The Game Show Forum

The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: gsfan85 on August 05, 2004, 10:50:47 PM

Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: gsfan85 on August 05, 2004, 10:50:47 PM
Hey everyone,

I'm not sure if I'm the only one wondering about this.  A while back, On The Cover was slated to premiere.  It premiered, aired 2 episodes, and mysteriously was taken off the air.

Now, after a few monthes, it's back and slated to premiere again on Monday, with no mention that it had been on the network before.  And as I saw in the commercials, the set is totally a different style, with a more nighttime look with stars and all, instead of the old set with the wood and the lighted up boxes.

Does anyone know what is going on, and what happened to all the other episodes shot with the old set?

Thanks!
Adam
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: rugrats1 on August 05, 2004, 11:22:23 PM
Maybe things didn't work out in the original trial run, so they redid the set for the new debut (or relaunch, whatever) this Monday. There's a chance that the rules of the game may change, too.

I think those "first 2" episodes were, more or less, the "pilots".
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: Matt Ottinger on August 05, 2004, 11:34:16 PM
[quote name=\'rugrats1\' date=\'Aug 5 2004, 11:22 PM\'] I think those "first 2" episodes were, more or less, the "pilots". [/quote]
 It's a bit more complicated than that.  The simple version of the complicated story is that the show got to air, the ratings (during May sweeps) were God-awful, and Mr. Pax himself was none too pleased.  So they yanked the show, did a massive retooling, showed him the new version, and got this second chance.

In short, the first two aired shows weren't pilots, they were just the original version of what now could almost be considered The All-New On The Cover.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: thgames65 on August 06, 2004, 12:43:09 AM
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Aug 5 2004, 10:34 PM\'] So they yanked the show, did a massive retooling, showed him the new version, and got this second chance.
[/quote]
According to sources, the 3rd round of the game has some minor changes.  The Bonus Round has a different structure altogether.  I guess we all shall see during the re-premiere next week.

Tim H.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: chris319 on August 06, 2004, 01:38:52 AM
Mr. Pax = Bud Paxson. FYI do not refer to Rupert as "Mr. Fox".

The On the Cover pilot I saw being taped on September 6, 2001 was likewise unwatchable.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: HairMetalLives on August 06, 2004, 02:19:45 AM
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Aug 5 2004, 08:34 PM\'] [quote name=\'rugrats1\' date=\'Aug 5 2004, 11:22 PM\'] I think those "first 2" episodes were, more or less, the "pilots". [/quote]
It's a bit more complicated than that.  The simple version of the complicated story is that the show got to air, the ratings (during May sweeps) were God-awful, and Mr. Pax himself was none too pleased.  So they yanked the show, did a massive retooling, showed him the new version, and got this second chance.

In short, the first two aired shows weren't pilots, they were just the original version of what now could almost be considered The All-New On The Cover. [/quote]
 So two episodes aired originally and then it was yanked. Were there more than two episodes shot? And if so, have they been destroyed?
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: BrandonFG on August 06, 2004, 02:40:32 AM
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Aug 5 2004, 10:34 PM\'] In short, the first two aired shows weren't pilots, they were just the original version of what now could almost be considered The All-New On The Cover. [/quote]
 Hmm...I think we've seen the shortest amount of time it would take for a game show to be revived. ;-)

Zach, that was a joke. Do not try to analyze my post with your irrelevant comments.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: Dbacksfan12 on August 06, 2004, 03:23:33 AM
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Aug 6 2004, 01:40 AM\'] [quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Aug 5 2004, 10:34 PM\'] In short, the first two aired shows weren't pilots, they were just the original version of what now could almost be considered The All-New On The Cover. [/quote]
Hmm...I think we've seen the shortest amount of time it would take for a game show to be revived. ;-)

Zach, that was a joke. Do not try to analyze my post with your irrelevant comments. [/quote]
 But Brandon!
You *must* know that it was <insert show, debut date, cancellation date, new debut date, and new cancellation date, on X network>
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: inturnaround on August 06, 2004, 03:56:43 AM
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Aug 6 2004, 01:38 AM\'] Mr. Pax = Bud Paxson. FYI do not refer to Rupert as "Mr. Fox".

 [/quote]
 Cause, seriously, "Howling Mad" Murdoch will sue.

Okay, not seriously.

But I can see a sitcom called "Mr Pax". It could star Gil Gerard as Mr Pax as a mediator for the Peaceville Police Dept.

ObGameShow: Judging solely from the ads I've seen, OTC looks horrible.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: CaseyAbell on August 06, 2004, 11:05:33 AM
Speaking of Mr. Pax, he just reported some serious red ink in the latest quarter:

http://southflorida.bizjournals.com/southf...02/daily81.html (http://\"http://southflorida.bizjournals.com/southflorida/stories/2004/08/02/daily81.html\")

At least revenues were up a little thanks to endless informercials, but the network is purely hurting on the bottom line. Somehow, I don't think On The Cover is the magic solution.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: uncamark on August 06, 2004, 11:22:42 AM
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Aug 6 2004, 10:05 AM\']Speaking of Mr. Pax, he just reported some serious red ink in the latest quarter:

http://southflorida.bizjournals.com/southf...02/daily81.html (http://\"http://southflorida.bizjournals.com/southflorida/stories/2004/08/02/daily81.html\")

At least revenues were up a little thanks to endless informercials, but the network is purely hurting on the bottom line. Somehow, I don't think On The Cover is the magic solution.[/quote]
And to be totally honest with you, as happy as I am that someone's doing studio game shows out there, I don't know what is.  It's time for Bud to sell out and for him to go on to the next scheme.

Or is he waiting to pull a Pat Robertson and demand that a new owner must continue to air "family-friendly" programming?  (Like Robertson forcing "The 700 Club" on Fox along with the Family Channel, and in turn forcing it on Disney when *Fox* sold the channel--they have no choice but to continue running it on ABCFAM, as much as they'd probably love to get rid of it.)

And I have the feeling that the unaired "On the Cover" shows haven't been wiped--they'll just never air.  Hope at least that the people who won the Newport Beach Film Festival prize still got to go.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: CaseyAbell on August 06, 2004, 12:40:05 PM
My guess is all that talk of Bear Stearns and Citigroup and "unlocking value" is about...selling out.

