CoMux Local Transmitter Network Update

124»

Comments

  • chrisychrisy Posts: 9,418
    Forum Member
  • sparkie70sparkie70 Posts: 3,053
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Is local tv for Birmingham still going to launch, was featured on BBC Midlands Today the other day, a local MP is asking OFCOM if they still exist and are going to launch anytime soon. Strangely no one was available for comment from the broadcaster.

    Today's Birmingham Post has reported that Esther Rantzen who is involved in That's TV could bid for the licence if City 8 misses it's deadline.

    If true it be very interesting seeing Made TV would most likely bid.
  • chrisychrisy Posts: 9,418
    Forum Member
    sparkie70 wrote: »
    Today's Birmingham Post has reported that Esther Rantzen who is involved in That's TV could bid for the licence if City 8 misses it's deadline.

    If true it be very interesting seeing Made TV would most likely bid.

    There was a article in Broadcast last week, saying everybody who previously bid is still interested should it be re-advertised.
  • RadiomikeRadiomike Posts: 7,926
    Forum Member
    sparkie70 wrote: »
    Today's Birmingham Post has reported that Esther Rantzen who is involved in That's TV could bid for the licence if City 8 misses it's deadline.

    If true it be very interesting seeing Made TV would most likely bid.

    Links to the two most recent pieces - today and Monday

    http://www.birminghampost.co.uk/business/business-news/esther-rantzen-in-running-birmingham-7575182

    http://www.birminghampost.co.uk/business/business-news/rivals-ready-pounce-city-tv-7544950
  • mossy2103mossy2103 Posts: 84,307
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    City TV now reported to be in administration, according to this (link thanks to mike65 in Broadcasting forum):
    Birmingham’s City TV is first of Hunt’s local television networks to go bust

    Administrators appointed to business which has no studio premises or broadcast equipment after nearly two years



    Birmingham’s City TV has become the first of Jeremy Hunt’s ambitious network of local TV stations to go bust.

    Ofcom awarded the local TV licence for the UK’s second largest city to local player City TV Broadcasting in November 2012, rejecting high-profile consortiums backed by heavyweights including former BBC Trust chairman Sir Michael Lyons.

    The company, also known as BLTV, appointed adminstrators on Friday to try and find a buyer for the local TV licence.

    Duff & Phelps has approached a number of other local TV licence holders via email with a “business opportunity”.

    The email says: “The joint administrators are seeking expressions of interest from parties interested in acquiring the licence and who believe that they are likely to obtain the consent of Ofcom for any transfer.”

    An attached “Business Lite Memo” states that the business has “no studio premises or broadcast equipment”, despite having had almost two years to get the operation up and running.
    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/aug/08/birmingham-city-tv-local-jeremy-hunt-bust?commentpage=1
  • a516a516 Posts: 5,241
    Forum Member
    Sheffield Live launches 23rd September 2014.
  • a516a516 Posts: 5,241
    Forum Member
    That's Solent: expected launch 22/10/2014.
    That's Oxford: expected launch 05/11/2014.

    The licences granted by Ofcom only allow them to launch on those dates. They can't launch earlier and if they launch later, the licence will be revoked (unless there's a good reason).
  • hyperstarspongehyperstarsponge Posts: 16,563
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Think Made TV will be like ITV at this rate owning most of local TV. They probably do a better job of it then so called Channel 3 ITV.
  • RadiomikeRadiomike Posts: 7,926
    Forum Member
    a516 wrote: »
    That's Solent: expected launch 22/10/2014.
    That's Oxford: expected launch 05/11/2014.

    The licences granted by Ofcom only allow them to launch on those dates. They can't launch earlier and if they launch later, the licence will be revoked (unless there's a good reason).

    Hardly inspires confidence does it? I've also noted how little information appears on the websites of some of the licensees, and which appear to have barely changed since the original licence award nearly two years ago. Similarly as regards the lack of any news stories about some of the forthcoming stations (City TV in Birmingham being the prime exception). You would expect more of a buzz.

    Anyone know how advanced the Southampton and Oxford stations are with regard to preparations - studios, staff recruitment, publicity etc.

    Given the number of licences they have won much may depend, so far as the local TV project is concerned, on how the likes of That's TV and Made TV fare.
  • kevkev Posts: 21,070
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Radiomike wrote: »
    Hardly inspires confidence does it? I've also noted how little information appears on the websites of some of the licensees, and which appear to have barely changed since the original licence award nearly two years ago. Similarly as regards the lack of any news stories about some of the forthcoming stations (City TV in Birmingham being the prime exception). You would expect more of a buzz

    The Notts TV site didn't really change either - most of their "buzz" was generated on Social Media - their staff and the station itself were fairly active in the run up to launch with various articles in Left Lion (a local entertainment/culture magazine) and the Nottingham Post (the local daily newspaper). The effort expelled on the website as to make it ready for launch.

