Dee Forbes banging the RTE TV licence drum again 60m uncollected fee *poll not working - pl ignore*

Elmo

Boggles wrote: »

They were commissioned by the BBC, their childrens budget is practically RTE's entire budget.

So RTÉ should stop buying in and commission children's content?

Boggles

Elmo wrote: »

So RTÉ should stop buying in and commission children's content?

What I am saying is it's a very different and dynamic market to what it was even 5 years ago.

The Beeb will spend £30+ million just on online childrens content this year.

There is about 15 childrens channels on sky, add in Netflix, Youtube, Video Games, the ability to have them on demand anywhere, then I do believe RTE when it comes to that demographic are a wee bit up against it.

Does that mean they shouldn't try, no. But they need to pick their battles carefully.

Elmo

Boggles wrote: »

Does that mean they shouldn't try, no. But they need to pick their battles carefully.

So we are in agreement that RTÉ's cutting of funding to Children's TV by 75% in 2017 was wrong?

And that with the likes of the above mentioned services that there continued 25m investment into important programming was also wrong?

NIMAN

Gen.Zhukov wrote: »

...Liveline has 400K daily listeners. That's over 10% of the adult population of this country. I'ts an advertising gold mine!

Makes you wonder then why Rte use half of this valuable time themselves rather than sell it on all those advertisers fighting for airtime?

Boggles

Elmo wrote: »

So we are in agreement that RTÉ's cutting of funding to Children's TV by 75% in 2017 was wrong?

And that with the likes of the above mentioned services that there continued 25m investment into important programming was also wrong?

Honestly Elmo I could not answer either of those questions without some details. It's a loss making entity so my primary focus would be on savings.

It they cut Childrens TV by 75% by not producing their own content, that suggests to me overwhelming that producing childrens tv is expensive.

Has the quality dropped? i.e. viewing figures / revenue?

Similarly with imported TV. What are the numbers and value for money ratio when compared with commissioned TV?

Gen.Zhukov

NIMAN wrote: »

Makes you wonder then why Rte use half of this valuable time themselves rather than sell it on all those advertisers fighting for airtime?

I was quoting and changing the post above mine. In fact I didn't even check his figures. You're right though.

The J Stands for Jay

The Late Late Show wrote: »

I know this is (slightly) off-topic but I've been wondering too about the 'benefit' of advertising. Think about it: when the ads come on, people often tune out, go get a cup of coffee/tea or can of beer/glass of wine, check their email, text someone back, etc.

Most ads about services most people use anyway such as banks, phones, etc. One time, ads were just a poster and a talkover on TV and were cheap. Now, they have to be almost mini-movies and they are expensive to make. When you have so-called 'stars' like this Dermot Bannon on them, you can be sure he will not come cheap! The costs will outweigh any gains I feel. It is only a matter of time before the advertising industry is radically altered and will revert back to more realistic affordable options.

This old fashioned scattergun approach seems crazy compared to targeted advertising that is possible on the internet. It has to change soon, possobly by getting cheaper as it is likely to be less effective than alternative advertising channels

sligojoek

People are saying Duffy, Tubbs and Darcy are attracting revenue. Have they listened to the ads? 2/3 of them are for RTE shows, RTE supporting the arts, road safety, TV licence and public service announcements. Have a listen tomorrow and tell me I'm wrong. There's even an ad for Liveline now before the show starts. Then the first ad break is a clip of an Interview of RD laughing his hole off at something slightly funny that a guest says. A paid ad. Then you have ray again with "Coming up after Liveline we have ... "

Boggles

McGaggs wrote: »

This old fashioned scattergun approach seems crazy compared to targeted advertising that is possible on the internet. It has to change soon, possobly by getting cheaper as it is likely to be less effective than alternative advertising channels

TV advertising is still the Daddy in terms of return and by some margin apparently.

Can't actually remember the last time I saw an ad on the internet or at least took any notice of one, except for those 5 seconds on Youtube where I am just frantically waiting for the skip button.

Elmo

Boggles wrote: »

Honestly Elmo I could not answer either of those questions without some details. It's a loss making entity so my primary focus would be on savings.

It they cut Childrens TV by 75% by not producing their own content, that suggests to me overwhelming that producing childrens tv is expensive.

Has the quality dropped? i.e. viewing figures / revenue?

Similarly with imported TV. What are the numbers and value for money ratio when compared with commissioned TV?

RTÉ have a public service attributes, Children's is one of those public services.
Children's TV is one of the cheap forms of TV for RTÉ to produce.

New Imported programming large goes out during the day or late at night, RTÉ reduced significantly the number of ads late night, in some case broadcast Imports gives no return to RTÉ because there are no ads, or few ads.

There is a high return on Imported programming than Commissioned programming, an average hour of TV cost 50,000 - 100,000, while imports cost from 1,500 to 3,000 to buy in. At its highest level that 8,500 hours of TV per year or 22 hour of TV per day, again much of this is air late night or during the day in the case of RTÉjr no return is made on imports or home produced shows as RTÉ carry no ads during these hours, and limit there ads during TRTÉ, many are repeats.

Should RTÉ stop producing home produced shows because commercially speaking imports should preform better?

The Idea that RTÉ lost money during the Soccer World Cup doesn't add up, the below table out lines its audience share for 2018. As you can see it has a 11% to 13% share during the WC2018, and an average of 5.5% for the rest of the year.


Channel Dec Nov Oct Sept Aug July June May Apr Mar Feb Jan
RTÉ2 5.09% 5.30% 4.48% 5.34% 7.64% 11.46% 13.31% 6.17% 5.19% 4.68% 5.20% 4.65%

SEPT 23 1989

sligojoek wrote: »

People are saying Duffy, Tubbs and Darcy are attracting revenue. Have they listened to the ads? 2/3 of them are for RTE shows, RTE supporting the arts, road safety, TV licence and public service announcements. Have a listen tomorrow and tell me I'm wrong. There's even an ad for Liveline now before the show starts. Then the first ad break is a clip of an Interview of RD laughing his hole off at something slightly funny that a guest says. A paid ad. Then you have ray again with "Coming up after Liveline we have ... "

Very true

Ads for other shows and government propaganda /threats to pay another bill makes up most of it

And ads for Mercedes and BMW during the teaching holidays

Boggles

Elmo wrote: »

Should RTÉ stop producing home produced shows because commercially speaking imports should preform better?

RTE need to stop doing what is causing a 13 million loss.

On a five year cycle they should be aiming to make a profit on 3 and break even by year 5.

That should be the goal.

They are adequately funded IMO to produce a proper product.

If Dee can't do it, get someone else who can.

The only solution to public services can't always be fúck more money at it.

The J Stands for Jay

Boggles wrote: »

TV advertising is still the Daddy in terms of return and by some margin apparently.

Can't actually remember the last time I saw an ad on the internet or at least took any notice of one, except for those 5 seconds on Youtube where I am just frantically waiting for the skip button.

I honestly can't remember the last time I saw an ad on TV. I do occasionally see some internet ads that catch my eye, as they are often for something I'm interested in anyway as they're often targeted at me.

Elmo

Boggles wrote: »

RTE need to stop doing what is causing a 13 million loss.

On a five year cycle they should be aiming to make a profit on 3 and break even by year 5.

That should be the goal.

They are adequately funded IMO to produce a proper product.

If Dee can't do it, get someone else who can.

The only solution to public services can't always be fúck more money at it.

But you agree that Dee Forbes’ & RTÉ’s statement that 13m loss was caused by special events such as the WC2018, on the face of it, was incorrect, at best.

Boggles

Elmo wrote: »

But you agree that Dee Forbes’ & RTɒs statement that 13m loss was caused by special events such as the WC2018, on the face of it, was incorrect, at best.

Dee is spin merchant. I have no time for them.

A surgical blade needs to be take to RTE line by line.

If a comprehensive and honest report suggests they are under funded, then I would support a change in the fee.

If which I suspect it is a bloated inefficient mess at some levels, then that needs to be fixed.

I'd also like a look at what RTE pay for the likes of the World Cup, compared to similar countries of size.

Boggles

McGaggs wrote: »

I honestly can't remember the last time I saw an ad on TV. I do occasionally see some internet ads that catch my eye, as they are often for something I'm interested in anyway as they're often targeted at me.

Advertisers would have a 360 approach. They are all over the internet as well as being on TV.

That data suggests you are far less likely to buy something from an internet ad than a "traditional" ad.

God bless ad blockser is all i say.

I have it turned off for here obviously.

kneemos

Elmo wrote: »

But you agree that Dee Forbes’ & RTÉ’s statement that 13m loss was caused by special events such as the WC2018, on the face of it, was incorrect, at best.

They had a forty million surplus the previous year from the sale of land.

They should have a contingency for these things they always come up.

NIMAN

Why do Irish stations pay money to buy English soaps?
Nearly everyone in Ireland now has access to the British channels and can say them there.

Elmo

Boggles wrote: »

Dee is spin merchant. I have no time for them.

A surgical blade needs to be take to RTE line by line.

If a comprehensive and honest report suggests they are under funded, then I would support a change in the fee.

If which I suspect it is a bloated inefficient mess at some levels, then that needs to be fixed.

I'd also like a look at what RTE pay for the likes of the World Cup, compared to similar countries of size.

I believe them to be underfunded but also agree with you that reform within RTÉ needs to take place first otherwise we will see them, not improving and making a loss.

RTÉ have a deal with the EBU they pay into that organization to buy rights to events such as the WC and the Olympics, indeed in 2015 they had the rights to the WWC but refused to air that event.

kneemos

Overextended rather than underfunded I'd say.

Elmo

kneemos wrote: »

Overextended rather than underfunded I'd say.

I’d say both but that by increasing its funding it will just lead to more over stretching with no return of their audiences.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Boggles wrote: »

Advertisers would have a 360 approach. They are all over the internet as well as being on TV.

That data suggests you are far less likely to buy something from an internet ad than a "traditional" ad.

God bless ad blockser is all i say.

I have it turned off for here obviously.

Have you any source for that data? Or is it just an opinion piece?

TheDavester

NIMAN wrote: »

Why do Irish stations pay money to buy English soaps?
Nearly everyone in Ireland now has access to the British channels and can say them there.

same with shows like big bang theory, Simpson repeats, etc,

elperello

NIMAN wrote: »

Why do Irish stations pay money to buy English soaps?
Nearly everyone in Ireland now has access to the British channels and can say them there.

I'm just guessing but I reckon they are popular and the price they buy in at allows them to show a profit by selling advertising.

rivegauche

Boggles wrote: »

Advertisers would have a 360 approach. They are all over the internet as well as being on TV.

That data suggests you are far less likely to buy something from an internet ad than a "traditional" ad.

God bless ad blockser is all i say.

I have it turned off for here obviously.

In the U.S. as online advertising has become more focused it has resulted in retailers at more local levels diverting their advertising budget to Online rather than traditional media(print,radio,tv). Those who are spending their advertising budget locally and targetting their audience are seeing a better return on their spend or at the very least being able to trace back sales directly related to advertising money spent trying to attract customers on the internet.
Local Car dealers in particular are embracing Internet advertising especially.

Bowlardo

Boggles wrote: »

Love/Hate seems to be the anchor everyone reverts back to. But lets be honest it was decent but it was over hyped to within an inch of it's life, Sunday World esque crime porn is basically what it was. They got very lucky because they stumbled upon Vaughan-Lawlor and cast him.

.

True nidge carried the show

dxhound2005

NIMAN wrote: »

Why do Irish stations pay money to buy English soaps?
Nearly everyone in Ireland now has access to the British channels and can say them there.

If they are getting them at a good price, and they are attracting a good size audience, I think it makes sense. For those with access to UK TV, they would lose some of the soap audience to BBC etc. For those with no access to UK TV, you would be denying them their soaps. Are you sure that nearly everyone has access to UK TV? Making original programmes to fill in the same viewing slots would likely cost a lot more. What would you put in their place, either home made or bought in?

And the same argument would apply to any programming, not just soaps. TG4 will be showing the Women's World Cup final, which will also be on BBC. They also showed Wimbledon for years, when it was wall to wall on BBC.

Pa ElGrande

RTE is still circling the drain towards irrelevance as its core audience dies off.


It must be close on a decade now since I last gave them or any other TV station any significant amount of my viewing time. I don't even have Netflix, admittedly I may be an outlier.
When I watch media it's usually a subject I'm interested in and it's predominately youtube, for instance at the moment I'm into cycling videos and fixing my dérailleurs or maybe watching Joe Rogan, ADVchina, Bald and Bankrupt , Caspian Report and several other podcasts. My Dad (in his late 70s) uses youtube a lot to find information on woodcarving and related subjects. He'll watch RTE for the main evening news and maybe some of the traditional music shows (TG4) or the GAA finals, most of the other content is repeats so he'll sleep through that. Local radio is very much for the death notices. New content does keep people engaged and repeats are a definate turn off.


RTE built up it's audience during an era where they had exclusive control of the airwaves and many are stuck with the illusion that they are still relevant. Many others are too, as an example in the US CNNs audience ratings have crashed, they now survive on fees from cable television subscriptions which is a legacy system originating in a different era. I have no doubt that like most traditional media organisations trying to survive a lot of their output is focused on riling people up just to keep them engaged but not informed... much as the tech industry has been doing building on the work of Dr. B.J. Fogg (have a read)


RTEs only role in future is that of a government sponsored enterprise along the lines of Russia Today (RT), China Central Television (CCTV), France 24, Deutsche Welle (DW-TV) etc.

dxhound2005

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

RTE is still circling the drain towards irrelevance as its core audience dies off.


It must be close on a decade now since I last gave them or any other TV station any significant amount of my viewing time. I don't even have Netflix, admittedly I may be an outlier.
When I watch media it's usually a subject I'm interested in and it's predominately youtube, for instance at the moment I'm into cycling videos and fixing my dérailleurs or maybe watching Joe Rogan, ADVchina, Bald and Bankrupt , Caspian Report and several other podcasts. My Dad (in his late 70s) uses youtube a lot to find information on woodcarving and related subjects. He'll watch RTE for the main evening news and maybe some of the traditional music shows (TG4) or the GAA finals, most of the other content is repeats so he'll sleep through that. Local radio is very much for the death notices. New content does keep people engaged and repeats are a definate turn off.


RTE built up it's audience during an era where they had exclusive control of the airwaves and many are stuck with the illusion that they are still relevant. Many others are too, as an example in the US CNNs audience ratings have crashed, they now survive on fees from cable television subscriptions which is a legacy system originating in a different era. I have no doubt that like most traditional media organisations trying to survive a lot of their output is focused on riling people up just to keep them engaged but not informed... much as the tech industry has been doing building on the work of Dr. B.J. Fogg (have a read)


RTEs only role in future is that of a government sponsored enterprise along the lines of Russia Today (RT), China Central Television (CCTV), France 24, Deutsche Welle (DW-TV) etc.

The population of the country increased by a million in the last 20 years or so, and it is on the way up. 1.5 million people watched the Late Late Toy Show in 2018, and there were massive audiences for the other top 20 programmes, nearly all of them on RTE. I think you are overdoing the doom and gloom a bit. But maybe there is a great untapped audience for programmes about dérailleurs.

Boggles

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

He'll watch RTE for the main evening news and maybe some of the traditional music shows (TG4) or the GAA finals, most of the other content is repeats so he'll sleep through that. Local radio is very much for the death notices. New content does keep people engaged and repeats are a definate turn off.

Local Radio has nothing to with RTE.

Your Dad sounds like just a normal TV watcher, Public Service TV was never meant to keep everyone in the country glued to it 10 hours a day, it doesn't work like that. 95% of what is on is shíté, the other 5% is personal preference.

But that is true for every other TV station and online platform IMO.

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

RTE built up it's audience during an era where they had exclusive control of the airwaves

Some analogue transmitters going back 30+ years use to beam out the BBC.

Sky have been in Ireland over 20 years.

Before them there was a great trade in analogue FTA receivers.

RTE haven't had exclusive control in quite a while and certain parts of the country they never did.

Radio Luxembourg anyone???