WAAF and the Red Sox

Scott Fybush scott@fybush.com
Sun May 14 00:58:16 EDT 2006

Dan Strassberg wrote:
> I assume that there is a reason why we haven't heard any more about how
> Entercom proposes to fill the gap in MetroWest in the signal footprint for
> next year's Red Sox night games. Several people on this list, including
> Scott Fybush, have commented that adding WAAF to the network--at least for
> night games--could make a lot of sense. Could it be that Entercom is
> constrained from making this move because the Red Sox contract with WTAG
> continues at least through the 2007 season? I had hoped that WAAF's CoL
> change to Westborough would eliminate a conflict with WTAG, regardless of
> whether WAAF was transmitting for Paxton or W Boyleston. There is signal
> overlap among many more than two of the Red Sox network affiliates and I
> thought that, as long as two affiliates weren't licensed to the same
> community, the standard affiliate agreement posed no problems, but maybe
> that isn't so or maybe WTAG's contract is different. Can anyone elaborate?

I'm no affiliate-relations expert, but my guess would be that - at least 
for an Arbitron-defined market - the contract probably provides for 
exclusivity within that market, not just within that city of license.

It's possible that there's at least some wiggle room there, as witness 
the existence of WEIM as another Sox affiliate within the Worcester 
metro. But WEIM and WTAG barely have any overlap within their night 
signal contours. WAAF, regardless of which site it's using and 
regardless of where it's licensed to, throws at least 60 dBu, and 
probably a lot more than that, over the entire WTAG night signal. I'd 
have to think WTAG wouldn't be very happy about that.

I wonder if we'll see some night games on WMKK instead? It's 
unquestionably in the Boston market, and wouldn't cause WTAG any grief.


More information about the Boston-Radio-Interest mailing list