Written Direct Statement of Settling Devotional Claimants, in the Matter of Phase II Distribution of the 1998 and 1999 Cable Royalty Funds
Before the COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES Washington, DC DR I GIMEL In the Matter of ) ) Distribution of the 2004, 2005, ) Docket No. 2012-6 CRB CD 2004-2009 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 ) (Phase II) Cable Royalty Funds )
In the Matter of ) ) Distribution of the 1999-2009 ) Docket No. 2012-7 CRB SD 1999-2009 Satellite Royalty Funds ) (Phase II)
WRITTEN DIRECT STATEMENT OF THE SETTLING DEVOTIONAL CLAIMANTS
Clifford M. Harrington (D.C. Bar No. 218107) Matthew J. MacLean (D.C. Bar No. 479257) Victoria N. Lynch (D.C. Bar No. 1001445) PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP Post Office Box 57197 Washington, DC 20036-9997 Telephone: 202-663-8525 Facsimile: 202-663-8007 E-Mail:[email protected] Counselfor Settling Devotional Claimants August 22, 2016 Table of Contents
I. Introductory Comments
II. Supplemental Testimony of Toby Berlin, School of Toby, Inc.
III. Supplemental Testimony of Erkan Erdem, Ph.D., KPMG LLP
IV. Supplemental Testimony of John Sanders, Bond k, Pecaro, Inc.
V. Declaration of Shirley Mahue, Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc.
VI. Declaration of Peter T. Vay, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
VII. Oral Testimony of Toby Berlin, Dkt. Nos. 2012-6 CRB CD 2004-2009 (Phase II) & 2012-7 CRB SD 1999-2009 (Phase II), Direct and Rebuttal Hearing, Tr. Vol 2 at 60:12-145:4 (Apr. 14, 2015).
VIII. Written Direct Testimony of Toby Berlin, Dkt. Nos. 2012-6 CRB CD 2004-2009 (Phase Il) A 2012-7 CRB SD 1999-2009 (Phase Ii), Amended Written Direct Statement of the Settling Devotional Claimants (Jul. 8, 2014). Before the COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES Washington, DC
In the Matter of ) ) Distribution of the 2004, 2005, ) Docket No. 2012-6 CRB CD 2004-2009 2006, 2007, 200S and 2009 ) (Phase II) Cable Royalty Funds )
In the Matter of ) ) Distribution of the 1999-2009 ) Docket No. 2012-7 CRB SD 1999-2009 Satellite Royalty Funds ) (Phase II)
INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS TO THK WRITTEN DIRECT STATEMENT OF THK SETTLING DEVOTIONAL CLAIMANTS
Pursuant to 17 U.S,C. ) 803(b)(6), section 37 C,F.R, ) 351,4„ the rules of the Copyright
Royalty Judges (the "Judges"), the Judges" May 4, 2016, "Order Reopening Record and
Scheduling Further Proceedings," and the Judges'ugust 16, 2016, "Order Amending
Procedural Schedule," the Settling Devotional Claimants ("SDC") 'ereby submit their %'ritten
Direct Statement in connection with the above-referenced reopened proceeding to determine the
'he term, "Settling Devotional Claimants" or "SDC" as used herein includes the following claimants: Amazing Facts, Inc., American Religious Town Hall, Inc., Catholic Communications Corporation, Christian Television Network, Inc., The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc., Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc., Cottonwood Christian Center, Crenshaw Christian Center, Crystal Cathedral Ministries, Inc., Evangelical Lutheran Church In America, Faith For Today, Inc., Family Worship Center Church, Inc. (D/B/A Jimmy Swaggart Ministries), International Fellowship of Christians A Jews, Inc., In Touch Ministries, Inc., It Is Written, John Hagee Ministries, Inc. (aka Global Evangelism Television), Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. (FIK/A Life In The Word, Inc.), Kerry Shook Ministries (aka Fellowship ofthe Woodlands), Lakewood Church (aka Joel Osteen Ministries), Liberty Broadcasting Network, Inc., Messianic Vision, Inc., New Psalmist Baptist Church, Oral Roberts Evangelistic Association, Inc., RBC Ministries, Reginald B. Cherry Ministries, Rhema Bible Church (aka Kenneth Hagin Ministries), Ron Phillips Ministries, Speak The Word Church International, St. Ann's Media, The Potter's House Of Dallas, Inc. (d/b/a T.D. Jakes Ministries), Word of God Fellowship, Inc., d/b/a Daystar Television Network, Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, and Zola Levitt Ministries. Phase II distribution of the 2004 through 2009 cable royalty funds and 1999 through 2009 satellite funds attributable to syndicated devotional programming.
On April 13-17, 2015, the Judges held a five-day Direct and Rebuttal Hearing concerning the distribution of the 2004 through 2009 cable and 1999 through 2009 satellite royalties in the program suppliers and devotional programming categories. Independent Producers Group,
MPAA-represented Program Suppliers, and the SDC presented evidence at the hearing. On May
4, 2016, the Judges issued an "Order Reopening Record and Scheduling Further Proceedings,"
finding that '"no party presented a methodology and data that, together, are sufficient to support a
final distribution in the contested categories" and "direct[ing] the parties to present additional
evidence and expert opinion." May 4 Order at 1-2,
Accordingly, the SDC submit the enclosed Written Direct Statement to present Written supplemental evidence and expert opinion supporting their proposed methodology for the
allocation of the 2004-2009 cable and 1999-2009 satellite royalties, The SDC hereby incorporate
into this Direct Statement by reference the rulings issued by the Judges in their March
13, 2015, "Memorandum Opinion and Ruling on Validity and Categorization of Claims."
Additionally, the SDC designate and incorporate by reference (a) the written Direct Testimony of
Toby Berlin that was included in the SDC's July 8, 2014 Amended Written Direct Statement in this proceeding for cable and satellite, and (b) the oral testimony of Ms. Berlin at the Direct and
Rebuttal Hearing on April 14, 2015 (Tr. Vol 2 at 60:12-145:4). The designated testimony is
attached hereto. Respectfully submitted, M ~~~~./48 , Clifford M. Harrington (D.C. Impar No. 218107) Matthew J. MacLean (D.C. Bar No. 479257) Victoria N. Lynch-Draper (D.C. Bar No. 1001445) PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP P.O. Box 57197 Washington, D.C. 20036-9997 Telephone: 202-663-8525 Facsimile: 202-663-8007 E-Mail:[email protected] Counselfor Settling DevotionaL Claimants
August 22, 2016 CKRTIFICATK OF SERVICE
I, Victoria N. Lynch-Draper, hereby certify that a copy ofthe foregoing "WRITTEN DIRECT STATEMENT OF THE SETTLING DEVOTIONAL CLAIMANTS" was sent overnight delivery via Federal Express, and sent electronically, this 22 day of August, 2016 to the following:
INDEPENDENT PRODUCERS GROUP PROGRAM SUPPLIERS Brian D. Boydston Gregory O. Olaniran Pick & Boydston, LLP Lucy Holmes Plovnick 10786 Le Conte Avenue Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP Los Angeles, CA 90024 1818 N Street, NW 8 Floor Washington, DC 20036
JOINT SPORTS CLAIMANTS Robert Alan Garrett M. Sean Laane Michael Kientzle Arnold & Porter LLP 600 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20001
Victoria N. Lynch-Dr/per Testimony of Toby Berlin UNITED STATES COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES The Library of Congress
In Re Docket No. 2012-6 CRB CD Distribution of 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2004-2009 (Phase II) 2008 and 2009 Cable Royalty Funds In Re Docket No. 2012-7 CRB SD Distribution of 199 2000 2001, 2003 1999-2009 (Phase II) 2003 2005, 2006 0007, )008 and 2059 Satellite Royalty funds
SUPPLEMENTAL TESTIMONY OF TOBY BERLIN
In connection with the 1999-2009 cable and satellite royalty proceeding, I provided testimony regarding my experience at DIRECTV, and my opinion, based on my years of professional experience as Vice President of Programming Acquisition, about the importance of local ratings in assessing the value ofprogramming within a category ofprogramming geared to appeal to a particular base of subscribers. I have reviewed the
Copyright Royalty Judges'rder of May 4, 20 l.6, which expressed concern that changes in the market and technical improvements emerging between the years 1999 and 2009 might have had an effect on local viewership ofprograms, and questioned ifthe habits described in data collected from 1999 — 2003 would continue through the 2004 — 2009 time period. I have also reviewed my prior written and oral testimony in this proceeding.
I stand by the testimony I have already submitted, but provide this Supplemental
Testimony to address the Judges'oncerns expressed.
To my knowledge, the relationship between local and distant viewing on cable systems or satellite operations during the time period 1999-2009 was not something that was routinely measured. To my understanding, this is partly because of the inherent difficulty in measuring viewership of programs in geographic areas where they are not locally broadcast, and partly because local ratings are such a widely used and accepted
measure of popularity that there is little market for more refined data. My personal
experience during the time period of 1999-2009 was that while there were significant
developments in the consumer technology of the industry (such as advances in HD, DVR,
and digital transmission), none of these changes affected the analytic process of
anticipating content consumption habits of existing and future subscribers. Throughout this entire time period, nothing provided me with more insightful information to determine which stations to transmit to distant markets than the types of programs offered on the station, coupled with local Nielsen ratings.
In my fifteen years ofexperience at DIRECTV, I found that local ratings correlated well to interest in programs outside the local markets, and also to willingness of home owners, apartment renters, RV owners, etc., to subscribe to our services, with the important caveat that it is always necessary to offer a range of different kinds of programming to appeal to different groups of subscribers, and to give all subscribers a variety of popular programs to choose from. These facts remained true through the entire period from 1999-2009. The reasons are obvious, and well-known in the industry.
Programs on a station that are popular in one market also tend to be popular in distant markets - especially in those distant markets where we judged the demand for a particular station's programming to be the highest. When we offered the stations carrying popular programs within a category of programs, we judged that we would receive more subscriptions from subscribers who were interested in that kind ofprogramming.
In short, program popularity was a reliable leading indicator of consumer happiness and operator success. I strived to ensure that DIRECTV offered the most popular content available in a variety of program categories to support our primary goals
of acquiring and retaining subscribers and ensuring maximum return on investment
(including signal costs and copyright fees) for the signal. To do so, I relied on Nielsen
data to guide my decisions as to how to value distant signals in unserved DMAs.
DECLARATION OF TOBY BERLIN I declare under penalty ofperjury that the foregoing Supplemental Testimony is true and correct and of my personal knowledge.
Dated; August 17, 2016
Toby Ber n Toby Berlin — Bio
In her current role, Toby Berlin provides consulting expertise in the Cable/Satellite/MVPD/OTT universe including, high level negotiations, strategic planning. business development, financial and contractual support. She also advises on organizational structure, packaging, pricing, cost reduction, revenue growth, subscriber acquisition and retention, contract database, compliance, contractual negotiations and strategies and crisis management.
She serves as the Cable/Satellite/Retransmission Consent Advisor for multiple research firms to educate large institutional investors on industry. Most recently, Sony Interactive Entertainment Network America, LLC (SIENA) engaged her as a member of the Playstation VUE launch team, seeking her expertise on many facets of the TV distribution business including content acquisition (including pricing and packaging), organizational infrastructure, expansion planning and MSO/ISP Bc Telco partnerships. She has created the roadmap for news- based cable network for expansion into airlines, hotels, motels and office buildings as well as crafted a successful negotiation strategy for cable networks seeking to extend contractual relationship with distributors. Finally, she assists Programmers in the sale, acqtusition and merger of assets through outright purchase or "buy % build" strategy; in expansion of subscriber base.
In her previous role, Berlin was responsible for aspects of programming acquisitions for the DIRECTV service including all networks available on DIRECTV's Spanish-language package DIRECTV en Espanol, DIRECTV's WorldDirect international programming packages, shopping channels, adult programming, DIRECTV's airborne platforms on Continental, JetBlue and Frontier airlines, as well as the Sonic Tap music channels available on the DIRECTV platform, After the passing of the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act of 1999 (SHVIA), which gave DIRECTV the rights to broadcast local channels across the United States, she led the efforts to bring these channels to homes across the country. Berlin negotiated the local into local rights for DIRECTV, and successfully launched the broadcast of local channels in over 143 DMAs since january 2000,
In 2006, she conceived, developed and directed the execution team for DIRECTV's Titanium package. This upscale service gives VIP subscribers access to every channel and every Pay Per View event and movie broadcast on the DIRECTV service for a single yearly fee, and debuted to a chorus of positive publicity singling out the platform's uniqueness and exclusivity.
Berlin was also the president emeritus and founder of the Women's Leadership Exchange at DIRECTV. This internal group enhanced the experiences of female employees at DIRECTV through monthly seminars with industry executives, networking sessions, Toastmasters club, a mentoring program, a working mothers group, and quarterly newsletters. Berlin is equally adept at handling sponsorship deals. As founding organizing committee member for DIRECTV's annual Beach Bowl and VlP "After Party" aligned with Super Bowl, she negotiated network and product sponsorships, celebrity, athlete and entertainer participation. 2013 celebrities included Mark Cuban and Justin Timberlake. The event is one of the most anticipated events of the Super Bowl weekend.
Prior to her work at DIRECTV, she served as executive director of The Learning Annex, where she was responsible for the creation of a monthly catalog of over 250 classes featuring top best-selling authors and personalities.
Berlin holds a bachelor's degree from the University of Miami in Coral Gables, Fla. and a law degree from Southwestern University of Law in Los Angeles. Berlin lives with her family in Santa Monica, Calif., where she is active in the community and in 2010, served as a board member for the Santa Monica Pier. Testimony of Erkan Erdem, Ph.D. Before the COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES Washington, DC
In re
DISTRIBUTION OF 2004, 2005, 2006 2007, DOCKET NO. 2012-6 CRB CD 2004-09 (Phase 2008, AND 2009 Cable Royalty Funds II)
DISTRIBUTION OF 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2012-7 CRB 1999-2009 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, and DOCKET NO. SD 2009 Satellite Royalty Funds (Phase II)
Testimony of Erkan Erdem, Ph.D. TESTIMONY OF ERKAN ERDEM, Ph.D.
August 22, 2016
I. Introduction
I, Erkan Erdem, am a Senior Manager at KPMG LLP ("KPMG") in the Economic and Valuation Services practice. The economists and statisticians of this practice provide expert
analyses on economic and statistical matters to a variety of clients. To assist with the
distribution of royalties associated with the retransmission of broadcasts signals by cable in years 2004-2009 and by satellite in 1999-2009, I have been retained by the Settling Devotional
Claimants (SDC), one of the two groups of claimants in the Devotional category in the matter of distribution of 2004-2009 Cable Royalty Funds and 1999-2009 Satellite Royalty Funds.
II. Qualifications
I received a Bachelor of Science in Mathematics and Bachelor of Arts in Economics from
Kog University in Istanbul, Turkey in 2000. I subsequently earned a Ph.D. in Economics from The
Pennsylvania State University in 2006. Between 2006 and 2010, I worked as an antitrust
economist for Bates White, LLC, an economic consulting firm, where I prepared expert reports on mergers and acquisitions, monopolization disputes, market power and concentration issues,
and cartels. From 2010 to 2013, I worked as an economist at IMPAQ International, a research
and consulting firm. In that role, I led large projects for federal agencies such as the Centers for
Medicare & Medicaid Services. Since joining KPMG in September of 2013, I have been involved
in projects for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, New York State Department of
Health, and Maryland Health Services Cost Review Commission. For the last three years, I have
been teaching graduate-level econometrics at University of Maryland as an Adjunct Professor in the Masters in Applied Economics program. My research has been published in peer-reviewed
economic journals. I have presented my work and research findings at numerous conferences to a wide range of audiences. I have also testified in prior proceedings before the Copyright
Royalty Board. My curriculum vitae, with detailed information on my publications, project work, and conference presentations, is attached as Exhibit 1. This report is based upon information made available to me. I worked with a team of economists and analysts at KPMG who worked under my guidance during the preparation of my report. I reserve the right to supplement this report should additional information be made available in the future.
The methodology I present in this report provides royalty shares that are consistent with the concept of relative market value in economics. The royalty shares that are based on this methodology are presented in Exhibit 2.
III. Royalty Allocation Process Overview
The purpose of this proceeding, known as Phase II, is to determine the allocation of royalty funds between two categories of claimants represented by SDC and Independent
Producers Group (IPG) in the Devotional category. The funds that are relevant for this proceeding were collected for 2004-2009 cable and 1999-2009 satellite retransmissions. It is my understanding that the distribution proceedings for cable and satellite retransmissions are consolidated in the interest of efficiency of case management.'t is also my understanding that the Devotional Claimants resolved by settlement their share of the allocation of funds in Phase I, which allocates funds between eight different categories of programming (e.g., Devotional, Sports, Program Suppliers, etc.).
It is my understanding that per Section 111 and Section 119 of the Copyright Act these royalty payments are made by Cable System Operators (CSOs) and Satellite Operators (SOs), respectively (collectively, "Operators" ), when they retransmit copyrighted works included in their broadcast television signals outside the program's original, local broadcast area. Royalties are deposited semiannually based on the formulas set forth in the Copyright Act. The owners of the copyrighted works are required to file claims every July to receive a share of the royalties collected in the previous calendar year. Because royalty deposits are not directly tied to individual programs, the Judges of the Copyright Royalty Board are charged with the allocation
Order of Consolidation and Amended Case Schedule, August 29, 2014. Distribution of the 1999-2009 Cable and Satellite Royalty Funds, Docket Nos. 2007-3 CRB CD 2004-2005, 2008-4 CRB CD 2006, 2009-6 CRB CD 2007, 2010-6 CRB CD 2008, 2011-7 CRB 2009; 2010-2 CRB SD 2004-2007, 2010-7 CRB 2008, 2011-8 CRB SD 2009, 76 Fed. Reg. 80969. Final Determination of Distributions Phase II, In re Distribution of Cable Royalty Funds 2000-2003. of and distribution of royalties among the claimants. As I detail in the sections below, the guiding precedent is to measure the "relative market value" of programs to allocate shares of royalties among programs within the "zone of reasonableness."
IV. Materials Considered
In addition to my testimony in the 1999-2009 consolidated cable and satellite
proceeding, I have obtained, reviewed, and used the following documents and data files during the preparation of this testimony:
~ CRB Order of May 4, 2016 reopening record and scheduling further proceedings.
~ Amended Direct Statement of Independent Producers Group, In the Matter of Distribution of 2004-2009 Cable Royalty Funds.
~ Amended Direct Statement of Independent Producers Group, In the Matter of Distribution of 1999-2009 Satellite Royalty Funds.
~ All supporting documents and data produced by Independent Producers Group as part of the discovery process for the Amended Direct Statement of Independent Producers Group,
In the Matter of Distribution of 2004-2009 Cable Royalty Funds.
~ All supporting documents and data produced by Independent Producers Group as part of the discovery process for the Amended Direct Statement of Independent Producers Group,
In the Matter of Distribution of 1999-2009 Satellite Royalty Funds.
~ CRB Order of March 13, 2015 addressing claims of the SDC and IPG.
~ Satellite Statement of Accounts for 1999-2009 from Cable Data Corporation (updated as of July 31, 2016).
~ Cable Statements of Accounts for 2004-2009 from Cable Data Corporation (updated as of July 31, 2016).
~ Programming data for WGN, both for the local market and the distant market (via satellite), for 1999-2009 from Tribune Media Services.
~ Programming data for 1999 from Tribune Media Services.
~ Nielsen distant viewing data (estimated hours of viewing) for 1999-2003. ~ Nielsen Reports on Devotional Programs (RODPs) for February sweeps of 1999-2003,
February, May, July, and November for 2004-2008, and March, May, July, and November for 2009.
~ Nielsen RODPs page R-7 for May, July, November 1999; May, July 2000; November 2001; July 2002; and May 2003.
~ Rebuttal Testimony of Alan G. Whitt, In the Matter of Phase II Distribution of the 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003 Cable Royalty Funds.
~ Amended Testimony of William J. Brown, In the Matter of Phase II Distribution of the 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003 Cable Royalty Funds
~ Written Direct Statement of MPAA-Represented Program Suppliers, In the Matter of Distribution of the 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003 Cable Royalty Funds.
~ Testimony of Jeffrey S, Gray, Amended August 20, 2012, In the Matter of Distribution of the 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003 Cable Royalty Funds.
~ Written Direct Statement of Settling Devotional Claimants, In the Matter of Phase II Distribution of the 1998 and 1999 Cable Royalty Funds,
~ Distribution Order, In the Matter of Distribution of the 2000-2003 Cable Royalty Funds.
~ Final Determination of Distributions Phase II, In re Distribution of Cable Royalty Funds 2000- 2003.
~ Final Distribution Order, In the Matter of Distribution of the 2004 and 2005 Cable Royalty Funds.
~ Revised list of primary programs represented by SDC for 1999-2009.
~ Stipulation of the Parties on the Issues of Program Categorization and Scope of Claims, In the Matter of 1990-1992 Cable Royalty Distribution Proceeding.
~ Direct Statement of Independent Producers Group, In the Matter of Distribution of 1999- 2009 Satellite Royalty Funds, including testimonies of Raul Galaz and Laura Robinson, and
data files used by Laura Robinson in her testimony.
~ List of IPG-represented claimants in the 2000-2003 Cable Distribution proceedings (Phase II).
~ Ruling and Order Regarding Claims and Separate Opinion, In Re Distribution of 1998 and 1999 Cable Royalty Funds. ~ "Primary Focus" (2004-2009) by IWV Media;
~ All programs by Jack Van Irnpe (2004-2009);
~ All programs by Life Outreach (2004-2009);
Satellite claims:
~ "Primary Focus" (2002-2007, 2009) by IWV Media;
~ All programs by Jack Van Irnpe (2001-2007, 2009);
~ All programs by Life Outreach (1999-2007, 2009);
~ All programs by Billy Graham (2001-2003);
~ All programs by Salem Baptist Church (2001).
In the rest of my report, I include only these programs permitted by the CRB.
Nielsen Ratin s orthe Claimed Pro rams The Nielsen sweep reports are available for 1999-2009. The reports rank devotional programs that qualify for inclusion in the report for each sweep period. The criteria for Reporting Standards for programs (program reportability) are set forth in each report, and provide as follows: "A. Program Reportability:
2. Syndicated devotional programs must meet the following requirements in order to qualifyforinclusion herein:
~ Program must be taped or on film and available for telecast on a market. by market basis. ~ Program must have been telecastin at leastfive NSI markets on reportable commercial 7V stations and scheduled at the same time and dayin at least two of the four weeks.
2. Additional Considerations:
~ Programs with both black and white and color versions were combined where the program titles were the same.
IPG also claimed "The City That Forgot About Christmas" (1999-2009) by Envoy/Promark. However, this program appears to be the same program as two other programs claimed by IPG ("The City That Forgot Christmas" by Envoy (2001) and "City That Forgot About Christmas" by Envoy/Promark/Pacific (1999-2009)). It was therefore excluded by the Judges'uling that "All titles 'cross-claimed'or more than one licensor, except Envoy/Promark, are disallowed from both Devotional and Program Suppliers categories." id. at Ex. A-2, p. 4.
~ syndicated programs are not included Foreign language herein."'imilarly,
the reports include criteria for station reportability for each sweep period as:
"Reportable stations are those which qualifiesfor reporting in the corresponding VIPfor the market. Reporting standards are shownin Section III of the VIP andin the Local Reference Supplement. In addition:
1. A station must have telecast the devotional program once during the four measurement weeks (at least three different daysfor Monday - Friday programs.) Program reportability (see A-1. above) must be met prior to station inclusion.
2. A station qualifyingfor a "Mini-Series" must have telecast the syndicated program two or more times during any week ofthe measurement. The telecasts need not have been scheduled at the same air time.
3. Non-commercial stations are excluded."
These reports are a very useful guide to understanding what the viewers of religious programming really "value" (see tables R-7 of above-referenced Nielsen Reports). It should be noted that the number of programs included in the ranking is not constant over time. Also, not all program titles claimed by SDC and IPG appears in the Nielsen Reports due to either reportability requirements or very low viewership. This is relevant because any allocation based on the Nielsen rankings or ratings will be exclusive of the programs that were not included in the rankings. I discuss this issue further in later sections.
Vl. The Value of a Program: Relative Market Value
It is clear that the current mechanism that determines how the Operators compensate copyrighted program owners does not represent a "free" market in which buyers and sellers exchange goods at mutually agreeable prices. If the Operators could negotiate these prices with the program owners, the price they pay would be based on the "value" the program generates for the Operators. As Dr. Gray discussed in his testimony, this is also known as the "fair market
See, for example, the Nielsen Report on Devotional Programs for February 2004, pages A-B. Please note that with respect to Calendar Years 1999-2003, I only had access to the full Nielsen RODPs for the February sweep months. Elsewhere in this report, I reference a summary page from certain other sweep reports from 1999-2003; however, I did not have access to the pages which describe the reporting standards. Nevertheless, because of the consistency of the reporting standards described in all full reports I have reviewed for 1999-2009, I assume that the standards and procedures were the same as the ones detailed in the February report of the same year. value" of a given program. This standard has been discussed extensively by the Judges based on the following definition from Dr. Gray: "The price at which the right to transmit a program carried on a distant broadcast signal would change hands between a willing buyer (a CSO) and a willing seller (a copyright owner), neither being under any compulsion to buy or sell."" It is my understanding that the Judges agree that "viewership can be a reasonable and directly
measurable metric for calculating relative market value" and that, for Phase II purposes,
"viewership is the initial and predominant heuristic that a hypothetical CSO would consider.""
However, it is also my understanding that Judges are "reluctant to rely so/e/y on viewership data merely because the marginal bundling adjustments are not readily measurable" in a Phase
II proceeding." The Operators sell bundles of channels to their subscribers with the purpose of
attracting a wide range of viewers. That is, subscribers cannot pick and choose the channels they are interested in. Instead, they can select from a small list of "bundles" (ranging from "basic" channels to "premium" channels) which come with channels and programs a subscriber
is interested in together with those the subscriber has no interest in watching. For this reason, the Operators carry a wide range of TV channels covering program types such as sports, movies,
TV shows, religious programs, and many more. Finally, it is worth summarizing the basic relationships between parties that constitute this "market." TV stations put together (and purchase) menus of programs and other content that would appeal to their audience. Based on the demographic makeup of a given TV station's audience, third parties (e.g., companies, organizations) purchase commercial time from the TV stations to market their goods and services. Then, considering the appeal of the TV station, Operators enter into agreements with
TV stations to carry their signal on their menu of TV stations. Subscribers decide which Operator bundles to choose from given the prices and content available to them in their local market. Even though subscribers appear to interact only with the Operators, their decisions (indirectly) depend on actions taken by individualTV stations as well. Subscribers'ecisions in
Testimony of Jeffrey S. Gray, Ph.D., May 30, 2012, In the Matter of Distribution of the 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003 Cable Royalty Funds. Final Determination of Distributions Phase II, In re Distribution of Cable Royalty Funds 2000-2003, at 22-27. Final Determination of Distributions Phase il, In re Distribution of Cable Royalty Funds 2000-2003, at 37. "Ibid. return affect how Operators and TV stations act. That is, if a program on a given TV station is very "popular", this program will (1) increase the value (and price) of commercials around the program for the third parties, (2) increase the attractiveness (and price) of the TV station for the Operators, and (3) increase the number of subscriptions for Operators with this TV station in their bundles. On the other hand, the opposite is true for a program that is not "popular."
Hence, the relative market value of a program is highly correlated with the demand from the consumers whose decisions affect both Operators and TV stations. The way the Operators operate may offer a few "candidate" methodologies to determine the relative market value of a program: (1) program volume measured as numbers of programs or hours of programming, (2) number of subscribers, and (3) actual viewing patterns. However, from an economic point of view, the correct methodology for allocating royalties is the one that is based on actual viewing patterns. I discuss in more detail below why actual viewership rather than hours of programming or number of distant subscribers is a more reliable method of allocating royalties.
Volume is not a reliable methodolo to allocate ro alties because it does not accuratel measure relative market value
The other methods may provide insights in this matter, but are not what determines the relative market value of a program. A methodology based on volume is not a reliable method because viewers and Operators may value a 30-minute program more than they value a 90-minute program." This "utility" or satisfaction one receives from a choice made, such as watching a program is not necessarily determined by the length of the program. Given that the
"quality" of the content and the time slot when a show is broadcast (e.g., prime time vs. 3:00 in the morning) are significant drivers of "demand", and that the demand for a program will certainly be a determinant of the relative market value of the program, a determination of relative market value should not be based on total hours or total number of programs."
This is also discussed by Dr. Gray in his testimony (amended August 20, 2012) In the Matter of Distribution of the 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003 Cable Royalty Funds. Similarly, from an Operator's perspective, with rare exception, programs that are not scheduled on a regular basis are less likely to drive subscriptions than regularly scheduled programs (such as the ones captured by the Nielsen reports). Moreover, absent proof that a non-regularly scheduled program is the rare exception, excluding it from our methodology is appropriate. Number ofsubscribers is not a reliable methodoloav to allocate rovalties because it does not accuratelv measure relative market value of particular proarams The methodology based on the number of subscribers is not a reliable method for
allocating shares in Phase II, either. As argued in prior proceedings, Operators are profit maximizing entities that construct bundles (or packages) of channels to attract and retain subscribers. Accordingly, the revenues of an Operator can be attributed to different types of programming that drive subscriptions to the bundle. This is consistent with the Bortz Surveys
conducted to measure the relative market value of different types of programming from a cable
operator's perspective, whose business assessments are analogous to a satellite operator's, particularly because cable and satellite services are in direct competition for subscribers.'ence,
the Bortz Surveys are relevant for Phase I of the proceedings which determine the
shares of the eight types of programming. However, Phase II of the proceedings deals with different programs that belong to the same category (e.g., Devotional) which are similar (or homogeneous). Because the effect of one religious program over another on the decision to subscribe cannot be determined merely by counting the number of subscribers to signals with many categories of programming, a method of allocating royalties amongst the devotional programs based on numbers of subscribers is not a reasonable allocation method. To demonstrate why the method of using total subscribers is not reliable using a simple example, assume in a hypothetical world that all claimants in the Devotional category are broadcast on the same channel provided nationally by all Operators.'ecause all programs are made available to the same (number of) subscribers, a methodology based on number of subscribers would not be able to offer meaningful percentages to allocate royalties among the programs. The only option based on number of subscribers would be to equally distribute the royalties among the programs which would completely ignore how viewers "value" each show.
In other words, the methodology would not be based on the notion of "relative market value" at all.
This can be explained using the following two hypothetical surveys. The first survey asks every subscriber the most important type of programming he/she would like to have in the bundle. The second survey asks every subscriber to provide percentages for each type of programming he/she would like to have in the bundle. The results from both surveys can be used to calculate shares for each category of programming. " It does not matter in how many markets the channel is retransmitted.
10 Cable Data Corporation (CDC) collects and analyzes information on Statements of
Accounts (SOAs) that cable and satellite providers file with the Licensing Division of the Copyright Office. "The reports from the CDC provide the number of subscribers together with total royalty fees generated for each channel. Based on the same arguments above, the methodology based on subscribers would not be a reliable royalty allocation methodology, either. There are additional reasons why a subscription-based methodology is not reliable. First, subscription is simply an offering of a list of channels to the potential viewers, and subscribers pay a price to have access to these channels over a certain period of time. In practice, each subscriber is interested in watching a small share of the available channels and programs even though he/she pays the price set for the "bundle." As an example, consider a community where grocery store A sells brand X coffee and grocery store B sells brand Y coffee. Coffee brands X and Y sell for the same price. Assume now that grocery store A has thousands of customers per month attracted to grocery store A's selection of European cheeses, 10 of whom also purchase
brand X coffee. Store B, on the other hand, has only a few hundred customers per month all of whom purchase Brand Y coffee. A claim that brand X has a higher relative market value based on the number of customers who patronize store A would clearly miss the mark in this situation.
Brand Y coffee clearly has higher "relative market value" — both for the consumers and the grocery store - than brand X coffee given that it is the preferred brand (with higher demand and sales) in this community. The determination of "relative market value" does not depend on how many customers walk through the doors of (or have access to) the grocery store.
To illustrate further, consider a channel with a copyrighted program, Program Z, which is
retransmitted via satellite. Assume that Program Z, broadcast on a particular day and time, has thousands of viewers. Now, consider replacing Program Z with another copyrighted program,
Program W, while keeping all other programs on the channel unchanged. Assume that there
are no subscribers who watch Program W. The theory suggests that Program Z has higher
"relative market value" than Program W because (1) higher demand for commercials around
' obtained and reviewed these reports covering 1999-2009 for satellite retransmissions, and 2004-2009 cable retransmissions.
11 Program Z will increase revenues for the channel," (2) it will increase negotiating power of the channel with the Operators as well as how much the Operators pay the channel to carry the signal, (3) the Operators will have no incentive to carry a signal with Program W which no subscriber chooses to watch.
Actual viewina patterns provide a reliable methodoloav to measure relative market value
What matters in determining the value of particular programs in Phase II is the actual viewing patterns of the subscribers. The concept of relative market value of a copyrighted program retransmitted on satellite is no different from the relative market value of a program
in the local market. What matters from the channel's and Operator's point of view is the "demand" for the program, which is best measured by viewership. If the viewers do not "value" a particular show, one would expect that show not to survive when profit-maximizing firms are
involved. We commonly hear about TV shows that are cancelled after a few episodes because the "ratings" were very low.
Nielsen is a well-known organization that conducts national research and publishes information on program ratings. This information, which is reliable and relevant to determine the relative market value of programs, is frequently used by profit-maximizing sellers and purchasers of advertisement time. The viewing pattern of households is clearly the most important factor driving the decisions in the television industry. The Nielsen Diary data is collected during one-week periods over four "sweep" months every year (February, May, July, and November). During these months, Nielsen mails seven-day diaries to homes to measure
what was watched on each TV set and these data are then aggregated into Nielsen's database. It is my understanding that the viewership data from Nielsen has been used in previous proceedings and deemed the most important factor in determining the allocation of
royalties in Phase II. As I argue above, this is consistent with the notion of relative market value
in economic theory.
It is plausible that organizations that consider paying the channel for such commercials also are profit- maximizing entities, and that their rationale for purchasing commercial time is related to the actual or expected viewership of the program. Direct Testimony of Paul B. Lindstrom, In the Matter of Distribution of the 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 Cable Royalty Funds.
12 Vll. Royalty Allocation for the Devotional Category
The average ratings provided in the Nielsen Reports on Devotional Programming (also known as Nielsen Diary Data) constitute the primary data source to allocate royalties. These tables, known as Households and Persons Ranking Tables (R-7), provide a ranking of devotional
programming sorted by average rating defined as the percentage of households that viewed the program during the sweep periods, on average."
These ratings are reliable measures for determining relative market value, but they are
not specifically calculated for programs retransmitted by Operators. However, unless a program
is appealing predominantly to local tastes and culture (e.g., a local church service, which is
unlikely to meet Nielsen program reportability standards), there is no reason to believe that
ratings in the local market are significantly different from ratings in the distant markets, on
average. In the absence of any distant ratings data and given that Nielsen ratings include
households with both cable and satellite service, Nielsen local ratings can be used as a
reasonable proxy for cable and satellite ratings, In addition, I have no reason to believe that the viewing preferences of satellite subscribers differ systematically from cable subscribers.
There are two other issues with the Nielsen ratings which require further analyses. First,
there are a few shows that are included in the rankings, but whose ratings are too small to
report. These shows, which have average ratings of less than 0.1 percent, have a rating of "LT."
Second, not all devotional programs are included in the Nielsen rankings due to the program and station reportability standards set by Nielsen or because they were not ranked due to low ratings.
Vill. Combining Data Files
To provide estimates of relative market value of retransmitted programs by SDC and IPG
claimants, I rely on both Nielsen Reports on Devotional Programs for ratings and CDC SOAs for
number of distant subscribers. As noted above, R-7 tables in Nielsen Reports ("Nielsen Ratings" )
provide reliable estimates of national average ratings by program title in each sweep.
The numerator is the number of households tuned in to the channel with the specific program and the denominator is the number of households with access to the channel with the specific program (i.e., coverage).
13 Additionally, "Market Audience Estimates for Devotional Programs" section of the Nielsen
Reports ("Nielsen Audience" ) provides market-level data on average number of households who viewed each program. If the average rating for a program is missing from the Nielsen Ratings data, then it can be calculated (or estimated) as the sum of number of households from the Nielsen Audience data divided by the number of households in the covered markets (known as "projected coverage" in Nielsen R-7).
To create a distant ratings measure and compare with local ratings, I combine Nielsen
Audience data, Nielsen Ratings data, and CDC SOAs as follows: First, I merge the Nielsen
Audience data with the CDC SOA data by year and channel. Then, I keep only the records that merge and exclude the rest from my analysis. The excluded records consist of programs that were broadcast on channels that were not distantly retransmitted (with no royalty payments) and channels from CDC data that did not broadcast any of the claimed programs. Then, I aggregate the number of households (from Nielsen Audience data) and distant subscribers by year and program title by summing over the channels. Finally, I merge this combined data with the Nielsen Ratings data by year and program title.
IX. Steps of the Royalty Allocation Methodology
I provide the details of my royalty allocation methodology in a few straightforward steps
(notation clarified since my rebuttal testimony in the original proceeding). I denote the average
national rating of a program by Ave Rtg,'.,where i represents each program title claimed by claimant k (SDC or IPG) in year t.. The number of shows claimed by each claimant k in year t is
represented by N, . The steps of the methodology are as follows:
Step 1: To impute the missing rating information (those with "LT") for a few shows
claimed by SDC and IPG, calculate the ratings information using the values provided in the
Nielsen Ratings and Nielsen Audience data. Specifically, I estimate the rating by dividing the
The estimated value for rating is expected to be less than or around 0.1 percent. The total numbers of households that view the program on each channel are available in column 13 of the detailed program data in these reports. The total number of households that view the program divided by the number of total households in the Nielsen sweeps (i.e., projected coverage in the market area) would produce the average rating. 14 number of households by the projected coverage in Nielsen sweep markets. This allows me to improve the coverage of my allocation estimates. This step only affects the program "James
Robison Life Today" (claimed by IPG) for a total of 5 years for cable and 4 years for satellite during 2005-2009 (given that 2008 satellite was resolved by CRB Order granting final
distribution to SDC (100%)). 2: Calculate the total'tep distant viewers for SDC and IPG programs in each year by multiplying the average ratings by the number of subscribers for channels the relevant SDC and
IPG programs are broadcast on, and summing over all such programs:
N,
Viewer,'/[Subscriber,',*Ave tttg,i]+ Ajdustment,'here
t ranges between 2004 and 2009 for cable and between 1999 and 2009 for satellite and subscripti represents each program title claimed by claimant k. This step measures the number of U.S. households tuned in to any of the programs claimed by SDC and IPG in a given year. This amount can be adjusted to account for claimed program titles (for both SDC and IPG) that are not included in Nielsen ratings, denoted by Adj ustmerjt,, for year t and claimant k. This step is necessary to account for all claimed programs in the royalty allocation methodology, but
requires additional data.'tep
3." Using the estimate of distant viewers, calculate the share of royalties, for example, for SDC by:
Viewer,SDC Share,Sgl SDC (4) Viewer, + Viewer, where t ranges between 2004 and 2009 for cable and between 1999 and 2009 for satellite.
Ro alt Estimates under m Pro osed Methodolo
Imputing small values (less than 0.1 percent) instead provides very similar results with no significant effect on the resulting shares. "It is logical to assume that the share of royalties for a given party (SDC or IPG) should increase with the number of claimed programs.
15 I calculate my royalty share estimates by removing all IPG programs disqualified by the Judges'uling and ensuring that all programs permitted by the Judges'uling were included (listed above) using the methodology described above. To avoid assigning (distant) subscribers to non-compensable programming, and to ensure that any treatment of WGNgWGNA does not unfairly benefit SDC, which is now the only devotional claimant with a rated compensable program on WGN(WGNA, I remove programming on WGNgWGNA completely from my calculations."
The satellite royalty allocations for IPG are lower than the cable royalty allocations because its claimants'rograms generally did not appear on the stations that were most highly retransmitted in satellite, demonstrating why coupling ratings with distant subscribers may be more appropriate to establish relative market value (because ratings alone do not take into account that not all programs are retransmitted equally, or at all, in distant markets).
X. Order Reopening Record
On May 4, 2016, the Judges reopened the record for this proceeding and requested additional evidence due to shortcomings of proposed methodologies. Based on the Judges'omments
in that order, I conducted additional analyses to supplement the methodology and royalty shares I had previously presented (as restated or summarized in prior sections, as appropriate) to the Judges. Specifically, the Judges stated:
Note that this only affects the satellite allocation in this proceeding given that the programs left were broadcast on WGN/WGNA only during 1999-2001. With the disqualification of certain IPG programs, the only remaining compensable devotional programs claimed in this proceeding that were broadcast on WGN and retransmitted on WGNA at the same time are "Miracles Now," a program claimed by the SDC in 1999-2001, "James T. Meeks" and "Reverend Meeks" by Salem Baptist Church, programs claimed by IPG in 2001 only, and "Billy Graham" and "Billy Graham Youth Special", programs claimed by IPG in 2001-2003. "Miracles Now," an SDC program, was broadcast on WGN and retransmitted on WGNA at the same time weekly during all of 1999-2001. IPG program "James T. Meeks," on the other hand, was broadcast only three times and "Reverend Meeks" was broadcast only once on WGN and retransmitted on WGNA at the same time in 2001. "Billy Graham Youth Special" and "Billy Graham," claimed by IPG, were broadcast only once on WGN and retransmitted on WGNA at the same time in 2002 and 2003, respectively. Also, "James T. Meeks" and "Reverend Meeks" in 2001 and "Billy Graham" and "Billy Graham Youth Special" in 2002-2003 are unrated programs, apparently because they were not regularly scheduled broadcasts, and hence carry no value in my methodology because I have no evidence of viewership. On the other hand, "Miracles Now" is a rated program over 1999-2001, which would increase the royalty shares for SDC if included. Based on this background, I would add that by excluding WGN/WGNA, the value of the SDC share is understated in our calculations for 1999-2001 and should form the lowest point in any zone of reasonableness analysis for the SDC. "The SDC's implementation ofits methodology suffersfrom a critical lack of data. First, Dr. Erdem bases his conclusion that local ratings are an appropriate proxyfor distant viewing on a correlation that he derived solelyfrom February 1999 data. There is no basis in the recordfor the Judges to conclude that the correlation Dr. Erdem foundin the 1999 data continues unchanged throughout the entire succeeding decade. Dr. Erdem's decision to rest his entire analysis ofrelative market value over a decade on such a diminutive slice of distant viewing data raises a question concerning the reliability of the application of his methodology. See 4/16/15 Tr. at 170 (Robinson). Second, the local ratings data on which Dr. Erdem rests his conclusions regarding relative market value are extremely sparse. For 1999 through 2003, Dr. Erdem relies on ratings datafrom a single month in each year to compute relative market value. The Judges will not rest a determination upon such a slender evidentiary reed."
XI. Data Files Recently Received
I was recently provided with a new file which included some of the missing Nielsen rating data. Previously, the Nielsen Reports on Devotional programs only included the February report for 1999-2003. The new file provided relevant data (page R-7 containing summary information) for all three remaining reports for 1999, two more reports (May and July) for 2000, and one more report for 2001 (November), 2002 (July), and 2003 (May). In the rest of this report, I refer to these additional R-7 data with local ratings from eight sweeps as Supplemental Nielsen RODPs.
I exclude the Supplemental Nielsen RODPs from my baseline royalty share calculations.
However, I include them in some of the analyses or sensitivity checks presented below. The
"baseline" royalty shares are presented in Exhibit 2. The average shares for the SDC are 90 and
98 percent during 2004-2009 for cable and 1999-2009 for satellite, respectively. I would note that there are certain differences between the distributions in this report and the ones in my prior testimony. The differences are attributed to two key factors: 1) I received updated SOA information from CDC, and 2) the erroneous inclusion of Jack Van Impe programming in 1999 and 2000 distributions in my last testimony. This inclusion overstated IPG's share for those two years, because IPG did not make claim for that claimant in 1999 or 2000.
17 XII. Supplemental Analyses in Response to the Judges'riticism
To address the Judges'irst criticism on solely relying on 1999 February data to establish that there is a positive, statistically significant correlation between local and distant ratings, I expanded my analysis to include Nielsen distant viewing data (i.e., HHVH) from 2000-2003.
Additionally, in addition to reporting the correlation coefficient for the relationship between
local and distant ratings, I conduct regression analyses relating distant ratings to local ratings.
Regression analysis is a widely-accepted statistical tool for the investigation of relationship
between a dependent and an independent variable while also controlling for other factors. This tool allows the user to determine whether or not there exists a statistically significant relationship (positive or negative) between any two variables. The estimated coefficient of an independent variable represents the "marginal effect" of that independent variable on the dependent variable. Unlike a correlation analysis, a regression analysis allows the user to
include multiple independent variables to "explain" variation (or changes) in the dependent variable.
To conduct the regression analysis, which includes the Supplemental Nielsen RODPs, I
merge the following data sources: (i) 1999-2003 Nielsen distant viewership data (known as
household viewing hours (HHVH) data), (ii) 1999-2003 Nielsen rating table (R-7) for ranked
programs, and (iii) 1999-2003 CDC Statement of Accounts with subscription information. To create a measure of "distant ratings", I divide the average number of households tuned in for the program by the number of distant subscribers for the channels that broadcast the program.
This estimate provides a comparable measure to the local ratings in the Nielsen Diary data for the distant markets."
I conduct two sets of regression analyses using distant rating as the dependent variable." First, using 60 data points from claimed programs, I estimate three models. In model
"Note that this measure is not necessarily the equivalent of Nielsen local rating for the distant markets, but a comparable measure that divides viewership data by the population size. Because programs with zero local rating are not included in the Nielsen RODPs, l exclude programs with no
reported distant viewing (i.e., HHVH of zero hours) as well. However, I repeat the analyses by including programs with no reported distant viewing and find that the impact on estimated coefficients is minimal. The statistical significance of the findings and my conclusions do not change. 1, I include only the local rating as the independent variable. In model 2, I include a trend variable for 1999-2003, in addition to the local rating. In model 3, I include year dummies, in addition to the local rating. Second, I re-estimate the same three models using 104 data points from all programs (not only the ones claimed by SDC or IPG) over the same time period. Given that these programs are relatively homogeneous, including observable (and objective) program-specific factors would not affect the results in a significant way. Also, because ratings are calculations over many stations, including station-specific factors is not feasible.
Exhibit 3 provides the results from the regression analyses where the first column shows the independent variables, next three columns show the coefficient estimates and the standard errors for the three models that are based on claimed programs, and the last three columns show the coefficient estimates and the standard errors for the three models that are based on
all programs. The coefficient estimates that are statistically significant are denoted by * or **, for 5 percent and 1 percent significance levels, respectively, in Exhibit 3. For all three models
that are based on the claimed programs over 1999-2003, I find that the coefficient for the
distant rating measure is positive (0.008) and statistically significant for all three models (no
covariate, trend variable, and year dummies, respectively). When I repeat the estimation
using all programs over the same time period, I get similar and consistent results: The
coefficient for the distant rating measure is positive and statistically significant for all three
models. This analysis, which is based on approximately 5 times more data points than the correlation analysis with 1999 February ratings, indicates a strong positive relationship between local ratings and distant viewership calculated as a percentage of distant subscribers. The
A coefficient estimate that is statistically significant at the 1 percent significance level is a "better" result than a coefficient estimate that is statistically significant at the 5 percent significance level. " Note that objective of this analysis is to establish the positive and statistically significant relationship between distant and local ratings. The magnitude of the regression coefficient, which would depict how much the dependent variable moves with a unit change in the independent variable (known as the marginal effect), is not relevant. Also, R-squared values range between .3 and .45, depending on the model, and are reasonable. In this analysis, the R-squared simply explains how much of the variation in distant rating is explained by the included independent variables. correlation coefficient for the 60 data points from claimed programs during 1999-2003 is 0.79 and it is statistically significant."
In the two additional models where I test if the distant ratings change over time or by year, I find that the coefficients for the trending term and year dummies are not statistically significant. That is, after controlling for local ratings, distant ratings appear to be consistent and stable over 1999-2003. These findings allow me to use the local ratings as a measure of cable and satellite retransmission ratings in the royalty allocation methodology below. They additionally allow me to conclude that local ratings can be used throughout 1999-2009 given the lack of evidence for trends or year fixed effects," "
To address the Judges'econd criticism on relying on only one month of rating data (i.e.,
February rating reports from Nielsen) for 1999 through 2003, I conducted multiple analyses.
First, to investigate if local ratings for February are representative of an entire year, I analyzed the consistency of ratings for claimed programs over all Nielsen sweep months over 2004-2009, as I had access to all four reports for these years." For every program claimed by SDC or IPG that is rated in February, I calculated how often the program is rated in the remaining three sweep months excluding the Supplemental Nielsen RODPs. Exhibit 4 shows that if a program was rated in February, it was also rated in all three remaining sweep months for approximately
91 percent of the time implying that it is highly likely that a program is rated for the rest of the year if it is rated in February. When I included the Supplemental Nielsen RQDPs for 1999 for which all four sweep months are available, the results were almost identical.
I present the correlation coefficient as additional evidence, as well as for completeness. There is no accompanying exhibit for this statistic. Note that one could forecast distant ratings for 2004-2009 using this model. The analyses presented in the later sections based on these projections (equal to estimated coefficient times the local rating for the program) instead of the local ratings themselves would produce similar results.
I repeated the regression and correlation analyses by excluding the Supplemental Nielsen RODPs, and receive very similar results. These sweep months are February, May, July, and November for each year except in 2009 when the first sweep month is March.
20 Second, I calculated the change in the ratings between February and every other sweep month for each claimed program.'his is simply a calculation of the difference between the rating of a program in February and the rating of the same program in May. Exhibit 5 shows that the change (calculated over 242 comparisons) was at most 0.1 percentage points approximately 97.1 percent of the time (exactly 0 for 51.2 percent of the time and 0.1 percentage points for 45.9 percent of time time). This analysis also shows that the rating of a program was highly stable within a year: There was rarely a change in ratings that was greater than 0.1 percentage points. When I included all the newly received Nielsen reports for 1999, I found out that the change was at most 0.1 percentage points for 96.4 percent of the time (calculated over 278 comparisons)."
Third, I checked the impact of using only February ratings data on my royalty estimates
even for years when I have access to four reports. If the impact is small, then this is further evidence that February is representative of the whole year. Exhibit 6 shows that the impact of royalty share estimates was very small: The largest changes in the shares of programs claimed
by SDC were 2.8 percentage points for cable in 2004 and 0.3 percentage points in 2005 for satellite. Finally, I expanded my calculations by including all the Supplemental Nielsen RODPs for 1999-2003. This analysis would not impact the royalty estimates for cable given that the additional data predates the relevant time period (i.e., 2004-2009). Exhibit 7 shows that the
impact of using a more comprehensive data has almost no impact (when rounded to 1 decimal point) on the royalty shares.
XIII ~ Conclusion
In this report, I provided analyses which show that (1) there is a positive and statistically
significant relationship between local and distant ratings, (2) distant ratings do not vary
significantly over time (based on evidence from 1999-2003) after controlling for local ratings, (3)
Because ratings are percentages with one decimal point, the differences can only be 0, 0.1, 0.2, and so on, percentage points with exactly one decimal point.
I excluded the Supplemental Nielsen RODPs for 2000-2003 from this analysis given that I did not have all four reports for these years. Because the "baseline" satellite estimates for 1999-2003 are based only on February reports, there is no impact on shares presented in Exhibit 5 for these years.
21 Nielsen reports for February are representative of the whole year, and (4) royalty shares that are based only on February Nielsen Reports are very similar to those that are based on all four
Nielsen Reports. Compared to my earlier report, I was provided with summary pages from more
Nielsen RODPs to improve the royalty share allocations. I expanded my analyses that correlate
local and distant ratings data by incorporating the additional information. When both local and
distant ratings data is available, I showed that they are positively correlated and that
relationship is statistically significant.
It is my understanding that distant viewing data for 2004-2009 is not available. Because I find no evidence of a trend or statistically significant differences across individual years during
1999-2003, I used local ratings for royalty share calculations for 2004-2009 as well.
The CRB has recently ruled that IPG methodology in prior proceedings (based on the
metrics that measure volume rather than value), which is repackaged and presented slightly
differently in previous proceedings, is seriously deficient.'he CRB also has indicated that viewership-based models of valuation are consistent with Library precedent and "relative
market value" could be made by reliance on viewership information when a more optimal valuation tool was not available.
Note on Shaplev Value Methodoloav
In its 1999 distribution decision, the Judges suggested that a Shapley Value
Methodology would be more ideal. In theory, more precise or optimal royalty share allocation
could have been possible using an approach that is based on the Shapley Value. This methodology could allow us to calculate average marginal contribution (or value) of each
program claimed by SDC or IPG over all potential orderings of the claimed programs that are retransmitted distantly by an Operator."
However, as I and other testifying experts have agreed, the data to conduct such an
analysis is unavailable. We can only observe the "actual" ordering of programs, and we cannot
Initial Determination of Distributions of 1999 Cable Royalty Funds (Phase II), page 20. Initial Determination of Distributions of 1999 Cable Royalty Funds (Phase II), pages 14-16.
22 precisely estimate the marginal value of each program (e.g., when SDC and IPG have one claimed program on a given CSO/SO) even in this actual ordering. The "perfect" study or data required to calculate or approximate Shapley Values for the claimed programs simply do not exist to the best of my knowledge. Even if the data existed and were obtainable, it is unlikely that existing computer technology would permit the computation of a true Shapley valuation on any cable or satellite system retransmitting any significant number of stations, because of the immense number of operations required. The best we can do is to glean certain characteristics of what a Shapley valuation would show, if it could be conducted. As I previously testified and as the Judges found, Shapley valuation predicts that ratings underestimate the value of the most highly viewed programs, when comparing programs geared toward similar audiences that have similar levels of overlap among viewers. Since the
SDC have consistently had the higher rated programs in these proceedings, this reinforces my conclusion that even as the Nielsen ratings and viewership data provide the closest approximation to how subscribers value specifically claimed programs in the devotional category, which in turn should affect how Operators value these specific, individual programs, they likely understate the relative value of the SDC's programs compared to IPG's.
Thank you for the opportunity to present my analyses. I hope they will be useful in the proceedings.
23 XIV. Declaration of Erkan Erdem
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing testimony is true and correct, and of my personal knowledge.
Executed on August 17, 2016 I
l Exhibit 1. Curriculum Vitae
Background Dr. Erdem is an expert in program evaluation, policy analysis, statistical modeling, econometrics, and data analytics. He has extensive experience with Medicare payment systems and health care claims data. He teaches graduate-level econometrics at University of Maryland as an Adjunct Professor. Prior to joining KPMG, Dr. Erdem was a Senior Research Associate at IMPACt International, where he led federal government projects. Prior to IMPAQ, he worked as an Economist at Bates White where he prepared expert reports on mergers and acquisitions, monopolization disputes, market power and concentration issues, and cartels. He has ERKAN ERDENI worked closely with clients including leading law firms, Fortune 500 companies, and Senior Manager government agencies on a number of projects.
KPMG LLP 1676 International Drive Testifying Experience McLean, Virginia 22102 ~ In the Matter of Phase II Distribution of the 1998 and 1999 Cable Royalty Funds, Tel 703-286-8188 Docket No. 2008-1 CRB CD 1998-1999 (Phase II) (Copyright Royalty Board). Fax 703-935-8887 Cell 240-461-2265 [email protected] Professional and Industry Experience Function and Specialization ~ Assisting the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight (CCIIO) Dr. Erkan Erdem is a Senior Manager with the review and evaluation of the financial performance of the State-based in KPMG's Economic and Valuation Services (EVS) practice. Dr. Erdem Marketplaces (SBMs). of research and has eight years ~ Assisting CCIIO with verification of employer-sponsored coverage (ESC) and consulting experience. He provides economic services to KPMG's clients analysis of advance payments of the premium tax credits (APTC) granted for health and teaches econometrics at coverage purchased through the Federally-facilitated Marketplace. University of Maryland's Masters in
Applied Economics program. ~ Supporting the New York State Department of Health (NYDOH) Delivery System
Representative Clients Reform incentive Payment (DSRIP) Program with community needs assessments ~ Maryland Health Services Cost and definition of target populations for various projects for healthcare providers'roject Review Commission (HSCRC) plan applications. ~ New York State Department of Health ~ Assisting the Centers for Medicare S. Medicaid Services (CMS) Office of Minority ~ CMS, CMMI Health (OMH) with data analytic support related to identifying high risk ~ Administration on Aging populations and reducing health disparities for minority and disadvantaged Professional Associations populations. AEA, APHA, ASA, and AcademyHealth ~ Assisting The State of Maryland, Health Services Cost Review Commission (HSCRC) with its implementation of the state's All-Payer Model as part of the new Medicare Languages English, Turkish waiver with the CMS.
