ckent Posted October 26, 2010 Posted October 26, 2010 Proud Queenslander said: The thought of replacing One with Sky News is idiotic.1. Many of the programs on Sky News are originally produced for Network Ten's main competitiors, the Nine Network Australia and Seven Network Australia. This might force an FTA version of Sky News to buy/produce more content. Even if Sky News and Network Ten were given the go-ahead to screen repeated editions of ACA and Today Tonight, few people would bother to watch them. The CNN content cross-licence will have a huge impact on this, but I think your point still stands. Quote 2. There's already a news channel on FTA. Ah but think of the strategy! Packer has his fingers in Foxtel, and Foxtel certainly wants an argument against the "necessity" of a government-funded news channel. Mark Day had fun yesterday calculating Murdoch's fraction-of-a-fraction percentage control of Sky News Australia, yet the glaring counterexample is how loudly the CEO of SNA fights the anti-ABC / anti-BBC agenda exactly e same way as Murdoch does. Quote 3. Network Ten has bought exclusive broadcast rights for many sports. Imagine the fallout if they were to drop One HD? It could lead to the sporting organisations currently under contract with Network Ten refusing to negotiate with them in the future. Amidst all this curiously-consistent rumour mongering, the topic of ELEVEN keeps failing to surface. Not only does it provide the bread-and-butter 16-39 demographic that Packer allegedly craves Ten to rejoin, but not once has it been mentioned that it's possible to put Sky News on the SD channel and bump ELEVEN up to HD. Despite constantly hearing about the ridiculousness of Sky News on an HD channel, the alternative of ELEVEN HD is never given a thought. Packer's motives may just as easily be explained as "jump on at the bottom, jump off at the top". Ten is presently undervalued and the market is rising, just as a new strategy is about to flower too. He doesn't necessarily need to run onto the bridge yelling "iceberg! Full astern!" Quote On an unrelated note, I hope Conroy allows all of the sports on the anti-siphoning list to be shown on the digital multichannels. This would work out great for Network Ten Australia, the sports bodies and Australians. Events like Wimbledon, Australian Open, NRL, AFL, cricket and horse racing can gain more coverage on One HD than any other FTA channel. It's entirely likely but you have to pre-empt the pay TV sector's reaction and make an equally bold prediction about a concession that they will receive, too. Let's have more discussion about "use it or lose it" and what "use" means (does it mean live? hello Bathurst!) and what "lose" means (instantaneous? permanent?) Frankly there's far more to chew on in that area, but nobody is talking about it on forums or newspapers. Just the simple multichannel decision — which, when you think about it, is just bringing forward by 2 years something which was going to happen in 2013 anyway, once the "main channel" concept disappeared. CK.
ckent Posted October 26, 2010 Posted October 26, 2010 Oh yes, further to that — we're hitting the 10th anniversary of Seven's attempt to multichannel the Australian Open and show a few matches at the same time. They got their wrists slapped for that (and a death stare from Fox Sports), because it contravened the current regulations. Seven thought is was "multiangle" not "multichannel". But having said all that, will Seven even bother to try that again after the rules change? Will they bollocks. At least we might-maybe-please-sir get it in HD again this season, on 7mate. Or not.
