The issue with itv is that they keep putting everything on itvx instead of promoting the actual channel. Most good itv shows come from itvx and shows like spitting image which many older folk who don’t have Britbox or even internet enjoyed and putting it online ruined the purpose of the show
And it’s completely unusable for anyone who needs subtitles and/or AD because they simply don’t offer them there. (That’s one of the reasons I always record programmes; that and it lets me skip the ads!)
🦕 🦖 🦖 🦕 's you understand what happened to them, dont you ?. Evolution, it means times have changed, so change with them or do not that is up to you. ITV are doing what they need to do moving with the times. The problems come with ITV X if you live in the U.K., but dont live in England that makes it problematic in terms of fast chanels. You can see all the channels, but unless you live in England & have an English based postcode, then your going to run into problems when it comes to watching the fast chanels. This makes a premium subscription pointless unless you live in England. ITV needs to stop trying to reganalise contact it has absolutely no place in the modern world even the B.B.C. are less restrictive in terms of region passific content. The other problem is that it's basically just ITV Hub under the surface with a new skin & fast chanels that lag about 2 mins behind where the live content should be. ITV X us absolutely terrible in comparison to Now formally Now T.V the operating systems are night & day light years apart . that is the problem that are holding ITV X back. Not techphobs like yourself.
@@DrWhoFanJ As I understand it, itvx does have both subtitles and audio description for many programmes, but you have to kick-start them after advert breaks.
But it's also the kind of "Government ministers chose to ignore this for over a decade" programming that would get the BBC's income "top-sliced to fund rural broadband" or "frozen to help with household budgeting" yet again (and the Licence Fee, anachronistic for at least half a century and ludicrously intrusive compared to the methods used to fund public broadcasting in other countries, survives mainly because governments know it makes people annoyed with the BBC).
Take BBC radio for example, Radio 1 is aimed at kids who all mentally add up to the lowest common denominator and Radio 2 is still playing music mainly from the 70s. At 40 years old personally neither are relevant to me or most people from my generation, its the same with TV. Lazy commissions like TOWIE, X Factor, Love Island etc are just trash TV that's made most people my age give up and not even bother with a TV license any more. After years of minimal innovation and toxic reality shows the chickens are coming home to roost and as the older generation who have habitually tuned in every night to watch tv start dying off the truth is now the younger generations are not following the same pattern and nobody had the foresight to see this coming and sadly i feel its too late to reverse this pattern.
What was "not seen coming" (though I think it probably was, in a rabbit-in-the-headlights sort of way) was broadband making the default for audio-visual distribution worldwide rather than national. In Adam's analyses of the BARB charts you'll rarely see shows from any of the international streamers, but when you add up all the mediocre ratings they gather in almost every country in the world, you get a total far higher than a show which is made for a specific nation or region. That means they can spend more, which means that programme makers can demand to earn more etc. (except that it also means cheaply made output with international appeal can be profitable for RUclipsrs etc.)
Radio 2 isn’t really mostly music from the 70s. It has its various “sounds of the…[insert decade here]” shows but outside of their specialist shows they mostly play either modern stuff (albeit stuff that would appeal to their target like Ed Sheeran etc..) or at least stuff from 90s onwards.
@@loftlegacy When Channel 5 started it was class as the new Sky Channel imagine having a movie every night at 9 starting with Mrs Doubtfire news update every hour plus Quiz Soap Drama plus children context with Milkshake, Channel 5 have dumb down in recent years due to change of ownership.
I was thinking that ‘Mr Bates v The Post Office’ was in the running for an NTA for new drama or even a special recognition/ impact award due it reigniting the Post Office justice movement. Maybe not now :(
BTCC ITV 4, WE HAVE 10:45AM TO 7:20PM OF LIVE SPORT ON ITV Premier motor racing series in UK All ITV have to advertise is Charity Advert Charity Advert Charity Advert Lynx body spray Charity Advert Charity Advert ITV can't find adverts for prime time sport
The reason why ITV is losing money is because the channel is rubbish I've been saying this for ages and ages. There is nothing on the channel worth watching. They put their best shows on their ITVX app. The channel needs rebranding and a massive revamp. Personel at the top need to go and fresh talent brought with fresh ideas and an understanding of what viewers want to watch on an evening. I mostly ignore the channel and haven't watched Mr Bates vs the Post Office because I think the channel is full of crap.
Why did 10 million audience used to pay the bills? Is it the advertising market - why aren't they talking about that? Or is it the production costs have ballooned - I'm reminded of the Charlie Brooker's ScreenWipe segment "Falling Off A Log", which detailed the kind of paperwork and overhead incurred by literally falling off a log, and filming it. ITV can't catch a break - their ITV News service had a scoop over every other live news network with a camera on the 21/7 bombers at the end of the manhunt. As soon as that was done, ITV News shut down, despite their proven success.
