news727 post_id=17434 time= user_id=1412 Wrote:johnnyboy post_id=17393 time= user_id=925 Wrote:I am slightly excited about the launch of GB News but, like many others on here, I fear for its initial visibility to the audience. If it doesn't get that within the first 6 months of transmission, it's going to have a very rough time generating revenue.
Interestingly enough, Redfield & Wilton Strategies did a poll on this last Friday and had some pretty damning results (sample size was 1,500, BTW):
Do you think there's been a genuine need for a new TV news broadcaster in the UK? 36% Yes, 47% No, 17% Don't know.
Are you aware that GB News is launching on 13 June? 26% Yes, 67% No, 6% Don't know.
Will you be watching GB News on 13 June? 26% Yes, 37% No, 37% Don't know.
What do you make of that?
Can't find any mention of this on the Redfield & Wilton website - do you have a source?
valley post_id=17439 time= user_id=971 Wrote:Can't find any mention of this on the Redfield & Wilton website - do you have a source?
Yes, right here (they say the poll is conducted exclusively for GB News):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcwZjkwWphI
Also, obviously, I'm not that creative to make up those questions & numbers out of thin air...
news727 post_id=17443 time= user_id=1412 Wrote:valley post_id=17439 time= user_id=971 Wrote:Can't find any mention of this on the Redfield & Wilton website - do you have a source?
Yes, right here (they say the poll is conducted exclusively for GB News): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcwZjkwWphI
Also, obviously, I'm not that creative to make up those questions & numbers out of thin air...
Thanks for sharing (wasn't trying to accuse you of that - sorry if that is how it came across!)
The survey results are completely predictable. There's a loud minority on social media backing the launch of the channel. (Politically, we saw this play out in Scotland with the ALBA party launch. A huge amount of hype which translated into very low voter turnout). [Sorry to go political there, just using a good example of how social can skew the reality of a situation].
In reality, television consumption - be it news, drama or light entertainment - doesn't particularly call people to action. We all enjoy watching a bit of TV, but that's really all it is these days - light consumption. We eat our dinner, we sit down with a tea or beer and watch a bit of telly. Nothing more, nothing less. It's fanciful to think a large chunk of the population will watch hours of people sitting around a table having a debate about the day's news. A good example of this failed approach is France. French TV news channels are famous for it. BFM adopted the more UK approach of news-as-it-happens, and won. (Don't be sidetracked by the recent success of CNews. It's definitely a blip like we witnessed here with Talk Radio during lockdown).
Part of the GBNews success strategy will need to be hitting the target audience via social and online. The available audience for news and talk channels is very low. The US manages it because of the scale of the country's population. 'Success' for GBNews will really be managing around 100k on viewership. It's basically guaranteed to make a sizeable loss, unless the channel owners can come with some seriously innovative money generationt tactics.
Let's see how it all unfolds. Successful or not, one thing I can absolutely confirm is that the line-up will look very different in a year. When I used to work in broadcasting, it's always an accepted truth that joining the launch of a TV or radio channel was never a long-term career move.
LI4M post_id=17431 time= user_id=1530 Wrote:Roger Darthwell post_id=17416 time=1623146450 user_id=1160 Wrote:Well Andrew Neil is now saying that he is having '''good conversations'' with Piers Morgan about joining GB News https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/p...7b3fdac64f That could definitely help the channel gain a lot of visibility to the audience
Dewbs & Co looks like a suspiciously long slot for a weeknight so-called appointment-to-view programme. You'd think they'd struggle to fill a two-hour slot with items of sufficient quality over an extended run.
Pure speculation, but I wonder if it's really planned to be a one-hour slot with a last-minute announcement of a nightly Piers Morgan Tonight programme at 19:00 timed to drop just prior to launch for maximum publicity in the red tops?
Morgan at 7 followed by Neil at 8 would be a pretty strong primetime.
