TopTV CEO wants 'mutual separation'

2012-02-02 09:14
Johannesburg - TopTV CEO Vino Govender is in talks with the board regarding a "mutual separation", the network said on Thursday. 

"The board and the CEO are in discussion regarding a mutual separation but those discussions are not completed yet," said spokesperson Melinda Connor.

She said no further comment would be made to the media until the matter was concluded.

On Wednesday TV journalist Thinus Ferreira reported that Govender was facing termination within the company due to mounting pressure from investors.

Icasa ruling

Last week the Independent Communications Authority of SA (Icasa) ruled that TopTV could not air its controversial, dedicated pornography channel.

The decision followed a lengthy process of public consultation after the pay television network's application to launch three porn channels.

Icasa ruled at the time that it was decided that women's right to dignity outweighed TopTV's right to freedom of expression, and the rights of viewers to receive pornography on television.

Connor said the regulator had committed to giving reasons for its decision within 30 days.

"We are still waiting for Icasa's report back," she said.

TopTV was awarded a pay-TV licence in September 2007 and the licence was issued in July 2008.

According to The Media Online website, TopTV had about 373 000 viewers in December, at a cost of between R99 and R269 per month.

Comments

  • Vuyo - 2012-02-02 09:54

    Icasa ruled at the time that it was decided that women's right to dignity outweighed TopTV's right to freedom of expression, and the rights of viewers to receive pornography on television. Thank you ICASA and thank God there are still institutions willing to do the right thing. We simply don't need these types of channels. I wonder if ICASA knows that one of the SABC channels - I think it's tv 2, do broadcast films around 10pm that in my view is nothing but soft pornography. I stumbled upon this during a stint in hospital while flicking through channels. So while I personally embrace your ruling I would like to see you doing this consistently accross the board.

      Johan - 2012-02-02 10:30

      "We simply don't need..." Speak for yourself. Don't be so selfish.

      Olaf - 2012-02-02 11:20

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....just got to love self righteous people. It is your choice if you want the channel or not, don't choose for other people.

      K0BUSL - 2012-02-02 12:01

      Must agree with Vuyo, I am no prude but having a DSTV Channel showing full frontals of different girls for an hour should be treated in the same manner as TOP having a PAID PORN CHANNEL. If it offends you don't have it.

      George - 2012-02-02 13:22

      All of us commenting here are porn stars in our homes with our partners, yet we treat sex as a filthy dirty thing to do while we indulge in it. SA streets are full of sex shops where you can buy porn videos, sex toys etc as long as you are 18 years old. Now why do we want to deny anyone from switching into a sex chanel if they are over 18 and want to just view sex. People have sex day in and day out. SA constitution even allows for homosexual and polygmous physical sex yet we are not allowed to choose a chanel to view what the constitution allows. Hypocrites. Next time you have sex you must know that you are engaging in pornography in which you are the star performer.

      Cass Arendse - 2012-02-02 19:41

      Please let us choose what we want to watch ourselves. Next we will have someone telling us wen and wen not to go to the toilet

  • ivan.coetzee2 - 2012-02-02 10:09

    What Vino is saying is, "I want a BIG parachute a'all you know, got wife and 10 kids in Chatswort n'all."

      Adrian - 2012-02-02 10:29

      Racist.

      Mattewis - 2012-02-02 10:56

      @Adrian I think it's more racial profiling than racism, but I think Ivan's statement is not at all true. Indian people do not generally have many kids. They do like wealth & bling, though, just like many people of other races as well. WRT the Article: My guess is as good as anyone's as to why this guy is planning to part ways with TopTV, but judging on many similar observations, these things usually indicate financial difficulty! In this case it is rather understandable, because TopTV should actually be called BottomTV judging by the quality of their content! They seriously needed to capitalize on their initial success by following up with the addition of decent material to their initial start-up portfolio within the first 12 months! It would seem they failed!

      gerald.jacob1 - 2012-02-02 12:09

      You are really dumb Ivan for making a comment like that, what money he has is his business, if you check your facts he is the guy that had the balls to start TopTv and all the others that are there climbed onto the band wagon, he has the balls to take on DSTV, dont speak about things you dont know about, this guy put the seed capital in to start this business

      ivan.coetzee2 - 2012-02-03 11:04

      @Adrian,Mattewis,gerald: Please it was a joke you PC twits, no I dont thionk all Indians have 10 kids...neva mind!

  • brandon.conroy3 - 2012-02-02 10:10

    373000 subscribers @ R 99.00 per month = 36.927.000, 00 income per month, and at R269.00 per month = 100.377.000,00, so Top TV is raking in the money with or without a porn channel, I assume the Govender must be negotiating a hefty payoff - aka "mutual separation".

      Ntombiziyabusa - 2012-02-02 14:06

      So, how much is it costing them?

  • Dalai - 2012-02-02 10:48

    Rule number one for peverts - and we have them aplenty: If you don't have it, perve it.

  • Preshen - 2012-02-02 12:52

    They ejaculated him

  • Charmaine - 2012-02-12 22:49

    We will wait and see the outcome

  • pages:
  • 1