MA
I thought ITV had bought SMG's stake from them though?
I think what TedJrr was actually getting at was...
If ITVplc owned GMTV outright, and therefore effectively owned the "channel 3 breakfast" licence (for the whole UK - even STV and UTV land), and decided to introduce any "ITV1" branding into the 6:00-9:25am slot (which they would be at liberty to do), then SMG might be annoyed that this would mean "ITV1" gets mentioned on channel 3 in central and northern Scotland.
So if SMG would get so shirty about ITV1 being mentioned on their precious channel, how come almost all of their output is ITV1?!
brotherton sands posted:
markstewart posted:
TedJrr posted:
The only serious contraint that might come into play would be SMG getting p***y if ITV tried to put its own branding about.
I thought ITV had bought SMG's stake from them though?
I think what TedJrr was actually getting at was...
If ITVplc owned GMTV outright, and therefore effectively owned the "channel 3 breakfast" licence (for the whole UK - even STV and UTV land), and decided to introduce any "ITV1" branding into the 6:00-9:25am slot (which they would be at liberty to do), then SMG might be annoyed that this would mean "ITV1" gets mentioned on channel 3 in central and northern Scotland.
So if SMG would get so shirty about ITV1 being mentioned on their precious channel, how come almost all of their output is ITV1?!