Channel 4 is no stranger to privatisation talk – but this feels different

Published

4 years ago

June 18, 2021

admin

Almost since Channel 4 launched 38 years ago, with the first episode of Countdown, there has been speculation that it is facing privatisation.

In January 1983, just two months after the channel launched, Kevin Goldstein-Jackson – the executive who helped launch hits like Tales of the Unexpected and who later headed the ITV franchise operator Television South West – was calling for it to be privatised.

As Margaret Thatcher’s privatisation revolution rolled on through the 1980s, the calls kept coming, often from surprising directions.

In 1987, Michael Grade, who was then managing director of BBC television and who later went on to be dubbed Britain’s ‘pornographer in chief’ when he became Channel 4’s chief executive, said “it would be a very good thing indeed for British broadcasting if that were to happen”.

Somehow, though, Channel 4 managed to remain state-owned. The last serious calls for the broadcaster to be privatised came after David Cameron’s 2015 general election victory, when John Whittingdale, the then Culture Secretary and Matt Hancock, the then Cabinet Office Minister, were said to be pushing for it.

A key aspect to their proposal was that it would raise up to £1bn for the government.

Now, however, privatisation talk is again in the air.

The Financial Times reported on Friday that Channel 4 will be “steered towards privatisation” by the UK government as soon as next year. It said ministers were set to launch a formal consultation within weeks on the future of the broadcaster.

This could, according to the FT, even see an outright sale of Channel 4.

Ominously for Channel 4, which has always opposed being privatised, the FT said the consultation would be run by Mr Whittingdale himself.

There are a number of reasons why the idea has resurfaced now. The first is that, in the eyes of some in government, Channel 4’s business model is under pressure. As a free-to-air broadcaster that has few programme rights to exploit, it is unusually exposed to the vagaries of the advertising market, as has been shown during the last year.

The broadcaster reported a pre-tax loss of £26m in 2019 – Channel 4 itself has put this down to the cost of opening its new site in Leeds – but then suffered a collapse in advertising revenues when the COVID-19 pandemic erupted in March last year.

For its part, Channel 4 itself has said that it expects to report a surplus for the year, with advertising having bounced back strongly in the second half of the year.

The broadcaster also shored up its finances with aggressive cuts to its budget during the pandemic and by taking out loans. One indication of its recovery to financial health was that it repaid furlough money to the Treasury as long ago as last autumn.

It is also argued that the rise of streaming platforms like Amazon Prime, Disney+ and Netflix and the continued strength of multi-channel television broadcasters like Sky, the owner of Sky News, makes Channel 4 vulnerable to a loss of viewers that would eventually hit its advertising revenues.

Channel 4 has responded by arguing that, in 2020, it actually raised its share of television viewing, not only in terms of linear television, but also via digital platforms. It said at the end of last year that digital viewing now accounted for one in every eight hours of Channel 4 viewing.

Despite all this ministers fear that, as a business, Channel 4 is unusually vulnerable.

Earlier this year, Oliver Dowden, the Culture Secretary, vetoed the reappointment of two of Channel 4’s directors, Uzma Hasan and Fru Hazlitt, even though both Channel 4 itself and Ofcom, the broadcasting regulator, were supportive.

It was reported at the time that Mr Dowden wanted the two women, both of whom come from a production background, replaced with new directors boasting more financial experience.

Another reason why privatisation may be back on the agenda is the public finances.

Some in Whitehall believe that a significant sum of money could still be made from a sale of Channel 4 – although most analysts who have run the numbers believe any sale proceeds would fall well short of the £1bn mooted six years ago.

It is also argued that a new owner for Channel 4, with deep pockets, might help ensure the quality of its output. The problem is that there are few obvious buyers out there for the channel.

Most of the big US buyers who might be interested are focused on other things while Channel 4’s relative lack of intellectual property rights – a big contrast with, for example, ITV – means there would be few gains to be made by a big media buyer.

Viacom-CBS, the owner of Channel 5, is seen as the likeliest buyer but it, too, is more focused currently on building its streaming service, Paramount+, as well as trying to shore up confidence among its investors after a calamitous drop in its share price earlier this year related to the collapse of the hedge fund Archegos Capital.

Investors also suspect Viacom-CBS will be looking to conserve capital to invest more in content as it battles it out with rivals like Netflix and Disney, whose Disney+ streaming service has strongly outperformed Wall Street’s expectations, rather than use it buying an asset like Channel 4.