ITV used to produce fabulous programmes, which I doubt cost fortunes, but they churn out so much crud now I'm surprised they have any viewers left. Mind-numbing reality shows, ludicrous 'drama' which often manages to be both dreary and unintentionally hilarious, long past their sell-by date soaps, etc., is a recipe for medium and long-term decline. That there's a large number of other channels available is manna from heaven for ITV (and BBC) execs as it gives them a very convenient excuse for low ratings. However, no intelligent person falls for this as there just aren't millions of viewers watching these niche channels. Much more likely is that large sections of the public are turning their back on the two main terrestrial broadcasters in response to the way they're treated. Those in charge of ITV evidently look down their noses at the average viewer, who are fit only to be patronised. Mr Bates certainly isn't representative of what is usually shown on ITV in terms of drama and is a useful if temporary diversion for Network Centre. Incidentally, I'm no Sky cheerleader as I've never subscribed to any of their output.
I don't always agree with you, Adam, however, in this case I must give you great credit for a piece of incisive analytical journalism. Keep up the good work!
I have a friend in America who was raving about Mr Bates. He is always watching the PBS UK dramas. It’s inevitable that dramas have to be made with a view to overseas sales (the old argument that Doctor Who made more in overseas sales than it cost to make), but as tv gets more homogenous this doesn’t bode well.
Not really - It's made by Hello Dolly and Mitre Studios rather than ITV themselves, so ITV will be paying a fixed amount per episode regardless of how much is won. On top of that, this sort of 'relatively low average amount won per episode, large (in this case unlimited) maximum prize' show _usually_ insures itself against needing to give away significantly more money than they've budgeted for over a season. If multiple couples won 5-10m in a row, that would likely get the show off air, but that would be due to the increase on premiums on whatever insurance company Hello Dolly and Mitre Studios are using for that show.
If it stop paying Z listers there own programs which are rubbish paying for Reality programmes and loads of Repeats why don't you put some interesting programmes on through the days at the weekends its definitely going down hill ITV and all the competitions they put out for people to gamble it shouldn't be able to happen
ITV X is basically just ITV Hub with a new skin & fast chanels add it has all the same problems as ITV Hub had. And unless you live in England, you do not have access to all fast chanels some are geography restricted & that makes a premium subscription, and it is pointless unless you live in England. If I lived in England I would consider a ITX premium subscription but as I live elsewhere in The U.K. it's a complete waste of time.
Not exactly. What Adam doesn't mention is that ITV has for years been pivoting towards international programme production, buying up facilities all over the world (hence, for example, the Graham Norton show is made by an ITV subsidiary and sold to the BBC among many other outlets worldwide)
@@PelinalDidNothingWrong Paradoxically, the Netflix Harlan Coben hit "Fool Me Once" was made for them by ITV Studios subsidiary Quay Street Productions
I normally have ITV3 and ITV4 on during the day..... Old stuff is better than anything new........I'm 50, so what do I care, but ITV do not help themselves by putting on boring Love Island, even bringing Big Brother back - talk about flogging a dead horse!...... The only good thing was Gladiators because it resided with me from back in the day.
I think the issue here is ITV marketing is just lost with what it wants to be. its one of those situations where ITV can have big budgets for their shows but they are unsustainable. When you consider they also have to run Corrie and Emmerdale on a week by week basis and often get mixed viewing numbers, it does ask what the overall future of the channel is becoming.
If itv wants to make money, then produce decent content, they could get rid of the soaps and save money there, the soaps are unbelievable depressing dribble
I mean ITV launched ITVX a while ago so that’s kinda their own fault because streaming has become the new form of entertainment and regular TV is struggling. Same with the BBC and the iplayer. Also, I think if ITV focuses more on their actual channels instead of releasing stuff early on ITVX, then they could’ve saved lots of money. Keep the work up.😀
If Mr.Bates aired 20 years ago it could of gotten an live television audience of about 10 to 12 million viewers an episode if not more and back in the 1970s, it could of gotten a live audience of 15 to 20 million viewers per episode with the last episode receiving an live audience of 21 million or more viewers. Look at the 1977 Mike Yarwood Christmas Special which received 21.5 million viewers during its first its first broadcast. Even in 1996, the last episode could of gotten a live audience of 24 million viewers if not more, like an episode of “Only Fools and Horses” did during that same year. So this tells you how much television has changed since the 1970s, and even since the early 2000s, and television’s business model will have to change or ITV and the other traditional broadcasts will go broke. Oh it also doesn’t help that Mr.Bates isn’t a sci-fi or fantasy series like “Doctor Who” because those types of shows sell well overseas because they have a massive cult following. Look at the fact that Disney+ brought the international first run rights of “Doctor Who” even though Disney+ is losing money. That really tells you something about the staying power of sci-fi and fantasy. The biggest health scandals in UK history would actually be both the contaminated blood scandal and the Thalidomide scandal of the late 1950s and early to mid 1960s due to all of the children born with birth defects and the parents who had still-births and other pregnancy complications due to Thalidomide. I do think that the series about the contaminated blood scandal well sell better overseas because most nations around the world had similar scandals in the 1980s. That was one of the major reasons why gay men couldn’t donate blood for so long in the United States due to the fear of AIDS that was happening in the 1980s. The mini-series “It’s a Sin” deals with the fear of AIDS in the United Kingdom during the 1980s, which was done by Russell T. Davis. Heck people who lived in or were born in the UK in the 1980s, the 1990s and for certain individuals beyond that could not donate blood in the US either because of the human form of BESE and that only changed recently as well. So many nations had a contaminated blood scandal in the 1980s including the United States and that’s how Ryan White, Arthur Ashe, and Isaac Asimov got either HIV or AIDS in the first place.
