All accepted registrations through August 15 at 7:00p ET have been activated. Thank you! -M.W.

Please note: Terms of Use have been amended effective June 9, 2019. Make sure you are aware of the new rules! Please visit this thread for details: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=30571

All user accounts that have been inactive since January 1, 2017 have been expunged. If you are one of these users and wish to submit a new post, please re-register. Thank you.

Now we know where WQAN was broadcasting from!

Covers all of Northern Lower Michigan (from Ludington to Tawas northward), as well as the Straits Area and Soo Region.
ftballfan
Posts: 683
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:38 pm

Re: Now we know where WQAN was broadcasting from!

Post by ftballfan » Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:13 pm

Just saw that WQAN has applied for a STA for two sites:
1.8kW nondirectional from its licensed site: https://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.ex ... _num=14646
650W directional from the WLDR tower: https://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.ex ... _num=14646

The 1.8kW STA appears to be operational as they're steady but weak in Manistee.

The only station I can think of that used a double STA site was WAXX when its tower collapsed several years ago. They had temporary setups in Eau Claire (its COL) and Marshfield: https://licensing.fcc.gov/cdbs/CDBS_Att ... &exhcnum=1



User avatar
TC Talks
Posts: 2198
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:41 am

Re: Now we know where WQAN was broadcasting from!

Post by TC Talks » Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:33 pm

Has there been a response to the violation? A STA application can't be the only response.


© 2019 TC Talks ltd. Assembled in U.S.A.

CK-722
Posts: 566
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2018 3:53 pm

Re: Now we know where WQAN was broadcasting from!

Post by CK-722 » Thu Aug 01, 2019 9:49 am

TC Talks wrote:
Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:33 pm
Has there been a response to the violation? A STA application can't be the only response.
They might think that applying for the STA before further action may mitigate any fines, and bring attention to the fact that what they did could be modified to be legal, but only if they had only applied for it.
Last edited by CK-722 on Thu Aug 01, 2019 9:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.


Is THAT where they got the idea for the 486-SX?

Same (x, y, z), different (t)

Your bullet missed my trial balloon.

RTN Price. Not guaranteed. As of 12:30, 157.71 Down 0.22.

Artificial Intelligence is a Child that needs a Parent to guide it through.

User avatar
TC Talks
Posts: 2198
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:41 am

Re: Now we know where WQAN was broadcasting from!

Post by TC Talks » Thu Aug 01, 2019 2:27 pm

CK-722 wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 9:49 am
TC Talks wrote:
Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:33 pm
Has there been a response to the violation? A STA application can't be the only response.
They might think that applying for the STA before further action may mitigate any fines, and bring attention to the fact that what they did was legal, but only if they had only applied for it.
Pass the popcorn and let's see how this goes...


© 2019 TC Talks ltd. Assembled in U.S.A.

statmanmi
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2018 12:07 am

Re: Now we know where WQAN was broadcasting from!

Post by statmanmi » Thu Aug 01, 2019 7:55 pm

FCC today approved the low power from the usual WQAN tower, but denied the STA for the WLDR stick.

Naughty, naughty.

Cheers ~~ Statmanmi



CK-722
Posts: 566
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2018 3:53 pm

Re: Now we know where WQAN was broadcasting from!

Post by CK-722 » Thu Aug 01, 2019 9:02 pm

Well, they could fix it so that the contour fits inside the 60 dBu contour, and just have the WLDR tower STA, which is likely what they are after anyway. And since when has the FCC cared about interference in the last few years, with all the IBOC sidebands and legal translators? What about boosters? That's exactly what a booster does. If it was located East of the ridge West of Traverse City, with a very short tower, and a few watts ERP, it wouldn't interfere significantly.

https://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/prod/ ... r_id=91831

But they definitely need a visit to the woodshed for doing this. Hopefully they'll have a little more respect next time.

What they really need is a sale and transfer to a licensee with more respect for everyone, regulators and competitors alike. I've been reading a book this Summer written by someone who began their career in the very early days of radio in Michigan, and what I read showed a mutual respect for competitors and even friendship, by and large. One competitor was a close friend AND a later FCC Chairman.


Is THAT where they got the idea for the 486-SX?

Same (x, y, z), different (t)

Your bullet missed my trial balloon.

RTN Price. Not guaranteed. As of 12:30, 157.71 Down 0.22.

Artificial Intelligence is a Child that needs a Parent to guide it through.

ftballfan
Posts: 683
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:38 pm

Re: Now we know where WQAN was broadcasting from!

Post by ftballfan » Fri Aug 02, 2019 3:25 pm

CK-722 wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 9:02 pm
Well, they could fix it so that the contour fits inside the 60 dBu contour, and just have the WLDR tower STA, which is likely what they are after anyway. And since when has the FCC cared about interference in the last few years, with all the IBOC sidebands and legal translators? What about boosters? That's exactly what a booster does. If it was located East of the ridge West of Traverse City, with a very short tower, and a few watts ERP, it wouldn't interfere significantly.

https://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/prod/ ... r_id=91831

But they definitely need a visit to the woodshed for doing this. Hopefully they'll have a little more respect next time.

