Invitation for views on merging further planned local TV coverage areas

  • Start: 12 August 2013
  • Status: Statement published
  • End: 09 September 2013

Following the completion of its first round of local TV licensing, Ofcom invited expressions of interest in 30 further areas that the successful local multiplex licence applicant, Comux UK, had committed to cover. Following this invitation, we received a small number of requests asking us to consider merging some locations, for which we had sought separate expressions of interest, and to advertise a single local TV (L-DTPS) licence for the merged area.

Following a short consultation in June 2013, Ofcom published a statement confirming the merger of:

  • Tonbridge and Maidstone (now referred to as Maidstone); and
  • Hereford and Gloucester (now referred to as Gloucester).

We also invited views on whether we should consult on merging any other areas for which we had determined technical feasibility, and received requests to consult on merging:

  • Luton and Bedford; and
  • Gloucester and Malvern.

Therefore Ofcom published a further short consultation on merging the above areas on 12 August 2013.

We received 5 responses to this consultation. These were from two individuals, 2 potential applicants for L-DTPS licences (University of Bedfordshire and The Triple Broadcasting Co) and the local multiplex licensee, Comux UK. Having considered these responses we have reached our final decision on these two questions which is set out below. We do not anticipate any further consultations on the definitions of local areas.

Luton and Bedford

We received one response from a potential applicant for an L-DTPS licence in these areas, the University of Bedfordshire. The respondent argued that these coverage areas should be merged because:

  • The two towns share cultural similarities; and
  • A larger coverage area would make a licence in this area more viable.

Comux UK responded that the question of merging these areas is one for any potential L-DTPS licence applicants to consider, noting that a merged coverage area would be unlikely to materially reduce costs as it would still need to be covered from two transmitters.

The individual respondent (from Bedford) was not in favour of merging these coverage areas, arguing that local news is of interest only if it is targeted at Bedford, and news targeted at Luton would not be of interest.

Based on the responses we have received, we consider that we should advertise the Luton and Bedford coverage areas as a single licensed area. This is because we think that merging the two areas would make the licensed service more viable. We consider that the conditions and requirements for the award of an L-DTPS Licence, as set out in the Local Digital Television Programme Services Order 2012, will ensure that the licensed service will meet the needs of the area or locality where it is received.

Following our established policy of naming coverage areas after the principal conurbation in the area, this merged coverage area will be referred to as Luton. We do not anticipate that we will need to produce any further indicative coverage planning for this area.

Gloucester and Malvern

We received one response from a potential licence applicant, The Triple Broadcasting Co. The respondent supported merging these two areas, primarily because:

  • A larger, merged area would make a licence more viable in this area;
  • There are significant cultural similarities and institutional links between these two areas; and
  • A merged Malvern/Gloucester area would be "likely to [be] creatively and editorially improved by covering a single area, in a way that more closely matches the audiences real life relationship with the communities and geography served."

Comux UK responded that the question of merging these areas is one for any potential L-DTPS licence applicants to consider, noting that a merged coverage area would be unlikely to materially reduce costs as it would still need to be covered from two transmitters.

The individual respondent was not in favour of merging these coverage areas, arguing that Malvern shared greater cultural affinity with Worcester rather than Malvern.

Based on the responses we received, we consider that we should advertise the Gloucester and Malvern coverage areas as a single licensed area because this will provide a material increase in coverage for the network overall, which may make it more likely that we receive viable licence applications for this area. We are satisfied that there are local affinities between the merged areas and that the conditions and requirements for the award of an L-DTPS Licence, as set out in the Local Digital Television Programme Services Order 2012, will ensure that the licensed service will meet the needs of the area or locality where it is received.

Following our established policy of naming coverage areas after the principal conurbation in the area, this merged coverage area will be referred to as Gloucester. We do not anticipate that we will need to produce any further indicative coverage planning for this area.

loading icon

Responses

Responder name Type
Comux_UK.pdf (PDF File, 9.7 KB) Organisation
Smith_Mr_E.pdf (PDF File, 10.2 KB) Organisation
The_Triple_Broadcasting_Co.pdf (PDF File, 42.2 KB) Organisation
Welby_Mr_J.pdf (PDF File, 9.6 KB) Organisation