DV
it's a bit disappointing to get to 4am on a quiet nightshift and discover that your viewing options amount to some rolling news or a three-year-old signed repeat of
Location Location Location
. I appreciate there's no advertising revenue at that time of the morning, but do channels really incur much of a cost by showing more repeats - even if it's just what was on earlier?
I agree I have long argued that they should repeat prime time overnight to give people a second chance to catch it or record it at least. You see more of it further up the EPG but it's strange that the most popular channels don't.
There is no money to be made on late night television anymore. Not with the competition of hundreds of digital channels and on demand services. And needless to say advertisers won't pay for their adverts to be broadcast to seven viewers at crazy o' clock in the morning.
That's why the terrestrial channels opt for repeats, news or Roulette which will at least make a bit of money.
That's why the terrestrial channels opt for repeats, news or Roulette which will at least make a bit of money.
I agree I have long argued that they should repeat prime time overnight to give people a second chance to catch it or record it at least. You see more of it further up the EPG but it's strange that the most popular channels don't.