Really, you gotta wonder if the age of the dinosaurs is finally drawing to a close. Will anybody ever try to start another broadcast network? Why bother with all the infrastructure hassles of over-the-air when cable/satellite has so many fewer barriers to entry?

Over the past several decades the number of commercial broadcast networks has grown from three to seven (we'll be generous and count PAX). The number of cable networks has gone from somewhere near zilch to hundreds.

Sure, broadcast lets you get just about everybody, but cable/satellite comes pretty close to everybody nowadays. Not to get political, but Kerry was complaining the other day that broadcasters don't cover party conventions much any more. I smiled and thought...no, dinosaurs don't care that much about another dying beast, the political convention.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: Jimmy Owen on August 06, 2004, 02:14:52 PM
I would prefer to have a bunch of broadcast outlets as there is a must carry provision that will get you cleared on all cable systems, whereas cable networks have to prove their worth before the systems will give clearance.  There are some systems that still don't carry GSN, for example, but do carry PAX.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: J.R. on August 06, 2004, 02:16:22 PM
I've always believed that the more a network hypes a show, the worse it's going to be. So, my guess is "On The Cover" will be a horrible show.

Besides showing your mug on TV. I don't understand why anyone would want to spend $1500 flying out to L.A. to try out for these shows, wait 10 weeks so you can have a shot to win just either a gift certificate or a trip to a place I could drive to in about 2 hours. (I have a feeling "OTC" won't be any more generious than "Balderdash")

I'm sorry, but if I'm going to go though the riggors of contestant interviewing, I want to walk away from a game show with a ton of loot (or at least try to). I also prefer cash over prizes. To a 19 year-old, WOF's $500 in cash is a lot of money for me. Hell, even just $100 in cashroo can go very far in my life.

If I want to play for little to nothing. I'll just pull out a board game and invite some friends over.
-Joe R.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: tvwxman on August 06, 2004, 03:29:22 PM
[quote name=\'JRaygor\' date=\'Aug 6 2004, 01:16 PM\']

Besides showing your mug on TV. I don't understand why anyone would want to spend $1500 flying out to L.A. to try out for these shows, wait 10 weeks so you can have a shot to win just either a gift certificate or a trip to a place I could drive to in about 2 hours
 [/quote]
 I would bet hard earned money that all of the contestants on OTC live in the LA area....when they introduce "Patti Ann Malarkey" from Des Moines, IA as a contestant, usually Patti Ann USED to live there...but doesn't now.

It's happened on bigger shows....
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: chris319 on August 06, 2004, 03:54:11 PM
Mr. Pax is doing what the big networks did for decades in daytime: programming the network as economically as possible. He gets original programming without having to pay an ensemble cast $1 million for their every utterance. No big stars + no location shooting + the set never changes + meager prizes = economy TV. This is how local station KTLA was programmed in the '50s and '60s before Gene Autry came in.

No one is going to travel from Des Moines to Hollywood expecting to win $10,000 on OTC. You're going to see all locals.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: TimK2003 on August 07, 2004, 03:16:34 PM
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Aug 6 2004, 11:40 AM\'] Really, you gotta wonder if the age of the dinosaurs is finally drawing to a close. Will anybody ever try to start another broadcast network? Why bother with all the infrastructure hassles of over-the-air when cable/satellite has so many fewer barriers to entry?

Over the past several decades the number of commercial broadcast networks has grown from three to seven (we'll be generous and count PAX). The number of cable networks has gone from somewhere near zilch to hundreds.


 [/quote]
Are there any independent open-air stations left in the US that...

•  Are NOT affiliated with any national network (ABC/CBS/NBC/FOX/UPN/WB/Telemundo/Telefutura/PAX/PBS...),

•  Are NOT primarily/exclusively religious or home shopping programming,

AND

•  Are NOT a low-power local channel??


It seems that with the advent of FOX, PAX, WB, UPN, and the Spanish Networks, stations once on the air as independents before 1990 have since joined the ranks of at least one of those networks, no?
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: clemon79 on August 07, 2004, 06:43:56 PM
[quote name=\'TimK2003\' date=\'Aug 7 2004, 12:16 PM\'] Are there any independent open-air stations left in the US that...
•  Are NOT affiliated with any national network (ABC/CBS/NBC/FOX/UPN/WB/Telemundo/Telefutura/PAX/PBS...),
•  Are NOT primarily/exclusively religious or home shopping programming,
AND
•  Are NOT a low-power local channel??
 [/quote]
 KCAL 9 out of LA comes immediately to mind. KONG 6/16 here in Seattle is another (although they are under the same ownership as KING 5, which is the NBC). I'm sure there are quite a few.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: tommycharles on August 07, 2004, 07:37:52 PM
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Aug 7 2004, 05:43 PM\'] KCAL 9 out of LA comes immediately to mind. KONG 6/16 here in Seattle is another (although they are under the same ownership as KING 5, which is the NBC). I'm sure there are quite a few. [/quote]
 KWHD 53 is the only one I know of here in Colorado, and they show Religious shows and sitcom reruns, mostly. Apparently their daytime ad rate is $25/ 30 sec... anyone know if that is really low, or just typical for these stations?
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: chris319 on August 07, 2004, 08:25:37 PM
Mr. Lemon, you forget that legacy (and now former) NBC affiliate KRON-TV San Francisco is now an indie owned by Young Broadcasting, the NBC affiliation having gone to KNTV San Jose. KNTV doesn't come in worth spit in the city, but they pack a helluva wallop in Milpitas. KRON-TV was once a great station until the Theriot family sold it.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: clemon79 on August 07, 2004, 10:02:34 PM
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Aug 7 2004, 05:25 PM\'] Mr. Lemon, you forget that legacy (and now former) NBC affiliate KRON-TV San Francisco is now an indie owned by Young Broadcasting, the NBC affiliation having gone to KNTV San Jose. KNTV doesn't come in worth spit in the city, but they pack a helluva wallop in Milpitas. KRON-TV was once a great station until the Theriot family sold it. [/quote]
 Chris Horan, ladies and gentlemen. ;)

All of that happened after I moved up to Seattle, so I had no idea that KRON had gone indie. I knew that KNTV had gone NBC, after flying as a silent secondary UPN affil for a while.

