ITV - paid for previews next?

Gavin, you surprise me. Archie Norman's experience at ASDA and as a politician is well documented. He was one of the best known businessmen of the 90s.

If you're an outsider to tv, like he is, you are going to ask fundamental questions - just as he did at Asda in the 90s.

One which he's bound to ask is. "We pay most of the cost of this product and we make most of this product... but we don't sell it ourselves to Scotland and NI and someone else does... and we think we're subsidising them!"

The idea that a new chief exec and chairman will drop the action against STV - far less do a U turn and believe they aren't subsidising the smaller companies - is almost certainly wishful thinking. It would be absolutely humiliating for ITV to drop the action and say their earlier calls for changing the network arrangements were misguided.

Here's a good potted biog of Archie Norman.

http://www.londonspeakerbureau.co.uk/archie_norman.aspx

simple that is how the ITV network is design

I didn't suggest they should drop the action at all. There's undoubtedly issues to be resolved for each party, and now is the time to do it.

On glimpsing at the link I do know Mr Norman. Not that we've been in the same orbit, you understand, but I'm familiar with his track record now I've reminded myself.

Should I infer from history that he'll fatten up the cow and sell it to the Yanks?

I can't see this working as a reliable revenue source for ITV. They don't actually produce anything that warrants someone paying for a preview broadcast of the next episode. I think you've got be be a fairly desperate individual if you can't wait a week or so for the next episode of a drama or soap, and I can't see it working for any other genre.

Sky often use their 'Anytime' function on Sky+ boxes to show previews of up-coming series. But that service is free (for subscribers) and is used to tempt people into something they may not otherwise watch. In fact, had I not seen the first episode of Stargate: Universe on there, I wouldn't be hooked on it now!

That's a completely different concept to asking people to pay for something that they will be getting sooner or later for free!

That was my first thought on hearing of his appointment to the post!

But then of course if the ITV network of the 1980's or 90's was still in existence then it wouldn't be happening at all as they'd never all agree to anything.. There's be no ITV Player, ITV.com etc and the current STV vs ITV battle multiplied 14 times

But yet it is, the 12 company are now one, but still have a system design with 14/15 in mind, just because the 12 main companies now singing as one have come up with ITV player etc still does not mean the old system is not there

No, the old system has gone, a single entity is calling the shots and the other 3 companies are mere afterthoughts.

The fact that the same programmes are scheduled across England and Wales, and they've actually come up with things like ITV.com is a by product of there being an ITV PLC. It wouldn't have happened with the old system in place and the fact that STV are in dispute demonstrates this

I don't dismiss the possibilty of the old system not embracing networked modern tech, there was a vehicle which could quite easily have undertaken such activities ITCA - The Independent Television Companies Association,

Not that the ITCA could get them to agree on things - hence how the ITV companies in the 80's were split on which satellite system to invest in and in the 90's how to grasp the new fangled internet thing. And that's just the important business stuff, they were each others throats about programmes too - each company with it's own agenda.

This is all very off-topic isn't it?

I just feel like ITV is so out of touch with how the market works at the moment, perhaps it's because the company is now run by people who specialise in 'business', rather than making money through great television.

They seem determined to charge for their content now, and the article talks about ITV content being 'pay per view' on Canvas in the future. They've also discussed charging for X Factor clips on the web, on mobiles, and taking their digital channels onto a subscription-only platform.

Their attitude baffles me. Clips like Susan Boyle became huge worldwide hits on Youtube because they were free to access. It would not have been such a big hit if people had to pay for it - and even if it was a pay clip, people would have ripped it and put it up on Youtube for free anyway.

ITV2 is the most popular digital channel, and often beats Five and has now overtaken Sky1 in Sky homes. Why take it off Freeview and slash a market of 8million viewers from your potential audience?

As for paying for the next episode, I can't see it taking off. I certainly hope it doesn't, because it paves the way for ITV to charge for more of its on-demand content, and whilst I enjoy shows like X Factor, I wouldn't pay for them. ITV has built its fortunes on providing the best free entertainment for years, and whilst they've fallen on hard times, they can't expect people will start forking out for programmes like Coronation Street.

Advertisers spend more online than they do on television. That should send a clear message that ITV need to sort out their website and make it the top UK destination for great programmes, so that they rake in a big share of that advertising spend. Instead, they've sacked most of their web team, ITV.com is an utter crock of ****, and a lot of their programmes play out without any adverts in them at all on the 'ITV Player'; and then they sit there wondering what to do, and come up with ludicrous schemes like asking people to pay £2 to see next week's episode of Emmerdale.

And? ITV's programmes aren't on the BBC or Channel 4. Your point is moot.

A preview service makes good sense on a business level. Advertisers pay £35 per 1000 viewers watching ITV1. They show about 12 adverts every half-hour, so that's £420 for a half-hour programme. However, with a preview service, ITV could make £2000 from the same number of viewers.

I don't agree with the principle of this proposal though. I think Viewers should either sit down and watch the programme at the allotted time or record it on their DVD-R / PVR / VCR or they miss it - simple as.

I don't agree with +1 channels (which should actually be called -1 channels since they're one hour behind the normal channels, not an hour ahead) for the same reasons.


I don't think that's going to happen.


The same is even more true of the BBC but I don't hear anyone complaining about that!


If it was up to me, ITV wouldn't even have a website. It's a total waste of money. You say advertisers spend more online than they do on television, but the money is spread so thinly between so many websites that ITV will never 'rake it in'.