Education, Licenses 5 Certifications ~ Led the technical efforts in the Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) Public ~ PhD in economics from The Use Data Pilot Project for the Centers for Medicaid S. Medicare Services (CMS) to Pennsylvania State University create de-identified Public Use files (PUFs) using Medicare claims data. Led a team ~ BS in mathematics and BA in economics from Kor, University, of economists and statisticians to generate samples of Medicare beneficiaries, link Istanbul and process enrollment and claims data sets, and apply various statistical disclosure Programming Skills limitation techniques to prepare analytic files that meet HIPAA standards. ~ Matlab, STATA, Gauss, SAS, and C ~ Led the design of the methodology for the calculation of baseline and benchmark ~ Tableau Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) expenditures in the Comprehensive End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) Care (CEC) Initiative for the Center for Medicare S. Medicaid Innovation (CMMI). Reviewed and synthesized payment models in the Medicare
25 Shared Savings Program (SSP) and Pioneer Accountable Care Organization (ACO) Model as part of the task.
~ Conducted monitoring and evaluation of the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement initiative (BPCI) for CMMI with a focus on services provided around the acute care hospital stay (i.e., episode of care). Statistically identified diagnoses with a potential to generate savings and designed various cost and utilization measures to assess the performance of the initiative compared to appropriate benchmarks.
~ Conducted a rapid-cycle evaluation of the Community-based Care Transitions Project (CCTP) for CMS to assess the impact of the program on continuity of care and outcomes, including readmissions, emergency visits, medication errors, costs, and patient satisfaction.
~ Conducted the process evaluation of the Chronic Disease Self-Management Program (CDSMP) for the Administration on Aging (AoA) and analyzing the determinants of completion rates using participant-level data.
~ Evaluated the performance of over 1,000 hospitals in the U.S. in the National Content Developer Project for CMS. The data elements cover patient safety culture, measurement of health care processes and outcomes, infection control, procedures, medications, nursing practices, communication.
~ Investigated the response rates in the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey using a predictive regression model and reported the findings to CMS with recommendations for future surveys.
~ Provided analyses for the liability and the damages experts for AMD Inc. in the exclusionary conduct litigation of Intel Corp, (AMD Inc. vs. Intel Corporation).
~ Estimated damages to
o Novell, Inc. in the Microsoft monopolization litigation (In re Microsoft Corp. Antitrust Litigation). o Purchasers in the price-fixing litigation of global rubber chemicals manufacturers (In re Rubber Chemicals Antitrust Litigation). o Purchasers of hypodermic products in a foreclosure litigation involving a major medical supplies company. ~ Ana(yzed the competitive effects of a merger in the
o Oil refining industry in the U.S, o Liquor distribution industry in the U.S. ~ Developed a methodology and a simulation model to estimate damages in Section
II (i.e., monopolization) cases,
~ Provided economic analyses related to the calculation of water price in an international arbitration case.
~ Analyzed market power of Shell Trading Gas S. Power Company in proceedings before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).
~ Conducted a review of the econometric modeling in the Enron bankruptcy
26 litigation. Publications and Research Papers ~ Erdem, E. "Prevalence of Chronic Conditions Among Medicare Part A Beneficiaries in 2008 and 2010: Are Medicare Beneficiaries Getting Sicker?" Preventing Chronic Disease. 2014;11:130118.
~ Erdem, E., Korda, H., Woodcock, C., and Pedersen, S. "Racial and Ethnic Minority Participants in Chronic Disease Self-Management Programs (CDSMP): Findings from the Communities Putting Prevention to Work Initiative." Ethnicity and Disease. Vol. 23. Autumn 2013.
~ Erdem, E., Korda, H., Sennett, C., and Haffer CS. "Medicare Claims Data as Public Use Files: A New Tool for Public Health Surveillance. Journal of Public Health Management I Practice. Forthcoming.
~ Erdem, E. and Korda, H. "Self-Management Program Participation by Older Adults with Diabetes: Chronic Disease Self-Management Program (CDSMP) and Diabetes Self-Management Program (DSMP)." Family and Community Health. April/June 2014. Vol. 37(2):134-146.
~ Erdem, E., Fout, B., and Abolude, A. "Hospital Readmission Rates in Medicare." April 2013. Journal ofHospital Administration. Revise and resubmit.
~ Erdem, E. and Holly Korda. "Medicare Fee-for-Service Spending for Diabetes: Examining Aging and Co-morbidities." Journal of Diabetes and Metabolism. Forthcoming.
~ Erdem, E. "Chronic Conditions and Medicare Spending." Medicare and Medicaid Research Review. Revise 5 Resubmit.
~ Erdem, E. and Fout, B. "Trends in Medicare Prescription Drug Utilization." Working Paper, April 2013.
~ Erdem, E., Prada, S. and Haffer, C. "Medicare Payments: How much Do Chronic Conditions Matter'" Medicare and Medicaid Research Review. 2013: Volume 3 (2).
~ Erdem, E., Korda, H., Woodcock, C., and Pedersen, S. "From Participation to Completion: Older Adults in the Communities Putting Prevention to Work—Chronic Disease Self-Management Program (CDSMP) Initiative." Working Paper, March 2013.
~ Erdem, E. and Thomas W. Concannon. "What Do Researchers Say about Proposed Medicare Claims Public Use Files?" Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research, November 2012, Vol. 1, No. 6, pp. 519-525.
~ Erdem, E. "Chronic Conditions in Medicare." IMPAQ Research Brief 43. IMPAQ International LLC, November 2011.
~ Erdem, E. "Gender Differences in Home Health Care Utilization in Medicare." IMPAQ Research Brief 41. IMPAQ International LLC, September 2011.
~ Erdem, E. and Sergio Prada. "Creation of Public Use Files: Lessons Learned from the Comparative Effectiveness Research Public Use Files Data Pilot Project." Joint Statistical Meeting Proceedings, Government Statistics Section. Alexandria, VA:
27 American Statistical Association, pp. 4095-4109, 2011.
~ Erdem, E. and James Tybout. "Trade Policy and Industrial Sector Responses: Using Evolutionary Models to Interpret the Evidence." Brookings Trade Forum 2003, pp. 1-43.
~ Erdem, E. "An Empirical Model of Investment Behavior in Dynamic Oligopolies." Working Paper, 2005.
~ Erdem, E. "Strategic Investment and Endogenous Entry." Working Paper, 2003. Conference Presentations
~ Erdem, E. "From Participant to Completer: Understanding Completion Rates among Older Adults in the Chronic Disease Self- management Program." American Public Health Association Annual Meeting, Boston, MA, November 2013.
~ Erdem, E., Singh, A., and Borton, J. "Aggregate Level Public Use Files with High Data Confidentiality and Analytic Utility for Descriptive Analyses from Medicare Claims Data." Joint Statistical Meetings, Montreal, QC, August 2013.
~ Erdem, E. "Medicare Public Use Files for Research, Training, and Innovation." Panel Chair. AcademyHealth 2013 Annual Research Meeting, Baltimore, MD, June 2013.
~ Erdem, E. "Chronic Conditions and U.S. Health Care." American Public Health Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, October 2012.
~ Erdem, E. "Getting the DIRT [Data for Innovation, Research, and Transparency] on Medicare and Medicaid Public Use Files." AcademyHealth 2012 Annual Research Meeting, Orlando, FL, June 2012.
~ Erdem, E. "An Introduction to Medicare Claims Public Use Files (PUFs)." AcademyHealth Methods Webinar Series, July 26 and August 9, 2011.
~ Erdem, E. "Creation of Public Use Files: Lessons Learned from the Comparative Effectiveness Research Public Use Files Data Pilot Project."
o American Evaluation Association Meeting, Anaheim, CA, November 2011. o Joint Statistical Meetings, Miami Beach, FL, August 2011. ~ Erdem, E. "CMS Public Use Files for Comparative Effectiveness Research", AcademyHealth Annual Research Meeting Innovation Center, Seattle, WA, June 2011.
~ Erdem, E. "New CMS Data Sets: CMS 2008 BSA Inpatient Claims PUF." Health 2.0 Developer Challenge Code-a-thon, Washington, DC, February 2011. il Exhibit 2. Royalty Distribution for SDC Claimants
Year SDC Cable share SDC Satellite share 1999 100 0% 2000 100.0% 2001 98.8% 2002 98.5% 2003 97 2% 2004 89. 1Yo 98.8% 2005 89.2Yo 98.4% 2006 87.5Yo 91.2% 2007 92.4% 97.1% 2008 90.2% Case resolved 2009 90.0% 97.9% Note: Values subject to rounding. 2008 Satellite was resolved by CRB Order granting final distribution to SDC (100Yo).
29 I
I Exhibit 3. Regression Analysis Results
Dependent Claimed Programs All Matched Programs variable: Distant rating Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Local rating 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.006 0.006 0.006 (9.84)** (9 87)QQ (9 64)QQ (9.25)** (9.24)** (8.96)** Year (Trend) -0.000 -0.000 (1.23) (0.64) 1999
2000 -0.000 -0.001 (0.15) (0.75) 2001 -0.001 -0.000 (0.93) (0.50) 2002 -0.001 -0.000 (1.38) (0.44) 2003 -0.000 -0.000 (0.61) (0.10) Constant -0.001 0.403 -0.000 0.001 0.218 0.00 (1.55) (1.23) (0.33) (0.03) (0.64) (0.06)* R 0.63 0.64 0.64 0.46 0.46 0.47 N 60 60 60 104 104 104
Note: * p&0.05; ** p&0.01. t-statistics are presented in parentheses.
30
Exhibit 4. Consistency of Local Ratings — Being Ranked
Excluding recently received RODPs for Including recently received RODPs for 1999 1999 Category Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Ranked in all 3 sweeps 90.70% 90 91.84% Missing in one sweep 4.65% 4.08% Missing in two sweeps 0.00% 0.00% Missing in three sweeps 4.65% 4.08%
Exhibit 5. Consistency of Local Ratings — Change in Ratings over Time
February to IVlay February to July February to November Overall Excluding Supplemental Nielsen RODPs for 1999 Change in rating Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Equal to zero 51 62.96% 36 44.44% 37 46.25% 124 51.24% 0.1 percentage points 29 35.80% 41 50.62% 51.25% 45.87% 0.2 percentage points 1.23% 4.94% 1.25% 2.48% 0.3 percentage points 1 25% 0.41% Total 100.00% 81 100.00% 80 100.00% 242 100 00% Including Supplemental Nielsen RODPs for 1999 Change in rating Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Frequency Percent Equal to zero 60 64.52% 44 47.31% 43 46.74% 147 52.88% 0.1 percentage points 32 34.41% 43 46.24% 46 50.00% 121 43.53% 0.2 percentage points 1.08% 6.45% 1.09% 2.88% 0.3 percentage points 2.17% 0.72% Total 100 00/ 93 100 00% 92 100.00% 278 100.00%
Note: The Supplemental Nielsen RODPs for 2000-2003 are excluded from this analysis given that not all four reports for these years are available.
31
Exhibit 6. Royalty Allocation for SDC and IPG Claimants — Sensitivity Check 1
Cable Satellite Year SDC SDC share Change SDC SDC share Change share (only February Nielsen share (only February Nielsen sweeps) sweeps) 1999 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% 2000 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% 2001 98.8% 98.8% 0.0% 2002 98.5% 98.5% 0.0% 2003 97.2% 97.2% 0.0% 2004 89.1% 86.3% -2.8% 98.8% 98.6% -0.2% 2005 89.2% 89.4% 0.2% 98.4% 98.1% -0.3% 2006 87.5% 89.0% 1.5% 91.2% 91.0% -0.2% 2007 92.4% 92.1% -0.2% 97.1% 97.1% 0.0% 2008 90.2% 91.1% 0.9% Case Resolved 2009 90.0% 89.7% -0.3% 97.9% 97.9% 0.0% Note: Values subject to rounding.
Exhibit 7. Royalty Allocation for SDC and IPG Claimants — Sensitivity Check 2 Satellite Year SDC share SDC share Change (All available Nielsen Reports) 1999 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% 2000 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% 2001 98.8% 98.8% 0.0% 2002 98.5% 98.4% 0.0% 2003 97.2% 97.3% 0.1% 2004 98.8% 98.6% -0.2% 2005 98.4% 98.1% -0.3% 2006 91.2% 90.2% -1.0% 2007 97.1% 97.0% -0.1% 2008 Case Resolved 2009 97.9% 98.0% 0.2% Note: Values subject to rounding.
32 Testimony of John Sanders Before the COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES Washington, DC
In re
DISTRIBUTION OF 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, DOCKET NO. 2012-6 CRB CD 2004-09 (Phase 2008, AND 2009 Cable Royalty Funds II)
DISTRIBUTION OF 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2012-7 CRB SD 1999-2009 2007, 2008, and DOCKET NO. 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, (Phase II) 2009 Satellite Royalty Funds
Testimony of John S. Sanders Testimony of John S. Sanders
My name is John S. Sanders and I am testifying on behalf of the Settling Devotional
Claimants ("SDC") in these proceedings.' have been requested to make a fair determination of the relative fair market values of particular devotional television programs claimed by the parties in the 2004-2009 Phase II Cable Royalty Proceeding and the 1999-2009 Phase II Satellite Royalty
Distribution Proceeding. For simplicity, these matters will be referred to as "the Proceedings" in this testimony.
I provided prior written and oral testimony in connection with the Proceedings, culminating with an appearance before the Copyright Royalty Judges ("Judges" ) in April of 2015.
On May 4, 2016, the Judges issued an Order Reopening Record and Scheduling Further
Proceedings requesting the participants to "present additional evidence and expert opinion" due to the Judges'inding that "(n]o party has presented a methodology and data that, together, are sufficient to support a final determination in the contested categories."
'he Settling Devotional Claimants are comprised of the following entities: Amazing Facts, Inc., American Religious Town Hall, Inc., Catholic Communications Corporation, Christian Television Network, Inc., The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc., Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc., Cottonwood Christian Center, Crenshaw Christian Center, Crystal Cathedral Ministries, Inc., Evangelical Lutheran Church ln America, Faith For Today, Inc., Family Worship Center Church, Inc. (D/B/A Jimmy Swaggart Ministries), International Fellowship of Christians S. Jews, Inc., In Touch Ministries, Inc., It Is Written, John Hagee Ministries, Inc. (aka Global Evangelism Television), Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. (FK/A Life In The Word, Inc.), Kerry Shook Ministries (aka Fellowship of the Woodlands), Lakewood Church (aka Joel Osteen Ministries), Liberty Broadcasting Network, Inc., Messianic Vision, Inc., New Psalmist Baptist Church, Oral Roberts Evangelistic Association, Inc., RBC Ministries, Reginald B. Cherry Ministries, Rhema Bible Church (aka Kenneth Hagin Ministries), Ron Phillips Ministries, Speak The Word Church International, St. Ann's Media, The Potter's House Of Dallas, Inc. (d/b/a T.D. Jakes Ministries), Word of God Fellowship, Inc. (d/b/a Daystar Television Network), Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, and Zola Levitt Ministries. The purpose of this current testimony is to clarify and supplement my earlier testimony.
As such, and to avoid repetition, this testimony is divided into two sections below: NEW ISSUES
COVERED IN REPOPENED CASE, which is limited primarily to additional data and analysis and
ISSUES COVERED IN ORIGINAL CASE, which summarizes and updates my prior testimony.
For the purposes of this analysis, "fair market value" is defined as the price in cash or cash equivalents between a willing buyer and a willing seller, both being fully informed and neither being under compulsion. Relative fair market value is a similar concept, but is expressed as a percentage rather than a dollar amount. The purpose of this analysis is to divide reasonably the royalty pool between SDC and Independent Producers Group ("IPG").
Professional Background - Work and Education History
I have been a Principal at the Washington, DC-based firm Bond & Pecaro, Inc. since 1986.
Bond & Pecaro, Inc. specializes in the appraisal of communications and media assets. Prior to
that, I was a manager with Frazier, Gross & Kadlec, Inc., where I worked from 1983 to 1986.
Frazier, Gross & Kadlec, Inc. also specialized in the valuation of media and communication assets.
During my career, I have actively participated in the appraisal of more than 3,000 communications and media businesses. Much of my work has been focused on the television and cable industries and the appraisal of intangible assets such as customer and subscriber- based assets, syndicated and feature film television programming, and advertiser relationships..
'he distribution of programming royalties for distant signals distributed on cable television and satellite systems is based upon a two phase process. In Phase I, the royalty pool is allocated to broad program categories. In Phase II, the contents of each pool are then divided among each of the constituent programming claimants. In other words, the Phase I procedure divides the royalty pool into reasonably homogenous categories, whereas the Phase II procedure allocates the contents of each category based upon the programming it contains. a double in I graduated from Dickinson College with a B.A. Cum Laude (Honors) and major
International Studies and Economics. I received an M.B.A. from the Colgate Darden Graduate
School of Business at the University of Virginia. I also hold the Accredited Senior Appraiser
("ASA") designation in the specialty of business valuation from the American Society of
Appraisers. Additional information on my background is provided in Appendix A.
Since 1983, I have worked on a regular basis for media companies such as Adelphia, Cable
One, CBS, Comcast, Fox, Nexstar, Sinclair, Time Warner and many others to perform economic and valuation analyses. These analyses are employed for a variety of purposes including, but not limited to, financial and tax reporting, mergers and acquisitions, financing, litigation support,
music rights fees and fixed asset management. I have also filed testimony in the 1998-1999
Cable Royalty Distribution Proceeding (Dkt. No. 2008-1 CRB CD 1998-1999 (Phase II)) in the devotional claimant category, as well as the initial phase of this proceeding, on behalf of the SDC.
II. Primary Materials Considered
In order to establish a comparative assessment of the relative fair market values of IPG
and SDC programming, I reviewed the CRB Order of May 4, 2016 reopening the record in this matter, the decision of the Copyright Royalty Judges in the 2000-2003 Phase II Cable Royalty
Distribution Proceeding, the CRJ's MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER FOLLOWING
PRELIMINARY HEARING ON VALIDITY OF CLAIMS regarding the Distribution of the 2000-2003 Cable
Royalty Funds, and the 2004-2005 Phase I Cable Royalty Distribution Proceeding. I also reviewed the 2000-2003 written direct and amended direct and rebuttal cases and oral testimony of witnesses for SDC, IPG and the Motion Picture Association of America-represented Program
Suppliers ("MPAA"). Further, I have reviewed the written direct, amended direct and rebuttal cases and the oral testimony of the SDC and IPG in the 1999 Phase II Cable Royalty Distribution
Proceeding, and the Judges'ulings associated therewith.
all I have also reviewed the written direct and amended direct and rebuttal cases, the expert reports prepared and testimony provided in connection with the distribution of 1999-2009
Satellite Royalty Funds and the distribution of 2004-2009 Cable Royalty Funds. These reports were prepared by Erkan Erdem, Ph.D. ("Dr. Erdem") and Toby Berlin ("Ms. Berlin" ) on behalf of the
SDC, Dr. Laura Robinson on behalf of IPG and Dr. Gray on behalf of the MPAA. Furthermore, I had access to and considered Cable and Satellite Statement of Accounts prepared by Cable Data
Corporation, programming data from Tribune Media Services, and Nielsen Media Research
("Nielsen" ) Reports on Devotional Programs ("RODP"). Additionally, I reviewed the list of IPG- represented clients in the 1999 and 2000-2003 Cable Distribution proceedings, and the 1999-2009
Satellite/2004-2009 Cable Distribution Proceeding. I also considered published statistics that report
Nielsen measurements of national viewing trends.
Appendix B is a summary listing of SDC claimants in this proceeding and the years in which they have made claims, with a separate listing for satellite and cable claims. Each of the
SDC claimants, through their representatives, sent an email confirming the SDC programs. A listing of their program titles, also broken out for the cable and satellite claims, is included in
Appendix C.
I will now address the additional issues raised by the Judges. Much of my commentary is drawn from two spreadsheets entitled "Satellite Viewing History" and "Cable Viewing History". Figure 3 Devotional Programming Viewing Trends 1999-2009Satellite Programs I
4 6,000
08 P S,OOO —Total HH Projection for All Rated Devotional C 'g 4,000 Programs (000)
SDC Programs HH o 3,000 — Projection
~ 2,000 Q — IPG Programs HH Projection ct 1,000
0 I I cn o nl foal ffi M W Ul EO CO Ch Ch CA O O O O O O O a Z2 V O CJ 'V CLI O Cl 0 CC. 0 u. 0 ~ CL. 0 ~ CC. 0 ~ u. 0 Nielsen RODP Report Date
A closer inspection reveals information about devotional programming that explains the
patterns in the figures above. I will first describe the information in the Satellite Viewing History spreadsheet, which closely mirrors the data in the Cable Viewing History spreadsheet.
First, the devotional category tends to be dominated by a relatively small number of important programs. Based upon the viewing for every RODP book and summary that was located for the time period in question (37 out of a possible 44), aggregate average viewing of
58.2 million households was measured. Of this, only 10 programs out of 111 accounted for the preponderance, 61%, of the viewing. Of these, most are SDC claimants, including Hour of Power
(¹1), In Touch 30 (¹2), Joel Osteen (¹3), Dr. D. James Kennedy (¹4), 700 Club (¹7), and Day of Discovery (C9). Only one of the Top 10 programs, James Robison — Life Today (P5) is an IPG claimant.
Similarly, a minority of programs exhibited longevity. Of the 111 programs, only 20 appeared in every available RODP report from 1999 through 2009. Of these, 9 are SDC claimants and only 2 are devotional entities for which IPG still has allowed claims in some of those years.
Although the total number of measured programs declined from 70 to 33 over the time period, it is important to note that most of the attrition related to a multitude of unstable and less highly viewed programs. There is often a story behind the numbers. The decline late in the decade of
Coral Ridge Hour (also reported as Dr. D. James Kennedy) may be attributed to the failing health and then death of Dr. Kennedy in 2007. Similarly, the ascendency and high household viewing of
Joel Osteen is a manifestation of Mr. Osteen's innovative approach to televangelism., which has made his Lakewood Church the largest "megachurch" in the United States and his program the most highly viewed devotional program in history.
The situation is similar for the devotional viewing in the cable category. Of the 81 programs that received measurable audiences, the top 10 accounted for 66% of the total viewing. Of these, seven were SDC programs and only one, Jack Van Impe, was associated with
IPG. The number of rated programs fell from 54 to 33 between 2004 and 2009, but the programs lost were largely unstable and more poorly rated programs. Of the 23 programs that showed uninterrupted and enduring viewership over the full seven year period, almost half (10) were SDC claimants while two were IPC claimants.
The flip side to the observation that much of the decline in viewing was due to the loss of marginal programs is that viewing on the surviving programs, particularly those associated with
10 the SDC, continued to be robust during this period. The average measured viewing per devotional program, as shown in Figure 4, remained in the 80,000 to 120,000 household range during the period, and showed no discernable weakening trend. Figure 4
Devotional Programming Viewing Trends 1999-2009 All Measured Devotional Programs 140
oo120
E 100 pA —Average HH/program ~o I 80
C 60
o 40
o 20 tO 0 l~ Ol R O rn cA M W cD 00 Ol Ch Ql Ol O CP O O O g O CP CP O Jh C + C Jh Jh + C Jh C St + Cl Q e ~ a o m LI 0 LL 0 ~ IJ 0 w LI 0 w LL 0 -l Ll. 0 Nielsen RODP Report Date
The information in the spreadsheets highlights the importance of audience measurements in the determination of the value or the relative value of television programming.
The highest rated programs tend to be the most enduring. As with larger and more enduring audiences, these programs have the most relative value for a myriad of purposes, including for the specific purpose of attracting subscribers to a cable system. As discussed in earlier
11 proceedings, this relationship is particularly important in the case of homogenous programming that attracts a similar audience, like devotional programming.
In short, the devotional category has not exhibited audience erosion patterns that are noticeably different from the television industry as a whole. Within the devotional category, absolute viewing to the SDC's programs has been stable and highly dominant, not just relative to these proceedings, but in the entire universe of devotional programming. While the IPG-claimed programming also exhibited relatively stable viewing, the measured viewing was much less significant.
IV. Mow relevant is the impact of relying only on February RODP reports?
As discussed earlier, in response to the Judges'equest, the SDC were able to acquire additional reports so that at least the R-7 summary page is available for each of 37 out of the 44 quarters encompassed in the 1999-2009 time frame. New data includes May 1999, July 1999,
November 1999, May 2000, July 2000, November 2001, July 2002, and May 2003. The additional data did not, in my opinion, reveal any anomalies or deficiencies in the data. In fact, to the contrary, audience measurements were in general quite stable from period to period, with the ranks of the programs staying relatively consistent despite the fact that Nielsen changes the survey sample each quarter. As shown in the charts above and in the associated spreadsheets, viewing proceeded logically from period to period, particularly for the top programs.
These four "sweep" periods are particularly important for local television stations, cable and satellite pay-television systems, and advertisers. Each year, Nielsen processes more than 2 million diaries from DMAs nationwide and uses electronic metering in the 56 largest television markets to compile information about viewing behavior. Seven-day diaries are distributed to a
12 different household sample each week during a sweep month. Because of the large sample size and the employment of a methodology that is both consistent and rigorous, the sweeps are the primary basis upon which programming and advertising decision are made, and were so in the
1999-2009 time frame. In fact, many television programmers air their most competitive shows during sweep months in an effort to drive ratings. Conversely, these ratings also form the basis for which programs are terminated.
Nielsen also compiles non-sweep, meter-only data during other months of the year. This data tends to be less influential because it is limited to the largest markets (therefore comprising a non-random and non-representative sample of nationwide viewership) and uses smaller samples.
It is also important to understand that diaries and meters measure different, although related, things. Diaries measure viewership as reported by actual viewers, whereas meters measure only whether the television is on. There are many households in which the television is kept on "in the background," or even overnight, even though nobody is watching. Meters register this as "viewing," whereas diaries generally do not. Diary data is therefore a better measure of what programming viewers (and therefore subscribers) actually value.
Metered data ratings in non-sweep months are therefore regarded in the industry as far inferior to diary ratings in sweep months. On the whole, I would prefer to have only one or a few months of diary data each year from all DMAs, such as is provided in the RODPs, than 12 months of metered data each year from an incomplete, non-random, and non-representative sample of
DMAs for the largest markets that does not effectively distinguish whether viewers are actually watching.
13 V. How relevant is the impact of relying only on 1999 data to establish the relationship between local viewing and distant viewing'P
of As I have testified previously, devotional programming is a critical component any menu of offerings by a cable or satellite system. Similarly, the importation of distant signals, which often contain devotional programs, is also an important component of the menu of services offered by cable and satellite system operators. However, due in part to the fact that these components are comparatively small relative to categories such as sports and syndicated programming, data relating to them is also somewhat limited. HHVH data regarding distant signal viewing is not available after 2003. Despite extensive efforts by the SDC to obtain out-of-
market viewing data (including multiple conference calls with Nielsen in which I was a participant), Nielsen was unable to provide any information in this regard for the years at issue in these proceedings.
The lack of available data in this regard is telling. Real life market participants do not have access to, and do not generally rely upon, information relating to out-of-market viewership.
There is no reason to suspect that hypothetical market participants in a hypothetical market would behave differently in this regard. In short, in-market viewership is widely regarded as a
reasonable basis to evaluate how a program or station will perform out-of-market. As I have testified before, there is an economic limit to the value of more information. Rational buyers and sellers of programming cannot and will not expend unlimited resources to obtain data to evaluate transactions. They obtain the best information available at a reasonable price, and then make the best decision that they can based on the information they have.
Viewership generally translates well from market to market, both in and out of market.
The reason is obvious and well-known to the industry — absent some peculiar connection to a
14 local market, the same factors that make a program popular in a local market also tend to make a program popular in distant markets.
Every component of information that is available confirms this understanding, and supports a strong and statistically significant relationship between local and distant signal viewing.
For example, an analysis contained in my Direct Statement in the Phase II Distribution of the 2000-2003 Cable Royalty Funds on Remand compared the RODP and HHVH data for the years
2000-2003 and calculated a strong correlation between local and distant viewing measurements for the same programs.
I have also reviewed the testimony of Erkan Erdem, Ph.D, in this matter. Dr. Erdem's analysis validates the strength of this relationship using a regression methodology,
The linkage between local and distant viewing, while supported by the quantitative data described above, also comports with my professional experience and the application of common sense. Participants in actual television, cable, and satellite economic decisions must inevitably make decisions based upon limited data. Nielsen data, primarily the quarterly sweeps reports and customized data such as the RODP reports, is the primary source of data for decisions related to program selection and scheduling. Survey data is often used to support decisions outside of the specific market where the data is collected. For example, a program that performs well in ten markets may be expected to perform well in a distant market with similar characteristics.
Due to the heavy reliance placed on Nielsen data for a variety of purposes in the broadcasting, cable, and satellite industries to make real marketplace decisions, there is no reason to believe that it will be any less authoritative in the hypothetical marketplace for specific programs
15 distributed distantly on cable and satellite systems. This relationship explains why, in part, companies will "test market" products and programs in in certain geographic markets before distributing them in others.
Vi. Revised Year-By-Year Allocation in Cable and Satellite Categories
Based upon the additional information received in this matter, the analysis conducted by
Dr. Erdem, and my own professional experience and opinion, the relative fair market value of the
SDC and IPG claimed programming in the cable and satellite categories is as follows:
Cable
Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
IPG 10.9% 10.8% 12.5% 7.6% 9.8% 10.0%
SDC 89.1% 89.2% 87.5% 92.4% 90.2% 90.0%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Satellite
Year 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
IPG 0.0% 0.0% 1.2% 1.5% 2.8% 1.2% 1.6% 8.8% 2.9% Resolved 2.1%
SDC 100..0% 100.0% 98.8% 98.5% 97.2% 98.8% 98.4% 91.2% 97.1% Resolved 97.9%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
ISSUES COVERED IN ORIGINAL CASE
Vil. Relevance of Audience Measurements for Establishing Relative Fair Market Values for SDC and IPG Programming
Over the course of over thirty years providing valuation assessments in connection with
media and communications, I have looked at a wide range of industry criteria for assessing program valuation. For the purpose of providing testimony to assist in addressing the task of the
16 Judges in the instant proceeding, namely to allocate shares of compulsory royalties collected by the Copyright Office from cable systems for the retransmission of the SDC devotional programs and IPG-represented devotional programs on broadcast signals on a distant basis, I based on my testimony on my professional experience in valuing content, on the CRJs 2000-2003 Phase II Final
Determination and the expert reports of Mr. Erdem and Ms. Berlin. To allocate reasonably the available funds between SDC and IPG in this proceeding, it is my opinion that audience measurements relying on surveys conducted by Nielsen, together with data from the Copyright
Office records, compiled by CDC, are the best available tools to determine shares.
One of the reasons that cable and satellite operators value devotional programming as a category is that it appeals to a class of potential subscribers who are not necessarily captured by other programming, like sports or movies, for instance. The programs claimed within the category of devotional programming are directed predominantly to a Christian audience, and can therefore be thought of as homogenous in terms of the subscriber base to which they are likely to appeal. In my opinion, where programs are homogenous, the most salient factor to distinguish them in terms of subscribership is the size of the viewing audience. A religious program with a larger audience is more likely to attract and retain more subscribers for the cable system operator, and is therefore of proportionately higher value. Nielsen ratings data is the currency of the broadcast, satellite and cable industries, and it is generally regarded as the most reliable available measure of audience size.
I reviewed the testimony of Ms. Berlin, which was prepared in connection with this satellite royalty proceeding. Ms. Berlin's testimony validates the foregoing and demonstrates
17 the importance or ratings data to determine the relative value of certain programs when satellite television companies are developing their channel offerings.
Vill. Role of Viewing Broadcast Signals in the Satellite Television and Cable Industries
The signals covered by this proceeding represent a small component of the program offerings of satellite television companies to their subscribers. Nevertheless, television signals have been essential to attract and keep pay television subscribers. By 1999, as Ms. Berlin explains, satellite television companies, active competitors to cable, first gained the ability to carry local programs, which greatly expanded the competitive strength of these operations.
Between 1999 and 2009, satellite television operators expanded service greatly, with broadcast signals playing a meaningful role in that expansion. Even as they too reached tens of millions of paying subscribers, satellite operators, like their cable competitors, determined that it is still beneficial to retransmit broadcast signals, principally because enough subscribers watched the programs on the channels and the operators were concerned that dropping of signals could adversely affect the appeal of satellite services to subscribers.
In the context of this proceeding, satellite and cable operators pay on a compulsory basis for the right to carry the entire broadcast day of a distant over-the-air television channel. As such, while satellite and cable operators give consideration to specific programs on a local television channel in making a decision as to whether or not to carry it, there are no transactions involving specific programs.
For this reason, there is no "free market" for the purchase of the rights to copyrighted programs broadcast in distant markets. If there were, it would be a relatively simple matter to sum up the amounts paid by satellite operators in individual arms-length transactions for
18 programs received from broadcast signals in order to determine the relative fair market value of programming provided by particular groups of claimants.
Such an approach is not possible because transaction data regarding individual programs is not available. It is necessary for an appraiser to develop an alternative methodology to determine the relative fair market value of devotional programs carried over broadcast signals.
Fortunately, ratings data is available from widely accepted organizations like Nielsen. Local viewing data is routinely employed in the broadcasting and pay television industries to facilitate a multitude of practical decisions, ranging from pricing advertising and determining the cost of syndicated programs to establishing the value of a pay television network and measuring the payback on a capital investment. As the CRB determined in the 2000-2003 case, local viewing data, when measured with distant signal subscribership information, can be a surrogate for viewing of content on a distant basis. Except for special studies ordered by the Motion Picture
Association of America ("MPAA") in other royalty cases, there is no readily accessible information about viewership in such a specialized market.
A notable exception to the requirement that cable and satellite operators retransmit broadcast programming precisely as telecast locally must be mentioned. The exception is WGN
America ("WGNA"), the most widely carried "superstation," whose local signal is WGN-TV,
Chicago, Illinois. By virtue of widespread carriage on DirecTV, DISH, and thousands of cable systems across the country and its manner of delivery, WGNA has establish a practice of substituting for some of its local programming at the satellite uplink, thereby creating a different programming package for pay television operators and their subscribers than is available to TV viewers of WGN in Chicago. This disparity has a devotional program corollary, because WGNA
19 substitutes a substantial number of devotional programs for certain local fare. As a result, while religious programming constitutes an important core of WGNA broadcast day, and serves a particularly important niche audience, the bulk of religious programming carried by WGNA is not compensable under the compulsory licensing rules.
IX. Nielsen Reports on Devotional Programs
ln its data reporting on viewing of religious television programming for the years in question in this matter, Nielsen produced a quarterly report called Report on Devotional
Programs (previously defined as "RODP"). These reports select a substantial, but not exhaustive, list of religious programs and provide detailed data on the viewing of the programs both in local markets and nationally.
Nielsen imposes restrictions on the devotional programs and stations that are included in the quarterly RODPs. These include the following:
a. The program must be taped or on film and available on a market-by-market basis.
b. It must be broadcast in at least five Nielsen Station Index ("NSI") markets.
c. It must be scheduled on a reportable commercial television station.
d. It must at the same time and day in at least two of the four weeks.
e. A station qualifying for a "mini-series" must air at least two times per week.
f. Foreign language syndicated programs are excluded.
g. A station must have telecast the devotional program on at least three different days for
Monday through Friday programs.
There are certain programs in the devotional category which, while they may be quite popular and generate significant audience ratings, do not appear in the RODPs because they do
20 not meet the reporting criteria. Examples might be Christmas and Easter specials, Spanish- language programming, or monthly specials. Consequently, any determination of the relative fair value of the distant signal programming related to the Phase II devotional parties may be subject to adjustment to reflect the audiences attributable to these programs.
X. Relative Valuation Methodology
In order to develop relative fair market values for devotional programming, the SDC retained Erkan Erdem, Ph.D. of KPMG to assess the Nielsen rating data and the CDC distant viewing data. The report of Dr. Erdem, attached to the SDC direct case, provides the details of his
methodological analysis. I fully endorse his approach, which relies on a sophisticated assessment of local viewing and distant subscribership as principal tools for allocating shares.
Further, as Dr. Erdem explains, special handling of WGNA devotional programming is required due to the limited amount of compensable, retransmitted devotional content as a percentage of all available religious programming on WGNA.
XI. Conclusions
Because all the IPG programs that are compensable are known, an application of the methodology described in Dr. Erdem's testimony, can be made.
Based upon actual practices in the broadcasting and pay television industries, it is clear that any methodology must reflect the popularity of the two groups of devotional programming.
Nielsen and distant subscriber data are the key tools to measure each compensable program's popularity and, hence, its value. This methodological approach comports with the procedures that are actually employed by broadcasters and satellite companies to make programming decisions.
21 The methodology in Dr. Erdem's report comports with these requirements and, as such, represents a reasonable and fair methodology for establishing the relative fair market values of the programs represented by the IPG and the SDC. As Dr. Erdem has calculated, the SDC programs delivered higher Nielsen ratings (the most important measure of audience delivery and popularity in the television industry) in every single quarterly measurement over the 1999-2009 period. To ignore this qualitative difference would undermine the very concept of value, and risk assigning the same value to filler and unpopular programming as to the programs that attract the largest and most loyal audiences. As a consequence, the following royalty allocation represents a fair and reasonable basis for the allocation of royalties between the SDC and IPG claimants'.
Cable
Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
IPG 10.9% 10.89fi 12.5% 7.69fi 9.8% 10.09fi
SDC 89.19fi 89.2% 87.5% 92.496 90.2% 90.0%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Satellite
Year 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
IPG 0.0% 0.096 1.2% 1.5% 2.8% 1.296 1.696 8.8% 2.996 Resolved 2.1%
5 DC 100..0% 100.0% 98.8% 98.5% 97.2% 98.8% 98.4% 91.2% 97.1% Resolved 97.9%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.096 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Dr. Erdem also notes in his testimony that certain programs claimed by both the IPG and the SDC are unrated, largely because they may not meet certain Nielsen-stipulated thresholds such as the number of markets reached or the number of times it is transmitted in a given
Testimony of Erkan Erdem, Ph. D., August 22, 2016, Exhibit 2. 22 measurement period. A review of the qualified, claimed programs indicates that the amount of unrated programs (while higher for the SDC) are only a minority of total programming. Based on the Nielsen standards for rating programs in the sweep reports, it should be noted that many of the unrated programs are telecast infrequently (monthly or annually), or lack the reach in number of stations to qualify for measurement. As a result, most of these programs are unlikely to generate quantifiable value for satellite operators, because existing or potential subscribers would be unlikely to rely on these unrated programs as a reason to subscribe to a satellite service, or drop a satellite service. Thus, unrated content should have only a marginal impact on the final shares of the SDC or IPG. Nevertheless, because there are more unrated SDC programs than IPG, it is appropriate to view Dr. Erdem's results as the low end of the zone of reasonableness for the SDC and the high end of the zone for IPG. In other words, because the
SDC programming comprises a greater share of the unrated programs, any credit for inclusion of that programming should enhance the SDC's overall royalty allocation by a modest amount. DECLARATION OF JOHN S. SANDERS
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing testimony is true and correct and of my personal knowledge.
Executed: August 22, 2016
John S. Sanders I AppendixA Qualifications of John S. Sanders PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS
JOHN S. SANDERS
John S. Sanders has over 30 years of experience in media and communications finance. He is a principal in and founder of the firm of Bond &. Pecaro, Inc., a Washington based consulting firm specializing in valuations, asset appraisals, and related financial services for the communications industry since 1986.
Mr. Sanders has been actively involved in both fair market valuations and asset appraisals of over 3,000 communications and media businesses. He has been qualified as an expert in valuation matters regarding communications assets in venues including U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, and the American Arbitration Association.
He is a member of the American Society of Appraisers and is an Accredited Senior Appraiser ("ASA") in the specialty of business valuation.
Mr. Sanders received a B.A. Cum Laude in Economics and International Studies (Honors) from Dickinson College. He also holds a Master's Degree in Business Administration from the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, Virginia. John S. Sanders
Sneaklna Enaaizements. Publications. and Exoert Testimonv
Sneaking Enizaaements
1. Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association, "Finding the Money Tree: Sources of Cellular Financing," First Annual Convention, Washington, D.C., May 29, 1985. Speech on effective business plan preparation and financing an acquisition.
2. National Association of Broadcasters, Radio Acauisition Seminar, Chicago, Illinois, October 25, 1985. Full day panel participation focusing on market evaluation, business valuation, and acquisition strategy.
3. National Association of Broadcasters, Radio Station Acauisition Seminar, New York, New York, November 1, 1985. Full day panel participation focusing on market evaluation, business valuation, and acquisition strategy.
4. National Association of Broadcasters, Small Market Radio Acauisition Seminar, Atlanta, Georgia, February 28, 1986. Full day panel participation focusing on market evaluation, business valuation, and acquisition strategy.
5. Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association, "An Acquisitive Industry: Mergers and Acquisitions in the Cellular Industry," Winter Meetiniz and Exoosition, Phoenix, Arizona, January 21, 1987. Panel discussion on business valuation techniques and specific value trends in telecommunications.
6. FCC Week and BOC Week Washington Seminar, "Techniques for Valuing Cellular Franchises in Rural Service Areas," Presentation at conference entitled Business Oooortunities in Rural Telecommunications: The Next Frontier, Washington, D.C., May 29, 1987.
Harrison, Bond 8c Pecaro Private Briefing on Media Financial Issues, Presentation on television network affiliation agreement valuation, Watergate Hotel, Washington D.C., December 14, 1987.
8. Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association, "Strong Signals From Wall Street," 1988 Winter Meetiniz and Exoosition, San Diego, California, January 25, 1988. Speaker on panel on how the financial community views cellular.
A-2 John S. Sanders
Soeakine Enaaaements. Continued
9. FCC Week and BOC Week Washington Seminar, "Market Analysis in Rural Service Area Cellular Telecommunications Systems," Presentation at conference on rural telecommunications issues, Washington, D.C., March 22, 1988.
10. Broadcast Financial Management Association, "The Impact of Proposed Tax Code Changes on Broadcast and Cable Values," 28th Annual Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, April 18, 1988.
11. Phillips Publishing, Inc. Washington Seminar, "Valuation of Mobile Telecommunications Companies," Conference on buying, selling, and investing in mobile telecommunications, Washington, D.C., June 9, 1988.
12. Cable Television Property and Sales Tax Group, "Methods of Valuation in Property Taxes," Chicago, Illinois, September 27, 1988.
13. Telocator Spring Convention, Moderator, Panel entitled "Optimizing an Acquisition: Tax &. Depreciation Issues," Orlando, Florida, May 1989.
14. Telocator 41st Annual Convention 5. Exposition, "Tax and Financial Reporting Issues in Acquisitions," Washington, D.C., October 7, 1989.
15. Telocator Spring International Convention, Moderator, Panel entitled, "The Financial Future of Cellular Telecommunications," San Diego, California, March 23, 1991.
16. Mobile Communications North America Exposition, Moderator and Speaker, Panel entitled "Site Acquisition and Management," Toronto, Canada, April 25, 1991.
17. Mobile Communications Marketplace, Moderator and Speaker, Panel entitled "Investment Outlook for Mobile Communications," Anaheim, California, October 23, 1991.
18. The Future of Paging, Moderator and Speaker, Panel entitled "Financing for Paging Growth," Washington, D.C., April 3, 1992.
19. Mobile Communications Marketplace, Moderator and Speaker, Panel entitled "Tax Issues in the 1990s," San Francisco, California, September 24, 1992.
A-3 John S. Sanders
S eakin En a ements Continued
20. The Future of Paging II, Moderator and Speaker, Panel entitled "Dollars and Sense: The Financial Future of Paging," Washington, D.C., June 25, 1993.
21. National Association of Broadcasters, Speaker, Panel entitled "Broadcasters and Taxation: New Benefits...and New Liabilities?" Las Vegas, Nevada, March 22, 1994.
22. Personal Communications Industry Association PCS Summit, Speaker, Panel entitled "Service Requirements for PCS: A Financial Perspective," Arlington, Virginia, June 24, 1994
23. Mobile Communications Marketplace, Speaker, Panel entitled, "Facts and Figures: Forecasting the Future of PCS," Seattle, Washington, September 22, 1994.
24. National Association of Broadcasters, Speaker, Panel Entitled "Buying and Selling Broadcast Stations in a Changing Regulatory Environment", Las Vegas, Nevada, April 12, 1995.
25. National Association of Broadcasters, Panel Entitled "Tax Reform School — The Impact of Proposed Tax Reforms of Broadcasting Station Values", Las Vegas, Nevada, April 6, 1998.
26. National Association of Broadcasters, Broadcasting Conference for the Americas, Panel Entitled "Station Valuation Techniques and Trends", Miami, Florida, August 26, 1999.
27. National Association of Broadcasters, 1999 Radio Show, Panel Entitled "Investing in Latin America", Orlando, Florida, September 1, 1999.
28. National Association of Broadcasters, Broadcasting Conference for the Americas, Panel Entitled "Buying and Selling a Station in Broadcasting", Miami, Florida, August 16, 2000.
29. National Association of Broadcasters, Broadcasting Conference for the Americas, Moderator of Panel Entitled "Investing Partners - Looking Beyond Boundaries", Miami, Florida, July 25, 2001.
30. Web Hosting Expo, Moderator of Panel Entitled "Venture Capital Looks at Web Hosting", Washington, DC, August 21, 2001.
A-4 John S. Sanders
Sneaking Enmai.ements. Continued
31. National Association of Broadcasters, Presentation Entitled "Broadcasting Valuation in an International Environment", Las Vegas, Nevada, April 7, 2002.
32. United States Telecom Association, Presentation Entitled "Telecommunications Valuation in an International Environment," Briefing to Egypt Telecom Delegation, September 23, 2002.
33. Broadcast and Cable Financial Management Association, Presentation Entitled "What's It Worth'? Media and Communications Valuation Techniques and Trends in Mid-2004," Atlanta, Georgia, May 16, 2004.
32. National Association of Broadcasters, Ownership Forum, Las Vegas, Nevada, April 15, 2007.
33. National Association of Broadcasters, Ownership Forum, Las Vegas, Nevada, April 13, 2008.
34. Minority Media &. Telecom Council, Financial and Procurement Forum, Washington, DC, July 21, 2009.
35. Media Financial Management Association, Moderator and Presenter on Newspaper Valuation Panel, Presentation on Public and Private Values of Newspaper Companies, Nashville, Tennessee, May 24, 2010.
36. Media Financial Management Association, Moderator and Presenter on Newspaper Valuation Panel, Presentation on Public and Private Values of Newspaper Companies, Atlanta, Georgia, May 16, 2011.
37. Media Financial Management Association, Moderator and Presenter on Newspaper-Broadcast Cross-Ownership, Presentation on Attrition of FCC-Permitted Newspaper-Television Cross- Ownership entities, Las Vegas, Nevada, May 22, 2012.
38. Media Financial Management Association, Moderator and Presenter on Newspaper Mergers, Acquisitions and Valuation Panel, Presentation on Valuation Trends and Merger Activity, Las Vegas, Nevada, May 23, 2012.
39. Media Financial Management Association, Presenter on FCC's Broadcast Incentive Auction Panel, Presentation of Spectrum Economics and Auction Strategies, New Orleans, Louisiana, May 20, 2013.
A-5 John S. Sanders
Publications. Continued
15. Co-Editor, The Television Industrv: Market-Bv-Market Review, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2016 Editions. 450 page reference volume containing detailed market data and projections for over 200 television markets.
16. With Harmeet K. Dhilon, "The New Gold Rush'? Wireless opportunities for colleges and universities through EBS broadcast spectrum leases", Universitv Business, October 2007.
17. "Financial and Accounting Considerations for Acquisitions," Chapter in Understanding Broadcast and Cable Finance, Chicago: Broadcast and Cable Financial Management Association, 2008.
18. "How Stations Can Reclaim Their Value," TVNewsCheck, www.tvnewscheck.corn, July 15, 2009.
19. "Kill TV-Newspaper Crossownership Rule, Now," TVNewsCheck, www.tvnewscheck.corn, June 27, 2012.
20. "The Good, The Bad, and the Opportunity: The tables are turning as investors purchase newspaper properties and reposition their operations for profitability," The Financial Manager, September/October 2012.
21. "Newspapers Round a Bend," The Financial Manager, November- December, 2013.
22. "Current Valuation Issues: Opportunities and Pitfalls on the Road to the Television Spectrum Auction," Bond 5 Pecaro, Inc., White Paper, December 2013.
23. "Compressed Press Values: Some newspaper managers fail to realize that they are valuing their printing assets inaccurately," The Financial Manager, July/August 2014.
24. "An Auction Like No Other: The World's Largest and Most Complex Auction is About to Take Place, and there are Billions of Dollars to be Gained, or Expended," The Financial Manager. November/December 2015.
A-8 John S. Sanders
Ex ert Testimon and S onsored Exhibits
1. Radio Tele hone S stems Inc. v. Metronet Inc. American Arbitration Association, AAA 011 119 00070 91. Testimony regarding changes in the financial condition of a radio paging business.
2. All Cit Communications Co. v. Industrial and Commercial Communications Services Inc., Milwaukee County, Wisconsin Circuit Court, 91-CV-003745. Testimony regarding the value of radio paging systems.
3. Ca obianchi v. Foster U.S. District Court, District of Columbia, 89-0936 NHJ-PJA. Testimony regarding the fair market value of a cellular telephone system and related economic issues,
4. O. R, Estman Inc, d b a Satellite Pa in v, Tel-Air Communications Inc. et. al. U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey, 91-5273(HCL). Testimony regarding the economics of the radio paging industry,
5. Cellular Information S stems Inc. C.I.S. 0 eratin Com an -1 Inc. et. al. Debtors U, S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, Case Nos. 92 B 45024 through 92 B 45037 (BRL) (Jointly Administered). Testimony regarding the value of cellular telephone systems in five metropolitan markets and three rural service areas, and related economic issues.
6. A lication of Vertical Broadcastin Inc. Town Board, Southampton, New York, May 31, 1996. Testimony regarding the future of the communications industry and other issues related to the construction of a 360'ulti-user communications tower.
7. US Mobilcom Inc. et. al. v. Jean Warren et. al U.S. District Court, Western District of Oklahoma, CIV-94-1582-M. Testimony regarding the value of a nationwide 220 mHz mobile radio license and related economic issues.
8. Western States Wireless Ltd. vs. Gerald Stevens-Kittner U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia, Civil Action No. 96-1513-A. Testimony regarding the value of applications for Instructional Television Fixed Service ("ITFS") and related economic issues.
9. CenCel Inc. MCT Cellular Inc. and SCC Cellular Tele hone Cor oration v. Contel Cellular Inc. SS Superior Court, Hillsborough County, State of New Hampshire, Northern District Case No. 96- E-126. Testimony regarding the value of a cellular telephone system and related economic issues.
A-9 John S. Sanders
Ex crt Testimon and S onsored Exhibits Continued
10. In re: Personal Communications Services World Cor oration Debtor. United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nevada, Bankruptcy No. 99 BK-N-31344. Testimony regarding the value of a specialized competitive local exchange carrier and related economic issues.
11. AirTouch Pa in Inc. vs. US West Communications Inc. United States District Court for the District of Colorado, Civil Action No. 99-WM-12. Testimony regarding valuation and related economic issues in the paging industry.
12. Interstate Cellular Holdin s Inc. vs, Radiofone Inc. American Arbitration Association, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Case No. 14 Y 181 00138 00 F. Testimony regarding the value of a cellular telephone system and related economic issues.
13. In re: WebLink Wireless Inc. Debtor United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, Bankruptcy No. 01-34275-SAF-11. Testimony regarding the liquidation of value of wireless messaging and related telecommunications equipment.
14. In re: United States Cellular 0 eratin Com an Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County, Civil Action No. 18976 NC. Testimony regarding the value of two cellular telephone systems.
15. Paul I. Kozel et al v. Kent S. Foster and Concho Cellular Tele hone Com an Inc. American Arbitration Association, AAA 016 168 00391 02 and 070 168 00390 02. Testimony regarding the value of a cellular telephone system and related economic issues.
16. WideO enWest LLC. Board of Assessment Appeals. Jefferson County, Colorado. Schedulel 976855. Docket'0405. Testimony regarding the state of the broadband industry and the value of cable television, Internet, and telephony assets.
17. In the Matter of Telecommunications Rela Services and S ecch-to-S ecch Services for Individuals with Hearin and S ecch Disabilities: TRS Fund Size and Pa ment Formula, Federal Communications Commission, CC Docket 98-67, May 12, 2005. Comments on the appropriateness of calculations regarding the Video Relay Service ("VRS") provider reimbursement rate and related qualitative factors.
A-10 John S. Sanders
Exnert Testimonv and Soonsored Exhibits. Continued
18. Broadcast Music. Inc. vs. Weiael Broadcastina Co., United States District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 04 Civ. 09205 (LLS). Testimony regarding economic factors in the television industry and calculation of music rights fees.
19. Alltel Communications of Michigan RSAs. Inc. vs Cass Cellular Limited Partnershio (AAA Case No 54 494 00212 10). Expert report and deposition in connection with a dispute between partners in a cellular telephone system regarding system values, revenue recognition practices, and related economic issues.
20. BSL Cellular, et. al. v. USCOC of Greater Iowa, LLC (as successor in interest), and United States Cellular Corooration, Court of Chancery for the State of Delaware, C.A No. 7628-VCL, Deposition testimony regarding the value of a cellular telephone system.
21. The Denver Post. LLC v. Adams Countv Board of Eaualization, Docket Nos. 62566 and 62567 (Consolidated), Tax Year 2013. Testimony regarding the value of printing, distribution, and robotic delivery systems and physical, technological, and economic obsolescence.
22. In the Matter of Phase II Distribution of the 1999 Cable Royalty Funds, Copyright Royalty Judges, Washington, DC, Docket No 2008-1 CRB CD 199 (Phase II). Testimony regarding the relative fair market values of certain programs in the devotional category.
23. In the Matter of Phase II Distribution of 2004-2009 Cable Royalty Funds and In the Matter of Phase II Distribution of 1999-2009 Satellite Royalty Funds, Dockets No. 2012-6 CRB CD 2004- 2009 (Phase II) and No. 2012-7 CRB CD 2000-2009; 2008-5 SD 1999-2000 (Phase II). Before the Copyright Royalty Judges, Library of Congress, Washington, DC. Testimony regarding the valuation of media assets.
~Aeedix B
Listing of Settling Devotional Claimants Including Years of Claims SDC Claimants and Claim Years - Cable
SDC CLAIMANTS Cable 2004 Cable 2005 Cable 2006 Cable 2007 Cable 2008 Cable 2009
Amazing Facts, Inc.
American Religious Town Hall, Inc.
Billy Graham Evangelistic Association
Catholic Communications Corporation
Christian Television Network, Inc. (Christian Television Corporation)
The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc.
Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc.
Cottonwood Christian Center
Crenshaw Christian Center
Crystal Cathedral Ministries, Inc.
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Faith for Today, Inc.
Family Worship Center Church, Inc., dba Jimmy Swaggart Ministries
International Fellowship of Christians Ik Jews, Inc.
In Touch Ministries, Inc.
It Is Written
B-1 m m m m w w m m m m m m w m m m & w
SDC Claimants and Claim Years - Cable
SDC CLAIMANTS Cable 2004 Cable 2005 Cable 2006 Cable 2007 Cable 2008 Cable 2009 John Hagee Ministries, Inc. (aka Global Evangelism Television)
Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. fka Life In the Word, Inc.
Kerry Shook Ministries (aka Fellowship of the Woodlands)
Lakewood Church (aka Joel Osteen Ministries)
Liberty Broadcasting Network, Inc.
Messianic Vision, Inc.
New Psalmist Baptist Chruch
Oral Roberts Evangelistic Association, inc.
RBC Ministries
Reginald B. Cherry Ministries
Rhema Bible Church (aka Kenneth Hagin Ministries)
Ron Phillips Ministries
Speak the Word Church International
St. Ann's Media
The Potters House of Dallas, Inc., dba T.D. Jakes Ministries
Word of God Fellowship, Inc. dba Daystar Television Network
Zola Levitt Ministries B-2 SDC Claimants and Claim Years — Satellite
Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite SDC CLAIMANTS 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Amazing Facts, Inc.
American Religious Town Hall, Inc.
Billy Graham Evangelistic Association
Catholic Communications Corporation
Christian Television Network, Inc. (Christian Television Corporation)
The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc.
Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc.
Cottonwood Christian Center
Crenshaw Christian Center
Crystal Cathedral Ministries, Inc.
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Faith for Today, Inc.
Family Worship Center Church, Inc., dba Jimmy Swaggart Ministries SDC Claimants and Claim Years — Satellite
Sateilite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite SDC CLAIMANTS 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 In Touch Ministries, Inc.
It Is Written
John Hagee Ministries, Inc. (aka Global Evangelism Television)
Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. fka Life In the Word, Inc.