Growing up in Monterey, we had this:

KRON-4 & KSBW-8 (Salinas): NBC
KPIX-5 & KMST-46 (Monterey, now KION, Salinas): CBS
KGO-7 & KNTV-11: ABC

When one of the affils had to black out in prime time, the SF ones would go. We watched our network TV on the latter of each pair above.

Later on, KTVU-2 would become the Fox affiliate, and then KCBA-35 (Salinas) turned into an English-language station, and soon thereafter the local Fox affiliate.

They now also have a dedicated WB station running out of Monterey, but no UPN affiliate. To the best of my knowledge KCBA is still a secondary UPN in addition to their Fox duties, running UPN programming on weekend afternoons and during overnights.

Honestly, the idea of network affiliates changing is really weird to me. The channels were as I describe them above for my entire life, so I never knew anything else. And I moved to a city that doesn't look like the affiliates are gonna change anytime soon, either.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: dzinkin on August 07, 2004, 11:35:25 PM
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Aug 7 2004, 10:02 PM\'] All of that happened after I moved up to Seattle, so I had no idea that KRON had gone indie. I knew that KNTV had gone NBC, after flying as a silent secondary UPN affil for a while. [/quote]
Secondary WB, actually... before KNTV was bought by NBC, it was owned by Granite, which also owned the WB affil (KOFY, later KBWB).  Once KNTV dropped ABC it had to fill the schedule somehow, so it shared the WB shows with its sister channel.

The issue of network affiliation switches doesn't seem strange to me because we had one here back in '89, when WROC switched from NBC to CBS and WHEC did the reverse.  A few months before the change, WROC picked up the CBS shows that WHEC wasn't carrying, including the entire Saturday morning schedule and (NOW we're on topic! :-) Family Feud and Now You See It.  What DID seem strange to me was when Dan Rather broke into NYSI one morning with a special report -- and because WROC didn't bother switching back to NBC (I guess they figured, "what's NBC going to do, drop us?"), Rather ended up on WROC and WHEC at the same time.

As to your question about indies, I can name two more.  WLNY-TV in Riverhead, NY, is carried on cable in New York City and carries a fair number of decent syndicated shows including Wheel and J!.  (However, NYC cable viewers don't see some of those shows due to syndex rules... not sure if Wheel and J! are among them.)  And KTVK in Phoenix became the #1 indie in the country (and may still be) after ABC dropped the station as part of the wave of affiliation switches in '94.  I remember specifically that KTVK ran Wheel and J! in prime time -- and ran ads in Broadcasting & Cable bragging that they'd beaten the networks. :-)
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: inturnaround on August 08, 2004, 12:30:39 AM
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Aug 7 2004, 10:02 PM\'] Honestly, the idea of network affiliates changing is really weird to me. The channels were as I describe them above for my entire life, so I never knew anything else. And I moved to a city that doesn't look like the affiliates are gonna change anytime soon, either. [/quote]
 We thought the same thing in Philadelphia. KYW was the NBC affiliate for over 50 years when it switched with WCAU to become a CBS affil. Now KYW (formerly part of Group W)is a CBS O&O and WCAU is a NBC O&O.

It's been 10 years and we're still getting used to the switch.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: tvwxman on August 08, 2004, 06:48:12 AM
WJXT in Jacksonville FL is another indy....the #1 powerhouse of the medium sized market was a CBS affil until 2  years ago, when Post Newsweek told CBS to take their affiliation deal and put it where Dan Rather doesn't shine.

Since ABC and NBC were locked up in affil agreements (both owned by Gannett, that's another wierd story)....and Fox and UPN were in bed together, they went the indy route, adding plenty of news to fill holes...

The results...lower ratings, but higher revenue, since they don't have to share national ad profits with the network....

Ratings, my friends, aren't the be all and end all in local news like they used to be!
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: opimus on August 08, 2004, 09:44:11 AM
Is WCIU in Chicago the bigest indy in the US?
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: aaron sica on August 08, 2004, 10:21:00 AM
[quote name=\'inturnaround\' date=\'Aug 8 2004, 12:30 AM\'] We thought the same thing in Philadelphia. KYW was the NBC affiliate for over 50 years when it switched with WCAU to become a CBS affil. Now KYW (formerly part of Group W)is a CBS O&O and WCAU is a NBC O&O.

It's been 10 years and we're still getting used to the switch. [/quote]
 "NBC 10" still leaves a funny taste in my mouth......

Although the absolute king of network affiliation switches, to me, has to be Baltimore.  Philly's 3 and 10 did the big switch in September 1995; Baltimore had all three of its network VHF stations play musical networks on Jan. 2, 1995.  

You had WMAR-2, which was NBC, switch to ABC (due to an agreement with Scripps-Howard and ABC);
You had WJZ-13, which was ABC, switch to CBS (because CBS bought Group W..same reason KYW-3 in Philly became CBS);
You had WBAL-11, which was CBS, switch to NBC (the only one left from the buyouts)..

Even more interesting to this is the fact that Baltimore had one affiliation switch ALREADY, 14 years prior in 1981; WMAR-2 was CBS, WBAL-11 was NBC, and they switched networks in September of that year.

So, during the span of 14 years, WMAR-2 sampled all three networks (CBS from inception to 1981, NBC from 1981-1995, and ABC from 1995-present);
WBAL-11 switched from NBC, to CBS, back to NBC again;
CBS has been on all three VHF slots (2, then 11, then 13).

To put this back on topic somewhat, in 1981, when 2 switched networks, instead of going with the NBC lineup from 11am-noon, they aired "Newlywed Game" reruns at 11:30.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: dzinkin on August 08, 2004, 11:39:32 AM
[quote name=\'aaron sica\' date=\'Aug 8 2004, 10:21 AM\'] Although the absolute king of network affiliation switches, to me, has to be Baltimore. [/quote]
 Close, but I think the king is Phoenix... the ABC station (KTVK) went indie, the independent station (KPHO) went to CBS, the CBS station (KSAZ) went to Fox, and the Fox station (KNXV) went to ABC.  Even funnier was the fact that they all didn't switch on the same day -- so each station took turns at being independent for a few weeks or so and had to fill the time with whatever it could find (game shows were one common "fill-in," I read).

Moreover, KTVK was so ticked at losing ABC that it immediately dropped all ABC News programming when the switch was announced.  ABC persuaded KNXV to pick up the shows in the interim, but since KNXV was still under contract with Fox, it had to air the ABC shows on a delay.  Good Morning America still hasn't recovered in the market, and one night, KTVK kept Monday Night Football but had dropped Nightline, so when KNXV took the latter, ABC was competing against itself. :-D
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: sshuffield70 on August 08, 2004, 01:17:50 PM
Seems to me Denver had it worse.  If I'm not mistaken, 4, 7 and 9 all changed affiliations in the big switch.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: aaron sica on August 08, 2004, 01:44:00 PM
[quote name=\'sshuffield70\' date=\'Aug 8 2004, 01:17 PM\'] Seems to me Denver had it worse.  If I'm not mistaken, 4, 7 and 9 all changed affiliations in the big switch. [/quote]
 You are correct there, too.

KCNC-4, which was NBC, changed to CBS;
KMGH-7, which was CBS, changed to ABC;
KUSA-9, which was ABC, changed to NBC.

When MG90 was on, KUSA was still ABC at that point and actually aired the show in a late afternoon time slot, if I'm not mistaken.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: tvwxman on August 08, 2004, 01:44:06 PM
Best affil switch was Jan 1, 1989 for Miami AND Palm Beach at the same time!

WTVJ 4 (cbs) became NBC (bought by NBC)
WCIX 6 (fox) became CBS (bought by CBS)
WSVN 7 (nbc) became FOX (still owned by sunbeam)

I cant' rememeber why, but it may have had to do with signal reach, but it set off a flurry of changes in WPB as a result...

WPEC (abc) became CBS
WTVX (cbs) became independent
WPBF  signed on(!) as an ABC
NBC stayed the same....

Reading the TV guide that week caused a few migranes!
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: chris319 on August 08, 2004, 02:58:42 PM
Quote
KCBA is still a secondary UPN
Secondary UPN? Geez, that would put you a notch or two below QVC and The Knitting Channel.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: SRIV94 on August 08, 2004, 03:39:26 PM
[quote name=\'opimus\' date=\'Aug 8 2004, 08:44 AM\'] Is WCIU in Chicago the bigest indy in the US? [/quote]
Could very well be, although CBS/Viacom-owned KCAL in L.A. to my knowledge doesn't run any of the net's programming (leaving that to KCBS-2).  So the question is WCIU the biggest indy because it's not owned by/affiliated with a major network (Kids WB doesn't count--and anyway they're losing it in September), or does KCAL qualify because its programming is all locally produced or syndicated?

Doug
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: sshuffield70 on August 08, 2004, 07:26:11 PM
[quote name=\'aaron sica\' date=\'Aug 8 2004, 12:44 PM\'] [quote name=\'sshuffield70\' date=\'Aug 8 2004, 01:17 PM\'] Seems to me Denver had it worse.  If I'm not mistaken, 4, 7 and 9 all changed affiliations in the big switch. [/quote]
You are correct there, too.

KCNC-4, which was NBC, changed to CBS;
KMGH-7, which was CBS, changed to ABC;
KUSA-9, which was ABC, changed to NBC.

When MG90 was on, KUSA was still ABC at that point and actually aired the show in a late afternoon time slot, if I'm not mistaken. [/quote]
 I lived in the Denver area for three years back when KCNC was KOA and KUSA was KBTV (those call letters are now in Beaumont, Texas) which is kinda why I didn't put the call letters up there, 'cause I'd look pretty damn stupid.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: aaron sica on August 08, 2004, 07:38:59 PM
[quote name=\'sshuffield70\' date=\'Aug 8 2004, 07:26 PM\'] I lived in the Denver area for three years back when KCNC was KOA and KUSA was KBTV (those call letters are now in Beaumont, Texas) which is kinda why I didn't put the call letters up there, 'cause I'd look pretty damn stupid. [/quote]
 I can't think of any single reason why you would look stupid, although your telling of the old call letters does raise a question, which COULD be stupid -

When KCNC was KOA, did they have any affiliation at all with the campground chain?
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: gamed121683 on August 08, 2004, 08:05:59 PM
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' date=\'Aug 8 2004, 12:44 PM\'] Best affil switch was Jan 1, 1989 for Miami AND Palm Beach at the same time!

WTVJ 4 (cbs) became NBC (bought by NBC)
WCIX 6 (fox) became CBS (bought by CBS)

 [/quote]
 ...and in 1995 they switched again.  

WTVJ 4 (NBC) moved to channel 6 (but kept the same call letters)
WCIX 6 (CBS) moved to channel 4 (who's now WFOR [get it?])

Rumor had it that this year WPLG (ABC-10) and WSVN (Fox-7) were supposed to switch channels as well but I don't believe that matured into anything.

Yeah, the Miami/Ft. Lauderdale area is odd like that.

OBgameshows: The game show pilot "Second Guessers" was shot in Miami.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: tommycharles on August 09, 2004, 12:14:59 AM
[quote name=\'aaron sica\' date=\'Aug 8 2004, 06:38 PM\']
I can't think of any single reason why you would look stupid, although your telling of the old call letters does raise a question, which COULD be stupid -

When KCNC was KOA, did they have any affiliation at all with the campground chain? [/quote]
 Um... none that I was ever aware of.

Although this raises yet another question in my head:

Did that mean the TV station and the radio station had the same call letters? I thought that wasn't allowed...

(BTW do you live in Colorado, Aaron? Or do you just know a lot about the situation?)