cwt Posted October 27, 2010 Posted October 27, 2010 ckent said: Packer's motives may just as easily be explained as "jump on at the bottom, jump off at the top". Ten is presently undervalued and the market is rising, just as a new strategy is about to flower too. He doesn't necessarily need to run onto the bridge yelling "iceberg! Full astern!" Its only when you consider who Packers mates are there is some clue to his motivations ; a lot of conflicts of interest if 7/9 are being fattened up for public listing http://www.smh.com.au/business/no-perfect-...1025-170fd.html
Aurora8 Posted October 27, 2010 Posted October 27, 2010 (edited) fredofrog said: What has been tough is if you only watch Ten and see SD only while 9/7 show content you're not interested in, in HD (when their not showing early 20th century content FFS). Basically looking at Ten's current lineup the following is HD shown in SD (primetime):Mon - Neighbours, JMC, GNW Tue - Neighbours, NCIS's, Late SHow Wed - Neighbours, Glee, House, Good Wife, Late SHow Thu - Neighbours, Burn Notice, Late SHow Fri - Neighbours, JMC, NCIS, L&O Sat - nil Sun - Modern Family, JMC, Medium Out of interest, is Junior MasterChef (and I guess MasterChef Australia for that matter) filmed in high definition? Also, you forgot about Rush on Thursday nights. Edited October 27, 2010 by cpandilo
fredofrog Posted October 27, 2010 Posted October 27, 2010 cpandilo said: Out of interest, is Junior MasterChef (and I guess MasterChef Australia for that matter) filmed in high definition? Also, you forgot about Rush on Thursday nights. it was done quickly so maybe there is the odd in when it should be out and vice versa. from looking at the JMC pq to date it's possible that it's in HD. As long as the JP board backers e.g BG, Perpetual, +1 other being 26.8% plus JP's 19 = 45.8% they are close to control but it's a matter of who runs the board not just own 50.1% of shares. You could have 20% shares and run the company although 40+% is much more doable. Graeme Samuals is basically licking his lips at this since connections between D. Gyngell and JP would make them running 10/9 a block for JP. If JP is worried about a lean operation, then paying out the NBA, NFL, AFL, Nascar, NBL, Serie A, Bundesliga, MLB, motogp, F1 and others for closing off ONE isn't a great cost saver. The news strategy is, since as much as people say they want quality at 6pm, viewers are lazy too and continue to veg out in front of AC and TT and Overton/Bath when ABC/SBS and even Ten delievr a bette rproduct right now let alone +1.5 hiurs The other point here was that both Ten SD and ONE HD have limited HD content available as of Oct 2010 so until 2013 rocks up when the govt will decide what final allocation of bandwidth is available will HD content more than SD content. Sport content will continue to increase HD / live broadcasts which management will use to market ONE compared to Ten/Eleven which will be made up of old and new content (HD/SD/4:3 etc) so it won't be different to 9/7 in content and has less appeal to market as HD. 1990's Simpsons cannot be promoted as 16:9 or 5.1 or HD so if it's a staple weeknights having a HD channel around Ten/Eleven is not considered as the best option. Obviously a GEM like channel is the common thread but I doubt it will work if non sport gets primetime (except forlive events) and sports gets early morning/late night. In the world of timeshifting an donlinbe rebroadcast Medium could be shown at 3am as much as 8.30pm. THe point of Freeview was to promote features such as PVR timeshifters in return for making it hard to avoid ads and on top you should get a future EPG that will be better than currently available. It will count towards ratings and only stops those wnating to sit and foloow a show at the time networks dictate from watching in that way.
dan2007 Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 It's funny how I used to hate One HD after it replaced TeN HD, I love it now. MLB, Basketball & Nascar:) I think the One HD haters are taking the comments made by the press way too seriously. It's nothing but pure speculation, if the horse himself came out of the cloest (pardon the expression) and said so that he was looking at demising One HD - then you would have a legetimate cry babies on your hands to deal with. (but that will never happen - No way he will manage to influence the whole board of TEN to can One and bring something else in.) Until then - One is still safe, and still much on Ten's agenda,I believe. It's funny how people seem to cry out that Ten HD was the best, yet this year we have lost 9HD and 7HD to the poorly planned GEM and 7Mate channels, at least with Ten's ONE HD channel you knew they were planning it for a while and what they wanted from it.
DansDans Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 dan2007 said: No way he will manage to influence the whole board of TEN You dont think he can? This is James Packer, son of media mogul Kerry Packer. People will do what he says, regardless of whether they feel its the right decision or not.
myrantz Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 DansDans said: You dont think he can? This is James Packer, son of media mogul Kerry Packer. People will do what he says, regardless of whether they feel its the right decision or not. No he can't.. Even ur post suggest it.. He's still being over shadowed by his dead dad.
dan2007 Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 I don't think he can - your posts suggests that One is still vailable for Ten as well - and the marketing decision behind One would have to be severely compromised by some other forces in the board for it to be axed. It may not be a huge selling point for Ten, but it seems to be doing just enough for now for them to warrant extended and new contracts for sports.
