TRP Licence Raj: Why entering the TV ratings business is easier on paper than in reality

India’s television ratings business is entering a new phase where obtaining regulatory approval could prove a little easier than building a commercially viable ratings operation. This is because the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) opened the market to new players while simultaneously imposing tighter conditions on how audience measurement companies operate.

The Television Rating Policy 2026 lowered the minimum net-worth requirement for ratings agencies from Rs 20 crore to Rs 5 crore and formally opened the sector to multiple agencies. But industry executives say the regulatory threshold is only a fraction of the capital required to build a credible nationwide ratings currency.

The bigger concern, they said, is whether companies will be willing to commit hundreds or potentially thousands of crores to a business where regulatory intervention can determine whether an existing ratings system is permitted to publish data.

Read more: TV industry braces for blackout fallout

“The policy has certainly lowered the formal entry barrier, but that is not the same as lowering the investment barrier. A company looking at a Rs 1,000 crore-plus investment will first want to know whether the regulatory environment will remain predictable for the next 10 years,” a senior media executive said.

The concern has become more pronounced following the prolonged suspension of BARC India ratings in 2026. BARC, despite being an industry-owned organisation, was directed to suspend publication of television audience data while its registration under the new framework was examined.

Read earlier e4m report on ratings blackout 

For the television industry, the episode has highlighted a fundamental change in the ratings ecosystem: BARC may continue to own and operate the measurement system, but its ability to function as the recognised television currency is now conditional on compliance with the government's regulatory framework.

From industry mechanism to regulated ecosystem

BARC was established in 2012 and began operations in 2015 as an industry-led television measurement body. It is promoted by the Indian Broadcasting & Digital Foundation (IBDF), Indian Society of Advertisers (ISA) and Advertising Agencies Association of India (AAAI) in a 60:20:20 structure.

The three stakeholder groups represent broadcasters, advertisers and advertising and media agencies, respectively.

The structure was intended to ensure that the industry's television currency was created and governed by the principal participants in the advertising ecosystem.

That model has now been supplemented by a more direct regulatory layer.

TRAI moves to reclaim role in ratings. Read more

Under the Television Rating Policy 2026, ratings agencies must register with the government and comply with requirements covering panel size, governance, audits, methodology, independence, technology and data integrity. Existing agencies, including BARC, have to come under the new framework.

“The important change is that ratings are no longer simply an industry service. The regulator now has a much more direct say in the conditions under which the measurement system operates. It is just like a license raj which is in play,” said a broadcast industry executive.

This has created an unusual structure: industry ownership, private operation and government-controlled regulatory legitimacy.

Blackout changes industry's risk calculation

The BARC blackout has become particularly important for potential entrants because it provides a real-world indication of how the new regulatory architecture can operate.

The central issue was not just BARC's ability to measure audiences. The issue was whether it could continue publishing the data while its registration and compliance under the new policy were being processed.

That distinction is significant for a prospective ratings company, which would need years to establish a representative panel, deploy meters, conduct establishment surveys, build statistical models and gain industry acceptance.

"The blackout is not just a BARC issue. Anyone considering entering this business will study what happened very closely. If an incumbent with an established panel and industry relationships can face an interruption, a new entrant will factor that regulatory risk into its investment decision," said a senior television industry executive.

The ratings business has a particularly long investment cycle. Unlike a digital measurement product that can be developed and scaled relatively quickly, a national television ratings operation requires substantial upfront investment before it can generate a commercially accepted currency.

Rs 5 crore threshold versus Rs 1,000 crore reality

The MIB has reduced the minimum net-worth requirement from Rs 20 crore to Rs 5 crore, potentially allowing more companies to qualify for registration.

However, executives say the move addresses only the financial qualification for entering the regulatory framework.

A credible nationwide ratings system requires representative households across geographies and demographic groups, field teams, meter installation and maintenance, sample rotation, quality controls, establishment surveys, data security, statistical modelling and continuous audits.

Industry estimates cited by executives suggest that building such an operation could require an investment of more than Rs 1,000 crore.

"The Rs 5 crore number can make the policy look highly accessible. But that is essentially a regulatory eligibility number. The actual business may require several hundred crores before the company has enough scale and credibility to compete," another industry executive said.

The commercial challenge becomes even greater because the new agency would be entering a market where BARC already has an established infrastructure and relationships with broadcasters, advertisers and agencies.

'Technology is not enough'

Chrome DM and TAM have already indicated their openness to working with BARC or other industry stakeholders. But CTV measurement alone does not solve the problem of creating a representative television ratings panel.

A full-fledged ratings agency would also need to measure linear television as well as digital screens, requiring physical recruitment of households, meter deployment, maintenance, field verification, sample management and statistical validation.