    Oh, and lots and lots of Blue Ducks on billboards and buses advertising the channel!
  • chrisychrisy Posts: 9,418
    Forum Member
    Radiomike wrote: »
    Anyone know how advanced the Southampton and Oxford stations are with regard to preparations - studios, staff recruitment, publicity etc.

    No, however as That's TV is SixTV in all but name, you can be sure unlike some of the other startups, that they actually have some idea how to run a TV station. Some people like to work quietly behind the scenes until they have something to announce. I think Daniel Cass has been in the local TV business long enough to pull this off and I'd be very surprised if That's failed to launch (and the same with NvTv - again, old hands).
  • RadiomikeRadiomike Posts: 7,926
    Forum Member
    Meanwhile over at London Live, after announcing last week that it was switching its target audience to attract older viewers, it has today announced that it is axing its entertainment commissions in favour of purely news and current affairs.

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/aug/18/london-live-evgeny-lebedev-evening-standard

    I love LL's line about its programming and commissioning team, that the “resource will be reapportioned” into the news and current affairs team.

    Sounds like an attempt to further cut costs given that some of the entertainment commissions were said to cost up to £20,000 an hour.

    Other than changing its target audience and programme strategy after less than six months on air though it's all looking good apparently :D
  • kevkev Posts: 21,070
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Radiomike wrote: »
    Meanwhile over at London Live, after announcing last week that it was switching its target audience to attract older viewers, it has today announced that it is axing its entertainment commissions in favour of purely news and current affairs.

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/aug/18/london-live-evgeny-lebedev-evening-standard

    I love LL's line about its programming and commissioning team, that the “resource will be reapportioned” into the news and current affairs team.

    Sounds like an attempt to further cut costs given that some of the entertainment commissions were said to cost up to £20,000 an hour.

    Other than changing its target audience and programme strategy after less than six months on air though it's all looking good apparently :D

    Sounds like they are taking a leaf out of the smaller operations which are concentrating on the stuff people feel needs to be local (e.g. News) and other stuff that has strong local relevance but is inexpensive to produce. Local TV in the States (which Jeremey Hunt tried to copy) seems to be pretty much news and little else with the rest being syndicated national programming - IIRC when looking at the schedules of the stations in Birmingham, Alabama, there was about 18 hours of local content (ignoring commercials) a day across the seven channels all of it news and one college sports match at the weekend.
    What sort of programmes will we being seeing on Notts TV?

    In a nutshell: everything! They’re the kinds of programmes you see on the BBC or ITV, but most will be deeply rooted in Nottinghamshire, so you’ll instantly recognise people and places. Initially we’re focusing on a selection of core priorities: news, sport, music, entertainment, business, property and history. We’re filming across the city and beyond so maybe you’ll see your street, workplace or school! As the channel develops, we want to expand our schedule as quickly as possible with a raft of extra programmes. These include: drama, comedy and original locally produced documentaries and films.
    http://www.nottstv.com/news?id=22
  • sparkie70sparkie70 Posts: 3,053
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    chrisy wrote: »
    No, however as That's TV is SixTV in all but name, you can be sure unlike some of the other startups, that they actually have some idea how to run a TV station. Some people like to work quietly behind the scenes until they have something to announce. I think Daniel Cass has been in the local TV business long enough to pull this off and I'd be very surprised if That's failed to launch (and the same with NvTv - again, old hands).

    There original Oxford application is good as they have Wesley Smith on board although that might have changed. Potentially 'That's TV' could be the better ones but I notice in their Surrey application they are teaming up the Eagle radio. I hope they are close as the two regional papers are only weekly.
  • JezRJezR Posts: 1,428
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    That's Oxford is associated with the Oxfordshire Guardian, which is the second tier free paper in the area. Oddly the predecessor of this paper was at one time owned by the Milestone Group when it also owned Six TV. When the paper relocated its offices to Didcot last year this was said at the time to be so it shared a newsroom with That's Oxford.
  • chrisychrisy Posts: 9,418
    Forum Member
    Any sign of Latest TV tests/placeholder yet?
  • a516a516 Posts: 5,241
    Forum Member
    chrisy wrote: »
    Any sign of Latest TV tests/placeholder yet?
    It's on air. Viewers in Brighton retune!
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 435
    Forum Member
    Mark C wrote: »
    The local muxes have a capacity of about 10 Mb/s, enough for
    nominally three SD TV services. Therefore the local
    muxes will carry the core local service, plus two
    nationally syndicated channels, to generate extra revenue

    Time will tell if the strategy of carrying three programs at QPSK makes sense.

    My opinion ,for what it is worth is the code rate should be changed ,reducing the available bandwidth in megabits and only one TV program carried in the mux, this would provide better coverage for local TV .

    However others disagree with me .
  • technologisttechnologist Posts: 13,334
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    But would the Local TV service be able to afford it ????

    The way that UK Local Tv has come about does not look to have a strong Financial basis at the best of times ...
    and I doubt if increasing coverage will add the additional income .....
    To cover what the pseudo nation additional channels would provide....