Moreover, if any of the big US broadcasters were interested in acquiring a UK free-to-air broadcaster, they are far more likely to alight on ITV which, unlike Channel 4, has its own production arm in ITV Studios and far more intellectual property assets to exploit.

That might make a flotation on the stock market, which would provide Channel 4 with more access to capital, as a likelier outcome – although it has been speculated in some quarters that ITV itself might be a buyer.

Expect Channel 4 to strongly resist any attempt to privatise it.

In the past the broadcaster has been able to muster a substantial lobbying campaign, relying on members of the arts establishment, to argue that its remit to produce distinctive programming would be jeopardised by a change of ownership.

It is also likely to point to the fact that it is a major investor in British content and spends heavily with independent production companies.

That, however, is a harder argument to make when the likes of Sky and Netflix are investing record sums in British programming, when the BBC’s drama output is still scoring hits and when ITV’s production arm is in such fine fettle.

In short, a lot of the arguments Channel 4 has used to resist privatisation in the past may not be as pertinent as was once the case.

This may represent Mr Whittingdale’s best opportunity yet to push for a policy he has sought for 25 years.

Business

Rachel Reeves is celebrating the Bank of England’s interest cut – but behind the scenes she has little to cheer

Published

9 hours ago

August 7, 2025

admin

Rachel Reeves is celebrating the Bank of England's interest cut – but behind the scenes she has little to cheer

The economy is stagnating and job losses are mounting. Now is the time to cut interest rates again.

That was the view of the Bank of England’s nine-member rate setting committee on Thursday.

Well, at least five of them.

The other four presented us with a different view: Inflation is above target and climbing – this is no time to cut interest rates.

Who is right? All of them and none of them.

Central bankers have been backed into a corner by the current economic climate and navigating a path out is challenging.

The difficulty in charting that route was on display as the Bank struggled to decide on the best course of monetary policy.

The committee had to take it to a re-vote for the first time in the Bank’s history.

On one side, central bankers – including Andrew Bailey – were swayed by the data on the economy. Growth is “subdued”, they said, and job losses are mounting.

This should weigh on wage increases, which are already moderating, and in turn inflation.

One member, Alan Taylor, was so worried about the economy he initially suggested a larger half a percentage point cut.

On the other side, their colleagues were alarmed by inflation.

The Bank upgraded its inflation forecasts, with the headline index expected to hit 4% in September.

In a blow to the chancellor, the September figure is used to uprate a number of benefits and pensions. The Bank lifted it from a previous forecast of 3.75%.

In explaining the increase, the Bank blamed higher utility bills and food prices.

Food price inflation could hit 5.5% this year, an increase driven by poor harvests, some expensive packaging regulations as well as higher employment costs arising from the Autumn Budget.

When pressed by Sky News on the main contributor to that increase – poor harvests or government policy – the governor said: “It’s about 50-50.”

The Bank doesn’t like to get political but nothing about this is flattering for the chancellor.

The Bank said food retailers, including supermarkets, were passing on higher national insurance and living wage costs – the ones announced in the Autumn Budget – to customers.

Economists at the Bank pointed out that food retailers employ a large proportion of low wage workers and are more vulnerable to the lowering of the national insurance threshold because they have a larger proportion of part-time workers.

The danger doesn’t end there.

Of all the types of inflation, food price inflation is among the most dangerous.

Households spend 11% of their disposable income, meaning higher food price inflation can play an outsized role in our perception of how high overall inflation in the economy is.

When that happens, workers are more likely to push for pay rises, a dangerous loop that can lead to higher inflation.

So while the chancellor is publicly celebrating the Bank’s fifth interest rate cut in a year, behind the scenes she will have very little to cheer.

Business

Bank of England issues inflation warning but cuts interest rate to 4%

Published

14 hours ago

August 7, 2025

admin

Bank of England issues inflation warning but cuts interest rate to 4%

The Bank of England has cut the interest rate for the fifth time in a year to 4% but warned that climbing food prices will cause inflation to jump higher in 2025.

In a tight decision that saw members of the rate-setting committee vote twice to break a deadlock, the Bank cut the rate to the lowest level in more than two-and-a-half years. Households on a variable mortgage of about £140,000 will save about £30 a month.

Andrew Bailey, governor of the Bank of England, said: “We’ve cut interest rates today, but it was a finely balanced decision. Interest rates are still on a downward path, but any future cuts will need to be made gradually and carefully.”

