Loading ...ITV have today announced a 41% drop in profits for 2008. It comes as no surprise that ITV profits are down, they’ve struggled for a number of years now, but with an expected 600 job cuts and £65m sliced from the budget, it poses the question what influence this will have on Freesat.
ITV are joint owners of Freesat with the BBC, and whilst funds will already have been allocated and taken into account for further development of the platform, you have to wonder how far their budget will go, and whether Freesat is as much a priority to them as their other projects, after all, Freesat is a ‘not for profit’ platform.
In addition, many will be concerned about high-definition; ITV whilst building on their existing content are still struggling to achieve more than 5-10 HD hours per week, via their red button service exclusive to Freesat. We can only hope that this severe drop in profits won’t damage their ability to think to the future.
If we can get a response from ITV on Freesat and HD specifically, we’ll let you know.
What do you think? Do you feel that this will have any impact?
March 4th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
What came first for ITV Poor quality programs leading to a drop in audience figures and a consequent drop in advertising revenue or a drop in advertising revenue leading to poor quality programing ?
Rather more programs worth watching may improve their financial position. The bosses need to take immediate action on this before the situation impacts upon future expenditure commitments.
March 4th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
I can only agree with Steve B. The quality of programs available from ITV are not of a standard which can compete with the BBC or Channel 4 for that matter.
The lack of quality takes them down the route of competing for revenue with the other lack luster commercial broadcasters. I tend to find myself watching ITV3 where you can find the quality aspect, albeit repeats, rather that ITV1.
Time for a rethink to save themselves and more importantly safeguard jobs.
March 4th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
What about launching an ITVHD channel on Sky and Sky paying for a lot of the costs like they did with Channel 4….only this time ensuring the contract allows them to broadcast on freesat as well. Or ITV, C4 and C5 all becoming one in order to share admin costs and more power to negotiate actors contracts and program purchase. In a world of falling advertising revenue I do think some TV actors should be taking a pay cut, I believe the BBC did this recently.
March 4th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
@LeeB: Why would Sky pay some of the costs if the channel isn’t exclusive to them? I thought that was the whole point of the C4 HD deal, which is why it’s not on Freesat.
Interestingly, ITV did raise the possibility of a merger of ITV, C4 and Five, although without discussing it with them:
http://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/news/2009/02/c4five_in_the_dark_over_itv_merger_proposal.html
March 4th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
@AndrewM, Sky are earning a tidy sum from the extra HD subscriptions (extra £10 per month ), no reason they can’t share the wealth for any channels improving their HD offering, after all they already have the equipment in place to support the channel. I’ve seen a lot of existing Sky HD customers rather upset that Sky does not offer the ITVHD channel but freesat does!. I believe ITV have already indicated Sky would have to pay if they wanted to carry their HD channel. I’m sure ITV are also getting back at Sky for messing with their merger plans with Virgin media.
March 4th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
@ Steve.B : I agree with your points, but i think ITV surely must’ve had an idea that things were getting really bad. See what happened over the phone ins (competitions) surely the wrinting was on the wall, and as for my thoughts on the subject, something has to happen to give the whole of ITV a great BIG WAKE UP call.
March 4th, 2009 at 6:52 pm
It is a shame this has happend but as Francis said the “writing was on the wall”. With the budget they are now left with, wouldn’t make sense to film popular soaps in HD to boost audience figures, show more films in HD to increase coverage. HD IS!! the future don’t let it slip through your fingers ITV.
March 4th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
Either they had a loss or they had a drop in profits. They can’t have had both. So what is it? A loss or less profit?
March 4th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
Hopefully we’ll see the end of complete and utter dross like ‘Ant & Dec’ finally . .
TV for the thick and ignorant . .
March 4th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
My parents never let me watch ITV when I was a kid. Am I just too middle-class?
March 4th, 2009 at 9:28 pm
When you talk about the dross on ITV you must remember the sort of audience which the advertisers wish to reach. ITV makes its pfrofits (or not) by delivering the largest possible audience from the demographic defined by the advertiser. And, sadly, in modern Britain, that means dross.
March 4th, 2009 at 10:26 pm
For more than 15 yrs I have hardly watched anything on ITV. They have lost touch with a balance of programmes for all. Most of the stuff on is utter dross, hardly any quality. Hope this is a huge wake up call for them.
I hope Freesat doesn’t suffer in HD programming for the future. Doesn’t it remind you of the ITV group stuffing up freeview and BBC mopping up the mess, more of the same second time around
March 4th, 2009 at 10:27 pm
ITV 1 could be re-named . . . Chav TV . .
March 4th, 2009 at 10:29 pm
The decline of ITV can be attributed to the Broadcasting Act 1990 – Check this link for details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_ITV
Up until that time you could say that ITV were a worthy rival to the BBC – not anymore.
I’m afraid this is the price you have to pay for multi channel tv – quality v quantity
March 4th, 2009 at 11:25 pm
So you read my previous comment and changed the editorial to sound less stupid without explaination?
March 4th, 2009 at 11:39 pm
And.. As for ‘The Jeremy Kyle Show’ . . Even lower than the lowest form of television I can imagine, ever!