DansDans Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 treblid said: No he can't.. Even ur post suggest it.. He's still being over shadowed by his dead dad. Is everyone ignoring the fact that he reportedly has Bruce Gordon on his side (who has about 12% or so in TEN shares) and an equity company/bank that has a 10% share. Not to mention he reported could convince/sell 1/2 of his share to Lachlan Murdoch? Nick Falloon is gone - resigned this morning. If thats not exercising some kind of influence already then I dont know what is...
DansDans Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 dan2007 said: I don't think he can - your posts suggests that One is still vailable for Ten as well - and the marketing decision behind One would have to be severely compromised by some other forces in the board for it to be axed. It may not be a huge selling point for Ten, but it seems to be doing just enough for now for them to warrant extended and new contracts for sports. My posts may suggest that, and in fact I more than most people here love ONE HD, but I am under no illusion that JP may, at the drop of a hat, decide to axe it due to his Fox Sports interests. I sincerely hope not though, but burying ones head in the sand wont make this issue go away. ONE keep announcing new sports contracts by the month - but that might not mean anything if they have to pull the plug. I assume in their board its a majority decision - and if Packer can gain 42% majority as has been widely reported - then youd need to pretty confident the remaining 58% believe the ONE HD project (experiment?) is worthy enough to continue. Having said that, there has been no official (or as official as you can get from Packer) statement from him detailing his plans so essentially everything we *know* (using that word loosely BTW) maybe be complete bollocks... (and consider most of the things reported have been sourced from News Limited newspapers, which means you need to take that with a grain of salt already)
djOS Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 DansDans said: Nick Falloon is gone - resigned this morning. If thats not exercising some kind of influence already then I dont know what is... That's not a good sign, I hope the ACCC step in and prevent JP from getting a seat as he has far too many conflicts of interest!
DansDans Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 dJOS said: That's not a good sign, I hope the ACCC step in and prevent JP from getting a seat as he has far too many conflicts of interest! http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2010/10/report...tands-down.html Not a good sign at all TEN has far too many shareholders with interests elsewhere. I wonder if Hungry Jacks get cheaper rates than everyone else?
Gozu Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 DansDans said: ONE keep announcing new sports contracts by the month - but that might not mean anything if they have to pull the plug. What about the NBA contract?
Hosko Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 (edited) dJOS said: That's not a good sign, I hope the ACCC step in and prevent JP from getting a seat as he has far too many conflicts of interest! He/his dad owned Channel 9 when they gained their shares in Foxtel/Fox Sports so how exactly is it anti-competitive if he owns another FTA station? Lachlan is the one who might be in trouble, he owns DMG and News Ltd own a heap of newspapers and under the current law you can only own 2 out of 3 in any market. He would have to convince the ACCC that he is separate from News Ltd. Plus it makes little sense for them to shut down one, expensive rights have already been bought. Makes more sense to outsource its production to Fox Sports. Currently they pay AFL Films to produce their AFL coverage, why not have Fox Sports AFL team cover it. Sports Tonight could be produced or even replaced with Fox Sports News. Reduces the cost base with roughly the same content. Disney owns both ABC and ESPN in the states and ESPN produces most of the sport on ABC. Edited October 29, 2010 by Hosko
cwt Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 Heres some good reading and its from a fairfax rag so the news limited bias isnt there . When it comes from 2 separate media analysts with one recommending a sell order on something that may not happen ? makes you think . DanDans is just being realistic here ; obviously sport costs less and contracts would have to be paid out .. http://www.smh.com.au/business/packer-tune...1028-175p7.html
Hosko Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 cwt said: Heres some good reading and its from a fairfax rag so the news limited bias isnt there . When it comes from 2 separate media analysts with one recommending a sell order on something that may not happen ? makes you think . DanDans is just being realistic here ; obviously sport costs less and contracts would have to be paid out ..http://www.smh.com.au/business/packer-tune...1028-175p7.html Channel 10 has a sell recommendation at the moment because when Packer started buying shares the share price went up because people thought he was going to launch a full take over and they would make money. It doesn't look like that will happen so people are advised to sell because the price is still artificially high.
djOS Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 (edited) Hosko said: He/his dad owned Channel 9 when they gained their shares in Foxtel/Fox Sports so how exactly is it anti-competitive if he owns another FTA station? Lachlan is the one who might be in trouble, he owns DMG and News Ltd own a heap of newspapers and under the current law you can only own 2 out of 3 in any market. He would have to convince the ACCC that he is separate from News Ltd. Plus it makes little sense for them to shut down one, expensive rights have already been bought. Makes more sense to outsource its production to Fox Sports. Currently they pay AFL Films to produce their AFL coverage, why not have Fox Sports AFL team cover it. Sports Tonight could be produced or even replaced with Fox Sports News. Reduces the cost base with roughly the same content. Disney owns both ABC and ESPN in the states and ESPN produces most of the sport on ABC. It's simple, ONE HD gives ppl like me no reason to pay for Foxtel with the sports package as I can get most of what I want for free now - I know ppl who have cancelled Foxtel because of One HD. Back when JP/KP owned Nein there was no multi-channel FTA sports channel competing against foxtel's sports channels - basically the TV landscape has changed in aus finally and for the better imo! Edited October 29, 2010 by dJOS
fredofrog Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 Hosko said: Channel 10 has a sell recommendation at the moment because when Packer started buying shares the share price went up because people thought he was going to launch a full take over and they would make money. It doesn't look like that will happen so people are advised to sell because the price is still artificially high. It's the ACCC aspect dictating that and not JP's decision. JP's happy for the sell recommendation because overtime he can wait and see and then convince the Board that the shar eprice is going no where with the current management so it's best to sell to me (JP).
dan2007 Posted October 30, 2010 Posted October 30, 2010 I actually that article that was posted - and interesting point - to reconfigure One HD for general entertainment. Would pointless doing that considering Eleven will be launching in the new year. Quote It's simple, ONE HD gives ppl like me no reason to pay for Foxtel with the sports package as I can get most of what I want for free now - I know ppl who have cancelled Foxtel because of One HD. Definitely agree with that.
DrP Posted October 30, 2010 Posted October 30, 2010 dan2007 said: I actually that article that was posted - and interesting point - to reconfigure One HD for general entertainment. Would pointless doing that considering Eleven will be launching in the new year. Unless HD becomes 11 and sport gets consigned to the 2nd SD program (assuming '24 hour' sports persists).
Riv39 Posted November 2, 2010 Author Posted November 2, 2010 dJOS said: It's simple, ONE HD gives ppl like me no reason to pay for Foxtel with the sports package as I can get most of what I want for free now - I know ppl who have cancelled Foxtel because of One HD.Back when JP/KP owned Nein there was no multi-channel FTA sports channel competing against foxtel's sports channels - basically the TV landscape has changed in aus finally and for the better imo! Agreed, I won't pay for sport even if they do can ONE HD. Hopefully plenty will agree and Ten's audience will shrink (I hope it does anyway) but the damage will have already been done.
myrantz Posted November 2, 2010 Posted November 2, 2010 Riv39 said: Agreed, I won't pay for sport even if they do can ONE HD. Hopefully plenty will agree and Ten's audience will shrink (I hope it does anyway) but the damage will have already been done. I'd prob pay for NBA league pass...
fredofrog Posted November 2, 2010 Posted November 2, 2010 DrP said: Unless HD becomes 11 and sport gets consigned to the 2nd SD program (assuming '24 hour' sports persists). Never saw it coming
ckent Posted November 4, 2010 Posted November 4, 2010 fredofrog said: The other point here was that both Ten SD and ONE HD have limited HD content available as of Oct 2010 so until 2013 rocks up when the govt will decide what final allocation of bandwidth is available will HD content more than SD content. Not sure what's so special about Oct 2010 (do you mean just until March 2011?) and the second part of your sentence is missing a verb somewhere before the word "more" ... maybe you could clarify your point? As for "the govt will decide what final allocation of bandwidth is available", I went to the ACMA spectrum seminar yesterday and it's 99.9% definite that there's no extra spectrum going to any TV network in the next decade or more. They can make do with the 23 Mbps they have, and the government can remove the HD quota, but we won't see more than one HD channel via terrestrial for a while. CK.
Recommended Posts