In re Applications of STANLEY WARNER
CORP. (TRANSFEROR), GLEN ALDEN CORP. (TRANSFEREE)
For Transfer of Control of Van
Curler Broadcasting Corp.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
11 F.C.C.2d 246
December 22, 1967
ACTION:
APPLICATION
JUDGES:
The
Commission, by Commissioners Hyde (chairman), Lee, and
OPINION:
[*246] The Commission, by Commissioners
Hyde (chairman), Lee, and Wadsworth, with Commissioner Bartley concurring and
issuing a statement, Commissioner Cox concurring and issuing a statement in
which Commissioner Loevinger joins, and Commissioner Johnson dissenting and
issuing a statement, granted an application for transfer of control of Van
Curler Broadcasting Corp., licensee of station WAST (TV),
CONCURBY:
BARTLEY; COX
CONCUR:
STATEMENT
OF COMMISSIONER ROBERT T. BARTLEY
As
to which of the corporations -- Stanley Warner or Glen Alden -- is the licensee
makes little difference. The intention
to sell provides an opportunity that the station may be transferred to local
ownership which would take an active part in the management. In view of this possibility, I am willing to
grant consent to this transfer.
CONCURRING
STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER KENNETH A. COX IN WHICH COMMISSIONER LEE LOEVINGER
JOINS
I
concur in this action. However, I want
to go on record as believing that parties in a situation such as this should
either arrange for a pre-merger spin-off of any broadcast properties involved,
or should present a concurrent proposal for sale to a third party as a part of
the overall transaction. In the
circumstances here, where it is not desirable to delay the merger pending
disposition of the relatively small broadcast interests involved, I think it is
most important that the transferee dispose of WAST-TV as quickly as possible to
negative any suggestion that it might have profited from its transitory holding
of the broadcast station.
DISSENT:
DISSENTING
OPINION OF COMMISSIONER NICHOLAS JOHNSON
Station
Transfers
The
FCC has today approved another station transfer in violation of its rules. The circumstances are so peculiar as to
warrant a brief explanation.
[*247] Stanley Warner Corp. controls
Van Curler Broadcasting Corp., licensee of WAST-TV Albany, N.Y.
This
particular transaction is further complicated, however, by the fact that Glen
Alden states that it has no intention of operating WAST-TV. It intends to sell it as soon as
practicable. This retransfer will
violate our "3-year rule" -- which provides that, with exceptions not
applicable here, stations must be held for 3 years before they can be
transferred 47 CFR § 1.597 (1967).
Of
course, the proposed future retransfer has no direct relevance to the transfer
question before us today. Normally, one
would expect that when the retransfer actually occurred, we would review it at
the time, and, if it appeared incompatible with our rules, withhold
approval. But something different is
actually going on. Not only are we not
scrutinizing the present sale to see if it benefits the public interest. We are assuring the parties involved of our
eagerness to accommodate their private needs by promising that we will allow
them a future transaction contrary to our rules.
In
effect, we are casually serving notice of intent to ignore an important
Commission proscription, simply because of a private party's self
interest. The station could have been
spun off prior to the merger -- a sale conditioned, if necessary, on the
consummation of the merger. It was
not. We could still have insisted on a
similar condition. Now, because we have
recently read in the Wall Street Journal that the merger has already been
approved by the shareholders of both corporations, and do not wish to embarrass
the participants by delaying the application of our imprimatur, we approve it
in its present form.
Nor
have we even sought to discover the roughest outlines of the transaction we
have just approved in advance. There
have been no representations as to the value of this station for purposes of
transfer to Glen Alden, its market value, or its proposed sale price. We have not stated any intention to
scrutinize closely the entity selected to be the new licensee -- quite the
contrary.
I
share the concerns of my three colleagues, Commissioners Bartley, Cox, and
Loevinger. Indeed, my only disagreement
is that the expressions of this Commission majority are not united in a dissent
that might preserve the integrity of Commission process as well as the private
interests involved in this case.