T
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: Tim L on August 09, 2004, 01:04:14 AM
According to the KCNC-TV 4 Denver Website Metropolitan Broadcasting, which in 1952 bought KOA Radio, put Channel 4 on the air Christmas Eve, 1953 as KOA-TV.  In the early days of TV, Co-Owned radio and TV stations could have the same call letters though in many cases they did not at least right away.  WNBK-TV 4 in Cleveland was owned by NBC which had WTAM-1100 (was moved to channel 3 later. Also, in Cleveland,  WEWS channel 5 had WEWS-FM 102.1 on the air a few months before the TV station to give some of the personnel broadcasting experience. 102.1 became WDOK-FM  WDTV channel 2 in Pittsburgh began in 1949 as a DuMont O&O.  Was sold in the last days of DuMont as a TV Network to Westinghouse which simply changed the call letters to KDKA-TV 2 same as KDKA Radio-1020.

Tim Lones

Ob:Game Show Down You Go was one of the few shows of any kind broadcast on  all four US TV networks ABC CBS NBC and DuMont at one time or another.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: DrBear on August 09, 2004, 07:59:19 AM
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' date=\'Aug 6 2004, 10:40 AM\'] Over the past several decades the number of commercial broadcast networks has grown from three to seven (we'll be generous and count PAX). The number of cable networks has gone from somewhere near zilch to hundreds.
 [/quote]
 Actually, it's nine, with Telemundo and Univision, both of whom probably have more viewers than Pax.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: CaseyAbell on August 09, 2004, 08:02:57 AM
All this talk of broadcast networks is starting to seem historical. The fast nationals for Saturday:

http://tv.zap2it.com/tveditorial/tve_main/...9863|1|,00.html (http://\"http://tv.zap2it.com/tveditorial/tve_main/1,1002,272_617|89863|1|,00.html\")

Yep, twos and threes. I know it's Saturday. I know it's August. I know the numbers won't look as sad in the fall.

But twenty years down the road, I wouldn't be surprised if the top shows on the broadcast networks are getting ratings like these. For my kids the only indication that the broadcast networks used to hold the nation captive are the lower numbers they get on the cable remote.

The whole idea of stations broadcasting through the air and linked into a network looks so brontosaurus-ish. As long as the networks manage to aggregate audiences a little better than anybody else, they'll survive in some form, I guess. But in the thousand-channel universe, who's going to remember that three channels called NBC, CBS and ABC once ruled the earth?

Oh, if you want to count nine broadcast networks, no problem. Still looks like a painfully small group compared to the large number of cable nets now available, and the much bigger number in the not-so-distant future.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: TimK2003 on August 09, 2004, 10:16:17 AM
[quote name=\'tommycharles\' date=\'Aug 8 2004, 11:14 PM\']
Did that mean the TV station and the radio station had the same call letters? I thought that wasn't allowed...

 [/quote]
I believe it was either 1976 or 1977 when the FCC required radio & TV stations to split the call-letter sharing if they did indeed share the same calls.

The only ado that was created in Cleveland was that there was a WJW-AM 850 on the dial, and a WJW-TV 8 on the idiot box.  Channel 8 wedged in a K into their name, becoming WJKW, allowing 850 to remain the same.

The 'K' remained into the early 80s when 850 changed calls to WRMR.  Channel 8 then reverted back to it's old calls.  This might have been around the same time when Storer Broadcasting sold their radio & TV properties.

In Akron, their lone TV station (and Cleveland's 2nd ABC station, so to speak), WAKR-TV-23 was related to WAKR-1590 AM.  Again the TV station switched calls to WAKC (AKron/Canton) and "Whacker" 1590 remained, and still does.  TV 23 died in the early 90s with no warning, and only when PAX was looking for a local Cleveland outlet did Channel 23 re-emerge as WPVX.  

Meanwhile, over in Toledo, another Storer property shared the WSPD moniker between its TV channel, WSPD-Channel 13, and radio combo WSPD-AM 1270 and WSPD-FM 101.5 "Speedy Radio".  Again the TV station did the changing and became WTVG, which it still remains today, as does the WSPD radio combo.  

IIRC, Toledo also had another incident with WOHO-1470 AM and WOHO - Channel 24, where Channel 24 switched calls to WNWO "The Star of Northwest Ohio"

The only change in recent years was the affiliation trade between WTVG and WNWO -- WTVG took ABC and WNWO took NBC in the early 90s.

And then there was the FCC rule that you cannot change call letters into a new 3-letter call unless your station previously had those call letters at one time in the past.  That's why WJKW could revert back to the 3-letter WJW call.  Chances are if you know of any station nowadays with 3-lettered calls, odds are you'll never see them changing their calls --those IDs are collectors items!
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: SRIV94 on August 09, 2004, 10:32:55 AM
[quote name=\'TimK2003\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 09:16 AM\'] I believe it was either 1976 or 1977 when the FCC required radio & TV stations to split the call-letter sharing if they did indeed share the same calls.

The only ado that was created in Cleveland was that there was a WJW-AM 850 on the dial, and a WJW-TV 8 on the idiot box.  Channel 8 wedged in a K into their name, becoming WJKW, allowing 850 to remain the same.

The 'K' remained into the early 80s when 850 changed calls to WRMR.  Channel 8 then reverted back to it's old calls.  This might have been around the same time when Storer Broadcasting sold their radio & TV properties. [/quote]
Maybe someone can unconfuse me.  In Chicago at that time the four commercial VHF stations (WBBM, WMAQ, WLS and WGN) all had radio counterparts that shared the same call letters, and I don't recall either the TV or radio stations having to change calls because of FCC mandate.  And three of the four still share calls today (only WMAQ no longer exists as a radio station, having been rechristened as sports talker WSCR).  So it seems strange that WJW-TV and WJW-AM in Cleveland had to separate calls when stations in Chicago didn't (and it would seem unlikely that a grandfather clause could have been invoked, because that would theoretically protect WJW from having to change calls on either side).

OK, what am I overlooking?  :)

Doug
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: urbanpreppie05 on August 09, 2004, 10:42:14 AM
The 95' affiliation switch did cause some confusion here in NE Ohio...

