ITV stations that lost their franchise

Though when you look at some of the stuff Carlton came out with in the early days, you can almost understand it...

Here’s an interesting watch, The Money Programme from the week after the ITV Franchise results in 1991.



In hindsight, as we’ve probably discussed on here before, TV-am did bid the right amount, more so when GMTV asked for a reduction.

Also interesting to see how much speculation there was of a European invasion and fears of quality, which largely did not happen to the extent they predict.

It really does feel like TV-am died in vain, knowing what we know now. I don't think Thames would ever have lost their franchise if it wasn't based on who could cough up the most cash either.

We've discussed this many times, but Thames was in an unfortunate position in that it had owners who didn't really want it. Thorn-EMI would have been happy to sell their stake to Carlton in 1985. As a result of this apathy, it was always going to be in a vulnerable position and would have likely been swallowed up post 1993 (probably by Granada).

It would have been interesting to see how long TV-am would have lasted in tact, and how badly it would have been affected as The Big Breakfast hit its stride. GMTV bid more but it also had significantly reduced running costs.

Yes, TV-am bid something like £16m, GMTV came along with about £33m I think it was, won the franchise and then later went to reduce this figure to a level below what TV-am bid in the first place.

Assuming all played out the same way it did, TV-am was very profitable in 1991 and very popular at the time. Its probably safe to say The Big Breakfast gained viewers because everybody turned off GMTV in the early days of 1993, when they tried to go off in a different direction and were ultimately forced to copy the TV-am model that worked well for the former company. If GMTV hadn't happened, and TV-am was still on the air, its could have put up a serious ratings fight against the Breakfast in 1993.

There was an arrangement, maybe forced by the ITC, for TV-am to have a peak time trail. In return TV-am would show network ITV trails in the 8am hour.

The LNN Betacart used standard Betacart analogue BetaSP decks but had a component A to D converter for each before a SDI channel output switcher.
When LNN adopted Sony Newsbase server playout the Betacart ended up at Meridian New Hythe in 2001

You're right, I just got the date, and direction of travel wrong!

In 1991, TV-am would, I think, have been selling the C4 ads during the Big Breakfast, which I guess helped their profitability?

I wouldn't agree with that, probably, The Big Breakfast's ratings were going up during TV-am's last few months in 1992, because every kid in Britain was watching it, and bringing their parents along too, so even if TV-am had carried on into 1993 it would have seen ratings fall quite substantially. GMTV was in pretty poor shape editorially at the start, but the main problem for them was that thousands of parents and kids who they were expecting to tune in weren't there, because they'd all gone off to The Big Breakfast. And boring old TV-am would have probably have been just as badly hit (not least as they'd then be doing all the high-faluting franchise-winning stuff they'd promised the ITC).

I don't really buy the idea, as often mentioned on this forum, that TV-am should have won, seemingly because they were popular and profitable. Bruce Gyngell would always over-exaggerate how successful TV-am was, and of course for most of the time they had a captive audience because Breakfast News and The Channel Four Daily were so boring. If you wanted something a bit lighter in the mornings, it was TV-am or nothing. The thing that had most effect on TV-am's ratings wasn't anything they did, it was Breakfast Time getting rid of the red sofas.

As for its profitability, that had no value for the audience, the ITC or the treasury. In Morning Glory they mention William Phillips reviewing TV-am in 1991 and saying it was likely to lose because it was "populist without being especially popular" and that it made more money than was "diplomatic". Certainly there was no sign of those massive profits being invested on air, even at the age of eleven I could tell its programmes had a very low budget. If the criteria for a successful franchise was that it made loads of money for its shareholders then yes, it was a success, but you would hope for higher standards than that.



Harry Turner talks about the TSW bid in Independent Television in Britain, which was massive, saying that it was based on the idea that they would then contract absolutely everything out and sell all the assets like the studios, and you'd be left with a newsroom and a Director of Programmes and that would be enough to keep the station going. Although it sounds so little like what TSW was you wonder what the point of it all was if that was all you were left with.

Its all conjecture anyway. I've said before its entirely plausible had TV-am won in 1991 they were well over due for some new presentation, since they were still using in 1991 what they launched with (for the most part) in 1983. Yes they certainly got their money's worth out of the sky divers, pigeons, the battleship and the overhead shot on the Bristol Downs in the end, but I'd like to think after 1993 they stopped using all of that (maybe kept the analogue clock still, just to be different) but we'll never know so...

Was it not the case that TV-am benefited from The Big Breakfast's early success because they sold the advertising for it?