What they really need is a sale and transfer to a licensee with more respect for everyone, regulators and competitors alike. I've been reading a book this Summer written by someone who began their career in the very early days of radio in Michigan, and what I read showed a mutual respect for competitors and even friendship, by and large. One competitor was a close friend AND a later FCC Chairman.
I know Midwestern is one FM below the market cap after selling off the puny 107.9 Charlevoix signal. How are MacGarb, Black Diamond, and Northern in relation to the market cap on the FM side? Traverse City has to be close to, if not the largest radio market in the country in which all of the top stations are locally owned. IMHO, Blarney Stone should have just stayed in Grayling.




EdWalker
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 2:51 pm

Re: Now we know where WQAN was broadcasting from!

Post by EdWalker » Mon Aug 12, 2019 6:22 pm

When the second STA site was rejected, the FCC said they were trying to get an STA for what is essentially a booster....and you can't get a booster under an STA.

So in today's FCC applications is a booster application for the station, using the "second site" denied by the STA. Wonder how the FCC will treat this as Roy, Blarney or whoever really need to get off the low power STA and back to licensed operations, which would likely negate the need for the booster. Fix it right, right?



User avatar
TC Talks
Posts: 2198
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:41 am

Re: Now we know where WQAN was broadcasting from!

Post by TC Talks » Mon Aug 12, 2019 11:20 pm

EdWalker wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 6:22 pm
When the second STA site was rejected, the FCC said they were trying to get an STA for what is essentially a booster....and you can't get a booster under an STA.

So in today's FCC applications is a booster application for the station, using the "second site" denied by the STA. Wonder how the FCC will treat this as Roy, Blarney or whoever really need to get off the low power STA and back to licensed operations, which would likely negate the need for the booster. Fix it right, right?
Where is the response to the original FCC action?


© 2019 TC Talks ltd. Assembled in U.S.A.

EdWalker
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 2:51 pm

Re: Now we know where WQAN was broadcasting from!

Post by EdWalker » Tue Aug 13, 2019 8:17 am

TC Talks wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 11:20 pm
Where is the response to the original FCC action?
8/1: http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/prod/c ... r_id=91831

8/8: http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/prod/c ... r_id=91890



User avatar
TC Talks
Posts: 2198
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:41 am

Re: Now we know where WQAN was broadcasting from!

Post by TC Talks » Tue Aug 13, 2019 5:25 pm

ftballfan wrote:
Sat Jul 27, 2019 10:50 am
Saw this on another board: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments ... 8715A1.pdf

99.3 WQAN was broadcasting 1.45kW from the WLDR tower in June 2019 without an STA.
Was there ever response to this action? It can't be the STA application.


© 2019 TC Talks ltd. Assembled in U.S.A.

User avatar
Myron Falwell
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 12:06 pm

Re: Now we know where WQAN was broadcasting from!

Post by Myron Falwell » Wed Aug 14, 2019 2:26 pm

TC Talks wrote:
Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:33 pm
Has there been a response to the violation? A STA application can't be the only response.
This is a lack of candor issue. It's going to take awhile for the hammer to finally come down, but it will. Roy/Blarney lied to the FCC with the unauthorized transmissions, and you just cannot lie to the FCC.

An STA kinda has to happen for WQAN, but don't be surprised if a rather hefty fine is issued for this. And that's the best case scenario... a license revocation(s) isn't (aren't) out of the question IMO.



User avatar
TC Talks
Posts: 2198
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:41 am

Re: Now we know where WQAN was broadcasting from!

Post by TC Talks » Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:02 pm

He made a "donation" of $50,000 and lost his CP over the 95.9 license over a decade ago. But that was a result of filing false paperwork to meet a deadline.

When he started using STL frequencies licensed to Interlochen, there was no penalty.

In this case, he didn't mislead the fcc, he just started broadcasting from a new site. I am suspicious and think there could be no punitive action. His lawyer has a better relationship with the commission than agents are.


© 2019 TC Talks ltd. Assembled in U.S.A.

ftballfan
Posts: 683
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:38 pm

Re: Now we know where WQAN was broadcasting from!

Post by ftballfan » Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:31 pm

TC Talks wrote:
Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:02 pm
He made a "donation" of $50,000 and lost his CP over the 95.9 license over a decade ago. But that was a result of filing false paperwork to meet a deadline.

When he started using STL frequencies licensed to Interlochen, there was no penalty.

In this case, he didn't mislead the fcc, he just started broadcasting from a new site. I am suspicious and think there could be no punitive action. His lawyer has a better relationship with the commission than agents are.
Also, good ol' Roy lost a license in Texas a couple of years ago (99.7 KROY, which was in the process of being sold) due to lack of candor. IMHO, he should either be forced to turn in all of his licenses or sell them at bargain basement prices.

Mike Rice (convicted felon) and James McCluskey (he lied about where his stations were broadcast) had all of their licenses cancelled due to lack of candor.



Post Reply Previous topicNext topic