Yeah, I definitely think that WIN would wait until after the NRL season (maybe making the switch sometime during those 4-6 weeks or so between the football and cricket seasons) before saying goodbye to Nine Network affiliation.
If I’m not mistaken, the NRL rates quite well in Southern NSW/ACT and Regional QLD so wouldn’t WIN be smart enough to keep the Nine affiliation until after the Grand Final? Look at it this way: Switching the affiliation on July 1 would mean a change right in the middle of the NRL season, possibly with still a game of State Of Origin to go and during the Winter peak for TV generally.
Meh - I’d assume they’d do the deal, set the date and just go for it.
Even with the NRL - why spend more time promoting Nine’s programming? Unless they’d run ads for Ten programs during their last days as a Nine affiliate?
With the old ways of broadcasting I could see that happening, the promoting of Ten programming before the change but with digital that could create more confusion I’d think as LCN’s will likely change and channel names. It might be easier to have a straight switch, LCN’s and all and so the viewer effectively notices no difference but with Bruce involved, there’s bound to be WIN cover ups over everything to ruin the illusion! Looking forward to WIN’s Eyewitness News at Five.
Would this then mean Tasmania gets a news bulletin on Ten rather than just having the Melbourne edition on TDT?
…the companies do not want an 11th-hour deal similar to Nine and WIN’s most recent agreement, which was a six-month extension struck hours before the deadline on New Year’s Eve. If the signals were to be swapped, the regional broad-casters would need time to organise their sales teams and back-office staff accordingly.
Given the deals expire in the middle of the rugby league season, one option would be to agree to swap signals after the finals had concluded in October to minimise the impact for passionate fans in regional NSW and Queensland.
I wonder how this affiliation switch would affect the Northern NSW market. If WIN becomes a Ten affiliate does that mean WIN would be broadcasting Ten into Northern NSW? It certainly wouldn’t be Southern Cross anymore.
I wonder how this affiliation switch would affect the Northern NSW market. If WIN becomes a Ten affiliate does that mean WIN would be broadcasting Ten into Northern NSW? It certainly wouldn’t be Southern Cross anymore.
No one is sure.
But if WIN stations become Ten affiliates, It’s logical to assume SC stations would become Nine affiliates. Nine already owns NBN covering the Newcastle/NNSW market - so I don’t see them selling that station.
Any affiliate “swap” would likely involve WIN buying NRN (the SC / Ten affiliated station that covers NNSW) off SC and continuing to operate it as a Ten station
I don’t think anything will change in regional WA and Mildura. WIN would still need to provide a Nine and Ten service for these markets. Surely they’d want to continue to associate themselves with the highest rating of the two, and not give Prime 50% of a better rating Nine joint-venture. They’ll stay wherever the money is where they can.
That makes sense. If WIN are going to jump to a Ten affiliation that this would only be in fully aggregated markets. For WA and SA they could continue with a Nine affiliation as Prime is wedded to 7, and sharing Ten signal makes more sense.
Tasmania might be different as it’s a market shared with Southern Cross.
If WIN switches affiliations to Ten, I can’t see the WIN name staying. I work in TV and branding and even when I see the WIN logo (even in the Ten look as above) I get so confused.
I think keeping the WIN name yet changing all the shows to Ten - it’s confusing as F for viewers. I just can’t imagine trying to explain to viewers.
I think they would have to go with the Ten brand from day one. And honestly I think Ten would push for it. There is more brand value in Ten and it would help ad sales.
I think Bruce would have to loose his ego and swallow his pride a little.
But I think there is way too much confusion and risk trying to keep the WIN name which has been synomonous with Nine for 2 decades, and switch it to Ten overnight. There is too much risk and even a ratings loss due to 1% would means millions of lost revenue.
WIN with Nine programms has been a strong brand
But WIN with Ten programs feel like a weak brand
Ten fells stronger.
While it would be in the best interests for the network to remain named “Ten”, I personally think that if WIN takes control, that they will stick to calling it “WIN”.
