From markwa1ion@aol.com Tue Jan 2 13:31:27 2018 From: markwa1ion@aol.com (Mark Connelly) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 13:31:27 -0500 Subject: WEZE Off the Air? Message-ID: <160b8247ee0-171e-2a9f@webjas-vae138.srv.aolmail.net> The usual "other 590s" here on Cape Cod are: VOCM - St. John's, Newfoundland Radio Musical Nacional - Cuba Radio Rebelde - Cuba HIDV - Dominican Republic WARM - Scranton, PA ... in more or less that order. I have antennas that I can set up to null towards Boston so all of those have been heard at night with WEZE on the air. Water, especially close by heading south, no doubt influences the stations received. Here to Cuba is like an RF bowling alley. WROW, CJCL, and CJCW - all theoretically audible - never seem to be in the 590 mix here. Mark Connelly South Yarmouth, MA << If so...What is appearing on 590??? WARM, WROW...Toronto??? On Dec 26, 2017 2:20 PM, Doug Drown wrote: Is WEZE currently off the air, or operating at low power? Normally it's the second strongest Boston AM signal up here in midcoast Maine, but last night (Christmas) it came in very poorly -- in fact, I'm not sure it was WEZE at all. This morning there is nothing on 590. >> From kvahey@gmail.com Tue Jan 2 15:03:44 2018 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 15:03:44 -0500 Subject: No subject In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: CJCL with its insane 9 towers sends very little RF to the states. - I believe they use the same pattern 24 hours a day On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 1:31 PM, Mark Connelly via Boston-Radio-Interest < boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org> wrote: > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Mark Connelly > To: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 13:31:27 -0500 > Subject: Re: WEZE Off the Air? > The usual "other 590s" here on Cape Cod are: > VOCM - St. John's, Newfoundland > Radio Musical Nacional - Cuba > Radio Rebelde - Cuba > HIDV - Dominican Republic > WARM - Scranton, PA > ... in more or less that order. > > I have antennas that I can set up to null towards Boston so all of those > have been heard at night with WEZE on the air. > > Water, especially close by heading south, no doubt influences the stations > received. Here to Cuba is like an RF bowling alley. > > WROW, CJCL, and CJCW - all theoretically audible - never seem to be in the > 590 mix here. > > Mark Connelly > South Yarmouth, MA > > << > If so...What is appearing on 590??? WARM, WROW...Toronto??? > > On Dec 26, 2017 2:20 PM, Doug Drown wrote: > Is WEZE currently off the air, or operating at low power? Normally it's > the second strongest Boston AM signal up here in midcoast Maine, but last > night (Christmas) it came in very poorly -- in fact, I'm not sure it was > WEZE at all. This morning there is nothing on 590. > >> > > From scott@fybush.com Wed Jan 3 07:29:24 2018 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 07:29:24 -0500 Subject: No subject In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: If CJCL were in pattern, that would be true. I hear them much better in Rochester in the last few years than I ever used to. On Jan 3, 2018 12:12 AM, "Kevin Vahey" wrote: > CJCL with its insane 9 towers sends very little RF to the states. - I > believe they use the same pattern 24 hours a day > > On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 1:31 PM, Mark Connelly via Boston-Radio-Interest < > boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org> wrote: > > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: Mark Connelly > > To: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org > > Cc: > > Bcc: > > Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 13:31:27 -0500 > > Subject: Re: WEZE Off the Air? > > The usual "other 590s" here on Cape Cod are: > > VOCM - St. John's, Newfoundland > > Radio Musical Nacional - Cuba > > Radio Rebelde - Cuba > > HIDV - Dominican Republic > > WARM - Scranton, PA > > ... in more or less that order. > > > > I have antennas that I can set up to null towards Boston so all of those > > have been heard at night with WEZE on the air. > > > > Water, especially close by heading south, no doubt influences the > stations > > received. Here to Cuba is like an RF bowling alley. > > > > WROW, CJCL, and CJCW - all theoretically audible - never seem to be in > the > > 590 mix here. > > > > Mark Connelly > > South Yarmouth, MA > > > > << > > If so...What is appearing on 590??? WARM, WROW...Toronto??? > > > > On Dec 26, 2017 2:20 PM, Doug Drown wrote: > > Is WEZE currently off the air, or operating at low power? Normally it's > > the second strongest Boston AM signal up here in midcoast Maine, but last > > night (Christmas) it came in very poorly -- in fact, I'm not sure it was > > WEZE at all. This morning there is nothing on 590. > > >> > > > > > From markwats@comcast.net Sun Jan 14 13:41:33 2018 From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2018 13:41:33 -0500 Subject: WRKO Saturday Night 60's Party Is No More Message-ID: <004101d38d67$4ded6db0$e9c84910$@comcast.net> Jeff Lawrence, host of the WRKO Saturday Night 60's Party announced yesterday on Facebook and Twitter that iHeart pulled the plug on the show. Last Saturday (1/6) was the last show, at that time he was not aware that would be the final broadcast. In place of the music last night was birdfeed talk. By the way, the Saturday Night 60's Party was on for just short of 2 years. Mark Watson From dav2149@comcast.net Sat Jan 13 15:09:12 2018 From: dav2149@comcast.net (DW) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 15:09:12 -0500 Subject: 1570 Message-ID: <0A06CA85-53D7-48EC-8D2F-A1F86B8737FB@comcast.net> For the last few weeks I have been enjoying WCCM 1570 Galaxia Boston, ?El Sonido de las Estrellas, quince setenta?. The daytime signal-strength here in Wellesley sounds like 1030 or 850. On Friday 1/12 I noticed in the morning the station seemed to be off the air. When I tuned in after 3pm I heard Michael Savage with mention at breaks of NE Talk (?) 102.9 HD2. Today (Saturday) it?s Spanish musical programming again but no mention of "Galaxia Boston". Instead, I heard ?Power, la m?sica bakana?(in the morning) and often ?ciento dos - merengue? and ?Power cl?sicos de fin de semana? in the afternoon.(Btw, the kids I was transporting in the car seemed to love it - when I changed the station they said ?turn it back to the Spanish 1570 station?). Is Galaxia no more? Is ?Power" just weekends? Is there a network called NE Talk? What is on 102.9 HD? In Wellesley there?s no signal on 102.9. I am interested in conservative talk so if there is a network carrying Savage and any others I?d like to know. I don?t have an HD radio but if I knew there were something I might listen to I might get one. And, what is ?m?sica bakana?? I googled it and looked in a urban dictionary but couldn?t find a definition of ?bakana? pertaining to music (although there are some other stations around the country using the word ?bakana?, spelled with a ?k?, in their programming slogan). There is a Spanish word spelled ?bacana?(with a ?c?, not ?k?) which colloquially means ?nice, great, hot?. This morning when I went to the site mentioned on the station ?PowerDeBoston.com ? I saw ?bakana? spelled with a ?k?. This afternoon when I went to that same URL it took me to ?Power800am.com?(and no mention of that word of either spelling). From scott@fybush.com Sun Jan 14 16:35:54 2018 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2018 16:35:54 -0500 Subject: 1570 In-Reply-To: <0A06CA85-53D7-48EC-8D2F-A1F86B8737FB@comcast.net> References: <0A06CA85-53D7-48EC-8D2F-A1F86B8737FB@comcast.net> Message-ID: <0c7861a5-52df-853c-e5c7-84de732cc397@fybush.com> The 102.9 they're referring to is the Lawrence translator of WNNW 800. It's a relatively small signal - if you're not in Andover or the immediate vicinity, you won't hear. It certainly doesn't make it to Wellesley. The talk format that runs on the HD2 of 102.9 (yes, a translator can run HD, and you can imagine how limited THAT coverage would be) is the old English-language WCCM talk format that got bounced around the dial among Costa-Eagle's stations, from 800 to 1490 to 1110 and then ultimately to HD2 on the 102.9 translator. It sounds as though they've been having some issues internally switching the right programming to the right transmitters. The "Power" programming comes from WNNW 800. I'm not sure if it's just filling unbought time on 1570 on purpose or if it was there by accident. On 1/13/2018 3:09 PM, DW wrote: > For the last few weeks I have been enjoying WCCM 1570 Galaxia Boston, ?El Sonido de las Estrellas, quince setenta?. The daytime signal-strength here in Wellesley sounds like 1030 or 850. On Friday 1/12 I noticed in the morning the station seemed to be off the air. When I tuned in after 3pm I heard Michael Savage with mention at breaks of NE Talk (?) 