Kerry Shook Ministries (aka Fellowship of the Woodlands)
Lakewood Church (aka Joel Osteen Ministries)
Liberty Broadcasting Network, Inc.
Messianic Vision, Inc.
New Psalmist Baptist Chruch
Oral Roberts Evangelistic Association, Inc.
RBC Ministries
Reginald B. Cherry Ministries
Rhema Bible Church (aka Kenneth Hagin Ministries)
Ron Phillips Ministries SDC Claimants and Claim Years — Satellite
Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite Satellite SDC CLAIMANTS 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Speak the Word Church International
St. Ann's Media
The Potters House of Dallas, Inc., dba T.D. Jakes Ministries
Word of God Fellowship, Inc. dba Daystar Television Network
Zola Levitt Ministries l AppendixC Listing of Program Titles Claimed By Settling Devotional Claimants SDC Program Titles - Cable
SDC PROGRAM TITLES CABLE
Amazing Facts, Inc. Amazing Facts Presents Millennium of Prophesy New Revelation, A
American Religious Town Hall, Inc. American Religious Town Hall (aka Religious Town Hall)
Billy Graham Evangelistic Association Billy Graham (aka Billy Graham Special) Billy Graham Television Specials Franklin Graham Ruth Bell Graham
Catholic Communications Corporation Chalice ofSalvation Real to Reel
Christian Television Network, Inc. (Christian Television Corporation) AII Over the World Becky's Barn Bloodstream Bridges Christian Fitness Coffee Club Herman & Sharron (aka Its Time for Herman & Sharron) Homekeepers Joy Junction Set Free (aka Set Free lf You Want to Be) Times of Refreshing You & Me(aka America's Prayer Meeting)
The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc. The 700 Club (aka 700 Club) Christian World News Living the Life Miracles: Touched By the Hand of God (aka CBN Miracles) Miracles II - AII Things Are Possible (aka Miracles II) One Cubed (aka 2 Cubed) Spunky's First Christmas Spunky's Camping Adventure SDC Program Titles - Cable
Spunky's Circus Adventure Micah's Christmas Treasure Straight Talk Alabaster's Song Superbook Superlibro Vida Dura Flying House Resp uestas Turning Point International Mundo Cristano Agua Viva Storyteller Cafe The Easter Promise Rescatados del Infierno The Witness
Coral Ridge Ministries Media, inc. The Coral Ridge Hour (aka Dr. James Kennedy; Coral Ridge Hour; Coral Ridge Hour, The; The Coral Ridge Hour with Dr. D. James Kennedy; Coral Ridge Ministries; Coral Ridge Ministry; Coral Ridge; The Coral Ridge Report; Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church; D. James Kennedy; James Kennedy; Dr. D. James Kennedy; Dr. James Kennedy; DJ Kennedy) Scrooge and Marley What lfJesus Had Never Been Born? Who is This Jesus? (aka Who is This Jesus: Is He Risen?)
Cottonwood Christian Center Answers with Bayless Conley Bayless Conley Cottonwood Christian Center
Crenshaw Christian Center Crenshaw (aka Frederick K.C. Price; Fred Price) Ever Increasing Faith
Crystal Cathedral Ministries, inc. Hour of Power (aka Robert Schuller) Christmas Eve at Crystal Cathedral Crystal Cathedral
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America Davey and Goliath (aka Davey and Goliath's Snowboard Christmas; Davey and Goliath "Happy Easter") Oh Davey!
C-2 SDC Program Titles - Cable
Native Notions: Standing Togetherfor Civil Rights Introducing Jesus of Nazareth Hunger No More Joy to the World Mosaic This Holy Night Uganda: Ready to Forgive
Faith For Today, Inc. The Evidence Faith for Today Lifestyle Magazine McDougall, MD
Family Worship Center Church, Inc., dba Jimmy Swaggart Ministries Jimmy Swaggart Jimmy Swaggart Telecast
International Fellowship of Christians & Jews, Inc. Blessing Israel Guardians of Israel Isaiah 58 Journey to Zion On Wings of Eagles
In Touch Ministries, Inc. In Touch 30 with Dr. Charles Stanley (aka In Touch with Chorles Stanley; In Touch 30; In Touch (30); Charles Stanley; Dr. Charles Stanley; In Touch Ministries; In Touch Ministry; C Stanley In Touch PAX First Baptist Atlanfa) In Touch 60 with Dr. Charles Stanley (aka In Touch wifh Charles Stanley; In Touch 60; In Touch (60); Charles Stanley; Dr. Charles Stanley; In Touch Ministries; In Touch Ministry; C Stanley In Touch PAX First Baptist Atlanta) En Contacto (aka En Contacto con Dr. Charles Sfanley; En Contacto Charles Stanley; En Confacto 30; En Contacto (30); Charles Stanley; Dr. Charles Stanley; Ministerios En Confacto)
It Is Written It Is Written
John Hagee Ministries, Inc. (aka Global Evangelism Television) John Hagee Today Cornerstone, aka Cornerstone Church Cornerstone with Pastor John Hagee The Difference
C-3 SDC Program Titles — Cable
The Difference with Pastor Matt Hagee
Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. fka Life In the Word, Inc. Lifein the Word Life in the Word Daily Enjoying Everyday Life Joyce Meyer Joyce Meyer: Enjoying Enjoying Everday Life
Kerry Shook Ministries, aka Fellowship of the Woodlands Kerry Shook Ministries (aka Pastor Kerry Shook)
Lakewood Church (aka Joel Osteen Ministries) Joel Osteen (aka John Osteen) Lakewood Church Marcos Witt
Liberty Broadcasting Network, Inc. Old Time Gospel Hour
Messianic Vision, Inc. Messianic Vision Sid Roth's It's Supernatural 8 Messianic Vision (aka It's Supernatural)
New Psalmist Baptist Church Empowering Disciples New Psalmist Baptist Church
Oral Roberts Evangelistic Association, Inc. Chronicles of Faith Hour of Healing Miracles Now Make Your Day Count The place for Miracles
RBC Ministries Day of Discovery
Reginald B. Cherry Ministries Reginald B. Cherry The Doctor and the Word
Rhema Bible Church (aka Kenneth Hagin Ministries)
C-4 SDC Program Titles - Cable
Kenneth Hagin (aka Kenneth Hagin Jr.) Rhema Praise Rhema Today
Ron Phillips Ministries Ahba's House Central Baptist Church Central Message Ron Phillips Ministries (aka Ron Phillips)
Speak the Word Church International The Exalted Word Randy Morrison Speak the Word
St. Ann's Media The Daily Mass Holy Sacrifice of the Mass The Mass Mass on 7V
The Potters House of Dallas, Inc., dba T.D. Jakes Ministries Potter's House, The (aka TD Jakes) Potter's Touch, The
Word of God Fellowship, Inc. dba Daystar Television Network Celebration Check the Sound Joni Table Talk (aka Joni; Joni Lamb) Marcus Lamb/Empowered by the Spirit Gospel Music Showcase
Zola Levitt Ministries Zola Levitt Zola Levitt Presents
Source: SDC Listing of Claimants and Program Titles as confirmed by emails.
C-5 SDC Program Titles - Satellite
SDC PROGRAM TITLES ISATELLITEI
Amazing Facts, Inc. Amazing Facts Presents Millennium of Prophesy New Revelation, A
American Religious Town Hall, Inc. American Religious Town Hall, aka Religious Town Hall
Billy Graham Evangelistic Association Billy Graham (aka Billy Graham Special) Billy Graham Television Specials Franklin Graham Ruth Bell Graham
Catholic Communications Corporation Chalice ofSalvation Real to Reel
Christian Television Network, lnc. (Christian Television Corporation) All Over the World Becky's Barn Bloodstream Bridges Christian Fitness Coffee Club Herman & Sharron (aka its Time for Herman & Sharron) Homekeepers Joy Junction Set Free (aka Set Free If You Want to Be) Times of Refreshing You & Me(aka America's Prayer Meeting)
The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc. The 700 Club (aka 700 Club) Christian World News Living the Life Miracles: Touched By the Hand of God (aka CBN Miracles) Miracles ll - All Things Are Possible (aka Miracles ii) One Cubed (aka 1 Cubed)
F-1 SDC Program Titles - Satellite
Spunky's First Christmas Spunky's Camping Adventure Spunky's Circus Adventure Micah's Christmas Treasure Straight Talk Alabaster's Song Superbook Superli bro Vida Dura Flying House Respuestas Turning Point International Mundo Cristano Agua Viva Storyteller Cafe The Easter Promise Rescatados del Infierno The Witness
Coral Ridge Ministries Media, inc. The Coral Ridge Hour (aka Dr. James Kennedy; Coral Ridge Hour; Coral Ridge Hour, The; The Coral Ridge Hour with Dr. D. James Kennedy; Coral Ridge Ministries; Coral Ridge Ministry; Coral Ridge; The Coral Ridge Report; Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church; D. James Kennedy; James Kennedy; Dr. D. James Kennedy; Dr. James Kennedy; DJ Kennedy) Scrooge and Marley What IfJesus Had Never Been Born? Who is This Jesus? (aka Who is This Jesus: Is He Risen?)
Cottonwood Christian Center Answers with Bayless Conley Bayless Conley Cottonwood Christian Center
Crenshaw Christian Center Crenshaw (aka Frederick K.C. Price; Fred Price) Ever Increasing Faith
Crystal Cathedral Ministries, inc. Hour of Power (aka Robert Schuller) Christmas Eve at Crystal Cathedral Crystal Cathedral
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
F-2 SDC Program Titles - Satellite
Davey and Goliath (aks Davey and Goliath's Snowboard Christmas; Davey and Goliath "Happy Easter") Oh Davey! Native Nations: Standing Together for Civil Righs Introducing Jesus of Nazareth Hunger No More Joy to the World Mosaic This Holy Night Uganda: Ready to Forgive
Faith For Today, Inc. The Evidence Faith for Today Lifestyle Magazine McDougall, MD
Family Worship Center Church, Inc., dba Jimmy Swaggart Ministries Jimmy Swaggart Jimmy Swaggart Telecast
In Touch Ministries, Inc. In Touch 30 with Dr. Charles Stanley (aka In Touch with Charles Stanley; In Touch 30; In Touch (30); Charles Stanley; Dr. Charles Stanley; In Touch Ministries; In Touch Ministry; C Stanley In Touch PAX; First Baptist Atlanta) In Touch 60 with Dr. Charles Stanley (aka In Touch with Charles Stanley; In Touch 60; In Touch (60); Charles Stanley; Dr. Charles Stanley; In Touch Ministries; In Touch Ministry; C Stanley In Touch PAX; First Baptist Atlanta) En Contacto (aka En Contacto con Dr. Charles Stanley; En Contacto Charles Stanley; En Contacto 30; En Contacto (30); Charles Stanley; Dr. Charles Stanley; Ministerios En Contacto)
It ls Written It Is Written
John Hagee Ministries, Inc. (aka Global Evangelism Television) John Hagee Today Cornerstone, aka Cornerstone Church Cornerstone with Pastor John Hagee The Difference The Difference with Pastor Matt Hagee
Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. fka Life In the Word, Inc. Life in the Word Life in the Word Daily
F-3 SDC Program Titles - Satellite
Enjoying Everyday Life Joyce Meyer Joyce Meyer: Enjoying Enjoying Everday Life
Kerry Shook Ministries, aka Fellowship of the Woodlands Kerry Shook Ministries (aka Pastor Kerry Shook)
Lakewood Church (aka Joel Osteen Ministries) Joel Osteen (aka John Osteen) Lakewood Church Marcos Witt
Liberty Broadcasting Network, inc. Old Time Gospel Hour
Messianic Vision, inc. Messianic Vision Sid Roth's It's Supernatural & Messianic Vision (aka It's Supernatural)
New Psalmist Baptist Church Empowering Disciples New Psalmist Baptist Church
Oral Roberts Evangelistic Association, inc. Chronicles of Faith Hour of Healing Miracles Now Make Your Day Count The place for Miracles
RBC Ministries Day of Discovery
Reginald B. Cherry Ministries Reginald B. Cherry The Doctor and the Word
Rhema Bible Church (aka Kenneth Hagin Ministries) Kenneth Hagin (aka Kenneth Hagin Jr.) Rhema Praise Rhema Today
Ron Phillips Ministries
F-4 SDC Program Titles - Satellite
Ahba's House Central Baptist Church Centra! Message Ron Phillips Ministries (aka Ron Phillips)
Speak the Word Church International The Exalted Word Randy Morrison Speak the Word
St. Ann's Media The Daily Mass Holy Sacrifice of t'e Mass The Mass Mass on TV
The Potters House of Dallas, Inc., dba T.D. Jakes Ministries Potter's House, The (aka TD Jakes) Potter's Touch, The
Word of God Fellowship, Inc. dba Daystar Television Network Celebration Check the Sound Joni Table Talk (aka Joni; Joni Lamb) Marcus Lamb/Empowered by the Spirit Gospel Music Showcase
Zola Levitt Ministries Zola Levitt Zola Levitt Presents
Source: SDC Listing of Claimants and Program Titles as confirmed by emails.
F-5 Declaration of Shirley Mayhue
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Before the COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES Washington, D.C.
) ) Docket No. 2012-6 CRB CD 2004-2009 ) (Phase II) Distribution of the 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007,) 2008 and 2009 Cable Royalty Funds )
) In the Matter of ) Docket No. 2012-7 CRB SD 1999-2009 ) (Phase II) Distribution of the 1999-2009 Satellite ) Royalty Funds )
DECLARATION OF SHIRLEY MAYHUK
I, Shirley Mayhue, hereby state and declare as follows:
1. For the time periods 2005 to 2012, and again from 2013 to the present, I have served as the Senior Media Assistant at Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc. ("Coral Ridge"), one of the
Settling Devotional Claimants ("SDC") in this proceeding.
2. On June 28, 2016, I received an inquiry from Coral Ridge's counsel, Jonathan McCants, passing along a request from counsel for the SDC to search for copies ofNielsen's Reports on
Devotional Programming ("RODPs"), particularly relating to the years 1999-2003. I understood that the SDC's counsel had RODPs for the February sweep month for each of those years, but not for the other three sweep months in each of those years.
3. After conducting an extensive search of Coral Ridge's files, I located certain paper files
containing page R-7, a summary results page, from the RODP for each of the following sweep months: May, July, and November, 1999; February, May and July, 2000; November, 2001; July, 2002, and May, 2003. Our files contained the documents attached hereto, which include the R-7
summary pages for the time periods specified, as well as certain "NSI Average Week Estimates" regarding Coral Ridge's programming for the same time periods. To the best of my knowledge
and belief, these are the only pages from the RODPs from 1999-2003 in Coral Ridge's possession. I provided copies of these pages to Coral Ridge's counsel, who I understand then provided them to counsel for the SDC.
4 The files were kept in Coral Ridge's off-site warehouse, located at 1441 SW 10'"
Ave 4206, Pompano Beach, FL 33060, with our other television and radio syndication files Rom
the same time period. Because of employee turnover through the years, I do not know why some
months were in our files, but some were not. I believe that Coral Ridge ordinarily attempted to
maintain radio and television syndication and ratings data in order to track ministry performance
and carriage information over time. I believe that the entire Nielsen reports were not kept due to
file size limitations. Since the R-7 pages and the NSI Average Week Estimates referencing
Coral Ridge were most helpful for our tracking purposes, they were maintained even when the
rest of the Nielsen reports were discarded because of space limitations.
I hereby declare under penalty ofperjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
August 17, 2016 Shirley Mayhue nQ O ~ g A e Q S Ol 0-0 Q
t' AUG i8 2885 3:81 Pf4 FR NIEl SEH 818543345387
PROGRAM NAtffB
LT 45 USIC 8 THE SPOKEN VfORD '18 ,A7JNG GRACE 8 LT a, 189 1,1 1008 HQURQFPQWER 58 ASS 462 IN TOUCH 60 KJO IN TOUCH 80 81 25526 DR, LERQYTHOMPBGN 8 I„T MASS FOR SHUT-IhtS 8904 8 BILL GAITHER 8649 8 J HAGEPS CORNERSTONE HR 24 80 10 QAYQP DISCOVERY 58. 187 11 EVER fNCREASING PAlTH 16. 15251 75 77925 874 11 KENhIETHCOPELAND 129'45 EQYOUNG 10918 41 11 DFL Q, JAMES KENNEDY 81420 ,4 888 RELISIGUB TOVIfR HALL 5'f19 LT LT 28 11 JACK VAN IMPE PRESENTS 142 58228 ,2 314 11 SEARCH.M, LYON 28. 1419$ 88 IT IS VlRITTEN 85 41410 180 221 1'f CREFLO A. DOLlAR, JR, $228 42 KEY OF DAVID 54158 2 229 71 JESSE DUl'LANTIS 80 18918 IS 88 49780 .2 22 700 CLUB 211 22 LIFE IN THE IIYORQ 95 8219 22 DIKO 7787 LT IT 28 22 OLDTIME GOSPEL HOUR js 7028 LT 28 22 CHANGED LIVES 18 18774 LT t.T 22 VYORLDVISIQhl-SPEQIALS 18 20809 22 JQHNJACQBS 7 7257 LT f.T 22 GARNERTEDARMSTRONG 19 8888 LT LT 2I 22 ROD PARSLEY 49 40851 128 'LT 22 PAT BQQNE LT 20 82 E.V. HIU. 7828 LT LT 28 LT LT. 28 82 BETTY JEAN ROBINSON 2't hIYLES'MUNRO E 7178 82 ERNESTMANGLEY 12 9198 LT 22 PRAISE THE LORD 9 82&2 LT LT DAIL'Y 'l4 118N LT LT 83 82 RQQ PARSI.EY '1 82 BENNY HtNN'S THIS IB-DAY 42 42274 18 52 KENNETH COPELAND'l3AII Y 98 57158 178 22 ORAL ROBERTS 9 15814 REGINALD CHERRY 8509 LT 18 8 CREFLQ A.DOLLAR,JR. DP ILY 419gb MIKE BARBER, w2 JIMMY SVifAGeART 15 'f8198 LT 82 CQI.BY'S CLUBHOUSE 8 7787 LT 17 82 DALEEVANS 5 6881 02 TOMMY 8 MATTHEVtf BARNETT 6801 25672 . JQHNHAGEETODAY 21 'l8 GOSPEL BILL SHOW 8924, LT I 18 CARMAN 9OW LT LT 49 EASTfJAN CURTIB 7 713f. LT LT 14 49 JANICE'S ATTIC 7787 I,T LT TS HERITAGE SINGERS 8' LT 18 49 77@'787 lLT KIDS AGAINST CRIME LT. 15 49 FAITHVILLE 9 7994 IT LT 15 49 JUST THE FACTS LT 75 49 RICHARD'ROBERTS 9241 LT PETER PQPOFF 11571 I.T 21 49 SHEPHERQSCHAPEL 9081 18 49 QN MAIN STREET I.T 49 CASEYTAEAT4JVING4OURSE 778T LT LT 14 49 REALVIDEOB 7787 I.T LT 78 49 lODS LIKE YQU 7281 LT LT LAVERNESEDITHTRIPP 7218 LT LT 12 'fO 49 TBhl TODAY LT LT 49 JERRYBARNARQ LT I.T LT LT 18 49 JOHN AhIKERBERG '19 49 hIARILYN HICKEY 145ta LT LT 49 JAMES ROBfSON.LIFETODAY 41937 LT LT 7'I SUCCESS N" LIFE 12782 LT 9 N81 JULY 1999 &008EHOL08
t.T 17.'1 80 6 '1441 LT 19 AMAZING GRACE 12 8677 LT LT MUSIC 8,THE SPOKEN IIVQRD 80 L0 ftt0 1,0 VAR 164 '92118 i9 HOUR OFPOVfER 62 44789 ,5 IN TOUGH 60 60 I,T IT .9 4 DR, t.EROYTHOMPSON "89 6452 LT 6 8!LL GAITHER ~2 201 80 2%86 41 6 IN TOUCH 80 11 LT LT 6 MASS FOR SHUT-INS 80 t1 98 HR 60 28 82 .8 9 J HAGEE'8 CORNERSTONE 80 14 18689 9 ED YQUi48 72 80 26 14196 SEARCH I~&CYON 16818 78 FAITH 60 .826 12 EVER INCFRAS!NG 80 147 12 JACK VAN IMPE PRESENTS 148 80 69 'l8 257 12 DAY OF DISCOVERY VAS IS~5 12 700CLUB 68808 .8 252 A. DOLLAR, JR. VAR 878 12 CREFLO VAR 152 12 DR, D. JAMES KENNFOV 849/ 85 JESSE DUPLANTIG 89 \8 Sg 12 VAR 79852'2m ,8'l2 19 KENNETH COPELAND ,2 $.58 .8 IIRITTEN 80 87 19 IT IG 2 :Ã1 t8 80 92 69468 'l9 UFE IN THE WORD 16 12971 LT LT 19 RELIGfOUS TOWN HALL 89 LT 80 80 8 80 18 JOHN JACOBS 80 19 LT LT 18 GARNERTEDARMSTRONG 19 867 LT LT 29 19 E.V. HILL 89 18774 LT LT ,8 19 CHANGED LIVES 80 910'I IT LORD VAR I0 'f74 'f9 Fr&BE THE 89 55681 19 KEY OF DAVID 4510 LT LT QN MAIN STREET 89 .1 126 19 VAR 82 421 88 80 RQD PARSLEY 24 80 9 LT tT 80 BETTY JEAN ROBINSON 6599 t,T I„T DINO 80 LT 89 VAR 16 18166 LT x ROD PARSt,EY DAff Y 7885 I.T MYLES 80 8 L'T
80 MUNRO'ENNY 46664 HINN'8 THfG fS-OAY VAR 50 80 27 'l8 1Xi90.. 15 80 CARMAN 30 6509 I.T 80 O'BA SE 68822. 188 ELAND DAILY 80, KENNEfII COP 1 6649 LT LT 80 JMMYS AGGART 60 4PA6 t2 89 CREFLO A,DOLLARQR. DAtLY VAR 8699 LT 2 COLBY'SCLUSHOUSE 89 9 LT 2 80 HELEN PENSANTI 80 5 17 GOSPEL HOUR 60 18 17 89 Qt.D TIME 80 LT t,T 30 REGINALOCHERRY LT LT 18 KIDS UKE YQD 80 80 I.T 8 VAR 80 LE SEA ALIVE 8'966 LT 2 GOSPEL BILL SHOMI 89 28 80 69 I0 'f1820 LT'.T RICHARDROBERTS 80 6 $206 16 18600 IT 20 2CLA LEVnT 0168 t.T 18, EftNESTANGLEY 88 61 VAR 18 17{85 I.T 51 ORAL ROBERTS 8tl669. JOHNHAGEETODAY 80 26 61 80 fT 51 PETER POPOFF 6058 LT 5'I LIFELESSONS 89 8 f 19 80 10468 5'I ACOUIRETHE FIRE 6661 LT 11 DALE EVANS 80 'LT LT 18 81 80 14 10608 51 JUST THE FACTS 86 LT LT 51 KIDS AGAINST CRIME 7865 LT LT 18 51 TOMMY 8 MATTHBV BARNETT LT LT 14 HERITAGESINGERS 80 9 7 $1 80 5 tT LT 61 CALLNG DR DONAI.O fh/HITAKER e LT LT 14 8 6899 51 FAITHVILLE 88 LT LT 18 80 6014 14 51 LAVERNESEDITH TRIPP 80 9 8599 LT LT 51 JANICE'8 ATTIC 'l8 80 8 LT 81 REAL VIDEOS 7 I.T 11 JERRYBARNARD, 89 ~7 LT 19 51 VAR 28 81 SHEPHERDSCHAPEL 'f8216 LT 227 WORLDVi8ON-SPECIALS VAR CASEY TREATJJVING«COURSE 45129. 89 5'I JAMES ROBISQN*LIFE TODAY .89 LT 10 CURTIS 18 61 EASTMAN 80 178N LT 61 MAft"LYN HICKEY 14669 tT 74 JOHN ANKERBERG 1 2782 I.T 74 SUCCESSN'UFE HOVSFHQI.08 CotIBRACE EQUI NAT'L ftTG %
47 LAUBIC 6 THE SPOKEN VVQAQ 13 GRACE 30 6 1460 2 AtAZING 40251 419 IN TOUCH 60 60 54 VAR 162 92789 1,0 942 3 HOUR QF POWER 26 257 5 IN TOUCH 80 30 31 5@X 53'l3 5 I.T 45 5 f6ASS.FQA SHUT-INS 10. 70 7 EDYOUN8 30 9815 60 76787 17 89 8 JHAGEESQORNERSTQNEHR 30'3 59. 304, CREFLQ A, COLLAR JR. VAA 59363 6 13545 18 68 8 EVER INCREABIMG F'AITH 60 154 DAY QFDISCOVERY 30 31409 31 ,2 VAR 243'f2 24 116 ORAL ROBERTS LT, 21 BILL SAITHFR 60 5 4447 VAR 53406 $94 31 DR. D. JAMES KENNEDY 260 700 CLUB VAR 67 325 JACK VAN IMPS PRESENTS 135 70409 70 133 8678 60 366 'l 1 KENNETHCQPELAND 69 11 DR LEAGYTHOVPSON 9 T5262 16 46 34 146 1'I LIFE IN THE VIIOAD 74 1'I JESSEDUPLANTIS 30 28 16 13799 14 66 11 CHANGEDLIVES 20 30'0 6 6562 LT 22 DlNQ 't4633 26'7'63 22 SEARCH M. LYOf4 25 30 35 41422 41 22 fT IS VJRITTEN L'T 25 22 GARNERTEQ ARMSTRONG 30 18 7267 7 175 22 KEY QF DAVID 30 A 5222t 30 14223 14 LT 4S 22 PETER PQPOFF 105 22 uFE IN THE WORD DAILY 30 34 33936 VAR 12 10763 11 33 22 ROD PARBt.EY DAILY f25 22 RQDPARSLEY VAR 45 41220 3'{ JEANROBINSON 6 7 LT 20 BETTY LT 18 31 LAVERNESEDITHTRIPP 5 &$9 6 CAR,".IAN 6 6662 LT 19 31 110 72349 ?2 235 3'I KENNETH COPELAND DA9 Y t.'T 'f9 EASTIJAN CURTIS 6662 51 '.1. 41 CAEFLOA.DOLLAR,JR. DAfLY VAA 49 51397 ERNESTAMSLEY 60 12 8263 LT 31 30 6 6662 ;LT 31 JQHN JACOBS 60'40 3'I QI.CTIME GOSPEL HOUR 60 "IS LT 3'I JIM51Y SVIAGGART 60 19423 LT 30 6700 LT LT 31 E.V. I.IILL 7 LT 31 PAAf BETHE LORD VAR fT 31 ZOLA LEVITT 60 VAA 18 f,T LT 31 YVQRLDVISIGN«SPECIALS LT 31 RICHARD ROBERTS 60 117% 12 'l2 3'I TOMMY 8 t4ATTHEVI SARNETT 30 6 5410 5 LT HINN'S VAA. 46057 103 31 BENNY THtS fS DAY 18 3'I ACGUIRETHE FIRE 30 't0 65% 9 30 6 LT 10 31 MESStANIC JEVIIISH VOICE 63 3'I JOHN HAGEE TODAY 29 61 REALVIDEQS :6 14 10 8 17 GOSPELBILLSHQW 10 QI4 MAIN STREET 30 5105 6 LT 62 8 6662 7 L'T 12 58 JANICE S ATTIC 30 2 52 Cr!RISTOFHERS VAR 6 977 f.T 60 16 11344 LT 62 REUSIQUS TQVVN HALL 'I.'I CQLSY'8 CLUBHOUSE 30 6 6662 LT 52 7 7797 8 LT 13 REG!MALO CHERRY 0. 52 kAYLES MUNAQE 30 6069 6 42 i"*ELEM PEMSANTI 5 6069 6 0 9 6 7 10 KIDS AGAINST CRIME 10 52 t4IKE BARBER 80 6662 LT 40 5 NN LT 6 62 DALE EVANS 12 52 JUSTTHEFACTS 30 10 8593 IT JAt4ES AQBIBQN-LIFE TQDAY 30 36 36275 4I 52 JOHN ANKERBERG 6 10724 11 14 HEAR'AGESINGERS 8 6662 7 52 LT 7 62 JEARYSAANARD 60 5 6069 6 62 SHEPHEADSCHAPEL VAR 32 18516 13 LT )5 62 tJARILYN HICKEY 17 7 71 'CASEY YREAT.LlVING«COURSE 30 6 6662 7 71 KIDS f.lKE YQU 4660 71 FAITHVILLE 6 6662 FFBAUARY2OOO HOUSEHOL08 ggmppg COVERAGE iiF NCJ iiiiiiiiVliiii NAViWS 'J UA!; RANK fili 30 6. 1480 1 LT 1 AMAZING GRACE 'LT , SPOKEN WORD 1'I 841.l 8 MUSIC 8 THE 61 4729'1 47 .,6 05 IN TOUCH 80 60'AR 3 161 9%40 92 1,0 3 HQUROFPONER 28175 25 :8 p 5 tNTOUCH30 28 SHUT.INS 5 MASS FOR 80 't0 DIL LEROYTHOMPSON C& GAITHER 30 5747 8 S LL 60 81 '16492 16 9 J HAGEE'8 CORNiERSTONEHR 82687 82 9 KENNETHCOPELAND VAR 188 74811 71 JACK VAN IMPE PRESENTS SQ 9 80 85 ,2 9 LIFE IN THE YIIORD LT LT EDYOUN8 VAR 81 59851 59 ,8 14 CREFLO A, DOLLAR JR. 'l6 18881 16 I 14 EVER INCREASING PAITH 80 145 84047 A 14 DR, D. JAMES KENNEDY VAR 30 81. 20690 2'I ,1 14 JESSE DUPLANTIS 16 DISCOVERY 30 42 16028 14 DAY QF 30 .6 14800 12 14 PETER PQFOFP. 13988 14 SEARCH.M, LYQN 30 28 LT tT GARNSRTED ARMSTRONG 80 18 7 14 VAR. 94 53488 68 700'CUIB LT 'f4 80 5 478I 5 GOODNESS 80 8874 7 f„T l4 DIANE BISH 88882 41 25 UFE IN TI WORD DAILY 80 29 88 42904 43 *2 IT tS IIIIRIEN 30 ".2 25 80 54194 '54 .2 25 KEY OF DAVID 'IS ORAL ROBERTS VAR 9 16909 VAR 48 43262 25 RCD PARSLEY 61128 51 26 CREFLO A.DQLLARPR. DAILY VAR 90 16'f0 15 2& CHANGED LIVES 7 LT LT 32 QN t IAIN STREET 19 ~671 60 22 22 I.'T1 32 JII4iMY SYIIAGGART 30 7%9 .LT LAVERNEaECITHTRIPP 5220 LT LT 32 STEVE BRCCK 6 80 0 7962 tT + +2 DINO LT LT MUNROE 30 6 670 7 82 MYLES 80 12194 LT LT ZOLA LEVITT, 47' .1 HINN'8 IS-DAY VAR 82 BENNY THfS 7962 8 f.T LT 32 PRAISETHE LORD VAR 80 67Ã 4 I.T LT 32 OLD TIME GOSPEL HOUR .7 .2 CQPELAND DAILY 80 114 78505 78 KENNETH 8 5701 7 LT LT 32 HELENPENSANTif 977 LT IT CHRISTOP HERS VAR 82 60 12 9268 8 LT I„T 82 ERI4EST AN~ VAR 15 13569 LT 32 ROD PARSI.EY. DAILY 8 8 LT 32 CQI.BY'5 CLUBHOUSE 7962'962 LT BETTY JEAN RQS!t4SON 80 8 P'Q SQ 8 IVlfKEREGINALDUAR5CHERRYFf M 80 SXO LT EV, HILL 80 8 7962 tT 82 11968 LT SHEPHEROS CHAPE VAR 32 80 18 8686 LT 32 RELIGIOUSTQWN HALL LT LT FAITHVILLE 30 7982 8 6737 7 I.T LT 82 DALE EVANS LT JANICE'8 AT11C 80 57 IS 11379 1'I IY 67 ACOUIRETHE FIRE 7962 LT 57 JOHN JACOBS 30 80 11529 f.T I 57 GOSPEL BILL SHOW 30 6 5701 7 'LT LT 57 JERRYBARNARD 7294 7 LTi 57 EASTMAN CURTIS 11 I,T UNDSEY ROBERTS VAR 5 11519 57 RICHARD 8 30 796K 8 67 KiDS AGAINST CRIME 16328 16 t.T 57 MARILYN HICKEY 30 80 7 108fs 't.T 17 57 JOHN ANKEFIBERG LT 10 JEWISH VOICE 80 60A 6 57 MESSIANIC VAR 50Ã I.T 8 57 LE SEA ALIVE 80 10 LT 16 57 JUSTTHE FACTS 8 LT 12 57 REALVIDECS 51 HAGEETODAY 80 20 57 JOHN 30 8 675'I LT 10 57 KIDS L1KE YOU 7962 8 t.T 'f2 57 CASEYTREAT-LlVING CCURSE 80 8 SINGERS 80 9 LT 57 HERITAGE 43 89901 40 ,'I I 57 JAMES ROBISQN-LIFE TODAY @90 t4ATTHEW BARNETT 60 57 TOMMY 8 VAR 19804 I.T 17 MtQRLDVISIOl4-SPECIALS 1.T 6 77 SUCCESS N'UFE VAR 1054II N AUG 18 2885 3:8P. PN FP I4IEI BEN I1EDIA RESEARC7639L81 To B.I9543345387
VouSEHOEQs
NLIVBER COVERAGE OF PROJ RATING PROJ PROGRAM NMP. sssss!os smmoss % US, ~kg
1 AsJAZING GRACE LT l'MUSIC 8i THE SPOKEN VVORD 10 3 HQURQFPOWER VAR 161 8 INTOUCH60 60 68 8 IJASS FOR.SHUT INS 30 LT 3 IN TOUCH 60 29 7 BILL SAITIIER 80 LT 7 J HAGEE'8 CORNERSTONE HR 60 9 DR, LEROY THOMPSON w0 10 EVER INCREASING FAITH 60 16 10 DR. D, JASIES KENNEDY VAR 141 T0 SEARCl+I!I, I.YON. 30 27 10 JACK VAN ItAPE PRESENTS 89 180 .3 10 GOOD NEVIS 80 7 LT 10 CREFLO A. DOLLAR, JR. VAR 79 .8 10 JESSE DUPLANTIS 30 8'I 10 ED YOUNG 10 LT 'l8 VAR 184 6 KENNETHCOPELAND'EYOF 16 DAVID 89 'l8 700 CLUB VAR 96 18 ff IB WRITTEN 88 18 P ER POPOFF IT 18 ORAL ROBERTS VAR 18 GiARNERTEDARMSTRONG 18 BETTY JEAN ROBINSON 18 EV,HILL 30 IT I.T 18 ZOLA LEVITT LT 16 LIFE IN THE WORD .'I 29 CREFLO A;DOLLAR„JR, DAlLY VAR QN IVJLIN SGREET 80 16 LT LT 29 Is!IKE BARBg 7 LT 0 29 POD P(RS VSI 47 29 CARM N 9 .LT LT 29 RELIGIOUS TO'@SHALL 'LT LT s~ DNO 60 9 LT LT 80 24 11 VAR 29 60 68'1 29 PRAISE THE LORD VPR 10 LT 29 JOHN JACOBS 9, LT .20 CAI.I,NG DR DONALD I!VHITAKER 89 IT LT 8 29 JOHNgGEE TODAY 80 24 78 29 89 16 29 OI.DTIME GOSPEL HOUR 60 I.T 9 8& KENNETH COPELAND DAILY 80 114 29 ERNESTANGLEY 12 IT 81 29 COLBY'S CI„UBHOUSE 9 LT IT '18 29 ROD PARSLEY DAILY VAR 18 LT 29 HKEN PENSANT! 7 LT I.T 14 29 tAARILYN HICKEY 89 'l1 LT IT 34 61 ACOUIRETHE F RE 80 17 61 CHANCED LIVES 80 10 LT 24 TOM%)Y 8. IsIATTHEVd BARNETT DAYQP DISCOVERY 30 5) MYLES MUNROE 30 7 LT 6'I RICHARD rs LINDBEY ROBERTS VAR 5 51 KIDS AGAINST CRINGE T 61 GOSPEL BILL SHOVV 10 LT LT 61 REAL VIDEOS 8 LT IT 61 EAS'PAAR CURTIS 89 10 IT 6'I VAR LT LT SNEPHERDSCHAPEL 34.7' $ ILIDS LIKE YOU 39 I.T LT ) JAs4ES RCBISON.LIFETODAY 80 61 JERRYBARNARD LT LT 6 HERITASESINGERS 80 9 IT LT '89 I 61 REGINALDCHERRY LT T'T 61 JANICE'8 ATTIC LT .LT 6'I 8 ROCK 60 61 CASEY TREAT-'UVING-COURSE I.T IT 61 MESSIANIC JEV!IISH VOICE 60 LT LT VriORLOVJSION-SPECIALS LT: SI CHRISTOFHE'RS VAR LT IT 78 JUSTTHE FACTS 80 IT LT 78 FAITHVILLE 89 LT RFSEARC7638181 To 818543345387
NSI JULY 2000 @OUSFHOLDS W@Smff QF PR03 " RANK PROGRAM ffAhfE ItURATIGN 8PATIBNs JMM Uk,
MUSfC 8 THE SPOKEN fVORD 10 3940 8 AMAZING GRACE 30 6 2135 LT LT 3 INTQUCH 60 60 67 44134 3 HOUR OF PQYYER VAR 'I83 93721 1.0 ..9 3 INTQUCH 80 80 29 26155 240 5 BfLL GAITHER 30 5747 LT LT 5 J HAGEE'8 CQRNERSTONE HR Bfi 14748 108. 8 MASS FOR SHUT*INS 80 10 504'I LT IT 8 PETER POPOFF 80 7 17470 115 10 GOODNEgf8 30 LT LT 6 EVER INCREASING FAITH 60 16 1%6& 3% :3 .3 373 11 CREFLO A, DQf.LAR, JR. 6 8'I 11 JESSE DUPLANTI8 18889 11 JACK VAN IMPE PRESENTS 30 1g 64319 ,3. LT 11 NEIIIIDIRECTIGNS,THE 30 5 4158 LT f.T 17'68 11 CHRISTOPHERS VAR LT 11 700'CLUB VAR. 66r7 ~3 t3 30. 1431'l 18 SEARCH M. LYON LT1 ED YOUNG 30 887 LT 35 8 331 18 DR.D. JAMES KENNEDY VAR 145 83918 .3'3 18 KENNETH CQPEiAND VAR 133 80ff29 .3. 309. 'l8 30 8 LT LT CARfJAN 7982'547 80'48 18 GARNERTEDARMSTRQf46 80 81 I,T LT 18 IT IS VYRITTEN 30 35 40910 18 LIFE IN THE WQRQ 80 63 37818 128 18 PRAISETHELORD VAR 9 CN LT LT 27 18 E.V, HILL 7963 LT iT 18 KEY QF DAVID 30 41 45457 145 18 JOHN JACOBS 30 8 LT t.T 85 18 ZOLA LEVITT LT 31 18 CREFLQ A,DQLLARQR. GAILY VAR 45996 139 18 D,I10 LT LT hi'.KE BARBER LT LT 38 REGINALD CHERRY 7 7369 LT: LT Fj 88 BENNY'HINN'8 THIS IS-DAY VAR 46 SB70 146. 33 LIFE IN THE WORD DAlf.Y A 31 100 83 33 SEfTYJEAN ROBINSON 7983 LT iT DEAN hfARY SROWI~I LT LT 33 5 'l53 33 RQD PARSI.EY DAILY VAR'(} 11765 LT LT 33 JIMMY SWAGGART 06 826'7 .1 65 TOMMY 6 MATTHSN'BARNETT .30 5 5116 LT LT 13 28 ERNESTANGLEY 8IK8'8924 LT fT 33 ROD PARSLEY VAR 47 33 KENNETH COPELAbD DAILY 30 f lo 33 OLD'IME GOSPEL HOUR 60 30. 13051 LT LT m 38 tVQRLDVISIONZPECIALS VAR 6 8649 LT LT 19 "g9 DAY QF DISCOVERY 95 739S »3 33 HELEN PENSANTI 58y. L$ LT 12 CHANGED UVES 11: 13761 29 hfYLESMUNROE 30 LT .LT 1'5 7'96Z 33 HERITAGE SINGERS 80 8 fT 17 COI;SY"SCLUSHQUSE 30 LT 16: b3 MAHII.JN HK'KEY 83 QN MA N STREET 30 LT JOHN HAGEETODAY 2973). ACQUIRETHE FIRE 30 LT 55 RELIGIOUSTQYIIN HALL 80 LT f.'T 'l5 55 QRAI.ROBERTS VAR ,e I-T LT 24 55 DALE EVANS 30 I.T LT 12 EASTMAN CURTIS 80 8 7339 IT LT 18
55 JAMES ROBISON 1JFE TODAY 34 55 GOSPEL BILL SHOW 100IS LT LT 65 KIDS AGAINST CRIME 80 7962 IT f„T 18'8 55 CASEY TREAT.IJVING.COURSE 30 iT 55 REAL VIDEOS 7 fT 7'4'969'491 55 JANIQE'8 A1TIC LT LT 65 FAITHVILLE LT LT 55 GOSPEL SINGING JUBILEE VAR 1924 LT 69 SHEPHERDSCHAPEL VAR 3'7 16505 LT LT 15 JUST THE FACTS 10 9097 LT IT KIDS LIKE YOU 00 I.T 1.T NSI NOVEMBER 2001 HOUSEHOLDS wmsa OMA'".8 CARRVIMG QF PROJ RANK PROGRAM NISIE DIIRATIQN STATIONS ~990 . % V.:S. '8 MUSIC E THE SPOKEN WORD 30 58 2 IN TOUCH 69 60 6» %0 8 HOUR OF POWER VAR '161 4 GOOD NEWS 89 LT 1» 5 IN TOUCH 30 39 15 84 LT. 32 6 BILL GAITHER 30 7 6 MASS FOR Sl iUT-INS 30 19 LT 709 CLUB VAR 63 394 8 JHAGEE'SCORNERSTONEHR 30 92 10 JACK VA'N IMPE PRESENTS 30 126 841 DR. D. JAMES KENNEDY VAR 189 4'18~ CREFLO A, DOLLAR, JR, VAR 74 399 10 JESSE DUPLANTIS 80 90 19 EVER INCREASING FAITH 60 69 KENNEIH COPELAND VAR 'f32 :8 850 19 E.V. HILL 8 LT 28 17 PETER POPOFF 80 17 DR. LERDY THOMPSON 80 7 68 17 SEARCH.M. LYON 80 81 67 17 I.IFE IN THEWORD 43 ».»» 17 ED YOUNG 80 10 17 ROD PARSLEY VAR 43 HINN'8 THIS ISGAY VAR 12 35 17 BENNY 149 17 CREFLO A,DOLLAR JR. DAILY VAR 54
BROWN 80 5 15 17 DEAN 8 hlARY '0 GARNERTED ARMSTRONG 23 OLD TfhIE GOSPEL HOUR 60 9 LT BETTY JEAN ROBINSON I.T 122 17 IT 18 WRITTEN 37 'l8 7 GOSPELSINGING JUBILEE VAR 7 LT 8 KENNETH COPEUWD DAILY 117 3 MIKE BARBER 39 6 LT LORD VAR 10 LT 8 PRAISETHE :160 BENNY H NNSTHS-DAY DAILY VAR 44 8» MYLES MUNROE 89 7 LT 17 '12 31 ERNESTANGLEY 69 LT 26 81 GRALROBERTS VAR 18 LT 81 REGINALDCHERRY 7 LT 6 TGMh'lY 8 MATTHEW BARNEIT 30 5 LT'T 10 8 ZOLA LEVITT 30 5 31 REUGIQUS TOWN HAU. 30 16 IT. THE 80 19 LT 17 31 JUST FACTS LT 14 81 REAL VIDEOS 31 DAY OF DISCOVEFIY 89 190 81 LIFE IN THE WORD'DAILY 89 23 19 LT 19 81 KIDS UKE YOU LT 31 JIMMY SWAGGART 18 'l8 61ARILYN HICKEY 30 LT 81 LT 24 31 RQD PARSLEY DAILY VAR 13 81 COLBY'SCLUBHQUSE 80 LT LT'T 47 81 KEY QF DAVID 30 15 '8 VAR 52 CHRISTOPHERS LT 9 ON MAIN STREET 80 'f4 52 24 71 JOHN HAGEE TODAY 10 CARMAN 39 DAILY 30 8 LT 12 52 CASEYTREAT4QURSE LT 62 JANICE'3 ATTIC 30 52 JAMES RGBISON»LIFE TODAY 80 43 FIRE 12 LT 62 ACQUIRE THE I.T 11 52 FAITHVILI.E 8 VAR 5 LT RICHARD 8 UNDSEY ROBERTS LT 10 52 HERITAGESINGERS 30 1."I 89 1'I LT 52 GOSPEL BILL SHOW I.T 52 SHEPHERDSCHAPEL 52 N8l JULY 2002
KQUIV 5MA'8 CAM'flNG FIATiL RANK PRGGRN$ NAME RTQ %
MUSiC 8 THE SPOKEN V/ORD 30 8 f.T 1 1l 2 HOUR OP POYIIER VAR 102 81888 808 BIU. BAfTFIER 8 LT LT. %7 4 fN TOUCH 60 60 ,8 4 Vi/ORO OF FAITtf 30 5 8874 LT' .6 'f903'I 6 EVER INCREASING PAITFI 60 18 102 'A.6 7 DFL D. JAMES KENNEDY VAR 188 78671 377 JACK VAN IMPE PRESENTS .80 118 64661 T4 7 700 CLUB VAR '89 56486 5 A PETER 8 18 88 A 7 POPOFF 80'AR )REFLO A. LAR„JR. 74 6 750 264 7 +DO 80 83 2 6IS 92 .4 7 BENNY HINiVS THIS IS49AY VAR 19 2 818 t1 89 :4 7 LIFE tN THE V/ORD 30 44 8 683 i I 128 .4 13 J HAGEE'S COFlNERSFONEHR 60 26003 103 .3 '15 LIASS FOR SHUT-INS 20 10 3844 1.T 15 .8 15 DIANE BISH 30 LT ."8 15 KENNETHCOPELAHD VAR 18 EX HILL 80 9737 LT LiT 'I5 PRAISE THE LORD VAR 11 LT tT t3 18 TOMMY 8 hfATTHEVi/ BARNE/T 30 6 .LT 21: 16 I 8,4JDIREOTtONS,THE 30 6 4%9 1'.T 7 18 15 ED YOUNB 30 18 10686 1.T. .3 15 IT IS WRITTEN 80 43610 143 i3 18 GOSPELS!HSING JUBILEE VAR 6781 LT 21 .3 15 ORAL ROBERTS VAR. 910F LT 29 .3 'I8 DR, LEROYTHOMPSON 216%~ 66 .3 't6 ROb PARSL'EY VAR .8 EOOD NEVI/8 30 5 1872 LT LT 5 29 I) 29 COLBY'S CLUB HOUSE 80 9 9'l08 LT BETIY JEAt4 ROBthfSQN 80 9t03 LT 24 29 KENNEYH OOPELAND DAILY 30 'f07 7'f&7 ,2 't87 y2 29 CREFLQ A.DQLtAR,JR. DAfLY VAR 52 4W6 'f17 i2 29 MIKE BARBER 80 8 LT I2 29 ZOLA LEVITY 80 6 4841 I.T 12 29 BENNY Hif4HS THSQAY 9@LY VAR 48 118 2 29 QN MAIH ~EET 30 1'5 39't5 1T 'f0 2 29 SEARCl+i/LLYON 30 83 iT 44 29 RESINALO CHERRY 9 LT 22 29 RELIGIOUS TOWN HAU 30 9 LT 15 .2 29 REAL VIDEOS 80 LT 2 29 ERNESTANSLEY 80 2 29 KEY OF DAVID 30 i4 REJOICE fNTHE LORD 60 5 %92 I.T 18 2 28 ROD PARSLIDAILY VAR 18 14710 LT 83 «2 PAITHVILLE 30 9 9108 LT LT CAPiMAN 80 LT LT 11 EASTMA 4 CURTIS 30 10 LT 19 29 MAR LYN HICKEY 80 12 f 1305 I.T 24 MYLES MLINROE 80 9t03 9 1T 19 EARNERTED ARMSfRONQ 80 29 8xS4 19 LT i2 29 DAY OFOISCGVERY 30 9? 80990 FF 164 42 63 KIDS UKE YOU 80 11%R LT 5i3 ERITASESINGERS 30 10 10871 10 LT OLD TIME GOSPEL HOUR 6897 „6 88 LE SEA AL,IVE VAR 6 7346 7 LT IT 14 63 UFE IN THE Vt/ORD DAII Y 30 283% 24 4T LT 53 DING 80 8 7854 7 LT JANICE'S AT11C 30 9 9108 9 LT 18 53 JOHN AHKERBERG 30 5 7 LT W 63 GOSPELBILLSHOV/ 80 13 124% f.T 83 Ji61MY BRAGGART 60 15 13743 53 JAt4ES ROBISON-LIFE TODAY 30 44 4373I 4'f 53 CHRISTOPH RS VAR 8 . 2'f36 2 f.T LT 38 SHEPHERDS CHAPEL VAR IT 1.T JOHN HAGEETODAY 80 75 NSI MAY 2003