Channel 8 went from CBS to Fox,
and 19 went from Fox to Cbs- but because they didn't have an news outlet there, they had to create one. And boy, did it suck. 19's news outlet is just now catching up with the rest of the market-and now it's surpassing other stations! (IMHO, I think it totally sucks)
 
Channel 8 opted not to pick up the Fox Kids lineup, it moved to religious affil. WBNX-55. For some odd reason though, a few months after the change 8 did run a lame hour of old warner brothers cartoons, called "8 Toons."

A few years later, 43 decided to keep UPN and WB moved to 55. Since both networks had weekday and saturday lineups, 55 ran Fox's in the afternoon and Wb's in the morning. WB got the saturday lineup on Saturday, and Fox's was pushed to Sunday.

Mike, correct me if I'm wrong.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: TimK2003 on August 09, 2004, 10:46:58 AM
[quote name=\'SRIV94\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 09:32 AM\'] [quote name=\'TimK2003\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 09:16 AM\'] I believe it was either 1976 or 1977 when the FCC required radio & TV stations to split the call-letter sharing if they did indeed share the same calls.

The only ado that was created in Cleveland was that there was a WJW-AM 850 on the dial, and a WJW-TV 8 on the idiot box.  Channel 8 wedged in a K into their name, becoming WJKW, allowing 850 to remain the same.

The 'K' remained into the early 80s when 850 changed calls to WRMR.  Channel 8 then reverted back to it's old calls.  This might have been around the same time when Storer Broadcasting sold their radio & TV properties. [/quote]
Maybe someone can unconfuse me.  In Chicago at that time the four commercial VHF stations (WBBM, WMAQ, WLS and WGN) all had radio counterparts that shared the same call letters, and I don't recall either the TV or radio stations having to change calls because of FCC mandate.  And three of the four still share calls today (only WMAQ no longer exists as a radio station, having been rechristened as sports talker WSCR).  So it seems strange that WJW-TV and WJW-AM in Cleveland had to separate calls when stations in Chicago didn't (and it would seem unlikely that a grandfather clause could have been invoked, because that would theoretically protect WJW from having to change calls on either side).

OK, what am I overlooking?  :)

Doug [/quote]
I could have swore it was an FCC mandate, but then again the call letter changes could have been necessary if the stations weren't owned by the same company anymore.  It's more logical, but it seemed like many of the Northern Ohio stations mentioned previously all switched calls within the same timeframe.

(o.b. Game Shows:  WJW/WJKW killed off their weeknight game show block at the time with a new Norman Lear 5-night-a-week strip, called "Mary Hartman, Mary Hartman".)
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: SRIV94 on August 09, 2004, 11:08:05 AM
[quote name=\'TimK2003\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 09:46 AM\'] I could have swore it was an FCC mandate, but then again the call letter changes could have been necessary if the stations weren't owned by the same company anymore. [/quote]
That may be what I was overlooking.  Viacom/CBS still owns WBBM-TV and WBBM-AM/FM, Disney/ABC still owns WLS-TV and WLS-AM and Tribune Company still owns WGN-TV and WGN-AM (Viacom/CBS also now owns the former WMAQ-AM, now WSCR, having acquired it with other Westinghouse stations--GE/NBC had sold WMAQ-AM to Westinghouse in 1987).  In these cases, the same company owned the TV and radio stations.

Contrast that with two commercial TV stations in New York that had radio counterparts, but did change their TV calls (WNEW-TV, now WNYW; and WOR-TV, now WWOR).  FOX's acquisition of WNEW-TV prolly forced the call letter change since they weren't picking up WNEW-AM/FM.  Not sure about the WOR/WWOR situation though--I know RKO General owned WOR-AM, but did they also own WOR-TV at that time?

On the other hand, even though Westinghouse owned WMAQ-AM those calls were kept until 2000 (13 years after GE/NBC had sold it off).  Perhaps the FCC looked at each acquisition on a case-by-case basis as far as whether to allow a station to keep their calls.

Doug
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: MikeK on August 09, 2004, 11:57:00 AM
[quote name=\'urbanpreppie05\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 10:42 AM\'] The 95' affiliation switch did cause some confusion here in NE Ohio...

Mike, correct me if I'm wrong. [/quote]
 You're throwing the lifeline to me?!  OK...

WOIO and WJW swapped network affiliations in September 1994.  I have several OB episodes of The Late Show with David Letterman from 1994 which aired on WOIO.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: Tim L on August 09, 2004, 12:57:51 PM
[quote name=\'urbanpreppie05\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 09:42 AM\']The 95' affiliation switch did cause some confusion here in NE Ohio...

Channel 8 went from CBS to Fox,
and 19 went from Fox to Cbs- but because they didn't have an news outlet there, they had to create one. And boy, did it suck. 19's news outlet is just now catching up with the rest of the market-and now it's surpassing other stations! (IMHO, I think it totally sucks)
 
Channel 8 opted not to pick up the Fox Kids lineup, it moved to religious affil. WBNX-55. For some odd reason though, a few months after the change 8 did run a lame hour of old warner brothers cartoons, called "8 Toons."

A few years later, 43 decided to keep UPN and WB moved to 55. Since both networks had weekday and saturday lineups, 55 ran Fox's in the afternoon and Wb's in the morning. WB got the saturday lineup on Saturday, and Fox's was pushed to Sunday.

Mike, correct me if I'm wrong.[/quote]
WBNX 55 though owned by Rev. Ernest Angley's Winston Broadcasting Company.  Was never a "religious" station in the TBN or Cornerstone (WPCB Pittsburgh) mold.  They have carried Anglley's shows at 9AM and 10PM at least 5 nights a week since their 1985 sign-on.  They were independednt then signed with the WB in late 1994.  Call letter combinations sometimes are in different cities, as with WONE AM 980 in Dayton, Ohio and WONE 97.5 FM in Akron even under different
Owners
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: aaron sica on August 09, 2004, 01:14:09 PM
[quote name=\'tommycharles\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 12:14 AM\'] (BTW do you live in Colorado, Aaron? Or do you just know a lot about the situation?)