102.9 HD2. Today (Saturday) it?s Spanish musical programming again but no mention of "Galaxia Boston". Instead, I heard ?Power, la m?sica bakana?(in the morning) and often ?ciento dos - merengue? and ?Power cl?sicos de fin de semana? in the afternoon.(Btw, the kids I was transporting in the car seemed to love it - when I changed the station they said ?turn it back to the Spanish 1570 station?). Is Galaxia no more? Is ?Power" just weekends? Is there a network called NE Talk? What is on 102.9 HD? In Wellesley there?s no signal on 102.9. I am interested in conservative talk so if there is a network carrying Savage and any others I?d like to know. I don?t have an HD radio but if I knew there were something I might listen to I might get one. And, what is ?m?sica bakana?? I googled it and looked in a urban dictionary but couldn?t find a definition of ?bakana? pertaining to music (although there are some other stations around the country using the word ?bakana?, spelled with a ?k?, in their programming slogan). There is a Spanish word spelled ?bacana?(with a ?c?, not ?k?) which colloquially means ?nice, great, hot?. This morning when I went to the site mentioned on the station ?PowerDeBoston.com ? I saw ?bakana? spelled with a ?k?. This afternoon when I went to that same URL it took me to ?Power800am.com?(and no mention of that word of either spelling). > From marklaurence@mac.com Sun Jan 14 16:44:16 2018 From: marklaurence@mac.com (Mark Laurence) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2018 16:44:16 -0500 Subject: More TV repacking? Message-ID: <6E0B2B45-ACD6-4737-9B93-3E56B408AD60@mac.com> I rescanned my TV channels last week and was surprised to find 2 clicks for WLVI and their Buzzr subchannel on 56.2. This morning the duplicate channels were gone. I wonder if they have now moved to the WHDH subchannels, or if this was a test in preparation for the move? Both sets of channels seemed to have equal quality. If they have made the move, they haven?t given up any services as This TV continues on 7.2. Also, WFXZ is now broadcasting the English language BizTV, which seems to me to be an odd choice for their new owner, WGBH. They?ve lost their subchannels in the move. I think there were 3 of them, mostly broadcasting home-shopping stuff. From raccoonradio@gmail.com Sun Jan 14 16:59:10 2018 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2018 16:59:10 -0500 Subject: 1570 In-Reply-To: <0A06CA85-53D7-48EC-8D2F-A1F86B8737FB@comcast.net> References: <0A06CA85-53D7-48EC-8D2F-A1F86B8737FB@comcast.net> Message-ID: 102.9 is the FM translator for 800 (WCEC?), licensed to Newton NH I think.Their HD2 may be running what used to be on WMVX 1110 Salem NH. When that station got an FM translator on 98.9, the AM dropped the talk (they even had Limbaugh) so the FM could duplicate the AM..which now has oldies and is branded Valley 98.9 On Jan 14, 2018 4:23 PM, "DW" wrote: > For the last few weeks I have been enjoying WCCM 1570 Galaxia Boston, ?El > Sonido de las Estrellas, quince setenta?. The daytime signal-strength here > in Wellesley sounds like 1030 or 850. On Friday 1/12 I noticed in the > morning the station seemed to be off the air. When I tuned in after 3pm I > heard Michael Savage with mention at breaks of NE Talk (?) 102.9 HD2. Today > (Saturday) it?s Spanish musical programming again but no mention of > "Galaxia Boston". Instead, I heard ?Power, la m?sica bakana?(in the > morning) and often ?ciento dos - merengue? and ?Power cl?sicos de fin de > semana? in the afternoon.(Btw, the kids I was transporting in the car > seemed to love it - when I changed the station they said ?turn it back to > the Spanish 1570 station?). Is Galaxia no more? Is ?Power" just weekends? > Is there a network called NE Talk? What is on 102.9 HD? In Wellesley > there?s no signal on 102.9. I am interested in conservative talk so if > there is a network carrying Savage and any others I?d like to know. I don?t > have an HD radio but if I knew there were something I might listen to I > might get one. And, what is ?m?sica bakana?? I googled it and looked in a > urban dictionary but couldn?t find a definition of ?bakana? pertaining to > music (although there are some other stations around the country using the > word ?bakana?, spelled with a ?k?, in their programming slogan). There is a > Spanish word spelled ?bacana?(with a ?c?, not ?k?) which colloquially means > ?nice, great, hot?. This morning when I went to the site mentioned on the > station ?PowerDeBoston.com ? I saw ?bakana? > spelled with a ?k?. This afternoon when I went to that same URL it took me > to ?Power800am.com?(and no mention of that word of either spelling). > > From ssmyth@alumni.psu.edu Mon Jan 15 04:49:15 2018 From: ssmyth@alumni.psu.edu (Sean Smyth) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 09:49:15 +0000 Subject: WRKO Saturday Night 60's Party Is No More In-Reply-To: <004101d38d67$4ded6db0$e9c84910$@comcast.net> References: <004101d38d67$4ded6db0$e9c84910$@comcast.net> Message-ID: Has WRKO been moved out of the trust, or is the trust LMA'ing to Clear Channel? On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 2:45 PM Mark Watson wrote: > Jeff Lawrence, host of the WRKO Saturday Night 60's Party announced > yesterday on Facebook and Twitter that iHeart pulled the plug on the show. > Last Saturday (1/6) was the last show, at that time he was not aware that > would be the final broadcast. In place of the music last night was birdfeed > talk. > > By the way, the Saturday Night 60's Party was on for just short of 2 years. > > > > Mark Watson > > -- Sent from my iPhone From scott@fybush.com Mon Jan 15 07:58:16 2018 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 07:58:16 -0500 Subject: WRKO Saturday Night 60's Party Is No More In-Reply-To: References: <004101d38d67$4ded6db0$e9c84910$@comcast.net> Message-ID: WKOX has been moved into the trust, which allowed iHeart to take full control of WRKO. (This, too, was in NERW.) On Jan 15, 2018 6:55 AM, "Sean Smyth" wrote: > Has WRKO been moved out of the trust, or is the trust LMA'ing to Clear > Channel? > > On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 2:45 PM Mark Watson wrote: > > > Jeff Lawrence, host of the WRKO Saturday Night 60's Party announced > > yesterday on Facebook and Twitter that iHeart pulled the plug on the > show. > > Last Saturday (1/6) was the last show, at that time he was not aware that > > would be the final broadcast. In place of the music last night was > birdfeed > > talk. > > > > By the way, the Saturday Night 60's Party was on for just short of 2 > years. > > > > > > > > Mark Watson > > > > -- > Sent from my iPhone > From richard@chonak.com Tue Jan 16 02:58:32 2018 From: richard@chonak.com (richard@chonak.com) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 02:58:32 -0500 Subject: More TV repacking? Message-ID: WNET took up "BizTV" also in connection with a donated license: http://current.org/2017/11/channel-shares-donated-broadcast-licenses-give-pubcasters-new-possibilities/?wallit_nosession=1 Does anyone know when WYCN, now owned by NBC, is supposed to start transmitting "NBC Boston" from WGBX's facilities? One net source claimed that it was supposed to happen on Jan. 15, but that didn't pan out. --RC ------ Original message------From: Mark LaurenceDate: Sun, Jan 14, 2018 5:44 PMTo: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org;Cc: Subject:More TV repacking? I rescanned my TV channels last week and was surprised to find 2 clicks for WLVI