I’ll speculate too and suggest Piers was never in the equation- he’s too big for a fledgling channel (and too expensive too). I think the line-up is fine but there are no ‘superstars’ apart from Andrew Neil (who is obviously not just ‘talent’ on GBN). They haven’t even got someone like Julia Hartley-Brewer or Nick Ferrari (who are presumably extremely tied-in to their lucrative radio commitments).
valley post_id=17439 time= user_id=971 Wrote:Interestingly enough, Redfield & Wilton Strategies did a poll on this last Friday and had some pretty damning results (sample size was 1,500, BTW):
Do you think there's been a genuine need for a new TV news broadcaster in the UK? 36% Yes, 47% No, 17% Don't know.
Are you aware that GB News is launching on 13 June? 26% Yes, 67% No, 6% Don't know.
Will you be watching GB News on 13 June? 26% Yes, 37% No, 37% Don't know.
What do you make of that?
Thanks for sharing, valley.
Please let me state that, although my career is in marketing and advertising, I am not an expert on how well general awareness or lack thereof of a new product or service translates into commercial success and I have never been involved in media sales.
However, my first thought when reading that is that 26% of the UK (if the sample is representative) are aware of the launch and they intend to watch it.
If one in twenty of that 26% tuned in and was of an audience attractive enough to advertisers, it may actually be a bit of a hit numbers-wise.
Let's say that the adult population of the UK is 50 million. At 26% recognition, 13 million people are therefore aware of GB News.
If just one in twenty of those decided to tune in for an hour a day, that's an audience of 650,000 across a 24hr period.
When doing research for this post, I came across
thinkbox.tv and CPT rates for TV advertising.
I'm too stupid to understand what it's saying, unfortunately. With GB News's annual budget set at £25 (according to
RXTV Info), could someone with the relative smarts tell us whether 650,000 daily viewers is likely to take them to profit?
johnnyboy post_id=17453 time= user_id=925 Wrote:I'm too stupid to understand what it's saying, unfortunately. With GB News's annual budget set at £25 (according to RXTV Info), could someone with the relative smarts tell us whether 650,000 daily viewers is likely to take them to profit?
I'll attempt to solve this question by using the most information I can gather.
This
link tells that the proposed cost for the premium service (basically à la Fox Nation) is at £5/month and there could be up to 135,000 who are interested to pay for it.
=> Revenue from this service would be £8,1 million.
Then there's the advertising. I'll take Sky News' rates as the base because GB News doesn't release yet, and BBC obviously has no ads.
This tells me Sky's is between £505 and £1,065 across the entire day (in total).
Rule is only 9 minutes of breaks each hour => that'd be up to 18 30-second ads. Taking the average rate at £785, revenue will be £14,130/day => £5,157,450/year.
Combining and you'll get £13,257,450/year in revenue, which means a £11,472,550 annual loss.
If GB News release advertising rates, I'll update the numbers. But for now, it could only break even sometime after the second/third year.
Is the lack of channel numbers perhaps because it's intended to be used as an advert on other actual broadcasters?
There's a lot more polish on that clip than on the ones used on the barker.
news727 post_id=17455 time= user_id=1412 Wrote:johnnyboy post_id=17453 time= user_id=925 Wrote:I'm too stupid to understand what it's saying, unfortunately. With GB News's annual budget set at £25 (according to RXTV Info), could someone with the relative smarts tell us whether 650,000 daily viewers is likely to take them to profit?
I'll attempt to solve this question by using the most information I can gather.
This link tells that the proposed cost for the premium service (basically à la Fox Nation) is at £5/month and there could be up to 135,000 who are interested to pay for it.
=> Revenue from this service would be £8,1 million.
Then there's the advertising. I'll take Sky News' rates as the base because GB News doesn't release yet, and BBC obviously has no ads.
This tells me Sky's is between £505 and £1,065 across the entire day (in total).
Rule is only 9 minutes of breaks each hour => that'd be up to 18 30-second ads. Taking the average rate at £785, revenue will be £14,130/day => £5,157,450/year.
Combining and you'll get £13,257,450/year in revenue, which means a £11,472,550 annual loss.
If GB News release advertising rates, I'll update the numbers. But for now, it could only break even sometime after the second/third year.