M)A's CARRVINQ ENIIV f4AT'L RATING PROD AVERAGE RTG % ,,'LS, ~iiii0, BiiTINB PROGRAM NAl'llE 2039 .2 LT LT 1 MUSIC!t THE SPOKEN Vi'IQRD 486. QF POWER 96. 66580 .;53 2 HOUR 26 38252 36: 824
2 JOELGSTEEN '.64 86450 81 5% IN TOUCH'60. 16837 16 J HAGEE"S CORNERSTONE HR 30 552'I0 52 330. 6 JACK VAN IMPE PRESENTS 99 270'' JR. 47 45533 'f24 6 CREFLQ A. DOLLAR, 15 m51 21 LAKEWGODCHURCH 6637 6 35 GAITHER 8 365. BILL 124 77468 73 10 DR, D, JAIAES KENNEDY 88 56858: 53 278 10 700 CLUB '3685 18 MASS FGR SHUT-INS 10 10 9699 43'25 10 E.V. HILL 80862 76 COPELAND 120 10 KENNETH 29 20930 82 16 JESSE DUPLANTIS 19789 77 15 EVER INCREASING FAITH 'l1 6870 6 LT LT 28 15 REUGIGUS TOWN HALL 32872 31 121 15 RQD PARSLEY 26115 24 93 15 BENNY HINN"S THIS IS-DAY 31902 M 't14 15 IJFE IN THE VJQRD 5 7416: LT 24 15 DIANE BISH 13 10865 10 LT 37 15 EDYOUNG f7 18372 13 45 15 ERNEST ANGLEY 41153 39 138 T IS WRITTEN 35 32 11 10057 15 PRAISE THE LORD LT LT 35 16 11426 11 'l1 GARNERTEDARMSTRQNG 371 2 8 LT REGINALD CHERRY 5 16 31 18085 17 I.T LT 50 28 SEARCH-M. LYON 8 2202 2 LT 6 28 CHRISTGPHERS 29878 79 v2 HAGFE TODAY 22 JOHN 174 101 66795 63 KENNY~ CGPELAND DAILY 9 90% 9 LT LT 23 REALVIDEOS 94 8%%9 75 .2 191. DAY OF DfSCOVERY 5945 6 LT TOMMY 8i MATTHEW BARNETT 39729 82 BENNY HINNS THS»DAY DAII.Y 21 25559 24 LT LIFE IN THE WORD DAILY 28 15668 15 LT JIMMY SWAGGART LT LT 17 9 9065 9 27' EASTMANCBRTIS 14446 LT RQD PARSIEY DAILY 4072 4 LT LT ON MAIN STREET 17 10 9123 LT DAVEY A'ND GGI3ATH 4313 LT 7 ZOLA LEVITT 5 LT 6 LE SEA ALIVE 66 %579 61 108 CREFLQ A.DOLLAR,JR. DAILY 18602 17 LT LT 29 MARILYN HICKEY 12 9 9085 9 LT I.T 14 COLBY'S CLUBHOUSE 11851 11 LT LT 17. ACQUIRE THE FIRE 6863 LT 10 YGU KIDS LIKE 9 7873 7 LT 11 MIKE BARBER 21601 20 LT. 25 .1 SHEPHERDSCHAPEL 47 9%5 9 LT 10 ,1 FAITHVILLE 10 LT 12 37 HERITAGE SINGERS LT YitQRSHIP 69 66 53 JAMES RGBISGN-I.IFE TODAY 9 LT LT JANICE"S ATTIC 53 LT 12 12485 12 LT 10 53 GOSPEL BILI SHOVE MARKETS REPORTING 13$ STATIONS REPORTING 182 TOTAL TV HH'3 LN Dt/A'3 84,973410 OMA YVOF U,S 38 EPISODES AVAILABLE NIA DSY" CORAI. RIOG 7/'NISTRIES TYPES'EVOTIONAL
RAI/K DMA HOUSEHOLD SHARES BV MARKET %!A,HOUSEHOLD SHARES.'BY'MARKET RAHK
NxmF @OF 0, NO.OF % NO,OF N % NI,OF ONA'3 88488 0//A'3 88ANi IKLCF 3 NOOF S 800F 01/4'0 SHARE ONA'8 3//493 'NANE 0NA.'8 SNARE 0NA'8 3//ANE 0NA'3 00388 ONES POST PRWIE.)S 8) OAYilME )t0F)j WEEKEND DAYTIME)SAS) EARLY FRINGE P&F) WEEKEHD PREiPRIMQSSS) PRIME ACCESS PNAT) TELECASTS 2 2 1 1 AVG..AU PRIME 8-8
NO. tlO, TOTAL 1849. OF OF DB AYG. 'l8+ 1840 2554 18+ DEPART CH SHR HHLDS V/OV/t MKP DMA 00rt '/CVN 10'ICVN 103/I V/00tt OX|0/ RTG N90) '0} 2/CVfl
DAYTIME (Mk)T EARLY FRINGE PkF) PRIME ACCESS )M-SAT) 8 8 '9 PRIME (3-Sj rr POST PRIME tS.S) rr V/EEKEND DAYIIME)SSS) 129 129 82 10 rr WEEKEND PRE.PRIME(SSS) 12 12 TGTAt.DAV 133 138 AVG. AU. TELECASTS RBeRTASIE FOUR 1//EEK AVPRAGE STATIONS Tlj))E PER)OD AUIEHGES HALF HDI/Rj MARKEF TX ON AIR jlHIS PROSRAH vs..PRECEIXNS DAY QMA TOTAL ATEQ MARKET AREA CQRRESPQ)IDIHG TIME STATION CH, NET. DMA SHARE PERIQIM HIGHEST GSIA '/9 PERSQHS SHARE % g CQMPETIRG STATIQ )IS START NO. OF DAY TIME T/CS O'AT)OH: PRQGRAM ,USE 4 tlat @ 1$ 4$ 4) 1$ g 10 10 17 1$ 10 IBAOIN PROD AM AXSKP-NCS NOQX CO Cbe XO W X43 OCN 2.00K 40/C 0332NER8
NCXAbTA 83 XX PPL-PPL/HGHQ t4420 CN,36 2 IN TOUCH 80 30K 40/C 4 8 8 8 8 8 870 CON 6 10 18 17 73 VRS /BPR TV 8XNOS/tNXON 1 8 18 24 22 ENTTON'GHT 60 N?ZQ CB, 63 X VSL-FFIT/3PRQ.W NNN 2,000 43/C tVCW-NT+ BRAVES Xohk THISWEEK-ABC &VX'00 SUPERTVSU1 33.00K 43/C HSTR+PK/3LVSTW NO YotFJQ k%50% i4VN,, bh. 2 A0000iA WAST SUN TODAY NBC C XPt, Iot/24 CE 33 WFKG BAYWATCR CON Oi 36/i 42/C WdSF WHOLE4/P137FIY V/01XQ00 Pk. 6 bbbbbOPXt/bb KERG 0 VOICE TRIUMPH 2 10 tX/KX CN. 32 4 CHViS-'N/CLBTG rt 4%/C KABE 80/t 2 ~ 00/t KBFK MRTHST/BYTE CICNX «T/Qtbobbb 2 032/O XECKON 33 'WBAL SUN TODAY-NBC. IO/btt Cg, 3 h Nt4 3 AMSU 33 18 V/42 EYEV/ITNV/3 Gott Oi 00lt 3N/C WNUV BTHL ALGWRXFS 5meoe me 3000
SXfA&ÃX 003FOQ/t4'tt 3 I/bOX CN 33 A 33% 1 80N Yi003 43/C 111 83 5828 3 /3 LM bXECBMiCN X'tt 6 SUNWYMRNCBS 'Z WBNG t/XCX Ctt«40 &3 WSGH BEET PRESS@UN 00N 9, 00/h 43'/C :WSKG BRNSFRNMCCH 0000 SCRUBBER 4 10 "IS 2 2 7,2. 4 8 3 8 8 2 8 3 8 8 3 4 7 4' 77 37 10 14 40 13 2 8 3 8 8 3 4 7 3
Far explanation et Sy/nbQIO, See ICSdPOS& BEPORTABI.E FQtJR V/EEK AVERAGE STATIONS T{ME PERIO9 AVD{ENCES INRIIEf TZ, 08 AIR {THIS PROBRAMva PSECEOINB HALF HOUR) TOTAL ON 819M STAT{ON TOTALS STATWN CK NET. OMA SHARE DL!A !o PERSONS SHARE o/o f. STARf KD, GF OAY 7th!E T/CS, LNE4 t&4$ $ 1@%'5 h'f1 23 23 LEAO IN-PROGRAM 3 4 5 8 7 8 8 10 11 12 SXBKtBOfOtSt CE XQ CE&60 X , WSRC JPRD.WKAYHL.FR BAE 6 0IIP 4E/C 33f40.NIRLTVoK Eaf&ft WVXEQ 'NAo . 1YfBS V/CY/-MT+BRAVES WERC FQX/tWSSUI4DAY WB/IA+8 THSWKIHR.FP WTBS SUPER TVSU1
Sf&F/&S"BBQftf&X-OE Eh 5 fF/Nt CE BB F 33 CHRSTN IY/HT 7 OQA 88 BQB 4T/C A,ST.MN BOSERS5f V/C% FORUM ~ BRNQFRfhfARTHR- SOBVOB tfQto&tj Eft& X&t CE.38 X 4% V/HDH 0 SUNTODAY»NSC BIIB 8.00th 4v/C &NEW84-SUN ftEtf t)F SSo/XS 17 WBZ WGBH ARTHR»tifBRNSFR Saitff&XEQ QREEb! CE 5 CB.4a F mm w CHNGDUFDCHL BQB O»OOA 40/C WSK03 WKGB BFINAFRN/fLTBSS QQBPEf& BR WKYU QFF R /MRKT»M BOFFftX&O Eft 5 tQISff CS' Xt X8of 't SOtf 7 & balt 4E/C 17 17 13 CQSPEt& 1 2220 24
RTK SOXEESB SfF 5 FBVS CE& 7 F 4% BQQ 7 OOS 48/C {000) KIILF BUNGAY MRN488 FML/LDS FM 3M&T f&VIB CQSBBf& V/CVH KV/YB 0 LDS KUSM BRNSFRN/fLIBBS CftBPER-RXtfERVOtf ftXi 5 EFBSW CB,XO fh 8E TODAY.NBC BtFA V.QOA 33/C :KIWQ'UN 608 FIIF&t SEPOftE KGWCo SUNDAY MRN«CBS K&/IYF K4!IOfoNIStoDRVN CSR ROB ftAE/&SOS CE 6 BIOQf CB, 3 C
48/CXX'0*00K 1 7 8 6 KCRQ 8 ROME BYR GUIDE SBOQIQIQ EISQIB 1 3 4 2 3 2 I 3 KV/WLQ THBLD/YRNLY Kilo TLTHB&SRNSFR CEhÃPMt&BPE»R".C CE 6 tQttOS CS X'f 7& 57W B.OOA 37/C 1 5 8 4 4 6 7 7 WCIA» SIODf/4!NICHSSN 8CmtE~ XXVEB 4 5 5 5 6 7 7 WASP». FQKNWS SUNDAY WICS+ HR F PW/PD PRQ CIOIRXEBÃOÃ& BC XQI, 5 ftCSO CB 3 O 338& BQE 7. baft 4E/C 3 24 21 't 1 1.1 25 12 11 WTAT WILD THINGS SEFPEB CAEQEBB 17 5 1.1 16 29 WMMP. KNQS HW/PD PRQ WCSC 8 RNGSHW/HRRS CBSRfoQXXE EA XO tf33hf CB, 3 C 338 L!QRE-CDKGUBGR 1 BIIE 6. OWI, 4%/C WSQC 7 JIMMY. SWAGGART ? WCCB CSB SHW/PD PRG 1 6 ~-RAIN EA 5 tft3tB CB. 8 A BE BtP4 '/«00th 4E/C WSAZo .HRQFPQWER XOQR f tt ENXSE WDWK NCKMWSIBRCH«M Y/FEY BRNAFFLN/ARTHR- CQftBVALXIQft Eft 7 ffbQO CB XQ C WRCB. TCDAY.NBC 4 21 8.30'E/C 1 3 4 2 1 2 2 2 :SBN PRESCtt"Q OOSPB 4 4 2 2 4 3 3 WIVC'Y/SCH9 GM BUN 3 15 'WTCI SESAMESTREET C&" CSEX "5CtTB ffL 4 BXkP/ CB. 27 F 53 KGWN'+ BOE V.OO/t 4V/C .SUNDAYMRN4%8 BPXSEROtB-QPS 0 60 60 KKTU SUN TODAY»NBG ACHW BLPS BDIBLP BD CBXCAQO CE XX t&fCPE CB«38 X BQB X.QQP 45&/C 18 WON 5 LD-FFLf/CBSBS 4 12 50 V/K L!QV '& PJIXO PBOQPAW IIIPIIR5 VPN 3 WLS VARIOUS 3 6 CBXCO REOQXEQ PA 7 EBCQ CB. '7 MRN.CBS BOW 8 OOA 3T/C KHSL SUNDAY QPSXS PROIEfftff KGVU FQKKWSSUNDAY KRVU HR GFP{7WER REPORTABLE FOUR I/ffEEK AVERAGE STATIC?/5 TIVE PERIOD AUQIEIfIGES IAARKET T2. OH A!8 ITHB PROBBA?4 ffs. FEECEOIHB HALF IIOURI TOTALOAY AREA DESIGE/ATED IIARKET GVj IXIRRESPGI?IGIFIS TII/IE STATION/ CH. tlET. OBA SHARE '»8 I000I» PERIG94 III8%ST DMA Vo PERSGI/8 SHARE START ?N, OF f V5 CGV»PETIIIG STATIGIIS V/I00N ON TII/E T/CS. EIOQEH QEt/ TOTAL AOCLTS Ltt/E 4 4E '» aL "sf STATION PRQGRAILf 14 19 15 1? 10 10 LEAGIH FROGRAAI CXI"CXNMTX X'A 0 MCPO CB, 9 A. 138 WLf»VT SUN TODAY-»NBC 0.00A 3T/C WKRC HRGPPGW& PAXD PROKSS WSTR 5 MN N BLIBTMN'8 C?&~ BA 9 5 CB» 5 A 13?f 'WKYC fgm 0.00A 4TIC V/JW PBRD CBX?»DIIRN 'Vjf@G
COMI SPR?»&»Q"PN» lX? 5 ERDO CB» 13 A. 1'& KXRhl SDN 9.005 3»,IC VARXODS KGAA
CÃtBfgXA~ CTX CX BSXS CB» 17 A 9ff KGL",U SUNTGDAY.HBG SQN 0. 00A 3T/C &KRCG SUiVDAYAIRN*CSS 50?»DXN NOR&?» Bg ..Kf/tGS BRNAFRN/ILTBBS
BN?»»7 CB,35 X KUIZ 0 V/L»L ST/MRTH'8 CDN 10.30A 4T/C V,'CC Kt/QS ARTHR P/STRTM IB»BC IIORNDXP KG?AU lf AR:BD /NGHT fff SU'/GAY? »Rl4488 JNP~ [009/
SC BAAW'O?»fDOfXA» 5 W?»O CB.XB A. Sf4 WLTX 10«00A 3TIC f009) AVIS +VARENESS ODAX DXBCOIIBRX WACH FGK NWS BUNGAY CO?»LC%-TOP"MP CB 4 MTffh Cft. 9 N 19% CREFLG-DIKL/LR SDN 9 i 30A. 4T/C jKQO REAGNBRAINBOW OXVg tX DXM»g GAY-DISCOVERY
CO?»DtCON» OB Rh 7 Self&7 CB» 51 X !ATLNS I»10IL~/CSHKP OAT "/*009 4T/C WCI/iH ACCSSHLYWDV/K BOf?XN ON WSYK ff 8I/IPSNB/SgFLU
MBXX CB& 4 A !II»888 IIFEY1VT-SUN AAI SDN 7*OCA 4TIC WOI.IH NW4 TOY SU HR1 DB OP PO»eg WGSU TTS TV~»PF P
WT WORM Cg 13 ~RTVT CB. LL C '?B SDN 5»OOA 4T/C
DAVNPRT"RX l&E Cg 5 MOAN CB, 0 A 11'DN OiOOA 3T/C 5MAAD ST OSN-RP
CAXTON Zli 0 CB,B A SES/L?AE STREET DDN '/»00A 4T/C PD PRGFLfCHNGO PAXD PROORAB 04/8 BRSIFLG RH Z?Ca~ ?»T 10 CS» 3 X VO KUSA ONWSSUNMGRII Of/N 7 30A 4T/C KA%H 5 714EWSSUV XT XS I?RXTTSS KCHG FLG RH?//SVG I/R
XXS k&XNDS-Al»RS Cg 0 35fa BCCX CB. 0 C 4 2 %HG SIT&4 TGDNDKBG SON 'li00h 4TIC 101 57 KLSHI MNK I/GC/2GRRG PAXD PRO!II?AN 'WGI 0 BTTRPT/DSGNR
DXTROXT Zh 10 MISS CB»00 X 4ff& NON 7»30A 4T/C XN TODCB 30 Cg 3 ~s Cgi 4 C 33?4 V/QHN 0 RQQCRSTCHRCH SON 9,30A 4T/C V/OFX JCK YN/FK NWS MROTQATB~»T DOLOTB-SI/»»XOR ee 4 BMB CB 5 N .13M 'WOO+5 RBCC GR/THS WK SDN 10i00A 4T/C WISE VHTFI I/R//LBUEI PAXD PACER»JW KOEH HAIK RL /88 Vl.«
Fa? ORPIDDOHO?I OI Sybil?OIS, SOO Iaef3 PSBO» DR. 0. JAMES KFNNEOY PROGRAMS VARIOUS REPOFtT ON OFVOTIONAL NBI AVERAGE %EEK ESTIMATES clUL 1999
RFFORTASLE FOUR WEEK AVERAGE STATIONS TIME PERIOD AUIIIEttCES I IARKET TX ON AIR ITNIS PROGRAM vs FREOEOVIG HALF HOURI DAY STATION TOTALS TarAL Q)RRESPGNDIItG TIME STATIOtt OH, KEf. Otth SHARE PERIQM tttGHEST PERSQttg SIIARE "ig f, STA'RONS START IIO, OF COIIIPETING ON TII48 7/CS, STATION PROGRAM LINE 4 «a'4'5& LEAD4M.PROGRAM 3 4 5 5 7 SS Erorrp@ TODAY-NBO CE 36 h 58 WETM SUN WYDC KN CPLNIPD PRB SOS 8,00h 48/C V«QVt4 xasoE ESXE~ Sh 5 P 58 V/ICtt MEETPRESS.SUN ttPEP CS,66 b!RN/PO PRG SVIS 10 008, 4T/C 155 155 WSEE SND NOD«tqVN/LDPN pcx rr«/3 so!rshE WQLN 'PS 6 tcvrs+ cs, 16 s 47$ KVAL+ SUiNDAYMRNCBS SISr VeaOA A"/C KEZI 6 RQBTSOHULLER s!«3 xashx ssc 22 18 18 KLSR AGRQLTRIO*DSCV
EVStrSVXX«XZ CE 7 MVV'S,44 C V/RE REBECCAGARDEN {00/0 Ca«ITERGIFIRS SOS 4,388 47/C KC WtVW OPS SXS WEHT TRAVELitNTRFT PRESS-SUN ttVBtr CE.63 X SORE MEET . KC MRN«MS Sr/S 8«305 47/C V/EVV SUNDAY phxo SSaoslot WTVW RQBTSQHULLER ~ kVC« PSSCO-YSXX«X CXX CE 5 6 h 168 trahx+'E. 6 1 SOS 7 30h 37/C 6 fOI OPOPOLQ sxoS 15 16
57«Xtei-Shrrahtl SC Sh 6 Vi«X CS,35 S SOS 7,008 47/C Vfatd trXLORTX"SPP tt
PV«SECS ~i SCE Eh 6 trpxs cE, 43 9 58 8«998 47/0 vfF~ SSXS"XlrC S/J«r«
9 SXEPB-rlhPV«S Ell. 6 i SUNTODAY-NBQ 7/XEE CE*XX 5 WBBH SOS 8 Oah 48/C /00/0 WZVN 5 HR QFPOWER sES coper«KMc WGCU SHQ«IEBtREET CE 5 trhe«E CE,15 C 188 15 1 6 SIP3'l. 058 47/C 1 6 via% EES COKIAtR CK Eh 4 tICOS CS e 30 SOS 9*888 XX/C psxo psorE«jiN
CS, «VSCPrt tarPSOS trP 5 CS 8 ~MS V.OOh 37/C 5 20 000),7 WJisxat/3 11 10 $
CS SSPXOO-Eh-XC Xh 7 YNG MR IPPLR4r i//XXE CS 13 h WQQD fMQO 4 TOUCH.SO SOS V.008 49/C WIIMI IN sm sESsxs star WQTV PD PRGRIX!RTH S KKEQ shx"hp//rs CS '7 trt«OE CS 51 P 84 6.308 VP% PSXS PSOGSl@l ~SSO"SP-WS Eh 9 Y«HL.FRT/A RD W %XXX CE. 61 X V/Rtv 4iO/C WXII 8 ENTTON!GHT60 SAP 7»99P X-FtlES'1 Eor«h She/XPP WGHP WeTMY tN TOUCH 60 200/IHS WK SOS XX«09h 47/C CC YOLV 8 GLF TRLSD /LITR V/K EO VCO!«O KC V/UNL '58 Y/RIIY SUNDAY MRN4BS tta'«Y CS,45 h t4EETPRESS4JN SOS 9.09h 39/C WKII WUNL THS LD /NW NK. 8PSXO PSOOSAS «7
Fcr cxptar!atlart of syitt0ots, soo twC pago. REPORTABLE FOUR VVEEK AVERAGE STATIC.iIS TIME PERlOD AUDlENCES IilARKET 72. GIN AIR {TRIS PBDGBAB vA PB(CEDING NALFBOIII8 TOTAL DAV DESlGMAT STATION CB. NET. ON SNARE COHREBPGNDlNG TIIBE ooio Glib 'io PERSONS SHARE oo f, PETIIGQ 8 HIGHEST START AO. OF CG//JoEYING STATIONS OAV TINE TICS,
LI"IE 6 LEANiOPROGRAM 3IE IIAQB Eh. CE 7 B 11% WCYI PD PRGRIJGK VN ENQ 6,3ah 4T/C V/UNM CLLG SCIPZZL P BQQB Cl'AXTE WNCT PAlO PROGRAM KIZBLAB-GMENK CE 3 NXI7 CB. 6 h 17% 10 3ah 3T/C 0 BEEE"ABC ~BQiIQ Eh ~V CB 3 h 3Ni BCIB Qo30A 3T/C OQAX"BXECQQBEX BMSSM"?k"BB X @. iiIBQ CB*21 C 1aoo l000] VIHTM REBECCAGARDEN QQB 7»ODA ET/C :WGAL SECREiil.IGfiGDM XiXPE E"EEET V/CVH 'V/IYF SESAME STREET BIIBTPBQQTi"io BAQB Bh 8 NTBE CB. 8 A QUII O,aah 3T/C CXQB Y~ riÃEITEB
BBTQroE BCTE I QTi) CE 5 OWlX CB„31 A XXOO 1VH%" %VSCHIBSU MRN BIB',00A. 4T/C WAFF .SUNTGDAV-AIBC QICIXiXi ET QBB BQ AVZDX PAID'PRGBRAM E~oo CE 13 EETB CB. 14 X Mf/8/oVHL-FR BAT 4T/C o& 0 6oaQP EIVT NASAoI DMB ElÃh ri VXET KC SAT 6PM MOVIE THIS'V/EEK-ABC XIB 'laiaah 4T/C BTLBRGRHLKSFR BB XQUEQ MEET PRESS%UN ETQU CB,85 X EVEV/YA//8 SU7A BUB 7 Qah 4T/C 'KPRC SUB YGDAV-.NBC 7QO CXiUB KTXH DBL DRGISP MRK XT/c KIRK 6 TH!8 WEEK.ABG . ma 1a.aoh BYLBRIGSHLKSFR Xhm.ofQ CEQECE MEET PRESSSUN
~ BPfr, XQIIBQ PhriLE-PQQ BX 6'XPX CBo 8 A 1QE SUB 7 Qah 3T/C KICK QEQQEAB KPVI QQAXQ 'KISU xrBP~arixQ Eh XX BEBQ CB.4a X WXIN:8 FGX MOVIE SUB E.QDQ 47/c C+000 V/TTV+ SUN'AFT MGV COBB AXuIE 2 WISHO PENSACLA4TLDR ~Bi M CE 5 CB 3 B 14B »WQ 9 Dah 4T/L BBBT HEBE EUQ
QACECQ~~/XQ34 Bh 8 EQEQ CB. X 58 'VTLV.Q WHL«FRT/JPRDAV EAT F 000 7 OT/C WJXT ER. EQXh XZVXTT V/AVIS 'MPSNS/SNFLD WJV/8 V/CW WLD WDE WR BUB 11*aah 4T/C WJXT RGBTSCHULLER BQ XQQEQ WJXX+8 YHS WKJPD'PRG
IOQXX+ CB QQ h 44 'WJXY 8UNDAVMRNABS QQB Qiaah 3T/C V/TLV MEETPRE884UN OXB TQUCB 60 LVTEV SHILGH
Qa~~"jPTtQ, Eh 6 7/PAoY CB.10 C l.98 WJAC GGSPELWINSTRS BUB 6,30A 4T/C WPSX SESAMESTREET OIBfJQPBE 8» A, WAYIiI CGLLMERCLFRG Qa&QQCEC CE 3 CB.48 X BQB 7oaaa 4T/C AQQIPB "oOX
For EfxplQIIQIIQII Qt syfrfbalQ, ms lasd poge, RBJORTABLE FOUR WEEK AVERAGE STATIONS TllylE PERIOD AUOlENCES MARKET TX ON PJR gfHS PROSRAM le. PREQEDINS HALF HQIIBl TOTAL DAY DESIGNATED MARKET AREA STATION CH. NET. OMA SHARE CORRESPONDING TIME DNA 'i'o PERSONS SHARE ao lOIQ) PER/QM HiGHEST BTARf I/O. OF VS 8@. CQIlPETING STATIONS OAY TILIE 7/CS. VBieVN HHIB LINE 4 STATION PROGRAM: LEAD-IN PROGRAM COPItXII"PFii'SBRF CE 4 ES4F CE 36 8 3314 BIN 10 00h 4T/C OIIERRF 8 CORE
frhEF~ CXTX CE 9 BBBB CE«43 8 6I/t FX4"SN/FX88N StN 7 005 4T/C WDAF
BBFlXIIS KMBC 0 HRVSTC/CRFL.D'CIV BRSO 4 RPRTCWANTLN It?M~ttIB Rh 6 trBXR CE XO B ROAN 6~00h 4T/C Y/ATE WL!. ST /B.SMIH BtN 'WBXX. PAID PROGR/LVI WVNZ: MRTHST/PDPRG Ith CESS"FISC CIR CR 5 tfIOttX+ CE. 35 F 510 V/EAU SUNTODAY-ge ~MS 4T/C 7.00h AQUI.THIUCATN PRINRhtf 68 WHLA+ PICO WKBT RPRTCB/ANTL.C ILREfOXIIB Eh. 3 tfSXB CE F St0 47 NEWB 18ttVKND 00h IOQOI 1.:, 1 V/ILX BIN 7. 49/C WLNS WLLI/JDiDSGV IIXEtXITÃ'-REPORT V/CVH, 121 0V V/L/Lf ON TOUCH 80 ~~ "QTIN Rh 6 PIBEX CE» 30 E "l014 BtN 6 30h 4TIC PRXB PRQBRhtt
ItXI% Bh 5 CE. 44 X NWS/RfBNBC44W 6 OOP 4T/C kAWRENCEV/EL'K CBRXPif-PAX /tGGSS HLYWD WK ItXIIQCP IIRIIX CR 6 0 5h IIMQI+ CE, h KOLN+ SUNDAY MRN4:BS SQII OiQOR 3T/C MEET PRQQRhft KHAS PRE3SSUN 4IPRXB KHGIf/I NTV SUN MRN.MV XXTB Rtst-PB BttF CB 9 IITBV CE.XX C 33% 605f 6,30h 4%/C CRTRQLXC IO@s
XAIB IttrC rtso Ih 35 CE 9 X 7h SQB 4i/C 5 1 7.00h 32 8 BR XV EIIdhRQ
IttEIXOVXLXcs Bh 8 ttnRS CE.41 F 7a 4T/C 2 1 SIN O.ON, 82 'PICO PRQORhtt 88,62
tthCOB FA 6
WPBh CR&55 h 38 MORN''
8.00h 4T/C VVMAZ WEEKND BBB V/GXA FN BRCH/PD PRG'MGT tttXIB XB RCTXQE SUN TODAY»NBG BBQFQRB RBE Flt8 Ph 5 INRV+ CE. XR h 35tt KOBI+ SUNTODAY.NBC BIN 7,00h 3T/C KMVV'AID PROGRAM OB@XRR"QRB-"rN KSYB BRNSFRNfARTHR- IEttstBXS Cs 9 WOIIX CE.40 X WLIOT SHOLVTIAE.APOILG 6 000 48/C WREG 6 NWS.S 8/MO 8 T Xolth XSVXTT V/MG 9 AGTN54WK+R WKNG ADViVRT/ARTH R. BtN 10 085 4T/C VlfREG 2ND'PRE/CR L'K RB 70053 WMG GT GS-N///R THN
IIZSR CR.I3 F 108 V/REG BUNGAY MRNC88 BtN 0.30h 4TIC 12 8 65 V/MG MT PRSS/41CNiBP Tg TQQCE 30 WPTY 9 CRFL»DL/BLLV 8
IIXREX FT, IthUOg Rh 33 CE.45 X 2 VYLTV NBA-UNI 7 OOP 4T/C 115 40 40 WSVN 0'ST6INSD DT/DC DRV XQIJL I VXTT V/FOR ENTTONIGHTSO WBFS HOYEY I.IODB mN U,OOh 4T/C WPLG 8 THS:WK~S VVK RB XQINO WBZL BWTDH /MLB. C
Per explaBRIIQR Cf symbols, 600 100d pOBO. CGIefPETING AVERAGE REPORTABLE WEEK PRGGRAIIA AUQIENCE SECTION FOUR WEEK AVERAGE PERIOO AUDIENCES STATIONS TIME (GEVGRGNAL PAOGIIAI&( GSLYI TIME RERIQQ AUO!ENQEB BASKET TX GN'OURAIB (THIS FROGRAII PE PRECEKNG HALF HOURI TOTAL OAY TOTALS DESIGNATED li(ARKET AREA STATION 'RME STA'AG'I CH, PET G&SA SHARE CORRESPONDING PERSONS (Ct/GI a V/(GGVH PERIOOG HIGHEST Of(IA. 5 PERSONS SHARE JS' START NG, OF. GONIPETING STATIONS
GAY TIL&E T/CS, @'ktt IITQ L1NE 4 STATION PROORAS( LEAD.INPROGRA 4 5 6 7 8 t/XL/X XT LLQPE EL 15 CQ, 7 P Qt& Z SQS 9. 0QL 3T/C 10 4 4 V/TIARA Xtt TOPEE 60 2 2 Z 8 8 I I t(N 72 8 8 IIXLMLQEEE CE 9 ttCQV CE,Q& X Qtt& 8 3 SUNTODAY.NBG Sbtt '/,bbh 4T/C KK V/ISN 6 CARRIEV/IATT KK IZS Tt 34 OP ttr&tLQEEE . V/ITI SECRETS((INGDI&( ttZEE/iPLS ET PL CE 9 CS 33 X 4/& I//mti SUNDAY IARN~ SW '8.3QL &T/C Kt4SP EXTGHS/BYR'SH EOP PRESLEY KARE SN TDWN PRS
EQDxr&E EEQ(pea) cE 3 tie CE,. 5 C 'I//PMI SQII Qibbh &T/C V/ALA TOOM/S KWNLR VlEAR IQI~X(sert OE 5 t(LEL CS* 6 C LEE/ 7 ~ Qbh &T/C QEEELtt"STQPX tlh6lXVXLr&E CE 9 ttPOO CE 50 X N NIYSGHNL'SATSP SLT 6.0QP &T/C '(GKQ V&KNDSC/VRB ZOLL JPRD.V/KNTIL-FR ~ THSV/(-/V/01487 GCN 10 & 0 DL 4T/C INTCH/PO PRG '0 tthriK TNN GRS/V/RON tat/(EEP /IIV, vf~/ "6 CE 11 li~ CS,PO X 3 QQP &T/C LEQOX»PEO&tPSOP
EEtt SÃiE EL 15 ttPZtt CE 31 X XE V/NBG It MCLGHLN/LIT PRS S05 10»bbh &T/C (4000 WPN. SVD 8:8/A(LB& C CLTEOLXC IQlQS V/CBS SND MRN/FC&NTN ttRPLE"PRT trp t»»t Ph XQ It(/PT CS, 43 P 4tt 7.QOL &T/C ZOREO
OKXL»Xi!&L CXTT CE 10 EOCO CE» 5 3, XXtt 'FOR 8UNTODAV NBG QQQ Viddh &T/C (000} V/CVH KV/TV NV/8 9 SU t4 ED PAXO PEOQRhtt KAUT SP t&(GNKEYS-TLi(N
ESEX CE 53 X CBB NV/84%'/8 O. 5»DQP &T/C SNV/CHISNBG h'/ ORXQXt/6 ABG NV/8/EV/TNV/
PLEO CS 14 X EVlT V&VS/V/HL.FR SLT 6&DDP 4T/C NLVS 08/DSCVR ZOLL LEPXTT 8NV/CHNA/St;GU) iVEETPREBS«BUN SES XQ.DQL &T/C FC NTN»/V&SBhNS EP XOQEQ NATURE
PARCEF && t&tr
CE 7
Etrw cE» 3 c SOW T. 00A 4X/C'LXP PEOShhtt
PPCE-Obl-ELE te/Q CE 6 IIQXL+ CS& 3 h SQE '/,OQL 3T/C 3 ? 3 Z SETTER OLROEEE 6 4 4
For oxptaoatlott ol Qyrobols, soo lead pago, i »8 ' » ! ~ ~ !»» » p»li~»'~+'»,1/?»»+ '+4 wQ~i «»» . »7»i q g I»& %4»»i» . inr! Jl»P?» ?»»»iTX»»»?«)» ?6 ~ » «7 C
OR. 0. JAMES KENNEDY TIARIGUS
HEPORTASLE FOUR WEEK AVERAGE NATIO 8 TIME PERIOD AUDIENCES MARKET TL OH AIH OBIS PROGRAM vs. PHECEOiTIG HALF HOIIRI TOTALOAY QE STATION TOTALS STATIOM CH, KET. OMA SHARE CDRRESPQNDING TiNE i,g ON Il PERSONS SHARE '8 &i? PERIOI58 IIIGREST START NO. OF g TOTAL CGNIPETIIOG STATTDNS DAY TIME TlCS. 58 HHLO TOTAL flTG ~ AOOLTS UNE 4 STATIOI6 FROGRAIS LEAD.I PROGRAM PRCRxa Rri??Q"GT?r ca 5 ?raox cs 39 R 9% SW 9.005 3T/C C?Q?RPZ?'» PXSXO2
P?rXr»RRRrPEXR Rh 13 WP?»Z CR. 69 X ACTNNOTANSD 8 OW XO 005 «T/C IN/SIOTDcCTPRS SND.44RN/FC NTN 7,00P 3T/C 66 MINUTES«:88 Y/ONDRF DSN-ABC XS CN»X?i73 9RX? O OAT&SU-TP.NSC WiW CS. 5'/ X 4% 7,3W 49/C 6fe) NY/SIQTD/SNTD. SW ACTH NY//SND L'Y CIIHPXO-OOXXOIR $ IN TCH IDRGN.B
P~~ ?IP XX R?»Xt? CaiX5 3» W 3T/C KPNK+ 12 N(VS SU MORN Nn O.OOR MRNCBS 65»RT3 t?P KPHO SUNDAY KTt?K GMAZSUN PXTTWQRW FJL 9 OR*40' I!PCS 26/26-SU?f-ABC 9 00P 4T/C CW CSS:SUN.IIOQV 7?RX-RX CO??RRX NSCSUNklOY t???W W.53 P 5% O/TAE ACTHNSSUN BW 7»ONI. «T/C RDBTSOHULL'SR PA30 PRosaAR P3 M/PXI 'tYPCB IN TOUCH SO
I//DIP/ PORT?»R?»7?» W XR 6 0% RPOX CG»49 P NATU-9 CH28UNORNNY/8 V.OO?t «T/C KOIN SUNDAY MRN.CBS XN?R ??S?? ROWS KOINE SAYED-BELLNBC QOX?'CX"Smi X@OX CS 3 ?ato?i cB '/ c 318 SW 7»OOR 49/C 7 Sl?OT?i~»» R?IX»XXG?t ??t?R(PX3 XA 9 CS. 40 1 4% WS XO,OOR «T/C ORCR VRQ XSPR
1ÃS"SW CX ROS CR 7 RES! CR, 3 C X7% UNTODAY4SC '?.005 4T/C KITC 8 SW KAAL 0 BU. 5l-GQCK HN P/is?4 RRPORT 7?» AWBR SP VNKSlSTR'SH
RXCS?5?&9-PTMOG XOL 6 WÃST CS,XX ?l X5% CW 7,005 «T/C RXCCXOW-CR?»TR
RRQ;0".!Z»XNCSRRO l% 7 t?WX CS 33 R lit SW 8»OOR 4T/C 7 O?»b TXXSI GOOP% 1 tO R~ CS 4 t?ORP Ca*39 P D?DSCYRIBB YL« SW 7,00R 4T/C KN.CPLN/I/RTH 8 STR?IXORT TI»X TMLSS T/PIN QRCRP~ STR t»O PR 9 RTXX» CS,40 P 6?t CW k»OOR «T/C
o?IX»xssaa7 R?L 3 CS. 47 R 9% Y/SOC SUNDAY KIRN CBS SW 9» 005 3P/C MICPB 9 THS L'D'/NMI NK- OPRXO PROOR?i?t Sht? 351O»»»XO CO 9 SR'?t.35 X 48 RW 7 i 0 OR «T/C PIC PROSR?at 3
For cxplsnatlen of symt?ofs, see lead page. REPORTABLE FOUR WEEK AVERAGE STATIONS l1ME PERIOD AU|7fEfVCES MARKET T,2, OH AIR (TIQS PROGRAM vs, PREQEOIHS HALF HOUBj TOTAL DAY STATION TOTALS DES!974ATEO fSARKET AREA DMA Sl'AVION CH. HET. OMA SHARE OMA»» PERSONS SHARE 'A 4 SQQ)
START HO. OF @ TOTAL'S~VS DAY TIME T/CS. fQILQ.: TOTAL UAE 4 '12 17 '/8 19 LEAD-IN.PROGRAM 2 8 9 10 11 13 14 f818 SAS QXEQO PA 9 E@T»/ CE. 10 KNSO KNSD VitKND'HWS SOS 7,30h 3T/C KUSI KUSI WKND NEWS IIXS TOQCE 30 KFMB SUNDAYMRN-GBS SAS ERAS"OAE M'A 14 EENQ CE 30 X 3S MR/4488 SW V.QQA 4T/C MEET PRESS SUN X XV'OQSE ASQ7 NW SU.VA!4 .KGQ'UNDAY EPWS+ CS 8 X
2 KPIff'8 QO MINUTE8488 7 QQP 4T/C KRGN8 DATE-SIFVP»KSD CgUtXS SAAVf WGNDRF'OSN ABD
SAWCPSiS 6 »IT'S CE 38 P 4E egg 7 00A. 4T/C OVEACCig PhTiif
SEATTXiE TACO.JL PA 10 CE X ETSQ 33 3E KING KIKGSIVKNO NWS 7 QQA 4T/C SCS KQMO 8 NW-V/NPDGH ABO APOÃfiXC"CRACE HOTS KIOSGNGSTV 8/f SXOQE CXTX CE 9 ECAQ CE 9 A, XXS Kl"fV SQS 9iQQA AT/C KMEG QQAT QXSCOVEQX KSIIV SXOQX PASPCEQ) CE 8 CE. ESPX+ 13 A 'KELO+ SNO MRNIFO:NTN SQS 9iQQA 3T/C TELTUBB!ES4%I CEECAT 2 8 7 HESTIA QCA%5iXC :IIV/+ V/LL.STABR4'.TH SO WMQ Sfi%lAT CE 6 CE46 X E HNG TM /BLL N« SQS V,QQA 4T/C 22 N TQ/IN STP QESSE QQPXi'TXS SESAMESTRc~ TQUGf+AbiGL488 Sm~ 7.00P eT/C DATE.SU42».NBO XS TOOCQ 60 8MPHNS/FTIQif-F WSQT CE.XQ C XQE TODAY'SGR SQS DICE 6 30h 4T/C SAFINEYXFRIBNDS OPS AXE ZQRRQ
SPSXSSPAC SfiXOK SA 4 A»XOS CE.40 138 * V/WLP SQS Si30A 3T/C 2 3 QQAX-PXSCOVESX 2 1 V/FSS V/GBY Si XOQXS CQ,34 X SQS 6iQQP KMGV QQM!N~SS KSDK 8 .DATE-'SU»TP-'M3G SXEQJATXOS KPLR'8 'PRNTHD/SMRTG 7 Xah 4T/C ~-TEIL% IITXXi CE 27 SOS 9 30A 1 3 2 SEES COPE/iASQ 2
TASPA-ST PfSAEj E'A 11 CE 38 A, 7E ~i* GD4/AY QAM SU QOS SiQQA 3T/C SU!4 TODAY/NBO QSATVXES BTLBRG8/HLKAFR %TARE SAQTE CE. 9 S DAYiDISGDVERY IO SQN SiON, 211 STUDENT SGIES XS TOQCE 60 5 31 28 10 XOX@QO SQPS C8,36 P V/TVG»9 TS:ACT N(V4UN SQS 8 QQA 7/TG': l1 NEWB AM SUN PAXQ PSOQPAIe WNV/G/ .RGBTSG/IULLER
For OXPhna!IOII Of SymbOIS„SCQ IOSd. y080. VARIOUS
REPORTAEIE FOUR NEEK AVERAGE STATelS TIME PERIOD AUDIENCES /JARKET T.Z, ON AIR ITHIR PROGRAM vs. PREOEOING HALF HOURI TOTAL GAY STATION TOTALS STATIO/I CH. IIK 61IA SHARE CORRESPONQING TIIIIE Iaaaj QMA 66 PERSONS SHARE 'iL f. PERIOM HIGHEBT BTART t/O. OF YS COT/PEITNG STATION OAY TILIE 7/OS. Y/IOOYR
UME4 LEAR-IN PROGRAM TRRVRS CYY~tiC Rh 9 tatlV'+ CB S C 23'4 7.00R 2 1717 312 Y/PEN+ PO PRGR/BRCL M sas av/c WGTU+ NCK.NWIBLL N- Xihxs SRCSRRtf WGKtf CRR WTT/BB VL- CRX CXXSSpTII VA. CR 9 R a%Pl'B.39 es WCYB BUM TODAY-NBC 3OR 5 4 2 Sfsf 0 4V/C fiVJHL TVBUNGAYSCHL BXSXCRti WP//VS 2 5 4 2 WEMT PAIO PROGRAM mCSOS (S 'VSVRI te 0 CB,30 2 38 KVOA BUNTOOAY-'NBC V,OOR 42/C KGLO HROF POWER ROSRRYS RRS SS KGUiY VARfOUS %KM~ CR 0 CS,4"l Risss R 26/28.WEQ ABG 12 23 1/Sa 9~009 42/C CBS WEQ MGV 7 14 ORRxi RCORRVs LAWSORQETNBC 6 11 VARIOUS 6 1S /R/S 10 000 4T/C /RAN 8'T/Y MK O 8 18 xtf VCR/CB 60 AR HARV/KP-'PPR 4 10 /St/IRST //WE~
R XD'IIYXRR CR 4 RXisY+ CB, 7 R /Rfs V,aall. 4R/C CC RCVXVSt-SRROSSS KC
1IRco"vvRfi-RRYR cs 7 RRRV CB. 35 R 98 BUNGAY MRNCBS 1 4 1 1 5 4 sm 0 3N, 32/c 2 FRSI'C/MT PRS 6411935 ROIS-sat/ 676511la BUNGAY MRN4JSS
RsMi" c cc IBRS) IIRRS CB 35 R fJTPRSS/MOLGHL sw 11.0OR 4v/c BB VL~S VlK BAY-1/xccarssr HONEY NIBS SatiR CS. 7 R 32II NWS44ANW84» SOS 6 30R 4R/C LF N WFYGRFL O Fxatio SRXS ITS WR/VG FP
VIRVRR~w.t RR 4 lorxx cB i 50 R 5R V/WNY HROF PGVitER 3 16 sate O.OOR 35/c NPBS+ KOSNGS/7/MZS H I 5 Itai?iti SY iVShhti ABY~'f SP I/NKS/SVR SH &C
$/RQGhU"RBISStiBR CR 4 Ioiw* cs. 9 h xaR 8 WJFW SUNTOOAY NBG strJ v.aas 39/c 8131818 V/SAWS HMRIPRV/YR NV/ «katsR s 1 18273733 7 V/HRM+ AOULTEOUCATN fess Xit41 SCR YS RR 7 tfsxir cs 29 r SttS 0 OOR 4R/C RRXS SROSRRtf 2
SXCBVR Ftiskt~i Cg 5 RRt/3 Csi 6 C XPc KSWG INTOUCHRO Satl V.OOR 4@/C I 5 KFOX POPRGR/SRCH-.M CtN BXRSIJI XÃS KJBG 6 SHP 7HfPO PRG tfXCSXR-ICB Sf 0 CR 3 K!QS+ CB 10 R M,'4 Slit/ 7 ON, 4S/C 5 IS VCDCR 30 12 15 IfxriRRS BRR-ccR SR 6 Ii/XOB CB. 23 C 10R WNEP. NWSWTCHI 68UVA SBS 7,3N 4V/C WORE EYEWftFSNRSSU BRY BxscavRRY WSWB WARPLANETS C48%%Wi RR e RIIRY CB, 3 R SECT MT PRES/PO PRG SC/I 9.3 DR 3iti/C WUNJ NW NKcVHtSTM 00RY"DxscaYSRY WSFX FX NWS /JRR FL rottsssvar4s I'A 5 tfFkkT CR 21 S 12R Sos 7 ~ 004 41/c t/YSRRICS RtJfCR
FOr ORPIOSRIIOII Ol Sy/ttbats, SCO fORd PRBO, LtARKETS REPORTING 129 STATIONS REPORTIIIG 142 TOTAL TV HH'S Itt Dt/h'8 83c498,246 OL(A to OF U.S. 63 EPISODES AVAILABLE H/A DIST; CORAL RIDGE LIINISTRIFS TYPF; DEVOTIOtlAL
SUMFAARY SV. DAYPARTS DtctA HOUSEHOLD SHARES BY MARKET RANK DIAA HOUSEHOLD SHARES BY tEARKET RANK
2GI St-. 00 161+ 25 59 51-100 'l0 + 125 DAYPART % NO/IF R HOOF ~«NDXIF'Ol@'6 "« I!0,9," S HC.OF tiDOF HD,OF '«SO.CF ONA'8 DIIA'8 082'2 SHARE 911A'5 SIIARE S!!ARE SHARE %225 l}HA S SHARE OHA 5 SHARE OSA 8 SBAIIS DAYTL'lE (Mjf EARI.Y FRINGE (IAFj PRE45 ACCESS (h~SATj PRlt"5 S-8 AND (OERSDNS DMA HH TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS NG, HG. Y AVG, TOTAL 12.17 2.11 OF OF D.S 18+ %49 2554 186 1849 OL(A'0 GH SHR HHI.DS ,4Kf'2 TV Yi'CVH OOO Y/COII IOOOI YICYS IOOOI OKER RTG (OOOj IOOH VICYH {0$0 V/CYH OOOI YICYH . IOOOI
DAYTD.IE (LccFjg EARLY FRtNGE (IFFj PRtt/E ACCESS (V~SATj FRIVE (8-Sj POST PB.'c/IE (S-Sj 44 19 45 16 189 59 ES 5 5 V/EEKEND DAYTIL'.E(SASj 125 125 89 1 2 484 259 59 4 18 5 .24 9 42 8 16 NEEKEttD PRE PRitAE(SBSi 9 9 8 21 9 41 45 45 181 26 8 TOTAL OAY 129 129 424 254 EO AVG. ALL TELECASTS 2 57
REPORTABLE FOUR SLEEK AVERAGE STAllOtlS T(f(E PER(QD AUDiENCES IXARKEf TZ, ON AIR (fHIS PROGRAM vo. PRECEDIKG HALF HODRj TOTAL DAY STATION TOTALS SfATIGH CH, HET. DLIA SHARE DLJ( 'e PERSONS SHARE ~etc g START IIO. OF TOTAL DAY TINE TICS, VI@'Bl
%17 241 . Lit(5 4 STATION PROQRAQ. 20 21 ... 22! 23 I.EAD.IN.PROGRAH 2 10 11 12 ALSO!!X SCS"TRQX PA 6 NTSXtc CB. 10 WNYT HOSTSCRULLER NSX '7, OOA 4T/C WXXA STARTREKVYGR PABTtaots WEWB GRIFFITH ScCN ATLALTA ZA X2 NATL CB. 36 P 72c SPR TV/SPRTV4 SOS 6.20A 42/C PPLcPFL/HGtt X3 SXIIO««TXO!1 Itt TOUCH 59 '4 L~"G CS. 63 2 EHTTONIGHT69 7 ~ OOP 32/C VVBL-FRT/JFRD W OXQLA XZOXTT EXTRA V/K THSWEEK ABC Stot 11iOOA 32/C 19 5 5 125 SS 65 VARIOUS Oco xooco BST t44/AVNGRS 3' 2 ht «!c /~ 21 21 ACCQSTA XA 7 mr4 CS.32 C WAST SUN TODAY»NBC SCS 0.308 49/C WJBF V&HOL'54(tt8SlRY OS%Ah@ M!R WEBA SESALIESIREET PASSRSPXSLO PA 6 CB 17 H SIXt 7.00A 42/C 6M''ANXOtc321
XOIXcTXIIQSS BA 7 ~«CB, 2 A 9% SOS O. OOA. 4T/C VA!LXOOS
SXLOXX SOLXPOST CS 4 25'4 NLox cB, 1,3 A 'l5 WKRG BR. J, KELitEDY SOS 7 ~ 002, 42/C SESAMESTREET 5 WMAH cXCK 1Bat/2 XcSN WXKV PAID PROGRAM SXHSShYis0'I XA 6 NXCX Cg,40 P 58 SUNDAY I'RN CBS SIBt 9&OOA 42/C BFINSFRl ccBSCM ROOT S~ t IEETPREEIS SUi4 SXMXISXSAtt CE 9 I~t!C eu. 6 WVTM MEET PRESS-SVH AXEI 9.30A 4T/C V/TGS 8 SUPERTV5 C~ LXOXS V/BIG WISIIBOII+PTV
For oxpianaUon of sytnbots, sos Icsd paga CQMPETlMG AVERAGE SECTION: REPORTABLE FOUR VifEEK PRQGRATII AVDIENCE FOUR VVEEK AVERAGE AUDlE9lCES STATKIIIS ll!NE PERKID IOEVOTIONAL PROGRAM.ONLYI TlFAE PERiOD AUDIENCES AIARKET TZ ON NR (IIIIS PROGRAIA.YK PEECEINS HAI,F HOOR) TOTAL DAY KET AR RON TOTAi.S STATIIXI CIL'NET. OBA SNARE ioN) DISA ".o PERSONS SHARE ok START NO. OF '~~'8"I@'TA YIIOOW BAY TINE TlCS. 16+ f64&'2&Sf PROGRAM LSIE 4 STATiQN
20 21 6 12 16 fe LEAD IN-'PROGRAN 2 3 6 7 0 1011
aopna-SEOKox oa EA 5 Hilaa CR.,59 P 4'aa WSWP V/0FIKPLCE+KLLS 7.00A, 4afc 'WVVA CHRSTN A"74TBB Chaffofo ROSEIISff ABB DSL DRBiRAIB4IK anaaoa ffoafcaa} EA 12 TODAY-14BC Ioona Ca 38 X 4R WHDH SUN saa 6.00K 4%'/c WIXr off/8 44lRGR BR KEX OF BIIVXO 'WLVI FU. HS /V/H'8 T aowixL'8 ca 5 ~ 3E 3 faafo ca 40 P Saa 8» 00K 4N/C 2 CQ7paa aa 19 10 19
EQFFAXO EA 6 !Calf Ca / E 10R 3 aaa 'f oofo OEYC I+IXXI cafipafi
SOPPE"EOXEIOIN fr1 5 SUAIO'AY KCXX CR* 7 F 4R hfRNCBS Boff 7 00K 4N/C INPAIRCLiBB Vi; ON alIXff STSSIPP JCK HNNILFSTL cAspza-axlfakpoa ffp 6 EFRS+ Ca. 20 A, XXN KTWO BUN TODAY.NBC SUNDAYfoRNCBS SON 7.00K 4%/C 3 KGWCo QS FA764 fIEPCEP 31 KCWC l EXPLRIiVtv/HLCH'V/IVL coa aps ffhaonaa ca 7 KQN ca„x c Xpr THS LD /YR HW Oaf 10 001 4afc ;KCRG HOME BYR GUIDE osaofaaaf Boaas KFXA+ UNDR HUPCK TT
c!RA%&spa"O~M ca 6 Xalf WCIAo .SND IARNICHSSN 4 22 ffhffn CS. 17 * 4 Sffa 0 008. 4a/C WRSP+ FOX NWSSUNDAY 1 4 C5l@lQS XcXOES V/IL'L BRNAFRNIARTHFI-
Caao'MM, CC SA "f ffcac cs. 6 c 213 aaff 'f OOE 4E/C xa Xoaca 30 CdjdlMTm EE 10 Eaxv ca, 3 V/SQC flroR240"CUEROR Snl% 6 OM. 47/C V/CNC BB VL46/IST'BP WCCB CSB SHWIPD PRS caela-Reify KE 6 acffo CS* 6 fo Sk 3 Sfaf 7.00K AiX/C I+090 Rfal anffSECALLS
CBAXPANOOIIA EA 7 frnaa CRAXE C 14% 4 Iiego 9 sfaf 6 301 4p/c 169 PXEACWQ COBE 3 3 6 caax sclXS ffp 3 19 IIKTnV Ca. 2'f F Naf 7oooa 4afc fOOO) 1 10 IIX'SXI,'OS UICVH caxchao Ca 14 29 x FOX NFLSU+fAI Ncpx ca. SUNWKNDTHTRf AXIS 1.00P 4%/C WGN PhXQ Paoofffffk WPWRS UPNS9VYKMOV pa 7 caxco-pp4Iaxaa 4 17 Kaca CE 7 E 13fo soa s.noA 4afc VIA 1 0 pffxa psoofIEN 3
Ero 6 Cxffcxffflh'N .SUNTO'DAY-'NBC 7 22 IICPO Ca, 9 k. Xafo WLVIT 1 4 9 1000'FLDAYXIX hOBC SCHIMGC SC 3 9 BidoE 4afc ana HRQFPDV/ER 2 AKKN COPEfoaaf 1 9 2 WKRC
cxzffaxÃza Ek 0 SUNTODAY-NBC ~ca CR» 5 A. Xaa 4ip/c FOX 9 NEWSSU sfaf 6 001 V/CVII BTfAff/SPIPKMNf- PEEII CSX55PJaf
For oxpfaanEorI of syrffbois„ooo koa ffago, SECTION REPORTABLE FOUR SEEK AVERAGE PROGRAM AUDIENCE STATKHN TIME PERIOD AUDIENCES IBEYOTIOHAL I HOSBAPIOHLYI IIAB KEY TZ OH AIH ITHIS PBOSHAL«vh PRECEOIHO HALF HOURI TOTAL DAY STATION TOTALS DESIGNATED MARKET AREA fCORRESPONDING TTME STAllOH CH, I/ET. OHli,SHARE ibffb) PERIOM HlGNEST DIIA;; PERSONS SIIARE STATIONS START HO, OF YS COMPETING Y/IOOYH 1&FH OAY TIME T/CS. Y/OBE THS CHS f848 8564 STATION PROGRAM Ll'lE 4 54 184 LEAD IH-PBOGBAL SPBESS"PSIi ET 5 COM FGXNWSSUNDAY IIRIO CB 13 h 15¹f KXRIA 3 VL-G,'Rt+HSC SOS 7. Odh 49/C 1 7 f2 1 12 KOAA BB 13 13 KKTV RGBTSCHULLER OTSS OI&O EOOSE 8 8 9
CTY CE CO10&&SXh"&IF TODAY»"t/BC Rfefa CS. 17 h 101& KOMU SUN SUNDAY IfIRtt-CBS SOS O,ddh 49/C KRCG ORATE GOSPI& BR KNL/ INTOUCHSO 0 THS «0K@ASSR T XIII&7 CB. 35 X E& KOMU 4T/C .KQFX FAISS'BlFX NPL SIEI 10,301 CHFS'PD/CBSNF 1&&EC WORSBIP KRCG
PARZhT &4177* COEOEOIh& SC I'h 6 'hOXO CB&35 h 9% 10&boh 4T/C 5 XOfX OXCCOYEEY 3 cE 4 coxoE303-'amp~ MIDLANDS CB, 9 WCBt FACE (0001 CREFLO4GLLAR SOS 303, 4T/C WLOV 9 V/CVH RAINBOW GIVE EE SIBLE NAIAD@ READNG
COIO. -OS, OB Eh 7 CBS NFL FTBL-2 IISF&7 CXf. 51, X NFLSV4Lk2 SOS 5.00P 4TlC CC FOX E8~ia@T AEOliEX KC VARIOUS NW4 TOY SU HR1 VSXX CO. 6 h 13% 5 18 8 It«BY«YT-SUiN AM 7 dbh 4T/C f000'/CVH AEI 123 73 TV fZBMF.P BE OF POWER TTS '«N 7l 50 XNXAM"FT*IIO"TB CE 13 ETfPP CE. 11 C Sh 5 I0%$ 3 3 SOS O.bdh 4T/C 1'4 14
ORYSPRT-IfX-PE&IIE CE 5 8 ISED KWQC I/EETiPRES84UN WORO CS, h MR"t&CBS SIN 8;Odh 4T/C CC WHBF SUNDAY VSSUNDAY ORESECCh @ffe@I CK KL/8+. FOX N
WPTD TBRWHSTILG-tW
. WRGT ON. DRG,'RUB-BK Y/KEF PD PRGR/CHNGD
IYO 10 1P~ SNWS SUil I',ORN
IO&&3 CB& 3 X 6% MRN488
8*ddh 4T/C CC 1 SUNDAY SIBI 7 NEWBSUN OR OF Pfx&~& 3 5 CE 6'CCI WS IXIII&TA XPES TODAY-NBC CB, 8 C 36¹ BUN DBL DRG/RMiB.BK AN "l.ddh 4TfC I 9 IS 121 95 VRS &IN SRC PAIS PSOGffilII CC 7
INTROIT Eh 10 Nfl/3 CB.XO X 4% 12. SOS 'l 30h 4TfC 5 6 45 IS TOOCB 30 f 8
OOIOTB SOPERXOE CE 5 RBCC'GRfTHS WK CB. 6 S 16E Yf/DIG+0 EP&IR RMX RL/BB VL- SBS 10»00h 4T/C KDt.H VifDSE VNTR NFVALBU/A PAXO PROORMI Eh 4 EXMPh SUNTODAY.NBC CB. 36 h, OE O,odh 4T/C SP MNKS&VLTRN- SOII PD PRGFYKN'CPL Ore~I I-EPOS
Eh 6 EBXE MEETPRESS-SUN f&i&XP CE*56 P SE PRG O'I/O SND IARN&PD SOS 10 ~ Odh HR FPW/PD PRG FOE NIS SOII10,E Ph sofoaà KVAL+ SUNGAYIARN488 131Th«CB.16 u'E SESAME STREET "l «Odh 49/C KOAC+ SON KEEI RGBTSCHULLER EOS TOORX"?IEC
Foi'xptaoatjoq of syfffbofs, soo toad page. REPORTABLE FOUR &VEEK AL/EAAGE PROGRAM AUDIENCE 8ECTTON STATIOIIS TIME PERIOD AUDIENCES {DEVOTIONAL PIIOSIIAM ONLY}
I/ARKET TX Otl AN {THG PRQSRAM v8. FREOEO!HS HALF HO{IS] TOTAL OAY DESIGNATED hfARKET AREA STATION TOTAl.8 STATION CH. HEf. DNA SHARE CQRRESPQNDIIIG TIAIE D!SA 'i PERSQNS SHARE 5 {/SO] PERQD»5 HIGHEST START IIO, OF f YS CQIAPETING STATIONS
OAY TIME T/CS, 9/IOPCI IVOSiH HH ROIIEH 5!I'2 8/IH 858 978 O'E 4 ttrg fib 'l $49 2564 C517 1 11 1 I fi 17'849 STATIQII PRQGRATA LEAIMN PROGRAM 8 9 !0 .15 . 18 18. 19 99 Tf ENptbvxr»xE cE 6 trxvp cg 44 C 134 Stol 6 30K 4Tfc 8 10 23'SXt*'T OPF SXR
P«tROO-VtiSr,r CTT CS 5 wxBir+ cg, 6 A xvr, SO:I '/.301 4T/C f 8 11 KVI.Y SN RNl/I»f7PRE PCPSX»ttR "P»xDP S KFME+ SStA STKBRNEFR KVRR~ PD PRGR/FX NV/S HLCtAW"SC PJI 6 h~c, CS«35 B 10rr
Ngf «.001 4T/C 11'f 19 10 19
trRP!trt pRspT R ~ K 11 Pr»RBCE tgtTr» SCS Ett 6'»VXS CS.43 P A 89Ã 8.008 4T/C .1 JQSgt ~S g/iXXi 'I't8 PT» ttXEBS"rtttP1»S EA 7 WXtgt Cg. 11 C 23tt Sg!I 8 ~ Pbbs. 41/ C 8 SUl4 llQDAY»NBC PES COP~ 83 HR DPPQY/ER SESAMESTREET PT» ft33718 togtE Cg 15 C Pbt/i 8.bt!S 48/C 9 SUN TQDAViNSC SEB coPEr»PBD 105 STDSE/CNTREI QQSCVIVVRS GR. »«1»tCPB Egl'XOS ET 5 Cg 8 A 148 Sttg V.OOA 48/C KREX Sr»EwWSt OXiPBSE 'KQQ KGJf tSI.ÃtPXDS-PX»"SC Er» "t WXZtt Cg 13 fi 33% SOS V. 007» 45VC 8gt4~»tEr»l»-Sxrt
KKBN SRT»/tPXTli CE V fgSE CS.11, 1'34 SOB 7 Oba 4T/C 9 18 9 9 23 2« 5 SDt».iSXOPAXD P 10 19 5 15 33 '101 ES 95
O 'BP WS Eh 9 1»XSX CB', 6l, X E/O'QNISHT '/ OOP 3T/C ViÃt 80 8SOSR XSVX"2T V/FTAY VARIOUS VYSHP X-:F!LES 1 SSB 11 OOE 3T/C » 'C. Vi/FMY Ai TQUCHSO 'V/UOIL 8ED rovst3 ST SHP /LITH V»ff VVXLV Vi/LFPCK/fHS fYK WXX»V Cg. 45 A 'Vt/FMY SUNDAY MRN«CSS SOB 9 Obr'» 4T/c ti/XII MEETPRESS-SUN voxcE "vxOTCRT 'V/UNL THS LQ /NV/ NK-
~-its "ttLPB EJk 7 WXTIt CS 7 ti Sgg 6 301 4TfC 9 4 IO 8 4 '9 DOOR OP PAXTB 18 9
SREEtf»tg EQZUK CE 3 3XS totSO Cg 6 A DRAGQN1LS-PYV SSS 10.301 4T/C P//»IAQ VYXVT DB TASCENE TSXS fggtt"ASC 8 BMB!XSONMRtt SA 3
r»ssv cg, 3 s Txs
SSS 3'30A 4TfC FQX N»VS SUNDAY D3Ã-DxscorsRT NATURE tOOBL~»XO r»S"r»S r Nk 6'XP CE*3 C 1 AMRQA-SYN 7» 00)L C 6VILD Sbg 4T/ SESAME ESTOES STREET X»XPE PAID PF!QSFIAht SOTI/XS XCTEIPl»I CE 5 138» rottlx cs.31 A 07/t/SCHIPSU IARN St/B 7. OOL 4T/C 4 7 8 f 17 99 'll 'l1 5 SUN TQDAY44SC pttxD p+scsor»R PATS PRQSRAIA