Adam your bang on & on about dramas. Here is a novel idea how about ITV: Actually, commission of the top of my head aome comedy series you never knew if they can find a hit comedy that the woke brigade will not complain about they might just might be able to make a profit. I.T.V or S.T.V for us in Scotland have have actually had some decent dramas in recent years Vera & Endeavour. Game shows I think are only really watched now buy people in there 60's upwards I dont think people from 18 to 50 really bother the same way about them now a days life is just far to busy for progams like that to be successful buy & large. ITV X is problematic if you live anywhere in the U.K that is not England with lots of geographical restrictions also it is basically just ITV hub with fast chanels & Britbox add the fast chanels are 2 mins behind whare they should be that is no good for live events like The Six Nations & so on. ITV need to fix a lot of problems with ITV X it's not fit for purposes & I expect it to crash often when Euro 2024 starts this Sumner as there servers will be extremely over load and as a result no dought crash as a result.
I’m outside the UK and would gladly pay for the streaming services but can’t (apparently for legal copyright reasons) so I use a VPN and get it all for free. Go figure!
The programme should sell even if it is about the British Post Office. It could be about any Post Office or large corporation with a faulty accounting system. The programme format is also sellable. It could be about a government department in New York who collects money from parking meters only for the accountancy software to miscalculate and they get accused of stealing. With drama in general it has a short life unless it's a soap. Who even thinks of the very successful Mr. Selfridge from around a decade ago? Downton Abbey has had some long term success but the series hasn't been revived for another series. Game shows on the other hand can be adapted for different countries, age groups and celebrity versions. If a country can't afford to produce their own they can sell them the UK version. ITVX would be a factor in the loss because online advertising is a fraction of ITV1. Game shows and children's programmes make the most off screen with licencing for merchandise, gaming and format sales. That is where ITV should be aiming for. The TV channel Challenge although owned by Sky shows mostly ITV produced programmes so they will be able to sell the programmes easier.
I personally fine itv very boring now. Not many films or programs like Londons burning or the bill on screen anymore . Not many films. Christmas should have plenty of films but no itv have talk shows and cookery shows on on Christmas day
I expect a lot of drama/premium shows are not being commissioned due to the ban on junk food advertising that comes in on the 1st October 2025. Coca Cola, McDonald's, Dominos etc. are big spenders and ITV will be concerned with how it affects their advertising rates generally before 9PM.
Why is it wrong for a TV show to be made by the profit accumulated from advertising that the same viewers have had to endure. Why is it not ok for ITV not to make profit on this, it is a British programme made for a british audience that happened to love it. Shouldn’t that be enough.
Dramas are expensive and 30 years ago this would have pulled in over 20 million viewers. The biggest impact is advertising revenue which is now going online. Services such as RUclips know the age, gender and the interests of its viewers allowing targeted advertising. This means it is better and cheaper than the traditional broadcast tv channels. If this continues then even drama heavily sold worldwide will struggle to break even.
Losing money on programmes is not new, but something else that isn't new and in my oppinion is a total waste of money, and this applies to all channels, why oh why ? when doing news reports is it deemed necessary to send out reporters to all things being reported on, .... standing outside No10 to report on what happened that day, why go to Downing street when it could be done in a studio with a Downing street background, standing on a bridge over a motorway to report on something that can't be seen, in a street where one thing or another has happened, the list is endless, all these reports cost money, a total waste of money, a reporter a cameraman a sound engineer the cost of the travel it all adds up.
Terrestrial television is now losing out to streaming services. More's the pity. Because a lot of people may not be able to afford streaming services and therefore miss out on their favourite television programmes. I hope that I will never witness this as I will miss Terrestrial television.
I think ITV should do the following to reduce money; Reduce the soaps to 3 commercial 30 minute episodes Scrap the reality tv shows Scrap the daytime gameshows Scrap Lorraine, This Morning, Loose Women Axe Limitless
The thing is, these shows are a lot cheaper than dramas and fictional shows. The biggest cost is probably talent. Gettong rid of some of this stuff, especially the low performing stuff would be wise and reducing the amount sbows down would help but otherwise... Why would they get rid of all the stuff which fills the schedule for cheaper. Also, these are shows that might not appeal to you but i know my mother has watched a lot of these shows and there is an audience for them. Your cuts seems to come from your own taste in television and not whats actually best for a public service broadcaster who must cater to all taste.
