Home› Broadcasting
Options

so, goodbye "GMTV", hello "Daybreak"...

adam_fransellaadam_fransella Posts: 1,660
Forum Member
✭✭✭
in Broadcasting #1
...it is worth noting how ironic/coincidental (select whichever word fits better) it is that not only has "GMTV" ended without there being a franchise round like that which saw it replace the superior "TV-am" - but when the 1991 franchise round occurred, "TV-am" lost its license after being outbid by "GMTV", which itself outbid (and was ahead of) "Daybreak", a breakfast television consortium in which Michael Green, he of Carlton Television notoriety, was a major stake-holder.

What a shame that "GMTV" was not disqualified for either its bid, or its programme quality. That way "Daybreak" could have replaced "TV-am" - or "TV-am" could have bid the highest amount, and stayed! (Whilst Green could have succeeded in buying into Thames in 1985, which could have saved itself, come 1991, if it could afford to do so.)

And how funny it is, also, that "GMTV" was originally called "Sunrise", before Sky television objected due to its own breakfast programme carrying the same title - and yet when Eammon Holmes quit "GMTV", he went over to Sky to host "Sunrise"!

Oh, what ironies there are to be found in morning television!!

Comments

  • Options
    VirginMediaPhilVirginMediaPhil Posts: 2,021
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #2
    And "Daybreak" was the first programme TV-am ever aired!

    We have come full circle.
  • Options
    linkinpark875linkinpark875 Posts: 29,703
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #3
    I wonder how they can call it 'Daybreak' when the day's hardly started to have a break?

    Atleast Sunrise, Big Breakfast, Rise, BBC Breakfast all have a better sound for the morning.
  • Options
    zippydoodahzippydoodah Posts: 2,778
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #4
    Let us not forget that the "superior" TVam had faults when it first started broadcasting 1983 and was close to crumbling and the IBA threatened them as well.

    When it was announced TVam lost its franchise, they did as many on screen competitions as possible to maxmimse profits back into the company.

    I strongly believe that the GMTV that we came to saw would have been TVam evolving into it.
  • Options
    adam_fransellaadam_fransella Posts: 1,660
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #5
    That "GMTV" has been on the air for far longer than "TV-am" is somewhat unfair -
    although not as bad as the overall lame results of the 1991 franchise auction!
  • Options
    JAS84JAS84 Posts: 7,430
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #6
    I wonder, if Thames had kept it's franchise, would ITV plc exist, and for that matter, the ITV1 brand? I can't see Thames being as willing as Carlton to sacrifice their identity. Even in their modern guise, they kept the Thames name in a dual brand with Talkback (talkbackTHAMES) instead of rebranding to parent brand Fremantle like Grundy did.
  • Options
    yorksdaveyorksdave Posts: 3,228
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #7
    JAS84 wrote: »
    I wonder, if Thames had kept it's franchise, would ITV plc exist, and for that matter, the ITV1 brand? I can't see Thames being as willing as Carlton to sacrifice their identity. Even in their modern guise, they kept the Thames name in a dual brand with Talkback (talkbackTHAMES) instead of rebranding to parent brand Fremantle like Grundy did.

    Perhaps we would have ended up with itv plc with a Granada-Thames production company?
Sign In or Register to comment.