Por exptartattoo of symbols„sea foatt PBSC, REPORTASLE FOUR NEEK AVERAGE COMPETING STATIC.'lS TIME PERIOD AUDIENCES FOUR SEEK AVERAGE AIARKEf T2. ON AIR ITIIS PROGRAM va..PREOEDISG HALF HOUR) TIME PERIOD AULIIEHCES TOTAL QiN STATIOII CH, tlET, WA SHARE OMA 0& .CORIIESPOIiIDII4IE TIME DMA '.f PERSOIIS SHARE 'i'o PERIOD.S NG%8T STAIIT tIO, OF 5 'CGthPETIIIG: STATIQI48. OAT TIME T/CS DOVER
LIIIE 4 LEAOIIIPROGRAM 4 '6 0 EOUSTO.'I cs 13 KETB Csi 14 1 SAT 6.009 4T/C KTXH V 12 XOIA hVXTT KPRC 9 5 13 KHQV 4 8 13 SUB 30.00K XT/C KTXH 5 14 EU xosnl" 83 35 35 KPRC 5 13 KTRK 5 13 KTSU CB. 55 X 20 Sfsf 7. OOA 4T/C 5 18 VOO CAUS V.lC% 3 11 3 3 ICOSI y/Ql/If xUAUO phxzs-poc lrr 6 KXVX CB. 0 SLS4DAY MRI4498 Sfsl 7*OQL 4T/C t 8 (XQQ 1 SC BSSTOlf-BXSXQl SUR TODAyftfBC 18 SABRINA ANM 0/IC 5 XfmXAttAPO~»XS l CB,40 X SBB 5 009 4T/C EOXU AAXUE
JACBSoli, M CE 5 ts»UT cB 3 S'sla SUB 9.00A 4T/C 5 1 1 Kwl psxss son 88 1I1 f1
QACKso-"arXXXLE Ek 6 NOES CB, 69 X EIAtf NTSIFRSR SAT V ~ OOP 4TIC XOUA XEXXTT VARIOUS Aff V@8 /Ats@RIA RQBTSCHULL'ER SU.'l 11, OOA, 4T/C WCi/IUIT39 y/QE 9/R EU XOUES RQ PRSuIGR PR WJXX» CB. 25 A SUNQAEMRtf488 Soll 9 OOA 4T/C xn Toocs 60 AfEETPRE884V/I SHILOH
oo'&STAN»vf Ar TfA zh 6 WTAS CB,XO C 22K Wa s,aOA 4T/C V/3AC arotxxOKA U/PSX @ATM SOQKrxtf"PXTTSK ls CB 4 Ksnx CB,16' 34% SUB 30 i 0 QA 4T/C scfuf TOG SBEETS
KANSAS cxsx cs KSBS CB*41 B O'DAF FXSSN IFX48N Sist V OOA 4T/C KSMG BTAIOUSP/PKt/Nf- BASS 4 SBUTXWS KAISG KN CPL/CCRFL«D KflOXVXLTQX EA KBXE CB, 10 21% n U/ATE THS LD./RN44SC BBB 4T/C 5.001 y/BXX PAID PROGRAM Y/TNE MRTH STIPQ PRG XA CESS-EAU Cut CE WAX+ CB.25 9 XOA Y/EAV SUN TODAY-tfBC Sfsf V.OOA 4T/C (OX@ 1 Vi/XOU/l GT RL /TILL N- PAXO Pw~ y/HLA+ ADULTEDUCATff AXESXE» 6 WSYB CB.4V 9 9A ssn 7 AQUA 4T/0 Uxsnx'ess frKX
~xtfsxon EA 6 CB.XS n XOS Son 6.30k 4T/C pxxo psosriAB
Bk V ttX'XW CB.44 X WLIO N&VS JRI/JNBC-NW SBS 6«009 4T/C 1 135 1 ff WQHL 9 FQX NFL'8041 IE CXQfXSTX»PAX ')VHIQ FTBLE+/FTBLR
For explanation of syrsbofs, see lead page. VANOUB
REPORTABLE FOUR WEEK AVERAGE STATION'" TIME PERIM AUDIENCES HALP HOUR) IJARKET TL ON AIR OBIS PROORAM 00. PRKCKIRNS TOTAI.DAY STATION TOTALS DESIGNATED tRARKET AR CORRESPONDING TltJE o STATel CH. tlKT. OMA SHARE rp PERIOD RICHEST SHARE 43 (OMI Dt~lA 5 PERSONS g VS COMPETINe STATIONS START NO OF VnbOTH VIOMFJI DAY TIME T/CS. WOSHN IIH 5049 2564 5'643 STATION PROGRAM 57 10 10 11 58 10 10
LIJJOQSP-KHJP/ CE 6 SLJQJ+ CJJ. 8 A SQG 8*OOL 46/C PJIXO P%0683PJ
QXTA RCS Pll SQF CS 8 KARK REACH OUT JQJJÃ CS. 23 C 15% XLRT PAlO PRrPSRAM GJJJJ 6.308 48/C PU4'A BESAMO CLPSOOIC JJLSS KETS+6
%08 JQ.:GSLQS PA 25 SC8?s CS. 9 3 5% 16 8 2 3 SQJJ 7*008 OP/C 86 62 10 21 JJJI 35! 830uNJJ
30QJJSJJ30M SL 9 30'-'JN GH328UMN 1888 CS. 43 F 1 WLKY NEWS 8,00L 4GIC 13 WAVE SUN TODAY-%C WHAR HRGF POWER PLX Jf PJJOG/IAM
QLCQIJ EL 6 65J 8/IJAZ WEEKNDIJORNibl bVGL CS,SS A TODAY-NBC OOL 40/C WIJST SUN SQJJ 8 ACR BAPTST 8088 3JI AcpxrN WSNM BRN
88OXSQJJ CS 6 V/MSN FOX NFLSU-PRE S 32 HQPJJ C8,57 3 CBS'NFL TODAY 2 6 SQQ 13,008 4%/C WIBC WKOW THSWKVPDPRS 5 4 OXSGY SCSS 3il53 6 JJSOF04JI-SXB PLS PA SUNmDAY4BC SQSV+ CQ.5.2 L 36JJ KOB4 40/C KTVL. SUNDAYMRN-CBS SQJJ 7.80A RCS/JCK VN GLJQNJJS KAIVU DSN 7 JJXS CS 8 18 P 33M 1 1 4 08. 83 2 )OINI 7 8 3 6 SQJJ 8 303 49/C 73 ~ 13 15 66 2 4 38 %lQCG 30 JAQJJS PL 33 JCJA",fX"FO FSTGNT-SA-.UNI 10 17 C8.45 3 3 4 V/LTV JGJFV 6 6 NW84.S!FNZN 6 10 SAG 7.00P 36/C 75 42, 61 WFOR WPLG 6 EWTNV/WIWItL-FR 6 8 03OLL LRVXGP 4 12 3 2 'V/BFS HONEYS.KIDS Cc N.N 6 OPERACN4U4IR 3 3 64 43 27 8 I 2 WBZL 3 :WTVJ. TODAY'S:S,FL SU 4 10 8~%'5 CS. 7 ''WBFS DSNS'DBfD% RC 3 8 9,OOL 46/C SQJJ WFOR SUNDAY LIAN-CBS 3 6 35f Gaffe Gb NB@& /5523
CG 9 8353JLQSSG WTMJ SUN TODAY«NBC WC'S',24 X {OOQI 1'2 Wl'0 PRESSURE2 SW 7.008. 49/C V!CVH SCOUltNBTODAY 24 rel 835530888 WVJV
LS 86* PL CS 9 2'I . SUNDAYMRN.CR8 6 CS,23 3 48 V/COOP JNSO KMSP 6 VLTRN4/DSNSD 3 16 SQJJ 8.30L 46/0 'KSTP+ SCHIEV/ NWS 3 8 800 P3PBQSF RBT
F/3035@ PJJSWN} CG 8 TODAY-NBC 38JJ WPMI SUN 4VRQ CQ. 5 C 7 {OOOI 6 SCHft/GC'8C 49/C "WAUl MBC SQQ 7,008 V/CVH WERE SERAI'ESTREEF WKRQ5 GSPL 68 0 JIOL~~(SSQ) CS SUN TODAY-NBC lfsSL CS. S C 298 SP MNKSJVLTRN* 81% 7.0OL 40/C FRM TH/GHNGD SSPJGQJ SSIQJJ
JÃ4 CG 83 JJCGO~CS. 20 3 SJ/ff 'l. 0 OP 4GIC uROY QRONPSOtt SL 34 ICg 3088 WNBC 6 MCLGHLNOJT PRS JGOQJ CS. 33 3 11 MOVtE jIMQQ EVPIX 'UN MORN SW XO.OOL 48/C WCBS SND tJRNIFC NYN C328QLXC PLSS
For expIQQQIIQJJ Qf Syrflbots, 506 lead page, REPORTABLE FOUR WEEK AVERAGE PROGRAF/I AUDIENCE SECTION STATIQNS TIME AUDIENCES PERIOD IOEYOTIOFIAL PROGRAM OIILYI MARKET TZ. Off AIR ITHIS PROGRAM fi8. PRECEDIHS HALF HOIIRI TOTAL DAY NAT ,YAIIKET STATION TOTALS SFATIOFI Off FiEf OMA SHARE 0 CORRESPONDING YIPPIE DIIA 48 PERSONS SHARE '&4 g PERIOD@ HIGFIEST START HO. OF TOTAI. BQFBPETING STATIQNS OAY TIME T/CS. Y/OMEN fFEK TENS CIOLO Y/Ot'4 RRLO TOTAL AOOI.TS .2664 1217 2-11 U"E 4 fai 1040 1'949 STATIQN PRQQRAIS 'f5 'l7 LEAD IN.PROGRAM 6 8 7 8 8 10 11 12 ML 18 10 ODESSh"aRDZLftD CE 5 EOSL CR 7 C 14% SDN '/.OOL 4%/C PLXD,PRONRLff
CfiXLRO.'2, CXPX CE 11 ROCO CN, 5 h 14fl LAPIS 9.8I3 FA ED 'f OOL 42/C NW SUN TMAY4IBC PLXD PROORLN HRDFPQWER ESSX CN.52 X S.aap 49/c fXO) GRFFTH«f4FLGLM mrt FYBLR w/FTBL'2 ORXOXItS V/CVH SNWCHN/NBC-NW RPDO CN. 14 X S.FIWCFIN/INSD D RLR S.aop xe/c D~XVI I/jCXVFI EWTHWSiWHL-FR «ZOIA HW894/DECI/R MEET PRE88SUN SDN 10 OOL N'/C ICXI VOO".",O V/CVH NATURE «ED SBRN'NM/DSN PC YARKLT Bott. fQNj Vi~CItH
O~JBR CE V ÃNPff CNi 8 C 14% SCN V.oah 42/C PRXD PROORLM
PDCN-CO-RRR fPPif CE 6 ffSXXit CNi 1 8, 1OR 49/C 'KFVS BREAKFASTSFRY 69Ã V.aah WPSD SUN;TQDAYiNBC PLXD 80 9 Piin KBSI BTTR4FLSHLtR. PEORXL"DXBINIPilt CE 6 fii;OX CN 19 * 129 SON 9.00h 49fC CRLPEXi VXNXfÃf
PNXDLDEXPNXL Ph 14 CN. X LciZ 69 ViCAU NW81OTDNi«T PRS SDN 10.00L 49/c 'WPI/I ACTNHWAHSD 8 3OX CP rVSXC KYW SND MRN/FC NTN 'KYW Ni FYBLE w/60 FANY
Sl?N 7 OOP 42/C YIIPVI 8 WQNDRFiDSH-ABC
KXNN XS CONXIIO WCAU DATE-SU-VP fi'BC RPEO CN»57 X 4ii'lat 'WCAV NWS10TD/SNTQ" XOL 4%'fC IOXQ . 7 KtY 0 EYEWTNWSWKND CRNEXXf-DOXX3iR WPW ACYN HW/SND'LV f aft V/CPH
PXRPSDCRON EL 10 RPCR CN 40 X (C KDKA Efct 9 OOP 4R/C WTAE 4 DLX"DXDCOVERX WPKI I1PON CN, 68 P DDN 'f OOL 49/C PLXD XPACRLN : WPKI (Ãai V/CVH POM'Xihftc, OR Ph 8 RPDX CN.49 P 9% CH28U FADRN NWS SDN V,aah 4%/C HW NCS SDH AM EElt COPEX3tffa SViNDAY t«RN48$
ODXffCX"NEXi EEOE CE EOCL Cg, 7 C 284i 1 GEFI SVNTDDAY NB SON 7.00L 42/C V/MFC+ TLTBBS-/BRNSFR 83LCE DLt~-Ziti/ RLXRXON-ZCRIPXF RL 5 LEPP CR. 40 X 45 WRAL sfci 10. OOL 49/c Wi'ROC 3LCR Vhti XNPE WNCN
For axplanatian ef symbols. See feaff psge. DR. 0. JAINES KENNEDY VARlOUS
E'/E1 HEFORTASLE FOUR WEEK AVERAGE STAT/OIIS TII'IE PERIOD AUBIENCES MARKET ON TL AIR ITHN PROGRAM ys. FHECEOIKB HALF HOUR) TOTAL OAY DESIGNATED MARKET AREA STATION CH. tfET, BhfA SHARE DSIA 'h 'ih {000) START tlO. OF PEAS{)NS SHARE f. PERSONS {EV/MBVH YS (OSO) DAY Tlt/E T/CS, TOTAL: HH OME y/HNYH SHE IIHLO TOTAI, U'lE 4 HVO AOIILTS STATIQg PFIQGRAM LEAOON PROGRAM 0 10 11 12 FiCS-tiff CX"ASS CE EXST CE«3 C 165a CtN V.aah 4T/C OXSgXS .0000 AE SUNTODAY-NBC 31 BLL N&UCK HN RXC/OtoNt PXSSES EA IGILT RL I.F I/MLB. C trirvT cs 13 E BRA'.oah 4T/C 'l1 7 8 8 5 I I 8 Y/RLH RXCRv.'0:SI"CEI/TR '13 17 CEDAFIST CHRCH 2/ 22 119 79 22 13 41 18 YiTVR RSC HFl+l.G RH WRIC ROAVFOEE"XivCSO'IO EA 7 JCKVN /PHL CH I/SET CS.13 E 139 Ser O.nah 4T/c ox@ TxEE soapxi Ny/8 7 SUN MORN SUNTODAY tIBC INTOUCH-PAX RorxFOFN CE 4 IHIP& CS. 39 0 XXE Satr '1 OOA 4T/C 'I 9 14 11 2 WREX D-DSCVFLBB IIXBtIX RECSS RK 1 14 Q: 13 26 S5 66 8/TVOS KN'CPLN/Ah/RCN WIFR SA~-STE RO PA 9 TMLSS TiFSN STXC CO,40 P 9% Zm 6 i Ooh 4T/C 5 3 BUNI:TODAY-KSC 20 vie% 51 SUNDAYMRN488 7 t'BTB BAX XSSORY Eh 3 ST/GLF MG 6 CS.4"/ A 1311 sas s.aoh 4T/c PAXS PROSBOE Y|CVH Shtl htPi01IXO CE 10 ERtLT CS. 36 X SN Batt 7» 0OA 4T/C 4 'I 2 IO,'.GL SUNTODAY.NSC phxo phorcIAE 3 1 5 v/{c% 37 29 KABB Sf;8/MN /DRGN.B KENS HRQFPGWER BAO 0XEOO PA 10 K@TV CS, 10 A XXE 80/t 7.30/I, 49/C KNSD KN'SDWIOVD "YS Xtt TOSCE 30 t VN KUSI KUSfhYKND HEY/8 KFMB 0Ã FRIOI-OAE Sir Ph 15 SUNDAY tifRNCBS Er SO CR. Xo I 311 SOS V.OOA 4T/C 10 SETTER-OAO'NS PX)l KRQN MEETPRESS»SUN KPO( 0 SUNDAY htRN488 KGO ABC7 AY/ SU-7AM EFAVI+ CS. 0 X sotr v.aap 4TIc KPIX 10II& +600 60hOKUTEBCBS ~ KGO 4 Y&QNORFGSN.ABC KRGta DANU-VP-NBC vfCFV) SA~~SN Eh 6 I/XSS CS. Xa F "19 8101 V.OOA 49/C V/TOC hAYTCJMRDVFL Pi'-PAS RXCE 10 VICYFI WJCL HRQF POWER WSAV IN BRCHiSYRD N v~ T~ PA XO FEVERS CE 33 X 4.'4 '/ 800 OOA 49/C KING KINGSXYKI/D4%98 APOSTXiXC~ KIRQ SUNDAYh/RN488
KGVO Nyy-v/NPGGH ABC SXOSX CXTX CE 5 ECAS CE S A 15'011 9»00h 4T/C I 1 XOIX-SXSCOYERX IOO 100 SXOOE PXSIt~) CE WTE+ CS, 13 h XV% BQÃ 9.00A 49/C 3. 4 3 KEL'G+ 8ND AIRN/FC NTN OATsrixc OQlcRT v!G% 14I '89 KTIW+ Y/LL ST/OR&TH KESDA TELTUBBIESIxII/ SO INC/0-ELESRT Zh 6 IvttSI CE. 46 X SZIJ 7 OOA 4TIC 2 3 2 WSBT RGBTSCHULLER 12 iVESSS SOPXtEES 151'19 WMDU HNG TM.ASL'L N 10 Y/SIV hIGC SCthoXGC SC 800 '1.00P 4TlC yi/SBT 0 60tSINUTES488 24 X11 TOSCS 60 WNDU GATEAU-VP4lSC 15 WSW 0 FX:NFL /KNG-HL IIRmT AJC.
SPRX?,"v~EriXOE EA 5 ASTRO CS.40 h 14% 800 S*30A 49/C WFSB SUNDAY MRN488 SAX-OXSCOVERX WIALP MT PRSS'CHLC.S WGBY 88t/I 8/R/ISCLGHL
For oxpioootio/I of sh/lsbole, soo lead PBHO. I'OUR REPORTABLE VIIEEK AVERAGE QQMTIETlhf6 STAT(otIS TIME PERIOQ A(IQIEMQE8 RhUff YifEEK AVERAGE h(ARKET TX ON AIR ffHI PROSRAIJ.vs. PRECEDSB HALF HOURI TIME PERIQ/9 AQQIEMQES TOTAL DAY STATION CH. NRT, DlfA SHARE 3TATfQII TOTALS QQRREWQhfofhfa Tfh(E QMA- Oh(A ',h START NO. a» I ERiO(D-3 HIGHEBT DAY TIME T/CS, EVOIJEN h(EN TNS OHO CQh1PETING STATIONS h(f(E 4 M 4'8- T( 12-17 STAT(Qhf PROGRAM LEADJN-PROGRAhf (4 '(5 18 17 10 19 ST. X40XS CE 8 IOILC CB 24 I SBB 6.00P 4T/C SXL~~SATXCS (GGQO
Y/STM VRS O'R NW WNVS WILD THINGS WCNY MATHLINE TAXiMNZ T~f/Xi ZA 6 Std CR» 27 A SII St 8 9.3(A 4T/C RES WGTV SVNDAYh(RN488 COPEXRIIS WFSU ARIHDR+TV ABXT f/ONSTERRAN.BKN TARPA ST P(SAR) EA 12 IIPTS CR. 28 8 84 S(0( 8'. OOA 4T/C 6 RAXIrXRII 20 2 TERRE RhlPl EA 3 5 IIThf3 CR. 2 8 148 SITS 8.0OA 4T/C 3 21 14 (6 22 WTHI DAY-DLSCOVERY XB TOOOB 60 31 17 21 26 WEAK PAID PROGRAM TP~~ XA 6 IIIIPÃ CR. 36 P 88 OOA, S(04 8. 4T/C AVTGI 888 CpPRXLAIBI 2 2 WTVG WGTE TRAf/RS CTX-CSXiC EA 4 WÃTV+ CR. 9 C 248 SOS 7. OOA,, 4T/C SAX0 PROORA8 ' 25 TRX" CTXESeT(t-f/A EA 5 N(PT CB 19 A 5% SlÃ2 8.3OA 48/C 8UOI TODAY%SO Vi'rPL8'5 8IS(42% TV BUNDAY
SCH'OS(A&l;BKN TUCSOS (8 PSTAI BT 9 CR 18 X 28 W".I 7 OOA 4T/C 3 KVQA 8UNTDDAYNNBC PAXTR~CR 135 IOAYhA BTMN Bhh'!A N B KUAT+ SESAME STREET Vnm-I/Ofay CE XXiTP+ CR» 7 A 238 888 7 OOA OT/C KETK+ 1STASh(BLYi GOD 8PAXS PRMRAB KFRK+ NW FTH/R Vl SC AWR. SP MNKS/VLTRN. (PICO-TECH -RRXI( CS 'l IC(XI/+ CR 25 8 XXR S(RI 8.30A 4T/8 4 (MG) 1 SX325 l&W 808 4 4
h7ISS, SC (SASI EA 10 hdAS CS 25 8 808 XX.OOA 4T/C " MT PFISS/MCLGHL SAX SXSC(RIERfr V!Ci BB VL-G/IHS WK HSSPRT/RQSKNS f(2(iA CE, 7 A. 1,38 588 8.. 3 OA 4T/C WRC SN TD-hhOIW84- RPST S~ V/CV!I O'USA &V/I(-SN/SND h(R WETA SS!4 STlfH TGB
h7I~TPXII EA 4 hATX CR. 50 A. 88 808 9»008 48/c f(Ahri ST OXSIAXi
RACSAP RBXSE(iSR CS 4 NAOS+ CR, 9 A 268 Sm 7.00A 48/C WJFW SUNTCDAY NBC OXIJi AIX8" 082 'WHRM+ AQUI.T EDUCATN WSAW PDPRGR/YR NW h8ST PAR ECS"PP EA 7 C8,29 P 88 SOB S.OOA 4TIC PAIO PROSRM( 2 105
IIXCRTA PXSOXifITI( CE 5 RA@2 CR 6 C 158 SOS 7 OOA 4T/C Cg KBV/0 IN TOUCH 60 88!8( BEASAM I/48 I FDK PDPRG(VSReH44 KJBQ 9 SHOP:ATHBh(E
For Oxplonation of syIIIbofs, soo (08d pogo. REPORYAShE FOUR VIEEK AVEFlAGE SYATtONS TlME PERlQQ AVQIENQES MARKET TZ O11 A1$ lT111$ PROBRAht 74, PBECEOSB ttAhF:ROVR1 TOYAh BAT SYAT1QN TOTALS CGRRESPQNQING AfN: STATtON CH, BEY. DMA SHARE lo PERlQQ S H1GHESY ghN ',o PERSQNS SHARE oAo g START NO, OF GQMPETlNG STATIONS DAT TlBE TICE. \VOhtBl TOTAh BH o %6 A00hTS 670 STAYlQht PRQG RANI
Bxcak"theft Ms cs 6 gssa+ Ca.io A 25m KSNW+ SUN TQDAV41BC stat 7.01'3/C 6 (000) KPTS WSB R R43$4CH xtt xeaca 30 KhVCHo WTR Pt/tY'$ W Bxxzs omt"sea EA 6 MXO3 CS. 22 e WNEP NV/SWYCH16$UVA StPJ 7*3%, 4X/0 ee WBRE EVEV/TN.SKRSSU AY axaco7xatx WSWB O1$NVRC$$ WKE
71XXBXt1036oJ SA 6 Nghg CS. 3 Jl, 246 stat 9,30K 4e/c 3 {ON aux axscovzax
Yen';062eo71 ZA 5 &53 ea 22 tt 34% WKBN PPXFFKD/JCKHN stat 7. 003 4%/c ee li/VTV 0 CRNRSY14'JL1MSW axta4tx os-Stdlcs hVTPK+ DENS DG/DSN RC
Por explanation ol symbets, see toad page, REPORTABLE STAT/DES MARKET T2, OH AIR
TNAL OAY STATER CH. HET. OLIA SHARE
START RO, OF OAY TIME T/CS, MEH TEENS CHIO IA 1949'32.19 2 9 'O 11 12 BXRp/XBGIXAB QB Xo Qxirt CB* 60 X SAT 6,009 4T/C WBA94 35'40 N/RL TV PRAZSB LOBO 'W8RC 3RDRCF«V/HL4"R
WPAT JPRC-'V/101NSDD
SUB Xa.aoA 4T/C CC VlfB38 SUPER TV. 1 SU 'BMA+9 Eo TOUSG P OSWEEK-ABC WBRC CH'%D L/PD PRG /64/QQBT ixpc.
SLPLO-SBCELT-OB BA 4 Iti/SX CB,59 9 2% SUII 7 ~ OOA. 4T/C &C IOOO} PAXO PROGRAB V/CVH
SOOTOB DO|AXSBII BA, 14 I/SSE CB,36 1 45 SZOI B*OOA 4T/C Esx Ot OAPXB
SOBLXBG GRBRÃ CB QTBT CB.40 SUI2 Q.QOA CT/C CC GOSPEL BR &C
SUPPALO BA 10 QTSI/ CB. 7 A 144 SUB 7,0OA 4T/C CBA1'BL
SUZXB -SO2 BRAÃ KCXE CB, 'l P 45 sUB 7.aoA 4T/c lÃ0I SABRC% AQUI/TREE V/OVH
CASPER" RX2/ERTOB IIT SPIC~ CB. 20 A 8% 7.aaA 3x/c I 11 13 K i A113 9 SUN TODAY-NBC SUS PAIQ& REPORT C& 16 KGWC SUNOAYMRN "BS KCWC HOB-PTV/DL A P COR RP-SA XCAUS CB 7 RGIOI CB. 2 c 10% OUI/ 10.00A 4T/C IOOOI KCFIG 4 HOME BYR:GUIDE «ROGBAB Balm V/CVH IOAV/L 4 EB VL~wVR HW KHN+ BRNSFR/4%LL ST CBA%'R/QSPR OSC CS 6 RAZQ) CB. 1'l A 234 SOB 9.QOA 3T/C 3 2 13 10 5 'WCIA+ SHD MRN/FC NTH SQBAIO3so LTPB« 7 IO WICS«4 HR.F PW/PD PBG WRSP+ FDKHWSSUNDAY CBARZBSTQB, SC BA 7 BCSC CB, 9 C 219 SOB 2.QOA 43/C I 9 WPV . ZBMFXPTIBRNSFR XB TOUOB 30 I 13 wcB9: cAL'vA'RY4HURCH WCN 9 PO PRGFO'Al TRBR CRAP La'iis BA 10 MBTV CB. 3 C X2% SUFI 6.00A 4XIC (OOO} MCRE4CNOUEROR V CVH BPTST C/1ST BP FXLFRGR/ARSON ,G Bh "l A irQ CB. 8 A, 91 "UB 2.OOA 4T/C 10 3 1 WSAZ& HRDFPQ'//ER RQB»BOUSBCALLS 140 51 WQWK THS LB SRCH44 WHCP C4D TIME GDSPL CBAXTAZiQ{K'A RA RQBP CB,12 C 11% SL71 8.30A &T/C 100OI WPCB w SON TODAY«HBC PREACBSG GOSPL V/CVH WTVC lflls CH9 GM SUN WTCI SESB MEBTREET L7QPZ-SOTTO BT 5 CB.27 t 4% SUB 7.OOA 4T/C &C IOOO} KGWNe SUNDAY MRH488 QZLO TBXBGS «k V/CVH KKTV c SUHTCOAY.IOBC KTNC SESAME STREET CBXCACO CB 13 QCPX CBi30 Z 2% SUS I,.OQP 4T/C ILKOI GALES SAPT CBR V/C'iH
COZCO-RBOOZBG PA 7 XRCR CR, 2 A 119 SUB S.OQA XT/C KHSL SUNDAY MFA-CBS «PAIS PROORAB KNVN 4 N, QLL,PD PRG 'KCVU K!XNiVSSUNOAY
Far QEPIOI7BIIOB of «yebol 2. «00 IOQEL yog&L REFDRYABLE CGMPETII4G STAT688 FOUR WEEK AVERAGE IIAR KET T2. Gtt AIR TIME.PERIOD AVt)IENCE8 TOTAL GAY DEG STATION TOTALS STATIGII CR, NET, GGA SKABE CDRRESPQI4DING TIME PERSONS fGGG) 8 V/IGGVII PERIQDG HIGHEST START RG. OP GQ33PETlt6G STATIQI48 GAY TIRE TICS.
UNE 4 STATIQR PROGRAM IEAG IN.PROGRAII 10 11 1Z CXNCXL%1TX RA ~O CS. 9 A i39 SIBI 9.00A 3T/C 9 NtS IOItid SCR ~%l RP 9 IiEWS CR, 5 A. 13% WKYC 9 SUN TODAYXKSC SRII 0.00A 4T/C IGGG} W3W FOX'8NEWSSU PRRD CRXLDRRII VICVH WUAB DSNS DGGBRN N COLO SPR!ISS PBL RT 6 XROO CR,13 A 120 '1 .00A 10 16 19 1 SBR 3T/C '135 '50 4'0 VARIOSS 98 50
COLIIRSZA"JP CIX CX 'I XSXX CR.X7 A 12 .SOS 0 . 00A 3T/C 11 SRQBT S~ 5 CRT 25 I KMIZ 6 WLL ST/PD PRG SSR 10.301 4T/C VARIOUS RORSRXP KOMU IILXC KRCG 4 CNTRCUPD'PRG KK
CO4014BIA SC XA 6 kOLO CR. 25 k 75 SSII 10 00A 3T/C 2 10 18 5 5 3 3 SDAX-DISCOIrSSX 2 8 18 223 223'49 149
CQLQtCSQS TOP WP CS 4 ltXPA CR, 9 Ih 16% . WCBI FACE MIGHTS SLil 9. 301 3T/C 1 V!5 203 105 V/MABh READNGRAINBQW 00XYS ItS SXBLR V/LOV CREFLO-'DOLIAR CQLQtt909, OR RA 7 IISPS CR, 51 X IIX)G) WSYX SSIt 5.00P 4T/C 'iVCMH 3kb%ST ASKXf VlCVH WITE II
II~MX CR, 6 A lah, WBNS 19 SQR 7.00A 4T/C IGX) 18 VICVH WCMR RR OP POSER )VOSU 4 000] VkVH DALLAS PT.IIQRTR CR 13 RTPT CR, 11 C KXAS 0 NBCS SUN'GAM 15 SQIt h. 009, hTJC KCiFW IIAVW c7),341714 IX KDAF PD PRGRGNGSTN 7 DAVBPRT"RX RLIIR CS 5 CR. 9 A 11% 'WHBF SUNDAY MAN-CBS SQR ST/C IGG0) 8.00A Vi'CVH KWDC 0 MEET PRESS SU)4 STSS OliD RQQSS KLJB FOX NWSSUNDAY
DATTIDI PA 6 RDXR CR, 2 A WPTD T BRWNS'RLG'tAV 7.00A hT/C (GGG} Set VICVH 'WHIG RSC HR~'KG RH PAXQ PROORAI4 WBDT 'PA83 PROGRAM
BRSYRR IIT 10 XSOS CR. 2 I 6% 6 4 3 3 2 KMGH 6 7NEWSSUN 13 Satt 0.00A hT/C 44 31 20 20 13 8 KUSA 6 9tAfSSUN MORN 13 RR OP PattRR KCNC SUNDAY MR)6488 12 080 INXtISS AINS CR XCCX CR. 5 C SIRI 7. 00K 4T/C 7
PAID PROORAPI KK 'CGG) DRTROIT RA la CR 30 I 48 WDIV 6 FD CHL'DA4WSBTP SQR 'l,30A 4T/C 1 4 2 W4BK YRNVPSFNNWS 12 VlCVH XR 1000K 30 1 5 WKYZ RBT SGH'ACTN )4
DQTSAÃ CX 4 RXitX CS, 4 C Im) WDHN9 RIDGCf6TCHRW SCH 9.30A 4T/C VICVH WDFX JCK VN'cX KWS 5@STOATS-CSPST ABDO EVRWI/N B,SMTH
DQLRTS-SQPRSXOR CR 5 ROTOR CR. 6 7t 14% SQR 10,30A, 3T/C 0IQOCIX RC4049 REPORTABLE FOUR WEEK AVERAGE STATIOIIS TNE I3ERIOO AUIEthCES LIAIIKET TL QH AN PHN P ROGRAIA YA PRECEIAHG HALF HQQ@ TOTAL DAY STATIOT9 TOTALS STATKIHCH, HET, OMA SHARE GAIA % START HO. OF OAY TILIE TICE. Htf HIS SN tah foho XS STATIQN PROGRAAT $ 8 ELttXRA EA 4 ttattT CE.36 h Xett SOB O.OOA ST/C CC EXEC'/8 FORIO6 K4
ERXS 6 Ctf. 66 F hh soà 10,0 oh 6 T/C Vf3ET 0 HRFPCPDPRG FOX Btto SU%AT IYtCU 4 hfEETPRESS-SUN @SEE SND IIRNfSN BSN NtOEttE FA 73tTR+ CS, 16 ft 8% SOW 7.00A 3T/C SSOB TODAY ttSC
EtfhttS"MLLE CE 4 Ctt.hh C oa SttB 6.30A hT/C OFF AX'tt
FAROO 'tALLT cTI'a 5 ICKY+ Ctt. 6 A 169 SOB '1.30A 3T/C SPOPttLAR-xxos
Ft AT SANAW4C tth BETT CE. 35 tt ah SOB i.oeA hT/C 'I 21 IGXI) I VfJRT 3 HNN QfRILHSC CROAtt PRSPX' 'I 21 VICVH 35 19 ViPUM BRNAFRNfARTHR 'Y/NEhl RSC HR iFLG RH FLEECE.INTL SCE ffA WFXE Ctt.h3 F SOB S.OOA hT/C httER TOtot itALL
FT. ttTERS BAFLE Eh WX'tX CR 11 C X hei Sett S,ooh hT/C 1 3 XZB COP ELAtto 93 39 42
FT, MAYBE CE 6 tthttE CS. 1$ C '16fi SttB 0.00A AT/C IVILIG 0 SUN TCGAY-NBC RES COPELABD 20 'APTA 0 'DQSCi%99V.ttVIV PfpofA GQ.N+THfGQ N+P OAX'P~~fXLLE Eh 4 RL 8 Ctt,30 A 18% SOB 9.00A 3T/C 2 tttfUFT 'FRNCH FiAS Tht PAID Ptlooohth t7/CGX .FQX fohtS SUNDAY VIGFL CIAPSNTi PQ'PRG OR.JR'-totTROO MT 6 l'ACT CE. 8 h 13% SDB 7 00A 3T/C ttmo} KREX SUNDAY MRN-CBS AttxtOiL+TSXSttx V/CVH 69 KKCQ 8 SUN TDQAY.NBC :KFOX 'KNGRTHtb&'BRiFR CR.RAPIDS-EL-DC EA 7 tfx"'f Co*3,3 A 118 SOB 7.00h hT/C 2 19 *!IOTi 2 AIXMI 6 IN TQUCHSO St'toh3IRTS SKB VfCVH 94 IVGQQ YNG LIR ~PPLR.K TIGVUW RLG.NthfhiYTS TV ORttXB EAT-APLTB CE. ttLOE CS 11 T 8% SOB 7.00h hT/C 1 't7 (Ot@ Y/BAY 9 PQ PRGFOKIFC/PL tETS TALE SPTS «C LOCVH 19 AGBA c QSCVRN143 RND 'AFRV NV TCILGRGN 1, OREEBSSRO EP WS EA 9 Ctf. 61 L 7.0OP ST/C VfttL FRTfJPRG-taf :6 th 10L'A tEWTT ENT TON fGHTSO 8 9 X.FILES'I 3 7 SILB XX.OOA hT/C Ifh TQL'CH 69 2 7 ED YOOB" THS LQ fAM GMB 2 6 PQ PRGFltTHS VIK '2 tfTLV CE. 6 9 A 6% Soft 9.00A 1T/C 3 2 offFMY SIJNBAY MRN@BS VOICE VICTORY'f 'i 51 ftfxlf 8 hfEETFRESS-SUN VIUNL 'fHS 1,D.NAI NK.
CREtom.-BS-tfhott RA totCX Ctt. 8 C 16% soB 'i.OOA hT/C IOOOI VIITN VARIOUS VIEPXi PAIDPRQGRAtA MARtOITtfATCS V/CVH WE 'YIFXI» PAID PRQGRAM
F«oxpfonotion of symbaL9, sett load pttgo. REPS RTASLE FOUR VVEEKAVERAGE CO}I(PETNlG STATIDIIS TIME PERIOD AUDIENCES FOUR WEEK AVERAGE ilARI{ET T2, GB AIR IRIS PRDSRA{6 w PRECEDIBD}IALF RDUR] TIME PERIOD AUNERCES YGTAL DAT STNfoN TOTAL3 STATIC(I CR, 'RET. DMA 'El{ARE PERM}48 V/I D(NH START RD, DF (DDD) k DAT TIAIE T/CS, TDTAt, BIRD'OTAL '9'S 'h ADULTS R fi STAT((}74 PROGRAM 4 9 10 13 14 15 14 14 19 QX8003 CRBBSUi CR 4 CB. 6 A ROA SUB 10.301. RT/C 18 17 '24 OXBIS MSNi-ABC 18 17 22
BARRXSCNMRO BA BILV CB. 3 R 11% SOB 9 «30A 3T/C :V/VPT ARTHUR-PTV 83 80SXTBR-SAROBBS BARRSM Ik-XB I RA 6 VBP CB. 01 C 9% SOB 7. OOA 4T/C I,XPR RSTSSt{ tanVAB-OCTA,{PX} CB 6 CB. 31 1 13% SU{I 7. 001 4T/'C V/HNT I{IVSCHt8 SU%&RN SPAIO PROQRAB WAFF I SUIITGDAY4{SC VlZGX PRCI+SSMCHA( BOPSXOB CS 13 RRTB CB.14 SAT 6.00P 4T/C 11 WiS AAT{L-FR PRAISR ZORO SAT SPM MGVIC BIT IIV/Sic( GVS SOII 10.001 4T/C THE V/EEK-ASC RO TOONO MEET PRESS-SU{4 GSAIS GD%RN H IITBU CB.55 I SUB 7.00'T/C EYGWf:I{V@ SUTA '100 CtiUS Sii{TGGA f~SC CHRL&CIAT SHP 27 XOABO PAXZiS "POC MI 6 XXPX CB. 8 1 13% SOB 7.001 3T/C 2 VARIOUS KC. IROXABAPOOIS BA 10 BIOCI CB. 40 I SOB S.OOP 4T/C BORD AIIVB
JACXSOB„ IIS CR 8 RIXiT CB. 3 B 154 SON 9,003i 3T/C 2 9 91012 8 2 (COO} 8INBT PRISS-SUÃ 4 17 18 12 'IS VIGVH
JACSSOIP/XIBB BA 6 {IJBS CB 89 I 7.0OP 4T/C (6$} BAL IiXROSST VICVH
SOB 11. OOA, 4T/C 80 IOCBO
BJXX CÃ,15 A 6% SM 9.00A 3T/C 1 3 8ZBQPI PAABBEX K'C
sam@TOSS-Ax ma BA CB, 10 C 39% EGSPEL468{STRS SOI( 4.303 4T/C VARIOUS 10 CGMMERCL PRG SESAME STREET JOPIiIB PITXSBRO'R RSBP CB. 16 B 12% 9 THSV(7{-PG'PRG SOB 10.001 3T/C KQGE MRAACSS VARIOUS KGAM SUHGAY KFLI I(GVA WAMAS CIIT CR 9 RSBS CB. 41 B SOB 7,001 4T/C IQ(IBI MASS 4 SBOTXNS
RMOXMIIIiB RA 'caIIR CB. 10 AFFAIRS SOB 6.001 O'I/O (DDD) P(t}uC VICVH THS LG Rld+ISC PAID PRGGRN( REPORTABLE POUR V/EEK AVERAGE STAROB8 TIME PERIOD Afff)IENCES COMPETING MARKET TL Off AIR IT)II PSOORAff ffs. PRECEOhaS IfffLF IIQURI FOUR VfEEK AVERAGE TOTAL OAY TIME PERIQO AUOIBffCES STATIOII CH, BET. lfMA, SHARE STATIQN TOTALS STABf NO. OF PERSONS SHARE ~is f, CQRRESPQNQfNG TffrfE DAY TBIE PERIQIM T/CS, '@AL HIGHEST. Y/Iaa/B. COMPETING STATfQNS UNE 4 'HLS. 'far 1848 3584 18+ t848 1017 814 LEAD ftAPROOBAM STA'YIQN 'la PROGRAM xh cRSs Rhtr cxR c8 6 30 trhAX+ Ca+35 8 $ h saN 1,00A 4T/c PAXb PROORAtr
xhrrsIsa 6 frSTrr C8.41 P Sh BCN T,aah 4T/c SARRXNA Afar RX 108 XXXXÃ~~~ RA 6 44XRX CII.18 8 Sh atrrr 6 3OA 4T/C VARZOOS hhiDKV
sxrrh V/VP/Q trxLw c8*4 4 I star 4.0OP 4T/c srrhrcf pzhca V@0'WS JRNfNBGNW WBGU'AWRENCBtfffELK xxrrarrsT-RRI17,'R 6 'VITVG 8 13CT NW/ABC NW XLtÃr CB. 8 A 58 soir 8 aoh ST/c ccrrpxT ccRCBFT KGLbf+ SUNOAYMRN438 KHQI+4 NTV SU MRN COI SITA RCK "prr OXF ca 8 KUGN+ SESAMESTREET KPFF crr.11 c 1$ h saN 6 sah 4T/c kk cATROIxc rrhss 18.
L03 ANOBxrrs FA 16 SCAT CS. S I Sh 7.00A 4T/C SR xv sxxxARO : 3 15 3 13 haaxNcxxrr Rh 0 3 13 traRR ca. 41 F ah RON 8.00A 4T/C FAxo FROORArr 1000) XVLKY V/CVH NFA%CH3&UMN 5 17 WAVE 4 SUtr TODAY.NBC 3 ta SACCfr Rh 7 WHAS HRQF POWER 1 5 CZ.$8 A Sh srà 8.00A 4T/C RcRO xrr AOTICN 7 38 I 4 FArfIscfr CS 4 ti3fsrr Ca*ST I h Raff 11.,08A, 4T/C axsfrx Racss rrR Kk THSiVK PDPRG WFFKEAD MGV 1 FROFORO RXr4 TXS ph 6 BB vs pvrsf Hs Rara/+ Ctf.13 A 1$8 388 T.OOA ST/C 18 19 18 13 12 88~i,* R-CAROrara 'f t8 35 18 28 1 KCBI+8 SUN'TODAY«NBC 'I 8 91 22 22 58 AMFD DBL GRBiRMIABK rarffpax8 CR S Kha/U SBRN NV/DShf P &C CR,40 X. RAT 5. Cop 4T/c PRAISR CORO 0/RES NV 8 3 Sr~D S T 8 10 MC ACTNSBV/HL4TI 5 9 309 10,00A 4T/C 'iYLhfr SHCVfTME APOLLO 5 9 WPTY 4 Ba Tahara hfGSTH R/THS WK . 2 8 WREQ ENG PRSCR LK .2 8' rr880 ca, 1,1 WfBS SUPRR TV'SU I 5 star 8.305 4T/c 3 2 2 4 XN TOCCR 30 'IO 2 SUNDAY MRN-'CBS 7 ta 2 8 28 I' 12 13. 18 IS IAT PRES'MCfa BP I'aoaj CRFL GLBILV 8 2 5 . 1 1 f f VICVH) 10 14 rfXAtrX.FT. Xhrfaa XA 13 18 RSFT C8,45 X sAT Y,OOP 4T/c PRAXSB IORO 4 1 2 VRLTV FST S."4T.SA«I)NI
tafr 29 53 'aoo) V/SVPI 4 /QUR BIB BREAK 308 11.00A 4T/C WBFS NYUNDERCGVER ViBFS RO XGCNO O'CVH HONEY I-KfDS V/PL'9 8 i BS VIK~THS WK rfs'll cR. 'l p 8h WTVJ ir NBCSNV/3 MIDDAY satr S.aoh 4Tlr ICOO); XN VfP/3 4 TCGAYS Toaca 80 9 fa VfCVH S,FL SU Vis QR SUNDAY MRNCBS hYPI,B 4 'iVPLS NV/ SU AIRN IOOr)f V/CVH
For expfarfatfolt of Ryrratcfa 84ra Iaorf PrfSrh REPS RTASLE FOUR VfEEK AVERAGE STATIONS TIME 1»EFIIG9 AUNENCES MARKET TZ. OH AIR ITHS FROG))AH v», PRECEO% HALF HOI)RI YOTALOAY DESGNATEO %MARKET AREA STATICS CH, HET. QHA SHARE '3 STARY HO. OF WA PEFI OAY YIHE 7/CS.
USE 4 STATIGYI PROGRAM LEAO OLPROGRAM 2 3 4 $ 14 )6 'l4 'l7 13 1$ I!X LUAU)ASS CS IICSV CU. 24 I 6)I SQN 7,00A 4T/C SUN TGOAY-toSC 24 CS %)IAURSS CARRIE NATT AMERCN ATHLETE )CUIRAPLS ST, )'L CS & ÃÃiIS CS.23 I 4% SQ)t 4.30A. 4T/C RQU PARSLST
SUSXLR PkPatf)IS) CS )IRRO CS, $ ,C 3$% SUR 6.3OA 4T/C UIQ20$ O»PA SR
HUHTUOINRXISRL) CS 4 WIXA CS. 0 C 24% SQS 7,0OA, 4T/C 1 1 20 SSRSAII STQDX 76 63 67 1 1 3 IISS ORLXASS CR 12 IUUIO. CR.20 X 1% sUU Y.oor 4T/C :!)I)YL . TOUCH-ANGL~ 22 17 ISROX T~OI«PUO'N 1 2 1 'f7 'YYOSUF 'VRS,'NBCSR 6 0 'NntGLO SHRQ SFR&V- 6 6 USIt TORA PA 14 UPX)t CS 31 I 2% SQR 10. 0OA 4T/C «« LYNEC 0 IICL'GHLkOAT PRS CATSOLXC SASS «« YYPtX 4 SWi MGRM IAGVIE )YWGR OSN P POY)SNRC IIRPLZ-PRT }IP )IS SA 30 WUT CS.43 2 3% M8 'I.OOA 4T/C SILL SXR SOT
ODRSSA )IXDLA'IU CS $ ROSA CS. 7 C 12% SU!i 7,003 4T/C IQQO) KY/ES+0 OR R'SCHULLER 1 13 PAXD PROCRA)k aC2IH KMIG 4 PO:PREPS HNN- 'PEJ BLLPt~CHM «C ORXAUOIQI CXTX CS 11 ROCO CS $ A 12% SUW 7.00A 4T/C KWIV PAID PROQRA)t KFGR 6 KGKH RSSX CS. $2 X SQ)6 3 OOP 4T/C 3 14 PRSD CRXX|URS)I 7'2 $ 20 RTSO CS,14 X SAT 6, OOP 4 T/C PRAXSS LORD
'! 1 SS SS 36
81 85 OSASA CS XPITU CS. 3 C 134 7.00A 4T/C 1 PAXD PROURA)6
PDCS-CQ NIR")ITV CS 6 )ISXX» CS. 3 A 8% SUR 7.00A 4T/C BREAKFASTSH)Y OPAXD PROORA)4 0/PSGS SUN TGOAY NBC Kit BTTfKFQSHLK. PSORXA UL)IXSSX)I CS 7 WSOX CE.19 A 102| SUS $ 0OA 3T/C 24 6 SCSAPSL VSSXQW 12 6
PSXLAQSLPSXA SA 14 wr)cx cs. 60 I SUU 10,0OA 4T/C ACYMNPA4NSL!'S $ 14 ZOT or M)SXC ttNIIS)OTGSIT PRS 3 9 SNO )ARNE NTN 3 0 SUS ') . OOP 4T/C «« 60 MINUTES.CSS 21 20 XXHS 1$ COHXHS 2YGNORF4)SN ASC 6 12 NB!GUS 6 10 RPSQ CS.$7 I $ % Sgg 7 3OA 4T/C CARPI'OLLAR RE)fQRTABLE FOUIY YVEEK AVERAGE STAT)QNS TISIE PERIOD AUDIENCES SAR NET TL. QN A)R ITNS PRQGRA)l vs. PRECEQ(NG NALP NGQR) YQTAL QAY SFAl)GN CN NEY. QNA SNARE QMA 8 START NQ, GP PERSONS SHARE ",4 g QAY TlME T)QS,
STATION PROGRAM 15 10 17 PEOEMXX )C('3 Iafxa CS. 10 A Sfrs 'l,bbh 38/C 1Q SESX OP f)AVID 15
PXXTOSDRCS RA 10 f(PCS CO*40 X scs 5.00P arfc SAX-DXSCOVERT
WP(RI CS»$3 SSis 7 Obh 4T/C PAID PSOCUN (NQO .V/TAN '(f(fp)3 KQKA VPA PORTAL%1» OR PA 8 XPDX CN i 40 P 70 SON 'I. Obk. 4T/C ADA(CITS DE((RAR
OWXI(CX*fml» EEOC CR ESCA CS, '7 C 10% Smf 'l.bbh 4T/C (QQQ) 7 SPOXLXOET 3 '25
RAAEZOS-DSR(PX) SA 0 tePT C8«40 X 4% SC(f 10. OOA 4T/C »IACX 7)N XVPS Vff(AL SHQA(RIOV/RL l4V WTVQ 6 YV.CCM )7)4S V(K RCE-loss cx Aas c8 'I V/RGC GSH'P H)GSH RG CR 3 C 184f SOn 7.0OA 4T/C 18 18 1Q OXSNX 0 IL»0( (0( KTTG 6 SGHTQGAY HSC AV/BR SP )fO(KS»VLTR)A RXCIDE»'.Sf ~~OS EA 6 KY(H 6 A(QV/LG»/SV6 SS CX(.33 ll 15(f S(R( 7 OOA 3T/C 1 f2 12 8 8 4 5 1 1 )f7RLH CEQAR STCHRCH RXCC»faf(0 CCSXR 1Q 8 7 3 73 17 20 .VIP/R RSC HR»SLG RH VffRC POXNOES I'f~s SA 7 ICK VH fptfL CH f(SXT CS 13 A 13% S(0( S.OOA, 4T/C OIXf TX((S OOSPt
ROCXPORO CS 5 RORP'g 30 P 68 SOII 7.008 47/C 1 8 fQ DXSN RSCSS
S~»STR«HO PA 0 RTX( CR.40 t 6% S'W 6»OOA, 4T/C ((XN) V/CVH shsxsEORY RA CE. 6'l A 9% S(R( P.OOA 3T/C PAID PRCCRAI( WBQC SLY(QAY t»(RP)CBS ABQ A(HSTRRHR(HSTRR 8/CPB Shff AICCI(XD cs 10 6 HLT)AVK»V/QVJRGH CS.XS X SD)f "I .OOA 4T/ C (OOO) PEED CEILDREN VFW Sht( DISCO PA 11 XOXV CE, 10 A. 0% SCS 7.00A 3T/C 2 8 7 SSAID '3 pRDSRAE 8 11 83 4W PR(N-OAX-Ss Rh 15 RD(fa Cg.80 X X(f SD)ff 7,00A 4TIC 2 2 SRTXRR ilihRDIO(S V(CA 3 18 /5 75 3 15 Sha~» Rh 'l 10 t(XOS CS.SS P 'l SL SW .00A 4TfC 44 'N STODX-f»AS CL 18 RXCR 'WTGC 'ff/SAY »» SEAT»»0 TACOI(A PA 10 CS. 33 X 3% SOS 7,00A 4T/C (GOO& KING APOSTXXC-CERCR 6 K(HSSV/KHQ.HfNS 4 24 V»'CVH f(CMG 6 Af((MAL RESC()E tl y(RG g/ITCRYPT CBS
Par OXP(OI(0()aft Of SYIRbO(S 004f IaafN )SAGO RKI))RTASLK FOUR WEEK AVERAGE STATICS TIIIIE PERIQQ AUDIENCES MAHKKT TZ. OH AN ITHS PROBRAM ta. FHKCB9)8 HALF })OUR) TOTAL OAT STAT)0)4 TOTALS STATIOH CH. HKT. DMA SHARK CQRRESPQROING TIME g ART HO. OF RE% PERIOD-3 HIGHEST OAY TIME T/CS. TOTAL CQATPETING STATIQRS
UHK 4 STATIQN PRQGRAM LKAM44}ROBRAM SXOUX CZTX CK 5 XCRU CS. 9 h 33% Sw 9 aah 3T/c 13 13 10 &2 18 19 50hZ DXSCOYRRT 2 9 8 8 tt 11 10
SXCQX PX&S t}KQIZ&} Ck 4 KS PTl CS. X3 h 145 SUM S.bah 3T/C 8 9 KKLQ+ SND AIRI&SFC NYN SPSRSOMZ&t&X SPKQ 1 4 5 4 MOLTED VNG MR /PD PRG KKSD+ TSLTUSBIKS PTV SPRZMQZXD Rf&TOR Rh 4 tlQQS C8.4 0 h 14% SZM 9 30h 3T/C VAVLPS MTPRSSC}ILC-8 3 15 SDRX»DZSCOVKRT 'AIFSB SUHDAYMRPH2IS 2 10 WGBY SS}A STR23CLGHL 1 5 ST. t&OUTS CK 5 IOIZ&C CS. 24 X SUM 4.009 4T/C 13 28 SMXbTQS 3 7 14 8 11 SXR}&CUSS KR 2 MZZIR CS. 5 C 23% SUM 7.aah 4T/C 2 WHYS WIL'D THINGS PAXD PROQRAM 5.5?: 58 WSTM 9 DR::CMMI&VYR NW WIXT 4 WT}tSTVIGt4TRI. ~ZZI-TKMSVL Mh 4 ttXXX CE&21 h 51& 9.3ah 3T/c ? 10 WCTV SUNDAY MRNCBS SXZÃ COPKQRMD ? 10 WTLH+ FOX NWSSUNDAY WTWC 6 PAID PROGRAM TMIPR ST P{SRR) Sh 13 MPTS Cg,28 SUM 8 aah 48/C WTVT'D&BAY SA}3 SU 5 19 Z}RXVZRM WFLA 4 SURTDDAVINBC 3 10 ZBt}9 BM) MRNIB}}9 XIR 2 5 TRRRR ELUXR MTMO CE, 3 Zt 138 NM 8 60h 3T/C 3 142520 XM TOUCK 60 3 21 25 5 XOZ&t}DO Rh 5 MUPM C8,36 P 6% SU}t 8.00h 4T/C WTDL 51 NKWSAM SUN KRM COPRZQZO Vit)}VIZ RDBTSCHULLKR WTVG' 1 8ACTNW-SUN TRRVRS CXT«CDXC Kh 5 MMTat CS. 9 C 23% SUM 7.005 42/C PRZD PROQRhtt
TRX«CTZRS&TM"Vh Mh 5 C8.19 3 $5 SUM 8,308 4T/c MT'&aht 5}MPMTS
TUCSQM IS VSTh) }tX KTXU C8 18 X mc 't,bah 4'x/0 POPUXRR "KZI}S
TXZ&RR-LOMQ&tXSM CS '5 Kt&XA CS. 'l nw X.aah 4T/c hahPR PZC&T CSR
Mhca-TKMPL4RXH CS Kxxa+ c8.25 h 9% 8+3ah ST/c OYTX SUNDAY MRHCBS 3 14 SPRZD PROQRhtt KCKN 0 FRST TCI5&IT PRB ? 9 KWKT& FK NWS NLTMT 1 3 MRS}t& DC ISRQ) Rh 12 MIDIS CS. 25 SOM 1,1. 0 ah 3T/C SPRSSK PZRZI XDT
CM 9 h 118 SUÃ 8*30h 3T/C SROST S~
MRTZIRTOI}M Ãh 4 MMTX CS. 50 h St& SOM 8.60h 3T/C Mht&Z& ST JRlQX HKPOHTAS{2 STATH}HS ffAHIIZT TZ. GH AIH TOTAI. GAS DQA STAT}OH CH. HKT. I}WL SHARK CGRRESPGfff}INC TIME {IXHf START HO. OP PER{6M HIGHEST YS CGMPEjfNQ STATIQI88 f}AY TIIIK T/CS. vf}DNIH
USE 4 'f«40 13 0' 'll 8T/ITIObf PROGRAM XSAO3H4IHOGHA}3 18 1% }OIDwho"RBXEEIIIE CE FAOF+ C}I. 8 S 80Ã 7,00k 3K/C 1 18 21 QXLL KQ»CDT 14
88M'LPI SCE«PP EA CE«28 P 5}I 808 8,00A 43/0 {000) P}IXS PSOOWW 8 ViGVH
VICES PLDSL~ CE 4 KADD C8 0 C XN 80F 0.00A 4v/c If}001 CEF BEADLE ALIIS Vl@tH
}IXC}XXA SKCE PL8 CE 4 KAEE+ CE,XD A 33% ~MR 7.00A, AK/C 15 IF IOUCK 30 20
MXLKES SAR-«CE EXODE C}}.33 C SCF '/.303, 4X/C Y/NKP. beVISWTGRI 8SU TA VAEXOQS WBRE 8 GU}TtA GOSPEL HR 'WDIA NGGOV-PIV }IXX}XNNW .tk ID}A'Y CB, 3 A 331 '8CF 9.30A 3T/C iaaa} 80}IX OXSCOVSEE VIGVH
YODÃ08«ORÃ EA IIPFJ CE,XX tl 338 'i 308 *DDA, 33/C 1 12 18 3 3 W}OSN PPLW(G/8 HNN. OYNAFXCS 'SLACK &C 119 WYTv 4 GIINRST}tPJAIQSW WNKG GMN 34GIII5N T
+ 0Kp}and}Ion of «yrnbofs„«ee lead page. fARIIEIS IIEPOBIBIG 118 STATIONS HERDING fdd TOTAI. I»/ HHS IH Dfft"8 DffA% OF US AVAKABLE 'H/A DIST: CORAI, R@GE INIISIIBES TYPE: DEYOINHAL
DAYIWE (fdFff EARLY FRINGE (fP) PRIIIE ACCESS (ffGATl PRIME DffA H TOTAL ~OLQS AMO FIEFISOff8 DAY(IAIf(T AYG, IXITAL SHH .fIRLDS 18«184f . 2086 18+ 1808 12-17 .. E.tt HIG (000) dtd V/OVR l. V/QvR V/OVK v/dvd fddf V/o»AI: DDDI . V/CVK. »Oddtt DAYIIffE (KFFfT EARLY FRINGE (Iffj PRIME ACCESS (ff4AIf PRDfE (84) POST PRBXE (SBf YfEEEENO DAYIIfdE(SAS) 117 117 81 1 8 47» 247 82 VVEEIIEHD PRE48tfffE(888f ii 11 8 28 9 TOTAL DA'/ 118 t18 4% 287 AYG.ALL TELECASIS 4 2 REPQRIABIE SIAIKXHS ffAR}ET TZ, OH AI TOTAL DAY SIADQH Cff, RH; Dffd SHARE OORFISSPOffO(HG Tfff(E START HO. OF PERIO(fG 'fflGHEST DAY TIRE OOffPETIHG STATIOHS I/CS. IE088 CISID
I&»hq» I'd«E R 'h Tt »5»7 R»t 6 6 7 6 d»d 'It td RKXt«KKK»~~ CK 5 XXOX CK.Xh X StiK 7.daA 4T/C
~ONl'L%«KX SCK TROT KA 7 %VX!t«CK.XS Sdtt '7. 00K 4T/C SOLO OWT CC
»tR 1X »»OC»«CK. 46 C VV stdt 6. 00J! 4T/c I I«SRCKTRKS dtddt» f8 18 I 18
ROOUSTR »tR 7 I/ROK CK.XX C Xd»» SOK 8 DDR 4T/C 2 WAST XK XOOCK 60 7 9 8 3 VVJBF VVCES ZMKRSVXK»«O Tt« 7 KOKT CK.17 K 1 Oak 4T/C I%CRT JR»ISORKK
KDXTXKORK Kt«7 »a»RR CK. d»dt 8«DDK hT/C BtfHTODAYMC SK OT t«OWI YVSAMS(f BIHL.M/BVR&S ex55xX d»»t«»TORT CK 4 »tt«OX CK. 13 A Xhv sm 6,00K 4T/c 4 4 I+cCO YAH J J JIP«Q.FFRO tdtXKOOXST KOOK 2 1Q VVXXV FOX HWS SUNDAY ABGP FH+ISCL/8SM% SX~OIXOK»tk 6 »Ixcx cd.ha v 08 SOK d,ddK hT/C ROKT d~ KX»OOXt»dtdtt Cd 10 »IKRc cK. 6 v xx% Smr d,sax 4T/c 8 10 7 19 10 18 0»«»iXO PROOR»at 8 1Q 11 20 18 19
»»TJR CK.60 r SAX 6«dad XT/C VRRXQUS YN
For axpfd»ICKon Ot ~ see 0»a»f page, RSPON'ASLE STAT(ON MARKET T2. OH AN TOTAL DAY STAT(O((M%T. BOA%ARE (oa(5 START ((O, OF VANN OAT TSIE T/OS. (/8'TAVeT4 FT(0(S@W
DliFKD DSCXAX OE ÃA 4 1PPK CE. 59 C 5057. 001 4T/C ROVXE 3
BOSXOE (EMIR) Nt. 14 ESDX CE,38 X 4% soE 0 OOA 4T/c SPAID PROQRMl 3 V%
SOFFAIic XA 10 EXEII'E. 9 1 SQE Y.OOA 4T/C 15 CSAPXO vtlm
COR RP-P(A-XCODS CE XCAE CE, 3 C 144 1'5 SON XO,OOA, 4T/C SXOCEAtPAXQ P Vk@
CSAÃÃÃOSPR DRC CE 6 RAEO GE,XY WO(A+ SHOMRJ4/OHTH 9 i OOA 4T/C V/RSP+ FOXHWSSP4BAY IiEADIAgf EAT VAOS+ HRFPY/R) PRS
CEARIiESTOE& OC RA T WCSC CE, 5 C 19% smr v.oax 4T/C IE TOOCE 30
CSARXOXTR XA 10 13% 4' waxa GE, 3 c 1 1 1 1 4 soE O.aox 4T/c 15 5 5 44 29
CSARXSTS NWXEO SAi WOES CEi 8 A 8% saE 9.aaA 4T/c EAREXPA FISISEP CPA~ EA T wxac cE. 9 A 14% SUN aiaaA 4T/* 4 SEARCE BBSXRXS 5
CESXWCTXS XOST CE«37 F '1% SOW V. OOA. 4T/C AEAXESXRO SOOR
COXCASO CE 14 WAD CS,SS F 10% sam 8.00A 4'I/O PAID PROORAÃ 8
SIXS CR. OX I SOS 11,OOA. 4T/c (K Ek OF POSER
cslco Nalso pA A 10% XRCR CE. 1 , ((HSL SHO MRÃf(4 SR@ scs 8. 00A 4T/c KQVV FXIAYS '49RSP PAXD PROORAE 10 ((NV(( 8 H, VLL A% PRO
4 ((6@0 8 12
~-AX(CN) SA 10 WERS CR, 5 A XNAN 2 WKYC SUi"( TOOAY-i4SC S(N O,OOA 4T/C " ~2 Y/JW RM 8 ((BVS'SV PAID PROCRAE VPA 'AUAB YYKHOR&ROSSV/
CORO SPRSOS-PMj RT 7
tf&ZEB
XRte CE.13 A 18% 4 4 1 1: 1 1 SVHOAY soE o. SOA 4T/G'TSS 1 8 fgga HS 22 22'( (8 HR OF PLEB OIQ EtNSE K4 FQX QYSSLO(DAY
FCI axp(soo((o(I o('yeing'(8, soo IOOO FESO SEPOfffASLE STAT}DWS WICKET TX Q}f A8} LNE 2 TOTAL OAT STATlN CH. WEf. OllA SHARE
START HO. CF DAV TDIE T/CS,
STAT}024:PRQG}TAM
coLlwaxh JX cxx cs 7 XWXX CS«17 h 88 90W 8 i 0 ah 42/C ROSX ~
COXSNSXh, SC Wl, 6 Wl'XX CS.19 C 170 Saw B,aah 4x/c xw xoacs 30 c{lholalga xtAf'»wa ca 6 WXVR CS 9 W 198 SUW 9,303 4X/C OXGS WS SXSXS
coxawsosg OK kh "/ CS $1 X. smr 8.009 4xtc SBWSGX ~ 23 22 waxx cs. 8 R 10% Sow 7,0dh axtc 4 1 1 2 1, wh ox Saws' $8 8 12:28 18 9 7 4'f fx fa XX.WORXS CS 14 XXVX CS 11 C 9% saw a,aah 4Ã/c HSQS SN SAM GM ~.SNITH RQSTSQHNLETI ORXXOW Xl. 8 WOXW CK, 9 h 6% aaw 7.aoh 4x/c WHC BLS QL~LTTL 8 anhxxow 0 isxKO VIRGT PAID PRQGRAM 3 VIKEF 88 VLGA/2fG Vf WXOX CK.43 SRX 7.009 3X/C IKHIQ 8 Sf99/6SGCSH XP 899AXSX XORO V/DTH if TVSNWSCHRS 4VKEF 8 HASH SR}DGES 11.00l, 3X/C VIRGT MN"AHT'K Sxa xaawa V/HIQ BQK ~RT V/8TH THE V/IL NGLS 36XSXSX AXC.