Shame took a drama like Mr Bates to get post office shambles back into headlines and more effort made get justice! How many more issues need a drama series to get justice! Question for linear channels, if box set all dramas before screening on main channels encourage more and more and more binge box set watching, does rest of series need to play out on TV channels as lowers audience so much...or just one episode like shop window get interest for streaming like Walter presents or paramount on 5? Event TV only way keep tv channels in focus as years pass. All need that eye grabbing focus shows that are less streaming box sets like dramas and if drama the main draw not reality or entertainment strip it as a week long drama (nightly) ... (before) box set available at all.
It does me wonder how much would it have cost if ITV Studios did the production alone, but it shows even in that headline about them losing one million, how stupid they sounded to the cost of the people who were the victims of the miscarriage of justice. It does make me wonder if there was a still a regional structure within ITV in terms of making programmes, and having everything in house and comissioned by the regions for the network how much cheaper would it have been. The Contaminated Blood scandal well that might have plemty of interest in the many parts of the world where it wasn't just the UK, and if ITV are clever then they can look at those countries and state that it is a global story but here is the UK's take.
@@david_g_barron It's not so much the technology as the staff. More efficient to have multiple studios sharing specialist staff in a single complex, which is why some of the old BBC Television Centre studios are now used by ITV.
The foreign accessibility is the reason why BBC's longest running gameshow 'Question of Sport' was put to an end last year after 53 years. Richard Osman in 'The Rest Is Entertainment' podcast stated that sport topics tend to age quickly. In other hand, the show Have I Got News For You, being a political satire, can have its formula being exported in foreign countries.
Hi Adam, be careful when you read ITV PR about losing a million on the Mr Bates drama. In fact £1 million is peanuts to the budget ITV have which is always over a billion pounds of revenue and more. £1 million is a drop in the ocean and not a loss. Millions of viewers have come to ITV and will want to see more drama. For that million pound loss, they gained far more in the future.
The 2023 annual report (though it doesn't include _Mr Bates_ ) suggests otherwise. Providing TV to British audiences is a declining percentage, now less than half of ITV's income (with advertising revenue down a particularly harsh £150 million on 2022). Making shows around the world is the future.
@@PastPresented The 2023 report wouldn't include Mr Bates, as it only aired in Jan 2024. So what is the annual revenue of ITV now? Recent figures at least? I know Channel 4 had been generating over a billion in revenue in recent years, but that will surely be lower now due to their financial problems.
@@johnking5174 2023 is the latest annual data. ITV results for the first quarter of 2024 are due to be published next Thursday, 9 May. Channel 4, having no shareholders, is more leisurely in the publication of its results.
@@PhilipMurphyExtra It is on a par, both shows consolidates to around 5 million mark on average. ITV rarely sees any show consolidated to more than 7 or 8 million, which is usually I'm A Celebrity
The issue with itv is that they keep putting everything on itvx instead of promoting the actual channel. Most good itv shows come from itvx and shows like spitting image which many older folk who don’t have Britbox or even internet enjoyed and putting it online ruined the purpose of the show
And it’s completely unusable for anyone who needs subtitles and/or AD because they simply don’t offer them there.
(That’s one of the reasons I always record programmes; that and it lets me skip the ads!)
🦕 🦖 🦖 🦕 's you understand what happened to them, dont you ?.
Evolution, it means times have changed, so change with them or do not that is up to you.
ITV are doing what they need to do moving with the times.
The problems come with
ITV X if you live in
the U.K., but dont live in England that makes it problematic in terms of fast chanels. You can see all the channels, but unless you live in England & have an English based postcode, then your going to run into problems when it comes to watching the fast chanels.
This makes a premium subscription pointless unless you live in England.
ITV needs to stop trying to reganalise contact it has absolutely no place in the modern world
even the B.B.C. are less restrictive in terms of region passific content.
The other problem is that it's basically just ITV Hub under the surface with a new skin & fast chanels that lag about 2 mins behind where the live content should be.
ITV X us absolutely terrible in comparison to
Now formally Now T.V the operating systems are night & day light years apart .
that is the problem that are holding ITV X back.
Not techphobs like yourself.
@@DrWhoFanJ As I understand it, itvx does have both subtitles and audio description for many programmes, but you have to kick-start them after advert breaks.
@@DrWhoFanJ it juts ruins the purpose of itv shows
I still miss ol' Yorkshire television with its signature tune, long gone all itv 1 now
The ident is at the beginning of A Bit Of A Do with David Jason.
I miss being in Granadaland.
This is the kind of ‘in the interest of the British public programming’ that the non-for profit publicly funded BBC should be doing.
But it's also the kind of "Government ministers chose to ignore this for over a decade" programming that would get the BBC's income "top-sliced to fund rural broadband" or "frozen to help with household budgeting" yet again (and the Licence Fee, anachronistic for at least half a century and ludicrously intrusive compared to the methods used to fund public broadcasting in other countries, survives mainly because governments know it makes people annoyed with the BBC).