Insulting . . . There is no comment to explain how disgusting this show is . .
March 5th, 2009 at 1:34 am
“You’re scum!”: Dead Ringers’ take on The Jeremy Kyle Show
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZb9-7i-ncc
And while I’m on the subject of Dead Ringers spoofing ITV…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiZKE0M4BSU
March 5th, 2009 at 8:14 am
Thanks fluffy, we quickly changed the post but didn’t have an opportunity to respond. We’d appreciate the avoidance of insults though thanks.
March 5th, 2009 at 9:35 am
We need to stop kids spending 3 to 4 hours on the internet when they get back from school. Make them watch TV ( BBC for the ones with taste ) so they can go out at the weekend and spend their pocket money on rubbish, keeping the advertisers happy. Then more money for HD movies etc.
I never watched any thing on ITV as a child, and still watch very little . But the other half did and yet I’m happy to say no lasting damage was done.
March 5th, 2009 at 10:09 am
The trouble with ITV is that they have aped successive governments by being reactive rather than proactive. One of their more recent shortsighted policies has been to to drop targeted regional news bulletins by amalgamating some regions, thus ensuring a further migration of viewers to the BBC for local news.
On new programming the future looks even bleaker. Most drama is now sponsored by companies such as Toyota and in the recession/depression we are now in we know the first thing to go is sponsorship.
Toyota et. al, are unlikely to shell out money whilst making people redundant or on short time.
March 5th, 2009 at 11:16 am
ITV is just reaping what it has sown. It treats its customers with absolute contempt. They refused to go onto satellite for 2 years in an attempt to discourage people going with Sky. After 2 years they caved in as they had lost a significant number of viewers. Even then they insult thier customers by transmitting the lowest definition and bit rate. Then came the ITV Digital fiasco which nearly destroyed terestrial digital and did alot of damage to football clubs. Now again they try to discourage people going with Sky by transmitting ITV HD on Freesat only. ITV is meant to be a Public Service Broadcaster and is subsidised by the government to do that yet they are clearly not putting the public first. As a PSB they should be platform independent like the BBC.
I must admit that when I saw that Michael Grade was going to ITV I thought things might improve. It seems that even he has been unable to turn ITV around.
March 5th, 2009 at 11:31 am
Yes, ITV is frankly dross; it’s far removed from what it once was – and in stripping out virtually every shred of regionality, to make more profit, I think they’ve gutted a once pretty good organisation.
I think they’re actually going against the flow in doing that – there’s a resurgence of interest in local things, with devolution, people looking to buy locally and so on. ITV could surely have tapped into that, instead of making the whole network bland and homogenous, brutally slashing the local news gathering too.
Some years back, does anyone else recall the programmes, fronted by Melvyn Bragg, that were part of ITV’s 50th birthday celebration? Frankly, when I watched them, for all that they were supposed to celebrate, they felt to me more like an obituary.
The ITV that brought us Brideshead Revisited, Jewel in the Crown, George & Mildred, Rising Damp, Minder, Rainbow, Black Beauty – and those are just off the top of my head – is long gone. It’s a miracle that they’ve not ditched the South Bank Show too; I suspect they fear the outcry if they did.
I had reasonably high hopes when Michael Grade took over, but I’ve been tremendously disappointed. About the only ITV production I’ve watched recently is Taggart, and I find there’s little in the schedules that appeals.
They are very much reaping what they sow.
March 5th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
When o when are (all) broadcaster going to wake up to the fact that people don’t watch “channels” they watch “programmes.” There seems to be an irrational nostalgia for the 70′s amongst TV companies who apparently think that all the have to do is hook us in with a big show (or soap) at tea time, then we’re locked into their channel for the night.
Here’s a thought: If ITV is a PSV, how about they ditch all the adverts and split the license fee equally between BBC & ITV so that both can spend on “quality” programming.
March 5th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
Mike – Perhaps you and I watch programmes rather than channels, but I’m sure the vast majority of couch potatoes select either BBC1 or ITV and stick with it until bed time.
The BBC has a track record of proving shows like Have I Got News For You, QI, and Weakest Link on BBC2, them dumbing them down and moving them to BBC1 to get a bigger audience. That gave ITV a big advantage – they didn’t have to dumb their shows down any further. It just seems that, over the years, they’ve gradually got rid of virtually everything worth watching.
Top shows on both BBC and ITV used to atttract 20+ million viewers. Now they’re doing well to get 5 million – and falling.
March 5th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
The trouble (or part of the trouble) seems to be that the more ITV try to cut costs the more it loses its identity/identities. The old regional ITV identities had viewers’ loyalty. Times have changed and the market is different now, but there’s a lot to be said for courting the good will of the public.