QfG30 12
ORB SXIXIN3 AIISS CS WOX CS. 6 K 98 saw «,aah 4x/c XB SSh«CK WRX VM 48
DSXROXX WWJ CN 63 C 8% 'l1 SKK 8.0ah 4T/C CQ} Was SoxhoR"c«8
OOXSBW CX 4 wxax cK* 4 c 33% Baw 9.30h 4x/c 2 8 8 2 +95} 2 wxaxahxw«c55T 1 S 09feoxs BaasaxoR cx 6 XSJR CS. 6 W 1,TING SOW 9.3ah 4X/C Qml 1 IIhx-ox«ca9RRx
XRXW Sh 6 WXX9 CS. 66 9 6% 10.00h 4T/c XOX NIB BOWOAY
XCGXR7I 9h 7 W 88 XWXR4 CS.16 KVALI SVHDAY.MRH-CBS NGI 7.0al 4X/C KEXl 'RQST SQHULLER Baw xoIIhx Ssc KLSR LGHTHSI94RV REFDRTAELE STAttott8 IIRIIET TZ Dlt AI
TOTAL DAY StAYIGR OILS. IIOIA SHARE
STARf RD, CF OAY TBIE TIOS.
7040 '9544 t@. '1440: N.tt 7"11 40 ROSSXCOI CR 14 XXXII CK 14. X 6.009 4X/C ORKXSX tiOSD
XO.OOR 47/C RD XOOW 54
XTSS CS. 55 X 1% SOS 7.00h 4X/C 700 Ctim
XDRSO SJiXAS ROC RX 4 XXSX CS. 0 * 11% SSX 7.OOR hX/C SXXsx cxsxoRX
XSDXItiOXiXS RR 10 Rsm cs.ha x
SOS 5.009 47/C 1 WISH'
tIORD AtiXOS 80 25 WXIN 8 VIRTV SXX7+ CS. 4 X 5'OS S»OOR hX/C V/THR tikXD l%bC3QX 9 WISH
OMXSOSp ICI CR 4 CS. 5 tt 1,50 SOS 9.00R hX/C 2 8 12 4 3 5 'I ICXXS RUISO SOS 5 17 IS tt 22 t8 18 OACXS~ XR 9 CZ.59 X 7.009 hx/C EWTNWSIF%8 9 14 SRRXSX tiORD WHL+RT/JPRO-W 8 18 FRST43V&LWO 4 7 sos 11 00R 47/c 2 1 INSD OT~ 5 11 '92 'I SD XQOÃG 35 RO PRSI/PD PRG 3 888'BWOISTV SP 3 C CK,XS g 4% SOS 9 AOR hXfC SONOAYMRtkCBS 'RiCA SX 4iNOA MEETPRESS SMN SIOLGH
zoKssxoott K'xsL RR 5 SXRX CX.10 C 19% Nor 6.SOR 4X/C WJAG GGSPKAUt@TAS tiXXD OROORiMI WWCP MGEBA 8 WP8X NGDOHSV
FX4 1 2 2 SN~rX4 SN 9 FRNÃJ4 )tt8 BLO Kth CPIJhICRFL"O XJiSSXÃG RR 7 ~~ CS.47 X 9% SOS 7.OOR 4V/C S. ~ IIX"OSS XdOCSIOXOS SIL 7 CS.S6 R OR sw 8.0OR 41'/c WLEX SUNTGOAV448C dkcx 1Qs xooiS WICYT ~BS BLD WIILE+ SESAMESTREET CJSIR 6
CS.ha X
SOS 6.009 4X/C taRSCKI ~ 4'iXS+ XXÃoSSX XRSX CX R oui CS, 8 SVNOAYMRNCBS 0 OOR 4X/C 2 [K'+ Stot IG448 MroTPRESS.SUN SAXD PROGRIItt KHGI+ ÃV SV MRN CTN
For axpionsttoit ot 0~ see tSSC PSBe. REPORTABLE STATIDRS MARKET TZ DII AI TarhL DAY STATION CIL NEf 04IA SHARE
STAft BD, 0F DAY TIB8 TlCS.
XiXXL RCX ffff BK3'R 8 XXIfff C8.11 C 15% SfDf 4.80A 4C/C 80 RAX LOS ~S RA 15 RCAL CS. 9 X 5% SCff 7.00A 4X/C MEETPREZSCN 4 13 QR XV EYPAfiTNV/SSUf 3 13 ~ SND MRf4FQNTN 8 8 LOQXNfXLX3 RR 10 WDRB Cff,41 Ã 84f SQff 8.0N 4W/C NIU{Y NEVffS CHSSSU MN 8 17 XiAXD RROGRAW V/AVE SUN TDDAY4IBC 4 l0 ;lV14AS HRBFPGWER 8 3 ffACOff RA. 7 W1"GA CR. 50 A 48 SffW 8. 001 4Z/C 0 VWQ THS~DM WORD XW ACXXOW '80 80 VIMGT SUN TDDAY4IBC V/DCD ARTHFH"CLFRQ WADXSQff CR WWXff Cff. 15 ff 12% JQW 7.00A 4X/C ffOQRXW RXS 80
ffRDRORD-XLW RLS PA XDRV+ CR'.XX A XSfff SCf{ 7,003 4X/C PAXD 'PROGRAW 230
WRffPRX8 Cl 0 WDOX C8,40 X 6,009 XX/C Kk {0$$ 8 13 SPRAXSR LORD KK 8 10 8 8 SOW 10 ~ ON 3&/C 3 8ÃD XOIRfG K& V{% 3 8 3 WEBB CS. 11 8 11% SDI 8. 001 48/C SRARCff 0f. LXOff
lfXJQK-?X, LAODR RA 14 Cff*45 1 SAX 7.000 4T/C Kk {Of6) CHI0NNVtHL-FR 8 '10 RRAXSS LORD Kk INSD'DT'S:DRV 5 8 CINMNDSAl.TEL 8 8 NfW XX.BOA 4X/C THS V/K4&SWK 4 8 RD XOOffG V/CV13 10 REPDPRZU4NI 3 8 HS SPRTICBS4 C 3 7
8 1 TDDAYSS.FLSU 11 8 VN SUNDAYMRNCBS CHI0%VSUMRN
)fXLWAORRR CR 9 WXM CL 11 A 188 SfRf 7.00A RRSRCCA GAffORW
WXffRARLS SX. RL CR 10 XSXR+ Cff. 5 A 128 SfDf 8. f!BA 4X/C 8 8 3 10 2 3 17 XW XOOCff Sa S 8 70 12 8 3 10 8 7 WOBXLR-liRS IRffB) CR 7 WRRff C2f. 5 C SfDf 6.3N 4X/C 8 14 V/ALA VARIOUS RAWOOS" SXBRAIfX 8 BED CN TV:8
PAID NOkW@ffffRX I SRLI CR 7 PROGRAM'ffSFA RARA CE. 8 C 18% Sf0ff 7.00A 4X/C SUNTQDAY4IBC BERRAW SXOOX VICDV FRM TH ILDNS Vl V/AIG+ CLL IMSTR R WRW ORIiXAW~ CR 11 WOE CS.24 Sgff S.OOA 4X/C 1 3 2 SUI4TCDAY44BC DR 3 1 3 C4Lk MKT/SN 'MRN
ROOffk1'SRO PBSBIBIVRMBNCH CS,XO 1 SOW 7.009 4X/C f 1 1 LRROX TSOWPSOW 'I 1 8 00
Fof OXPIOruBOff Of SVWfbofB, 808 IOfwl P088. OR. Gj. JAMES KENNEDY VARIOUS
RUSSIA 5 CE.33 A 6% Ball 0.0OA 4T/C PAXO NBA MESTPRESSSVH ~ lfBVV &Xl&AtrSl48RS P '8 EVAQUXVILIR cE 7 EVIQ CBS AfKX Skf@CS. 'HioV C8.44 C 8% SUE 6. 30A 4T/C SAT X&ATS EV 3 V/FIB SCS V&LA-AGAOS VXXVi&V QlSollECBSSWK EISA CE. 63 I WlQE+ ~SKRTS SUE 8'.3OA 4T/C WFIS MESXPfrSSSSDAf Velar 228 ,WEVV SUNDAY h!RfoKBS VnVW Saeva~ VXCLVf FAUCO-VAXir&T CTT CS 6 UOAT+ CE. 6 * 354& 7.30L 4T/C Z&AT-OX8COVERT
Fizz SAQQrr sc EA 6 CE.25 R N SUE 7.0al, 4T/C 1 'l2 18 UUSJ|E OASOT k 18 1 5 18 SXOO&CN5Ci UCE SA 5 UXXS CS.43 7 4% SUÃ 8.001 4T/C SXURSO COOKER
XT RXEL9 EAI&X&8 EA 7 rrXXX CE.L1 C 16% SUE S.attL 4T/C 7 8 7 33&8 CO07E&ARO 10 5 12 XT. XrAXUE EA 5 laetC CS 15 C 17% SUE 8.00A, O'X/C 2 Xoar COX&XX&AEO 127 UE&UECXM-IQCl08 ÃI 6 E&7CX CE& 8 A 13% SUE 7 OOA 4T/C KK SXES OUO EUUBE K&
ULUAOXOO "XX& SC XA S NZZE CE.13 A 11\ SUN 7, 04A, 4T/C 8AXO PAOrOAR
CUXEU X&kx APAxhr cL 2 UX&UC CE. 11, X& 158 SUN 7. ool, 1 1'1 4T/C 18 8. 8 1 XAXO OAO|XOAR 128 70 28 20 Ur& ws RA ~rc&TI cE, 61 I SAT 7.aoo 3T/e SXOX&A f&XVXXT
Srar 11, 001 3X/C 8EO XOUEO.
MID CS 4$ A 6% SUE &,00A tT/c 1 '1 4ICS-VXCXOAT 1
C0EXUVX&«EB EASE RA, 7 RECT CE. 8 C 17% SUM 7. 00A 4T/C 8 . 3 CUS '~ RE )+&I Bra&LISCEEUAO 83& 3 8880'E& 3 A 30% SUE 8.00A 4T/C COR'IOXOÃ8 EE CLL A~S FCX NVS SVHDAY SPJ&SOO fA"N T SA 6 UR131 CE. 37 A XXo 8&r 7,0OA rv/e S*SEXTH-STXXof y/GAf. 8 CTRg43 NSD ÃTF ARXHR PCLFFRD WP187 PAlD PROGRAM
For oxplaUUSUU ol symbols, see foal psge, {KPORTAHLE STAYS% }(AR}{6T TX OH AI TOTAL OAT STAT{OH C}L AHT. }}HA SHARH
START HO,OF SAT T(HH 7/CS. HH 676 ~ STAT(off PHQGRAM 10 15 'C 17 ST. LOOTS CK 8 NLC CK.XC 9~assss 6 aap 4T/c
XPLR CK XX X SDK 7.00k 4T/C TSSX ADT TERRE
XgLMSS 'X@g% Sk 6 WXXL CE 27 k 7% 'I 'l SSS 9.00k 4T/C 1 TSCTY 6(P(OAT~ PAXD PROGSAS 111 66 66 WFS{I AGAHLHS AHIATO ,Y/(Y/C }(8(COPELNO SSS 9,30k 4T/C &K 1 1 WCTV SUHQAYM}%CHS DR.C. XXAXS?X 5 66 66 Y/FSV 'CL}FFRO BGOCG Y/WC PA}O 1 f ~ }.7 7 TAIIPA-ST P(SAH} Sk 14 tiCLP CK» 22 X SKS 7.00P 4T/C CCSCEPTS"PAXXS
SFXQ CE.25 k ?tt 8.04A, 4T/C KK DKSPR LT SSSTR
TERRI 'SLKXS Rh ttxso cs. 2 s 260 NN 8.00k 4T/C 6 1'1 2 XS XDSCK 60 23 3} 18 XOLSOO 6 irJpit cs. 36 9 5% StRr 5*00k 4T/C 12 ACT%/«SV}( KEN COPRLASD ROBTSCHULLER ORAGQ}C TUFTY XRAIIRS CXX CDLC Xk 5
IarXV+ CK, 9 C
SSS'.00h 4T/C PAID PROQRAK XRI-CXXKSITS Vk Xk 6'XPT CK.X9 k 4(i amer 8,30k 4T/c DXRLCAL PKPSXS TOCSQS (8 PSXh} SX 9 CK. 15 I 34 SSS '? . 00h 4T/C PLXD PROQRM(
STXCh Sk 5 irIXV CK. 33 T 5% Stat 8. 003, 4T/C 'YYKTY PAID PRORRAS (SVTR YIPNY KACO-. TEKPL-XRXS CS 'l 32207+ C5.25 k 9(I BUM 8. 30k 4T/C KK PAIXI PROSRIW KK
Wi"K, DC (SAC} SA 10 'N4LA CE, 7 k 201I 0(R( 8.30k 4T/C 1 1 RODT SCKOLLSR 4 6 5
tthDSAK RSXSSLDR CS 6 SAOW+ CK. 9 k 15% 80S ?,aah 4T/C 8 10 7{XXX SKID SS
HUH TQOAY4(HC PBS-BARN SHCH PO'9RGFL8 FLRO IIXCKXL-SXCS PLS CR ? XAXSe CK.10 k 11% HS}{We SUHTOOAY4{}C SCS 7 ~ aak O'X/C XS TOXCS 30 PO PRGRTT S W HPTS SKAMHSTREET
For axPLXDRHon of KYIDDCKL 000 {Sat( PKSS OR. O. JMES KENNEGV
RKPOIITAttlE STATIOIIS ttAEKET Tg, QtlAI
TDTAL CN, ttET. Dtth SHAREDA1l'TATION
START ND, DF. DAY TtllE T/OL
t~ O' 'h Tt 0 R» STATIGtt PRQGRAQ S 4 0 4 7 0 8 10 Sslt OSXSI CS 1X SONXST @Plë
tatS TOSS %i. XS IIPXS CspSX I SSS XO,OOh 4T/C CATSOLXC ttLSS VN SSPXT-PRT-ttP 10t SL 10 CE.4S P 40 SOS 7 *001 4T/C PXXO PsostQE 1
ISI CXTT CS XX SOCO CS, 5 * SOS '/. Oah 4T/C 1 815ttTGDAYSNIC ITS fJSIXTS 27 37 NWS:9 SU M. ED PAID P~ FISt'2 8NWCttNIttSC-:%V~ FDXSUNINFI.CAN EY/7NtYSYR-FR v,™d SNW~WDNIVSOOGSCVR SOE Xa.aoh ST/c tctN) MEETPRESSSUN 580 TOOSI@ NAYUR"", FC NTt4tWSTt/INS vs+ OKQQ. CS 7 SETS CS, S C X5% SSS 7.001 4T/C PXXO PSOXIQX VN pocs-cs-ESS-ev cs 4 SSXL+ CS 3 h 8% SIOt 7.001 4T/C atT axles VFC PSOSXh-SQIXIISTS CS 7 tOK0 cs 01, c XNI 008 7.00h 4T/c S~ SSll PSXOXQESPSXh Sh 14 ttPttS CS. 09 T Stst 10.001 4T/C WPVI ACTN @VIINSD 8 EXP' ksSSSSS .WCAU t4BC10:IOMT PRS Stot 7.00P 4T/C WTXF 0 FK;NFL/YRS xxss xs caKQts Kvv/ 0 50 MINlfK8438 WPVI 0 WDNDRFQSNAttC CE.X7 1 SISI S.aah 4T/C 2 2 2 2 2 WCAU SUNTQDAY@SC Xtt TOOCtt 4'0 5 2 8 2 't2 'KYW EYEWPA@V/KND 'PVI SI54DAY MVE psassxx NT 11 44XV CS.15 8 St| sos 7 008 4T/c TOSS SSW SOma
PXTTSSOtIOE XIL 10 Ill?CS CS 40 SISt 9 OOP 4T/C Qaaa KDKA 0 CESSUNMGV 14 19 OAT-XtXSCOOSS WPXI 0 LAWAQRfKQBC 15 WPGH 0 VRS tX~ 10 18 WTAE ACT4NS SUN WFXI RCS'7 SCHUIXEFt WFCB IN TQUCHSO
PORTOIISOp Ok Ph 0 XPDX CS,49 P 8% Salt 7,00h 4T/C XSII COPSOhtO
PSI77IDttC lf. Em Elj B SPkl CS, XS C XS8 Salt 7.001 4T/C 2 5 4 2 1 1 I sao vxf4 hahxs ? 'lO 79 54 54 54 OR. D. JAMES KENNEDY VAR|OUS
REP(effABLE STATNHS LAIIKET TZ DII AN TOTAL DAT STATION N. SET, IEIA SNARE
SfART HO. CF DAY TIIIE TICK
LINE 4 LEODSOPRDRRAIO RADEXGE-DSR(IXI EA ERAO CE.SO 9 6% NO( 7.001 4T/C 5 3 PAXD PRCORAE 1 "I 3 'VN Rce EAOE cr«ess cs EXET CE. 8 C 16% 'I 67SI * 0OA 4T/C ''" EAIXt ST JRSAXe VC RXCBICRO-PTADIO SA 7 REST CS. 10 E 14E SCS 'l.bbA 4T/C 50 " RX(SO(OSD Cl@IR 18 'vN RNÃbxe xscesRQ EA 7 %SET CE. 13 A. 12% SW 8,00A 4T/C ODD Tree Casper Rocxeoeo ce 9 TORI ce. 99 I 100 SOE 7,001 4T/C 1. WRE( IMSCVIV(55DRS I 8 TASSE INES~CPS 14 80 WIFR A(DWSTT/FSN ' 4 WTVD KMCPLWPOPR(6 ~-STE-No TA 9 ÃIXA CEa40 I 95| SEN',00A 4T/C
SAAXOSDRX EA, 4 MEDT CE.47 * 10\ SEE 9. 00A, 4T/C PAID PRCORAN
OAE hmceeo ce 11 ESAT CE.IT SCM 7abOA 4T/C 4 @+X BUNTDDAY+IBC pexD IROERM( 1 SUPER'TV S BNS+fMPLNT SAW DXXQQ PA XX XQTV CE. 10 A 9\ O(D( 7. 0OA 4T/C KNSD xARRX JOMXO KUSI KPBS SAR IM-OAR N PA 1$ XSER CE, 44 X SCE 8*001 4T/C ORARCS"5( AYOS SAVAICQE EA l OE.Re I 60 SOS 7«COA 4T/C WSAV IN%CHIWRD N STODX pAO Rxcx WTQG FRNKLMee BLD VOL HRGFKAlvER wxoc ce,xx c xe(i SOE S,OOA, 4T/C WSAV SUIOTDDAY48C SCS SCXADR CSS vc(~4 WJCL INTGUCH80 WVAN Cb.FRD vive/ SEATTLE TACCEA PA 10 XTSS CE. 11 X DCE 7 OOA 4T/C KINe..KINGS'WEND NWS 3 17 AposTDxc"ceRSE KD'LO K~8 BVSA 3 KIRQ' SUNDAYA(f%CBS 2 8 sxoex cxTI ce 4 XCAS CE. 9 A 12% ecs 9.00A 4T/c DAI-DXSCONX
SXQQX IXS(IEX(AI CS 6 xsex+ CE.XS A xee SDS 9.00A 4T/C I PRXEART ICCOS 38 18
SRiCI«EMCEE SA CE. 46 X "l OOA 4T/C Qa(O 3 WNDV 9 JROQ ooptlrrxs 184 WSXV 9 1 Wmff 7 Sm 7.00P 4T/C WSBT 0 13 23 xs xoccE ea vQ™ WSJV 0 8 14 wNQU 8 7 13 pp(ex/fr Afsg vF/
For oxpIODDBon ot sfoe7OLA ~ Iosd yogb. HEPCSTABLE STA @% kVlKET T2 CH AHl TOTAL BAY STATlgH CH, HET. HHA SHABE CoaaESPQTTEHm THEE i7ERt058 RICHEST START HO, OF CCTHPETIF@ SfATlWS BN TM TtCS,
SfATt0M PROGRAM 4 1O 11 XXLQS SAR SCk Xs 7 Ssks CE.QS Tl TOO sea 7,oos 4T(c ONE OHYSWTC141OSV TA 7 48 44 'WVfA ACT WAILAHLP. PAXO OROORSH WGPX J ~OSCV !CTACHVgCÃ Os'E. N 4 DA 'l &.BOA 4X/C 1 1'XSCOOSOS 1Bl 117 TOOS~ Xk. S WS747 CX.NL Ã A4% RW 7 i 0OA N'/C KQcca asses Ke
For explanaHdn of sycibdls, soe lead page. MUSIC THE & SPOKENWORD 30 8 2473 2 -f. 2 IN TOUCH 60 60 '81 51112 48 3 HOUR OFPOWER VAR 97374 .6'T GQOD NEWS 'I8I2 5 IN TOUCH 80 f5 10729 10 6 BILL GAfTHER 30 7 4698 5 MASS.FQR SHUT-INS 10 %44 3 LT 8 700CLUB VAR 83 52652 50 8 JHAGEE'SCORNERSTONEHR 60 30 16899 'f8 10 JACK VAN IMPE PRESENTS 30 128 69072 86 f0 DFL D. JAMES KENNEDY VAR 'l39. 81 10 CREFLQ A. DOLLAR„JR. VAR 59 10 JESSE DUPtANTIS 80 19 10 EVER INCREASING FAfTH ,60. 16 f5570 'f5 10 KENNETH COPELAND 'VAR 132 85042 81 .3 't0 EV. HILL 80 8 7037 LT 17 PETER POPQFF 'l7 30 5 16055 15 DR, LEROY THOMPSON 7 17556 17 17 SEARCH-M, LYON 30 31 17C% 17 17 UFE fN THE WORD 30 43 29547 26 f7 ED YOUNG 30 'f0 8165 8 LT. LT 17 ROD PARSLEY VAR 86859 35 17 BENNYWRITTENHINN'S THIS ISOAY 'l7 VAR 12 9978 9 LT t,T CREFLO A.DOLLAR JR. DAILY VAR 54 46MB 44 .1 17 DEAN & MARY BRO& @A 5 4%9 IT LT t7 GARNER TED ARMSTRONG 30 23 13804 'l3 LT LT 17 OLD TIME GOSPEL HOUR 60 9 4565 LT fT 17 BEfTY JEAN ROBINSON 30 7 6403 6 LT 4.T 17 IT IS 30 87 38992 37 17 GOSPELSINGING JUBILEE VAR 6053 6 LT LT 8t KENNETH COPEtAND DAILY 30 117 7@PS 71 31 MIKE BARBER 30 6 4853 5 LT LT 31 PRAISE THE'LORD VAR 10 7745 7 LT LT 3'I BENNY HINNS:THS-DAY OAfLY VAR 44 531% 31 MYLES MUNROE 30 7 6403 6 LT 31 ERNESTANGLEY 50. 12 9616 9 LT LT 31 ORAL ROBERTS VAR 13 18406 17 81 REGINALDCHERRY 30 .7 6403 '6 LT LT TOMMY & MATTHEW BARNETT 30 5 4007 LT fT 31 ZOLA LEVANT 30 5 4217 LT LT 31 RELIGtOUS TOWN HAU. 30 16 15881 LT 31 JUSTTHE FACTS 10 7710 7 LT LT 31 REAL VIDEOS 30 6103 6 LT 't'T 31 DAY OF DISCOVERY 30 60768 31 UFE IN THE WORD DAiLY 30 23 27663 26 31 KIDS UKE YQU 30 8662 8 LT LT 31 JIMMYSWAGGART 60 18 19640 19 LT t.T 31 MARILYN HICKEY 30'AR 9 SK6 8 LT LT 'I 31 ROD PARSLEY DAILY 18 1385. 11 LT LT. 3f COLBYS CLUBHOUSE 6406 8 LT IT 31 KEY QF DAVID 15 22877 22 LT LT 52 CHRISTOPHERS VAR 7 1522 1 LT LT 52 QN MAIN STRFET 14 4647 LT LT JQHNHAGEETODAY ~1 CARMAN 30 5344 5 LT LT CASEYTREAT4QURSE DAILY 80 8 7037 LT. t.T 52 JANICE'S ATTIC 30 7 6403 LT LT 52 JAMES ROBISON.UFE TODAY 80 43 42777 52 ACQUIRETHE FIRE 30 12 %85 LT1 52 FAffHVILLE 30 8 7037 7 I.T LT 52 RICHARD & UNDSEY ROBERTS VAR 5 8867 8 fT LT 52 HERITAGE SINGERS 8 7971 8 LT LT 52 GOSPEL BILL SHOW 9 LT LT SHEPHERDS CHAPEL VAR 24153 23 LT fT LIARKETS REPGNRNS 111 STATIONS REPGITRKS '124 TOTAL TV HH'S IN DXIA'8 77@58,150 D,*SIR% GF V,S. 73 EP'iSODES AVAILABLE Nl* DST,"CORA1, RIDGE 51IIHSTRIES TYPE: DEVOTIONAL
SU{mVRV BY DAYPARTS D! IA HOUSEHOLD SHARES BY MARKET BANK 51-700 10+ 2850 DAYPART DAYPART I/Q.OF 51 tlO.QF EQ.QF 16 KQ,OF 8 tfOCF ",+ f10.QF ffQOF % NlXIF 8 SHAHP QOA'5 QMA"S SPARS QIA'3 SHHIH QN'5 Sf/ABE 0!IA"6 Sak% 0~i 5 PH/NE Qfg8 SHARP QIIA3
DAYTfME {FFF)t POST PRIME,{9-8) '23 EAR{.'Y FRftfGE {fFF) WEEKEND DAYTIME{858) PRMIE ACCESS {5{-SA'fl 0/EEKEND PRE PRII/IE{855) PRlME 8 AVG, ALL TELECABTS 23 1
NO. NO. '4 M D 5 TOTAL OF OF V.S AVG, '1840 12-77 2-11 HHLOS 18+ %49 2&54 18+ !'Kl"6 DMA'6 TV GH SHR V/CYH QQQI V/CVH RTB {000) MQ V/QVH IQ0M V/CVH ] V/CVH 100/f VlCVH } VMVH { OAYTOXE (IX.F)j EARLY FRltlGE {tFF) PRP/IE ACCESS {LFSAT) PR7«{E {S.S) 4 4 8 18 POST PRII!5 {S.S) 27 20 5 10 2 7 2 WEEKEND OAYTILIElSSS) 109 109 71 427 231 54 35 9 43 11 115 12 V/EEKEIID PRE-FHIME{888) 12 12 11 28 12 44 2 7 3 10 5 19 3 21 10 TOTAL DAY 1M 1'l1 419 224 35 44 1M AVG. ALL TELECASTS 4 2 25 COMPETING REPORTABLE FOUR WEEK AVERAGE STATIONS TIME PERIOD AUDIElCES FOUR WEEK AVERAGE I!ARKET 72. ON AIR {tHIS PBOSBAM YL FRECEDIAS HALF HOUR) TINIE PERIOD AUD)ENOES TOTAL DAY STATIOlf CH, tP~T, DEA SHARK CORRESPOND)t{8 TIME BLIA",e PERSONS SHARE 'i'3 To {X«") PERSONS (OM) IE V/{B{)VH PFRIOD.S HIGHEST STARf tlO, OF VS TOTAL COA{PETING STATIONS DAY TI! IE TlCS, Yi'0!.*Fit V/IQQYH HH HHLQ TOTAL QHB ~Q AQQLTS 1247 211 UNF 4 STATION PROGRAM LEAD IN FROG BRM 6 7, 6 6 70 ABIDBk/B 7rlVATB cB 5 BIDX CB 54 I'A SUNTGDAY-NBC BIQr 7.00A 6T/C DRAXVINSCHRIST XfBTBAttY BOOB PRCHNG/SRCH M giSJ6 BCB TBOY BA S MTPJ+ CE XQ A XX% 6'.QQA 4T/C 3 ABTHFFP/CLFFRD 12 23 1S DR XPLRBLS CL CODD ODT CAPITLNWS9 SU ATDM/TA BA XX HQW CE. 46 C A WSB CH2 ACNVi/SU AM 6077 B.QQA AT/c 7/ALVE-SU HAM PBACBTRBB PriDD V/788 SUPERTV5
ENTTGNISHTSQ VPv& BFIAVF9 8'AT IVHL-FRT/XPRD W THfSV/EEK-ABS BQfr XX. 0QA 4'T/C VPA 77IVILMKVFL%7IL*PL ZD VOIQlQ CHF/S MT/11LV-9 J~~ AV7. v{C~) AVBQBTA PA 0 NKÃ CE. XX C QtB/ Q~QQA 4T/C 10 00/0 Ilf TOQCB 64 $
DADTIRQBB ftA 7 'n7/AR CB. I A. 70 3 '8, 8 YVBAL SONTGDAY.NBG QIC/ B.QQA 4T/C ' 'WJZ EYEVHTNV/8 AMSU OMBY v/I:4 74 8 8 /DfACB k WNUV BTHL AQPD PRB DIP'tnt shiit CB 0 hTBC CB. 6 P X6% BSMITH-'STYLE 28 {000) 6707 6,30A. 4T/C 3 11 THSGLDHGUSE 14 32 Vi'QVH PAID PBOOPW! 3 t2 YGURNEV/HOUSE BTJP OH*60 I *'I/O 33/40N/WHL+R
BAT 6,00P )CQS ACCSS HLYV/0 VlK SOON ftHABDS HRD RCIOMASH
THIS WEFK4BD Nar XQ.QQA 6T/C PD'PRSR/SONG L BD TOQBB VIA 2'9 CHR8'MT/CRLTN 7&SKY /fPB. F. 0 5 3 (Ã$ 59 23
For QYDIQrtoSOD of oymflols, soo IQDO pago. COTEPETI6Ia WEEK AVERAGE AUOIEIICE SECTION 2:"PORTABLE FOUR PROGRAM FOUR SEEK AVERAGE STATIGIIS TCIE PERIOD AUDIENCE G,"lLVI {DEVGTIGNL PRGSBALI TIME PERIOIT AUI7IENCES BASKET TZ Gil AIR Im{S PRGSSAU vs. TRECEDEiS BALF tIGURI TOTAL DAT TOTALS DESIGNATE STATION STAT@ll CIL TIET. DLIA ERNE PERSONS SHARE % {000I PERSONS (ESGI 4 V/ISGVH START 'AG, GF aa DAY Tai'lE T/CS. I'lOL'EII IIEIJ VIIatr6{
LINE 4 STATION PROGRAM LEAD.IM.PRGGRAfil SLPLD-JIBCSJitt-Oa SA 6 IIVSX CB.59 C 4% SIBI V,GOA 42/C PAXD IJROCRAB
SOSTCG Ittot."Cmt) BA 24 ttsax OB.38 I 48 SUN'TODAY-NBC salt G.GOA 4T/C WBZ NWS SU SA xtt Toaca ao NEWEEKEg)
LOFfhIia BA 8 IIXDtt CL "I A 22tt WBRZ J HANNA-AGV SOS V.OOA «T/C WIVE'N TOUCH'60 FATIIDI V/NYO SHE,SPIES cAapttlt"ItxtrsttTC"'IT 6 BFII2v CB. 20 A 5% KBWC+ SUNDAYMRN4BS 2 'l7 SOB 7.0011 4T/C 16WO SUN TODAY-NBC 1 13 TBC OLD BotJSS KCWC 8 4.3 JTP/TLTBBS coR Rp tra«xctiDD cs 7 SCAB Cg, 2 C 220 KCBS HOME BYR GUIDE GIDI XO.GGA 4T/C KV///L P GREATEXCHANGE amotamr uoBBG 6 3 KON+ BRB. SHFLG..BKBR
CBAIIPCIJGSPR-DBC CS 7 ttAm CB.XV A Xoa Stat 9.00A «T/C 4 (NN) PAXD PROCRAII
CBARDIISXXBti SC BA V 222 IWLTRBR Kcoc cB. 5 c 8 iWCW IAITCH GIN V.OGA, «TfC IOQX WCBD CALVARYCHURCH OPOPBIL IOO t12 'WITV PLE SSAIJARTHR-
COAL OTTS 3 C 3,33 I/ORECOAGUEROR hoer CBi 4 V/SOD sea 5.0OA «T/c 4EIO) .V&CIC: BPTSTC/1ST BP %vcBS pDpRBRIBUCK
CBAIILSTII-BCITCC BA 'I CC,S A 4 V/SAZ+ IN TOUCH 60 Sall V. OOA 4T/C 132 82 WDWKG THS LOIBRCH4$ PAXD PROCRAtt V/HCP 324{4Y SV/ABBART CBAVTAIION XA 7 hIVC CB, 9 A 24% WRCB. SUN TODAY/NBD Catt 8.00A «T/C WDEF PRCH% JLVNS C SSARCB F ISTRIS WTCI SESAME STREET
CIIIDI GCTXG FiT 4 YAMJ Ctt. 07 P 4'4 Stttt 7.1}OA 4T/C ASAXIDJIt'0 BODB
CBXCACO CS 24 OLD CB, 32 P 9% 1 2 26 Catt G.OGA 4%/c )000) aDILL WItirSTOII
CBXCO- PZDDIIIG PA 7 IIIICR CB 7 A 8% ae G.aoA 4x/c PAXD PROCRIOI
cLBGBlttD "Att (cttl BA 9 NIXO CB, 29 C 9% Satt S,GOA «T/C PAXD PPOCRAtt 2
COIO SERliao "PDL JIT 7 XBDO CB, 33 A. 22% 10 6 satt 7 OGA 4T/c 77 77 C BNaat-ADV
CCL'PIDIA OP CTX CS 5 IOIXA CB. 27 A 7tt KOMU SUN TODAY-NSC 1 2 Stttt 8*OGA 4T/C Qaaa KPCB SUNDAY MRI«4BS ROJIT SCRUIAM KVOS BRNSFRI4'TLTBBS
COLIRKFJ-TOP IIP CB 5 IITt/A CB. 9 M 258 WCBI EACENATN486 ' PAIBPR{PSRJN salt 9i30A 42/c VPv& WLOV cxtttt tat SIDLING V%)H THISWEEK«ABC
Par oxplcttotlott at cyrnttattt, Catt lccC Ttago. REPORTABLE FOUR LVEEK AVERAGE PROGRAM AUDIENCE SECTION BTATICllS TIIAE PERIOD AIjDIENOE8 IBEYQTIQI/AL IIARKET TE, Qtl AN I/HIS PRQSRNI Ys, PRECE9tt4 HALF INIIR) PRGSRA/4l'ONLY)'ORRESPONDING TOTAL BAY t/E8!GNAT STATIQN CH. tlET, OIIA SHAK TIIEE (aCZI PERIOD@ HIGHEST SrART t/O,QF Vi TOTN, CGRIPETII48 8TATIGN8 BAY TIME T/CS, NBI TNS CHS YA~'5 HH NtB mrAL QIRi. UI48 4 NG ACSLTS 1849 19«17 STATION PRO GR/IIN LEAD.I/f-PRQGRAIJ 18 19 90 RI Cofil2VUOi OB PA '7 NBA'B. 53 SBM 5iaaP 4T/C VARIOUS BICIBBT P ISTBY WTTESUH f/QV 3 NBA PL4Uf T ltSXII CB, 6 A ZII CU.'f Z,OOA 4T/C t4W4 TOY SU HR1 BR OF PCOBI 'IV) 1 QEY1VT4UN A'J GU. /CLFFRO 2 vc~v) 8/ $2 BAIiBAS PT.IIORTB CB 39 BTUP CB. XI C 8% BBB 6,0%i 4T/c $000) 10
BATIOlf RA. 8 BBTII cB. 3 A aA XPMlBL'8 Balf "/.OOA. 4T/C 1 5 GR CL VL-G/CHAS M PAID PROGPAB 1 5 .5& BB STf'F H/RLG-NV/ I/BOI CB. 43 I BAT 7,009 4T/C KC V/HL.FRT/CSH KP OPRAXBB XORB 4C .PA THT 708IEVRBQ- FRNBS /JPRD-IV u,aoA 4T/c LGHTSD/VRS BB YOUNG VteQ THS V/K-/PQ PRG NOW W/8 ViQYERS llalsXRT Avdl. 1. VJQVH 0 24 BBINSR IIT Xa tafff!f CB. 3 I 50 RBtr O.aaA 4T/c KUBA SNiVSGUHMQRN BR OF Poring KCNC. SUNDAY II/RN488 .KEOGH 7 HE1YS SUiN BBO BOINBS At%to CB 6 f/OX CB. 5 A SUII 8 00A 4T/C KCCI SUNDAY At/LACES TODAY«IQV/ASUN Xff B~iCB ftAY J J.JIP/ZBMF-P BBTROIT BA Xa VAO CB.6Z C SIBI «.OOA 4T/C I NEWSBEAT4UN BBIBS CfiUB-CBS 1 3 VS& FQÃ2KV/8 ATSA/J SA SUN ACTN NY/ BOTUAlf CB I/TFY CB. 4. C 30% 81st 9.30A 4T/C :V/QHN RQGCRBT/GRTR.B SIBIBAT faof COO V4& WBQQ WW PLC /CLB JB WDF/I PQPRGR/FKNWS BUSUPB CUPRRXOR Co 5 BaiTR+ CB, 6 B ISO FACEAiATff&BS UUII 9.90A 4T/0 Iog 0 BAY-BXSCOVSRY THIS QLQ HQUSE AT ISSUE ERXR BA 6 RPXP CB. 66 F 5% SIBI 10.00A 4T/C POX SWB SIRIDAY VVV)
BUG liB PA 7 RIITR+ CB. 36 M 8% 0 BON 7 00A 4T/C K4 L00$ 2 SUN TOBAY-tfisC 1 13
BUR'iTJI PA 6 BARF OR*33 A 48 SUNDAY MRN-CBS San 8.OOA RT/C " LIEETPRESS-SUN PRIBIRA.f V/FA PAXD W LN'8 //V 411 BifAIfBUXfifiB CR 6 IIBIIV CB.44 C 9% BQB VILA AGAIN BUN 4T/C 6.30A QIBN RECESSWK Axial 19 ABVIITRB PAID PRQGRA/d FARGO-VAIiLY CXY CB 6 N)AY+ CB. 6 A 359 KEY S"4T0400AT PRS 4T/C 1 5 BUS 7.30A KXJB KM CPt.N/SND 9/R PUT OBOP , KF/JEER J J JTP/BG-CCH PfiXBT-BAmIAtf-BC RA 25 8% NKE CB. B V/JRT JHNN TLatN44SC IBI 7 aaA 4T/C 2 WHERI CHLKZNMHRNLQ AKSCTR35UP CM WSldH GSN'RCSIV/LD h'R
Far oxptsftoSott of symbols, aoe food Psgo. HEPQHTASI,E FOUR WEEK AVERAGE I7ROGRAI8 AUOIEIIICE SKTIOIfI GGMPETIRG STATIDtf8 TlME PERIMI AUOIEIIICES FOUR WEEK.AVERAGE '(DEVQTIQNAI. PHQBRN Qtff.TI BASKET T2, 011 AIB ItHI8 FRQQHAht vs, PHECEDQIQ HALF HQBH) TifAE PERIQO: AUOIERCES TQTA!, DAV STATION TOTAI.S SYATIQH CH, tIBT. D',tA SHARE CQRRESPQNUIRG TfliIE Oi Df,IA 'h PERSONS SHARE 'i~ BYABY t'0. QF PERIQDS fflGHEST DAY TB!E TIC8. COMPETING STATfQRS
UttE 4 10f 1849 2%64 STATIGR PRQGRASl LBAIWH P QBRABI PliBffCB fDITfi DCB BL 5 ATXB CB.43 P BUU 0,00A 4T/C PAXD PBOGBAff 108
PT. ÃrSBS tfhPLS I'A 7 WXbN CB.11 C 160 SlLB 8.00A 4T/C V/BBH BBff COPBfihfi71 V/GCU V/ZVN PT. WAN BA 9 mDB CB.XS e 200 Sfaf B,ODB 4T/C PAID .PROGmf VPCV)
GR.ifffCTI1-K%HOB ffT 6 ffiYCT CB, 8 A 0% SUff l. 00A 4'r/C Bi7 Bhffffh-ADfl
GB.BAPXDS-Xfr DC BA 8 BZQ! CB, IB A 10% Sag 'l.dah 4T/C 3 2 Vi'CQD Petit QV/YVILI tIR PAID PROGRAM 107 Bf VifXEH IN TOUCH V/ZPX 60'QPRGR/D.QSCV GBBBff PAT APATff CB 7 WliQK Cfl, 11 P 100 Smf 7,00A 4T/C PAXD PBOGBAlf V53
GBBBff SBBO "BP "ffS BA 9 tffafX CB. 61 I SAT 7.00P 4T/C fVHI:FRTNPRQ 7 18 ZOlA Ji~TT Z4 ENTTGNITEBOW 8 8 DUFFY I 8 8 SOff 11,0DAi 4T/C /910 f8 TCUCH 60 8 8 BD XOOBG $ THISV/EEK-ABC 8 4 ti!RTH ST/HT TCK 4 ffXfiV CB 45 A Bt SOB 9,00A 4T/C 8 2 1 1 %FtAY SUNQAVMRNCBS 17 XEff COPBLiABD 83 88 88 '%XII AIEET.PREBBSUI4 0 V/GHP FQK INIS SUN DAY 8 8 1 f 7 f. 35 80 Pt. GBBBtfffA-ffD-tfASB BA 8 kNCT CB. 9 C 200 SW 7, OOA 4T/C VIICTI dACK VAN It4PE CDB IOfTffTCB bW V/ITN 9 EIBHYFORCE EVEPX+ PAID PRQSRIB Vv'K BABBXSOHBUFD WL 2 WBSff Gf. 9 h, 174 BUll 9.04A 4T/C COBUTBBTOBB BB BABPDBB»DA-XD-X Bh 6 BBXfif CB. 27 A XO0 SUff '/.OOA 4T/C V/GAL STRNG.B/SGTS8 PAXD PBOGBhff fVITF AffTHR+ICLFFRD WHP PQ'PRGRIQDSCV BXSTOB CB 16 BBXD C5.14 X BAT 6,00P 4T/C KHOU 14 NWWWHLM PBAXSS fDPXf v5) KRIV 0 KNG'F HISMPSNS KTRK EfVYNV/SIEKTRP THISV/EEK-AB. DOff 10.00A 4T/C f000) 7 8. 8 8 8 KfRK. BD TdmfG 43 43 88 88 KHV/B CSB 8100/CSB SH KPRC IDEETPRESSSUN NSXST AW. VFA XDABO PhfifiS-POC NT 6 XXPX Cff. 0 A 10% SOB 7.00h 4T/C KICK PAXO PBOGBAN IQBU KPVI XffDXhffAPOfiXB BA 10 CB.40 x «Dlf B.OOP 4T/C WKIN 6 FQKSUN 0/QV 8 W~SXAB II.D.C. VfRYV VAR KNS V/ISH 0 VRS lACCSS CB. 4, 40 ATTY+ I TODAY-NBB SUff B.OOA 4T/C SUN NiORN PAID PROGPAB 2 QAYBRK SU QC KDS/QC KQS
Fdl" OÃPIODOttdff df OVfffbdlS, SBO IOOd POBO. REPOIITABLE FQIjFI KVEEK AVEFIME STATIOIG TIME PERIOD AUDIENCES LIARKET T2. Qll A/8 tfBIS P RQSBALI inr. FRECEOlflB KALF HOURI TOTAL OAY STATION TQTALS QI/IA STATfON CR. NET. Of,'IA RARE CQRRESPQNDIMG TUBE I4IGHEST OfhA 48 PERSQNS SHARE % PERIODS START flQ, OF CQfIPETING STATIQNS "S 88: OAY Tl T/08, TfiS 050 8HS RYB UME4 STATION PRQGRAIII
LEAO IN PRO BRAAI 1 2 8 4 6 iTACBSOlfi NS CS 6 ffrieT CB 3 8 178 AVJYV 9.068 4T/c 15 12 8 2 10 7 3 2 3 )ITS 83 3'I 2? 30 WAFT lrssT passe"erpr 23 12 27 lVOBD
iYACXSOYIVXIZie SA 9 Mace ca. 59 1 WHEAT/JPRD.W OAT 7,00P 4T/C EVRBD6VHTTCK prrAxse MAO AND BRF/GIJM MK PD PRGR/PDPRB SIIB 11.aeA 4T/C LYLL.ST /PD PAB Ba Terr/ra 1STBPSrPDPRB
ffirfrX CB*25 A BUNDAY MRNCBS sae 9*OOA 4T/c fiARNB SHWSU 8 COSTS BATXBE'r(S fXEET PRESSSUN
daXÃOTO+N-AXiTtrA FJt 5 frTAi7 CB, 10 GOSPEL.MINSTRS 'I4 WJAC sfar 6.30A 4T/c 8 WWCP,CQMIMERCL PRG 13 10 60 PAXxr Pfraafrfaa Yi/PSX JAY JY JETPLNE rcalaes cxTT cs 9 SSBS CB. 41 8 lvoAF Fxe'BN/Fxe:BN efar "/.OOA 4T/C KCTV DR;XPLR/BL'8 Cl, fidi88 4 OBOTXBS KCPT TRLSD /7ifTR Y/K
FSOXVXXiriB Fh 8 18ITS CB. 6 A efr WBIrf SUMTQDAYONBC smr 8.00A XT/c 2 WVLT UPNTHS//LKl 'f V,4~3 88ACOS"N» xixo",1 3 (VTN2 JGK VN lfAIPL 8 V/S/R MEETPRESS SUN srar Xa.ave 3T/c 2 MRN/FD'NTN VPwI V/V LT SND xrr Tel/ca 60 2 3 2 //BXX OBMNSN/RCSSW /~i APi7, II' XiABSXAir EA / PXM'B,53 A 48 WILX SUMTIAY-f4BC salr 8. 0OA 4T/c 5%vI ZBIAFiPTIRGM T xxvxse 1 afre WLNS KN CPLN/JCK VN
XiBXXSSTOS FA 6 fiV4XI CS. 36 A 7% srB e.eeA 4T/c «Ac@ VAfr urpB I xroi SA 6 rfexiif ca, 44 x ')VLTB LIEA PPRESS SUN 9*oaA 4T/c sall VICA :WHIG SUNDAYMAN%88 Xrr ToeCS 60 YVBBU BRNAFAN/ILTBBS WUD ANDRQAIEDA COB 12,008 4T/C PDPRBR/SHSPB V,FA 8/ifIQ oAvxxr ifsp~ V/BBU MATURE 39N/rFT APJ. rixrrriesT setrT cs 6 SXifaf CB. 8 A KOLN+ SUNDAYMRN-CSS siar 0.0OA 4T/c K HAS MEETPRESS-SUN SSAPCB"B. XiXOV KUQNV CLL+NBL/ARTHR-
liXT/i 11CS Plr erie CS 'l ATre/ ce,11 C 17% KARK REACH QUT srar 6,30A 4T/c KATV PROUD FMLY"ABC CA~ii C fiLSS KASM PAG'PROGRAM IDs Acslca!s PA 18 SCOP Crr«XX X 3fr KNBC TODAY&A W/040 sier 7.00A 4T/c KABC EYEWITNESS SUI PAXO PROS/IAfr KGBB 0 MATH:BT/BNB MR
l@BXSVXfiYiB FA 9 frOFB CB«41 P 78 SBB 9.00A 4T/C xrl Toaca 60
icicaà BA 7 11POA CB 58 A 38 0/MAT THS 5KN/I/lrfND M SYSil 8.00A 42/C WDCQ ARTHIH"/DRGNT viaP31 xe ACTxe:1 Vi7/GT SUNTODAY-NBO
For c/IPIOrlafferr Of eprrrbofa, ace feat! POBoi REPORTABLE FOUR TVEEK AVERAGE PROGRAM AUOIENCE 8ECTION STATIOHB TIME PERIQ9 AUOIENCES IDEVOTIOHAL PROBRAfk DilLYI I!ARKET T,Z. Otl Rift ITHIB FROBRAXI 73. FRECEDItlS HALF'HOOR]: 'TOTAL DAY STATION TOTALS STAT)Oil QH, KET, DBA SHARE CORRESPONDING TIME DO)A PERSONS SHARE % (ÃO PERIOD-3 IflGHEST START I'O. OF VS
OAY TIL!E 7/CS, 3'78 'ORE VHO7/8 COIRPETING STATIONS SS LlEII TEEN CIRLO. FRS USE 4 STATION PROGRAM LEAD.IH PROBRAR'I )mXSOH CB 6 CO. 13 8 XXX OILf 7 OOA 4T/C NOD)ffff FFII sr.
~~FORD 7844 FfiS PA 6 RORY+ CB, 12 3. 138 Sf)ff 7.00A 4T/C KGBI+ SUNTODAYINBC PAID PROOMI)f KSYS ANGLN BIA4BLS KIVL O'FDTR BtPD'PRG fbfffPSX8 CB S NPI)X CS. 40 I 'I OAT 6.00l? 4T/C )00/0 3 2 1 1 :)WMG ACTN56@llHL-FR PRAXSS MFD 'B4 53 53 35 WREG NIVS380)WSCHB SW lb.OOA 4T/C BD XOllffS VPA W)AC STRNR-3/SOTS S WLAIT '8 LBTR m)M'W. 2 2 V,% f22 4Y) 38 38 'JRCSSAV'ARODIA IIX)IIIX FTi fiADDR FA 14
WEPT'R. 45 I SAT ').00P 4T/C 3 2'3 Utft FRAXSR Iiorio 47. SNFLD~BD- CHAiNW/HI.LWD. Soff XX OOA 4T/C TIISWM'HS:WK RD XOWS SUN MORN:MOVIE
KSW CfC 7 F 8% SW S. OOA 4T/C 2 1 10 V/FOR SUNDAYMRN.CBS Xtf TODCS 60 WLTV AViIBGSZW-UNI Y)TVJ TDS S,FICHRB IA
)IXIiMAmfRB CS 10
HXC)f CR. 12 A 113
TODAY-'NBC SW 'f OOA 4T/C'AID SUH PROSRA)I 2 WLD IAIANITBS.RAf RCK'8 RCLL HXCISAPIiS ST, Pfi CR 10 f4TP+ ISf. 5 A Xlk 80:I 7.30A 4T/C 2 1 1 SSOPPRS SEOiCS 25 12 'f4
NODXSZ-FRSWe) CB 7 IRIRO CR. 5 C 36% SIRI 7.00A OT/C 1 5 PAID PFiOSPA)f 7 5 5
KDIIXSLfDRY (0FIi) CS 7 IIARA CR. 0 C 168 "SW V.OOA 4T/C 4 2 1 WSFA SUNTODAY44BC DRRRAII"STODY 145 87 53 53 WCOV FRM TH /VRS VitAIG& ADV»VRT/SGVICH IIASRVXWiB CB 9 fi"ZTV CB. 1V F 6% SW 9, OOA 4T/C Fox xr68 swDAY
IIR)f OPJiRAIIS CR 11 amfo Cf),20 I sw 7.00F 3Tlc VrWL VARIOUS XiRROY TSORPSO)f V/GNO VARIOUS )VVUE SMPBNSIVRS )IRFIR FRT ))P )SI FJl XO )fnf)T c8.43 F 4% OW V.OOA 45'/C 'VJAVY CfiOSRR IOIIiR WTKR ')VVEC O)ffiMIODA CXTY CB 11 FBSX Cff. 52 X SW 5,00P 3TlC KFGR 8NWCHNiVIBC NW 1cTLIPIio-AIAXS)20 KIVTV VARY)US KGCG VARK)US
KV/TV N)iVS 84M'GRS KFOR 8 NWCHNOILLVi8 KGCG EWTN)VBWHL.FR Sfnf XO.OOA 4T/C 2 2 2 1 KFGR I/EET PRESS-SUN RD Yo)RIO 34 34 34 18 RV/TV FC NTN-ASST)/iNS FZfA+ NATURE IJ!RKSF /I là f 24 f7 17
For oxplanaOon of Symbol~ seo load page. REFORTADIE FOUR V/EEK AVERAGE AUOIENCE SECTtON STA'fl0)IS TIME PER)OD AUOIEE4CES (BEVOTIONAL PROGRALI O&Nf.Y) 11ARKET TX 0)l IN IT)fi8 PROGRIL»f PS. PRECEIX)f8 BALF ROIffrf TOTALDAV DEIN)ATED MARKET AREA STAT)alf CH. NET, OIXA SHARE Df&)A 'o PERSONS SHARE 'k faao) IE V/TOOVH START llO, OF PERSONS (OOOj OAY TISIE TICS. TNAL T&XILIEff VfIWV)f H&fLO TOTAL AOCLTB ONE 4 18t 14( 13«r 2-11 STATIQ)4 PRDGRAhl LEAD IN.PROGRA»l 1 2 8 4 8 8 18 14 '15 48'7 18 18 02orrrA CB 7 VPw'ROGRAM rarer crr. 3 c x«8 srpJ T,oah 4T/c j000) NOWT SU&»)TODAY.NHG pkxD pRoapAfr KETV WLD MA&bf/PT SHP KPTM 'FRST F)NCK VN poca cG"BAR rrTV cB 5 r'SXI&+ CB, 3 A 68 Oral v,aaA «T/C Ie)O] BREAKFASTSHW PAID PROO1$31 SUNTODAV-NBC PAID PROGRAM PBXLADBLPBXA BA 14 rrFrrB cB. 69 x SOB 7 ~ iadP «T/C 000) 2 SOMINUTESCBS RIrla Is coirxrro $ VARfQUS DATE-.SU.TP«NBG rrprrl& cB. 17 x 5% smr 8.00A «T/c 0%4 SUNTODAY-NBC 5 14 xrr Toocrr Sa $ SUNDAY"IVE 3 3 EYBVTNWS WKNB 3 6
pBoBrxxfpBscoT) rfT 11 Bfrxlr CB. 1$ A 58 Oc.'r 6.80A 4T/c
PXTTS1&ORCH RA 10 rrpcB cB. 40 x srar 9,0op 3T/c KDKA. 4 CBB.SUN MQV ODAT-DXOCOPBRT WPXI LAWSORDO)&i(BC V/TAE 0 ALilAS.ABG NFGrr ca,53 p srp3 7,0OA «T/c 'AYTAE ACT«NB SUN 5 20 PAID PROGBM« Wpxf 0 CH11 NV&S SU"A'lA 3 10 KDKA DR XPIF»&BLS CL 3
PORTr&!Bra& OR PA 8 RPDX CB«49 X 48 SOB 7..00A 4T/C KQIN pAxD DRoopA)r 3 KBW
RAr&BXG»»DORIFX) BA '1O KATU'TVD rQAB cB. 50 F SlPJ',00A 4T/C 1 3 1 EYEÃTAISSUTA APPAR OF GOD 3 WiNGN NBS17SUNRIS-7 WRAL MLDTHRISPRT W ROB-rrL&rr cx-AN cB 7 XX'H. 3 C 158 StPi 7.OOA «T/C 2 13 1920 2 13 fMO" 8 3 2 1 %8&r& ST OPXIM& 11 7 V& VII 68 78 24 24
rtxormr&&rrl - pTDODQ .DA 'r hfiBT CH. 12 lf 148& sfRr 7. OOA 4T/c 2 6 'l4 6 'fl 15 9 1 2 6 JCK VN fii@DLV RxcBi:rara crRiTR 2 9 19 17 25 'f26 77 TB 14 49 22 CHLKZOI-kl RNLD CEDARSTCHRGH BOArrOF3r-L;~&DPG TA S rrsBT cB.X» A xoa so3 B. 0ari «T/c V/DBB NWS 7 SUN h!ORN OLD TIE GOSPX, WSLS 8UNTODAY«NSC V/PXR INTQUCH60 ROCBpop3) CB 5 rrOBP cBi 39 P 78 'Oar 7,00A 4T/C WREX&a DDSCVRICHRSM Dxsfr p31&csss fry BRFR MDWSTT)FSN (K VirBR R)FHSCUB:SMTH K4 BAcracrTo-sTB-f."o pA 9 BTxr& clr.40 P 78& Glar 6.00A 4T/C 15 KCRA SUNTODAY-NBC 3 15 KXTV 8 ALKSL'M /6:BYPATH 1 KQOA APOSTUC4HRCH 4
2 'OMj 1. 'VifBOC SUNDAY MRNCBS WCPB 8 PBMIKWRM BNCH EBOC 6 LGTR /ROSS W SArr AF&iO&7XO CB 12 RBCB CB.B» I SAT 6.OO1 «T/C KENS EWTORVSAVHL-FR 9 18 'PRAISB LORD KSAT 0 EIOTTQNIGHTBO 4 8 V/QAI ACCSSHLYWDWK 4 8 sorr DIBGo PA 12 KGTÃ CH.10 A 9&r ser T,OOA «T/c KNBD KNSDWKNDNWB r&ARRY crOBBS KUSI KUBIWKNDNEWB KPBS .ZBMF-PT&DRSN T
Far oxpfolroEolr of syrobofs, OCO fool) Pago. ONE 1 REPORTABLE NUB V/EEK AVERAGE CCIFIPETtNG STATCIS TIME PERIOD AUDIENCES FOUR tt/EEK AVERAGE IJARKET ON AIR TL ITNESS PROORAht vt. PRECEf@IO HALF HOUR) TIIIIE PERIOD AUDIENCES TOTAL DAY D RIARKET AREA STATlO:I. CR, Nf, OBA SRARiE CORRESPONDING TIME OP 'io ONA ".o io PERSONS (OOO) 5 V/tOOVII START tiO. OF PERIOD HIGHEST 'PCS. COMPETING STATIONS OAY TfLE 'i'OPER NEtf 'O'9!EEN fEENS CHILD LINE 4 STATION PRMRAFA LEAIA!N PROGRADI shtt pphtt ahtt BJ SA 15 RSRK Clt. 44 X 39 SOR 8 ON, 41/C KRON 6 KRQN4NWSSU-AN 3 11 PAXO X'ROGRAtt KNTV tiaETPRESS-SUN 2 8 KGQ TNI81VEEK«ABC 2 7. BAVAtcrAR RA CS,XS V 7tt SIRr 7, ooh 4T/c HR QF PQ'PER 6 OTme-pha Rxctt DR'RPLRIBLS CL 6 LNSR HIV/RON KC ttXOC CR. 11 C 199
61st S.OOA I 4 6 2 WSAV CtiVS«CM4T/C'tXiVSS 1 6 6 3 WJCL WGSA
SBATTLS-TACOMA Ph 19 lWiS CR 33 X 39
star X.ooh 4T/C KING KINGS V/KNOT
APOSTliXC"CRRCS KGklQ KQI/iO49FW84U TA KING DG'XPL'RNLS CL SXOOX CXTX's 6'tchc CR. 9 A 399 star 9, OOA. 4T/0 f999] SND I/Rt4rC NTN 3 1S OAT OXSCOVBRX CLFFRD/A"I GLN OUTER LILI}TS
"C KELQt SND NRNFi KffN KDLTF PD PRGEVAG PjID KTTWS Hfs DS /QR-LTH RT, xiattxs cs RPXR CR, 11 I 8% StRt 7.99A. 4T/C KSDK SINTQDAY«ItBC TtRfs AttT XttFJfd KTVI RQBTSCHULLER KMGV RGRTS-CAVLDTH TAX@MRS"XM'SVti RA 8 ttTxri co. 97 h. Sort S.OOA ST/C SUNDA'YSIARNiQBS PAXO PROORlN YPA PAID PROGRAM FQfttt&VS SUNDAY &tftt 9 3{5. 4T/C BUNGAY NRNOBS SOR.J.ttstZtOX'r VVII FQKNWSSUNDAY PAID'PRQGRAt3 Nl."r Xa.aah XT/c (OÃQ SUNDAYAIRN488 OR. J. RstaiSOX PAID PRQGRALI PAID PROGRAtt 1~i AVTL Thttoh ST PfSAR} RA 14 tlctif Crt» 33 X SCR 7.99R 4T/C 900) WTSP 69 I'IINUTESCBS JattXCtt VOXCS $ VFi"'LA 9 QATEJttf 7PAISC VRS lKNG-HL WIYf'IVT ttPTS Ctt, SS A SR 62l S.OOA 4T/C GD-BAY ShfitSU TODAY-NBC PAXtt PROSRAN 3 WFLA SUN WTOG 8 LGTR /ROSS Vf
TsttRtt Rhtriit EA 3 fix%a ctt, 1 xt 13% DAY43ISCGVERY smr s.ooh 4T/c 2 16 11 8 4 2 19 %999) 4 Xtl TattCK 60 3 18 29 14 13 DICSBDS RA 6 tiXtFJ Ctt, 36 V Stt stRr S.ooh 4T/c 1 2 18ACTNY/@UN copstihtto RQBTSCHULLER Rstr DRAGON'fLS.,'qV TSAVRS CVX-Colic RA. 6 tritTY* cs, 9 c 37% BN+ AMRCN TiBRCL ht Stm 7.998 4T/C 1 13 13 'INIDj VIP PRG PAXO PBtORAtt 1 AVFQK+ GTDRSJJ/PD WGTU+ Vi'LL ST/lk SRC TRI-CTISB,Ttr-VA Rli. 6 Ctt,19 h A WCYB BUN TODAY-NBC SSN 8.398 4T/C VhTttTS VfJHL TVSUNDAYSCHL tt~ WAPK fhtf !MAL RESCUE Tocsa'.l ls vsTAI Pi 9 Ctt, 18 I 2% StOt 7.99h 4T/C PAXO PROGPhtt
Far oxpfottatlatt of syrttbat~ ~e feat! Popo, REPORTABLE FOUR WEEK AVERAGE STATIOHS TlNE PERtOO.AUD}ERf'ES HARHET TS Oll Q} PHIS PROQRA}il ID, PHECEDIITB HAlf HODR} TOTALRAY ,YARKET AREA STATICS CH. HET, Dli}A 8RAPE STATION TOTALS DElA CDRRNPQHI}88 T}fifE START HO,O." PERSONS SHARE '8 faabj PER}GETS HIGHEST OAY TIHE T/N, I TOTAL Yi'OLDE}} Y/Ill}} COIYPETI}8G'TATIQHS HHLO HIER LIRE 4 18+ 4( 1}k .1549 2554 tar. 3048 1NX'841 LEAD.I}HPROSRArl 15. Ia 17 10 19 20 21 DXXCA SA 5 Baxter ct},33 p 44 s}R} 8.00A 42/c RAXD tiRMDJII4
wLm, Dc Ixtaal RA xb WJXiA CB. 7 A 50 Dtbr a.aaA 4v/c 1 3 4 3 1}XXiD AiECA SX}t I 4 7 4 9}ADSAD-RBX1IBMR CB 5 WAO}r+ CB. 5 A Xati SD}r 2. 00A 48/C GOOD FSRT Y/6FY/: SUHTODAYW}BQ 8 18 YYSAYY'DPRGI}/TDS-RM «K NZSX Dtitit DCB"PR Zh 8 Y/HFIA}+ AOU}.T EDUOATN IiV&ir CB,39 sa:I 8. 00A 4T/c RES}i ADYN}xaF$ 83 wxcBRA"BxcB rrM cs 2 BARD~ CB. Xa A xaam SIX} "/, 00A 48/C XN XODCB 60 KS}4&V+ SU}4TQDAY4SO
}6YOH+ FF}ST PAYTT 8 YY
Rxxarss DAR*scR RA 2 HSAS+ PAID'PFIIMFIAM NBRD CB. 30 rr XA'N 2. 0 03, 5'X/C CBRXS NIXXBRI}S 40 RXQ}XRSYDH RA 8 CB* 3 A XN BW 5,308 4V/C 'l'7 DAX-DXSCOVSRV YYEOT PFISSiOIRS M YHLM SUHOANilRH488 Y/UIAf xorclasxa521 BA 5 Wf}K~L}«tU ttti}N Ct}.33 8 268 zmr 2.aaA 45'/C 52YTY:8 DXlDiXIXCS DAACR OFINRSTWiAASLV }VKBH 0 HHH-'D/PLrPRO YilHEI3'SF}T+HS }OHFIOHS
,I For axpl aatiaa of syrabal", Sea }ear} page. I
O 0) FA 0 0 g Q I Q
C I '4 I I I I Before the COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES Washington, D.C.
) ) Docket No. 2012-6 CRB CD 2004-2009 ) {Phase II) Distribution of the 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007,) 2008 and 2009 Cable Royalty Funds )
) In the Matter of ) Docket No. 2012-7 CRB SD 1999-2009 ) (Phase II) Distribution of the 1999-2009 Satellite ) Royalty Funds )
DECLARATION OF PETER T. VAY
I, Peter T. Vay, hereby state and declare as follows:
1. I am the manager ofresearch services in the Washington, D.C., office ofthe law firm
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, Prior to joining Pillsbury's legacy firm Shaw Pittman
Potts k Trowbridge in 2001, I worked as an Interlibrary Loan Specialist for the law firm
Williams 4 Connolly from 1996 to 2001. I also hold a graduate degree in Library Science f'rom
The Catholic University ofAmerica in Washington, D,C. In twenty years ofworking as a librarian, I have developed an expertise in locating obscure and hard-to-find print materials from various lending institutions, including public, private, government, and. other specialized libraries and repositories. 2, Between May and July 2016, I conducted research to locate copies of the Nielsen Station
Index Report on Devotional Programs ("Nielsen Devotional Programs Report") for the years of
1999-2003. As detailed below, my search was unavailing.
3. I contacted Nielsen directly. Their media team confirmed that Nielsen does not maintain
copies ofthe Devotional Programs Report for the years in question.
4. Next, I searched the database of the Online Computer Library Center, Inc. (OCLC), for
issues of the Nielsen Devotional Programs Report. OCLC's database contains the holdings of
thousands of public, government, university, law, and specialized libraries in the United States
and abroad, Regent University was the only library with a match. And the record lacked
information on the years covered by the university's collection. A Regent University librarian
confirmed that its collection only contains the 1996 issue of the Nielsen Devotional Programs
Report.
5. I also searched OCLC's database more broadly for issues ofthe Nielsen Report on
Syndicated Program Audiences. The search returned a list of eighteen libraries with such
holdings. I checked the online catalogs for aH eighteen libraries. Seventeen libraries did not list
the years of 1999-2003, even though some Hsted either earlier or later years; one—the New York
Public Library—was silent on the years covered but stated that volume two ofthe Nielsen Report
on Syndicated Program Audiences covers devotional programs. I contacted the New York
Public Library to confirm whether they maintain any physical copies ofthe Nielsen Report on
SyncHcated Program Audiences. A librarian checked the shelves but found no holdings for the
volume on devotional programs, The librarian then checked and confirmed that the volume on
devotional programs required an additional subscription, which is not part of the New York
Public Library's collection. 6. Last, I posted a request to the American Association of Law Libraries'istserv to ascertain whether any law libraries in the United States have acquired copies ofthe 1999-2003
Nielsen Devotional Programs Report. To date, I have not received a single response from any of the libraries on the listserv, indicating that none ofthe law libraries maintain the report for these years in their collections.
I hereby declare under penalty ofperjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
July 21, 2016 Peter T. Vay I
I I I I I I Before the COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES Washington, DC
In the Matter of ) ) Distribution of the 2004, 2005, ) Docket No. 2012-6 CRB CD 2004-2009 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 ) (Phase Il) Cable Royalty Funds ) )
In the Matter of ) ) Distribution of the 1999-2009 ) Docket No. 2012-7 CRB SD 1999-2009 Satellite Royalty Funds ) (Phase Il) )
DESIGNATED TESTIMONY Volume 2
Before the COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES Washington, D.C.
ZN THE NATTER OF: : Docket No. 2012-6 CRB CD 2004- Distribution of the 2004- 2009 (PHASE II) 2009 Cable Royalty Funds
IN THE MATTER OF : Docket No. Distribution of the 1999- : 2012-7 CRB SD 1999- 2009 Satellite Royalty : 2009 (PHASE II) Funds On Behalf of the Motion Picture
VOLUME ZZ Association of America: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 GREGORY O. OLANIRAN, ESQ. Room LM-408 Madison Building HOLMES PLOVNICK, ESQ. Library of Congress LUCY 101 Independence Avenue, S.W. WHITNEY S. NONNETTE, ESQ. Washington, D.C. The above-entitled matter came on for of: Mitchell Silberberg 5 Knupp LLP hearing, pursuant to notice, at 9:10 a.m. 1818 N Street, N.W. BEFORE: 8th Floor THE HONORABLE SUZANNE M. Copyright Royalty Judge Washington D.C. 20036 THE HONORABLE JESSE FEDERg Copyright Royalty Judge (202) 355-7900
THE HONORABLE DAVID R. STRZCKLERg (202) 355-7899 fax Copyzight Royalty Judge
APPEARANCES: TABLE OF CONTENTS On Behalf of the Worldwide Subsidy Group, d/b/a Independent Producers Group: WITBESS: DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS
BRIAN BOYDSTON, ESQ. John Sanders B'y Mr. Bcydstan of: Pick & Boydston, LLP 10786 Le Conte Avenue Tohy Berlin By Nr. Naciean 60 137 Los Angeles, CA 90024 624-1996 By Mr. Boydston 90 (213) Raul Galaz (213) 624-9074 fax By Nr. Bcydstan 147 By Mr. NacLean 257 On Behalf of the Settling Devotional By Mr. Olaniran 277 Claimants: MATTHEW J. MACLEANs ESQ. Vair Dire on pages 216 and 217 CLIFFORD M. HARRZNGTONg ESQ. VICTORIA N. LYNCH'SQ. Exhibits: Nark Reed of: Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP SDC 1200 17th Street, N.W. 633 Berlin Written Testimony Washington, D.C. 20036 634 Berlin Written Testimony (202) 663-8000 642 Galaz Written Testimony (202) 663-8007 fax IPS 124 Mr. Galas's report on Claimants, Claims and Years of Representation 147 149 ARNOLD P ~ LUTSKSRc ES{}- BENJAMIN S. STERNBERGs ESQ. 125 Report on Programs Claimed 150 151 of: Lutzker & Lutzker, LLP 1233 N.W. 20th Street, 141 Report on Stations Distantly 703 Suite Retransmitted by Direc1V fram Washington, D.C. 20036 1999 to 2009 152 154 (202) 408-7600 (202) 408-7677 fax 142 Attrition Rates — DirecTV Data 158 160
143 Royalties and Growth 164 168
144 Report of Receipts — Distant Royalties, Nay 2014 165 166
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
57 59
THE WITNESS: No, I have not. 1 started off at 15 cents pez subscriber and now
JUDGE FEDER: Do you have any 2 it's been going up to 50 cents and 75 cents and particular knowledge of how a cable operator 3 now over a dollar.
4 values a local station, when determining how much So again, it's a big thing, and it'
5 to pay for retransmission consent? 5 been on the upward trend. Most of the agreements
6 THE 'l4ITNESS: Yes. 6 have escalations built into them, which again is
7 JUDGE FEDER: And how is that done? 7 largely a function, in my opinion, of the iron
THE WITNESS: I would answer that in 8 fist of the marketplace, that the specific
9 two phases. Number one, I think it was 9 programming, the most important programming that 10 manifested in the example that I gave you 10 these television stations offer is indispensable 11 initially about Nexstar, in that looking at 11 for the pay television operators and the 12 certain portions of a broadcast day that drove 12 satellite cable sectors. 13 viewers and subscribers, and what that means for 13 JUDGE FEDER: Okay. So if I'm 14 the system. 14 understanding, generally it's not — these things 15 I'd also mention that this 15 aren't negotiated one cable operator to one 16 zetransmission that's getting paid for the over- 16 station. It's much broader than that? 17 the-air broadcasting and then particularly for 17 THE WITNESS: That's the way it has 18 the most desirable programs, it would become a 18 evolved over the years. It was probably much 19 huge thing in the television industry. A lot of 19 less so over the time period that we'e looking 20 the larger multi-station operators entered into 20 at here. 21 sort of blanket agreements with cable systems, so 21 I mean I think it's really taken off 22 that for example, I'l just another company as an 22 kind of in the last four to five years. So like
58 60
1 example. 1 a lot of industries or segments of an industry There's another similar company called 2 that's in its infancy, I think there was a lot 3 Sinclair Broadcasting that owns television 3 more negotiating at the local basis the
4 stations. If they buy one in a certain market, 4 retransmission phenomenon was going through its
5 it might be — and say Comcast is the provider 5 infancy.
6 thoro, the retransmission will be based on some JUDGE FEDER: Okay. Thank you very
7 kind of a global agreement that they have arrived 7 much.
8 at, to some extent to make it easier so that they 8 JUDGE BARNETT: Any follow-up?
9 don't have to, every single time they buy a 9 VOICES: Nothing. 10 station, enter into a whole new negotiation. 10 JUDGE BARNETT: Okay. Thank you Mr. But those rates have been set, you 11 Sanders. You may step down. 12 know, based on the tug and pull of the 12 MR. MACLEAN: Your Honor, the SDC 13 marketplace, based upon the programming that 13 calls Toby Berlin.
14 those companies provide across markets. The 14 Whereupon, 15 recurrent theme, and you'l see if you look at 15 TOBY BERLIN 16 the literature that any of these companies 16 was called as a witness and, after having been 17 produce is localism, that they try and produce 17 first duly sworn, was examined and testified as 18 programming that's very difficult to duplicate, 18 follows: 19 and expensive to duplicate, and as a consequence 19 JUDGE BARNETT: Please be seated.ross.corn 20 has a higher level of desirability. 20 DIRECT EXAMINATION
21 So the retransmission revenues have 21 BY MR. MACLEAN:
22 been going up, you know, at a very high — it 22 Q Good morning, Ms. Berlin.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrg Volume 2
61 63
A Hi. 1 THE WITNESS: Sorry. Via the
2 Q As you know, I'm Matthew Maclean. I 2 Internet. It's kind of acronyms that we use to
3 represent the Settling Devotional Claimants. 3 confuse everybody.
4 Could you please introduce to your judges, JUDGE FEDER: Confused me. starting with the spelling of youz first and last 5 (Laughter.)
6 name? BY MR. MACLEAN:
7 A Sure. It's Toby, T-O-B-Y, Berlin, B- 7 Q So now your experience with respect to
8 E-R-L-I-N. I have an undergraduate degree in 8 programming was primarily developed at DirecTV,
9 Business from the University of Miami, and a law 9 is that right? 10 degree from Southwestern University of Law in Los 10 A That's correct.
11 Angeles. 11 Q A satellite system operator?
12 I had a stint in a large casino and a 12 A Correct. We were a satellite 13 stint in a theatrical agency, and now I'm -- from 13 distributor of live networks.
14 October of '98 through July of 2013, I was at Q Are you also familiar with the 15 DirocTV, where I was a vice president of 15 programming decisions made by cable system
16 Programming Acquisitions. My responsibilities 16 operators?
17 were general entertainment, Spanish, 17 A I am.
18 International, Adult, Audio Music, Airborne, 18 Q And in what way have you become 19 which were airlines. 19 familiar with cable system operators essentially?
20 When DirecTV got the right to do local 20 A Well, it's a very similar business.
21 to local, I handled all of those deals, which was 21 We all try to acquire subscribers and keep 22 about 143 DMAs. I also started their pay-per- 22 subscribers.
62 64
1 view business, and finally I was the founder and In addition, I'e always made it a
2 president of the Women's Group called the Women' 2 point to be really good friends with my folks Leadership Exchange. In all of those areas, I 3 that do the same thing that I do. So I'm well
4 did the content acquisition deals. 4 aware of the issues that we all face, and through
Since July 2013, I have my own 5 my stint at DirecTV I was — many head hunters
6 consulting business called School of Toby, and I 6 called me to do the same thing for a cable do pretty much the same thing. Content 7 operator. 8 acquisition deals for various distributors. I So it really is the same identical 9 also advise hedge funds that are interested in business. Getting and keeping subscribers, and 10 investing in the cable, satellite, telco over the 10 the programming deals do not differ at all.
11 top arena. Q Would you regard cable system In addition, I'm the content 12 operators as among the competitors of DirecTV? 13 acquisition and strategy consultant for Sony 13 A Yes, exactly.
14 Playstation on their Vue product, which is an app 14 Q Are you background and your 15 on the Playstation, which is about 120 live 15 qualifications more fully set forth in the 16 networks through the Playstation Vue, all 16 written testimony we submitted?
17 delivered over the top. 17 A Yes.
18 Q Have you ever testified as an expert 18 MR. MACLEAN: Your Honor, I offer Ms. 19 witness before? 19 Berlin as an expert in satellite and cable 20 A No. 20 television programming.
21 JUDGE FEDER: Excuse me. Just one 21 MR. BOYDSTON: Your Honor, may I voiz 22 question. What is over the top? 22 dize?
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
65 67
1 JUDGE BARNETT: You may. JUDGE STRICKLER: So you'e moved or
VOIR DIRE 2 applied to strike her testimony, but you'e
3 BY MR. BOYDSTON: 3 saying—
Q Thank you, Your Honor. Good morning, MR. BOYDSTON: I beg your pardon, Your
Ms. Berlin. My name is Brian Boydston, 5 Honor. We did not. We did not in a written—
6 representing the Independent Producers Group. 6 that was not one of our written objections filed
7 When did you first speak with a representative 7 ahead of time, to answer your question.
8 from the SDC? JUDGE STRICKLER: So we won't see it
MR. MACLEAN: Objection, Your Honor. 9 in any papers that we have now. This is speaking
10 That has nothing to do with— 10 objection that you may have—
JUDGE BARNETT: That has nothing to do MR. BOYDSTON: That's correct.
12 with her expertise. 12 JUDGE STRICKLER: —depending upon
13 MR. BOYDSTON: May I make an offer of 13 what you develop in cross-examination?
14 proof, Your Honor, or an explanation? MR. BOYDSTON: Exactly.
15 JUDGE BARNETT: Yes. 15 (Pause.)
MR. BOYDSTON: Ms. Berlin spoke with JUDGE BARNETT: We'e going to consult
17 IPG before — we believe before she spoke with 17 for a couple of minutes.
18 the SDC. IPG provided her attorney with various 18 (Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 19 proprietary and confidential information, and 19 went off'he record at 10:15 a.m. and resumed at 20 then several weeks later, it was made known to us 20 10:27 a.m.) 21 that she was rotained by the SDC, and we wish to JUDGE BARNETT: Please be seated. 22 find out the details of that, but we don't know. 22 Counsel, we'e going to treat this speaking
But we want to know whether or not 1 motion the same as we are treating all of the
2 certain information was passed on without our 2 other motions that are pending. So Mr. Boydston,
3 knowledge. 3 to the extent you want to develop anything on
MR. MACLEAN: Your Honor, whether or 4 cross-examination you may.
5 not, that would be permissible for cross- Just so you'e aware of our thinking,
6 examination. It, certainly is not permissible for 6 what. I think is is that responses to all of the
7 voir dire. It has nothing to do with her 7 pending written motions that would otherwise have
8 qualifications as an expert. 8 been due today or tomorrow should be filed with
9 MR. BOYDSTON: I couched this voir 9 your proposed findings and conclusions, or 10 dire, Your Honor, only because I believe that if 10 simultaneously with your proposed findings and 11 the facts came out a certain way, there could be 11 conclusions, and replies to those motions should 12 grounds to strike her testimony. That's why I 12 be filed simultaneously with your reply findings 13 couched this voir dire. 13 and conclusions, and then we'l have the whole
JUDGE BARNETT: Okay, all right. It' 14 record to work with. 15 not voir dire, so have a seat Mr. Boydston. 15 MR. MACLEAN: Your Honor, with respect
16 JUDGE STRICKLER: I have a question. 16 to the subject, IPG has submitted no objection to 17 Is this part of the written objections that 17 the testimony of Ms. Berlin. Objections were due 18 you'e made, that we need to rule upon? 18 last Tuesday. They didn't file any written
MR. BOYDSTON: To a degree, except we 19 objection or motion, with respect to Ms. Berlin's
20 are — yes, but we are operating in a vacuum of 20 testimony. 21 information, which I seek to close up with a few 21 JUDGE BARNETT: That is true. I 22 questions when I have the opportunity. 22 understand that. So that will be part of your
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
69 71
1 response no doubt. 1 JUDGE STRICKLER: Did you keep it oz
MR. MACLEAN: Yes, Your Honor. 2 did you send it back to him?
3 DIRECT EXAMINATION (resumed) 3 THE WITNESS: I still have it.
BY MR. MACLEAN: JUDGE STRICKLER: How did he send
5 Q With respect to your written 5 that?
6 testimony, have you spoken with Mr. Galaz? THE WITNESS: He sent it via email. A I did. 7 Again, I didn't ask for any documents and I — it
8 Q How many tzmes? 8 went into sort of the email chain. I don't think
A Once. 9 I even looked at it or read it, because I again
10 Q Can you explain the circumstances? 10 didn't ask for it. We weren't engaged. My A He was introduced to me by a former 11 friend was copied on it, so I can't see how they 12 DirecTV attorney, who hadn't — I don't — I just 12 would say it's confidential. 13 have a friendly relationship. I don't work with 13 He didn't ask me to treat it as
14 him. He's not under my employ, and we were 14 confidential. I don't have any privilege with
15 introduced via email and he called me once. 15 him at all.
16 Q By the time -- by that time when he JUDGE STRICKLER: Your friend is 1'7 called you, had you begun speaking with Mr. 17 referred to — the attorney that you mentioned 18 Lutzker on behalf of the SDC? 18 before in your testimony? 19 Yes, I had already spoken to Mz, THE WITNESS: Yes, exactly, 20 Lutzkor. JUDGE STRICKIER: Do you have a copy
21 Q Had you been engaged as an expert foz 21 of that email in court, the hearing zoom today?
22 the SDC at that, time? 22 I don't want it now. I just want to know if you
70
1 A We were discussing, but I hadn't been 1 have it.
2 engaged. 2 THE WITNESS: I have my laptop with
3 Q Were you ever engaged as an expert 3 me, and it's in there.
4 witness or expert consultant for IPG? JUDGE STRICKLER: So is it available
5 A No, I was not engaged by them. 5 foz us to look at should we choose to?
6 Q After that initial phone call with Mr. 6 THE WITNESS: Uh-huh, right.
7 Galaz, did you ever speak with Mr. Galaz again? 7 BY MR. MACLEAN:
8 A I did not. 8 Q Subsequent to that conversation with
Q Did you agree on that phone call to Mr. Galaz, were you engaged by the SDC? 10 serve as an expert? 10 A Yes, I was.
A No, I did not agree to do anything. Q How long after that conversation?
12 I didn't ask him to send me any documents. I 12 A Maybe a week to ten days.
13 mostly listened. Quite honestly, I didn' 13 Q Subsequent to your engagement by the 14 understand it or didn't think it was the same 14 SDC, were you again contacted by anybody on 15 case for quite some time, and then I — but there 15 behalf of IPG?
16 was no meeting of the minds in any aspect. 16 A I was.
17 JUDGE STRICKLER: You say you didn' 17 Q Can you explain the circumstances of
18 ask him to send you any documents? 18 that?
THE WITNESS: I did not. 19 A Dr. Robinson called me about a month
20 JUDGE STRICKLER: Thank you. Did he 20 later, and I had never met her, and she made it 21 in fact send you any documents? 21 sound like she was working for Mr. Lutzker's
22 THE WITNESS: He sent me one document. 22 firm, and so I immediately got off the phone and
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
73 75
1 contacted Mr. Lutzker and said is she on her 1 sorry, go ahead.
2 team, and I subsequently found out she wasn', 2 BY MR. MACLEAN:
and sent her a note to say that I wasn't engaged. 3 Q Turn to SDC 633.
JUDGE STRICKLER: Excuse me. (4hen A Yes.
you say she made it sound like she was with your 5 Q What is SDC 633?
6 team, working with Mr. Lutzker, what as far as 6 A It's my testimony.
you recall did she say to make you come to that 7 Q If you could turn to the last page.
8 conclusion? 8 A Uh-huh.
9 THE WITNESS: Well, it was about a 9 Q I'm sorry, the last page before 10 month later, from when I had spoken to Mr. Galaz, 10 Exhibit I, which is at the bottom. Is that your and she said I'm from the attorney's office, or 11 signature on the last page? 12 I'm from — on the case, you know, and I hadn' 12 A Yes, it is.
13 spoken to anyone in a month. So but it sounded 13 Q Is everything in this testimony true 14 like oh, you know, I'm ready to discuss your 14 and correct? 15 testimony with you, something along those lines. 15 A Yes, it is.
JUDGE STRICKLER: And she didn' 16 Q Do you have any changes to this 17 identify which attorney? 17 testimony?
18 THE WITNESS: No. 18 A No, I don'.
19 JUDGE STRICKLER: Thank you. 19 Q And Your Honor, I'm sorry. I don'
20 BY MR. MACLEAN: 20 think you'e ruled on my offer of Ms. Berlin as
21 Q And after speaking with Mr. Lutzker 21 an expert as an expert in satellite and cable 22 about that phone call, did you respond to Dr. 22 television programming.
74 76
1 Robinson? JUDGE BARNETT: You'e right. Any
2 A Yes, I did. 2 objection?
3 Q And what was your response? MR. OLANIRAN: No obj ection.
4 A That I had a conflict and couldn' MR. BOYDSTON: No objecti.on, Your
5 ,peak with her. 5 Honor.
MR. MACLEAN: Let's take a look at 6 JUDGE BARNETT: Okay. Ms. Berlin has
7 your written testimony. In the binder in front 7 been authorized to testify as an expert in—
8 of you, turn to SDC Exhibit 633. 8 MR. MACLEAN: Satellite and cable
(Whereupon, the above-referred to 9 television programming.
10 document was marked as SDC Exhibit No. 633 for 10 JUDGE BARNETT: Thank you. Satellite 11 identification.) 11 and cable television programming.
12 JUDGE STRICKLER: Before you do that, 12 MR. MACLEAN: Your Honor, I offer SDC 13 after the first conversation you had with Mr. 19 633 into evidence.
14 Galaz when you received the email, and before you 14 MR. BOYDSTON: Your Honor, no
15 hoard from Dr. Robinson, did you ever get back to 15 objections except for the ones we may have, 16 Mr. Galaz, I want to make sure I understand this, 16 depending upon the content, as we'e discussed. 17 and toll him "I'm sorry, I can't work with you 17 JUDGE BARNETT: Okay.
18 because I have a conflict. I'm working with the 18 MR. OLANIRAN: No objection. 19 SDC," or you just didn't get back to him at all? 19 JUDGE BARNETT: 633 is admitted.
20 THE WITNESS: I just did not get back 20 (Whereupon, the above-referred to
21 to him. 21 document was received into evidence as SDC
22 JUDGE STRICKLER: Thank you. I'm 22 Exhibit No. 633.J
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
77 79
MR. MACLEAN: Your Honor, I'l also 1 A That's correct.
2 note foz the record that SDC 634, and we 2 Q Okay. So how do you reconcile these
3 submitted her testimony in both the cable and 3 two, these two claims, one that ratings are an
4 satellite proceedings prior to the consolidation, 4 important single driver, and the other that 5 SDC 634 is identical to SDC 633, and we submitted 5 quirky, niche or subsets of the market is the same testimony in both so as not to burden 5 important? the judges of the Copyright Royalty Board. We'e 7 A Sure. So the way that I always looked
8 not going to offer 634, simply because it' 8 at it is that, sort of going back to the basics,
9 identical to 633. 9 my job was to get and keep subscribers by virtue 10 (Whereupon, the above-referred to 10 of content, and what we found early on at DirecTV
11 document was marked as SDC Exhibit No. 634 for 11 is that we reached sort of a maturation or 12 identification.) 12 saturation point with certain areas, like general
13 JUDGE BARNETT: Okay. Would you 13 entertainment, and then in order to grow the 14 actually withdraw? 14 business, we needed to look at niche markets,
15 MR. MACLEAN: We will withdraw SDC 15 There in fact we found very fertile 18 ground, Spanish, international, religious,
JUDGE BARNETT: Thank you. 1/ children and I headed up most of those
(Whereupon, SDC Exhibit No. 634 was 18 businesses. Then within those niches, I would 19 withdrawn.) 19 look at the Nielsen ratings, to decide which
20 BY MR. MACLEAN: 20 Statiana I would carry within the out of market
21 Q All right. Ms. Berlin, I don't want 21 DMAs.
22 to go through your entire written testimony Q Now why would you do that?
78 80
1 becau.,e we have an agreement amongst the parties 1 A I just felt that Nielsen, you know, 2 and with the judges not to rehash. These matters 2 I'm not one to reinvent the wheel. It's what we are already set forth. all use to look at the popularity of like — for But just to get to some of the 4 like programming stations, and I found that it 5 arguments that have been made by IPG, and I'l 5 gave me the best indicator of the popular 8 get right to the heart of it, in your written 8 stations.
7 testimony, you talk about Nielsen ratings being 7 Q To your knowledge and understanding,
8 important in the decision-making by cable and 8 is this also the kind of analysis that your
9 satellite operators to carry programming and 9 competitors would conduct? 10 stations; correct? 10 A Yes.
11 A Yes, I do. 11 Q Was there some -- why did you consider
12 Q You also talk about the importance and 12 Nielsen in particular a measure of viewership?
13 your participation in courting these markets, 13 A Well, there were a couple of reasons. 14 like devotional programming, Spanish language- 14 First of all, everything comes with a cost, and 15 speaking and other markets of that nature, or you 15 in a big corporation, there's a lot of eyeballs. 15 know, subparts of the marl.et; is that right? 18 I was a cost center. So there were eyeballs on
A Yes. 17 every decision that I made that cost the company
18 Q Now by definition, programming geared 18 money.
19 towards a niche market or a small subpart of the 19 So I needed to have a reason why I 20 market might have lower ratings than programming 20 would make these decisions, and Nielsen provided 21 that is more broadly marketed or more broadly 21 me with a really good backbone to make these 22 attractive, right? 22 decisions, and one that was recognized by the
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
81
1 different groups within DirecTV that had 1 as a particular niche, you say you relied on
2 oversight on the spending that I would make. 2 ratings predominantly to decide which ones would
3 Q Did you consider — did you consider 3 be most attractive; is that correct'?
4 Nielsen information when deciding whether to THE WITNESS: Yes.
5 retransmit a broadcast station from a distant 5 JUDGE STRICKLER: Did you ever do any
6 market". 6 sub-niche work so as to distinguish between
7 A Yes. 7 whether or not you wanted more evangelical
8 Q When you were considering Nielsen's 8 religious programming or more Catholic
9 information in that context, would you consider 9 programming? I noticed you mentioned something 10 the zatings information from the originating 10 from the University of Notre Dame in your 11 market, or from the market in which you were 11 testimony. Did you ever get that granular within 12 retransmitting? 12 religious programming, or you treated all 13 A I looked at both. I would look at— 13 religious programming as homogenous, foz purposes 14 I found that they were both good indicators. So 14 of making your business decision? 15 I would look at the market where the station 15 THE WITNESS: For the religious 16 resided, as well as the outside market. 16 programming, I treated it pretty homogenous, and
17 Q Now were there circumstances in which 17 I relied on the ratings information to tell me
18 you were looking at acquisition of a distant 18 what was most popular in those DMAs or out of 19 station, when viewership information in your 19 market DMAs. 20 particular market was not available, maybe 20 JUDGE STRICKLER: Thank you.
21 because the station wasn't — ? 21 BY MR. MACLEAN:
22 A There were. 22 Q Now the observation was also made I
82
1 Q What would look at in those 1 think first by you and maybe by Mr. Galaz, that 2 situations, where you don't have Nielsen 2 DirecTV would rarely drop a station, that it information for the particular market in which decided to retransmit. Is that an accurate
4 you are retransmitting? 4 observation?
5 A I would look at the DMA where the 5 A Yes, that is.
6 station resided. 6 Q And what's the reason for that?
7 Q And did you find as a general matter 7 A Every station, every channel, every
8 that the information that you would get from that 8 network has a constituency, a very vocal
9 DMA would be transportable to making business 9 constituency and we pretty much found out the
10 judgments in the DMA where you'e retransmitting? 10 hard way when, I think very early on, there was a
11 A Yes, exactly. 11 very unpopular Japanese network dropped and, you
12 Q Have you ever had a circumstance where 12 know, we got thousands of emails. 13 you were surprised unpleasantly about the — or 13 So from that moment on, and I think
14 plea,antly, relating to the transportability of 14 most of them were in calls to my home number, so 15 the information you were relying on from an 15 from that moment on we decided, and we found that
16 originating DMA to the DMA where you were 16 there was just every station has a constituency 17 retransmitting? 17 no matter, and they'e very vocal.
A No. I found the Nielsen very 18 Q How do you reconcile that
19 valuable, and I was never surprised in my 19 understanding with your claim that Nielsen 20 deci,ion-making. 20 ratings are important in a carriage decision?
21 JUDGE STRICKLER: I have a question 21 A Well, Nielsen ratings are the
22 for you. When you look at religious programming 22 measurement that I used, and then we would find
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
85 87
1 that the Nielsen ratings were in fact true and 1 Q And would those zetransmissions be
2 the station would have quite a vocal group, and 2 negotiated? 3 let me just explain what the constituency that Yes.
4 was — liked each station. Q Can you explain how that process would
If my job was to get and keep 5 work, the negotiation of local into local subscribers. I never wanted to lose a subscriber retransmission?
by dropping a station. We never wanted a 7 A Sure. So basically we would decide to
8 subscriber to call the call center, because a 8 go into a DMA. There were a lot of factors that
9 call center is basically to acquire sales, and 9 would determine why we would decide on a DMA, 10 every call costs money. 10 population, topography, whether or not we had a So you never wanted to be the 11 good installer or installers, and then we'd go
12 executive that, you know, flooded a call center 12 into a DMA.
13 basically. And then so the Nielsen ratings would 13 We would need to announce it by 14 tell me what's popular, and I enjoyed getting 14 sending a letter to every station, and then a
15 calls from my subscribers, letting me know that I 15 station could either elect must-carry or 16 made a right decision. 16 retransmission consent. Must carry meant I
17 Q Would the fact that you would 17 needed to carry them; retransmit I had to 18 generally not drop a station once you were 18 negotiate. 19 carrying it, did that bear on your decision to 19 Then once the negotiations started, 20 use the Nielsen ratings in the first place, in 20 the way that it works is per subscriber per 21 deciding whether to carry— 21 month. So if I say a dollar, it means I was 22 A Exactly. 22 being charged a dollar per month per subscriber,
86 88
1 Q Why is that? and they were highly negotiated deals.
2 A Because you never wanted to make the 2 Q And how would that price be
3 wrong decision, and I found that by using the 3 negotiated, that dollar versus some other number
4 Nielsen ratings, I made the right decisions. It 4 per subscrzber?
5 never steered me wrong. 5 A There were a number of factors, but it
6 Q Now there's been a suggestion made and 6 was mostly based on popularity of the station.
7 testimony from IPG that you, and I'l quote you, 7 Q How was popularity of the station 8 mistakenly suggest that distant retransmission by 8 typically measured?
9 SSOs could not occur prior to 1999. Do you have 9 A Nielsen ratings.
10 a response to that claim? 10 Q I just have -- just one more question.
11 A So there was prior to '99, and this 11 Thank you. No further questions.
12 was before I was at DirecTV, there was an 12 JUDGE BARNETT: Mr. Boydston.
13 instance where we were or they were able to 13 MR. BOYDSTON: Thank you.
14 tran .mit the Big Four, would transmit as a JUDGE BARNETT: You know, Mr.
15 distant signal. But in my vernacular and what 15 Boydston, because of order of presentation, you 16 I'm testifying to, is once DirecTV got the right 16 seem to always be interrupting your examination.
17 to launch local into local. So that's purely my 17 MR. BOYDSTON: All right.
18 area of expertise. 18 JUDGE BARNETT: Why don't we take our
Q Can you explain to the judges what 19 morning recess now, and then we won'0 have toross.corn 20 local into local means? 20 interrupt your questioning.
21 A Sure. It's basically the right to 21 MR. BOYDSTON: Thank you, Your Honor.
22 carry a local station in a DMA. 22 JUDGE BARNETT: So we'l be at recess
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrg Volume 2
89 91
1 for 15 minutes. 1 Q Of this year?
(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 2 A No, of 2014.
3 went off the record at 10:43 a.m. and resumed at 3 Q Oh, 2014? Okay, and did they contact
11:01 a.m.? 4 you or did you contact them?
5 JUDGE BARNETT: Please be seated. Mr. 5 A They contacted me.
6 Boydston, cross-examination. 6 Q And did they say how they had found
MR. BOYDSTON: Thank you, Your Honor. 7 your name or your information?
8 JUDGE BARNETT: Oh, okay. Judge Feder A Yes.
9 has a question while you'e organizing. 9 Q And what dzd they say?
10 MR. BOYDSTON: Okay, thank you. 10 A And actually let me go back. There
JUDGE FEDER: Ms. Berlin, you 11 was a consultant that Mr. Lutzker used, John 12 testified earlier that, in determining the price 12 Sanders, and he had contacted me first, the way
13 point for retransmission consent, you considered 13 I'm recalling, and he connected with my old boss, 14 Nielson ratings to be given only at the level of 14 Derek Chang, and Derek had recommended me for 15 the station, the overall ratings for the station, 15 this.
16 or did you ever look behind that at the ratings 16 Q And was Derek Chang a boss from 17 for individual shows? 17 DirecTV then?
18 THE WITNESS: Well, shows are what 18 A Yes.
19 sort of drives the ratings for the station. So I Q And so it was actually Mr. Sanders 20 would look to see if it was, you know, what was 20 that contacted you first, and then Mr. Lutzker? 21 driving that heavy duty rating, what day part, A Yes.
22 that kind of thing. But usually the station'8 Q And do you recall speaking with Raoul
90
rating told the story of the shows. 1 Galaz?
But I did look underneat:h, because A I do.
3 also I might find something that: I could exploit 3 Q And that was approximately when'? That
on pay-per-view or a different mechanism wit:hin 4 was March of 2014'?
5 DirecTV. So I was always looking for different 5 A Yes, early March.
6 ideas, to see for a breakout then. 6 Q At the time, I think you said you just
7 JUDGE FEDER: Thank you. 7 had one conversation with him; is that. correct'?
MR. BOYDSTON: Your Honor, may I A Yes.
9 consult just for a moment with the Clerk about 9 Q Did you exchange emails with him or 10 two exhibits just one second? 10 were there emails sent to you from Mr. Galaz?
JUDGE BARNETT: You may. A He sent me an email.
12 CROSS EXAMINATION 12 Q And you responded, do you recall?
13 BY MR. BOYDSTON: 13 A I did not.
Q Good morning, Ms. Berlin. My name is Q At the time that you spoke with Mr. 15 Brian Boydston. I'm the attorney for Independent 15 Galaz, did you recall informing him as to whether 16 Producers Group. When did you first — was Mr. 16 or not you had any familiarity with these 17 Lutzker the first person you spoke with from the 17 proceedings?
18 SDC? 18 A I don't believe we discussed that.
19 A Yes. 19 Q I assumed you discussed the
20 Q And when was that, to the best of your 20 proceedings, yes?
21 recollection? 21 A Yes.
22 A It was in mid or late February. 22 Q And did you tell him that you were
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
1 familiar with the proceedings? 1 attachment with you? 2 A Again he — I didn't recognize that it 2 A No.
3 was the same proceedings until very, very late in 3 Q Did you ever discuss that attachment
4 the conversation. 4 with Mr. Lutzker'?
5 Q Okay. Once you did, did you tell Mr. 5 A No.
6 Galas that you already had some involvement in 6 Q Are you aware — I believe you 7 the proceedings? 7 testified that it was your understanding that Mr.
8 A No. 8 Galas sent documents to Mr. Nielsen?
9 Q And do you recall, did Mr. Galas tell 9 A No, I did not testify to that.
10 you how he came to contact you? 10 {} My apologies. Did you have any 11 A Yes. 11 awareness that Mr. Galaz did send documents to
12 Q And what was that? 12 Mr. Nielsen? 13 A Through Mike Nielsen. 13 A No.
14 {} And you explained that Mike Nielsen Q Did Mr. Nielsen ever communicate with
15 was an attorney. How did you know Mike Nielsen 15 you after your conversation with Mr. Galaz about 16 or how did he know you? 16 Mr. Galas and possibly working with him? 17 A Mike Nielsen was an attorney for 17 A He, I believe, emailed or called and 18 DirecTV, and assisted on local into local retrans 18 just said I — something like I hope it works out 19 deals. 19 or if it works out, that's fine, or something
20 Q And had you worked with him in the 20 along those lines. I don't actually recall, but 21 past then' 21 it was very brief.
22 A At DirecTV. 22 Q Was there any substance to your—
94
1 Q And prior to Mr. Galas contacting you, 1 have substance — excuse me. Was there any 2 did Mr. Nielsen contact you and tell you that Mr. 2 substance in your conversation with Mr. Nielsen 3 Galaz had been referred to you? 3 you just described, about Mr. Galas's document
4 A Right, yes. 4 that he had sent to Mr. Nielsen?
5 Q And did Mr. Nielsen tell you anything A No.
6 further about what the content was? 6 Q So did Mr. Nielsen ever describe the
7 A No. 7 document to you'?
8 Q I believe you testified that Mr. Galas A No. — 9 emailed you a document'? 9 {} Is it do you recall or aze you 10 A Yes. 10 familiar with whether or not in June 2012, a new
11 Q And what was that document, to the 11 CEO was installed at DirecTV named Michael White? 12 hest of your recollection? 12 A Yes.
13 A I don't know. I didn't open it. 13 Q When did you leave DirecTV?
14 Q Okay. Did you forward any of your 14 A July of 2013.
15 emails from Mr. Galaz to anyone else? 15 Q And what was the reason for your
16 A Yes. 16 leaving?
17 Q And to who? 17 A I was ready to move on after close to
18 A To Amia Lutzker. 18 15 years.
19 Q Did you 1'orward the email with the JUDGE STRICELER: Did you say the new
20 attachment to Mr. Lutzker? 20 CEO was in June of 'l4, 2014, or 2013?
21 A Yes. 21 MR. BOYDSTON: Well, I said '10.
22 Q Did Mr. Iutzker ever discuss that 22 JUDGE STRICKLER: I'm sorry.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
97 99
JUDGE BARNETT: No, I think he said JUDGE BARNETT: The answer's stricken.
2 '12. 2 MR. BOYDSTON: Okay. I was just
3 THE WITNESS: I think you said '12, 3 trying to clarify.
6 but it was '10. JUDGE BARNETT: If she answered, I
5 MR. BOYDSTON: I beg your pardon. didn't hear the answer, so the objection was
JUDGE STRICKLER: Well, let's listen 6 sustained.
to what the witness has to say, because she's the 7 MR. BOYDSTON: Understood.
8 only one testifying. What year was the new CEO? 8 JUDGE BARNETT: Start from there.
THE WITNESS: You know, I think it was 9 BY MR. BOYDSTON:
10 2010. There was quite a few, so I'm not quite 10 Q Got it. Are you familiar with the 11 sure what date, when he started. 11 satellite statements of account that must be
12 BY MR. BOYDSTON: 12 prepared by entities such as DirecTV?
13 Q While you at DirecTV — well actually 13 A I'm aware of them, yes.
16 strike that. Is it accurate to say that you'e Q Sounds like you probably didn' 15 being offered here as an expert on the subject of 15 prepare them then. That was someone else's job? 16 local to local retransmission of broadcast 16 A Correct.
17 stations by satellite and cable system operators? 17 Q What's your understanding of them? 18 A What was the question? 18 A That twice a year our supplier
Q I'm sorry. I'm just confirming on 19 payments person would calculate what was owed and 20 your expert — the reason you'e here is to 20 submit them to the Copyright Tribunal.
21 testify as to your expertise with regard to the 21 Q And I beg your pardon. When did you 22 subject of local to local retzansmission of 22 start at DizecTV again?
98 100
1 broadcast stations by satellite and cable 1 A I started in October of 1998.
2 operators? 2 Q Thank you. So I believe that you
3 A Cozrect. stated that satellite carriers did not have the
MR. MACLEAN: Objection, 6 ability to carry local broadcast stations until
5 mischaracterizes 5 1999; is that correct?
JUDGE BARNETT: Sustains. 6 A Yes. The exact date of the passing of MR. MACLEAN: —the witness'2 7 the liability was late '99, early 2000.
8 expertise. 8 Q Okay. Despite that, do you have an
MR. BOYDSTON: I'm sorry. I didn' 9 understanding as to how — whether or not prior 10 catch what the objection was. 10 to 1999, satellite carriers could carry signals
MR. MACLEAN: It was sustained. 11 distantly, going back to 1988?
MR. BOYDSTON: I know that. 12 A Right. There was, and that is not my 13 MR. MACLEAN: The objection was it 13 area of expertise, but they did have the ability
16 mischaracterizes the witness'xpertise. 16 to carry the Big Four into DMAs, other DMAs.
