FCC Record, Volume 2, No. 1, Pages 1 to 409, January 5 - January 16, 1987 Page: 75
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Federal Communications Commission Record
was obtained as a result of Commission approval of a
settlement proposal, not a comparative award. Thus, the
one year holding period does not apply to this case. We
also see no merit to Stevens' argument that the sale of
WWDB to NEWSystems was a de facto distress sale.
Clearly, neither the Commission's March 31, 1986 approval
of the Settlement Agreement nor the staffs subsequent
approval of the WWDB transfer was based on our
Distress Sale policy. The mere fact that NEWSystems is a
minority enterprise does not support Steven's position
that the earlier transfer of WWDB was, in fact, a distress
sale. Moreover, we do not believe that application of the
Distress Sale policy was appropriate in this case. Accordingly,
Stevens' arguments are rejected.
13. We find that Panache is fully qualified to be a
Commission licensee and that a grant of the application
will serve the public interest, convenience and necessity.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth herein, IT IS ORDERED,
That the Petitions to Deny filed by Evans and
CC ARE DISMISSED and, when treated as Informal
Objections, ARE DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED,
That the Petition to Deny filed by Stevens IS
14. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, That the pro forma
assignment of license for WWDB from NEWSystems to
MediaComm IS GRANTED.
15. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, That the assignment
of license for WWDB-FM from MediaComm to Panache
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
William J. Tricarico
On November 24, 1986, NEWSystems filed an application to
assign the license of WWDB from itself to MediaComm III,
Limited Partnership (MediaComm) (File No. BALH-861124HL).
The proposed assignment involves no substantial change in the
ownership of WWDB and its strictly pro forma. On December
3, 1986, Leonard Stevens filed an Informal Objection charging
that this assignment violates 47 C.F.R. 73.3518 (inconsistent
applications) and will result in an unlawful transfer of control
to Charles Schwartz, the sole owner of Panache. The inconsistent
application rule is designed to prohibit applications not all
of which can be granted, Comark Television, Inc., 51 RR 2d 738
(1982), and does not apply in a situation such as this where
grant of the pro forma assignment does not preclude approval of
the proposed assignment from NEWSystems to Panache. This
pro forma assignment also will not result in an unlawful transfer
of control since Mr. Schwartz's equity interest in
MediaComm will be the same as his present equity interest in
NEWSystems and there will be no change in Mr. Schwartz's
present role at the station.
2 Evans and CC go so far as to allege fraud, collusion,
conspiracy, pay offs and death threats on the part of various
parties to the Settlement Agreement and Panache. These allegations
are, however, totally unsubstantiated and therefore shall
be summarily dismissed.
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Federal Communications Commission. FCC Record, Volume 2, No. 1, Pages 1 to 409, January 5 - January 16, 1987, book, January 1987; Washington D.C.. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc1597/m1/82/: accessed March 28, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.