Lost it when it went national. Needs its local identities back. All the local studios that turned out quality content lost, shame.
Take BBC radio for example, Radio 1 is aimed at kids who all mentally add up to the lowest common denominator and Radio 2 is still playing music mainly from the 70s. At 40 years old personally neither are relevant to me or most people from my generation, its the same with TV. Lazy commissions like TOWIE, X Factor, Love Island etc are just trash TV that's made most people my age give up and not even bother with a TV license any more. After years of minimal innovation and toxic reality shows the chickens are coming home to roost and as the older generation who have habitually tuned in every night to watch tv start dying off the truth is now the younger generations are not following the same pattern and nobody had the foresight to see this coming and sadly i feel its too late to reverse this pattern.
What was "not seen coming" (though I think it probably was, in a rabbit-in-the-headlights sort of way) was broadband making the default for audio-visual distribution worldwide rather than national. In Adam's analyses of the BARB charts you'll rarely see shows from any of the international streamers, but when you add up all the mediocre ratings they gather in almost every country in the world, you get a total far higher than a show which is made for a specific nation or region. That means they can spend more, which means that programme makers can demand to earn more etc. (except that it also means cheaply made output with international appeal can be profitable for RUclipsrs etc.)
X factor was stopped years ago…
I’m 50 and BBC and ITV have very little to attract me. I said to my wife as we watched a documentary on Channel 5, that channel is the “new BBC 2”
Radio 2 isn’t really mostly music from the 70s. It has its various “sounds of the…[insert decade here]” shows but outside of their specialist shows they mostly play either modern stuff (albeit stuff that would appeal to their target like Ed Sheeran etc..) or at least stuff from 90s onwards.
@@loftlegacy When Channel 5 started it was class as the new Sky Channel imagine having a movie every night at 9 starting with Mrs Doubtfire news update every hour plus Quiz Soap Drama plus children context with Milkshake, Channel 5 have dumb down in recent years due to change of ownership.
I'd love to find the capacity to find sympathy for ITV
But this is karma for putting the nation through the X-Factor
The bbc makes us go through numerous things..
@@Micfri300 agree, I wouldn't have any sympathy for them either
I was thinking that ‘Mr Bates v The Post Office’ was in the running for an NTA for new drama or even a special recognition/ impact award due it reigniting the Post Office justice movement. Maybe not now :(
BTCC ITV 4, WE HAVE 10:45AM TO 7:20PM OF LIVE SPORT ON ITV
Premier motor racing series in UK
All ITV have to advertise is
Charity Advert
Charity Advert
Charity Advert
Lynx body spray
Charity Advert
Charity Advert
ITV can't find adverts for prime time sport
All these streaming services need taking down as we won’t have no TV channels or no cinemas anymore what a sad world 🌍 that will be
I only watch RUclips, Netflix and Amazon prime on my TV. No terrestrial.
The reason why ITV is losing money is because the channel is rubbish I've been saying this for ages and ages. There is nothing on the channel worth watching. They put their best shows on their ITVX app. The channel needs rebranding and a massive revamp. Personel at the top need to go and fresh talent brought with fresh ideas and an understanding of what viewers want to watch on an evening. I mostly ignore the channel and haven't watched Mr Bates vs the Post Office because I think the channel is full of crap.
Why did 10 million audience used to pay the bills? Is it the advertising market - why aren't they talking about that?
Or is it the production costs have ballooned - I'm reminded of the Charlie Brooker's ScreenWipe segment "Falling Off A Log", which detailed the kind of paperwork and overhead incurred by literally falling off a log, and filming it.
ITV can't catch a break - their ITV News service had a scoop over every other live news network with a camera on the 21/7 bombers at the end of the manhunt. As soon as that was done, ITV News shut down, despite their proven success.
ITV used to produce fabulous programmes, which I doubt cost fortunes, but they churn out so much crud now I'm surprised they have any viewers left. Mind-numbing reality shows, ludicrous 'drama' which often manages to be both dreary and unintentionally hilarious, long past their sell-by date soaps, etc., is a recipe for medium and long-term decline. That there's a large number of other channels available is manna from heaven for ITV (and BBC) execs as it gives them a very convenient excuse for low ratings.
However, no intelligent person falls for this as there just aren't millions of viewers watching these niche channels. Much more likely is that large sections of the public are turning their back on the two main terrestrial broadcasters in response to the way they're treated. Those in charge of ITV evidently look down their noses at the average viewer, who are fit only to be patronised. Mr Bates certainly isn't representative of what is usually shown on ITV in terms of drama and is a useful if temporary diversion for Network Centre. Incidentally, I'm no Sky cheerleader as I've never subscribed to any of their output.
Good video
ITV only airs stuff that appeals to old people. They don't make any shows at all that appeal to me.
there are plenty of childrens programmes for you to watch
I don't always agree with you, Adam, however, in this case I must give you great credit for a piece of incisive analytical journalism.
Keep up the good work!
I have a friend in America who was raving about Mr Bates. He is always watching the PBS UK dramas. It’s inevitable that dramas have to be made with a view to overseas sales (the old argument that Doctor Who made more in overseas sales than it cost to make), but as tv gets more homogenous this doesn’t bode well.
The new colourful look of all ITV channels is in July.
If Limitless Win had a couple that went absolutely bonkers, ITV could’ve been bankrupt easily. That’s how risky Limitless Win is for ITV
Not really - It's made by Hello Dolly and Mitre Studios rather than ITV themselves, so ITV will be paying a fixed amount per episode regardless of how much is won. On top of that, this sort of 'relatively low average amount won per episode, large (in this case unlimited) maximum prize' show _usually_ insures itself against needing to give away significantly more money than they've budgeted for over a season. If multiple couples won 5-10m in a row, that would likely get the show off air, but that would be due to the increase on premiums on whatever insurance company Hello Dolly and Mitre Studios are using for that show.
All game shows have to have some kind of insurance via sponsorships in order to pay out The Prize Money for these contestants
If it stop paying Z listers there own programs which are rubbish paying for Reality programmes and loads of Repeats why don't you put some interesting programmes on through the days at the weekends its definitely going down hill ITV and all the competitions they put out for people to gamble it shouldn't be able to happen
Wandering if Disney or someone like that would buy itv?
Price gouging. Inept cost control, catch up TV?
I want family guy to returm to bbc 3
NOoOoOoOoO
Anything but that
ITV really seem to be banking on ITVX to save them
ITV X is basically just
ITV Hub with a new skin & fast chanels add it has all the same problems as
ITV Hub had.
And unless you live in
England, you do not have access to all fast chanels
some are geography restricted & that makes
a premium subscription, and it is pointless unless you live in England.
If I lived in England I would consider a
ITX premium subscription
but as I live elsewhere in
The U.K. it's a complete waste of time.
Not exactly. What Adam doesn't mention is that ITV has for years been pivoting towards international programme production, buying up facilities all over the world (hence, for example, the Graham Norton show is made by an ITV subsidiary and sold to the BBC among many other outlets worldwide)
@@PastPresentedOhhh I see. I had no idea! I don't watch broadcast TV,let alone ITV or BBC. Adam is the only information I get about Broadcast TV
@@PelinalDidNothingWrong Paradoxically, the Netflix Harlan Coben hit "Fool Me Once" was made for them by ITV Studios subsidiary Quay Street Productions
Keep it up Adam love ur vids 🎉
Thank you
@@AdamMartyn Why don't you review the Sonic X episode The Last Resort or Little Chap Lost like what you did with Brum and Pingu
I normally have ITV3 and ITV4 on during the day..... Old stuff is better than anything new........I'm 50, so what do I care, but ITV do not help themselves by putting on boring Love Island, even bringing Big Brother back - talk about flogging a dead horse!...... The only good thing was Gladiators because it resided with me from back in the day.
Itv
I think the issue here is ITV marketing is just lost with what it wants to be.
its one of those situations where ITV can have big budgets for their shows but they are unsustainable.
When you consider they also have to run Corrie and Emmerdale on a week by week basis and often get mixed viewing numbers, it does ask what the overall future of the channel is becoming.
If itv wants to make money, then produce decent content, they could get rid of the soaps and save money there, the soaps are unbelievable depressing dribble
I mean ITV launched ITVX a while ago so that’s kinda their own fault because streaming has become the new form of entertainment and regular TV is struggling. Same with the BBC and the iplayer. Also, I think if ITV focuses more on their actual channels instead of releasing stuff early on ITVX, then they could’ve saved lots of money. Keep the work up.😀
If Mr.Bates aired 20 years ago it could of gotten an live television audience of about 10 to 12 million viewers an episode if not more and back in the 1970s, it could of gotten a live audience of 15 to 20 million viewers per episode with the last episode receiving an live audience of 21 million or more viewers. Look at the 1977 Mike Yarwood Christmas Special which received 21.5 million viewers during its first its first broadcast. Even in 1996, the last episode could of gotten a live audience of 24 million viewers if not more, like an episode of “Only Fools and Horses” did during that same year. So this tells you how much television has changed since the 1970s, and even since the early 2000s, and television’s business model will have to change or ITV and the other traditional broadcasts will go broke.
Oh it also doesn’t help that Mr.Bates isn’t a sci-fi or fantasy series like “Doctor Who” because those types of shows sell well overseas because they have a massive cult following. Look at the fact that Disney+ brought the international first run rights of “Doctor Who” even though Disney+ is losing money. That really tells you something about the staying power of sci-fi and fantasy.
The biggest health scandals in UK history would actually be both the contaminated blood scandal and the Thalidomide scandal of the late 1950s and early to mid 1960s due to all of the children born with birth defects and the parents who had still-births and other pregnancy complications due to Thalidomide.
I do think that the series about the contaminated blood scandal well sell better overseas because most nations around the world had similar scandals in the 1980s. That was one of the major reasons why gay men couldn’t donate blood for so long in the United States due to the fear of AIDS that was happening in the 1980s. The mini-series “It’s a Sin” deals with the fear of AIDS in the United Kingdom during the 1980s, which was done by Russell T. Davis. Heck people who lived in or were born in the UK in the 1980s, the 1990s and for certain individuals beyond that could not donate blood in the US either because of the human form of BESE and that only changed recently as well. So many nations had a contaminated blood scandal in the 1980s including the United States and that’s how Ryan White, Arthur Ashe, and Isaac Asimov got either HIV or AIDS in the first place.
Adam your bang on & on about dramas.
Here is a novel idea
how about ITV: Actually, commission of the top of my head aome comedy series you never knew if they can find a hit comedy that the woke brigade will not complain about they might just might be able to make a profit.
I.T.V or S.T.V for us in Scotland have have actually had some decent dramas in recent years
Vera & Endeavour.
Game shows I think are only really watched now buy people in there 60's upwards I dont think people from 18 to 50 really bother the same way about them now a days life is just far to busy for progams like that to be successful buy & large.
ITV X is problematic if you live anywhere in the U.K that is not England with lots of geographical restrictions also it is basically just ITV hub with fast chanels & Britbox add the fast chanels are 2 mins behind whare they should be that is no good for live events like
The Six Nations & so on.
ITV need to fix a lot of problems with ITV X it's not fit for purposes & I expect it to crash often when Euro 2024 starts this Sumner as there servers will be extremely over load and as a result no dought crash as a result.
I’m outside the UK and would gladly pay for the streaming services but can’t (apparently for legal copyright reasons) so I use a VPN and get it all for free. Go figure!
And ITV don't profit from commercials during streaming?
The programme should sell even if it is about the British Post Office. It could be about any Post Office or large corporation with a faulty accounting system. The programme format is also sellable. It could be about a government department in New York who collects money from parking meters only for the accountancy software to miscalculate and they get accused of stealing.
With drama in general it has a short life unless it's a soap. Who even thinks of the very successful Mr. Selfridge from around a decade ago? Downton Abbey has had some long term success but the series hasn't been revived for another series. Game shows on the other hand can be adapted for different countries, age groups and celebrity versions. If a country can't afford to produce their own they can sell them the UK version.
ITVX would be a factor in the loss because online advertising is a fraction of ITV1. Game shows and children's programmes make the most off screen with licencing for merchandise, gaming and format sales. That is where ITV should be aiming for. The TV channel Challenge although owned by Sky shows mostly ITV produced programmes so they will be able to sell the programmes easier.
I personally fine itv very boring now. Not many films or programs like Londons burning or the bill on screen anymore . Not many films. Christmas should have plenty of films but no itv have talk shows and cookery shows on on Christmas day
I expect a lot of drama/premium shows are not being commissioned due to the ban on junk food advertising that comes in on the 1st October 2025. Coca Cola, McDonald's, Dominos etc. are big spenders and ITV will be concerned with how it affects their advertising rates generally before 9PM.
Why is it wrong for a TV show to be made by the profit accumulated from advertising that the same viewers have had to endure. Why is it not ok for ITV not to make profit on this, it is a British programme made for a british audience that happened to love it. Shouldn’t that be enough.
Probably take Coronation Street off TV that will save you money sell it to streaming service or to another channel
Dramas are expensive and 30 years ago this would have pulled in over 20 million viewers. The biggest impact is advertising revenue which is now going online. Services such as RUclips know the age, gender and the interests of its viewers allowing targeted advertising. This means it is better and cheaper than the traditional broadcast tv channels. If this continues then even drama heavily sold worldwide will struggle to break even.
the recenlty treatment of midsomer murders and the Acron Streaming service are one of many prolems with ITV IMO
Losing money on programmes is not new, but something else that isn't new and in my oppinion is a total waste of money, and this applies to all channels, why oh why ? when doing news reports is it deemed necessary to send out reporters to all things being reported on, .... standing outside No10 to report on what happened that day, why go to Downing street when it could be done in a studio with a Downing street background, standing on a bridge over a motorway to report on something that can't be seen, in a street where one thing or another has happened, the list is endless, all these reports cost money, a total waste of money, a reporter a cameraman a sound engineer the cost of the travel it all adds up.
Some things will make a loss, but the shit stuff will cover those losses...
Terrestrial television is now losing out to streaming services. More's the pity. Because a lot of people may not be able to afford streaming services and therefore miss out on their favourite television programmes. I hope that I will never witness this as I will miss Terrestrial television.
Can you do ITV 1, 2, 3, 4, Be Bank Holiday Monday schedules 6 May
And ITV will confirm linear timeslots in July.
