That may depend on who wins the multiplex licence. One of the bidders, Avanti Local TV Services Ltd, proposes setting up a cell system with all transmitters being fed from the same satellite, using a single-frequency network. That may allow them to customise the coverage area.

They would first have to win the contract, then negotiate with the Joint Planning Project what service they can actually achieve along with getting planning permission to do it. I don't think they realise that TV transmitters are not able to use the same rules that mobile phone companies are, which basically lets the phone companies stick masts and aerials wherever they like with very little that the public can do about it. TV transmitting aerials are subject to the normal planning laws, and the NIMBYs will be out in force.

Latest award: That's Solent (Southampton)
Highlights include yachting around the Isle of Wight with Alan Titchmarsh
This is from the SixTV stable, it's nice to see some of the old RSLs winning new licences.

Intresting they plan a split news service for Southampton, Portsmonth & the I O W but they are heavy on news it seems.

I think Mustard should try and sign this guy up from Sky.

Anyone got any idea when we will know who has won the local TV for Glasgow and Edinburgh.

Darren

Next month, according to Ofcom's orignal schedule (http://www.a516digital.com/2012/09/t...ce-awards.html)

However, there's still two plus the mux licence scheduled in for this month, and only three days left, so that timetable may have slipped. The mux licence was supposed to be awarded two weeks ago, then last week - I think Ofcom are having serious trouble deciding. Once you throw out LMux for coverage reasons and Avanti for being too radical, you are still left with CoMux and Local TV Mux (CMA) - which are both very similar, with CoMux having the advantage that the owner (Canis Media) are experienced in selling Freeview slots and run the Manchester mux, however the CMA bid has more assurances on quality and backed by people who were involved with analogue RSLs. It's a tough decision, even with binning two of them out-of-hand, which Ofcom are unlikely to do!

CMA will be using new transmitters capable of DVB-T2 operation for reliability while CoMux will be using Arqiva's cast offs as they are doing with the Manchester Network.

I would think that should swing it assuming the business plan stands up. I agree that Avanti is too radical and the BBC mux is a non starter.

City TV (Birmingham) and That's Oxford (erm, Oxford) have just this second been awarded the latest two local TV licences.

That's Media aka SixTV are the second company to win licences in multiple areas (and effectively means a relaunch for SixTV Oxford)

First 20 local channels announced.

Has anyone questioned whether 20 is enough for a viable economic model? Inevitably some operators will win more than one licence and some independents will create content aimed at small channels for syndicatation. Is 20 stations enough for economies of scale to work?

It will be large enough to find out if people are interested in these channels and if they can be self funded. If there is not enough people watching them and they don't get enough money via adverts, then they will fold.

TBH, some of the larger cities like Birmingham , maybe even Oxford can make a go of it, but the smaller towns and cities the idea is a stupid idea.

To be fair Ray, the Winter Hill installation was not an Arqiva 'cast off', it was built by GMG.

I'd have thought the muxco is a toss up between Canis and the Beeb. They strike me as the only people capable of running a business like this, partly because they currently 'are' running businesses like this. I also think the Beeb are just being realistic with their coverage figures. It was well known amongst those with an understanding of propagation that GMG inflated their figures for commercial gain.

It just seems like an unrealistic pipedream. Look at the continuing "success" of local papers. Ads can be very local, unlike other TV, but rates will be low and people won't rush to tune in to watch low budget filler about lost cats, the am dram society and plans to change traffic lights.

Just because the costs are low doesn't mean they can't make programmes that local people want to watch. Look at Channel M in its heyday - Frank Sidebottom's Proper Telly Show was quite highly regarded, although I suspect it helped that M was also available on Sky at that point. Some of the other local RSLs such as SixTV, NvTv and TV-6 (I think they were called before TV Solent took over) were quite popular in their local areas. Bear in mind that the analogue coverage was mostly rubbish, and people had to consciously manually tune in, just the visibility aspect of being on Freeview should help them immensely.

Yes but Channel M covered one of the largest urban areas in the UK. Most licences cover much smaller areas.

And now two licences have LOST there licences...


http://www.a516digital.com/2012/11/o...ngham-and.html

But could be re-awarded to either or both of them next week... However it could mean that one of the other applicants gets it in an unexpected second chance!

A bit embarrassing for ofcom who only say there is a small problem but I hope SLTV keeps its licence.

An administrative error apparently (not a problem with the bids or an appeal). Hopefully the two former winners will be re-awarded their licences and it won't disrupt or inconvenience them too much.

At least Ofcom caught it without it being pointed out to them rather publicly, unlike a certain west coast rail franchise decision.

Administrative error. First trains, now TV. Is The Joker running the civil service?

If it is down to admin error the correct word is "withdrawn" (as used by Ofcom), not "lost". Lost implies something inappropriate from the broadcaster and no second chance, withdrawn implies turning the clock back to before the award, no prejudice against the "winner". And if this is on the Ofcom website I can't see it. For a communications regulator they really are poor at communication.

Award 10/10/12 http://media.ofcom.org.uk/2012/10/10...l-tv-licences/
News Index http://media.ofcom.org.uk/news/
Redaction ?

http://licensing.ofcom.org.uk/tv-bro...icences/local/

and it does say "withdrawn", only kev said they'd been lost.

Ofcom is not part of the Civil Service

I don't see what is too wrong with us (not Ofcom) using the term "lost" - there are after all usually two ways of losing an existing licence to broadcast: (a) it gets withdrawn or (b) it is revoked.

Providing the context is given in conjunction with the term "lost" (either a or b of the above), it will be clear what the case is. In the case of (a) 'lost licence due to it being withdrawn', it is not an alien concept for something to be lost, but then given back to its original owner.

Interestingly, Sheffield's local TV service is due to launch on a frequency Ofcom wants to clear in 2018...

Where as Nottingham's (from Waltham) is one of only two multiplexes that isn't in the frequencies Ofcom want to clear....

"Retaking their consideration" is a new one on me. It reminds me of sitting on the toilet whilst reading "the Beano" but in this case a local TV licence application.

Looking forward to our new channel in Oxford

Well there seems to be a varied programmes with many you used to get on Meridian & TVS before that. But the only thing I question is the rolling news they propose in the evening. There simply no money in news & having say headlines on the hour is much better but we have to see.