the only way anyone would watch win-7 if if they make the win just like the current prime7 watermark. other wise under that scenario they would loose viewers
This is the darkest timeline.
2 Likes
I can only imagine 
The horrors!
Itâs certainly interesting to think about⌠Now time for some mocking!
2 Likes
As weâve already seen - SWM will need to put forward a âbetterâ proposal to get the major shareholders (Gordon, Catalano) on side, I really canât see this happening in the short term
This to me seems unlikely - I canât see Packer being interested in media and an agreement with Nine would need NEC to do something with NBN or forcing Prime to sell off the northern nsw licence
While unlikely, this is surely more likely then a Packer/Murdoch/Nine tie-up, but it puts WIN in a difficult position - I canât see why WIN would want to change the affiliation of their own stations to accomodate the sale of another station that WIN has an investment in.
maybe they wouldnt have to . they already own some of the 7 network in southaustralia . so could they expend on that and just buy out primemeda outright . this would been they would have two networks under there belt . and the laws would have to change to make this happen
The government has given no indication that it will change the law to allow one person to own two television licences in the same market, so itâs not going to happen.
2 Likes
This wasnât the scenario I was thinking could happen, more that southern cross media might negotiate for a deal with 7 like they have in Tasmania. The only issue would be seven Qld. I suppose if seven wanted to free up some capital, the regional stations could be bought by either a Packer/Murdoch consortium or CBS/Ten
1 Like
I was thinking that and all the complexities surrounding the WIN acquisition of the former NRTV licence in northern NSW - asset swaps etc, but the SXL (Southern Cross Media) could potentially do a asset swaps eg radio licences for NBN-TV licence. I think with the current economic climate there will be some turbulent, yet interesting time ahead and I am sure that Bruce Gordon will be creating havoc somewhere
1 Like
Would make Tim Bailey happy, Ten really would be pumping it out on Prime this time 
4 Likes
ACMA has released their report on
2019 compliance with Australian and childrenâs content compliance (TV content standards)
This is the main table
Strange that only Nineâs east coast channels are reported.
3 Likes
I think itâs because they were lumping Nine Adelaide and Perth in with WIN when Bruce Gordon owned them. I emailed ACMA a couple of years ago to point out the inconsistency in their reports, but they just ignored my email.
2 Likes
2 Likes
2 Likes
Change in legislation (again)? To do what, force the companies to show all the channels?
From a TV viewerâs perspective itâs a bit ridiculous to blame the networks for affiliates not meeting their legal obligations because theyâre not transmitting all the channels (as the article says, this was the case in 2017).
The biggest underlying issue is of course the long-standing perilous financial situation, which has just gotten worse.
If the regionals were owned by the metro networks, one organisation would be responsible for their channels across the country, avoiding this finger-pointing, internal cross-subsidies would work (supporting the regional audience would just be a part of being in the TV business), and the networks would have to pay for fully deploying a new channel (weighing that before deciding to launch a new channel), instead of the current situation.
Allowing further consolidation between regional media companies would reduce competition and the number of âvoicesâ, so should be avoided.
Broadcasters get to use the publicâs spectrum, from which they make profits (or try to), so there should be some consistent reciprocation, including local content (including local news).
2 Likes
WIN wouldnât care, because they have SNOW and Headline News (simulcast on WIN) that puts them well above whatever percentage of Aus content Ten shows.
However Prime and Southern Cross would have to monitor their numbers quite closely.
1 Like
you could do that directly or indirectly - either be explicit that the service offering must be consistent across metro & regional (which will potentially cause some issues in some markets, as an aside - its time to squash these markets, especially places like Mildura and Griffith) or make the regionals meet their obligations without carving get-outs, that way the regionals get to choose how to achieve it - either produce their own content, change their lineup or add the extra channels.
I suspect a large number of viewers simply donât care about the reasons why the regionals dont pick up the multichannels - it especially amplifies when the metro networks move content to these multichannels which results in content âdisappearingâ regionally (yeah, its available via streaming)
Yet we have an example, right now where this doesnt occur (NBN/9 & 9rush)
This is where the Government could actually do some good - things like enforcing stronger licence conditions on changes of ownership.
3 Likes
and how much Australian content is broadcast on SBN (Sonlife)? None.
Not sure your point?
sbn is most pointless channel ever
3 Likes
SNOW and Headline News may boost WINâs overall Australian content, but not the Australian drama content nor childrenâs program content.
2 Likes