@@ntvalt4361 What do you mean
@@ntvalt4361 What do you mean by this
golden age of tv could be over
That's been over for quite a while now. Sorry to say.
Freely coming out in the Summer, So tv as we know it will be over in the next 5 to 10 years.
@@scottpeacock5492 It's been over since about 2002!
Sack Ant and Dec that would be a start.
I think ITV should do the following to reduce money;
Reduce the soaps to 3 commercial 30 minute episodes
Scrap the reality tv shows
Scrap the daytime gameshows
Scrap Lorraine, This Morning, Loose Women
Axe Limitless
The thing is, these shows are a lot cheaper than dramas and fictional shows. The biggest cost is probably talent. Gettong rid of some of this stuff, especially the low performing stuff would be wise and reducing the amount sbows down would help but otherwise... Why would they get rid of all the stuff which fills the schedule for cheaper.
Also, these are shows that might not appeal to you but i know my mother has watched a lot of these shows and there is an audience for them. Your cuts seems to come from your own taste in television and not whats actually best for a public service broadcaster who must cater to all taste.
Great analysis, Adam.
Thank you!
Shame took a drama like Mr Bates to get post office shambles back into headlines and more effort made get justice! How many more issues need a drama series to get justice!
Question for linear channels, if box set all dramas before screening on main channels encourage more and more and more binge box set watching, does rest of series need to play out on TV channels as lowers audience so much...or just one episode like shop window get interest for streaming like Walter presents or paramount on 5?
Event TV only way keep tv channels in focus as years pass. All need that eye grabbing focus shows that are less streaming box sets like dramas and if drama the main draw not reality or entertainment strip it as a week long drama (nightly) ... (before) box set available at all.
They spend less time on day daytime soaps.
If the broadcast tv landscape is so bad, I don’t understand why they haven’t just cut back to one channel each.
Same. Or 1-2 channels each. They're all struggling to maintain 5 of them
Don’t let ITV lose money
Tbh if feel bad for itv
@@jamesplantboy I feel bad for itv get more money
Who cares?
Daytime soap and soaps should end.
ITV don’t have Daytime Soaps.
It does me wonder how much would it have cost if ITV Studios did the production alone, but it shows even in that headline about them losing one million, how stupid they sounded to the cost of the people who were the victims of the miscarriage of justice.
It does make me wonder if there was a still a regional structure within ITV in terms of making programmes, and having everything in house and comissioned by the regions for the network how much cheaper would it have been.
The Contaminated Blood scandal well that might have plemty of interest in the many parts of the world where it wasn't just the UK, and if ITV are clever then they can look at those countries and state that it is a global story but here is the UK's take.
It wasn't cheaper though. Having full-facility studios all over the country was horribly inefficient.
@@PastPresented Maybe with the technology available then, but with the technology available now it would have benefited ITV now globally.
@@david_g_barron It's not so much the technology as the staff. More efficient to have multiple studios sharing specialist staff in a single complex, which is why some of the old BBC Television Centre studios are now used by ITV.
first bbc, next channel 4 or now itv. Is this the apocalypse for terrestrial telly
It's the apocalypse for non-global telly, except in countries with strong protectionist regimes.
Out with the old and in with the new I say
The foreign accessibility is the reason why BBC's longest running gameshow 'Question of Sport' was put to an end last year after 53 years. Richard Osman in 'The Rest Is Entertainment' podcast stated that sport topics tend to age quickly. In other hand, the show Have I Got News For You, being a political satire, can have its formula being exported in foreign countries.
😢
How has Kevin Lygo managed to stay with ITV for so long?
Hi Adam, be careful when you read ITV PR about losing a million on the Mr Bates drama. In fact £1 million is peanuts to the budget ITV have which is always over a billion pounds of revenue and more. £1 million is a drop in the ocean and not a loss. Millions of viewers have come to ITV and will want to see more drama. For that million pound loss, they gained far more in the future.
The 2023 annual report (though it doesn't include _Mr Bates_ ) suggests otherwise. Providing TV to British audiences is a declining percentage, now less than half of ITV's income (with advertising revenue down a particularly harsh £150 million on 2022). Making shows around the world is the future.
@@PastPresented The 2023 report wouldn't include Mr Bates, as it only aired in Jan 2024. So what is the annual revenue of ITV now? Recent figures at least? I know Channel 4 had been generating over a billion in revenue in recent years, but that will surely be lower now due to their financial problems.
@@johnking5174 2023 is the latest annual data. ITV results for the first quarter of 2024 are due to be published next Thursday, 9 May.
Channel 4, having no shareholders, is more leisurely in the publication of its results.
9 milon like there was in 1980s
First
Limitless Win, who watches that anyway?
Close to 5 million viewers do according to BARB ratings
@@johnking5174 Hmmm probably doing better then Britain's Got Talent then
@@PhilipMurphyExtra It is on a par, both shows consolidates to around 5 million mark on average. ITV rarely sees any show consolidated to more than 7 or 8 million, which is usually I'm A Celebrity