"At five percent, the pain threshold would be exceeded".
SRG Director General Armin Walpen Takes Steps to Minimize Damage
SRG Director General Armin Walpen prepares for damage limitationThe SRG will only accept the announced fee splitting for local and regional television stations if it receives compensation. Radio advertising is just one of several possible demands that SRG Director General Armin Walpen is putting on the table.Immediately after the Federal Council announced its plans for fee-splitting, you put your demand for radio advertising on the table - you are obviously very serious about it now.
Armin Walpen: If there is a large-scale fee-splitting, then we have to accept that we will have to ask about compensation. We have always pointed this out; this demand is nothing new. Further fee-splitting would mean fewer financial resources for SRG SSR idée suisse; one possible compensation for this would be radio advertising.
However, the chances are slim. The Federal Council said on the same day that it announced the splitting plans that it did not want advertising on SRG radio stations. Doesn't this statement put you off?
Walpen: The question will only arise when the new Radio and Television Act comes into force. On the other hand, this is a passive demand. In other words, if the framework conditions had remained the same, we would not have discussed radio advertising. I have always linked any demand for radio advertising to a significantly higher fee-splitting. SRG SSR can certainly do without radio advertising. We could live with that, as we do today. But if people want to take money away from us, as Director General I have to ask where I can recoup this money. We are not a company with an enormous amount of money. On the contrary: we are reaching our limits.
Nevertheless, the Federal Council will have the final say, as whether SRG radio stations are allowed to advertise or not is laid down in their licenses. However, the Federal Council is responsible for amending licenses.
Walpen: Of course it is up to the national government to decide. If the Federal Council says no, then that is a no, and SRG SSR idée suisse must also accept this. But if it says yes, then we would also accept that.
With the threat of radio advertising, the main aim now is to keep the amount for fee splitting, which has yet to be determined, as low as possible. Is there a pain threshold at which you would give up the demand for radio advertising?
Walpen: Various figures are now being bandied about. For my part, I assume that it is still completely unclear at the moment how high the fee share for local and regional broadcasters will be. One thing is clear to me: five percent would clearly be too much. At this level, the pain threshold would be exceeded and we would not just be asking the question about radio advertising.
Do you have other compensation claims in your sights?
Walpen: There are several conceivable options; for example, an increase in fees, which Marc Furrer, Director of the Federal Office of Communications, has at least not ruled out. However, SRG SSR would not be responsible for this increase. Another compensation option would be more entrepreneurial freedom for SRG SSR.
However, the Federal Council is also making concessions to the SRG, as it can keep its radio and television sponsorship and thus around CHF 40 million in annual revenue. This is roughly the amount that is now being talked about with regard to fee splitting. Is that not enough for you?
Walpen: I reject such offsetting against a possible loss of fees. We already have these 40 million francs today. If sponsorship had been taken away from us, we would have lost another significant proportion of our income.
What does it mean for SRG if it can now keep the sponsorship?
Walpen: I am extremely grateful to the Federal Council for coming back to this decision. Sponsorship is very interesting for us. And it's not just about SRG SSR. Sponsorship is also primarily about the fact that culture, sport and the economy benefit from it. The fact is that today there are many events that could no longer be held without sponsorship or that are at least heavily dependent on it.
However, opinions are divided on the desirability and impact of radio advertising on private radio stations.
Walpen: I am aware that there are two opinions. It's like when TV advertising was introduced, only back then it was the press that harbored fears. But even today, some private radio stations are of the opinion that they would lose revenue if SRG also offered radio advertising. Another group, however, is convinced that it will be the other way around. They say that if the market leader offers radio advertising, radio advertising will become more important overall. This opinion is held by both the industry and advertising acquisition. There are at least some radio broadcasters in German-speaking Switzerland who also see it this way. In French-speaking Switzerland, the majority share this view. But ultimately, neither position can be proven today. They are and will remain assumptions for the time being.
What is your opinion?
Walpen: I don't know whether one or the other will apply. There are arguments for both possible developments. For me, as I said, the crucial question is how we can recoup any financial resources that may be lost. Interview: Daniel Schifferle
Armin Walpen: If there is a large-scale fee-splitting, then we have to accept that we will have to ask about compensation. We have always pointed this out; this demand is nothing new. Further fee-splitting would mean fewer financial resources for SRG SSR idée suisse; one possible compensation for this would be radio advertising.
However, the chances are slim. The Federal Council said on the same day that it announced the splitting plans that it did not want advertising on SRG radio stations. Doesn't this statement put you off?
Walpen: The question will only arise when the new Radio and Television Act comes into force. On the other hand, this is a passive demand. In other words, if the framework conditions had remained the same, we would not have discussed radio advertising. I have always linked any demand for radio advertising to a significantly higher fee-splitting. SRG SSR can certainly do without radio advertising. We could live with that, as we do today. But if people want to take money away from us, as Director General I have to ask where I can recoup this money. We are not a company with an enormous amount of money. On the contrary: we are reaching our limits.
Nevertheless, the Federal Council will have the final say, as whether SRG radio stations are allowed to advertise or not is laid down in their licenses. However, the Federal Council is responsible for amending licenses.
Walpen: Of course it is up to the national government to decide. If the Federal Council says no, then that is a no, and SRG SSR idée suisse must also accept this. But if it says yes, then we would also accept that.
With the threat of radio advertising, the main aim now is to keep the amount for fee splitting, which has yet to be determined, as low as possible. Is there a pain threshold at which you would give up the demand for radio advertising?
Walpen: Various figures are now being bandied about. For my part, I assume that it is still completely unclear at the moment how high the fee share for local and regional broadcasters will be. One thing is clear to me: five percent would clearly be too much. At this level, the pain threshold would be exceeded and we would not just be asking the question about radio advertising.
Do you have other compensation claims in your sights?
Walpen: There are several conceivable options; for example, an increase in fees, which Marc Furrer, Director of the Federal Office of Communications, has at least not ruled out. However, SRG SSR would not be responsible for this increase. Another compensation option would be more entrepreneurial freedom for SRG SSR.
However, the Federal Council is also making concessions to the SRG, as it can keep its radio and television sponsorship and thus around CHF 40 million in annual revenue. This is roughly the amount that is now being talked about with regard to fee splitting. Is that not enough for you?
Walpen: I reject such offsetting against a possible loss of fees. We already have these 40 million francs today. If sponsorship had been taken away from us, we would have lost another significant proportion of our income.
What does it mean for SRG if it can now keep the sponsorship?
Walpen: I am extremely grateful to the Federal Council for coming back to this decision. Sponsorship is very interesting for us. And it's not just about SRG SSR. Sponsorship is also primarily about the fact that culture, sport and the economy benefit from it. The fact is that today there are many events that could no longer be held without sponsorship or that are at least heavily dependent on it.
However, opinions are divided on the desirability and impact of radio advertising on private radio stations.
Walpen: I am aware that there are two opinions. It's like when TV advertising was introduced, only back then it was the press that harbored fears. But even today, some private radio stations are of the opinion that they would lose revenue if SRG also offered radio advertising. Another group, however, is convinced that it will be the other way around. They say that if the market leader offers radio advertising, radio advertising will become more important overall. This opinion is held by both the industry and advertising acquisition. There are at least some radio broadcasters in German-speaking Switzerland who also see it this way. In French-speaking Switzerland, the majority share this view. But ultimately, neither position can be proven today. They are and will remain assumptions for the time being.
What is your opinion?
Walpen: I don't know whether one or the other will apply. There are arguments for both possible developments. For me, as I said, the crucial question is how we can recoup any financial resources that may be lost. Interview: Daniel Schifferle