Money latest: What interest rate cut means for savers and borrowers

The Monetary Policy Committee (MPC), the nine-member panel that sets the base interest rate, voted in favour of lowering borrowing costs by 0.25 percentage points.

However, rate-setters failed to reach a unanimous decision, with four members of the committee voting to keep it on hold and another four voting for a 0.25 percentage point cut.

Alan Taylor, an external member of the committee, initially called for a larger 0.5 percentage point cut but after a second vote reduced that to 0.25% to break the deadlock. Had they failed to reach a decision, Mr Bailey, the governor, would have had the decisive vote.

It is the first time the committee has gone to a second vote and highlights the difficulty policymakers face in navigating the current economic climate, in which economic growth is stagnating, with at least one rate-setter fearing a recession, but inflation remains persistent.

Although the central bank voted to cut borrowing costs, it also raised its inflation forecasts on the back of higher food prices.

The bank predicted that the headline rate of inflation would hit 4% in September, up from a previous estimate of 3.75%.

The September inflation rate is used to uprate a range of benefits, including pensions.

The increase was driven by food, where the inflation rate could hit 5.5% this year. About a tenth of household spending is devoted to food shopping, which means it can have an outsized impact on inflation.

The Bank said this risked creating “second round effects”, whereby a sense of higher inflation forces people to push for pay rises, which could push inflation even higher.

Economists at the Bank blamed poor harvests, weather conditions, and changes to packaging regulations but also, in a blow to the chancellor, higher labour costs.

It pointed out that a higher proportion of workers in the food retail sector are paid the national living wage, which Rachel Reeves increased by 6.7% in April.

Economists at the Bank also blamed higher employment taxes announced in the autumn budget. “Furthermore, overall labour costs of supermarkets are likely to have been disproportionately affected by the lower threshold at which employers start paying NICs… these material increases in labour costs are likely to have pushed up food prices.”

There is also evidence that employers’ national insurance increases are causing businesses to curtail hiring, the Bank said. It comes as unemployment in the UK rose unexpectedly to a fresh four-year high of 4.7% in May. Separate data shows the number of employees on payroll has contracted for the fifth month in a row,

The Bank said the unemployment rate could hit 5% next year and warned of “subdued” economic growth, with one member – Alan Taylor – warning of an “increased risk of recession” in the coming years.

Business

Trump announces yet more tariffs and praises ‘significant step’ from Apple

Published

23 hours ago

August 7, 2025

admin

Trump announces yet more tariffs and praises 'significant step' from Apple

Donald Trump has announced 100% tariffs on computer chips and semiconductors made outside the US.

The move threatens to increase the cost of electronics made outside the US, which covers everything from TVs and video game consoles to kitchen appliances and cars.

The announcement came as Apple chief executive Tim Cook said his company would invest an extra $100bn (£74.9bn) in US manufacturing.

Soon, all smartwatch and iPhone glass around the world will be made in Kentucky, according to Mr Cook, speaking from the Oval Office.

“This is a significant step toward the ultimate goal of ensuring that iPhones sold in the United States of America are also made in America,” said Mr Trump.

“Today’s announcement is one of the largest commitments in what has become among the greatest investment booms in our nation’s history.”

Mr Cook also presented the president with a one-of-a-kind trophy made by Apple in the US.

Trump’s tariffs hit India hard

Mr Trump has previously criticised Mr Cook and Apple after the company attempted to avoid his tariffs by shifting iPhone production from China to India.

The president said he had a “little problem” with Apple and said he’d told Mr Cook: “I don’t want you building in India.”

India itself felt Mr Trump’s wrath on Wednesday, as he issued an executive order hitting the country with an additional 25% tariff for its continued purchasing of Russian oil.

Indian imports into the US will face a 50% tariff from 27 August as a result of the move, as the president seeks to increase the pressure on Russia to end the war in Ukraine.

Mr Trump told reporters at the White House he “could” also hit China with more tariffs.

Apple’s ‘olive branch’

Apple, meanwhile, plans to hire 20,000 people in the US to support its extra manufacturing in the country, which will total $600bn (around £449bn) worth of investment over four years.

The “vast majority” of those jobs will be focused on a new end-to-end US silicon production line, research and development, software development, and artificial intelligence, according to the company.

Apple’s investment in the US caused the company’s stock price to hike by nearly 6% in Wednesday’s midday trading.

The rise may reflect relief by investors that Mr Cook “is extending an olive branch” to Mr Trump, said Nancy Tengler, chief executive of money manager Laffer Tengler Investments, which owns Apple stock.