[Thomanory]

U&W's one certainly represents how the channel has gone from a premium entertainment channel to a female-skewing channel, which probably has something to do with the Discovery deal back in 2019, when all of that stuff was skewed to Really. Its name makes no sense, the idents aren't eye-catching and it's just not very appealing. U&Yesterday's one makes me wonder if the channel is a straight-faced history channel anymore, it more represents BBC One/BBC Two daytime, what with the whole "auction" aesthetic. It's certainly a million times cheaper than the current idents (not that they show a lot of them, just one bloody ident). I think people should know by now that these channels are under the same brand, so why should they go out and make something that no one seems to like?

[rick]

I wonder if they changed the naming strategy slightly so '&U' came after the channel names rather than having 'U&' before them, would that help?

It certainly sounds a little better and it would help when ending a promo so you are hearing the channel name and streaming service in one, despite it actually just being the channel name, without it sounding clunky.

Or they could just scrap this terrible idea and come up with something else...

[Stuart]

I wonder if they changed the naming strategy slightly so '&U' came after the channel names rather than having 'U&' before them, would that help?

It certainly sounds a little better and it would help when ending a promo so you are hearing the channel name and streaming service in one, despite it actually just being the channel name, without it sounding clunky.

Or they could just scrap this terrible idea and come up with something else...

I don't think any amount of tinkering can actually save this re-banding disaster.

I guess we'll see in a month exactly how it will look in terms of idents and pres. Unless there is a well kept secret lurking in the background, but I'm not hopeful.

They've not yet announced a date to inflict this on the subscription channels Gold, Eden or Alibi. So perhaps that will provide an excuse for backtracking.

[IanJRedman]

I think I've figured out what's bothering me the most about this rebrand, and it isn't even the clumsy channel names - it's the fact it's binning the heritage of the UKTV name itself. It all just feels unnecessary.

[JAS84]

U&W's one certainly represents how the channel has gone from a premium entertainment channel to a female-skewing channel, which probably has something to do with the Discovery deal back in 2019, when all of that stuff was skewed to Really. Its name makes no sense, the idents aren't eye-catching and it's just not very appealing. U&Yesterday's one makes me wonder if the channel is a straight-faced history channel anymore, it more represents BBC One/BBC Two daytime, what with the whole "auction" aesthetic. It's certainly a million times cheaper than the current idents (not that they show a lot of them, just one bloody ident). I think people should know by now that these channels are under the same brand, so why should they go out and make something that no one seems to like?

W was originally called Watch. The name has certainly lost meaning now it's no longer the premium product it launched as (didn't come to Freeview until it changed it's logo from the BSB-like blue diamond to the current red slanted oblong).

[Stuart]

W was originally called Watch. The name has certainly lost meaning now it's no longer the premium product it launched as (didn't come to Freeview until it changed it's logo from the BSB-like blue diamond to the current red slanted oblong).

I'll never forget the freaky 'Watch . . .' idents with people oddly dancing around in black leotards. They only lasted 18 months.

The diamond 'W' idents were OK because they matched the premium style of the channel they were targetting. They were very nice, even if the name was odd.

Then it all fell apart when they went FTA, and used the logo from the frontage of a disused Woolworths store, with cheap programming to match.