Apologies if this has been mentioned elsewhere, but on 8th March, destruction of Marco Polo House in south London commenced.
An iconic but divisive building architecturally, it housed many broadcasters and media organisations over its short but eventful life, being somewhat of a curse for Sky competitors BSB and On Digital. It is to be redeveloped into a series of flats and penthouses to be called Vista Chelsea Bridge.
Swathes of it must've been empty for most of its life. The transmission control areas were used from 1989 to the end of 1992, then again from 1998 - 2002. Presumably these areas were unused the rest of the time? It's often forgotten that the reason ITV Digital ended up there was because Sky were an initial partner in the company.
The studios will have fared a bit better, in use during 1989 (as intended), then scarsely until 1993 when QVC received the space. Between '89 and '93 I guess it would have been used (initially at least) for the continuing BSB productions (Now Sir Robin - anything else?).
Any idea how much use The Observer made of their space? I'd guess they moved in with The Guardian some time in the 90s?
It's certainly a very of its time design. Sad to see it go, even if I'd not go as far as to say I liked it.
:-(
A former member
Would ON digtail faired better IF the transmissions control come from Kent house?
Would ON digtail faired better IF the transmissions control come from Kent house?
It would have fared better if it hadn't overcharged for a service high on quantity and low on signal quality, and by not using a crackable decryption system, and by paying way over the odds for Football League soccer, and by undermarketing, and by over-complicating the pricing structure, and by then rebranding at horrendous cost....
It would have faired better if BSkyB weren't ordered out of the consortium, by the ITC under political pressure, for the paranoid belief that letting Uncle Rupe in on DTT as well as satellite and cable television wasn't a good thing.
Even though, Sky's involvement would have been offering Sky Sports and Sky Movies at a reduced price for OnDigital, than we subscribers actually ended up paying per month - and Sky would have done most of the marketing (yes, via The Sun and Times - prop. R Murdoch) and you suspect the actual launch under Sky's supervision would not have been Ulrika Johnson pressing a prop button at the Crystal Palace transmitter in the middle of a windswept fireworks display.
Sky had to leave - and all the things (bar the signal quality) that Michael mentioned above that then happened could be tracked back to that decision.
It would have faired better if BSkyB weren't ordered out of the consortium, by the ITC under political pressure, for the paranoid belief that letting Uncle Rupe in on DTT as well as satellite and cable television wasn't a good thing.
Even though, Sky's involvement would have been offering Sky Sports and Sky Movies at a reduced price for OnDigital, than we subscribers actually ended up paying per month - and Sky would have done most of the marketing (yes, via The Sun and Times - prop. R Murdoch) and you suspect the actual launch under Sky's supervision would not have been Ulrika Johnson pressing a prop button at the Crystal Palace transmitter in the middle of a windswept fireworks display.
Sky had to leave - and all the things (bar the signal quality) that Michael mentioned above that then happened could be tracked back to that decision.
It would have ended up being a significantly different product, certainly.
Overall though, the consumer has benefited from ITV Digital's failure.
