[interestednovice]

I'm not sure I buy the argument that they need to prove they're "moving on from TV" by dropping the TV part of the name. Up-start competitors in the same space include Pluto TV and Freevee... it's still TV programming they show and the primary mode of viewing is on a TV set, just because they want to emphasise their non-linear broadcasting offer doesn't make their offer any less "TV" than it always has been.

Just feels straight up clumsy to me.

I appreciate the problem they have though, that by creating a dozen unique identities they now have a struggle getting brand recognition on a service which unifies them. A smarter solution would have just been to strap 'UK' on to the front of each, IMHO.

I tend to agree with you. A lot of companies do seem to be obsessed with “moving on” from their existing brands, which makes no sense. Mastercard altered the version of their logo which appears on cards, for example, to no longer include the text “Mastercard” because they were “moving beyond cards”. It’s just quite silly, in my view.

TV, at it’s core, just really means home viewing (or anywhere viewing) media, contrasting with cinema content - although even that line is being blurred with streaming services producing original films. It doesn’t have to be “broadcast”, it’s still TV on demand.