    And the Comux business plan (slightly) subsidises the Local TV Channels.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 435
    Forum Member
    epsilon wrote: »
    I can see where you are coming from but I wouldn't have referred to it as an LCN if it was merely the code internally assigning a feature to a channel number.

    What happend to the dynamic duo.

    Yer know ,Ed Hall and Chris whatshisnam?
  • farfar Posts: 3,697
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    What about York's local channel - oneandother TV? Last I heard the launch was supposed to be yesterday?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 435
    Forum Member
    But would the Local TV service be able to afford it ????

    The way that UK Local Tv has come about does not look to have a strong Financial basis at the best of times ...
    and I doubt if increasing coverage will add the additional income .....
    To cover what the pseudo nation additional channels would provide....

    And the Comux business plan (slightly) subsidises the Local TV Channels.

    So you have swallowed the PR Bullshit then .

    Firstly the potential revenue stream for local TV is local advertising ,any increase in coverage would mean more revenue .

    The reduction in code rate depending on terrain would increase coverage by 100% .
    There of course other factors such as population density and each site would provide a different set of coverage results, but nevertheless on a significant percentage of transmitter sites a increase in coverage could result.
    But what has gone wrong here the whole Muxco ,Co Mux nonsense was designed in my opinion to ensure the failure of local TV ,by diverting funds that should have been used as start up capital for local TV .Instead in my opinion , it has been sucked into the pockets of a front company .
    The dynamic duo abandoning ship confirms my original suspicion in my opinion , that Co Mux was a front company .

    The UHF spectrum is worth billions and the recent purchase of EE by BT proves this beyond doubt .
    The UHF spectrum used to provide hi speed internet to the home would have destroyed BT,s monopoly .
    Of course the regulators couldn't see this and in allowing the acquisition of EE by BT helps BT retain its monopoly ,apart from Virgin in some areas .

    4G makes the whole UK mast infastructure worth zillions more .
    Barclay J Knapp had the vision of this ,and also with direct wired coax to the home .
    But of course he lost investors about $7.5 B before it ended in the hands of its current owners .
  • technologisttechnologist Posts: 13,334
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    So you have swallowed the PR Bullshit then .

    Firstly the potential revenue stream for local TV is local advertising ,any increase in coverage would mean more revenue .

    But would it mean more revenue to pay for the remaining 2/3 or thereabout the costs that are currently Bourne by the other two channels .....
    Same argument as the comm mux coverage ...
    But what has gone wrong here the whole Muxco ,Co Mux nonsense was designed in my opinion to ensure the failure of local TV ,by diverting funds that should have been used as start up capital for local TV .Instead in my opinion , it has been sucked into the pockets of a front company .
    The dynamic duo abandoning ship confirms my original suspicion in my opinion , that Co Mux was a front company .
    .

    What does Comux do... A one stop shop which can back haul, playout, Code and mux and then transmit your service ... -and gives you visibility if what is going on even down to a sniff of what is going up the mast- accessible from a web interface anywhere in the world.

    For a small company to,do this each on thier own would be expensive and may not have had the reliability due to the staff that they would need.... And the lack of spare kit you would need ....
    And would be charged by the large monopolies you hate!

    But it is a novel model.... Which did not fit what was put to be tendered....
    And had a lot of audit over it as it was using the BBCs money ..
  • chrisychrisy Posts: 9,418
    Forum Member
    far wrote: »
    What about York's local channel - oneandother TV? Last I heard the launch was supposed to be yesterday?

    The mux isn't due to come on-air until the 11th of October, so it won't launch before then. The April date was probably their indicative launch date from the application.

    btw, it's known as "Hello York" now.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 435
    Forum Member
    But would it mean more revenue to pay for the remaining 2/3 or thereabout the costs that are currently Bourne by the other two channels .....
    Same argument as the comm mux coverage ...



    What does Comux do... A one stop shop which can back haul, playout, Code and mux and then transmit your service ... -and gives you visibility if what is going on even down to a sniff of what is going up the mast- accessible from a web interface anywhere in the world.

    For a small company to,do this each on thier own would be expensive and may not have had the reliability due to the staff that they would need.... And the lack of spare kit you would need ....
    And would be charged by the large monopolies you hate!

    But it is a novel model.... Which did not fit what was put to be tendered....
    And had a lot of audit over it as it was using the BBCs money ..

    Your conclusion is total nonsense.
    Ch M did it no problem whatsoever and it cost chicken shit and less .

    It is simplicity itself to set up a STL to a TX site ,broadcast a DVB-T Mux and pick up a broadcast from from any Mux from a transmitter serving that area and extract the EPG and re insert it into the transport stream of the local TV transmission
    Any engineer with more than two brain cells should be able to do this, it's easy peasy .

    So please no BS on this propaganda and nonsense peddled out by I suspect Arqiva to convince the regulators to give all the £25m of dosh to them and not where it should have gone and that is direct to the local TV companies , who would have spent it wisely and much better than the front company managed by the dynamic duo.
    Makes me wanna puke !!!!!
Sign In or Register to comment.