WWBZ 700, WFNX 99.9 "vote for format"

[Jibguy@aol.com]

EEI is out there and CBS isn't.
----BB
 
 
In a message dated 5/28/2014 11:48:10 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
scott@fybush.com writes:

On  5/28/2014 11:35 PM, Jibguy@aol.com wrote:
> Perhaps the callsign WWBZ  could be put on the FM, to act as an oversized
> translator for the  Sports Hub, with CBS renting it from Steve. Perhaps a
> Worcester area  Class A FM would be next.   Saga likes translators, so
> why  not CBS?

To what end? CBS has no reason to be interested in the  Worcester market. 
The company is focused almost exclusively on the top 20  markets these 
days (with a few heritage clusters such as Hartford and St.  Louis 
hanging on). It has long since divested itself of even Buffalo- and  
Rochester-sized markets, never mind a market as small as Worcester. And  
especially never mind a market as small as the tiny corner of the  
Worcester market served by the Athol FM.

I suppose it's remotely  possible to imagine that Silberberg might want 
to *affiliate* with Sports  Hub to provide programming, the same way some 
New England broadcasters  (Jeff Shapiro in NH, Qantum-turned-CC on the 
Cape) affiliate with WEEI.  But even so - since the Sports Hub doesn't 
use any "WBZ" branding, why  pick "WBZ" calls? The only reason Sports Hub 
is "WBZ-FM," legally, is  because (a) it had to be something, (b) Boston 
is a PPM market so calls  don't matter and (c) that way WBZ(AM) and 
WBZ-FM appear in sequence in  Arbitron/Nielsen Audio printouts. None of 
those factors apply to  Athol.

> Hard to imagine how the Athol FM or 700 could make any  money on their
> own, especially with distant ownership.  Renting  as a simulcast makes
> more sense.

For Silberberg, maybe. For  CBS, not at all. And why would Silberberg pay 
CBS for Sports Hub  programming when he can simulcast his own WXRV for  
free?