"Connected TV gives a company a strong technology layer, but the television ratings business is not just a technology business. The difficult part is creating a statistically representative panel and convincing the entire industry that the resulting number should be used as currency," said a media measurement executive.

This could make collaboration a more viable entry strategy for technology-led companies than immediately attempting to build an entirely independent ratings operation.

TAM has experience, but experience comes with a cost

TAM, meanwhile, has historical experience in television audience measurement. That could provide it with an advantage over companies entering from adjacent technology businesses.

But executives said historical expertise does not remove the infrastructure and governance requirements imposed by the 2026 policy.

A new entrant would still need to establish the required panel scale, field operations, data security, governance structures, audits and methodological systems. It would also need to make a fresh investment case for entering a television market whose economics are under pressure from the growth of digital video, connected television and OTT.

TAM CEO L.V. Krishnan did not comment on the developments.

"The question for a company like TAM is not whether it knows how to measure television. It is whether the size and economics of the Indian market justify rebuilding the infrastructure and making the capital commitment required under the new regime," said an industry executive.

Shrinking TV economy adds another layer of risk

The investment question is becoming more difficult because the television market itself is facing structural pressure.

Television remains an important advertising medium, but advertisers are increasingly spreading budgets across digital video, connected TV and other platforms. This means a new ratings company would have to invest heavily in an industry whose traditional advertising economics are no longer expanding at the pace seen in earlier years.

The 2026 policy also requires technology-neutral measurement, including connected-TV viewing. This potentially expands the opportunity for new measurement models, but it simultaneously increases the complexity of building a comprehensive currency.

"An investor is not only looking at whether the government permits entry. They are looking at the size of the addressable market, how television advertising will evolve and whether there will be enough revenue to recover a very large upfront investment," the executive said.

Governance could become another barrier

The policy also places considerable emphasis on independence.

The original framework required at least half of the board of a ratings agency to comprise independent directors. The MIB subsequently amended this requirement to at least 33%, while retaining restrictions intended to ensure that independent directors do not have direct or indirect associations with broadcasters, advertisers or advertising agencies.

The framework also addresses cross-holdings, conflicts of interest, security clearances and operational independence.

This could complicate entry for companies that already have commercial interests elsewhere in the media ecosystem.

"Ratings are not neutral data in a commercial sense. A change in ratings can affect advertising rates, channel revenues and programming decisions. The regulator therefore wants structural independence, but that also makes the ownership and governance model more complicated for prospective entrants," said another industry executive.

Registration may only be the beginning

Even after obtaining registration, ratings agencies would have to maintain compliance around methodology, panel selection, rotation, geographical coverage, audits and data governance.

For a new entrant, that creates continuing costs rather than a one-time regulatory hurdle.

The company would need to be able to explain how every major component of its ratings methodology works and defend its numbers if broadcasters, advertisers or agencies challenge them.

For BARC, many of these systems already exist.

For a new entrant, they would have to be built while the company is simultaneously attempting to persuade the market to adopt its currency.

"The biggest moat BARC has is not necessarily the technology. It is the ecosystem. Its data is already embedded in media planning, advertising negotiations and broadcaster decision-making. A competitor has to build the system and the market around it at the same time," said a senior agency executive.

Can India sustain multiple television currencies?

The policy's stated objective is to encourage competition and reduce dependence on a single ratings provider.

But the industry could eventually face another challenge: whether advertisers and agencies are willing to trade on multiple currencies.

If competing agencies produce different audience numbers, broadcasters may favour one methodology while advertisers favour another. The market could potentially become fragmented between BARC, competing ratings agencies, CTV datasets, DTH and cable data and platform-reported OTT audiences.

The government's challenge, therefore, will be to ensure that greater competition produces greater credibility rather than multiple competing versions of television reality.

The bigger question is whether anyone will invest

For now, industry executives say restoring a functioning common currency remains the immediate priority.

Their preferred sequencing is to bring the existing ratings system back within the new regulatory framework, establish a predictable environment for new agencies, allow technology specialists to participate through partnerships and then develop genuine competition among companies capable of meeting the full requirements of a national ratings operation.

"The objective of competition is difficult to disagree with. But competition requires investment, investment requires confidence, and confidence ultimately comes from regulatory predictability," said a senior television executive.

That could be the defining test for the Television Rating Policy 2026.

The MIB has lowered the formal financial barrier, opened the possibility of multiple ratings agencies and introduced a technology-neutral framework.

But the BARC episode has simultaneously demonstrated the power of the regulatory architecture surrounding the ratings business.

For potential entrants such as TAM and Chrome DM, the question is therefore no longer simply whether they can enter India's full-fledged television ratings market.

It is whether they believe the market is stable enough, large enough and predictable enough to justify the investment required to build a competing currency.

India may have made television ratings easier to enter on paper. It has not yet made them easy to invest in.