He refused to believe that 2002 would be a year of recovery, and was widely condemned as a pessimist for his trouble, but he was right. Somehow or other, they must respond to the creation of a single ITV and this may be the way. As things stand, Channel 5 seems to be rather keener on the idea than Channel 4. Much of the drive for an alliance is coming from Lord Hollick, one of Channel 5’s major shareholders Channel 4 would be unwise to ignore him.

It may not be the solution, but at this stage it’s hard to see where else the two channels will derive the sort of cost cuts and synergies they need to survive in an era of intensely competitive multi-channel TV.Take a showerDuring the downturn, Sir Martin Sorrell, chief executive of the advertising giant WPP, gained notoriety with his references to bath and saucer-shaped recoveries. How might that be done, with one channel government-owned and subject to public service broadcasting obligations, and the other a fully commercial enterprise with private shareholders to answer to? A full merger, in the legalistic sense of the term, seems out of the question For that, Channel 4 would have to be privatised. To the BBC and BSkyB leviathans has now been added an 800lb gorilla in the shape of a newly resurgent ITV, further widening the divide between the super league of broadcasting and the also-rans.To add further to those disadvantages, Channels 4 and 5 continue to maintain separate infrastructures and advertising sales houses Merge the two and all that duplicated cost is removed. Nobody is ruling this out as a long-term option, but it would take ages to happen and the present government is philosophically against it.However, there are a lots of other ways in which the two channels could share costs and even coordinate scheduling in a manner that would enable the two of them to be more competitive. With the merger of Carlton and Granada to form a single ITV, with a half of all TV advertising, Channels 4 and 5 are left looking even more out on a limb and niche than they were before. The question of the moment is whether a merger with Channel 5 might provide the answer.The logic of such a get together is obvious enough.

The Barclays, and other private equity bidders, are unlikely to have to go through that process.The Delaware judge who presided over the case, Leo Strine, said that the one colour that didn’t figure in his judgment was grey, meaning that it was a black-and-white, open-and-shut case. The same cannot be said about the future ownership of the Telegraph, which is about as clear as deepest grey mud.Channel 4/5Should luke Johnson continue to call himself The Maverick, the title of his column in the Sunday Telegraph, now that he’s been elevated to the chairmanship of Channel 4? However he plans to approach his new job, he’s certainly got to think fast and laterally if he’s to stop Channel 4 from slipping into the sea The media landscape is changing all around him. Furthermore, he brandishes a potential ace, which is pre-emption rights over the Telegraph’s 50 per cent interest in West Ferry printers. To the contrary, Lazard Brothers, the merchant bank conducting the process, is keen to have the Barclays full participation. Any buyer of the whole company, on the other hand, would have to bear the litigation risk, which further adds to the attractions of selling the whole rather than the individual bits.So now that the future of the Telegraph is back in the melting pot, who becomes favourite to win? Richard Desmond, publisher of the Daily Express, is only interested in the Telegraph titles, but he claims deep enough pockets to bid for the whole should that prove necessary.