I have no idea of the economics of this, but I would suggest getting rid of national ITV1 and replacing it with new regional services which combine network and regional identities (though the number of regions/sub-regions may need to be more limited than in the past due to cost). You could have services with names like ITV Southern, ITV Yorkshire, ITV Westward (thus acknowledging the past – if those names are available for use) and ITV Capital or ITV Metropolitan, ITV Dragon, ITV Somewhere-North-East-Of-The-Lakes, ITV Badger, ITV Otter, and so on, and so on. It may be costly, but I suggest it would aid recognition and, hopefully, encourage viewer affection. Throw in a few cheap and daft regional interest programmes (‘Cornwall’s Most Haunted Tin Mines’ anyone?), and the advertisers will come flocking… maybe (well, people will watch cheap and daft if it has some connection to them).
Oh, and how about an ITV HD channel with its own identity, rather than a part time service carrying Manchester-area ads (and I don’t mean a part-time ITV Granada HD – or ITV Northwesterly HD – either!).
March 5th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
Oh, and it looks like Five is cutting its staff by 25%. Things aren’t looking good in the world of commercial FTA TV.
March 6th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Firstly id like to say that I am a huge fan of bbc 1, HD, 2 and c4. But i also think ITV has managed some excellent tv of late, the 3 part dramas have been of a quality that bbc sometimes seem to miss, whitechapel (tho oddly not in HD), unforgiven, the children, Lewis, their HD football and even im a celebrity and dancing on ice for light hearted entertainment (viewing figures alone show the merrit in a commercial organisation showing dumb reality tv). The other streams showing repeats have some classics on them too. Considering ITV provides 4 (+3 time shifted) channels i think they havent done quite as badly at program making as some have suggested. Obviously id prefer all their content to be to my taste, but there seems to be more good quality shorts coming through than of late. Now i would love to see C4 HD, but i cant because they suck up to sky, at least itv supports this venture, even if its limited. Anyway, i need to go now to watch loose women:-<
March 6th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Agree with pretty much all of the coments about the demise of ITV.
@Davei, I too am saddened by the loss of regionality.We now only get so called regional news and that is a poor standard compared with what we used to have, the format and presentation governed by the national company.
Your idea for reverting to the strong regional presentations certainly appeals.
Perhaps if ITV goes bust we night get a resurgance of regional companies ?
March 6th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
ITV have got a good boss at the helm in the shape of Michael Grade. Sadly he’ll not be able to realise his ambitions for the channel in the short term because of declining advertising revenues (combination of multi-channel competition and the economic downturn). All we can hope is that during these lean times they position themselves to come out at the end of it stronger – but that could be 2-3 years, and there may need to be some serious restructuring (and possibly merger) to get to that point.
I know everyone (including me) knock’s ITV for lack of HD content, but we shouldn’t forget that they were one of the founding members of the freesat consortium – without which this conversation wouldn’t be taking place. I hope they can get back on their feet and start giving us better quality programming – and more HD!
March 7th, 2009 at 11:15 am
HD is the future and ITV know that. If you want to sell shows to the US you need to offer HD else your not in the game at all. Just drop all the plus one channels and ITV3 and 4. That will provide plenty of savings in EPG costs alone let alone anything else.
In a few years there will only be HD TV’s available so what would be the point in transmitting in SD at all. I don’t see any channels still broadcasting in 405 line black and white.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
I’m not surprised. They are a bunch of morons. I am currently watching the Coventry v Chelsea match in HD, I’ve had to switch back to SD as the sound drop outs make it unwatchable. They really can’t get anything right.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:13 am
The sound issues on the Coventry v Chelsea match caused a stir with hundreds of complaints sent to ITV, but instead of ITV fixing the problem for the Fulham v Man UTD match they upscaled the picture in SD. However, I don’t want ITV to disappear altogether because they do have some good points and neither do I want to see their football matches given to SKY. I will not join SKY because they charge another £10 a month to watch HD and they seem to have enough problems of their own to.
March 8th, 2009 at 9:39 am
If money’s a proble, do away with the regional news service and use the money to fund a proper HD channel with LUXE TV encoding equipment.
At the end of the day regional news costs a fortune. There are dozens of channels, dozens of regional studios and staff and for what, 1 hour per day (1 x 30 minute bulletin and 2 x 15 minute bulletins approx).
It must cost ITV a fortune to fund it for 1 hours worth of programming, hardly a good cost to benefit ratio. The money would be far better spent on a dedicated HD channel to remove the problems of the red button service and up the quality and content. Even a very limited service on a dedicated channel would be better than a red button service riddled with problems.
At the end of the day, anyone wanting regional news still has the BBC to fall back on and their own local papers. It really is a duplicate service at huge expense to a commercial broadcaster thats struggling.
HD is the future and the flagship for ITV. If ITV don’t invest and nurture the service then ultimately they will lose viewers and in turn further advertisers and revenue.
Personally, I’ve already abandoned watching ITV 1 simply because the split recordings cuased by the news and the dramas of the red button system simply aren’t worth it. I’d rather watch ITV 3 or 4 or another broadcasters channel than ITV 1 now. If a films on ITV1 I wait for it to be repeated on ITV4 so there’s no split with the news. If its on ITV HD, I don’t care, give me ITV 4 SD anyday, less drama. I am a huge HD fan, but I simply can’t be bothered with an ITV system that doesn’t work properly. As for recording of ITV 1, wouldn’t even think about it, simply not worth the hassle.