TV-am was the most profitable TV company in the world by the end, wasn't it? Makes their demise seem even more sad. In a franchise round taking contractor's achievements into account, I really don't see how they could have lost.
They lost because they didn't bid enough for it, GMTV bid 3x what TV-AM bid, near enough. The previous achievement wasn't enough - if you passed that it became a case of the highest bidder in a blind auction.
The ironic thing is, GMTV later applied for a reduction in its licence payments - as it was in financial trouble well up to the late 1990s - and it fell below the £14m that TV-AM had bid in the first place.
typed this, whilst Neil, above, was posting his - hence the slight treading on toes...
I'll tell you why they lost. A oddly low price bid in the envelope £14.13m.
Remember, highest bid and programming plans wins, unless programming/business plans fall apart under ITC forensic investigation.
There was some totally unrealistic programming and business plans as well, that put the ITC off. Those would have required significant investment (they wanted to be a rival to ITN at some point) and which, if they had won the franchise, would have been scaled back or dropped totally. Maybe the ITC saw that scenario belting down the motorway, headlights flashing and everyone flying in all directions to get out of the way.
Plus, with existing ITV companies and the beneficial cost savings using existing studio facilities circling around the breakfast franchise, money bags or not, TV-am were a complete sitting duck.
Plus, it probably didn't help that Gyngell publically kept banging on about how Baroness Thatch was impressed on how he personally took on the ACTT and 'won'. They may have been only on air for 3 hours and 25 mins per day, but you suspect if they had won, they would have tried to elbow their way into ITV programming at all times of the day.
Had Thames won in 1991 then would they have taken over many other ITV companies like Carlton or would they have stayed very metropolitan? I suspect that Thames would have made plenty of extra money from supplying programmes from its back catalogue to satellite channels which could have dulled its appetite for trying to take over other ITV companies although... blah blah blah
This shows you have absolutely no idea about the consolidation of ITV. As soon as stations were allowed to take over each other, it was a race to the finishing post. Who could snap up the most affluent regions with the biggest audiences as quickly as possible. Ie who could get themselves in a position to be the biggest company, less prone to be taken over and ultimately the most dominant partner in a single ITV.
Had Thames done nothing but fanny around selling old episodes of Rainbow to The Children's Channel, they would have been quickly absorbed by another ITV company.
MA
Maaixuew
Check out these vintage news reports:
Granada takeover of LWT - ITN news report February 1994
Anglia News Re Takeover by Meridian - Probably Jan 18th 1994.
ITV Border Television takeover report 1
ITV Border Television Takeover Report 2
ITV Merger October 2003 - ITV News
ITV News - Regions Changes 2008
The Sad News for ITV Westcountry
Last edited by Maaixuew on 27 January 2016 9:52pm - 3 times in total
It sure did. Carlton was rubbish with no well-known shows and then ended up buying the smaller companies just to make it look big. They then managed to persuade Granada to a merger which then ruined ITV.
It was not Carlton who ruined the smaller companies and with it the ethos of the old ITV.
That dubious honour falls to Granada through and through. From their mooted hostile bid for the Anglia franchise, to their actual hostile bid for the North East one (which had the effect of taking £24m/year out of the ITV system, since neither Tyne Tees nor Granada need have had serious competition to their contracts -- and their actions permanently damaged regionality across the network), to their hostile takeover of LWT once the franchise rounds were over, to their cost-slashing antics once they'd bought up half the network in the late 1990s. An existing ITV licencee bidding for another was complete folly when you consider that all you're achieving is increasing the fees paid to the Government. Tyne Tees (and to some extent Yorkshire) could be forgiven for fighting a rear-guard action. Granada had no such excuse.
The 'ruin' of ITV was essentially Granada extending their approach to the licences to those owned by Carlton as well.
Thames losing was regrettable. Granada winning was perhaps equally so.
TV-am was the most profitable TV company in the world by the end, wasn't it? Makes their demise seem even more sad. In a franchise round taking contractor's achievements into account, I really don't see how they could have lost.
It may have been making massive profits, but what benefit was that to the viewer, the industry or the treasury?
TV-am was the most profitable TV company in the world by the end, wasn't it? Makes their demise seem even more sad. In a franchise round taking contractor's achievements into account, I really don't see how they could have lost.
It may have been making massive profits, but what benefit was that to the viewer, the industry or the treasury?
The economy was in recession in 1991 for a start.
It would be good for the treasury because of the fees paid, the corporation tax, etc because at the end of the day it was a company.
It would be good for the industry as TV-AM would have been financially sound, whereas GMTV was in financial trouble for most of the 1990s. Had TV-AM survived, as previously speculated, it would still end up owned by ITV plc one way or another - nothing changes that.
As to the viewer - familiarity, the same brand, presentation, another few years of the skydivers, pigeons, cruiseship and human lettering... Whether any of this would have lasted after 1993 is debatable as the entire package was beginning to look dated after a few years.
Interesting thinking that there originally wasn't even going to be a "quality threshold"- they were just going to give it to the highest bidder regardless, until they relented. Under that circumstance, neither Carlton or Granada would have won- so the face of ITV would be totally different due to the two companies that have come to dominate it not being involved! In fact LWT, Channel, UTV and Grampian would have been gone under that system too.
I find it interesting when I've heard some of the people in the ITC who had to make the decisions on who won saying they weren't really happy with the process themselves or some of the decisions they had to make, but they had to follow the rules they were given.
Last edited by james-2001 on 28 January 2016 10:22am
Thames losing was regrettable. Granada winning was perhaps equally so.
The irony of that view is that Granada lost their auction by several multiples, and a view I have heard expressed is that the ITC only awarded the franchise to Granada (by failing the winning bidder North West TV on the quality threshold) because it feared the loss of both Thames and Granada at the same time would be a fatal blow to ITV as a whole.
Purely on bid amount and disregarding anything else:
Central Scotland, Border, Central, TVS, Tyne Tees, TSW, HTV, Anglia and Yorkshire would have stayed, the first three unopposed, the others bid the highest.
Elsewhere:
Channel, Thames, LWT, Grampian, Granada and TV-AM would have gone. Carlton wouldn't have won the London licence as CPV-TV had a higher bid.
In that scenario, out of the big 5, only Central and Yorkshire would have been left. Carlton would still have a backdoor way into the ITV network as they'd had a stake in Central since 1987 so its still plausible they'd have bought Central out in its entirety and then start from there.
I guess that's no different to when people say Thames would have won if Carlton was allowed to take them over back in the 80s, of course we don't know who else might have bidded or what figures would have been put up in that situation. Or if Death On The Rock would have even gone out in 1988.