from its line up of stations and that operation will eventually go dark unless it can sell one hell of a lot of car and lawyer commercials.

Before I had cable TV I remember Channel 40 trying for years to get a spot on cable because its over-the-air signal was so bad that I couldn’t even get a clear picture; and I live ½ hour east of downtown Rochester.



<P ID="signature">______________
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted and I won't be laid a hand on.
I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them".</P>
 
Want to know the future of WBGT-TV after UPN? All you have to do is look to the Buffalo TV market and see what happen to WNGS-TV (channel 67) after they lost the UPN affiliation several years ago.
 
> Personally if I were the owners of WBGT-TV I would be
> meeting with executives of the satellite companies real
> quick because it’s not “if” Time Warner Cable will drop
> WBGT-TV from their line-up of stations, its more like “when”
> Time Warner lowers the ax.

WBGT has a carriage contract with TW. TW has always said they were happy to provide carriage for WBGT if they agreed to lease the channel. TW is not going to delete a leased channel as long as the checks clear. Many may not remember Pax is also bought and paid for on TW's lineup locally (we get the national satellite feed, not the station in Genesee county). They went to "i" and will inevitably become "i"nfomercial in the process, but TW will be making no changes to their carriage, again as long as the checks keep coming.

> And there are a lot of religious or infomercial operations
> that would pay Time Warner even more money to be on their
> cable. So Time Warner isn’t too worried about replacing lost
> revenue if WBGT-TV is no longer around.

TW has no plans to carry any additional religious channels, particularly on analog. They are the least favored channels in the package, and even with the substantial launch bonus payments and access fees paid, it's not worth coughing up analog space for them. TW isn't even willing to add home shopping to analog at this point.

> I have no inside information, but just an observation.
> Should WBGT-TV no longer have a network affiliation the only
> avenue the station will have is to run programming that is
> already featured on some town cable access stations.

That is unlikely as well. Public access programming is granted gratis airtime as long as a local resident provides the programming to the public access channel. WBGT is not going to carry Jewish Stories gratis.

There is plenty of second tier syndicated programming that can fill WBGT's schedule, most of which they get for free in return for airing the included spots. Prior to UPN, WBGT ran more of these as well as some low cost movie packages which I'm sure were also provided gratis with national spots included. Overnight, it was home shopping.

> Before I had cable TV I remember Channel 40 trying for years
> to get a spot on cable because its over-the-air signal was
> so bad that I couldn’t even get a clear picture; and I live
> ½ hour east of downtown Rochester.

Channel 40's tower in over near Mt. Read Boulevard so west siders get a better picture than eastsiders. Channel 26 is down in Victor, ostensibly to serve Ontario county.

For a real DX catch, the Educable West guy actually ran a LP operation on channel 6 from 490 at Ridgeway. I doubt it's still running.
 
What Future?

You hit the nail on the head.” As long as the checks clear." And without a network affiliation, or the ability to afford decent syndicated programming, just how long would you give WBGT before someone turns out the lights?

Remember a few years ago there was a TV station with a small studio located off Monroe Avenue near the Inner Loop? That station had no network affiliation and its programming was spotty to say the least. One hour religion, the next old 1930s cowboy movies. That operation lasted, I think, just a few years before going dark. I predict the same scenario for WBGT.

As for an LP or any other agreement with Time Warner, any contract can be broken. All a company needs is a good law firm. And if you had to choose who could afford a good law firm, Time Warner or the owners of WBGT, who would you select?

<P ID="signature">______________
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted and I won't be laid a hand on.
I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them".</P>
 
> > I read the thread about the potential ramifications of the
>
> > CW merger in markets like Buffalo and Binghamton, but I am
>
> > wondering what will happen to WBGT-TV. Since it appears
> > that WRWB will get the CW affiliation, then where does
> that
> > leave "Big-TV?" They would be a station without an
> > affiliatiom.
>
>>
> > Also, since they are a LP, Time Warner has no legal
> > obligation to carry them in their cable package. Without
> a
> > major network affiliation like UPN, it seems even more
> less
> > likely that they would do so. They don't need the pithy
> > wage, WBGT-TV pays to lease time on cable.

The thing is, if WBGT went off the air tomorrow who would miss them?
The only show I watch is Everybody Hates Chris. Before that Star trek Enterprise. I even watched Star Trek off air before they were on cable. After they got on cable the picture quality was horrble and there was a very annoying ground buzz in the audio. Maybe if they showed some decent programing people would miss them off cable. Look at their program schedule. It's all shopping and cheap (and just stupid) reality shows. They should counter program like independent stations used to. Run good off network programs. They should look at what that indie TV station in Chicago is doing. I'd rather watch a rerun of Get Smart than any judge show or let's look into the personal life of a boring celebrity show. And if they really wanted to be different here's a short list of programs not to run...The Love Boat (or any Arron Spelling show) The A Team,
Miami Vice, Cosby Show, Rosanne, Prince of Bel Air, or any other program that has been run to death elsewhere on the dial.
 
Re: What Future?

> Remember a few years ago there was a TV station with a small
> studio located off Monroe Avenue near the Inner Loop? That
> station had no network affiliation and its programming was
> spotty to say the least. One hour religion, the next old
> 1930s cowboy movies. That operation lasted, I think, just a
> few years before going dark. I predict the same scenario for
> WBGT.