T [/quote]
 I don't live in Colorado, but thanks to my satellite TV days, I was able to get the Denver channels on DISH Network for a few years.......
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: MikeK on August 09, 2004, 02:15:56 PM
[quote name=\'Tim L\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 12:57 PM\'] WBNX 55 though owned by Rev. Ernest Angley's Winston Broadcasting Company.  Was never a "religious" station in the TBN or Cornerstone (WPCB Pittsburgh) mold.  They have carried Anglley's shows at 9AM and 10PM at least 5 nights a week since their 1985 sign-on.  They were independednt then signed with the WB in late 1994. [/quote]
 I thought WBNX got the WB around 1996.  WUAB was airing the WB's programming until at least Fall 1996...

ObGS:  When WNBX first signed on, they had a number of syndie games including Sale of the Century, Crosswits, and, IIRC, The Joker's Wild.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: uncamark on August 09, 2004, 02:34:23 PM
[quote name=\'SRIV94\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 10:08 AM\']Contrast that with two commercial TV stations in New York that had radio counterparts, but did change their TV calls (WNEW-TV, now WNYW; and WOR-TV, now WWOR).  FOX's acquisition of WNEW-TV prolly forced the call letter change since they weren't picking up WNEW-AM/FM.  Not sure about the WOR/WWOR situation though--I know RKO General owned WOR-AM, but did they also own WOR-TV at that time?[/quote]
They did own both stations and WKYS at the time--as you probably remember, RKO was more-or-less ordered by the FCC to get out of the broadcasting business after several violations.  WOR-TV was sold to MCA in 1987, who then added the extra "W" to the calls.  When MCA/Universal was acquired by Matushita, rules barring ownership by foreign nationals had the station sold to Chris-Craft/United in the 90s.  A few years ago, after TV duopolies were allowed, most of the Chris-Craft/United stations were sold to Fox, who owns them (and WWOR) today.  (Of course, lest we forget, Rupert Murdoch became a part-U.S. citizen to keep the TV stations he bought in the 80s.)

It seems to me that WOR Radio after RKO's sale has not been owned by a station group, making it a rarity in today's radio scene, but I can't remember the exact owner.

ObGameShow:  One of our mods knows the Chris-Craft Videotape Center studio where B&E shows were taped intimately.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: SRIV94 on August 09, 2004, 03:11:53 PM
[quote name=\'uncamark\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 01:34 PM\'] They did own both stations and WKYS at the time--as you probably remember, RKO was more-or-less ordered by the FCC to get out of the broadcasting business after several violations.  WOR-TV was sold to MCA in 1987, who then added the extra "W" to the calls. [/quote]
 I hadn't really followed RKO's troubles, so thanks for the quick course.  ObNitpick--the FM station was WRKS (nee WXLO).

Quote
When MCA/Universal was acquired by Matushita, rules barring ownership by foreign nationals had the station sold to Chris-Craft/United in the 90s.

I'm assuming this would be around the time that WWOR got pulled off most cable systems (leaving TBS and WGN as the only superstations left), yes?  Or was that later?

Doug -- soon to celebrate 600 posts
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: aaron sica on August 09, 2004, 03:15:31 PM
[quote name=\'SRIV94\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 03:11 PM\'] I'm assuming this would be around the time that WWOR got pulled off most cable systems (leaving TBS and WGN as the only superstations left), yes?  Or was that later?
 [/quote]
 The mid-90's is when WWOR started losing its "superstation" status. Starting January 1, 1990, with the syndex rules, there were basically 2 WWOR stations - a "superstation" one, and the regular WWOR-9 feed...
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: SRIV94 on August 09, 2004, 03:23:19 PM
[quote name=\'aaron sica\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 02:15 PM\'] The mid-90's is when WWOR started losing its "superstation" status. Starting January 1, 1990, with the syndex rules, there were basically 2 WWOR stations - a "superstation" one, and the regular WWOR-9 feed... [/quote]
Same goes for WGN--they also offer two feeds (and they're still carrying the "Superstation" tag on their national feed, not the Chicago one).  But my question was whether WWOR's acquisition by Chris Craft/United coincided with the station stopping its nationwide cablecasting, or if there was a significant gap in the time.

Doug -- soon to celebrate 600 posts (and right now tied with you [that was as of 2:23 PM CT on 8/9/04] ;-) )
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: uncamark on August 09, 2004, 03:25:54 PM
[quote name=\'aaron sica\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 02:15 PM\'][quote name=\'SRIV94\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 03:11 PM\'] I'm assuming this would be around the time that WWOR got pulled off most cable systems (leaving TBS and WGN as the only superstations left), yes?  Or was that later?
 [/quote]
The mid-90's is when WWOR started losing its "superstation" status. Starting January 1, 1990, with the syndex rules, there were basically 2 WWOR stations - a "superstation" one, and the regular WWOR-9 feed...[/quote]
Dec. 30, 1996, to be exact, when Animal Planet took over WWOR's analog satellite transponder space (it'd been distributed digitally for about a year before that).
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: Tim L on August 09, 2004, 03:38:58 PM
[quote name=\'hmtriplecrown\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 01:15 PM\'] [quote name=\'Tim L\' date=\'Aug 9 2004, 12:57 PM\'] WBNX 55 though owned by Rev. Ernest Angley's Winston Broadcasting Company.  Was never a "religious" station in the TBN or Cornerstone (WPCB Pittsburgh) mold.  They have carried Anglley's shows at 9AM and 10PM at least 5 nights a week since their 1985 sign-on.  They were independednt then signed with the WB in late 1994. [/quote]
I thought WBNX got the WB around 1996.  WUAB was airing the WB's programming until at least Fall 1996...

ObGS:  When WNBX first signed on, they had a number of syndie games including Sale of the Century, Crosswits, and, IIRC, The Joker's Wild. [/quote]
 You might be right Nike.  I was trying to tie in Channel 55/WB with the Fox/CBS changes about the same time in 1994.  I had the first night of the WB on 55 on videotape.  I Think now it might have been New Years Eve 1995 with the WB Sitcoms on a Sunday Night.


