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 Likes
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.
1 Like
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.
1 Like
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.
18 Likes
Exactly right.
3 Likes
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?
1 Like
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.
9 Likes
Yes, the news-heavy “CBS This Morning” works but, remember, there’s no ABC News Breakfast over there.
2 Likes
If CBS Ten is going to do brekky, they would have to have blackbox doing it Studio 10 style.
4 Likes
Don’t hold your breath for local weekend news.
1 Like
But just a shitload of cable news channels…
1 Like
Not sure where you’re getting your info from, but CBS’ O&O stations in the U.S. are primarily on channels 2 (4 stations) and 4 (4 stations), with 3, 5, 7, 11, 12, 13 and 62 also used.
There would be no reason for CBS to shift to another channel number unless it wanted to ditch the Ten brand completely and start from scratch (unlikely at the moment). If so, it would only be able to use 1xx or 4xx.
1 Like
I think that was “number 1” refering to the ratings of CBS, not their channel.
But anyway, you’re on top with Ten.
1 Like
It’s going to be a massive culture shock for any American executive that comes over to guide management of Ten. They can’t possibly use the CBS template to replicate success here given the fluid program starting times that have become common and the tendency for the competition to shift programming on a whim. It would be an interesting experiment, and a relief for viewers, for them to set programming in stone months in advance but they’d hardly be competing on a level playing field if they did that.
12 Likes
I think news 5:00-6:00 and The Project 6:30-7:30 is a good lineup in terms of news. It gets their main bulletin it’s own timeslot, and means that their primetime show start at the same time as their competitors to put those shows on equal footing in regards to start time.
I think the 6:00-6:30 slot is what needs a change. Not so much because Family Feud is bad, but News->FF->Project isn’t really a cohesive lineup. People are unlikely to continue watching through all 3 shows, which means they’re switching off. Maybe keep FF on One or Eleven for people who really want a game show, but 6:00-6:30 should also be news. People are more likely to contintue watching from the main bulletin, just as it will create a lead up for The Project. It could be staffed entirely by the same staff from the main bulletin, and largely repeat the same stories - but obviously curated down to the most relevant 30mins. It could also be a good place to do something different like an extended report from time to time, creating somewhat of a middle ground between a standard news bulletin and The Project.
Pros of this approach include:
-Viewers from 5:00 will continue watching news on Ten into the 6:00 hour.
-Project views can catch all the news at 6:00 before the project - so they don’t start watching Seven or Nine and then forget about the Project.
-If it fails, nothing is lost, since all the news is still being made for and watched at 5:00 (which in turn sets the required ratings lower and gives it more chance to succeed).
The Morning Project!! Something I have wanted to see happen at 10 for sooooo long. It has so much potential and DOES offer a point of difference.
Oh if only I was in the industry to pitch it.
5 Likes