I get the impression that, with the exception of London Live, YourTV and City TV (and maybe That's TV) they are all doing pretty well.

Unfortunately all the media are based in London, so the poorly-performing London Live gets a disproportionate amount of coverage and makes it look like the entire local TV project is doomed.

The problem with Channel M wasn't coverage it was content. Although at my location the old analogue signal was a bit noisy, when it had a quite good breakfast show and an evening news fronted by Andy Crane I watched it. The station was making a loss so they thought the answer was to put a load of cheap rubbish on and that was the end of that. Sadly, even though I thought some programmes were OK I never met another viewer. At DSO they waited months before installing a new digital transmitter, the multiplex is still there but I have yet to meet anyone who watches it or the newer QPSK service for that matter.

Coverage is blamed, programme number is blamed but with poor content it wouldn't matter if it was transmitted at 1MW, no one will watch it, community radio likewise.

That's why there is a really handy option to edit your posts!

CH M was transmitted at 1kw ERP on ch 57 and on ch 58 the mux is 100kw ERP ,but worse the narrow radiation pattern of the ch 57 antenna at about +/- 30 deg reduces the signal by a considerable degree. The consequence is ch 57 is drowned out by the high adjacent ch 58.
Coverage was and is on the new owners programs ,severely restricted ,unless this has been attended to

Similar problems are at Shefield and some other local TV transmitters.

Content of course is important ,but good content is useless if coverage is compromised through technical error.
Efforts must be made by Ofcom to ensure coverage is good enough to give every chance to local TV.
It would be usefull if Ofcom had their own technical experts ,so they could provide qualified judgment and support.

The big advantage these new local stations have is that they're a lot easier for the average viewer to find on their receiver. In the analogue world you only normally adjusted the tuning when you bought a new telly, moved or once every 15 years when a new channel launched.

Having it on the EPG in such a prominent place is a big bonus

No use being in a prominent position if the content is simply not compelling enough.

All three needed .

First page position on the EPG and you can thank Oxford TV for that.

Plus good content and this will take time and of course coverage ,which needs addressing .
The coverage maps produced for local TV in some instances do not stand up to actual coverage and to those who have experience could see this before transmission commenced .
Insufficient skill in my opinion by the planners ,and the regulator is the prime reason for this failing.
Local TV is likely to fail without addressing all the issues.
I have seen local TV work in other countries and it needs good cost control and competent engineering.
Allowing local TV to operate their own transmission facilities is key to this as cost can be kept to a minimum.
Some stations in the past also moved into posh buildings with huge overheads .
This lesson seems to have been learnt this time around,

It will only appear on the EPG if your TV checks overnight for new services, many, especially older ones don't and apart from DS readers few people retune on a regular basis unless they are forced to do so.

In this modern world you have to hit the ground running, if viewers don't like what they see when watch a new station for the first time they probably won't bother again. In cities, advertising on the back and sides of buses can be effective, just being on the EPG is a dead loss.

Equally there's no point having good content if no bugger can find your channel

The position on the epg is likely to matter less than the amount of promotion for the channel, its contents and its aims.

And if the publicity clearly states the LCN, then no-one will have any trouble finding it!

Precisely.

EPG prominence has proved to be very beneficial on the Sky platform, with channels benefiting from big increases when moved to better slots:

http://www.feh-mi.com/blog/from-mtv-...pg-prominence/

I suspect the same would be true on DTT, which is why QVC was very keen to keep hold of LCN 16 for example.

Indeed, but if the programmes are crap, no one will watch, regardless of EPG position

Very true. Content is king

But of course on the sky platform the number for the local service is not relevant ....
It's yellow button !

And yes dtt LCN 16 is why there is no shopping category ... But after all why did AVC get it .... One if the first commercial channels to show faith in DTT .

It's official: despite everything you may have read, local TV has been deemed a "stunning success"


http://www.theguardian.com/media/201...bc-trust-chair (about halfway down)

I'm sure there are many words to describe the content of London Live but exciting isn't one of them! No wonder the audience laughed.

It would appear that the licences for Manchester and Preston & Blackpool held by Your TV, and which should have launched in February, are in the process of transfer to That's TV who currently provide That's Solent and have another somewhat delayed station That's Oxford due to launch by the end of the month.

Based on That's TV's own record of delayed launches and the rather limited service provided by their Solent station to date i'm not sure that this news fills me with confidence.

http://www.a516digital.com/2015/03/t...l-tv.html#more
http://media.info/television/jobs/station-editor
http://yourtvmanchester.co.uk/

An update to this story, via Prolific North, that I think you'll be interested in: YourTV holds the licence, but That's TV will control the channel. A launch deadline extension until June 2015 has been granted.

Thanks for that. Another ringing endorsement for the success story that is local tv in this country!!

I had to smile at this quote in the article from That's TV :-

“That’s TV seeks to bring the brand values associated with US city TV to the towns and cities of the UK, delivering the latest news and entertainment on TV, mobile and web,” it added."

Whoever reckons that needs surgery to remove their tongue from their cheek. It doesn't come close

But having a LCN on a digital EPG is very much better than requiring your audience to tune their tellies into 'UHF ch 54'.

That and the better transmission arrangements is the advantage the current crop of local TV has over the likes of Channel M.

In the analogue days Channel M told its viewers to tune to frequency 49 (or whatever UHF channel it was on), not exactly helpful.

Does anybody have any audience figures for Thats Solent? must not even hit the 100's.
I have given it a go but the god awful sound is so annoying no live content even for a major story no weather presenter no sports presenter no local adverts at all!
The US stations have all this and more.
And where is the promised Alan Tichmarsh and Esther Rantzen mmm Thats life!

Try and be a bit more positive .
Give these people a chance.
There is a lot of hardworking and commited genuine people trying hard to make a go of local TV.
I am sure the technical teething problems will get sorted.
Even the BBC and IBA had technical problems despite the very talented engineers they had.
If you understood the technology ,you perhaps would be a little more understanding.

But as simono pointed out t's not just technical teething problems that are the issue here. It's the actual content (or in many cases more appropriately lack of it) and the clearly apparent lack of funding and resources which are the main reason why many of these local tv stations are failing to cut the mustard.

However hardworking and committed you are if you haven't got the resources or cash you need you won't succeed. Many of those who pursued licences are finding that their own optimism as to launch dates, funding and content grossly overstated what they have been able to achieve.

Half the £25m from the licence payers ,should have gone direct to the TV stations .
Not squandered on a Mux.Co who as Canis Media was or may be still at the same location as Arqiva at their current and earlier address. They were then spun off as Comux .

Old transmitters that could have been on the monopoly broadcast supplier balance sheet at £0.00 have been installed at some locations ,I understand are approximately ten years old ,yet the cost to the so called Comux was very high indeed for site lease and capital cost .
So much so that start up capital that could and have gone to local TV startups ended in the pockets of greedy bankers ,who are the people and the owners of our monopoly broadcast supplier .
It really in my opinion stinks.
But hey these are the people who through another division gave money to David Cameron's leadership campaign if my info is correct .
Seems politicians ,as recent events have shown do ,not know the meaning of the word integrity and representing the interests of the voters and not greedy bankers and corporations who wish to rig markets through lobbying .