Given Bruce Gordon’s ability to assess every scenario, one has to wonder how SCA could reveal TDT is profitable. Logically, one would think that there would be a confidentiality clause preventing unwanted disclosures, especially as it could impact any attempt to extract government assistance in the future
SCA wouldn’t agree to a confidentiality clause, because they need to report the performance of the JV in their numbers.
2 Likes
I’m sure there are legal ways around this, especially given Tasmania isn’t their only JV
No but looking at the MDV site information it’s already been updated to surrendered:
It would be good If an independent broadcaster was to enter the market & Invest In local studio facilities to provide local content, I remember when WIN axed their local news In Mildura some advertisers pulled their advertising from WIN because of the decision.
4 Likes
If that’s the case which I totally believe, then the NDV licence will be deleted from the Mildura TV1 Licence Area Plan & with everyone talking about streaming If you go out of Mildura Into the more remote parts of the viewing area then Internet is an issue, As for VAST this does not come cheap with a setup costing around $800 not many people have that spare change in their wallets.
3 Likes
I wonder if the JV between Imparja and SCA could make it to normal terrestrial television in Mildura. Given they have advertisers in place, they could easily retransmit into Mildura, possibly even look at attracting some local Mildura advertising.
2 Likes
Broadcasting infrastructure is starting to sound a bit like coal power stations, old minerals processing mills and sugar mills - all the cash sucked out and then when plant maintenance or replacement falls due the doors are locked and in some cases the metals recyclers called in. There are plenty of reports around about AM radio transmission plant not being maintained and radio studio’s being let decay. Most old TV studio’s seem to go to developers if the land is worth anything.
1 Like
It feels like the right fit given it technically is in Mildura already via VAST. But CDT taking over as a 3rd station locally goes against the concept of what a joint-venture is in the first place - a way to get 10 into a market without establishing competition. The two incumbents owning it removes the competition. The only way I can see CDT taking MDT’s place is if Mildura is absorbed into Remote Central & Eastern and Seven and WIN leave the market.
I think a more likely scenario is Seven and WIN coming to an agreement with SCA to take services from a nearby 10 station and mixing them in with their own services. Similar to what we see now with WIN Griffith relaying 7 Wagga intact. I’m not sure how WIN has made that profitable but no longer handling playout, separate transmission and administration suggests it’s the cheapest way to do it.
2 Likes
Honestly, I think the best way forward for all stakeholders could be the South Australian scenario where one incumbent manages all 3 stations. The only problem would be is if an event is not available on the frequency it is available across metros eg if Tennis matches might be available on 9Gem and 9Go between 6pm and 7pm but not available due to say 9Go no being available due to frequency restrictions
1 Like
This would not be unheard of.
In Mount Isa, two of the three licences are separate from the rest of Remote Central and Eastern Australia - ITQ and IDQ, while the third is the same Imparja as the rest of Remote Central & Eastern Australia with the call letters IMP.
In reality, all channels relay the same programs as the rest of Remote Central & Eastern Australia.d
1 Like
Noting too that ITQ/QQQ were already under common ownership at the time of aggregation.
Wasn’t ITQ/QQQ really just the same station, just with different licence areas both broadcasting as QSTV? I recall in the late 90s it was mostly Channel Ten programs with opt outs for sport only pretty much.
1 Like
I believe that ITQ, QSTV and TNQ were under the same supply deal, hence the programming being mostly aligned to Nine Network in late 1989 to December 1990, where to Nine affiliation ended due to the agreement to purchase RTQ and DDQ by WIN Television’s owners.
The programming then fell into place as primarily as an Ten affiliate, and then moved to a Seven affiliate in line with BKN/GTS.
As we all know, TNQ remained a Ten affiliate late December 1990 until except between July 2016 to June 2021.
3 Likes
My reading of the legislation is that the ACMA can only issue the licence to either a JV of the other licensees, or just one of the licensees if the other is not interested, but if that owner then decides to sell it to a third party there is nothing stopping that.
It depends on the size of the loss and the “non-financial” benefits. By having the full suite of channels it keeps the audience on TV, so even if the JV was losing a small amount, it may have created a benefit of having more viewers watching TV and therefore sometimes watching Prime/7 and WIN also.
MDT was also run with WIN (and Prime/7??) providing services such as sales, admin and tech - these were billed to MDT, so WIN/Prime may have been making a profit from providing those services to MDT, even if it caused MDT to have a small loss.
I think this is a likely cause. They were able to weather small losses given the minor benefits they received elsewhere, but now that they would need to outlay significant money to upgrade equipment it becomes significantly less viable.
SCA is a public company so is required to provide some level of transparency and reporting. Often the exact numbers of a deal might be confidential, but it’s existence has to be public - as such they need to tell shareholders (if asked) if it’s a profitable venture, but don’t have to disclose the actual numbers.
Griffith is a bit different as all three licenses are owned by the same licensee. In Mildura, having 3 different licensees, each with a different combination of shareholders, meant that each reported separately and it was very easy to separate the performance of the 3. In Griffith, they’re all combined together and all operations are fully shared. Sales teams sell to all channels equally, clients usually buy packages to advertise across all channels, the same tech will work on all transmitters together. Each channel is treated more equally and it’s harder to apportion revenue and expenses across each channel separately. The same logic applies to WIN and SCA’s SA/Broken Hill services.
3 Likes
I thought they switched to a relay of 7 Sydney for many years now?
1 Like
It was a feed of 7 Sydney with local commercial inserts until recently. Now its a dirty 7 Wagga feed.
2 Likes
So Griffith gets 7 Local News at 6pm then? I didn’t think they did.
2 Likes
Not doubting you, but do you have a source?
My interpretation of the recent amendment was stations are now allowed to broadcast services from more than 1 license on a single transmitter should they want to regardless of ownership. If it is an amendment only for the solus markets then yeah, it has no impact on Mildura.
1 Like
As well as discussion in the WIN Corporation thread.
5 Likes