15 MR. BOYDSTON: Okay. 15 Q And the Big Four are?
16 JUDGE BARNETT: Well, it might not 16 A ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox.
17 mischaracterize her expertise, but it 17 Q Okay. You said that's not your area 18 mischaracterizes what she was qualified to 18 of expertise. Specifically what do you mean?
testify to as an expert. 19 A Right, because what I did at DizecTV 20 MR. BOYDSTON: Thank you, Your Honor. 20 was, as I testified, when we got the right to 21 Is the answer then stricken or is it on the 21 open local into local or to start broadcasting
22 record? 22 local stations in DMAs, that's when I started to
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
101 103
1 do those deals. I wasn't involved in those deals 1 at least one local station. So now, because we
2 or any kind of deals with local into local and 2 made that decision, we'l carry all of them;
3 distant network prior to that time. 3 correct'?
Q Okay. So prior to that time, you 4 A That's correct, in the DMA. — 5 weren't involved with local into local or distant 5 Q And that was actually and that was
6 you said; correct? 6 requzzed by law?
7 A Correct. A Right.
8 Q Okay, but then after that time, you 8 Q Now in that circumstance, you -- well,
9 were involved with local to local? 9 strike that. In a situation like that, to the
10 A Yes. 10 extent that there was one or maybe a couple of
11 Q Were you involved in local to distant, 11 stations locally that you wanted to transmit, 12 or excuse me, were you involved in distant? 12 with regard to the other stations that you
13 A Yes, I was. 13 wezen't particularly being motivated by, did you
14 Q Okay. Now you said that you oversaw 14 look at ratings to make a decision of whether or
15 the launch of 2,100 stations and 143 DMAs; not to carry one and carry all?
16 correct? 16 A Are you talking about in the DMA or
17 Yes. 17 outside of the DMA?
18 Q Now isn't it true that only about 50 18 Q Local to local in a DMA. 19 of those stations were distantly retransmitted? 19 A I didn't have a choice. Either they 20 A That's correct. 20 carry — elected must-carry, in which case I must
21 Q So the vast majority were local to 21 carry them, or elected retrans, in which we would 22 local? 22 have an opportunity to negotiate. So within that
102 104
1 A Yes. process, there wasn't a Nielsen ratings element.
Q And so when you say that you oversaw 2 It was carry one, carry all.
3 the launch of 2,100 stations and 143 DMAs, you 3 Q Okay. Now in that kind of a
4 primarily are saying you were in charge of the 4 situation, I believe that cost was the overriding
5 local to local zetrans — local to local concern, correct, as to whether or not to carry
6 transmission, not a zetransmission; correct? 6 one — carry all of the local stations?
7 A My — let me explain. My duties were 7 A Which costs are you referring to?
everything regarding local into local, the must- 8 Q Well, I probably should have asked you
9 carry station election, then the retransmission 9 that first. Let me back up a step. When you 10 consent, and then the decisions of what stations 10 were making that decision about whether to carry 11 we would distribute into DMAs outside of the 11 one and all local stations, was cost a 12 station's DMA. 12 consideration?
13 Q Okay. Now are you familiar with the 13 A Yes. So like I testified before, we
14 carry one, carry all rule? 14 went into a DMA. We looked at quite a number of 15 A Yes. 15 things. First of all, how many DirecTV
16 Q And that rule essentially states that 16 subscribers were in the DMA. We looked at the 17 if a satellite carrier decides it's going to 17 topography, because in highly saturated markets 18 carry one local station, it's got to agree to 18 with multiple dwelling units, DirecTV did not do 19 carry all local stations; correct? 19 as well, because cable was very entrenched.
20 A That's correct. 20 We looked at the station lineup. We
21 Q And in that situation, you would make 21 at that time did not have our own installers. So 22 the decision okay, we want to carry some, some, 22 we looked to make sure that there was a strong
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
105 107
1 installer base there. We also looked — also at 1 A That's correct.
2 that time, we worked with big box retailers and 2 Q And so a distant retransmission was
3 small mom and pop stores. So we looked to see if 3 essentially mutually exclusive with a local, the
4 we had enough stores there. 4 local transmission; correct? And then finally, we would install a 5 A Do you want to ask me that a different
6 local collection facility, and we would like to way. I don't understand the way you'e asking.
see which signals we were able to pick up at that 7 Q You know, I'l withdraw the question. 8 local collection facility. So there was an 8 The point's covered. In the distant
9 absolute cost in every decision. 9 retransmission context, there was no negotiation
10 Q Now in terms — you discussed earlier lo with the signal or with the station, I should
11 negotiating with local stations. Do you recall 11 say, whereas in local to local, where 12 that? 12 retransmission consent was being raised, there
13 A Yes. 13 was negotiation. So they were fundamentally
14 Q Now that only occurred if the local 14 different in that regard; correct? 15 station exercised its right to demand its consent 15 A Yes.
16 to be broadcast locally; correct? 16 Q Now you understand that these
17 A They would elect retransmission 17 proceedings only concern situations, royalties
18 consent, and then we would negotiate. 18 collected for the right to retransmit distant or
19 Q So essentially you'd go into a DMA and 19 distantly retransmit a broadcast?
20 say okay, we want to have the local stations. 20 A Yes.
21 That means you have to carry one and carry all; 21 MR. MACLEAN: Objection to that 22 correct? 22 characterization.
106 108
A Right. MR. BOYDSTON: As far as I know,
2 Q But amongst those local stations, they 2 that's where you are.
3 could say well, we'e opting out of this, and 3 JUDGE BARNETT: What's objectionable?
4 we'e demanding that you get our consent. Is MR. MACLEAN: Well Your Honor, these
5 that a fair way to describe it? 5 proceedings are about allocating royalties that
6 A Well, you wouldn't say "opt out." 6 were paid for distant retransmissions. That's a
7 They would either decide to elect must-carry or 7 different question than—
8 elect retrans. 8 MR. BOYDSTON: I think I just asked if
Q And if they elect retransmission 9 that the subject of the proceedings, and she said 10 consent, essentially that local station is saying 10 yes. 11 is we won't allow you to retransmit us or MR. MACLEAN: I'l withdraw the 12 transmit us, I should say, unless you pay us some 12 objection.
13 money? 13 JUDGE BARNETT: Thank you.
14 A They would — it would be a BY MR. BOYDSTON:
15 negotiation, exactly. 15 Q Are you familiar with — you'e
Q Right. Now in a situation of deciding 16 familiar with pay-per-view orders, I have no
17 whether oz not to rebroadcast a distant signal, 17 doubt? 18 there was no negotiation; correct? 18 A Yes.
19 A That's correct. 19 Q And you understand that this
20 Q And that's because the right to do 20 proceeding has nothing to do with the popularity 21 that wes obtained by paying the compulsory 21 of programming, as reflected or demonstrated by 22 license; right? 22 pay-per-view; correct?
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
109
1 A Yes. 1 Q Now when you were trying to determine — 2 Q Did DirecTV look at retained or 2 when you were looking for programs oz stations 3 increased subscribership, and if so, how did it 3 rather that would fulfill various niches, you — 4 tie that into distant retransmission royalties? 4 were looking you had to look at stations as 5 In other words, did DirecTV sit down on a 5 opposed to programs, right? In other words—
6 periodic basis and say "Gee, the distantly 6 let me restate that. retransmitted stations that we'e paying a When you were making this decision,
8 compulsory license for, are resulting in certain 8 you were looking for niche programming; correct?
9 subscribership numbers"? A Right.
10 A Well, let me explain. So there's the 10 Q But your choice was not the ability to
11 DMA, where all of the stations are carried, and 11 purchase the rights to retransmit a particular
12 then they would be a neighboring DMA, and I would 12 program; it was to retransmit the station the
13 look at the neighboring DMA to see if there were 13 program was on; correct? 14 some stations that 1 could distantly import, that 14 A That's correct.
15 filled a niche, that were popular, that perhaps 15 Q So in doing that, you had looked at 16 cable was carrying but DirecTV wasn't carrying, 16 the program certainly, but you knew that what you 17 oz I felt would be a strong asset to that lineup. 17 were going to be paying for is not just the I primarily use Nielsen ratings, and 18 program, but the whole station, all of the 19 if I was able to, I would import that signal. I 19 programs on the station; correct? 20 would distantly transmit that station into the— 20 A That's right. I would import that
21 and also that DMA had to be unserved. So that 21 entire station.
22 station could not — they couldn't have that 22 Q And to the extent that that station
110 112
1 station in that DMA. 1 might have very highly rated programs like
So if that DMA had an ABC already, I 2 Everyone Likes Raymond, but that might not drive 3 couldn't import or distantly transmit the ABC. 3 your decision if what you were looking for is
4 So it had to be unserved is the vernacular. 4 something in niche like a cooking show. Is that
5 Q So when you were looking at that and 5 fair to says
6 trying to make that decision, you said you were 6 A I would primarily — I don't think you
7 usually looking to see if you could fulfill a 7 could make it that granular. I would primarily
8 particular niche; correct? 8 look at the ratings of the entire station.
9 A Yes. 9 Sometimes it was driven by a hit show or a
10 Q Now a niche I consider by definition 10 popular show. But I, because there was, you
11 to be something that is not broad, a subject 11 know, I needed to tell my management why I was 12 matter that's — a niche. It's smallez. Is that 12 making this decision, I again looked at the 13 your understanding? 13 lineup of the ratings, and then the ratings were 14 A The way that I looked at niches were 14 primarily holstered by hit shows or popular 15 a subset of subscribers that might enjoy this 15 shows.
16 popular programming in certain categories. 16 JUDGE STRICKLER: Dzd you say a
17 Q So I mean for instance, something with 17 moment ago, in answering counsel's questions, 18 wide popularity like Monday Night Football 18 that you look at two different things to 19 obviously is not niche programming, or is it? 19 determine whether you would import from Market 2,
20 A Sports you probably wouldn' 20 DMA 2 into DMA 1, one being the ratings that you 21 characterize as niche, the way that I 21 just testified to, but also whether or not that 22 characterized it as niche. 22 station was on the cable — was a cable-available
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
113 115
1 station in DMA 1? 1 station group's stations oz other things that
2 THE WITNESS: Is DMA 1 the original 2 they have
3 DMA or DMA— 3 JUDGE STRICKLER: That are commonly
4 JUDGE STRICKLER: DMA 1 is the 4 owned you mean?
original one. 5 THE WITNESS: Exactly.
THE WITNESS: Okay. So— 6 JUDGE STRICKLER: So you'e buying
7 JUDGE STRICKLER: So you wanted to 7 the bundle?
8 look — if you wanted to also look to see if you THE WITNESS: Right, or there was a—
9 wanted to get that cable, in DMA. 1 that station 9 there was a reason. There was, you know, cable 10 was available on cable but wasn't yet available 10 just tended to really appeal to a large mass, and
11 on DirecTV. 11 they were kind of, in my mind, renowned for
12 So did you sort of say well, something 12 carrying different things that might not have
13 in the profit ratings. Do we want to meet the 13 really moved the needle.
14 competition, and get that station here in DMA 1 And because at DirecTV there was a,
15 as well, so we can tell potential and existing 15 you know, I had to back up my decisions and there 16 subscribers you don't have to be on cable to get 16 was money involved, and I was a cost center, I 17 the station. You can get it on DirecTV? 17 would not carry that entire lineup.
18 THE WITNESS: So just to make, to 18 JUDGE STRICKLER: In addition to
19 clarify, DMA 1 is the DMA that I am carrying one, 19 cable carrying stations that weren't necessarily
20 carrying all. DMA 2 is where I'm distantly— 20 popular because they had to be acquired in a
21 JUDGE STRICKLER: DMA 1 is the 21 bundle, as you testified to, did cable also
22 importer; DMA 2 is the exporter. 22 acquire stations simply because they had — they
114 116
THE WITNESS: So I don't want to represented certain types of niche genres that 2 emphasize too much the cable lineup, because 2 might appeal to the marginal subscriber?
3 cable was renowned for carrying a lot of stations THE WITNESS: The cable operator?
4 that did not make a lot of sense. So it was Perhaps, you know. What I noticed was that there
5 never apples to apples. I would look to see what 5 were all sorts of reasons. In one DMA, a station
6 was there, and to see if my lineup was missing 6 was carried because the CEO's wife was on the something. But I would always go back to a 7 staff. In other DMAs, you know, it was a bundle.
ratings, to make that determination. 8 In others, it was kind of an odd one-off kind of
JUDGE STRICKLER: This might not be 9 public service, you know, some station that maybe
10 something you can answer, but you just said that 10 just didn't really resonate with my demo, with my you noticed that cable would include a number of 11 demographic.
12 stations that didn't make a lot of sense. Why 12 JUDGE STRICKLER: Thank you.
13 would cable have stations that didn't make a 13 BY MR. BOYDSTON:
14 whole lot of sense? 14 Q In response to one of the questions, 15 Or let me back up for a second. Did 15 you said about these cable stations, that your they not make sense because they didn't have good 16 observation was there were channels which — you 17 ratings, but they kept them on? 17 used different phrases. But one was you said it 18 THE WITNESS: So let me answer it in 18 didn't seem — the cable stations tended to carry 19 two parts. The reason that they might carry a 19 — sorry. Cable systems tended to carry stationsross.corn 20 station that I'm saying didn't make a sense or 20 that didn't move the needle. 21 wasn't popular is sometimes with retransmission 21 When you say "didn't move the needle," 22 consent, you'e obliged to carzy other of the 22 I presume you mean didn't have particularly
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrg Volume 2
117
1 impressive ratings? 1 station, after that it almost always continued
2 A That's correct. 2 doing so; correct?
3 Q Now going back just a little bit, with 3 A We would continue doing so until that
4 regard to DirecTV, did DirecTV analyze whether or 4 DMA was served, for that particular station. — 5 not it was achieving increased subscribership due 5 Q So you didn't DirecTV didn't go
6 to particular distant retzansmissions, if you back and say you know what? The ratings on this
7 know? 7 particular — the ratings we see for this
8 A Are you asking me because of one 8 particular station we'e paying a license on for
8 particular station, did they analyze? 9 three years are lousy. We'e discontinuing
10 Q Yes. 10 paying the retransmission fee. That didn'
11 A I don't know. My experience was is 11 happen; correct? 12 that we took everything as a whole. So— 12 A I don't believe so, no. — — 13 Q And when you say you took everything 13 Q Now is it I believe that well,
14 as a whole, are you — well, strike that. Well, 14 you tell me. My understanding is that between 15 could you expand on when you say "everything as a 15 1999 and 2003, DirecTV only distantly
16 whole" ? 16 retransmitted between nine and eleven stations, 17 I asked it, and I did ask a very, very 17 primarily stations from New York, Los Angeles and 18 ,pecific question, which was whether or not 18 Chicago. Is that correct do you think? 19 anyone at DirecTV sat down and said you know, 18 A What years?
20 that distantly retransmitted station we'e just 20 Q '99 to 2003, just a handful of
21 been paying for for three years, it's increased 21 stations from LA, New York, Chicago?
22 our subscribership or it's decreased our 22 A Perhaps. I don't know exactly.
118 120
1 subscribership? Your answer is you don't think 1 Q Yeah. Do you have any reason to
2 anyone made an analysis that specific, but there 2 believe that's not the case?
3 may have been some more general analysis done? 3 A I would really to need to see. That
4 A Yeah. I mean so there were certain was quite some time ago, so I really need to see,
5 instances where I may have imported a distant 5 you know, the list of who we imported and what
6 signal, where we had a big jump in subscribers. 6 the dates were.
7 So patting myself on the back, I could certainly 7 Q Okay. There's a binder over there 8 say that was it. 8 which I'l help you with, and Your Honor, may I But so we didn't get as granular to 5 approach?
10 the specific station, but we would take into 10 JUDGE BARNETT: You may.
11 account a lot of different aspects of what was BY MR. BOYDSTON:
12 going on in each DMA, and we were quite focused 12 Q I'd like to take a look at what's been
13 on what was again moving the needle in each DMA. 13 marked as Exhibit 141. Now I'l represent to you
14 Q I'm sorry, you were or were not? 14 that this is a document that was prepared by IPG,
15 A We were. 15 and these figures are, as I said, was prepared by
16 Q You were. Now my understanding is, 16 IPG. 17 though, is that DirecTV almost never dropped any 17 I'd ask you to look at this, only to 18 retransmitted stations; correct? 18 the extent that looking at these numbers might or A Yes. 18 might not refresh your recollection as to theross.corn
20 Q So once a retransmitted station was— 20 number of stations DirecTV was retransmitting 21 excuse me. Once DirecTV made the decision to pay 21 between 1999 and 2003, based upon what's on this 22 the compulsory license to retransmit a particular 22 page.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrg Volume 2
121 123
1 A And sorry. Your question is? 1 from sort. of the big media hubs like LA, New
2 Q Does this refresh your recollection as 2 York, Chicago?
3 to whether or not my representation might be 3 A It just depended on a number of
4 accurate, that between '99 and 2003, DirecTV only 4 different things. So that's hard to say.
5 rebroadcast about eight to nine stations? 5 Q Did amongst those, were the stations
6 A I don't know, but you have it here so 6 that were distantly retransmitted by DirecTV
7 during that time from New York, LA and Chicago?
8 Q Okay. Do you have a recollection over A Yes.
9 any of your time at DirecTV, as to how many-- 9 Q Were there — were there other places 10 well strike that. Between 2004 and 2009, do you 10 that you can recall that they were distantly 11 recall that DirecTV only distantly retransmitted 11 transmitted from?
12 between 34 and 50 stations? 12 A We — I made the decision to import
13 A Right, yes. 13 from a number of different cities, just depending
14 Q Okay, and during that time, the number 14 on our spot beam technology, or where I thought 15 of stations that were locally retransmitted was 15 the most popularity would be. So it didn't make 16 quite large? 16 sense to import like a Telefutura from Miami to
17 A Yes. 17 Wichita, Kansas. It just wouldn't be that
18 Q In the thousands? 18 popular or make any sense.
A Yes. 19 Q Right, whereas stations like the ABC
20 Q Given that disparity, I imagine there 20 affiliate in New York would probably be something 21 was a lot more focus at DirecTV on looking at 21 that a lot of people would be interested in 22 local, the transmission of local stations, rather 22 theoretically, right?
122 124
1 than the retransmission of distant stations? 1 A You would think.
2 A Our primary focus was to get more DMAs 2 Q You testified that there was explosive
3 served, yes. growth in satellite retransmission between 1999 JUDGE FEDER: Excuse me. Would you and 2009. Is it fair to say that at least with
5 just clarify what you mean by getting more DMAs 5 regard to DirecTV, that explosive growth was in
6 served? 6 the local to local context?
THE WITNESS: Sure. So we would want 7 A You cannot characterize it just
8 to launch more DMAs, because that would enable us 8 because of local into local. There were a number
9 to compete against cable. Once we had local 9 of reasons. But we were able to compete on an
10 stations in the DMA, it really solidified our 10 even playing field when we had local stations in 11 place, our place in the market. So we would want 11 a market.
12 to expand that. 12 Q When you had local stations in a
13 JUDGE FEDER: So by serving a market, right? Right. And so, I mean, we'e
14 particular DMA, you mean going in and getting 14 talking about explosive growth. 21,000 15 retransmission consent deals with local stations 15 retransmissions, or rather 21,000 locally 16 for local into local retransmissions? 16 transmitted stations is a lot of stations. That
17 THE WITNESS: Exactly, or they could 17 implies explosive growth from some lower number. 18 elect must-carry. 18 Is that what you mean when you'e talking about JUDGE FEDER: Right, okay. 19 explosive growth? ross.corn
20 BY MR. BOYDSTON: 20 A 2, 100.
21 Q Of the handful of stations that were 21 Q I'm sorry. 22 distantly retransmitted, do they primarily come 22 A 21,000.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrg Volume 2
125 127
1 Q I stand corrected. 1 ratings -- when you said you got ratings for
2 A But so let me explain that. So when 2 everything, you got ratings for everything that
3 we had explosive growth, again local into local 3 you could within a DMA, right?
6 lead us on an even playing field. But we were A Yeah, and then we would also get
5 really able to compete effectively on a number of 5 nationale. We would get regional. We cut our-
6 different aspects, because the signal quality was the research in every which way.
7 so much better. 7 Q But DirecTV never engaged Nielsen to
Our cost centers, our CSRs, there were 8 study distant ratings?
9 a lot of other issues. So local into local was A No.
10 sort of the foundation, and then we went from 10 Q Did DirecTV ever look at ratings 11 there. 11 according to the timing of programs, ratings
12 Q Okay. Now DirecTV didn't actually 12 during a particular time block or a time of the 13 order ratings data from Nielsen itself; correct? 13 day, in order to determine whether or not it was 16 It obtained them from advertisers and things like 16 filling a gap of lower ratings on other DirecTV 15 that? 15 broadcasts?
16 A 'We had a number of different groups 16 A I would look at day parts, in addition 17 that supplied — within DirecTV, we had a number 17 to overall ratings, and again, I would look at 18 of different groups that would supply information 18 some of the breakout, more popular programming as
19 to me. We had a research group, a business 19 well.
20 analytics group, an advertising group and a 20 Q Turning to the subject here, which is 21 customer service group, and many of them have 21 about devotional programming or religious 22 access to Nielsen information that I relied on. 22 programming as sometimes it's called, is it your
126 128
1 Q But it sounds like there wasn't a 1 understanding that religious programming was a
2 formal relationship between DirecTV and Nielsen, 2 fairly small portion of overall programming 3 where DirecTV was paying for a bunch of 3 appearing on distantly retransmitted stations?
6 information, including underlying data and stuff 6 A Was it a small portion of the
5 like that? 5 distantly retrans?
6 A That's correct. Q Correct.
7 Q And so did the Nielsen information you 7 A I don't know.
8 got, it was just what was given to you by other 8 Q Was it a small portion of DirecTV's
9 people or entities; correct? 9 programming generally?
10 A Yes. 10 A Yes. — 11 Q And it was there was the Nielsen 11 Q Would you say something on the order 12 data that DirecTV got, it was just for local 12 of three percent? 13 ratings; correct? 13 A I don't know the exact percentage.
16 A We got Nielsen ratings for everything, Q Okay. You had a general knowledge as
15 every broadcaster, every cable network. We 15 to whether or not religious shows generally 16 looked at Nielsens for everything. 16 garner large or small ratings relative to other
17 Q But within a given DMA; correct? 17 programming?
18 A No. We would look at everything in a 18 A Relative to other programming, it
19 DMA, how every network was doing as well. 19 garnered smaller ratings.
20 Q Within a DMA; correct? 20 Q Do you consider — well, we talked
21 A Yes. 21 about niche programming. Would Spanish language
22 Q Right. In other words, you got 22 programming be niche programming, or is it bigger
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
129 131
1 than that? 1 add new subscribers or keep existing subscribers.
2 A Spanish is a niche. 2 Q And if a show wasn't helping to round
3 Q Okay. Now let's go back to the niche 3 out, then it might not be of much interest,
4 issue again. If you have two channels with 4 right?
5 identical niche programming, in other words like 5 A If a station, yeah. If a station—
6 two different children's shows. They'e 6 I used to say if a station wasn't going to sing different shows, but they fit the same niche, or 7 for itself or work foz me, I would not bring it 8 let me strike that. 8 in.
Let's say you'ze looking at your 9 Q And you used the term "round out." I
10 lineup in a particular DMA, and you have a 10 think we all pretty much know what you mean. But 11 children's show, and it garners some ratings, but 11 in this context, when you say "round out," what 12 ratings that are small relative to other non- 12 it means is is that okay, I think round like a 13 niche programming. Then you'e taking into 13 wheel. We'e got different types of programming.
14 consideration whether to use another local We seem to have all this covered. 15 station that has other children's programming on 15 This other station, while it looks kind of cool, 16 it. 16 it's in the pazt that's already covered. So it 17 Even if that other program with other 17 doesn't round out the station. Is that a fair 18 children's programming had ratings that were 18 way to put it, or it doesn't round out the 19 relatively attractive, would you take into 19 DirecTV lineup' 20 consideration whether or not bringing that into 20 A If it didn't round it out or if I 21 your lineup would simply displace the viewership 21 thought that by adding a station that had a niche 22 that was already being garnered by the existing 22 that might bring me more subscribers, I would
130 132
1 niche programming, in this case a children' 1 normally go with the station that has the niche,
2 show? 2 that would bring me more subs.
3 A I'm not sure what you'e asking me. 3 Q But if it's a niche that's already
Q I'm try a different -- I'l tzy a 4 covered, it probably wouldn't bring new 5 better way if I can, and I'm focusing on your 5 subscribers. Fair enough?
6 making the decisions about niche programming, and 6 A Perhaps.
7 I guess what I'm really wondering is wouldn' 7 Q You used the example earlier on about
8 your decision signs by influenced by the thought 8 the Japanese station that got dropped, and then
9 that well, there's interesting niche programming 9 everyone got mad. Do you recall that?
10 over here, a cooking show let's say, but I'e 10 A (No audible response.)
11 already got these cooking shows here. Q And I don't think I quite caught your 12 So because of that, even though this 12 explanation. I think I just didn't hear part of 13 show is good, gets nice ratings and everything, 13 the words. I imagine that that Japanese 14 I'm not really adding anything new. At most, the 14 programming, the station with Japanese
15 people who watch my existing show might just 15 programming, was low rated relative to all of the 16 continue to watch cooking shows on this new 16 programming, because it was a fairly targeted 17 channel, and so maybe it doesn't add much. Did 17 audience; correct? 18 you ever have analysis like that? 18 A And let me be clear. It was a cable 19 A Yes, exactly. I would see what was in 19 network. It wasn't a station, and it was very
20 a DMA. I'm assuming you'e talking about 20 low rated.
21 distantly broadcast, and I would see what would 21 Q And you said that the decision was 22 be needed to round out the lineup, and what would 22 made well, we don't need to keep carrying this,
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
133 135
1 and then the hue and cry was so great, that you 1 A Yes.
2 got calls at home and things like that, and the 2 Q Do you know, and I don't know if you 3 reaction was all right. Well, it's low-rated, 3 would have occasion to know this, but do you know
4 but apparently people feel passionately about it 4 how many signals a CSO typically retzansmits
5 I guess, right? 5 distantly?
6 A There is a passionate group for every A No.
station, yes. 7 Q You'e brought up the term "unserved
8 Q And so you recognize that regardless 8 household" earlier.
9 of the fact it was low rated, it was worth A Right. — — 10 carrying? 10 Q Could you well is it my 11 A Well, I wouldn't say it was worth 11 understanding is that an unserved household is a 12 carrying, because it was extremely low rated. It 12 legal rule that says that in order to receive a 13 was taking up very valuable bandwidth, and we 13 distant network station, the household has to be 14 were able to contain the cry. But we learned a 14 unserved, meaning it doesn't — it isn't getting 15 very valuable lesson when we dropped that, and we 15 a network feed or something like that?
16 decided that we would not do that in the future, 16 A Yeah. The way that I would describe
1I because we didn't want to upset our base, to lose 17 it is in that DMA, if a station does not exist. 18 subscribers, overwhelm our call center by having 18 So it's unserved for that particular station.
19 to make people call in or get bad publicity. 19 Q Okay. Now in a situation like that,
20 Q So there were business reasons to keep 20 the decision where to distantly retransmit a 21 it; correct? 21 signal may have more to do with the viewer
22 A There were business reasons to keep 22 qualifying as an unserved household, than the
134 136
1 it, yes. ratings of a potential station; correct? JUDGE STRICKLER: In that particular 2 A I could not bring in a distant network
situation, how important was bad publicity 3 signal if that DMA had that — I testified to
4 relative to the other factors? this -- if that signal was already being
THE WITNESS: It was important for 5 broadcast in that DMA.
6 DirecTV not to get bad publicity. 6 Q No matter how great the ratings might 7 JUDGE STRICKLER: I understand that, 7 be, that just couldn't be done?
8 but was there actual bad publicity that you were 8 A Could not be done. Let me clarify.
experiencing with regard to the removal of that 9 There were very corner cases where I might get 10 Japanese station? 10 permission from the existing station to bring in
THE WITNESS: I don't believe so. It 11 the distant, the competing distant signal, but 12 was really long ago, and it was a very vocal 12 that's not a — it was very difficult to get that constituency. But I don't believe we got bad 13 permission.
publicity from it. MR. BOYDSTON: Thank you. I have
BY MR. BOYDSTON: 15 nothing further.
16 Q I understand that you'e never worked 16 JUDGE BARNETT: Do you have more 17 for a CSO; correct? 17 questions Mr. Olaniran?
18 A Correct. 18 MR. OLANIRAN: No questions, Your
19 Q Nevertheless, based upon your 19 Honor.
20 familiarity with people who have, is it youz 20 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
understanding that they have a similar view of 21 BY MR. MACLEAN:
22 the necessity for niche programming? 22 Q Now Mr. Boydston asked you a question
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
137 139
1 about whether you forwarded the email from Mr. 1 sentence, you testify "Many religious channels
2 Galaz, with an attachment to Mr. Lutzker; is that 2 applied for the PIO, Public Interest Obligation
3 right? 3 channel spots," right?
A Yes. 4 THE WITNESS: Yes.
5 Q That was recent; correct? 5 JUDGE STRICKLER: Of those many
6 A Yes, that was recent. 6 religious channels that applied for it, how many
7 Q When was that? got it?
8 A It was within the last 30 days. 8 THE WITNESS: I really don't recall, — Q Since IPG started raising allegations 9 but most of them did. It's that's pretty much 10 that it may have sent you confidential 10 who applied for that carriage. 11 information? JUDGE STRICKLER: So if they got 12 A Yes. 12 those PIO spots, you were running those to — 13 Q In the course of preparing your 13 fulfill a statutory obligation, not to not 14 testimony, your written testimony in this matter, 14 because they were highly rated within a niche or 15 did you consider or incorporate anything from 15 otherwise?
16 what you received from Mr. Galaz? THE WITNESS: These were mostly cable.
17 A I did not. 17 A lot of them were cable netwoxks, and we carried
18 Q Did you discuss anything that you 18 — they weren't stations, although some of them 19 received fxom Mr. Galas with any of the counsel 19 did have stations. But these were carried
20 for the SDC? 20 nationally as a cable network.
A I did not. JUDGE STRICKLER: And your decision
Q Did you show us at that, that is prior 22 to carry them was based on your obligation at
140
1 to your written testimony, or at any time before 1 DirecTV to fulfill that FCC requirements, as 2 just recently, any email that you had received 2 opposed to promote ratings?
from Mr. Galaz? 3 THE WITNESS: The public interest
A I did not. 4 platform, we needed to balance a number of
MR. MACLEAN: Nothing further, Your 5 issues. So popularity of progxamming, ratings,
6 Honor. 6 what the network looked like, who it would
7 MR. BOYDSTON: Nothing further. 7 attract, and in these parti.euler instances,
JUDGE STRICKLER: I have a couple of 8 actually that's what we would look at, and who
9 questions for hex. 9 else was in the pot is what I was going to say. 10 JUDGE BARNETT: Ask. 10 So it was a little bit of a tightrope, JUDGE STRICKLER: Okay. I'm going to 11 because it was a very competitive group that 12 direct you to page eight of your written 12 wanted the ten or whatever it became. Each year 13 testimony, Ms. Berlin. Tell me when you'e 13 we had to recount.
14 there. JUDGE STRICKLER: It was a
15 THE WITNESS: Yes. 15 competitive
JUDGE STRICKLER: Thanks. In 16 THE WITNESS: The group that applied
17 footnote seven, you make reference to the FCC 17
18 mandate that DirecTV take four percent of its 18 JUDGE STRICKLER: For the PIO 19 capacity, about ten channels for non-commercial 19 designation?
20 channels. Do you see that? 20 THE WITNESS: Yeah. It was very
21 THE WITNESS: Yes. 21 competitive. It was very — folks that didn'
22 JUDGE STRICKLER: In the next 22 get it were very angry. So we had to be very
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Volume 2
141 143
1 careful how we went about the process. 1 JUDGE STRICKLER: Pay per view
2 JUDGE STRICKLER: So what factors did 2 doesn't apply towards that?
3 you consider specifically — well, this is a 3 THE WITNESS: No.
4 religious niche we'e talking about. What 4 JUDGE STRICKLER: Okay, I got it.
5 factors did you consider, since you got more 5 And how about the other ones you mentioned, the
6 applicants than you needed? How did you decide 6 specialty devotional programs. You mentioned the
7 who got admitted and who didn't get in? 7 church service from the University of Notre Dame.
8 THE WITNESS: Well again, we looked at 8 Did that count towards it?
9 popularity. We sampled the programming. We 9 THE WITNESS: No. It needed to be a
10 liked to do a mix. So in addition to religion, 10 24 by 7 channel. We called it a 24 by 7
11 we got some distant learning. We got, as I 11 turnaround. So it needed to a fully owned 12 recall, a couple of music kind of travel 12 program channel. 13 channels. So we — so in addition to the mix, it 13 JUDGE STRICKLER: So am I correct, 14 was popularity and how it looked. Some of them 14 that none of the programs that you mention on 15 just didn't look great. 15 page eight were those that qualified for the PIO 16 JUDGE STRICKLER: So this is sort of 16 deszgnatzon?
17 a baby, a sub-niche. In other words, it' 17 THE WITNESS: Correct.
18 religious programming that will fulfill a 18 JUDGE STRICKLER: Okay, thank you. 19 particular regulatory requirement, and within 19 JUDGE FEDER: I'm just trying to get 20 this sub-sub-niche, you then used popularity 20 a handle on how carry one, carry all works. So
21 through ratings, to determine or buy, as I think 21 suppose in a particular DMA there were four local 22 you mentioned as one of your viewership measures, 22 channels. One opts for must-carry. Does that
142
1 to determine which of the programs in this sub- 1 have anything to do with the carry one, carry all
2 sub-niche are going to get the PIO designation 2 rule?
and get aired? 3 THE WITNESS: Yes. So let's say we
THE WITNESS: Yes. 4 decide to go into Philadelphia. I give notice to
5 JUDGE STRICKLER: And the ones that 5 every station in Philadelphia, and half of them
6 you mention on page eight of youz testimony, elect must-carry, that I must carry them, and 7 there's the Easter Pageant from the Crystal 7 then the other half elects retrans, and then I
8 Cathedral. Was that a PIO? 8 would negotiate.
THE WITNESS: So those were just— 9 JUDGE FEDER: But you must negotiate 10 I'm sorry I interrupted. 10 with them under carry one, carry all?
JUDGE STRICKLER: That's okay. Was THE WITNESS: Yes. There was a good 12 the Easter Pageant that you referenced from 12 faith negotiation standard.
13 Crystal Cathedral, was that one that received the 13 JUDGE FEDER: And if there's a 14 PIO designation? 14 holdout?
15 THE W1TNESS: That was a pay-per-view 15 THE WITNESS: Then I don't have to
16 event. So it was just a one-time show. We did 16 carry them.
17 it every year, and the subscriber'ould click and 17 JUDGE FEDER: Okay. So one station
18 buy it for 3.99. 18 can't hold up going into the DMA by holding out? 19 JUDGE STRICKLER: I understand. Does 19 THE WITNESS: Correct, yes. ross.corn 20 that go towards the PIO designation or it 20 JUDGE FEDER: Ail zight, thank you.
21 doesn'? 21 JUDGE BARNETT: Any follow up
22 THE WITNESS: No. zz questions?
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrg Volume 2
145 147
1 MR. OLANIRAN: No, Your Honoz. For some, it's really prejudicial to
2 MR. MACLEAN: No. 2 admit it even provisionally at this time. I'l
3 JUDGE BARNETT: Thank you, Ms. Berlin. 3 raise the objection though when it comes up.
4 THE WITNESS: Thank you. JUDGE BARNETT: Okay. Thank you.
(Witness excused.) 5 DIRECT EXAMINATION
JUDGE BARNETT: It's time for our noon 6 BY MR. BOYDSTON:
7 recess. We will be at recess for one hour. 7 Q Thank you, Your Honor. Good
(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 8 afternoon, Mr. Galas. Could you please tell us
9 went off the record at 11:57 a.m. and resumed at 9 your position with Independent Producers Group? 10 I:06 p.m.) 10 A Currently, I call myself consultant
JUDGE BARNETT: Mr. Boydston, you may 11 because I'm no longer technically employed.
12 call your first witness. 12 Q Okay. And you'e familiar generally
13 MR. BOYDSTON: Your Honor, Independent 13 with the matters surrounding these proceedings.
14 Producers Group calls Raul Galas. 14 Correct'
15 WHEREUPONr 15 A Clearly.
16 16 Q Can I please ask you to take a look at 17 was called as a witness by Counsel for the 1') what's been marked as Exhibit I in the IPG, 18 Independent Producers Group and, having been 18 excuse me, not one, 100, that is and 24. 19 first duly sworn, assumed the witness stand, was 19 (Whereupon, the above-referred to 20 examined and testified as follows: 20 document was marked as Independent Producers 21 MS. PLOVNICK: Before we get started 21 Group Exhibit No. 124 for identification.)
22 here, just for the record, MPAA has a motion to 22 JUDGE BARNETT: Before we go there,
146 148
1 strike that's directed at Mr. Galas's testimony 1 Mr. Galaz, for the benefit of the court reporter,
2 and many exhibits. 2 could you spell your first and last names, And so I just wanted to put on record please?
4 that there's some papers we filed on objection, THE WITNESS: Certainly, R-A-U-L and
5 but would you like me to say something when these 5 G-A-L-A-2
6 are offered? Or is it just understood that that 6 JUDGE BARNETT: Thank you.
7 motion's been filed as we go through exhibits? 7 BY MR. BOYDSTON:
8 JUDGE BARNETT: The only objections we 8 Q And are you familiar with what'
9 want to hear are objections that are not in your 9 marked as Exhibit 124?
10 papers. 10 A Yes I am.
MS. PLOVNICK: All right, thank you, Q And what is it? 12 Your Honor. So just those objections are all 12 A This is the exhibit that was submitted
13 made in my papers. 13 as part. of IPG's direct statement wherein we
JUDGE BARNETT: Okay. 14 identified the particular claimants on whose
15 MR. MACLEAN: Your Honor, as I said 15 behalf we were representing, program claims and 16 yesterday, we do have objections that are made in 16 the particular years of representation. 17 the papers that we will be requesting a ruling 17 And to be more clear about that, years 18 here because it is prejudicial. 18 for which claim was made and that was applicable 19 Now, I mean I'l make the argument 19 to retransmitted broadcasts that generate a 20 when the objection arises, but for some of the 20 retransmission royalty.
21 testimony that's being offered here, for some I 21 Q And did you prepare this document?
22 have no problem with the judgments reserved. 22 A Yes, I did.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc. (202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.corn Before the COPYRIGHT ROYALTY JUDGES Washington, D.C.
In the Matter of Phase II Distribution ofthe1999, 2000, 2001, Docket Nos. 2012-7 CRB SD 2000-2009; 2002 2003, 2004, 2005 2006, 2007, 2008 2008-5 CRB SD 1999-2000 (Phase II) and 2009 Satellite Royalty Funds
In the Matter of Phase II Distribution ofthe 2004, 2005, 2006, Docket Nos. 2012-6 CRB CD 2004-2009 2007, 2008 and 2009 Cable Royalty Funds (Phase Ig
Testimony of Toby Berlin Testimony of Toby Berlin
My name is Toby Berlin and I am testifying on behalf of the Settling Devotional
Claimants ("SDC") in these proceedings.' have been requested to provide testimony on the
procedures employed by satellite and cable television companies to make programming decisions
in the 1999-2009 time kame.
I. Professional Background: Work and Education History
I am the President and Founder of School of Toby, Inc., a media consulting business, which was founded in 2013. I provide consulting expertise in the cable, satellite, multichannel video programming distributor ("MVPD"), over-the-top ("OTT") industries. My services include high level negotiations, strategic planning, business development, financial and contractual suppoit. I advise media companies on organizational stiucture, packaging, pricing, cost reduction, revenue growth, subscriber acquisition and retention, contract database, compliance, contract negotiations and strategies and. crisis management. My clients include
The Settling Devotional Claimants are comprised ofthe following entities: Amazing Facts, Inc., American Religious Town Hall, Inc., Catholic Communications Corporation, Christian Television Network, Inc., The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc., Coral Ridge Ministries Media, Inc., Cottonwood Christian Center, Crenshaw Christian Center, Crystal Cathedral Ministries, Inc., Evangelical Lutheran Church In America, Faith For Today, Inc., Family Worship Center Church, Inc. (D/B/A Jimmy Swaggart Muustries), International Fellowship of Christians & Jews, Inc., In Touch Mnistries, Inc., It Is Written, John Hagee Ministries, Inc. (aka Global Evangelism Television), Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. (FIK/A Life In The Word, Inc.), Kerry Shook Ministries (aka Fellowship ofthe Woodlands), Lakewood Church (aka Joel Osteen Ministries), Liberty Broadcasting Network, Inc., Messianic Vision, Inc., New Psalmist Baptist Church, Oral Roberts Evangelistic Association, Inc., RBC Ministries, Reginald B. Cherry Ministries, Rhema Bible Church (aka Kenneth Hagin Ministries), Ron Phillips Ministries, Speak The Word Church International, St. Ann's Media, The Potter' House OfDallas, Inc. (d/b/a T.D. Jakes Ministries), Word of God Fellowship, Inc., d/b/a Daystar Television Network, Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, and Zola Levitt Ministries.
MVPD generally refers to cable and satellite television companies. OTT refers to television viewers who bypass traditional over-the air, cable, and satellite-delivered programming by using the Internet. 2 multiple research fnms that educate large institutional investors about the media industry. In addition, I am a consultant to the Sony team that's creating a digital MVPD for the PlayStation. Prior to starting School of Toby, I was a Vice President of Programming Acquisitions at DIRECTV. I was a member of the executive team that grew the business from 3.5 million subscribers to over 20 million subscribers between 1998 and 2013. I managed sourcing and negotiations for programming acquisitions for the DIRECTV service across numerous catego&ies including all New Networks, Spanish-language and international Prograrruning, Shopping Channels, Adult Programming, Airborne," and Music packages. I formerly oversaw Pay-per- View Sports, Events and Retransmission Consents/Must Carry. I graduated from the University of Miami in Coral Gables and hold a law degree from Southwestern University of Law in Los Angeles, My Bio is attached as Exhibit 1. II. Satellite Television Marketing Strategy When I started, DIRECTV did not have the ability to carry local broadcast stations. In 1999, the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act was passed by Congress and DIRECTV was afforded a statutory right to launch local stations across the U.S. That right has been subsequently extended by Congress through the Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act in 2004 and by the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act in 2010. I was the executive in charge of launching all the local stations and had oversight responsibility for those deals through 2007. In total, I launched 143 DMAs (Nielsen's Designated Market Areas) consisting of approximately 2,100 local stations. When satellite operators like DIRECTV and DISH started operations, they competed against entrenched cable company competitors; therefore, to gain subscribers, it was particularly important for the satellite companies to develop program offerings that would be most attractive to gaining potential subscribers and retaining those who became subscribers. Quite simply, more popular programs, as measured by viewing patterns, were more valuable and those with smaller audiences were less valuable. In this regard, DIRECTV carefully analyzed the ratings of cable program because we wanted to be sure that we offered programs that were competitive with the most popular offerings on cable systems, as measured by Nielsen audience ratings.
The Airborne service allowed viewers to watch DIRECTV programming on the following airlines: Continental/United, Jet Blue and Frontier. 3 In order to compete effectively against cable, one ofthe successful marketing tactics we deployed was to target "niche" demographics. Among the "niches" were sports, women, religion, foreign language and children. We knew our superior sports products attracted men, and we had a great line-up ofnetworks to attract women (e,g, Food, HGTV, Lifetime, WE, audio music). Each ofthese networks carried specific programs that achieved strong ratings. We realized early on that religion was a very strong niche and decided to aggregate religious programming to satisfy that niche based upon programs that would likely be the most popular in the context of the socioeconomic characteristics of a particular DMA. I would add that this approach was no different from the tactic developed by cable operators over the same time period. Both industries, satellite and cable, recognize the importance of niche audiences for content, and plan to deliver such programming packages so that they can attract and retain paying subscribers. III. Serving DMAs and Channel Selection I will now describe DIRECTV's process for commencing service in new DMAs, how stations were selected for carriage and the decision process to determine if we would carry the stations'ignal out of market. Because we had to follow a "carry one, carry all" local stations rule, and because there were business limitations preventing us from launching all DMAs, we had to choose channels carefully to ensure that they carried programing that would be popular and attract subscribers. A. Local-Into-Local Service Upon receiving the right to launch local stations, DIRECTV appointed a "local-into- local" marketing team. Among its duties was to choose the DMAs and the order in which they would be launched. For each DMA, the team's research took into account the number of DIRECTV subscribers, the competition (cable only at that time) and its penetration, the topography (because satellite did better in flat, rural areas), the number of multi-dwelling units and cable's penetration in those units. At the time, we sold mostly at retail outlets, so we also looked for DMAs with a strong DIRECTV retail presence. Finally, at that time, we did not own many of the companies that did our installation, so we tended to focus on DMAs where we owned the installation companies and customer service call centers. From a satellite transmission perspective, instead ofusing a national signal to distribute local stations throughout the entire U.S. (which would have been a waste of bandwidth,) DIRECTV developed a spot beam technology that enabled it to have smaller satellite beams throughout the U.S. This technology allowed DIRECTV to tailor channel and program offerings from DMA to DMA. This became an important reason why DIRECTV carried quite a few stations out ofmarket. I must emphasize how important it was to obtain the right to carry local channels. The feeling among DIRECTV management was that we would be unable to meaningfully compete against cable if we could not carry local content. At the time, DIRECTV subscribers wanting to see local channels were either using a lifeline cable service or an over the air antenna. Neither of these options was a good or easy solution for the subscriber, and both placed DIRECTV at a severe marketing disadvantage. 8. Factors Driving Subscribers to DIRECTV There were several significant factors reasons that drove customers to become DIRECTV subscribers. The first was NFL Sunday Ticket. The second was to ability of West Coast subscribers'o receive East Coast signals. Access to East Coast signals was the first time a West Coast subscriber had the ability to time shift a network. The third involved subscribers that were "unserved" by a local station. These subscribers could elect to receive a "distant network signal" of a broadcast network as an alternative. Access to network channels in unserved areas was a big plus for DIRECTV, as well as other satellite service providers. When DIREACTV launched in 1994„ iit was expensive to become a DIRECTV subscriber. It could cost $ 1,000 just to set up service. By comparison, cable set up fees were relatively cheap. However, once DIRECTV was authorized to distribute local channels, DIRECTV was able to drop costly installation fees, thereby making the company a formidable competitor to cable. While at the beginning of DIRECTV in 1994, our subscribers tended to be more affluent, once we were able to stop charging for installation and were able to offer local channels, our subscriber base became more diverse and, over time, more closely paralleled cable.
A "lifeline" cable service is the lowest tier in a cable system's pricing package, and typically consists only of local stations available over-the-air. 5 The process for launching local channels in a DMA was mandated by the FCC. It began with an affirmative notice to stations in each DMA, at which point a station could either elect "must carry" or "retransmission consent." "Must carry" means exactly what it says — DIRECTV was obligated to carry that station as long as it delivered a quality signal to our head-end. "Retransmission consent" meant that DIRECTV had to enter into a negotiation to pay that station license fees in order to carry it. Up until that time, except for people receiving signals via home antennas (i.e. over the air), only cable subscribers could receive local stations. And the cable system operators never paid for carriage. In fact, stations willingly offered their stations'ignals for free so they could have enough "eyeballs" to sell advertising. All of this changed when DIRECTV and Dish decided to launch local channels. Because we had to initiate service in so many markets in a short period of time, it was decided that we would pay a nominal fee to each station for the right to carry their signal. The way stations were paid was an amount per subscriber per month. So, if a station is being paid $0.25, it means $0.25 per subscriber per month. C. Competing with Cable Once we determined what stations we would carry in each market, we performed another study. Since we were utilizing spot beam technology, the marketing group would perform a study showing the station line-up in each DMA that was launched and covered by the same spot beam satellite against a cable line-up in the same DMA. For example, Los Angeles and San Diego were covered by the same satellite. If there was a station in Los Angeles that we wanted to carry in San Diego, either because cable was carrying it and we wanted to compete, or because cable was not carrying it and we thought it would bolster our line-up and attractiveness to subscribers, we would then carry it and pay out of market royalty fees (compulsory royalty fees). In other words, we wanted our line-up to at least match our cable competitors, or be better than our cable competitor. D. Importance ofProgram Ratings In deciding whether or not to carry that station on an out ofmarket basis, we would look at ratings, just like our cable competitors. Our marketing and business analytics departments would supply a list of stations in a DMA with their Nielsen ratings. If a station had high ratings, and cable had it or we believed it would bolster our line-up because it had high ratings, we would carry the station out ofmarket and pay copyright royalties. Ratings were the single most significant factor that the business team considered when evaluating new programrmng acquisition opportunities. The Nielsen ratings and other audience measurement tools play a pivotal role in determining the true value of a signal and its constituent programs. This is consistent with the very simple paradigm that satellite operators value programs that people watch and do not value programs that people do not watch. Based on my years of experience in the subscription television industry, I would say other satellite service providers and cable operators all viewed ratings as principal measure of value within a defined genre of programming. One reason ratings are crucial is because it is difficult to discontinue a channel after a commitment has been made to include it. Once a decision was made to carry a station out of market, DIRECTV rarely, if ever, pulled it from the DMA, unless that DMA became "served," or if that network's station launched in the DMA. The reason we never pulled a station once launched is that every station had some loyal constituency, usually a niche audience. However small it might be, we never wanted to have subscribers retaliate by "churning" off the platform, or discontinuing service. So, it was a common practice of DIRECTV that once a station's carriage commenced, the signal rarely went dark, or was pulled off the air. As one of the top Programming Acquisitions executives at DIRECTV and the person in charge of launching the local programming, I was the executive responsible for the local carriage decisions. My goal was to have the most popular programming and to make our subscribers happy so they would stay for a long time. In addition, I wanted a strong line-up to market to potential new subscribers whether they were already cable subscribers or simply using an over- the-air antenna to get their favorite stations. III. Religious Programming DIRECTV always understood that religious viewers were an important niche that needed to be courted and secured. In the late 1990s, DIRECTV targeted the devotional programming
The practice was challenged in 2012, when DIRECTV was forced to pull down all of the Viacom networks in a bitter dispute over programming fees. Consistent with my earlier comments, a fee increase initially demanded by Viacom was not justified by the ratings for its channels and programs. DIRECTV was willing to "go dark" on Viacom programming until the fees were reduced. audience with several specific pay-per-view program ("PPV") offerings. At the time, DIRECTV shared a satellite orbital slot with a company called USSB. USSB had exclusive rights to HBO, Showtime and MTV. DIRECTV had everything else. This created a disparity in DIRECTV's PPV revenues, because USSB was afforded the exclusive rights to all ofthe PPV boxing matches (solely distributed by HBO and Showtime). Because ofthis, DIRECTV experimented with alternative PPV products that it might not normally seem a typical PPV show. Prime example of the targeted, niche PPV offering were the Easter and Christmas pageants &om the Crystal Cathedral. Crystal Cathedral, whose Hour ofPower program has a loyal following, staged extravagant pageants during the most important religious seasons. The programs had respectable "buys," which let us know that our subscribers enjoyed this type ofprograms. The Crystal Cathedral programs were an important bridge to a valuable niche audience that helped DIRECTV grow and sustain growth during a very formative period. Launching local channels also allowed DIRECTV to distribute a large quantity of religious programming that it did not have access to prior to launching local channels. Carriage ofbroadcast channels, particularly those that telecast large amounts ofreligious programming, was met with enthusiasm &om our subscriber base. Our positive experience with religious programs also encouraged DIRECTV to produce its own specialty devotional programs, such as church services &om the University ofNotre Dame as well as a televised series entitled "Songs ofPraise". The latter show featured well-known performers singing popular religious songs and featured choirs &om around the country, including from the Crystal Cathedral, Brooklyn Tabernacle, St. Olaf, and Coral Ridge, among others. One ofthese specials even garnered over 2 million viewers and strengthened DIRECTV's position as a proud supporter of family-&iendly programming.
The "buy" rate for a pay-per-view program serves a similar function to Nielsen ratings because is quantifies the popularity of a program. I also helped DIRECTV launch a special platform called "Public Interest Obligations" or PIO channels. The FCC mandated that DIRECTV take 4% of its capacity (about 10 channels) for non-commercial channels. Many religious channels applied for the PIO channel spots. I was able to negotiate carriage deals with some ofthem, thereby continuing to serve our importance religious subscriber niche. IV. Other Niche Areas A. Spanish Language Subscribers Another area over which I had oversight was DIRECTV's Spanish language platform, formerly known as Para Todos and now known as DIRECTV Mas. Our satellite competitor had launched a Spanish language platform, and we knew it was very popular. We thought we could improve upon the Spanish line-up and in 2000 we launched our version of a Spanish platform. Unfortunately, our competitor had the largest Mexican network on an exclusive basis, but I was able to "own" the Puerto Rican, Cuban and Dominican markets by virtue of exclusive deals with networks from those countries. According to research, we understood that the Hispanic market was an active consumer of religious programming, particularly religious programming from their home country. To that end, I handled distribution deals for the following Spanish language religious networks: EWTN Red Global Catolica, Enlace Christian TV and Almavision.. B. Children Programming Another area that I had oversaw was children's programming. As children's viewership habits largely depended on parental involvement, we knew that chilchen's programming was a big driver for new subscribers, as well as a great marketing tool to introduce new programming packages. Some of the more popular children's programming was originated by PBS and Discovery. I also launched some of the "new" entrants to the children's programing market— PBS Kids, Baby First TV (English and Spanish), Vme (a Spanish language network geared towards children), Discovery Familia (Spanish network geared towards families). These eventually became widely distributed by other pay TV operators as well. [declare vnder penalty ofIN,rjury that the foregoing testimony is trne and correct and of my personal knowledge.
Dated: May 9, 2014 Toby Be in EXHIBIT 1 Tob Berlin Bio current in her role, Toby Berlin provides consulting expertise in the Cable/Satellite/MVPD universe including, high level negotiations, strategic planning, business development, financial and contractual support. She also advises on organizational structure, packaging, pricing, cost reduction, revenue growth, subscriber acquisition and retention, contract database, compliance, contractual negotiations and strategies and crisis management. She serves as the Cable/Satellite/Retransmission Consent Advisor for multiple research fnms to educate large institutional investors on industry. In addition, Berlin is a consultant to the SONY team that's developing a digital general network distribution product for the Playstation and advises on essential successful media distribution strategies and sales, marketing and operations best practices. She has created the roadinap for news-based cable network for expansion into airlines, hotels, motels and office buildings as well as crafted a successful negotiation strategy for cable networks seeking to extend contractual relationship with distributors.
In her previous role, Berlin was responsible for aspects ofprogramming acquisitions for the DIRECTV service including all networks available on DIRECTV's Spanish-language package DIRECTV en Espanol, DIRECTV's WorldDirect international programming packages, shopping channels, adult programming, DIRECTV's airborne platforms on Continental, JetBlue and Frontier airlines, as well as the Sonic Tap music channels available on the DIRECTV platform.
As a contract specialist, Berlin contributed millions of dollars to the bottom line from programmers'ontractual non-compliance.
After the passing of the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act of 1999 (SHVIA), which gave DIRECTV the rights to broadcast local channels across the United States, she led the efforts to bring these channels to homes across the country. Berlin negotiated the local into local rights for DIRECTV, and successfully launched the broadcast of local channels in over 143 DMAs since January 2000.
In 2006, she conceived, developed and directed the execution team for DIRECTV's Titanium package. This upscale service gives VIP subscribers access to every channel and every Pay Per View event and movie broadcast on the DIRECTV service for a single yearly fee, and debuted to a chorus ofpositive publicity singling out the platform's uniqueness and exclusivity.
Berlin was also the president emeritus and founder of the Women's Leadership Exchange at DIRECTV. This internal group enhanced the experiences of female employees at DIRECTV through monthly seminars with industry executives, networking sessions, Toastmasters club, a mentoring program, a working mothers group, and quarterly newsletters. The WLE currently operates in Los Angeles, Denver and New York. 11 Berlin is equally adept at handling Sponsorslup deals. As founding organizing committee member for DIRECTV's annual Beach Bowl and VIP "After Party" aligned with Super Bowl she negotiated network and product sponsorships, celebrity, athlete and entertainer participation. 2013 performers included Mark Cuban and Justin Timberlake. The event had been held for six years and is televised throughout U.S. and is one ofthe most anticipated events ofthe Super Bowl weekend.
Prior to her work at DIRECTV, she served as executive director of The Learning Annex, where she was responsible for the creation of a monthly catalog of over 250 classes featuring top best-selling authors and personalities.
Berlin holds a bachelor's degree from the University of Miami in Coral Gables, Fla. and a law degree from Southwestern University of Law in Los Angeles. Berlin lives with her family in Santa Monica, Calif., where she is active in the community and in 2010, served as a board member for the Santa Monica Pier.
12