Areas where ITV is 'missing a trick'

But why would they turn down a paid-for advertiser with an advert for themselves? That is bad business. The income from one advert for themselves wouldn't work out as more income than one advert that some-one else has paid for... especially that rubbish 'Brighter Side' promotion.



ITV Casino and Bingo are spin off's from TV programmes (or maybe still programmes). No idea why they're doing signing for deaf babies, presumably it's ticking a regulatory box somewhere but it's not 'core' either.

The internet and TV are slowly integrating, they are ITV's core business. Cinema isn't 'core' even though the early ITV companies (including Granada) started as cinema companies. Branding a block of cinema advertising with a TV company isn't good branding - it wasn't for Carlton. And of course the other ITV company that owned/owns a cinema advertising company didn't tarnish their brand with it.

Besides, Pearl & Dean had such a jazzy jingle I can see why STV kept it.

That is a very naive way of interpreting my suggestions.

In vision continuity would generate a pool of fairly low cost, but popular presenters who could front other programming in addition to their continuity work. It wouldn't even have to cost much more, they could create a 'continuity and weather' department to cut costs.

Ant & Dec have probably got another 2 years left in them. Their only show which wasn't format driven has lost favour with the public and they're basically left with I'm A Celebrity and Britain's Got Talent.. both of which would be equally watchable without them. Ant & Dec really aren't the most popular faces on television anymore.

And to simplify the presentation of news is not insulting viewers' intelligence; it is showing an understanding of what they really want from the programme: the facts. If anything, creating a studio that throws up charts and facts behind the presenter is a greater insult to the intelligence of the viewer.

I'm not suggesting they turn down paid advertisers - and they wouldn't need to. Carlton screen advertising played idents into cinemas before and after the advertisements anyway. ITV could have used that space - two showings per movie - to play an ITV ident or promo instead. It would cost them nothing, and would screen their message to millions of movie goers a week.

As somebody has mentioned, the Pearl&Dean ident is very memorable. Everybody knows that when the jingle plays, the adverts are finished and the film is going to start. There is nothing 'tarnishing' about having the ITV name played out on the silver screen in front of an excited audience.



But to the viewers in the cinema they wouldn't be 'branding the adverts'. I'm not suggesting they play an 'ITV Cinema' ident. They could be playing an ITV1 promo - for free! Carlton never used the slot to promote their TV services, so yes, it was a wasted opportunity.



Who are the most popular presenters on television then? Graham Norton and John Barrowman? I don't think Ant and Dec will necessarily run out of steam. They could be an ITV version of Terry Wogan, presenting prestigious shows for many, many years; and if they get too old for 'Britain's Got Talent', I wouldn't be surprised to see them get a talk show or something.

I do like Ant & Dec, but their impish charm isn't going to last forever - and that, along with making each other laugh, is what makes them so good on screen.

When they're pushing 40 they may look more like the Chuckle Brothers, don't you think?

It would cost them nothing except the cost of running a cinema advertising company which they don't really care about or won't channel resources to as it's not core. That's the main problem with non-core assets - the subsidiary gets overlooked and doesn't do very well. ITV are a TV company, and they're struggling at that without having to worry about something else

I believe that Carlton Screen Advertising was struggling to make a profit when they sold it, if not it certainly would be in this climate.



But it would dilute the brand - what is ITV, a TV company or a cinema company?

Pearl and Dean is a very famous tune/animation but it's not there to do anything else but promote itself and the block of adverts. When a company wants to advertise in a cinema they think Pearl and Dean



But that is the point of the cinema advertising stings - to 'brand the adverts'.

ITV playing a promo would only be free if the income it brought in matched the cost of running the company, the loss it makes and the time used to show it. It wouldn't be free, I assume that the advertising company only get a limited amount of time in a cinema so a promo would displace a paid for advert. Even if the time isn't restricted, it's still much more profitable to sell the 30 seconds than run a promo that might, at best, bring a handful of extra viewers

Yes however their big problem is that they are just presenters, that's their only talent. They don't write or have any expertise in any other field. Yes, they acted and released a record when they were teenagers but not to any fantastic level (their Likely Lads remake shows their acting proficiency!).

Other well known double acts are comedians who also act or write so they do things out of the double act, even Richard and Judy work apart. I can't see anyone hiring Ant without Dec or vice versa

Well Orange don't have that problem. Nobody sits wondering "is Orange a phone company or a cinema advertising company?". To the viewer, it would be ITV showing promos in a cinema, just like Orange do.

Regarding Ant and Dec, I wonder why ITV have themselves never split them up, for example, have Ant do a link and Dec reporting 'backstage'. Fair enough they wouldn't have their 'boyish banter' in this situation, and they might just come across as a bit dull reading links, but it works for Dermot O Leary...

I don't understand. You say the viewer wants "the facts" but then complain about ITV News having too many "charts and facts"! Perhaps you'd feel happier listening to the news on the radio.

That's totally different, Orange are just a prominent advertiser/sponsor. They're not selling advertising, they're selling phones. They're not keeping a loss-making non-core business on board just so they can run a few adverts!

It wouldn't be cheap to do in-vision continuity and they'd get very little back from it. Also the fact that their playout is done by another company now adds extra complications to doing something like that

If they need presenters for their programming there's no shortage of half competent presenters knocking around who could front them on an ad-hoc basis

That's not what I was contesting. You said ITV running promos in the cinema would dilute their brand, and I offered an example to demonstrate that being associated with cinemas does not confuse your brand message.