Sponsor (1964)

munities is m>t necessarily an indi cation thai these stations, and others like them, are ilin\ ing. I he signal of one ot more V operations in nearb) cities ma) reach the metro .ire. i ol such .1 I HI millet In some eases, this has resulted in revenue losses causing the i outlet to leave the aii Ifl 1 III markets < omposed oj either two or three stations. These cities pose DO problems for advertisers or viewers I he outlets have network affiliations Norm ally, there is no designation that these are U stations, as opposed to Vs. since there is little or no competition from Y"s with strong signals bom other cities. Perhaps die only limitation is a lower rate card tot each Station, since the I signal doesn't have "the numbers" (homes reached) outside the metro area rWO-Station LJHF communities are: Huntsville. Ala.; Lexington, K\ . Harrisburg, Pa.; Yakima, Wash.; Springfield. Mass Three-Station markets are: Bak ersfield, Calif.; Evansville, Fori Wayne and South Bend. Ind.; Youngstown, o h in: ScrantonWilkes-Barre, Pa The lone exception to the two or three station pattern is Fresno, Calif., which boasts four outlets, with a fifth licensed to YisaliaFresno. ; Intermixed markets of either tWO or three stations, usually two or three stations, usually two I HI outlets competing against one I /// facility. In these cities, the situation is similar to the all-C market operation: the stations have network affiliations and a proper share of the market However, there is one substantial difference between outlets in these markets as opposed to stations in all-CHI communities. In all cases. the YHF stations "have the numbers" because o\ greater signal reach outside the metro area. Result: a higher rate card for the VHF stations, and a direct distinction between the two types Of broadcasting facilities Since buying by "the numbers'" is held to be the usual timebuyer criterion for spot purchases, the smaller I HI audience is reflected in the spot buy approach. \ Sponsor check of buyers at leading agencies disclosed .« unanim u\ of opinion W . DO) the \ station 01 StS lions in the intermixed market." the) say, "and it we decide we wanl some more coverage in the metro ai We place a leu spots on the I But the majorit) Ol the budget goes tO iiu \ HI stations." In an attempt to offsel the largCl Y audiences outside the metro ai the I operatoi offers such selling points .is greater elliciencv. 1111 duplicated homes, no Overlap, etc I wo I \ competing w ith one \ I ll station is the predominenl situation in the tWO categories "I intermixed markets. I hese communities ate Montgomery, Ala. Hartford, Conn; Champaign and Rockford, III.; Binghamton, N \ Erie, Johnstown and 1 ancaster, Pa.; Columbia. S ( ; Madison, W is. ( Prior to passage of the all-channel bill, the FCC had proposed to demtermix eight of these markets. ) I here are fewer intermixed markets with two VHF and one I III station I hey are: St. Petersburg I ampa, I la.; 1 ouis\ Die, K\ ; Knoxville, lenn. ; /; ,/. />. /;. <:,' / /// stater tempting out their own aud lent 1 1, w ing ■ "a progran ■ n^nse tin remaii type >■' i in I operation Perhaps the keenest I \ rSUS Y Competition exists in mark,' such st.itions .it But this competition, .is yet, is l ifl i r el.it ix c l\ minor scale In th ing l broadcasters h ned nst some ol the top \ Hi nous in the nation I or example: l mler the same ownership. KM1 \ I \ Los tageks and K\\ l \ l\ San Vntonio both operate as all-Spanish-language stations l hex have been quite successful in reaching the Mexican American populations of Southern California and I as! I .xas. and have attr.;. much sponsor interest. In Washington. WOOK l V . offering a 100 percent N ' oriented program schedule, has been telecasting since earl) 1 \nd the latest I entry, Chic \\( u also amis its programing at various ethnic groups. Spanish International Sales, rep for the two Spanish-language sta UHF and VHF Stations Reporting Profit or Loss By the Amou nt of Profit 1 Dr Loss UHF VHF Total Number of Stations Reporting 75 448 Number of Stations Reporting profits 43 362 Number of Stations Reportini g Profits of: Profitable Stations as Percent of Total 57.3 80.8 53,000,000 and over 21 1,500,000-3,000,000 33 1,000,000-1,500,000 35 600,000-1,000,000 33 400,000 600,000 25 200,000 400,000 3 49 100,000 200,000 16 73 50,000 100,000 9 48 25,000 50,000 5 17 Less than 25,000 10 28 Number of Stations Reporting Losses 32 86 Unprofitable Stations as Percent of Total 42.7 19.2 Number of Stations Reporting Losses of: Less than SI 0,000 3 16 10,000 25,000 9 14 25,000 50,000 4 20 50,000 100,000 10 17 100,000 200,000 1 8 200,000 400.000 5 9 400,000 and over 0 2 Source: FCC tv financial repoi t, 1963 Auguit 10. 1964