Yes... they were located in the same building as Verio put their co-location facility for their ISP. WAWW was an affiliate of Channel America/America One which served a lot of LP stations. In fact, they largely just relayed that satellite feed continuously. Their audience was mostly older folks and rural people without cable.

They sold it and then it reverted to home shopping and then it went dark. To me, running any LP station without cable carriage is a license for profit disaster unless you are running paid religion or maybe home shopping or ethnic/minority programming in a larger city.

If WBGT continues to pay for carriage, they can make a go of it as a local independent on cable. Let's face it, UPN programming was hardly setting ratings on fire. The only reason people even wanted WBGT on cable was for Star Trek and Buffy. Both are gone. UPN going away is not a make or break - being off cable is.

> As for an LP or any other agreement with Time Warner, any
> contract can be broken. All a company needs is a good law
> firm. And if you had to choose who could afford a good law
> firm, Time Warner or the owners of WBGT, who would you
> select?

I really think you are overestimating TW's interest in dropping WBGT. They honestly don't care. WBGT is no threat.
 
WBGT & Soviet TV: A Twisted Pair At 60Hz

> The thing is, if WBGT went off the air tomorrow who would
> miss them?

I realize that. I stopped watching them myself when Buffy folded. Enterprise never caught on with me and Voyager ... don't get me started.

> After they got on cable the picture quality was horrble and there was a very > annoying ground buzz in the audio.

You mean their Soviet-style transmitter equipment? The 60Hz hum was part of the charm! I kept looking for Vremya to start. :) (And for those who forgot what THAT sounded like, enjoy this reminder courtesy of my ridiculous collection of news themes, tuning signals, anthems, and other trivia: http://www.yourfilelink.com/get.php?fid=19559 )

It took more than a year to clean that up, along with the video that resembled someone's attempt to copy a Macrovision videotape. Bright... dark... bright... dark. Oh whatever!

Part of the problem was on Mt. Hope because WBGT is the only station they didn't receive a fiber feed from. But most of it was at the station.

> Maybe if they showed some decent
> programing people would miss them off cable. Look at their
> program schedule. It's all shopping and cheap (and just
> stupid) reality shows. They should counter program like
> independent stations used to. Run good off network
> programs. They should look at what that indie TV station in
> Chicago is doing. I'd rather watch a rerun of Get Smart
> than any judge show or let's look into the personal life of
> a boring celebrity show. And if they really wanted to be
> different here's a short list of programs not to run...The
> Love Boat (or any Arron Spelling show) The A Team,
> Miami Vice, Cosby Show, Rosanne, Prince of Bel Air, or any
> other program that has been run to death elsewhere on the
> dial.

Part of the problem is what shows are available to syndication. A lot of older shows like Bionic Woman or Lou Grant or Cannon just aren't in a syndication window so they're not available. What independents used to program have now been swiped up by basic cable networks that didn't exist to any degree before Fox. Hell, I remember when USA signed on at 6:00pm at night and they ran a cartoon clip and god-awful Film Board of Canada filler (just like HBO!) on a show called Calliope. They couldn't afford the syndicated stuff. Now, Hallmark swiped Little House and Hogan's Heroes, along with random other shows for TV Land and Nick at Nite.

What is left of the evergreen shows not already on basic cable are not sold for barter to stations but also require some up front cash and you can bet WBGT doesn't have it. But the plethora of first run reality shows are almost all available for barter and now you know why we are soaking in them.

I have great nostalgic feelings for the superstations of years gone by like WPIX (when they ran Star Trek and Space: 1999 overnight before program length ads!), WWOR, WSBK, WNEW/WNYW, WSBK and WGN (and for satellite dish owners we also had KTVT and KTLA, et al.) Unfortunately, those days are long gone, particularly when the FCC said it was okay to put program length ads on the air. Americans are too stupid not to believe in the Abelectrifier, they order a million of them, and a new industry is born. It's like TV Spam.

<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Phillip Dampier on 02/06/06 05:50 AM.</FONT></P>
 
Re: WBGT & Soviet TV: A Twisted Pair At 60Hz

> Now, Hallmark swiped Little House and Hogan's
> Heroes, along with random other shows for TV Land and Nick
> at Nite.

Note that many shows that are running on cable networks are also available in syndication. The two shows that you mention above are examples of such, since both run in broadcast syndication in several local markets right now.
 
Re: WBGT & Soviet TV: A Twisted Pair At 60Hz

> > Now, Hallmark swiped Little House and Hogan's
> > Heroes, along with random other shows for TV Land and Nick
>
> > at Nite.
>
> Note that many shows that are running on cable networks are
> also available in syndication. The two shows that you
> mention above are examples of such, since both run in
> broadcast syndication in several local markets right now.
>

Such as Chicago's WWME and Los Angeles' KDOC -- both stations run reruns that don't get much airplay on other local stations, or, in some cases, even on the cable networks.
 
No UPN = big revenue loss

I would have to disagree with the gentleman that said that losing the UPN priemtime programming was no big deal. I know for a fact that the UPN programmin was their prime selling point. The station is rated too low to appear on the local Nielsen's, so atleast they had performance reference number to provide potential advertisers with.

Also, the loss of WWE Smackdown will be huge for the station....
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom