English Entertainment
Is Reliance the front runner to be Disney Star India’s strategic partner?
MUMBAI: Last week, Bob Iger’s statement that Disney was looking for an out – either totally through a sellout or a joint venture partner in Disney Star India sent tremors across the entire media ecosystem.
From the outside, Star India seems to be doing well with its general entertainment channels Star Plus lording over the space like a colossus. It has also been seeing its channels’ fortunes rise in some of the regional languages.
Yes, the sports business appears to be under pressure as the network refused to invest top dollar for digital rights of the IPL, ISL and several other important sports properties. And the recently concluded IPL was allegedly a millstone, reportedly not even recovering what was invested. Or at least that was what was being claimed by the Reliance owned rival Viacom18 and Sports18 which is now led by former Star India CEO Uday Shankar.
At least one professional believes that there is a possibility that Iger and Ambani could get into bed for the complicated Indian market. And that’s Investment analyst Karan Taurani of Elara Capital. Predicts he in a newsletter Elara Diet Report released last week: “We believe there is also a likelihood of Viacom 18 (73 per cent owned by RIL/TV18, 11 per cent TV ad market share)- the third largest broadcaster after Zee/Sony and Disney, becoming a strategic partner with Disney India as the former is aggressively seeking to make inroads in the media segment (TV via TV18/NW18; digital via Jio Cinema).”
Taurani also is pretty bullish on the continued sustainability of television as a business, despite all the soothsayers saying that it is headed south. “As per our assessment, unit economics of the TV business is strong, led by healthy profitability margin (30-32 per cent EBITDA for larger broadcasters core TV business, ex OTT losses),” he writes in the report. “We continue to believe that despite converging growth rate, linear TV medium is a key mode of mass campaigning for larger advertisers (FMCG contributes 45 per cent to TV ad revenue), given the reach/scale it has. Digital has the potential to grow, but unit economics are not yet proven. We, thus, prefer the linear TV business from a profitability standpoint and believe it will be a win-win for India despite tepid growth rates, as digital is an expensive medium. This may be a challenge to scale at mass – digital ARPU for a consumer with major OTT platforms subscriptions and data costs is around Rs 1,500, 4x higher than that of TV ARPU (Rs 350). “
Overall, his opinion is that an exit or strategic change in Disney Star India bodes well for the overall market with peers such as Zee, Sony, Viacom18 and Sun TV gaining. He explains: “This could enable a strategic shift in the ‘go to market’ strategy, in turn benefitting other players to gain market share. Disney India enjoys strong recall across genres such as urban GEC, Tamil, Telugu, Marathi, and sports, which together contribute 65 per cent to India’s TV revenues. TV may become further consolidated post Z-Sony merger with top two players (Z-Sony and Disney India) commanding around a 60 per cent ad market share, leaving little or no potential for peers to gain (or spike) market share.”
If Taurani’s prediction of Reliance and Disney forging a marriage come true, it will be a homecoming of sorts for the savvy mover and shaker Uday Shankar. Already, he has been shopping aggressively at Disney Star India and has managed to recruit many senior executives from there for his charge.
UK: The aerial is losing its grip. As broadband becomes the default way Britons watch television, the UK is edging towards a decisive, and divisive, question: should Freeview be switched off by 2034? The issue, highlighted in reporting by The Guardian, has exposed deep fault lines over access, affordability and the future of public service broadcasting.
For nearly 25 years, Freeview has delivered free-to-air television from the BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5 to almost every corner of the country. Even now, it remains the UK’s largest TV platform, used in more than 16m homes and on around 10m main household sets. Yet the same broadcasters that built it are now pressing for its closure within eight years.
Their case rests on a structural shift in viewing. Smart TVs, superfast broadband and the Netflix-led streaming boom have pulled audiences online. Advertising economics have followed. By 2034, the number of homes using Freeview as their main TV set is forecast to fall from a peak of almost 12m in 2012 to fewer than 2m, making digital terrestrial television, or DTT, increasingly costly to sustain.
But critics say the rush to switch off risks abandoning those least able, or least willing, to move online.
“I don’t want to be choosing apps and making new accounts,” says Lynette, 80, from Kent. “It is time-consuming and irritating trying to work out where I want to be, to remember the sequence of clicks, with hieroglyphics instead of words. If I make a mistake I have to start again.”
Lynette is among nearly 100,000 people who have signed a “save Freeview” petition launched by campaign group Silver Voices. She fears the government is about to “take [Freeview] away from me and others who either don’t like, can’t afford, or can’t use online versions”.
Official figures underline the fault lines. A report commissioned by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport estimates that by 2035, 1.8m homes will still depend on Freeview. Ofcom’s analysis shows those households are more likely to be disabled, older, living alone, female, and based in the north of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Freeview is owned by the public service broadcasters through Everyone TV, which also operates Freesat and the newer streaming platform Freely. After two years of review, DCMS is expected to set out its position soon, drawing on three options proposed by Ofcom: a costly upgrade of Freeview’s ageing technology; maintaining a bare-bones service with only core PSB channels; or a full switch-off during the 2030s.
The broadcasters have rallied behind the third option. They argue that 2034 is the logical cut-off, when transmission contracts with network operator Arqiva expire. By then, they say, the cost of broadcasting to a dwindling audience will far outweigh the returns from TV advertising.
Ofcom agrees a crunch point is approaching. In July, the regulator warned of a “tipping point” within the next few years, after which it will no longer be commercially viable for broadcasters to carry the costs of DTT.
Others see risks beyond economics. Questions remain over whether internet TV can reliably deliver emergency broadcasts, such as the daily Covid updates, in the way that universally available DTT can. The UK radio industry has also warned that an internet-only future for TV could push up distribution costs and force some radio stations off air if PSBs no longer share Arqiva’s mast network.
“It is a political hot potato,” says Dennis Reed, founder of Silver Voices, who says he has “dissociated” his organisation from the government’s stakeholder forum, which he believes is “heavily biased” towards streaming.
The Future TV Taskforce, representing the PSBs, counters that moving online could “close the digital divide once and for all”. “We want to be able to plan to ensure that no one is left behind,” a spokesperson says, adding that rising DTT costs could otherwise mean cuts to programme budgets.
The numbers show the scale of the challenge. Of the 1.8m Freeview-dependent homes projected for 2035, around 1.1m are expected to have broadband but not use it for TV. The remaining 700,000 are forecast to lack a broadband connection altogether.
Veterans of the analogue switch-off, completed in 2012 after 76 years, recall similar fears of “TV blackout chaos”. Around 6 per cent of households were labelled “digital refuseniks”, yet a targeted help scheme and a national campaign, fronted by a robot called Digit Al voiced by Matt Lucas, delivered a largely smooth transition.
This time, the BBC is less keen to foot the bill. Tim Davie, the outgoing director general, has said the corporation should not fund a comparable support programme for a Freeview switch-off.
Research for Sky by Oliver & Ohlbaum suggests that with early awareness campaigns and digital inclusion measures, only about 330,000 households would ultimately need hands-on help ahead of a 2034 shutdown.
Meanwhile, viewing habits continue to fragment. Audience body Barb says 7 per cent of UK households no longer own a TV set, choosing to watch on other devices. In December, YouTube overtook the BBC’s combined channels in total UK viewing across TVs, smartphones and tablets, albeit measured at a minimum of three minutes.
That shift may accelerate. YouTube has recently blocked Barb and its partner Kantar from accessing viewing session data, limiting transparency just as online platforms consolidate power.
“When the government chose British Satellite Broadcasting as the ‘winner’ in satellite TV it was Rupert Murdoch’s Sky instead that came out on top,” says a senior TV executive quoted by The Guardian. “There already is such an outsider ready to be the winner in the transition to internet TV; it is YouTube.”
Freeview’s future now hangs on a familiar British dilemma: modernise fast and risk exclusion, or protect universality and pay the price. Either way, the aerial’s days as king of the living room look numbered.
