Be careful what you wish for: -
“BBC is going to stop being funded by the TV licence”. That head line might be greeted by applause and gasps of “at last” But with reference to my last blog what would that mean?
From the 1st of November BBC will become a subscription or pay per view service only.
If the BBC became a “for profit” organisation the senirio would be different and the changes more radical, but lest assume that they remain a “not for profit” organisation at first.
From the BBC’s perspective they need the same money as they did before. They have no guarantee that they will get the same number of subscribers as licence fee payers so will have to charge more per subscriber than the licence fee cost.
As a consumer I may be happy with that as I never watch BBC. So what would be the choice for millions of people that do watch BBC? Pay more or give up BBC.
Suddenly freeview/freesat doesn’t look so attractive so subscribe to Sky/Virgin but to get BBC in the package there is a premium to pay. I could go for BT Vision and only pay for the programmes I want. But if I say watch Never Mind the Buzzcocks, Have I Got News For You, Top Gear (building a profile of me?) Heros, at £1.50 each per week that’s £6 per week. I know these are not on 52 weeks a year but 4 programmes a week would not be unreasonable compared to what I watch now. Suddenly without any effort I’m into £312 – considerably more than my licence fee and that doesn’t include the broadband, cable or satellite basic subscription I would have to pay also.
What looks good up front isn’t going to benefit me (or most people) in the long run financially – the effects on the content long term is another matter, as is the BBC becoming a for profit organisation.
Friday 24 October 2008
Carpet Baggers
Here is a thought: -
A few years ago the “carpet baggers” went around the mutual financial institution, forcing or at least encouraging them to become commercial operation. Building societies became banks. Savers, mortgagees and other account holders got some money depending on their stake in the company.
Some of the organisations management got pay and status increases and the companies changed there paradigm from a non-profit making organisations run for the benefit of their account holder to profit making organisations run for the benefit of the management and the shareholder.
The vast majority of the people went along with the change, either actively for, or passively led. A minority actively opposed. I have to say that I was in the passive mode.
One of the results of this is that come the “credit crunch” none of the remaining mutual societies have made even the slightest noise about financial difficulty. None of the account holders is withdrawing their money or having their house repossessed because they are worried or they had their mortgage over sold.
A part of me hopes that those that actively pursued and gained from the demutualisation craze have reaped their just deserts.
A few years ago the “carpet baggers” went around the mutual financial institution, forcing or at least encouraging them to become commercial operation. Building societies became banks. Savers, mortgagees and other account holders got some money depending on their stake in the company.
Some of the organisations management got pay and status increases and the companies changed there paradigm from a non-profit making organisations run for the benefit of their account holder to profit making organisations run for the benefit of the management and the shareholder.
The vast majority of the people went along with the change, either actively for, or passively led. A minority actively opposed. I have to say that I was in the passive mode.
One of the results of this is that come the “credit crunch” none of the remaining mutual societies have made even the slightest noise about financial difficulty. None of the account holders is withdrawing their money or having their house repossessed because they are worried or they had their mortgage over sold.
A part of me hopes that those that actively pursued and gained from the demutualisation craze have reaped their just deserts.
Wednesday 1 October 2008
ITV emergent strategy matches their declared strategy
What happened to September? Well IBC for one thing. Preparing and being there was one thing but we didn’t expect the level of interest. Even the real BBC has given us an opportunity. I say “real” but I mean the ones I would most like to do business with. Not for the sake of the business but for the opportunity to meet them at their offices…The BBC in question is the Barbados Broadcasting Corporation…
Enough drivel. What inspired me to log on and write a blog, was the news that ITV have bought 51.2% of Imago TV Film, a German TV production company. This is a sign that Micheal Grades declared strategy of making ITV a production company that happens to be a broadcaster rather than the other way round is underway.
As well as Imago providing content and formats for the ITV stable they also have the relationships with the German broadcasters to ease the sale of ITV’s formats, content and archive into the German market.
ITV will need a few more deals like this to reinvent itself and PDQ if it is to avoid the speculation of takeover following the decision that BSkyB have to sell their 17.5% stake in ITV.
Watch this space!
Enough drivel. What inspired me to log on and write a blog, was the news that ITV have bought 51.2% of Imago TV Film, a German TV production company. This is a sign that Micheal Grades declared strategy of making ITV a production company that happens to be a broadcaster rather than the other way round is underway.
As well as Imago providing content and formats for the ITV stable they also have the relationships with the German broadcasters to ease the sale of ITV’s formats, content and archive into the German market.
ITV will need a few more deals like this to reinvent itself and PDQ if it is to avoid the speculation of takeover following the decision that BSkyB have to sell their 17.5% stake in ITV.
Watch this space!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)