It will be interesting to see if GB News has sponsored segments (like weather, market reports, or sport) which can bring in additional income for broadcasters. If we do see that I imagine it would only be in Breakfast / Daytime programming rather than peak.
johnnyboy post_id=17453 time= user_id=925 Wrote:I'm too stupid to understand what it's saying, unfortunately. With GB News's annual budget set at £25 (according to RXTV Info), could someone with the relative smarts tell us whether 650,000 daily viewers is likely to take them to profit?
£25?
I think with that annual budget, they'd be in profit with the first advert in the first break - no wonder Discovery are one of the investors, they'd be coining it in at the end of the first week!
Hatton Cross post_id=17469 time= user_id=1471 Wrote:johnnyboy post_id=17453 time= user_id=925 Wrote:I'm too stupid to understand what it's saying, unfortunately. With GB News's annual budget set at £25 (according to RXTV Info), could someone with the relative smarts tell us whether 650,000 daily viewers is likely to take them to profit?
£25?
I think with that annual budget, they'd be in profit with the first advert in the first break - no wonder Discovery are one of the investors, they'd be coining it in at the end of the first week!
Yeah Hatton Cross, real tight ship this channel! :-)
news727 post_id=17455 time= user_id=1412 Wrote:johnnyboy post_id=17453 time= user_id=925 Wrote:I'm too stupid to understand what it's saying, unfortunately. With GB News's annual budget set at £25 (according to RXTV Info), could someone with the relative smarts tell us whether 650,000 daily viewers is likely to take them to profit?
I'll attempt to solve this question by using the most information I can gather.
This link tells that the proposed cost for the premium service (basically à la Fox Nation) is at £5/month and there could be up to 135,000 who are interested to pay for it.
=> Revenue from this service would be £8,1 million.
Then there's the advertising. I'll take Sky News' rates as the base because GB News doesn't release yet, and BBC obviously has no ads.
This tells me Sky's is between £505 and £1,065 across the entire day (in total).
Rule is only 9 minutes of breaks each hour => that'd be up to 18 30-second ads. Taking the average rate at £785, revenue will be £14,130/day => £5,157,450/year.
Combining and you'll get £13,257,450/year in revenue, which means a £11,472,550 annual loss.
If GB News release advertising rates, I'll update the numbers. But for now, it could only break even sometime after the second/third year.
Non PSB channels can show up to nine minutes per hour averaged over 24 hours. They can use less in off peak to compensate for higher usage (12 minutes) in peak.
From Ofcom's COSTA:
2. Time devoted to television advertising and teleshopping spots on any channel in any
clock hour must not exceed 12 minutes.
Further to Rule 2:
3. Non public service channels must show no more than an average of 12 minutes of
television advertising and teleshopping spots for every hour of transmission across the
broadcasting day, of which no more than 9 minutes may be television advertising.
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on...dvertising
I expect Andrew Neil will get the full 12 minutes. Sky News can't be far short of 12 minutes in their 10pm hour, as the Press Preview only lasts about 16 minutes in total!!
derek500j post_id=17472 time= user_id=1363 Wrote:I expect Andrew Neil will get the full 12 minutes. Sky News can't be far short of 12 minutes in their 10pm hour, as the Press Preview only lasts about 16 minutes in total!!
Well, News at Ten generally is 30 minutes, the press preview is 16-18 minutes, 1.5 minutes of weather, 1 minute of COVID-data into the TOTH break… roughly 10 minutes of break, the last two adverts of which are normally two Sky programme teasers which don’t count against the 9 minute limit.
globaltraffic24 post_id=17448 time= user_id=1708 Wrote:The available audience for news and talk channels is very low.
One exception to this is in London - where LBC's talk station has by far the highest market share of any commercial station and has for some time - pre Covid, the last time Rajar reported:
Quote:In London, LBC remains the number 1 commercial station on market share (8.4%), followed by Magic (4.5%), Heart (4.4%), Capital (3.5%) and Absolute (2.8%). KISS is sixth, followed by Smooth then Radio X.
https://radiotoday.co.uk/2020/05/rajar-q...s-roundup/