Sheffield Star - Saturday April 21St 1962

[DaveH]

I remember a few years ago when the floods hit Sheffield and Look L**ds did not even mention them on the day, if that had been L**ds they would have been all over them. it took until the next day for Krista and Harry to get off their backsides and come down and report on what had happened............

My recuuring grievance against Look North (hence it's alternative name).

Local TV gives very poor coverave to most major Yorkshire cities except L**ds which just happens to be where the studio is.

[DaveH]

wrong end of the M1, Richard! lol

Ashby de la Zouch isn't at an end of the M1 it's in the middle

The "other end" is in London

Now as for the "wrong end", which is worst? L***on or L**ds?

Depending on your viewpoint it could be a close call.

It may be a long way south but personally I prefer London.

[Athy]

I've just spent ten entertaining minutes reading the '62 cuttings from The Star. As I love '60s music, the Roy Shepherd record review page was of great interest, especially as he mixed star names with artists who are now all but forgotten like Grant Tracy & The Sunsets. But who was "Sheffield's Jimmy Crawford"?

I spotted a future star name in there - Sheffield Telegraph columnist Peter Tinniswood, who would later find fame with a series of hilarious cricket-based books starting with Tales From A Long Room.

[ukelele lady]

Well I remember Jimmy Crawford in his leathers , I even bought his hit record " I love how you love me "

But I'm sorry I don't know who Grant Tracy and the Sunsets are, never heard of them.

[DaveH]

Well, SLTV covers nothing but Sheffield. Still manages to be totally **** though!

Yes, - and this has happened before when Sheffield has its own cablevision and rediffusion services.

They couldn't actually produce anything that was worth watching, - possibly due to lack of funding, but which ultimately led to their demise.

Looks like things could be repeating themselves with SLTV then, - unfortunately

[DaveH]

I don't think it's an exact repeat because this time they have pots of money, much of which has come via the BBC and we are paying for via the ridiculous licence fee. So this time around it's not lack of funding, it's a total lack of talent.

So if its finance is coming from the BBC is it a BBC run station?

I thought it was run by a private company who had applied for the licence to run the service.

They also seem to have a lot of advertising on, something the BBC do not do and which would bring in extra revenue.

[madannie77]

The BBC's financial involvement in local TV is limited to providing £25 million to the company tasked with setting up the multiplex network and a commitment to pay up to £5 million per annum for content from the local TV channels if suitable material is available.

From the BBC Document "Local television multiplex licence funding arrangements" from May 2012:

"the BBC’s £25 million funding will be used for the capital costs to establish the local multiplex distribution network on which the local television services will broadcast. It cannot, however, be allocated to support the L-DTPSlicensees through direct additional funding."

The Local TV companies' operating costs have to be found from advertising, sponsorship etc.

[tozzin]

I wonder if the Fred Pass mentioned in the Birth section is the Fred Pass who wrote " Weers Mi Dad" , if it is he must have been very happy at the birth of his son

[Waterside Echo]

I wonder if the Fred Pass mentioned in the Birth section is the Fred Pass who wrote " Weers Mi Dad" , if it is he must have been very happy at the birth of his son

Yes. Mark was the the first child to Fred and Sandra Pass, followed by Jonathan and Jill. W/E.

[vox]

It's what they call a 'community company' or something like that. It's basically a private enterprise with shareholders from the local community, although I don;t thing anyone not local would be stopped from putting in money. One interesting part about it (as explained to me by the people who run it) is that however much cash you put in they claim you get an equal share and equal voting rights etc. I'm not quite sure how that works as surely someone contributing a few thousand pounds (as some have) should get more for their money than someone who has only put in a hundred quid!

Just a layman's take on it. -

If that's how it works it sounds very good.

Those who contribute most in cash will get a bigger cash return on their investment, but with equal voting rights for all, there isn't the same threat of a "takeover" where those who own most shares can dictate policy.

As I said - Just a layman's take on it.

[DaveH]

Just a layman's take on it. -

If that's how it works it sounds very good.

Those who contribute most in cash will get a bigger cash return on their investment, but with equal voting rights for all, there isn't the same threat of a "takeover" where those who own most shares can dictate policy.

As I said - Just a layman's take on it.

To be honest vox, that sounds a very fair system for share payouts and with a sensible built in set of voting rights to protect the company from being sold out.

Makes sense to me.

[vox]

I've got some shares in the Portland Works Project. I think that's how the voting system works for us as well.