[Brekkie]

Baffling when ITVBe only just rates higher than CITV anyway (0.15% share v 0.12%). So ITVBe+1 will probably have less than half the audience of CITV, ad wise target a market already swell served and tick no PSB or brand value box for ITV at all.

[CCFG]

Baffling when ITVBe only just rates higher than CITV anyway (0.15% share v 0.12%).  So ITVBe+1 will probably have less than half the audience of CITV, ad wise target a market already swell served and tick no PSB or brand value box for ITV at all.

Also when you consider that ITVBe is most likely up for the chop in the next few years, it's quite a bit more baffiling!

[Rex]

Also when you consider that ITVBe is most likely up for the chop in the next few years, it's quite a bit more baffiling!

Once the advertising revenue and slots aren't as plentiful as it was a decade ago on Be it'll end up being removed. ITV2's ad slots being consistently filled was the reason why they launched the channel.

[WillPS]

Also when you consider that ITVBe is most likely up for the chop in the next few years, it's quite a bit more baffiling!

Not really - they have the capacity now, might as well use it for something. For all we know they are marketing a sell off of the capacity or perhaps have even agreed a future exit point for it.

They clearly already had an ITV Be+1 feed internally and so the cost of putting that to air for most of the day using that vacant capacity is negligible.

Baffling when ITVBe only just rates higher than CITV anyway (0.15% share v 0.12%).

Not all audiences are equal in revenue terms - but clearly this isn't a move intended to improve their linear reach!

So ITVBe+1 will probably have less than half the audience of CITV, ad wise target a market already swell served and tick no PSB or brand value box for ITV at all.

The costs of running ITV Be +1 on Freeview are more or less nil (carriage they have and presumably couldn't get rid of yet, feed of ITV Be +1 already exists and doing nothing 23 hours a day).

[Kunst]

I don't think ITV Be is next for the chop.

It clearly is the odd one of the ITV family, but it has a kind of purpose and audience and carries Little Be programming

[rick]

I'm surprised, I would have thought ITV 3+1 would have extended its Freeview hours instead considering that it is a much more popular channel. Are ITV ever going to bother with an ITV Be+1 for satellite, or is it a Freeview/cable exclusive, just like ITV Be HD is a cable/streaming exclusive?

[Brekkie]

Choosing ITVBe+1 rather than ITV3+1 does feel more temporary with perhaps the intention to let the 24 hour slot go.

[Joe]

Why does it feel more temporary?

[Keith]

Choosing ITVBe+1 rather than ITV3+1 does feel more temporary with perhaps the intention to let the 24 hour slot go.

Worth noting that until Friday the stream used by CITV appears to have been split as follows.
- 04:00 to 05:00: ITVBe +1
- 05:00 to 06:00: ITV4 +1
- 06:00 to 21:00: CITV
- 21:00 to 04:00: ITV3 +1

According to www.xhxf.uk  it's now split as follows.

Freeview timeshares

  Source: www.xhxf.uk

- 04:00 to 05:00: ITV4 +1
- 05:00 to 21:00: ITVBe +1
- 21:00 to 04:00: ITV3 +1

It does feel like the 1 hour per day channels are now of a 'parliamentary service' to retain the channel number on Freeview. I thought the existing rules required the equivalent of 2 hours per day, though may not have been applied to existing channels when the rules were introduced.

I wouldn't be too surprised if some the ITV +1 channels swap their broadcast hours in the near future. Longer term I imagine some of them may close completely in preference of their ITVX service.

[WillPS]

All these +1 channels can disappear quickly and without any to plan the service being wound down.

Why ITV continues to squat on rubbish Freeview EPG numbers when the heat in that market has clearly fizzled out I'm not sure, but on the flipside - if this is capacity they already have committed to and they can't sell or release it, then what's to be lost from continuing with that?