and their Buzzr subchannel on 56.2. This morning the duplicate channels were gone. I wonder if they have now moved to the WHDH subchannels, or if this was a test in preparation for the move? Both sets of channels seemed to have equal quality. If they have made the move, they haven?t given up any services as This TV continues on 7.2. Also, WFXZ is now broadcasting the English language BizTV, which seems to me to be an odd choice for their new owner, WGBH. They?ve lost their subchannels in the move. I think there were 3 of them, mostly broadcasting home-shopping stuff. From ssmyth@alumni.psu.edu Tue Jan 16 09:26:52 2018 From: ssmyth@alumni.psu.edu (Sean Smyth) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 09:26:52 -0500 Subject: WRKO Saturday Night 60's Party Is No More In-Reply-To: References: <004101d38d67$4ded6db0$e9c84910$@comcast.net> Message-ID: Oops. I'm still a couple of NERWs behind. On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 7:58 AM, Scott Fybush wrote: > WKOX has been moved into the trust, which allowed iHeart to take full > control of WRKO. > > (This, too, was in NERW.) > > On Jan 15, 2018 6:55 AM, "Sean Smyth" wrote: >> >> Has WRKO been moved out of the trust, or is the trust LMA'ing to Clear >> Channel? >> >> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 2:45 PM Mark Watson wrote: >> >> > Jeff Lawrence, host of the WRKO Saturday Night 60's Party announced >> > yesterday on Facebook and Twitter that iHeart pulled the plug on the >> > show. >> > Last Saturday (1/6) was the last show, at that time he was not aware >> > that >> > would be the final broadcast. In place of the music last night was >> > birdfeed >> > talk. >> > >> > By the way, the Saturday Night 60's Party was on for just short of 2 >> > years. >> > >> > >> > >> > Mark Watson >> > >> > -- >> Sent from my iPhone From 011010001@interpring.com Tue Jan 16 10:51:44 2018 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 10:51:44 -0500 (EST) Subject: WRKO Saturday Night 60's Party Is No More In-Reply-To: References: <004101d38d67$4ded6db0$e9c84910$@comcast.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 15 Jan 2018, Sean Smyth wrote: > Has WRKO been moved out of the trust, or is the trust LMA'ing to Clear > Channel? According to the FCC database, an application was granted on 12/18/2017 to transfer the license to "CC LICENSES LLC", which is probably Eyeheart by any other name. Rob From raccoonradio@gmail.com Thu Jan 18 09:10:00 2018 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 09:10:00 -0500 Subject: WMEX sale: calls not included Message-ID: https://licensing.fcc.gov/cdbs/CDBS_Attachment/getattachment.jsp?appn=101759053&qnum=5040©num=1&exhcnum=1 FCC document, sale of WMEX to Marshfield Broadcasting (Ed Perry of WATD).Call letters not part of the sale, will change From raccoonradio@gmail.com Thu Jan 18 09:32:13 2018 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 09:32:13 -0500 Subject: Exclusion of WMEX calls Message-ID: " The WMEX call sign is excluded from the sale and Buyer recognizes that it will request a new call sign before Closing. " That's from the WMEX sale agreement.Scott Fybush said Daly got to use WMEX calls only through permission from WMEX-LP in NH. From markwa1ion@aol.com Thu Jan 18 12:24:57 2018 From: markwa1ion@aol.com (Mark Connelly) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 12:24:57 -0500 Subject: Exclusion of WMEX calls Message-ID: <1610a4d59fb-1719-10876@webjas-vaa011.srv.aolmail.net> Any info about tower site, day and night power? Diplexing with 1260, 1300, or even 1030 should put city-grade into Quincy and probably adequate grade around Dorchester, Milton, Braintree, Weymouth, Hingham, and Hull. There's a big tower near the Neponset River just west of the Distressway. I think that would be Milton. Not sure what that's used for. Maybe some kind of a sloping wire / vertical dipole off the east side of that could work. "Franklin" type antenna wouldn't necessarily require ground radials. If the station has to be directional, that's a different ballgame. 1200/1330/1600 site (Oak Park - Newton) likely too far inland / west to deliver adequate "beef" to a South Shore market. 1510 South Shore coverage (rather than full Boston metro) had been mentioned at one point. With water towards Winthrop, Revere, Lynn, Swampscott you get some limited North Shore coverage also. That's certainly the case for 1300. Of course if 5 kW or less you don't get full coverage of either shore or the whole Boston metro. Mark Connelly South Yarmouth, MA << " The WMEX call sign is excluded from the sale and Buyer recognizes that it will request a new call sign before Closing. " That's from the WMEX sale agreement.Scott Fybush said Daly got to use WMEX calls only through permission from WMEX-LP in NH. >> From aerie.ma@comcast.net Thu Jan 18 13:24:14 2018 From: aerie.ma@comcast.net (Jim Hall) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 13:24:14 -0500 Subject: WMEX sale: calls not included In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <015101d39089$8cb68ed0$a623ac70$@comcast.net> Amusing that on the third page from the end of the document, the station is listed as operating at 1510 MEGAHz. Maybe that explains their low listenership :) -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Bob Nelson Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2018 9:10 AM To: Boston Radio Group Subject: WMEX sale: calls not included https://licensing.fcc.gov/cdbs/CDBS_Attachment/getattachment.jsp?appn=101759053&qnum=5040©num=1&exhcnum=1 FCC document, sale of WMEX to Marshfield Broadcasting (Ed Perry of WATD).Call letters not part of the sale, will change From richard@chonak.com Thu Jan 18 14:09:39 2018 From: richard@chonak.com (Richard Chonak) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:09:39 -0500 Subject: WYCN-CD on air Message-ID: <5783d3f5-8f01-dcff-c992-8cfa9def1c5d@chonak.com> In the "Radio with Pictures" department, WYCN-CD started transmitting today on channel 15-1 (NBC 10 Boston, 1080i) and 15-2 (Cozi, 480i), so NBC now has 1080i video available to a broader part of the Boston metro. On-screen ID at the top of the hour names WBTS Boston, WMFP Lawrence, and WYCN Nashua (with their respective suffixes). --RC From raccoonradio@gmail.com Thu Jan 18 14:20:20 2018 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:20:20 -0500 Subject: WMEX sale: calls not included In-Reply-To: <015101d39089$8cb68ed0$a623ac70$@comcast.net> References: <015101d39089$8cb68ed0$a623ac70$@comcast.net> Message-ID: > > 1510 MHz? Oh my. >From sale agreement: " Litigation. The parties recognize that a law suit is pending in the Superior Court of Middlesex County, Massachusetts between Duffy Associates, LLC vs. Daly XXL Communications, LLC d/b/a WMEX, Blackstrap Broadcasting, LLC and Edward Perry regarding transmitter towers." From 011010001@interpring.com Thu Jan 18 14:39:37 2018 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:39:37 -0500 (EST) Subject: your mail In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 12:24:57 -0500 From: Mark Connelly To: boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org Subject: Exclusion of WMEX calls > There's a big tower near the Neponset River just west of the > Distressway. I think that would be Milton. Not sure what that's used > for. Do you mean the Industrial Communications tower near the golf course in Quincy? Rob From rbello@belloassoc.com Thu Jan 18 14:10:14 2018 From: rbello@belloassoc.com (Ron Bello) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:10:14 -0500 Subject: Exclusion of WMEX calls In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: You can?t sell something you didn?t ?own? Just as the WMEX calls were licensed to Blackstrap with permission from WMEX-LP, Ed Perry might do the same On Thursday, January 18, 2018, Bob Nelson wrote: > " The WMEX call sign is excluded from the sale and Buyer recognizes > that it will request a new call sign before Closing. " > > That's from the WMEX sale agreement.Scott Fybush said Daly got to use WMEX > calls only through permission from WMEX-LP in NH. > -- Ron Bello 160 Speen St - Suite 303 Framingham, MA. 01701 508.820.1100 From 011010001@interpring.com Thu Jan 18 16:57:31 2018 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 16:57:31 -0500 (EST) Subject: your mail In-Reply-To: <14B94B4E-71D2-4016-9CFB-15442A3C7320@comcast.net> References: <14B94B4E-71D2-4016-9CFB-15442A3C7320@comcast.net> Message-ID: There's also a Sirius/XM terrestrial repeater there. Rob On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, Jeff Lehmann wrote: > For a long time there were no broadcast stations on that tower, but a few years ago 91.9 WUMB moved there, and 102.1 W271CG which translates 103.7 on the Hancock (which then translates 88.5 WWRN Rockport) is there also. >> On Jan 18, 2018, at 2:39 PM, Rob Landry <011010001@interpring.com> wrote: >> Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 12:24:57 -0500 >> From: Mark Connelly >> To: boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org >> Subject: Exclusion of WMEX calls >>> There's a big tower near the Neponset River just west of the Distressway. I think that would be Milton. Not sure what that's used for. >> Do you mean the Industrial Communications tower near the golf course in Quincy? From jjlehmann@comcast.net Thu Jan 18 16:27:02 2018 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 16:27:02 -0500 Subject: your mail In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <14B94B4E-71D2-4016-9CFB-15442A3C7320@comcast.net> For a long time there were no broadcast stations on that tower, but a few years ago 91.9 WUMB moved there, and 102.1 W271CG which translates 103.7 on the Hancock (which then translates 88.5 WWRN Rockport) is there also. Jeff Lehmann > On Jan 18, 2018, at 2:39 PM, Rob Landry <011010001@interpring.com> wrote: > > > Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 12:24:57 -0500 > From: Mark Connelly > To: boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org > Subject: Exclusion of WMEX calls > >> There's a big tower near the Neponset River just west of the Distressway. I think that would be Milton. Not sure what that's used for. > > Do you mean the Industrial Communications tower near the golf course in Quincy? > > > Rob From joe@attorneyross.com Thu Jan 18 17:58:27 2018 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 17:58:27 -0500 Subject: WMEX sale: calls not included In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <52e3ad9c-9b07-157d-4c12-8d9e61fb11ca@attorneyross.com> a-GAIN??? On 1/18/2018 9:10 AM, Bob Nelson wrote: > https://licensing.fcc.gov/cdbs/CDBS_Attachment/getattachment.jsp?appn=101759053&qnum=5040©num=1&exhcnum=1 > > FCC document, sale of WMEX to Marshfield Broadcasting (Ed Perry of > WATD).Call letters not part of the sale, will change > -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. ? 1340 Centre Street, Suite 103 ? Newton, MA 02459-2004 617.367.0468 ? Fx: 617.507.7856 ? http://www.attorneyross.com From aerie.ma@comcast.net Thu Jan 18 20:19:39 2018 From: aerie.ma@comcast.net (Jim Hall) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 20:19:39 -0500 Subject: WRNJ Message-ID: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> If 1510 returns to the air from a new transmitter site, will that affect WRNJ in New Jersey? Since WLAC and WMEX protected each other, with a null in each other's direction, WRNJ was able to sneak into the void between them, albeit with not very much night power. Similarly a station near Denver squeezed into the nulls between WLAC and KGA. Since KGA downgraded itself, there's not a lot of power on 1510 at night except WLAC. From scott@fybush.com Fri Jan 19 00:06:16 2018 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 00:06:16 -0500 Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> Message-ID: The rules are, you have to protect everything that got there before you did. So an application in 2018 for a minor mod to 1510 in Boston has to protect WRNJ as it now exists, as well as WLAC and WWSM in Pennsylvania and the phantom CJRS that hasn't existed in Sherbrooke for 20+ years but is still notified internationally to the US. The one advantage Ed has now that didn't exist even a year ago is that the "ratchet rule" has been repealed. That rule, when it was in effect, required an AM minor mod to show a reduction in total interference, which in practice meant it was very hard to move an older AM without being forced to take a power/coverage loss. Does that help answer the question? On Jan 18, 2018 8:24 PM, "Jim Hall" wrote: > If 1510 returns to the air from a new transmitter site, will that affect > WRNJ in New Jersey? Since WLAC and WMEX protected each other, with a null > in > each other's direction, WRNJ was able to sneak into the void between them, > albeit with not very much night power. Similarly a station near Denver > squeezed into the nulls between WLAC and KGA. Since KGA downgraded itself, > there's not a lot of power on 1510 at night except WLAC. > > From wollman@bimajority.org Fri Jan 19 01:03:25 2018 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 01:03:25 -0500 Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > The one advantage Ed has now that didn't exist even a year ago is that the > "ratchet rule" has been repealed. That rule, when it was in effect, > required an AM minor mod to show a reduction in total interference, which > in practice meant it was very hard to move an older AM without being forced > to take a power/coverage loss. The other side of that, though, is that there are precious few places in the market where 1510 could actually *go* and maintain protection to WRNJ, WLAC, and that nonexistent Canadian. They certainly can't go to Newton (there's no space and 1510 is well inside the "10% rule" from 1600). There aren't any other DAs with enough towers in the right orientation for Ed to do anything *but* take a power/coverage loss. Assuming he does downgrade, maybe he gets 5 kW or even 25 kW daytime, but the only plausible night site that would give meaningful power is the 890/1060 site in Ashland, and even if Ed's a Natick boy he'd be nuts to invest that kind of money in this facility. So what he's probably looking at is OK day power and maybe minimal class-B facilities at night? You could probably do that from the 850 site in Needham for a reasonable amount of money, if Entercom is willing to lease. The 680 site is in the wrong place, likewise 1030. The 1150 site is out because 1470. 590 and 1260 are both ... problematic -- although it would be some irony if Ed did manage to move the thing back to Quincy. The 650 (ex-1200) site here in Framingham would work as a directional but he'd have to relicense it. If he's willing to make the compromises necessary to go ND-U then a few other sites open up: 1360 and 1300 would both "work". (1090/1430 and 740/1550 are obviously out.) He could string a unipole on someone's grounded communications tower, although that rarely turns out well. Or just throw up a Valcom whip somewhere. -GAWollman From ssmyth@alumni.psu.edu Fri Jan 19 01:08:44 2018 From: ssmyth@alumni.psu.edu (Sean Smyth) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 06:08:44 +0000 Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: >From what it sounds like he wants to do -- target South Shore listeners, and not worry about the full market -- the 1260 or 1300 sites work. On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 1:03 AM Garrett Wollman wrote: > < > said: > > > The one advantage Ed has now that didn't exist even a year ago is that > the > > "ratchet rule" has been repealed. That rule, when it was in effect, > > required an AM minor mod to show a reduction in total interference, which > > in practice meant it was very hard to move an older AM without being > forced > > to take a power/coverage loss. > > The other side of that, though, is that there are precious few places > in the market where 1510 could actually *go* and maintain protection > to WRNJ, WLAC, and that nonexistent Canadian. They certainly can't go > to Newton (there's no space and 1510 is well inside the "10% rule" > from 1600). There aren't any other DAs with enough towers in the > right orientation for Ed to do anything *but* take a power/coverage > loss. Assuming he does downgrade, maybe he gets 5 kW or even 25 kW > daytime, but the only plausible night site that would give meaningful > power is the 890/1060 site in Ashland, and even if Ed's a Natick boy > he'd be nuts to invest that kind of money in this facility. > > So what he's probably looking at is OK day power and maybe minimal > class-B facilities at night? You could probably do that from the 850 > site in Needham for a reasonable amount of money, if Entercom is > willing to lease. The 680 site is in the wrong place, likewise 1030. > The 1150 site is out because 1470. 590 and 1260 are both ... > problematic -- although it would be some irony if Ed did manage to > move the thing back to Quincy. > > The 650 (ex-1200) site here in Framingham would work as a directional > but he'd have to relicense it. > > If he's willing to make the compromises necessary to go ND-U then a > few other sites open up: 1360 and 1300 would both "work". (1090/1430 > and 740/1550 are obviously out.) He could string a unipole on > someone's grounded communications tower, although that rarely turns > out well. Or just throw up a Valcom whip somewhere. > > -GAWollman > > -- Sent from my iPhone From joe@attorneyross.com Fri Jan 19 02:04:18 2018 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 02:04:18 -0500 Subject: WMEX sale: calls not included In-Reply-To: References: <015101d39089$8cb68ed0$a623ac70$@comcast.net> Message-ID: What's the lawsuit about? On 1/18/2018 2:20 PM, Bob Nelson wrote: >> 1510 MHz? Oh my. > >From sale agreement: > " Litigation. > The parties recognize that a law suit is pending in the Superior Court of > Middlesex > County, Massachusetts between Duffy Associates, LLC vs. Daly XXL > Communications, > LLC d/b/a WMEX, Blackstrap Broadcasting, LLC and Edward Perry regarding > transmitter > towers." > -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. ? 1340 Centre Street, Suite 103 ? Newton, MA 02459 617.367.0468 ? Fax:617.507.7856 ? http://www.attorneyross.com From joe@attorneyross.com Fri Jan 19 02:07:56 2018 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 02:07:56 -0500 Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> Message-ID: I wonder what Ed Perry will program on 1510.? Might be nice to get WATD programming in Boston, especially for UMass athletics.? The oldies music they do on weekends would be nice, too. On 1/19/2018 12:06 AM, Scott Fybush wrote: > The rules are, you have to protect everything that got there before you > did. > > So an application in 2018 for a minor mod to 1510 in Boston has to protect > WRNJ as it now exists, as well as WLAC and WWSM in Pennsylvania and the > phantom CJRS that hasn't existed in Sherbrooke for 20+ years but is still > notified internationally to the US. > > The one advantage Ed has now that didn't exist even a year ago is that the > "ratchet rule" has been repealed. That rule, when it was in effect, > required an AM minor mod to show a reduction in total interference, which > in practice meant it was very hard to move an older AM without being forced > to take a power/coverage loss. > > Does that help answer the question? > > On Jan 18, 2018 8:24 PM, "Jim Hall" wrote: > >> If 1510 returns to the air from a new transmitter site, will that affect >> WRNJ in New Jersey? Since WLAC and WMEX protected each other, with a null >> in >> each other's direction, WRNJ was able to sneak into the void between them, >> albeit with not very much night power. Similarly a station near Denver >> squeezed into the nulls between WLAC and KGA. Since KGA downgraded itself, >> there's not a lot of power on 1510 at night except WLAC. >> >> -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. ? 1340 Centre Street, Suite 103 ? Newton, MA 02459 617.367.0468 ? Fax:617.507.7856 ? http://www.attorneyross.com From raccoonradio@gmail.com Fri Jan 19 03:48:09 2018 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 03:48:09 -0500 Subject: WMEX sale: calls not included In-Reply-To: References: <015101d39089$8cb68ed0$a623ac70$@comcast.net> Message-ID: Back payment of tower rent, I believe On Friday, January 19, 2018, A Joseph Ross wrote: > What's the lawsuit about? > > On 1/18/2018 2:20 PM, Bob Nelson wrote: > >> 1510 MHz? Oh my. >>> >> >From sale agreement: >> " Litigation. >> The parties recognize that a law suit is pending in the Superior Court >> of >> Middlesex >> County, Massachusetts between Duffy Associates, LLC vs. Daly XXL >> Communications, >> LLC d/b/a WMEX, Blackstrap Broadcasting, LLC and Edward Perry regarding >> transmitter >> towers." >> >> > -- > A. Joseph Ross, J.D. ? 1340 Centre Street, Suite 103 > ? > Newton, MA 02459 > 617.367.0468 ? Fax:617.507.7856 ? http://www.attorneyross.com > From radiotest@plymouthcolony.net Fri Jan 19 08:23:54 2018 From: radiotest@plymouthcolony.net (Dale H. Cook) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 08:23:54 -0500 Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20180119080259.06ed2878@plymouthcolony.net> At 01:03 AM 1/19/2018, Garrett Wollman wrote: >... there are precious few places in the market where 1510 could actually *go* ... Didn't Ed build a four tower DA about 1978? I first met Ed early in 1980, and IIRC he already had that station on the air, an early AM effort of Educational FM Associates? I remember seeing some documents about it at his office when I first met him. I disremember the calls or COL but I thought it was on the South Shore. Dale H. Cook, Radio Contract Engineer, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA http://plymouthcolony.net/starcityeng/index.html From raccoonradio@gmail.com Fri Jan 19 11:18:12 2018 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 11:18:12 -0500 Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20180119080259.06ed2878@plymouthcolony.net> References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <7.0.1.0.2.20180119080259.06ed2878@plymouthcolony.net> Message-ID: Meanwhile RadioInsight reports "...the contract states that the current tower site owner Duffy Associates, LLC has filed a lawsuit against Daly XXL Communications, Ed Perry, and former WMEX owner Blackstrap Broadcasting." Blackstrap goes back to 2015.Exactly how much tower rent is owed? On Friday, January 19, 2018, Dale H. Cook wrote: > At 01:03 AM 1/19/2018, Garrett Wollman wrote: > > >... there are precious few places in the market where 1510 could actually > *go* ... > > Didn't Ed build a four tower DA about 1978? I first met Ed early in 1980, > and IIRC he already had that station on the air, an early AM effort of > Educational FM Associates? I remember seeing some documents about it at > his office when I first met him. I disremember the calls or COL but I > thought it was on the South Shore. > > Dale H. Cook, Radio Contract Engineer, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA > http://plymouthcolony.net/starcityeng/index.html > > From scott@fybush.com Fri Jan 19 09:49:32 2018 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 09:49:32 -0500 Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20180119080259.06ed2878@plymouthcolony.net> References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <7.0.1.0.2.20180119080259.06ed2878@plymouthcolony.net> Message-ID: <1566d087-3eb6-5d21-6d7b-1f5891d6a5ba@fybush.com> WMEX/WITS built a four-tower array in 1981 in Waltham. Maybe that's what you're thinking about? As far as I recall with Ed's career, it was WATD(FM) in 1976 in Marshfield, then he bought 1410 in Brockton (ex-WOKW) and ran it as WATD(AM) for a few years in the 1990s, which is also when he had WATB(FM) out on the Cape. Then he scaled back to just WATD-FM again. There aren't many DAs on the South Shore - used to be two towers each at 1410 and 1460 in Brockton, and the four-tower 1390 that's been in Plymouth forever. On 1/19/2018 8:23 AM, Dale H. Cook wrote: > At 01:03 AM 1/19/2018, Garrett Wollman wrote: > >> ... there are precious few places in the market where 1510 could actually *go* ... > > Didn't Ed build a four tower DA about 1978? I first met Ed early in 1980, and IIRC he already had that station on the air, an early AM effort of Educational FM Associates? I remember seeing some documents about it at his office when I first met him. I disremember the calls or COL but I thought it was on the South Shore. > > Dale H. Cook, Radio Contract Engineer, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA > http://plymouthcolony.net/starcityeng/index.html > From wollman@bimajority.org Fri Jan 19 22:08:53 2018 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 22:08:53 -0500 Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: <1566d087-3eb6-5d21-6d7b-1f5891d6a5ba@fybush.com> References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <7.0.1.0.2.20180119080259.06ed2878@plymouthcolony.net> <1566d087-3eb6-5d21-6d7b-1f5891d6a5ba@fybush.com> Message-ID: <23138.45765.795801.301710@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > There aren't many DAs on the South Shore - used to be two towers each at > 1410 and 1460 in Brockton, and the four-tower 1390 that's been in > Plymouth forever. 1170 in Norfolk was a two-tower DA, wasn't it? (Is it still standing?) -GAWollman From scott@fybush.com Fri Jan 19 22:10:30 2018 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 22:10:30 -0500 Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: <23138.45765.795801.301710@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <7.0.1.0.2.20180119080259.06ed2878@plymouthcolony.net> <1566d087-3eb6-5d21-6d7b-1f5891d6a5ba@fybush.com> <23138.45765.795801.301710@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: I don't really think of Norfolk as "south shore," but yes, it was a 2-tower DA. I think it's been demolished. s On 1/19/2018 10:08 PM, Garrett Wollman wrote: > < said: > >> There aren't many DAs on the South Shore - used to be two towers each at >> 1410 and 1460 in Brockton, and the four-tower 1390 that's been in >> Plymouth forever. > > 1170 in Norfolk was a two-tower DA, wasn't it? (Is it still standing?) > > -GAWollman > From joe@attorneyross.com Sat Jan 20 02:03:03 2018 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 02:03:03 -0500 Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <7.0.1.0.2.20180119080259.06ed2878@plymouthcolony.net> Message-ID: <43d1051a-e74d-6b99-6eab-912eddcfed74@attorneyross.com> Why would they be suing Ed Perry? On 1/19/2018 11:18 AM, Bob Nelson wrote: > Meanwhile RadioInsight reports "...the contract states that the current > tower site owner Duffy Associates, LLC has filed a lawsuit against Daly XXL > Communications, Ed Perry, and former WMEX owner Blackstrap Broadcasting." > > Blackstrap goes back to 2015.Exactly how much tower rent is owed? > > On Friday, January 19, 2018, Dale H. Cook > wrote: > >> At 01:03 AM 1/19/2018, Garrett Wollman wrote: >> >>> ... there are precious few places in the market where 1510 could actually >> *go* ... >> >> Didn't Ed build a four tower DA about 1978? I first met Ed early in 1980, >> and IIRC he already had that station on the air, an early AM effort of >> Educational FM Associates? I remember seeing some documents about it at >> his office when I first met him. I disremember the calls or COL but I >> thought it was on the South Shore. >> >> Dale H. Cook, Radio Contract Engineer, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA >> http://plymouthcolony.net/starcityeng/index.html >> >> -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. ? 1340 Centre Street, Suite 103 ? Newton, MA 02459 617.367.0468 ? Fax:617.507.7856 ? http://www.attorneyross.com From wollman@bimajority.org Sat Jan 20 02:48:32 2018 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 02:48:32 -0500 Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: <43d1051a-e74d-6b99-6eab-912eddcfed74@attorneyross.com> References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <7.0.1.0.2.20180119080259.06ed2878@plymouthcolony.net> <43d1051a-e74d-6b99-6eab-912eddcfed74@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <23138.62544.502658.989767@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > Why would they be suing Ed Perry? Because Ed Perry is trying to buy the 1510 license. You'd probably know better than the rest of us what they'd have to plead to keep him as a defendant -- I assume it's something like interfering with their contract with Daly XXL, maybe claiming that Perry somehow induced Daly XXL not to go through with the planned auction (which was to include an assignment of the tower site lease) which "might" have brought in more cash / left Daly XXL with enough assets to satisfy all of its obligations. (I'm assuming, based on the way it went down, that the auction didn't take place because the broker running it had not received any expressions of interest in buying the whole station, but Perry submitted an offer for the license alone.) One question is whether Daly is actually the party on the lease, or if Daly sublet the facility from Blackstrap. That might explain why Blackstrap was also joined. Normally, in a situation like this, you might expect Daly XXL's creditors to file for involuntary bankruptcy. However, if Daly actually went into bankruptcy, they could simply reject the lease -- and Duffy surely must know that the site is of no use to anyone other than 1510.[1] Furthermore, they must also know that if the station remains off the air for another six months, its license simply *evaporates*, poof, by operation of law, and then the most they can expect is some share of whatever cash or other assets Daly might have. So my guess would be that they know that their time is up, and they're hoping to squeeze a few more dollars out of *someone* -- possibly Ed Perry -- as a price for allowing the transaction to close before the license expiration clock runs out later this year. Basically, Daly XXL and Duffy are playing "chicken". -GAWollman [1] Not quite true: it could be used by 1430, 1470, or 1550, but none of them has an interest in moving and even if they did, there is absolutely no chance they'd pay the sort of rent that 1510 is currently on the hook for. From aerie.ma@comcast.net Sat Jan 20 15:10:56 2018 From: aerie.ma@comcast.net (Jim Hall) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 15:10:56 -0500 Subject: Sharing TV stations ID Message-ID: <018001d3922a$c9287570$5b796050$@comcast.net> I haven't been able to catch any official station IDs yet, so I am wondering how that works with stations that are sharing bandwidth. For example, does CW56 still ID itself as "WLVI-TV Cambridge/Boston" or is it identified as "WHDH-TV 7.3 (or whatever it is) Boston". Most of the sub-channels these days just do their official ID with a quick text display on the hour at the screen bottom, and almost exclusively use their network/service name the rest of the time From wollman@bimajority.org Sat Jan 20 15:27:16 2018 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 15:27:16 -0500 Subject: Sharing TV stations ID In-Reply-To: <018001d3922a$c9287570$5b796050$@comcast.net> References: <018001d3922a$c9287570$5b796050$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <23139.42532.959085.788163@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > I haven't been able to catch any official station IDs yet, so I am wondering > how that works with stations that are sharing bandwidth. For example, does > CW56 still ID itself as "WLVI-TV Cambridge/Boston" or is it identified as > "WHDH-TV 7.3 (or whatever it is) Boston". They are separate licenses with separte virtual channels and separate call signs. Just like in the old days with share-timers. (In fact, I think legally that's how the FCC treats these "channel sharing" arrangements -- they're just sharing on a microsecond-by-microsecond basis rather than by the hour.) They each maintain their independent must-carry rights on cable and satellite. It is possible (as in the case of WGBX with WYCN-CD) for low-power and class-A stations to share channels with full-power stations, or even vice versa, and the rules applicable to each class of station continue to apply even though they're using a shared transmitter facility. Class-A stations are generally not entitled to must-carry, but are also not subject to ownership limits. By the way, the sale of WYCN-CD to NBC was consummated on Thursday. -GAWollman From wollman@bimajority.org Sat Jan 20 15:35:52 2018 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 15:35:52 -0500 Subject: Sharing TV stations ID In-Reply-To: <23139.42532.959085.788163@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <018001d3922a$c9287570$5b796050$@comcast.net> <23139.42532.959085.788163@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <23139.43048.200722.105609@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < By the way, the sale of WYCN-CD to NBC was consummated on Thursday. A little more research shows that OTA (the former owner) applied for a license to cover on the channel-share with WGBX simultaneously with the consummation of the sale, as was originally contemplated in the agreement with NBC. -GAWollman From scott@fybush.com Sat Jan 20 15:25:00 2018 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 15:25:00 -0500 Subject: Sharing TV stations ID In-Reply-To: <018001d3922a$c9287570$5b796050$@comcast.net> References: <018001d3922a$c9287570$5b796050$@comcast.net> Message-ID: WLVI is still a separate license, so its ID would still be WLVI-TV Cambridge, regardless of which patch of RF spectrum it's using. On Jan 20, 2018 3:14 PM, "Jim Hall" wrote: > I haven't been able to catch any official station IDs yet, so I am > wondering > how that works with stations that are sharing bandwidth. For example, does > CW56 still ID itself as "WLVI-TV Cambridge/Boston" or is it identified as > "WHDH-TV 7.3 (or whatever it is) Boston". Most of the sub-channels these > days just do their official ID with a quick text display on the hour at the > screen bottom, and almost exclusively use their network/service name the > rest of the time > > From joe@attorneyross.com Sun Jan 21 01:02:19 2018 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2018 01:02:19 -0500 Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: <23138.62544.502658.989767@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <7.0.1.0.2.20180119080259.06ed2878@plymouthcolony.net> <43d1051a-e74d-6b99-6eab-912eddcfed74@attorneyross.com> <23138.62544.502658.989767@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: This isn't my area of law, but I don't see how Ed Perry, who does not own the station, has any rent obligation on the tower.? Nor do I see how trying to purchase the station license would constitute interference with the contract.? The current owners are already in breach of the lease by not paying rent, and if Ed Perry purchases the station, he might be interested in using the transmitter site and paying the rent for it going forward.? Or perhaps they can make a deal of some sort for Perry to use the site and pay a reduced rent.? I guess I understand why they're suing him, because sometimes you just sue everyone in site and sort it out later, but I have trouble seeing where he would be liable for anything. On 1/20/2018 2:48 AM, Garrett Wollman wrote: > < said: > >> Why would they be suing Ed Perry? > Because Ed Perry is trying to buy the 1510 license. You'd probably > know better than the rest of us what they'd have to plead to keep him > as a defendant -- I assume it's something like interfering with their > contract with Daly XXL, maybe claiming that Perry somehow induced Daly > XXL not to go through with the planned auction (which was to include > an assignment of the tower site lease) which "might" have brought in > more cash / left Daly XXL with enough assets to satisfy all of its > obligations. (I'm assuming, based on the way it went down, that the > auction didn't take place because the broker running it had not > received any expressions of interest in buying the whole station, but > Perry submitted an offer for the license alone.) > > One question is whether Daly is actually the party on the lease, or if > Daly sublet the facility from Blackstrap. That might explain why > Blackstrap was also joined. > > Normally, in a situation like this, you might expect Daly XXL's > creditors to file for involuntary bankruptcy. However, if Daly > actually went into bankruptcy, they could simply reject the lease -- > and Duffy surely must know that the site is of no use to anyone other > than 1510.[1] Furthermore, they must also know that if the station > remains off the air for another six months, its license simply > *evaporates*, poof, by operation of law, and then the most they can > expect is some share of whatever cash or other assets Daly might have. > > So my guess would be that they know that their time is up, and they're > hoping to squeeze a few more dollars out of *someone* -- possibly Ed > Perry -- as a price for allowing the transaction to close before the > license expiration clock runs out later this year. Basically, Daly > XXL and Duffy are playing "chicken". > > -GAWollman > > [1] Not quite true: it could be used by 1430, 1470, or 1550, but none > of them has an interest in moving and even if they did, there is > absolutely no chance they'd pay the sort of rent that 1510 is > currently on the hook for. > > -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. ? 1340 Centre Street, Suite 103 ? Newton, MA 02459 617.367.0468 ? Fax:617.507.7856 ? http://www.attorneyross.com From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Jan 22 07:29:37 2018 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 07:29:37 -0500 (EST) Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Fri, 19 Jan 2018, Garrett Wollman wrote: > So what he's probably looking at is OK day power and maybe minimal > class-B facilities at night? You could probably do that from the 850 > site in Needham for a reasonable amount of money, if Entercom is willing > to lease. All the engineering work would cost him a fortune, and this is a station that is off the air, so there's no audience to sell. My guess is he puts up a Valcom whip, or diplexes with his Brockton AM, and runs ND with as much power as he can get. Rob From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Jan 22 08:06:13 2018 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 08:06:13 -0500 (EST) Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <7.0.1.0.2.20180119080259.06ed2878@plymouthcolony.net> <43d1051a-e74d-6b99-6eab-912eddcfed74@attorneyross.com> <23138.62544.502658.989767@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Sun, 21 Jan 2018, A Joseph Ross wrote: > This isn't my area of law, but I don't see how Ed Perry, who does not > own the station, has any rent obligation on the tower. Daly XXL filed an application on January 18 for assignment of license (to Ed Perry's Marshfield Broadcasting). The Asset Purchase Agreement, signed on January 16, includes "all studio equipment" and a short list of "tangible personal property" that appears to exclude everything at the transmitter site. The purchase price is $125,000. Ed Perry will not be able to build a comparable four-tower DA for ten times that. > Nor do I see how trying to purchase the station license would constitute > interference with the contract.? The current owners are already in > breach of the lease by not paying rent, and if Ed Perry purchases the > station, he might be interested in using the transmitter site and paying > the rent for it going forward. If he were, he'd be buying the transmitters and other essential assets at the transmitter site. The omission of those assets indicates that he doesn't intend to use the Waltham site nor to run enough power to require a 50 KW transmitter. >?Or perhaps they can make a deal of some sort for Perry to use the site > and pay a reduced rent.? I guess I understand why they're suing him, > because sometimes you just sue everyone in site and sort it out later, > but I have trouble seeing where he would be liable for anything. Will the Duffys file a petition to deny the assignment of license? If not, the assignment goes through in 60 days or so, lawsuit or no lawsuit, although of course the buyer and seller have the option of postponing the closing. Rob From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Jan 22 07:34:17 2018 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 07:34:17 -0500 (EST) Subject: WMEX sale: calls not included In-Reply-To: References: <015101d39089$8cb68ed0$a623ac70$@comcast.