Follow us on...
Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Facebook
Register
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,718
    BBC Canada is a brand that should stay on the air, but not in the hands of Corus.
    I agree, I have mentioned before that I think it should be sold to Knowledge Network who bought BBC Kids. This would put both BBC channels under common ownership and I think a change of ownership might help improve this channel. Does anyone know how BBC Kids is doing, is it any better with Knowledge running it?! They made two key changes that I am aware of once they took over, getting rid of commercials and instituting a CBBC kids programming block. This channel should be a 'best of Britain' channel IMO, airing the best British TV content from all major channels there not just the BBC. However, this probably is not possible due to content being spread out among different channels and different broadcasters here in Canada.

    Lostjon I noticed you keep quoting subscriber numbers, those don't mean much IMO- viewership numbers are the key stats to have. Up until recently most channels were sold in packages, which means even though a channel might have say 3 million subscribers does not mean all 3 million of them are watching the channel. With the up coming changes that will supposedly give consumers more choice, we should be able to get a much better idea of which channels are popular and which ones are not. In order for the subscription TV model to remain viable (I think it still has a bit of life left) they have to have channels to sell which means I don't believe you will see a huge chunk of existing specialty channels shut down. What might eventually happen and based on the article quoted above about Corus, I think things are heading in this direction, namely consolidation- fewer channels with better content instead of the current situation where most channels are watered down with repeats and filler junk.

    CDN Viewer said History would be dropped... I duno about that.
    Actually, this channel is one that I think they will sell off due to it not fitting with their core focus. Its a very popular channel and one of the old legacy analog specialties, I wouldn't sell it but from what I have read it caters to more of a male audience and Corus only cares about women and children. If it were put up for sale, I could see Bell snatching it up, it would fit with their group of channels.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    Lostjon I noticed you keep quoting subscriber numbers, those don't mean much IMO- viewership numbers are the key stats to have. Up until recently most channels were sold in packages, which means even though a channel might have say 3 million subscribers does not mean all 3 million of them are watching the channel. With the up coming changes that will supposedly give consumers more choice, we should be able to get a much better idea of which channels are popular and which ones are not. In order for the subscription TV model to remain viable (I think it still has a bit of life left) they have to have channels to sell which means I don't believe you will see a huge chunk of existing specialty channels shut down. What might eventually happen and based on the article quoted above about Corus, I think things are heading in this direction, namely consolidation- fewer channels with better content instead of the current situation where most channels are watered down with repeats and filler junk.
    I acknowledged in one of my previous posts that within a year none of these numbers will matter. Nonetheless, they present some interesting figures which makes it a good place to start for observation and discussion on this topic, even though they only partly illustrate the popularity of the various specialty channels filling up our airwaves.

    Of course, for the companies that own these channels, they could very well use this as a measure of how well these channels are doing, in the same manner how networks will use the instant Nielsen ratings to determine a show's fate. This could partly (not fully) explain why Bell Media chose to convert M3 to Gusto in light of a gradual decline in subscriber numbers.

    At the same time, I do not think viewership numbers will make much of a difference from the subscription numbers registered by the likes of certain services such as BookTelevision and FashionTelevision. With the endless reruns and filler junk filling up their schedules, that has been enough to drive away many subscribers in recent years as both channels continue to experience a continuous decline in subscriber numbers. Now it's possible that during this time, more providers started offering these services only as a Pick and Pay option, which contributed toward these steady but constant declines. In a year from now, these declines could be even bigger to the point that they reach new lows, and a number of channels with high subscription numbers may very well translate to about 1 million or less viewers.
    Last edited by lostjon; 09-18-2016 at 05:46 PM.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,443
    This is a very, very thorough thread. It covers all sorts of angles and possibilities, but in the end, at some point, the cable companies will move us to the Internet and IPTV. So what they do now, is most likely a preview of what's to come online.

    If Corus sells the History channel to Bell, that doesn't really change much, because we didn't lose a channel (although it would be annoying if Bell decided to air the "fresh" content much later than it's already delayed in Canada).

    If DTour also suddenly became an online channel with the rights to include Travel Channel content on its website (available as VOD the next week after a US airing), they wouldn't have to worry about scheduling. Subscribers would just watch whatever they wanted, when they wanted (via VOD), even if the content never even aired on the Canadian cable/satellite services. But since we live in Canada, it's going to take a very long time until we gain access to more exclusive foreign content on a Canadian website. The cost to do such a thing wouldn't be justified because there's only so much time in the day to watch less-than-stellar content, so why should Corus pay for content that most likely wouldn't be watched in large enough numbers? At least not now anyway.

    Once the novelty of pick-and-pay wears off, and we see how prices continue to rise (unless perhaps we bundle things to reduce those price increases), while content choices decrease (when compared to what is actually available elsewhere) due to fewer channels, that's when more and more Canadians will most likely be ready to be switched to an IPTV model that costs more, but gives you more choice and convenience, thus making it harder to resist (especially when more of the pirate sites and official foreign website options are reduced even further).
    Last edited by PokerFace; 09-19-2016 at 04:18 AM. Reason: typo
    Warning: I'm not playing with a full deck.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    313
    Quote Originally Posted by PokerFace View Post
    This is a very, very thorough thread. It covers all sorts of angles and possibilities, but in the end, at some point, the cable companies will move us to the Internet and IPTV. So what they do now, is most likely a preview of what's to come online.

    If Corus sells the History channel to Bell, that doesn't really change much, because we didn't lose a channel (although it would be annoying if Bell decided to air the "fresh" content much later than it's already delayed in Canada).

    If DTour also suddenly became an online channel with the rights to include Travel Channel content on its website (available as VOD the next week after a US airing), they wouldn't have to worry about scheduling. Subscribers would just watch whatever they wanted, when they wanted (via VOD), even if the content never even aired on the Canadian cable/satellite services. But since we live in Canada, it's going to take a very long time until we gain access to more exclusive foreign content on a Canadian website. The cost to do such a thing wouldn't be justified because there's only so much time in the day to watch less-than-stellar content, so why should Corus pay for content that most likely wouldn't be watched in large enough numbers? At least not now anyway.

    Once the novelty of pick-and-pay wears off, and we see how prices continue to rise (unless perhaps we bundle things to reduce those price increases), while content choices decrease (when compared to what is actually available elsewhere) due to fewer channels, that's when more and more Canadians will most likely be ready to be switched to an IPTV model that costs more, but gives you more choice and convenience, thus making it harder to resist (especially when more of the pirate sites and official foreign website options are reduced even further).
    I would think Deja View and BBC Canada would be suitable to Zoomer Media as Moses Znaimer is one for ages 50 plus and his channel Vision TV features British shows and Retro shows as well but lord knows if Moses Znaimer would have any general interest in either one. W Movies maybe they should change that to Lifetime Movies. I would be nice if we'd seen a Retro Cartoon Channel be brought back to the airwaves like changing Teletoon to Cartoon network and Cartoon network into something Like Boomerang Canada but highly unlikely that can ever happen. Movietime could use a facelift. Dtour another one I am not too keen on. Canada's Specialty Channels I must say are basically all rubbish and sometimes I wish Channels like antenna or MeTV were made available on canadian soil. Not many places can get them over the air where they live. I hear some who have over the air TV where I live can get Antenna Tv and METV direct from either Buffalo, Rochester or Watertown. And as for action perhaps that should become TRUtv as they do air TRUtv programs. Guess we'll just have to wait and see what corus intends to do.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    23
    for my point of view , I put different financial numbers about the channels (well the ones that financial informations are available) in a spreadsheet in order to try seeing them in a business perspective.
    I put national advertising revenue, total revenue, expenses, the margins and advertising stats.
    EDIT: I didnt put subscribers stats in my spreadsheet , it was really more margins and national advertisings stats.

    Here's some points


    -OWN isn't doing well. Margin went from 31.8% in 2011 to approx 15% since 2013.National advertising revenue used to pay only a third of all expenses since 2011 and in 2015 it was worse with only 25%.
    -CMT is a boat that can continue to float mainly because of advertising, it is counting for 80% of all revenue and covering the expenses but the margin is dropping, it was 37.2% in 2011 and it is only around 15% since 2013.
    -History might be a big name, attracting advertisers but it is also very expensive! History have a really big interest expense, last year it was bigger than the total expenses. History pre-tax margin is dropping since 2011 from 34.3% to a 17.2% in 2015. By doing this spreadsheet I started reading about Interest coverage ratio and decided to apply the formula to History because those are so huge it is really hard to miss them .
    First the definition from http://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/...erageratio.asp
    The interest coverage ratio is a debt ratio and profitability ratio used to determine how easily a company can pay interest on outstanding debt. The interest coverage ratio may be calculated by dividing a company's earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) during a given period by the amount a company must pay in interest on its debts during the same period.
    The results from 2011 to 2015 are 1.9,1.7,1.7,1.8 and 1.4
    The lower a company’s interest coverage ratio is, the more its debt expenses burden the company. When a company's interest coverage ratio is 1.5 or lower, its ability to meet interest expenses may be questionable. 1.5 is generally considered to be a bare minimum acceptable ratio for a company and a tipping point below which lenders will likely refuse to lend the company more money, as the company’s risk for default is too high.
    -Lifetime did show better margin when they rebrand Showcase Diva but now it is pretty much the same as Showcase Diva in many aspects.
    In 2011, 46.2% of the total revenue was coming from advertising and it was good to pay 72% of all expenses(interest expense included)those numbers jumped to a high of respectively 54% in 2013 and 119.9% in 2012, last year they returned to 47.3% and 72.3%
    The margin followed the same pattern with 35.8% in 2011,a high of 61% the following year and since 2014 it is 37.4% and 34.5%.
    -Crime + investigation show good numbers for now.
    -Fyi is not really doing any better than twist tv , this ain't bad but this is not a big game changer either !
    -H2 numbers are good.
    -The Scripps Networks channels (Food Network,HGTV,diy) all have excellents numbers! national advertising largely covers the expenses and they have pretty good margins.
    -National Geographic numbers are just as good, a 60% + pre-tax margin and ad revenue covering the expenses.
    Sadly Nat Geo Wild numbers are not good, with the following margins numbers since 2012, -187.3%, 20%, 19.5% and -0.2% last year.

    So overall just because a channel is a big name , it doesn't mean it is a hit for the company.

    More points to come ...
    Last edited by DraicKin; 09-25-2016 at 01:05 AM.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by musimax View Post
    CMT - will have more value once they can drop the music videos
    Just a quick rectification to be sure this is understand correctly, CRTC already eliminate genre exclusivity and it is already effective for all discretionary services , including category A.
    Only discretionary services that are include in CRTC's skinny basic are excluded.

    Numerous channels already asked for deletion of conditions of licence regarding genre exclusivity and those were approved.

    CMT among others made the application.

    http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2016/2016-39.htm
    The Commission approves an application to delete certain nature of service conditions of licence for the national, English-language specialty Category A service Country Music Television (CMT).
    The Commission also approves the request to delete CMT’s condition of licence relating to the exhibition of Canadian programming and to amend its condition of licence relating to the broadcast of Canadian music videos.
    The Commission denies the request to delete CMT’s condition of licence relating to allocating a portion of the service’s revenues to the development and production of Canadian country music videos. However, the Commission has amended that condition of licence to remove the reference to “country music.”
    Application



    1. Corus Entertainment Inc. (Corus), on behalf of Country Music Television Ltd., filed an application relating to the national, English-language specialty Category A service Country Music Television (CMT). Corus requested the deletion of the following nature of service conditions of licence:Footnote12. (a) The licensee shall provide a national English-language specialty Category A service with programming focused on country and country-oriented music.
      (d) No less than 50% of all programming broadcast by the licensee shall be drawn from category 8(b) Music video clips.
      (e) No more than 15% of the programming broadcast during any broadcast week shall be drawn from category 7 Drama and comedy.
      (f) No feature films shall be broadcast except those in which:
      (i) a country music artist is the key subject of the film or
      (ii) a country music artist is cast in a key performing role.
    2. Condition of licence 2.(b), which allows the licensee to draw programming from all program categories for broadcast on the service, and condition of licence 2.(c), which limits the broadcast of programming drawn from program category 6(a) Professional Sports to 10% of the broadcast month, would be retained.
    3. Corus also requested changes in regard to the following conditions of licence relating to the broadcast of Canadian programs and music videos:3. (a) With the exception of programs drawn from categories 8(b) Music video clips and 8(c) Music video programs, in each broadcast year the licensee shall devote no less than 60% of the broadcast day and no less than 50% of the evening broadcast period to the exhibition of Canadian programs.
      (b) No less than 40% of all music videos (category 8(b)) broadcast by the licensee during the broadcast year shall be Canadian music videos, whether aired as part of videoflow or packaged in other types of programming.
    4. Specifically, it requested that condition of licence 3.(b) be deleted, and that condition of licence 3.(a) be amended to remove the exceptions for program categories 8(b) and 8(c). Accordingly, that condition of licence would read as follows:In each broadcast year the licensee shall devote no less than 60% of the broadcast day and no less than 50% of the evening broadcast period to the exhibition of Canadian programs.
    5. Finally, the applicant requested the deletion of the following condition of licence:12. In each broadcast year, the licensee shall allocate no less than 11% of the previous year’s gross revenue to the development and production of Canadian country music videos.
    6. Corus stated that the above requests are consistent with the Commission’s decisions stemming from its elimination of the genre exclusivity policy.
    7. Pursuant to Broadcasting Regulatory Policy 2015-86, Corus provided the following description for CMT:The licensee shall provide a national English-language discretionary service offering comedy, movies, real-life reality series and one of a kind music programming.
    "one of a kind music programming" that phrasing makes me laugh!

    Last edited by DraicKin; 09-27-2016 at 08:23 PM. Reason: correcting link

  7. #27
    Would love to see Corus try to improve Sundance Channel, Not much goes around there, even the branding is 3 years behind. As long as they don't have endless Law & Order re-runs like the US Sundance. Also looking at the list of Sundance Channel's movies broadcasted:

    http://www.sundancechannel.ca/films

    Yeah sure, it has Heathers (seen this on bunch of other Corus channels couple times in the Guide) and The French Lieutenant's Woman. Ok, When it comes to French Lieutenant's Woman, that came straight outta the nowadays MGM library (because United Artists produced it), Corus uses select MGM films to air simultaneously re-ran on Sundance, the website doesn't even list Carrie, Dances with Wolves, Midnight Cowboy, Leaving Las Vegas, The Birdcage, Fargo, Hotel Rwanda, etc. in that list and Corus broadcasts these lots on Sundance (and some others as well). Sundance in addition has few small-sourced films, like Metropolitan (1990), etc. I am a fan of Indie / Arthouse cinema but Corus can ruin Sundance, they can either improve it or sell it. Plus the website seems a bit outdated, and oh, check out the Digital on Screen graphic- It's fairly big! Who needs a bug big?? Nobody!

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •