# Digital switch causing DMA realignment?



## PF9 (Jul 10, 2009)

With the digital transition, some markets are now seeing city-grade signals overlap more than ever.

Example: in Boston, NBC affiliated WHDH provides a city-grade signal to Providence. Conversely, Providence's WJAR reaches Boston better than ever.

Will the transition end up causing a realignment of the DMA maps?


----------



## Msguy (May 23, 2003)

For years the local cable company in my area was always able to carry 2 different NBC Stations. One NBC Station being from Memphis, Tennessee and the other being from Tupelo, Mississippi. On DirecTv I could only receive Memphis although Tupelo geographically is closer to my home by more than 50 miles. The NAB should allow Satellite Customers to receive atleast the two closest markets to your area just as the way cable has been able to provide that service through the years. I still say at some point in time they are going to have to allow us to receive adjacent markets. It's silly to only allow us one set market and that be it. It's silly that for those of us willing to subscribe to out of town markets like New York and Los Angeles can't do so because of the Distant Network Rule stating that if you receive your local channels on satellite that you can't order the Distants. It really is a messed up law.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

PF9 said:


> With the digital transition, some markets are now seeing city-grade signals overlap more than ever.
> 
> Example: in Boston, NBC affiliated WHDH provides a city-grade signal to Providence. Conversely, Providence's WJAR reaches Boston better than ever.
> 
> Will the transition end up causing a realignment of the DMA maps?


I dont know about the DMA's being changed, my understanding is they are updated every year in September. I know that the digital transition has affected how many affiliates have to approve a waiver now for DNS feeds though.

After the last transition D* now says that I can get a 3rd CBS thats 165 miles away. Kind of crazy but thats what they say.


----------



## PF9 (Jul 10, 2009)

And then there are the Springfield MA and Hartford markets. Their stations, more or less, provide city-grade coverage to both main areas.


----------



## Tower Guy (Jul 27, 2005)

PF9 said:


> Will the transition end up causing a realignment of the DMA maps?


I believe that there will be changes.

Nielsen changes counties when the plurality of off air homes changes from one market to another for three straight rating periods. In this case that would be July and November 2009, plus February 2010.

My guess is that the counties most likely to switch are probably located partway between markets. Look at Windham County in Southeastern VT. It's in the Boston DMA. The VHF analog signals from Boston made it to those on the east side of the mountains. It'll be interesting to see if the UHF signals get that far.


----------



## PF9 (Jul 10, 2009)

Tower Guy said:


> I believe that there will be changes.
> 
> Nielsen changes counties when the plurality of off air homes changes from one market to another for three straight rating periods. In this case that would be July and November 2009, plus February 2010.
> 
> My guess is that the counties most likely to switch are probably located partway between markets. Look at Windham County in Southeastern VT. It's in the Boston DMA. The VHF analog signals from Boston made it to those on the east side of the mountains. It'll be interesting to see if the UHF signals get that far.


The Firelands in Northern Ohio could also be reassigned to the Toledo DMA, as their stations now provide city-grade coverage to Sandusky


----------



## Jon Ellis (Dec 28, 2003)

Since over-the-air viewers account for less than 15% of households, the digital transition has little impact on viewing overall. 85% of households (or more) have cable or satellite and are receiving the same set of channels as before the transition. Markets are assigned based on what stations are actually watched, not which ones can be received over the air.

Since cable/satellite penetration is so high, counties would have to have already been very close (51% market A, 49% market B) for the broadcast transition to push the county from one market to another. Also, keep in mind cable/satellite penetration is much higher (virtually 100% in some cases) for rural counties midway between transmitter locations.


----------



## PF9 (Jul 10, 2009)

Next we have the Lafayette and Lake Charles markets in Louisiana.

For years, they have been separate. Still, their "big three" stations combined to serve both markets. However, each market has its own FOX affiliate.

A collapse into a single market seems inevitable. But neither FOX affiliate has enough power to cover both cities. So the owner of one of the stations has to buy out the other station.

Most likely, since ComCorp, which owns KADN in Lafayette, is larger, they be buying KVHP, and probably its sister stations.

Programming assets would be combined, and KVHP would become a satellite of KADN.