It will be confusing for viewers, but I reckon that’s how Bruce’ll keep it.
With Ten programmes airing, WIN News could be broadcast at 6pm right after the Ten News, which would be a much better time slot than 7pm in my opinion.
It’s my understanding that a SCA/NEC and WIN/TEN deal is most likely at the moment because NEC is interested in merging with SCA, while TEN has no interest, and WIN would likely prefer to stay as their own thing?
If any affiliation changes were to take place, surely WIN and SCA would have to carry the exact same number of channels (aside from datacasts) that the metro viewers get? For instance, I’m sure viewers who currently get WIN HD and 9Life would be none too pleased if the affiliation change meant that they would lose 9Life and not have any “SC Nine HD” service!
Even when it comes to the infomercial channels, surely SCA would have to carry Extra? And maybe WIN might have to carry TVSN, perhaps in exchange for GOLD being broadcast to metro areas? So many variables…
Yep, I agree. While he should bite the bullet and rebrand it to “WIN Ten” or just the exact same Ten branding that metro viewers get, Bruce would most likely keep calling the network WIN.
While that would be the most ideal solution (Family Feud airs on two other channels, so who cares if the main one isn’t showing Family Feud the same time!), somehow I wouldn’t be terribly surprised to see WIN axe all their local news bulletins in favour of a “news update service” all read from the one studio in Wollongong or something.
Really, SC10 (or it’s predecessors) axed all their full local bulletins years ago because it wasn’t making enough money/rating enough…and that was during a time when the media market wasn’t so affected by the internet. Could WIN really sustain full 30 minute local bulletins under Network Ten affiliation in the long run? Sadly, I very strongly doubt it.
Basically now in say Canberra, Cairns, Ballarat, Wollongong etc - SC is really just Ten. All promos, bugs, graphics, news branding, TV guides etc are just “Ten” or “Channel Ten” - we all know that the SC branding is really invisible - and viewers call it “Ten” and for all intents and purposes it is simply Channel Ten.
Now, the affiliate swap happens. And viewers are now expected to understand that Channel Ten no longer exists - and al those shows are now over on WIN. Ten no longer exists. But The channel they have come to know as WIN loses 100% of it’s familiar shows - and now has all the Channel Ten shows - but it is called WIN.
And then, you have a new channel Nine - where all the WIN shows are now located.
It’s just beyond confusing for viewers - and it will hurt them in ratings.
WIN stations will already see their ratings drop by switching from a stream of Nine programs to lower rated Ten programs - that will cost them 5-7% n ratings an tens of million in revenue. I don’t think WIN can afford to lose a single percent more coin ratings by confusing the F out of viewers. Yes Bruce has an ego - but his ego is built on $$$$. He’s a businessman. He knows switching to Ten programming will cause ratings to drop - I think he knows not to confuse viewers more with mixed branding.
I think there is more money to be made for Briuce by taking the Ten name, than the WIN name. Win will live on somehow - maybe in will be WIN NEWS on TEN for a few years.
And Yes I think
5PM TEN EYEWITNESS NEWS
6PM WIN NEWS ON TEN (OR TEN LOCAL NEWS)
6.30 THE PROJECT
It’s evident now that WIN is backing off with the saturation of their brand across their services. I’m with @KICK-IT. At worst we will probably see the WIN name next to Ten in regional areas.
Ok, I’m going to be Captain Buzzkill here and reiterate previous advice I’ve given on this subject - do not read to deeply into this (or any other speculation that may arise).
There are a lot of hypotheticals in play at the moment (remember we dont have a legislative framework to allow any of these deals yet) and there will be a lot more to play out before we have a final answer.
I suggest you dont read too much into any permutation that may or may not occur, nor attempt to ‘read between the lines’
If things get out of hand in this thread with wild speculation, staff will consider moderation measures (including time in the penalty box)
(before you ask, this is not aimed at anyone in particular - its important to keep some perspective on this topic)