Tim Lones
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: mclemore63 on August 09, 2004, 07:27:09 PM
Well,how about this? I used to live in the Tampa-St. Petersburg market about that time and their switch occurred on December 12,1994:


WTSP-10 (Gannett) was ABC,now CBS
WTVT-13(New World,now Fox) was CBS,now FOX
WFTS-28(Scripps-Howard) was FOX,now ABC

The intersting part was CBS allowing WTSP to show TPIR from September to the official switchover in December!

BTW,Tampa Bay does have an indie,WMOR-32(Hearst-Argyle)

Travis D.McLemore,Jr.

"I think I'm in a deli...I'm on a roll!"
Mr. Baggy Pants,"Remote Control"
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: trainman on August 09, 2004, 08:12:21 PM
Re call letters:  As far as I know, the FCC's rule had been that AM and/or FM radio stations and TV stations could only share call letters if they were owned by the same company and in the same market.  That changed around 1988, when call letter duplication was allowed if all parties agreed.

As long as we're on the subject of Tampa, that's what I can use as an example:  in the early 1980s, Media General sold off WFLA(AM) and WFLA-FM while keeping WFLA-TV.  But they had to change WFLA-TV's call letters, so it became WXFL.  After the FCC rule change, they got permission from the then-owner of the radio stations, and the TV station became WFLA-TV again, as of January 1, 1989.

(Actually, very early in the days of TV, radio stations and TV stations weren't allowed to share call letters, but that rule was gone by the early 1950s.)
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: ChuckNet on August 11, 2004, 10:18:49 PM
Quote
Channel 8 opted not to pick up the Fox Kids lineup, it moved to religious affil. WBNX-55. For some odd reason though, a few months after the change 8 did run a lame hour of old warner brothers cartoons, called "8 Toons."

A number of other "second-tier" Fox affiliates that came aboard following the New World buyout also didn't air the Fox Kids shows...on a trip to Tampa in '96, I found out that the aforementioned WTVT (Ch. 13) didn't air the FK block, and instead of the customary sitcom reruns from 5-7 PM, they aired a 2-hr. news block.

Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby")
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: ChuckNet on August 11, 2004, 10:20:42 PM
Quote
WOR-TV was sold to MCA in 1987, who then added the extra "W" to the calls.

And for a time in the late 80s/early 90s following the buyout, the station was actually referred to as "Universal 9".

Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby")
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: Ian Wallis on August 14, 2004, 12:36:24 PM
Quote
And then there was the FCC rule that you cannot change call letters into a new 3-letter call unless your station previously had those call letters at one time in the past. That's why WJKW could revert back to the 3-letter WJW call. Chances are if you know of any station nowadays with 3-lettered calls, odds are you'll never see them changing their calls --those IDs are collectors items!


I've always wondered about that.  Since it seems like more than 98% of all calls are 4 letters, why allow 3-letter calls in the first place?  They just seem out of place.

As for superstations, TBS and WGN are the only two national superstations, but there are a couple more "regional" superstations.  WPIX New York and WSBK Boston are in most satellite "superstation" packages, but (to the best of my knowledge) are only carried in the Northeast on cable.  KTVT Dallas-Fort Worth was considered a "mini-superstation" for a while too, but lost that when they affiliated with CBS.  Their C-band signal was discontinued at that time too.

Speaking of C-band transponders, after superstation WWOR was pulled off satellite in favor of Animal Planet, they had the regular New York feed on another satellite and transponder for a while, but that only lasted a few months until it was taken off satellite altogether.  

During the times when the "superstation" feed existed, they'd run all the regular commercials and promos that would air on the regular New York feed, so you'd see a promo for (game show tie-in here) Bill Cosby's "You Bet Your Life", but it would never air on the superstation feed!
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: aaron sica on August 14, 2004, 12:45:23 PM
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Aug 14 2004, 12:36 PM\'] WPIX New York and WSBK Boston are in most satellite "superstation" packages, but (to the best of my knowledge) are only carried in the Northeast on cable.  KTVT Dallas-Fort Worth was considered a "mini-superstation" for a while too, but lost that when they affiliated with CBS.  Their C-band signal was discontinued at that time too.
 [/quote]
 I remember being excited about having KTVT on satellite if we would have gotten the big dish back in 1990...

WPIX and WSBK are offered on Dish Network's "superstation" package, along with WWOR, KTLA (La's WB) and KWGN (Denver's WB).
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: trainman on August 14, 2004, 09:40:06 PM
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Aug 14 2004, 08:36 AM\'] Since it seems like more than 98% of all calls are 4 letters, why allow 3-letter calls in the first place?  They just seem out of place. [/quote]
 Those stations all got their call letters in the early days of licensed commercial radio, before the FCC decided they were only going to allow commercial radio stations to have 4-letter call letters.  Actually, speaking of being out of place, it's the same deal with the "K" stations that exist east of the Mississippi and the "W" stations that exist to the west.

Topic:  While I was in college, I watched "Jeopardy!" on WLS.
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: Dbacksfan12 on August 15, 2004, 02:11:47 AM
[quote name=\'trainman\' date=\'Aug 14 2004, 08:40 PM\'] [quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Aug 14 2004, 08:36 AM\'] Since it seems like more than 98% of all calls are 4 letters, why allow 3-letter calls in the first place?  They just seem out of place. [/quote]
Those stations all got their call letters in the early days of licensed commercial radio, before the FCC decided they were only going to allow commercial radio stations to have 4-letter call letters.  Actually, speaking of being out of place, it's the same deal with the "K" stations that exist east of the Mississippi and the "W" stations that exist to the west.

Topic:  While I was in college, I watched "Jeopardy!" on WLS. [/quote]
 Iowa seems to have exception to all of these...

WHO13 (NBC, Des Moines) has 3 call letters...however...several station in Iowa have "K" stations, including KCCI-8 (Des Moines) and KGAN-2 (CBS, Cedar Rapids/Waterloo).
Title: On The Cover-What's The Deal?
Post by: trainman on August 16, 2004, 08:17:55 PM
[quote name=\'Dsmith\' date=\'Aug 14 2004, 10:11 PM\'] KGAN-2 (CBS, Cedar Rapids/Waterloo). [/quote]
 Which was originally WMT-TV.  WHO, WMT, and WOI (in Ames) are all radio stations dating back to the early 1920s.