Original post:
Growing Up
In the 60s Lord Thomson famously called the ownership of a local ITV franchise in the UK ‘a licence to print money’. Certainly, even the smallest of the broadcasters flourished as TV became a dominant, monopolistic medium.
Regulation was gradually relaxed and competition appeared, with inevitable results. In return, the local franchisee owners were allowed to merge creating what is today ITV (with three other franchise owners in the Channel Islands, Scotland and Northern Ireland).
Today’s results from ITV plc show that Thomson’s truism has long disappeared. The company was slow to move online and lacks the necessary skills to succeed. There are no major UK portals it can purchase and the valuations on successful online properties make it easier for them to acquire ITV rather than vice-versa. The lack of international presence is another issue in a global media world.
Their online TV JV, Kangaroo is a double edged sword and taking production in house with the expansion of ITV Productions would be an instinctive move for Michael Grade, which may prove to be the cleverest move of all.
So, what does ITV need to do to survive ?
First of all it needs to focus its role; media companies largely exist to deliver audiences to advertisers. But one, large amorphous audience is always going to be less valuable than highly targeted audiences. The long tail needs to be embraced and exploited.
Then, it needs to recognise that its current cost base is unrealistic for a contracting business and needs to seriously cut back.
A more imaginative approach needs to be taken to multiple income streams; premium phone lines and the loss of ITV Play were a blow to these plans, but this is no time to retrench.
Building brands and franchises; the value of TV is increasingly in its properties and ITV rarely own the formats it presents. Companies like HIT and Endemol show the way.
The company needs to set up an incubator and grow new online properties; it has been partially successful with ITV Local, but Friends Reunited shows why you can’t afford to buy an audience.
The company needs to start delivering international audiences, realising that the old geographical paradigm for audience delivery is only half the story.
However, an overseas bid for the company at its currently deflated valuation cannot be far away. Oh, for the old days…
View post:
It’s All Over Now
So, we’ve reached the early bits of the 21st century, only to find TV companies (Sky) selling themselves using door-to-door salesmen.
To me, this says less about the viewer than about the ability of TV to market itself.
If you don’t want sports, most TV is available free in the UK (as long as you don’t live in a Welsh valley as I do – where you have to pay a TV licence despite being incapable of receiving digital or analogue TV or radio), so why do nigh on 9 million households pay Sky ? Well, because they’re willing to put people on the pavement. They sell their service like no one else.
The BBC doesn’t need to sell – it just needs to terrify the population into paying their licence fee through their obnoxious ads; ITV isn’t sure where it stands in all of this and is seeing its audience disappear to more savvy operators. But as the recession bites, why spend that £20 – £50 a month when you can get it for free ?
Sky’s pounding of the pavements is a smart move, but may not be enough in the face of ‘free’ competitors.
View post:
Pounding The Streets
The old 80:20 rule really applies to software development (the last 20% takes 80% of the overall timescale of the project). The last leg seems to be the longest, and this is proving to be the case for Project V. As ever this is a combination of developers under-estimating and clients (that’s me) over-specifying (oh, and changing their minds. I really should know better..).
The trouble with software development is that the metalanguage around it suggests that it is a science. In reality, it is an art. An iterative process where craft is at a premium. At the same time, producing code is an industrial process involving different roles and responsibilities. An industry where an idea takes ten seconds and realising it takes ten months. And also an industry where your product is never complete, there are always revisions to make.
So, during our long, hot summer, things are moving slowly to their conclusion. I am sanguine about the prospects for the Project since the actual product is becoming better and smoother every day, ideas are being refined and it will not only be the most cost effective, but also potentially the best, product on the market when it is fully released.
Excerpted from:
Project V – The Last Leg
The disparity between the regulations that broadcasters in the UK, such as ITV, and Google trade under are truly ludicrous. You either regulate video content or you don’t. YouTube’s self regulation is laughable, but that’s the nature of unmoderated content. Now it seems that the legislators are waking up to this.
This is a long standing issue – are ISPs responsible for the websites on their service, or are publishers responsible for what their authors write?
Personally, I believe that there’s a simple measure for this. Any party benefiting commercially from the provision of content (not services) should be regulated. YouTube should be brought under Television Without Frontiers regulations.
And this isn’t an issue isolated to the UK; there is an increasingly long list of countries where YouTube has been banned. But there is a dark side to this. I reckon that the only reason more countries haven’t blocked YouTube is that its influence is not yet significant, but this may change and there is a danger of political censorship overtaking moral censorship.
Excerpted from:
Unlevel Playing Field
