… there were four options put by DoTaC in 1985, three aggregation and one MCS, I don’t recall STV ever being in an aggregated market and owner Eva Presser was a key supporter of MCS … Prime was formed specifically to opt for aggregation rather than MCS, only Capital was against it in AMC …
1 Like
STV-8 was a strange animal. A tiny market that was networked with BCV/GLV and then Vic Tv.
The saga involving its ownership in the late-80s by Alan Bond is legendary.
3 Likes
SES 8 Mount Gambier and RTS 5A Riverland lasted a while.
1 Like
This is from the Draft Indicitive plan ((August 1986) Note that Victoria was originally to be AM6, as Queensland was to have 2 Markets and NSW 3, and AMV’s spill into Victoria is listed as being in AM5 (Southern NSW) STV was indeed originally to be the 3rd party in Victoria.
6 Likes
… ah yes, the let’s have even more markets version and make the whole thing pointless … as you have it there just check, I think there was one version where all of SA was an aggregated market - including Adelaide, did that make it past the draft or was it only in the 1985 version?
I wonder if there is a digital version of this that can be viewed online? Tried searching to no avail.
Yes, PAM8 (Potential Aggregated Market) is Adelaide plus all SA regionals
How did they come to that conclusion? Basically SAS, ADS and NWS would have to buy GTS/BKN (or BKN gets split, for the only reason of being in NSW), RTS and SES, and effectively the Adelaide metros get a state-wide network of translators.
Foreshadowing what’s happening now I guess.
Those proposals were really bizarre - MTN was going to split off from Midstate and compete with CBN/CWN and NBN in a central and western NSW market?
And the reason they didn’t go ahead with SA the was”too many owners currently”
Sorry I haven’t time to scan properly, but this was the initial NSW suggestion:
1 Like
… it wasn’t “the initial NSW suggestion”, it was one of the options that emerged from discussions following the “initial” white paper in June 1985, the whole thing was rushed and completely crazy, but hey, that’s what happens when a politician and a media mogul get into bed with each other, everyone else loses out …
Someone would’ve pulled them aside and say “they’ll make it work”. 
Basically, you would have merged Adelaide and the solus SA markets into one expanded Adelaide/SA market. All that needed to happen is that the Adelaide stations buy out a regional station each, OR one Adelaide station buys out all the regionals and assists with the rollout of relays for the other Adelaide stations.
Was that based on 2 stations per approved market? Or a demerger of one of the stations to form that third station?
I’m looking at AM3 - NEN/ECN and NRN/RTN would not have worked, unless you included the Queensland DDQ/SDQ (recreating GET in a way). AM4 is weird geographic wise, AM5 looks about right, but both have the 3 stations.
… that’s the whole point, none of the options “worked” it was just a mess cobbled together for political reasons that started the slow death of not only the buoyant regional television industry but it took with it regional radio and newspapers and the ensuing changes to ownership laws killed off the smaller metro television stations … a very sad chapter for the whole media industry …
1 Like
In NEN9/ECN8 and NRN11/RTN8, I assume the expectations would have been RTN8 split from NRN11, given RTN8 was the feeder to the Gold Coast. If DDQ10/SDQ4 went to NSW, then would MVQ6 have been excluded from the scenario or would ITQ8 have been included for 2 markets to be established - in a 2 market scenario,
I assume it would have been (assuming ITQ8 was included) to be ITQ8, TNQ7 and FNQ10 and MVQ6, RTQ7 and SEQ1
Alternatively with DDQ10 included instead of ITQ8, I assume it would have been TNQ7, FNQ10 and MVQ6 and RTQ7, SEQ10 and DDQ0 or TNQ7, MVQ6 and RTQ7 and SEQ1, DDQ0 and SDQ4.
Geographically, I don’t think that NBN3 being CBN6 and MTN9 made sense.
IMO, MTN9 should have been bought and merged with RVN-2 and if CBN6 was paired with NBN3, the third channel should have been NEN9 with NRN11 being included in the southern Queensland market along with DDQ0 and SEQ1.
That said, its probably better that the current structure is in place as its less complex, even if all the outcomes that it was spruiker to achieve weren’t met - eg increased choice but no real choice for Local News
1 Like
While I’m here, you may as well have the Queensland map, from the draft indicative plan.
They seem to have forgotten to put Maryborough on the map, but AM2 was to be the areas of SEQ, DDQ/SDQ with a new third licence to be called for.
5 Likes
So was AM1 and AM2 effectively merged because of objections by TNQ7 and RTQ7 because they viewed getting MVQ6 as the third being disadvantageous to the former 2 due to MVQ6 being significantly smaller than TNQ7 and RTQ7?
2 Likes
QSTV (QQQ) began Sunday 24 April 1988.
For some reason, the “Longreach Leader” saw fit to tuck the news of a new TV station away on Page 8!
6 Likes
Thanks!
The Longreach paper didn’t publish a QSTV (RCTS) guide until the following week.
3 Likes
3 Likes
Thanks, where did the RCTS term come from, was that partly government funded/sponsored given the small population involved at the time and so a more generic name for the service?
1 Like