KPLC may need to move its transmitter a bit to the east so they can get a better signal in Lafayette. And KLWB will either have to sign on a repeater or full-powered satellite to get coverage in Lake Charles. KLAF, accordingly, would also have to build a repeater in Lake Charles.


----------



## n3ntj (Dec 18, 2006)

I wonder how this may affect WPVI in Philly. They went back to ch. 6 in June and many people (including me) now can't get them OTA. No problem getting them when they were using UHF before 12 June. They raised their output power to 30kW.. still no go even with a pretty good VHF antenna. FM radio broadcasts also play havoc with ch 6. A bonehead move for WPVI, if you ask me. They should have stayed on an available UHF channel.


----------



## rnbmusicfan (Jul 19, 2005)

Jon Ellis said:


> Since over-the-air viewers account for less than 15% of households, the digital transition has little impact on viewing overall. 85% of households (or more) have cable or satellite and are receiving the same set of channels as before the transition. Markets are assigned based on what stations are actually watched, not which ones can be received over the air.
> 
> Since cable/satellite penetration is so high, counties would have to have already been very close (51% market A, 49% market B) for the broadcast transition to push the county from one market to another. Also, keep in mind cable/satellite penetration is much higher (virtually 100% in some cases) for rural counties midway between transmitter locations.


Good points. Its also the case, that after cable/satellite carriage is set, the newscasts of these locals over time catered to the cable audience, usually within the same DMA, and not extending, or less so, to out of DMA areas, wherever a Grade B signal also happens to reach.

Example: WJAR's focus is still Rhode Island as far as local goes, so the over-the-air audience outside of Rhode Island, will still likely tune to what is local first, over WJAR.

I know that the big 4 DC stations have cable reach in Howard County, MD. A number of residents in Howard County commute into DC metro. The DC stations get some viewership. But because the county is in Baltimore's DMA, the DC stations tend not to cover actual local stories from there, and won't run snow school closings info for Howard County schools, but will run school closings info on scroll, for counties way outside of DC on the other side, in VA and elsewhere. During those snow storms, the Balt stations provide info for Howard County.


----------



## rnbmusicfan (Jul 19, 2005)

n3ntj said:


> I wonder how this may affect WPVI in Philly. They went back to ch. 6 in June and many people (including me) now can't get them OTA. No problem getting them when they were using UHF before 12 June. They raised their output power to 30kW.. still no go even with a pretty good VHF antenna. FM radio broadcasts also play havoc with ch 6. A bonehead move for WPVI, if you ask me. They should have stayed on an available UHF channel.


Well its not like they have to compete against another nearby ABC affiliate. They may lose a small share of OTA viewers (maybe retirees on a limited income who can't afford subscription tv) who'll lose access to 'Action News' or ABC World News, in favor of a CBS NBC or FOX news product.

I think they'll be ok, in that most people have access to Comcast, Fios, Dish and DirecTV.


----------



## rnbmusicfan (Jul 19, 2005)

PF9 said:


> Next we have the Lafayette and Lake Charles markets in Louisiana.
> 
> For years, they have been separate. Still, their "big three" stations combined to serve both markets. However, each market has its own FOX affiliate.
> 
> ...


Some DMAs have multiple network affiliates already.
Tampa/ St. Petersburg (Sarasota) has WFTS 28 and WWSB 40, both which are ABC stations and are not co-owned, and signals of the two stations cover different areas.

Given that Lafayette and Lake Charles are within the same state, it may work in favor for the merger of markets. It's not like interests in one state will be an adversary against interests in the other state.

But I think there are some other issues that may keep them separate:
1. Political?
2. Economic/population activity. Are these two markets classified as one, anywhere? Is it considered one conglomerated market, or just two really independent markets that happen to be close to each other?

checking the population figures:

Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana (Lake Charles) 185,618
Lafayette Parish 206,976

but the two parishes between Lake Charles and Lafayette have small numbers:
Jefferson Davish: 31,263 
Acadia: 60,070

and little growth, so I don't see a converging.

3. Sports teams claims: Do they get the same sports RSNs?
4. Power of Status Quo.

While the Fox station (KADN) can buy out the other Fox station, the winners would be the ABC NBC CBS affiliates who didn't have to put up any extra money and got a station bumped up in DMA status worth, where the Fox station would be burdened with the debt of purchasing a station to basically shut it down and merge operations.


----------