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 19 Jan 2018, Bob Nelson wrote: > Back payment of tower rent, I believe I heard a rumor that the old lease has a termination clause requiring the tenant to remove the existing towers and associated structures at his/her expense. Rob From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Jan 22 07:37:01 2018 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 07:37:01 -0500 (EST) Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20180119080259.06ed2878@plymouthcolony.net> References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <7.0.1.0.2.20180119080259.06ed2878@plymouthcolony.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 19 Jan 2018, Dale H. Cook wrote: > Didn't Ed build a four tower DA about 1978? Building one today would be a colossal expense, even if he already has the land and the necessary building permit from the locals. It's hard to see how he would ever get that money back. Rob From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Jan 22 07:46:30 2018 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 07:46:30 -0500 (EST) Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: <23138.62544.502658.989767@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <7.0.1.0.2.20180119080259.06ed2878@plymouthcolony.net> <43d1051a-e74d-6b99-6eab-912eddcfed74@attorneyross.com> <23138.62544.502658.989767@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Sat, 20 Jan 2018, Garrett Wollman wrote: > Normally, in a situation like this, you might expect Daly XXL's > creditors to file for involuntary bankruptcy. However, if Daly > actually went into bankruptcy, they could simply reject the lease -- > and Duffy surely must know that the site is of no use to anyone other > than 1510.[1] Furthermore, they must also know that if the station > remains off the air for another six months, its license simply > *evaporates*, poof, by operation of law, and then the most they can > expect is some share of whatever cash or other assets Daly might have. That's why I expected Duffy to buy the station and put it back on the air, perhaps with time brokered ethnic programming, while trying to find a buyer. Rob From scott@fybush.com Mon Jan 22 08:56:33 2018 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 08:56:33 -0500 Subject: WRNJ In-Reply-To: References: <016201d390c3$94f40980$bedc1c80$@comcast.net> <23137.35373.125508.596519@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <7.0.1.0.2.20180119080259.06ed2878@plymouthcolony.net> <43d1051a-e74d-6b99-6eab-912eddcfed74@attorneyross.com> <23138.62544.502658.989767@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <626651f1-01c6-baeb-b71e-3275a8edea6b@fybush.com> On 1/22/2018 7:46 AM, Rob Landry wrote: > That's why I expected Duffy to buy the station and put it back on the > air, perhaps with time brokered ethnic programming, while trying to find > a buyer. But actually running a radio station is no job for a novice, either. Regulatory compliance costs money. Finding and managing time-brokered programming isn't as easy as it looks, either, especially in a market with so many AM players all vying for tenants (and another big AM, 1200, coming available in February, too.) My guess - and it is only a guess, and I would prefer not to be quoted on any of this outside of this list, Bob Nelson - is that in naming Perry as a defendant in its lawsuit, Duffy is presumably doing what most plaintiffs with good lawyers would do in its position, which is going after any potentially deep pockets it can. Do they know they probably don't have any contractual relationship with Perry that could hold up in court? Sure. But at this point, I'd imagine they're also looking to put any pressure they can on Daly XXL - and if Perry backs out of the purchase to avoid a lawsuit (even a nuisance one), or if Daly XXL gets less money for the 1510 license because of the threat of legal action, Duffy has at least hurt Daly even if it doesn't end up seeing any more money at the end of the day. Vengeance plays a role in litigation sometimes, too. As for why Ed isn't buying any of the transmitter site equipment: my guess - again, only a guess, and again, don't quote me, please - is that there are two factors at play. First, that whole lawsuit thing...if Perry never sets foot on the Waltham site or attempts to take possession of any equipment that is or was there, I'd assume it makes it that much harder for Duffy to successfully establish any kind of contractual connection to Perry. (And anyway, that old Nautel AMPFET at the Waltham site is...old. If you're going to build a new 1510 site elsewhere, you could probably get a different used transmitter in better shape for less money and hassle.) Second, and perhaps more important: I don't think it's a correct assumption to think that Perry is after a big 1510 AM signal. This play is all about a translator, and you don't need much of an AM signal to make that happen. We know from the contract that Perry *will* be filing in the window that's scheduled to open Thursday, and for that, all he needs from 1510 is the most minimal of signal, sited such that the translator's 60 dBu contour is contained within a 25-mile radius of the new AM site*. Doesn't matter if the AM becomes just a 250-watt daytimer at that point. And you certainly don't need a huge ancient 50 kW AMPFET to make that happen. (There is, of course, no guarantee he GETS a translator - there aren't many channels left available and he's surely not the only AM in the area who'll be applying. I would imagine he figured this risk factor into the deal he made with Daly.) Ed's a smart guy. I'm sure he's had all of this figured out seven ways to Sunday long before we ever started talking about it. I'm going to be VERY interested to see what he files in the translator window. s *For the purposes of the filing in this window, whatever he applies for also has to be contained within either 25 miles or the 2 mV day contour of the current licensed 1510 signal from Waltham. That should encompass most of the places he's likely to want to drop a translator. From rbello@belloassoc.com Mon Jan 22 11:23:11 2018 From: rbello@belloassoc.com (Ron Bello) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 11:23:11 -0500 Subject: WMEX sale: calls not included In-Reply-To: References: <015101d39089$8cb68ed0$a623ac70$@comcast.net> Message-ID: This type of provision is very typical for a commercial lease especially when the "improvement" is so specialized It is usually at the option of the landlord to whether the area is "restored to original condition" --------------------------------------------------- On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 7:34 AM, Rob Landry <011010001@interpring.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, 19 Jan 2018, Bob Nelson wrote: > > Back payment of tower rent, I believe >> > > I heard a rumor that the old lease has a termination clause requiring the > tenant to remove the existing towers and associated structures at his/her > expense. > > > Rob > From joe@attorneyross.com Tue Jan 23 01:55:15 2018 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 01:55:15 -0500 Subject: WMEX sale: calls not included In-Reply-To: References: <015101d39089$8cb68ed0$a623ac70$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <5ecbb671-3291-2606-c360-e871539a2a50@attorneyross.com> It is common in a commercial lease, but it's up to both parties to negotiate on whether such a clause will be required.? Commercial leases can be subject to a lot more negotiation than residential leases, since many commercial tenants have a lot more bargaining power. On 1/22/2018 11:23 AM, Ron Bello wrote: > This type of provision is very typical for a commercial lease especially > when the "improvement" is so specialized > It is usually at the option of the landlord to whether the area is > "restored to original condition" > > --------------------------------------------------- > > > > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 7:34 AM, Rob Landry <011010001@interpring.com> > wrote: > >> >> On Fri, 19 Jan 2018, Bob Nelson wrote: >> >> Back payment of tower rent, I believe >> I heard a rumor that the old lease has a termination clause requiring the >> tenant to remove the existing towers and associated structures at his/her >> expense. >> >> >> Rob >> -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. ? 1340 Centre Street, Suite 103 ? Newton, MA 02459 617.367.0468 ? Fax:617.507.7856 ? http://www.attorneyross.com