A place for all your post-CBS speculation/mock schedules/program ideas
For all we know, the CBS-ownership of Network Ten might even result in more Australian programing (eg, more CBS programing for an international market being produced in Australia) and local jobs. And wouldn’t that be a good thing?
Yes, CBS is an overseas company. But I’m sure there are hundreds of overseas companies with a heavy presence in Australia (including the employment of many Australians) as it is now. I don’t see why free to air TV should be such a sacred industry, especially when Ten has been under foreign ownership before.
I would assume a massive yes to this. There would’ve been instant job losses if Murdoch took over and merged news rooms with Sky.
Australia is cheaper to produce TV drama than the US, isn’t it?
Surely better production values in News?
The possibilities are fascinating. It will take a frigging genius with deep understanding of both markets to get this right.
-because CBS This Morning works, do they do that here? Or, not?
-late night news - national, local? Or nothing?
-local news production in Adelaide and Perth??? How safe is it?
-local news in general?
-Will CBS use their (generally attractive) coookie-cutter templates that they use in news across the US?
It could also mean documentaries like Gold Coast Cops and Territory Cops, or dramas like Rush, which were axed for poor ratings, could be revived and distributed internationally by CBS.
CBS co-owns cable channels in Europe and Southeast Asia (RTL CBS) which will also help.
- It would be a challenge to enter breakfast TV and morning news with such a long absence, associated history of failures and the viewer loyalty on Seven, Nine and ABC. However, it would be valuable for Ten to have a lead-in to Studio 10. Pay close attention to what failed previously on Ten and avoid it like the plague!
- If late news was revived (the magazine format of the later years worked quite well), there would be little chance that it would be anything other than a national bulletin.
- Local news in all metro cities would be a must, especially in the more distant Adelaide and Perth.
- As in local regional news? Perhaps in time they could work some sort of arrangement out with WIN.
Realistically focussing on anything outside the core metro business isn’t going to happen for some time, but provided WIN are happy to cooperate, given they are already producing local news in most markets, it wouldn’t be that difficult to work out a mutually beneficial national strategy for those bulletins.
In terms of resources, WIN is probably the best equiped regional broadcaster. Their failings are largely due to Bruce’s ego, with a bit of stroking of his ego, and cooperation from both sides, a Ten/WIN partnership has the potential to deliver a very good, comprehensive news service.
Bruce Gordon should do nothing aside from cooperate with CBS. A strong ten will only benefit him in the long run.
Alternatively, when the media laws eventually change…CBS can buy the regional network as well to reach all the nation.
I disagree that the magazine late news was a hit. It was the worst - by far.
By local news, I mean what they have now - Five local news hours. Let’s see if they are guaranteed.
IMO, sometime in the near future, the 1x LCN’s will maybe get moved to 4x to get rid of Ten.
1x should be going to CTV if that happens.
What’s the point in that?
4 would’ve made sense had Bruce Gordon gotten control & inflicted the WIN ■■■■■■■■■ on metro viewers (WIN was originally on channel 4 in Wollongong), but (thankfully) not now.
If CBS wanted to get rid of the WHOLE Ten brand, they would shift to LCN 4.
It would be better if CTV goes to LCN 10 though if that happens due to it’s proximity to the start of the guide.
They can change the names without switching the LCN range from 1xx to 4xx, so why move to a different LCN range?
To get rid of TEN and make it CBS or something.
The 10/ 1x LCN is now Cursed.
Nah, CBS would want to be number 1 here as they are in their home country, so despite Americans being scared of having a floor labelled 13 in a building, etc., I don’t see any business reason they’d throw away channel 1, and of course there is the greater difficulty for viewers having to re-tune.
I wasn’t online for a day and came back to see over 100 posts in this thread, but surprisingly it was good news.
CBS is the ideal buyer for Ten - experienced in successfully running a TV network, including having worked in overseas markets. At the very least I’m sure they could send capable executives over here to sort out the mess that Ten has become.
I think CBS understand a particular thing that’s relevant here - the importance of sports rights. The damage losing the NFL did to them, and how much it set them back as a network is really key. Ten having neither the AFL or NRL is a significant factor in how behind they are - those key weekly sporting events get people tuning into their network, and their promos for the rest of their schedule seen.
That should also mean they bid strongly for cricket. They should probably try and work out a sublicensing deal for AFL or NRL - but one that guarentees at least a game a week - not the half match deal Fox Sports had on the table.
I do hope they ditch the Ten branding - move the main channel to 1 and have the HD version on 10. Call it CBS. Ten’s brand has been dragged through mud - time for a restart.
On 6:00 local news - while many here, myself included, would welcome local news at 6, would CBS really want to skew so old in that time slot (and compete with entrenched rivals in a losing battle)?
At breakfast: even if they get the mix pitch-perfect for a breakfast news show on Ten, are there enough viewers out there?
The first news changes should be local news on weekends and a late news being reintroduced. Then they can slowly build from there. It will great to see more resources poured back into the newsrooms around the country.
CBS chipped away at breakfast against NBC and ABC and has only recently saw some growth. It will take years and years to get the brand and offering right but I think CBS will be in for the long haul.