When Samir Shah takes to the stage at an event in Leeds next month, one topic will be sure to dominate the conversation: the BBC's survival.
In his first public speech since taking over as the corporation's chairman in March, Shah is expected to discuss how to safeguard public service broadcasting in the streaming age.
Behind closed doors, however, BBC executives are already exploring more radical ways to reverse a steady decline in audience numbers, including the possibility of opening up iPlayer to include programmes from other UK channels.
Supporters of the plan, which is thought to be at a nascent stage, say it would allow traditional broadcasters to form a new streaming superpower with the technology and scale to take on deep-pocketed US rivals such as Netflix.
Such a move would face an inevitable raft of industry and regulatory obstacles. But as pressure grows to haul British broadcasting into the digital age, bosses know that time is running out to save public service broadcasting.
Ever since Netflix was crowned victorious in the streaming wars, the UK's traditional broadcasters have grown increasingly aware of the need to play catch up.
This acceptance has already started to pay dividends, as each of the BBC, ITV and Channel 4 have posted faster rates of streaming growth than their larger US counterparts this year.
This has been achieved while Netflix, Disney and Amazon Prime have been forced to cut back spending on films and TV shows amid rising interest rates, while price rises have forced many viewers to rethink their subscriptions.
UK media executives also point to audience demand for authentic British programming, such as the hit ITV drama Mr Bates vs The Post Office, which they say would never be made by a cut-throat streaming service in the US.
After years of non-cooperation, British channels are starting to show signs of unity.
Freely, a free-to-air streaming service from the major public service broadcasters, launched earlier this year. It now has 70,000 hours of programming - more than any other streaming service in the UK - while this week it struck a deal to launch on Amazon's Fire TV service.
However, insiders acknowledge that this venture is essentially a successor to Freeview for the digital age. Instead, what broadcasters need is the scale to win over bigger audiences and challenge their larger rivals.
As a result, TV bosses are looking at more radical options. Both the BBC and Channel 4 vigorously denied a report in The Guardian over the summer that the broadcasters were eyeing a merger.
Alex Mahon, the Channel 4 chief executive, this week insisted that the broadcaster did not need a different structure to manage the digital shift, but added: "We do need to make sure that we're distributing in all the ways that young people want to view content."
Instead, one solution under consideration is to combine broadcasters' digital operations in a beefed-up iPlayer that would serve as a new British streaming behemoth.
'Logical path'
The concept is not a new one. Plans to open up iPlayer to third parties - dubbed Project Marquee - were blocked in 2009 by the BBC Trust, which branded the move "too complicated" and questioned whether it would deliver value for licence fee payers.
That came shortly after proposals for a joint streaming service, known as Project Kangaroo, were kiboshed by competition regulators.
More recently, Britbox, a joint venture between the BBC's commercial arm and ITV, was launched in an effort to sell British programming overseas.
But the service failed to gain traction and was effectively subsumed into ITVX earlier this year, while the BBC took full control of the international operations after buying out ITV's stake for £225m.
Still, the idea of some sort of tie-up has taken on a new urgency as the TV market reaches an inflection point, with streaming poised to overtake traditional viewing.
Phil Redmond, the veteran producer behind series such as Brookside, Hollyoaks and Grange Hill, says combining streaming services under iPlayer "makes perfect sense".
"The iPlayer is the best platform for all the PSBs [public service broadcasters]," he says. "The commercials have tried it but never seem to make any cut-through."
Redmond describes such a move as the "logical path" to a more radical combination. "The BBC is the primary and dominant public service provider, so it just indicates to me that the future should be some kind of merger," he says.
Tom Harrington, head of television at Enders Analysis, says there would be "obvious advantages" for consumers.
"If you add all the tech spend of the PSBs together, it's still insignificant compared with Netflix or Amazon, who set the perception of what a streaming service should be," he says.
"Divided up and doing their own thing it's going to be even worse, so combined they could pull together something half-decent that would work."
Discussions over a joined-up streaming service are at an early stage and BBC insiders are quick to point out that any "hand-holding" between broadcasters would complement existing streaming offerings.
Channel 4 this week announced a slate of new advertising technologies that bosses hope will boost revenues by as much as £10m. Streaming minutes rose by a quarter in the first eight months of the year - outstripping rivals.
But with digital revenues still accounting for just 27pc of overall income, the Left-leaning broadcaster still has some way to go before its streaming transformation is complete.
'Beige blob'
Meanwhile, for the BBC, a tie-up could help the broadcaster reach new audiences and reverse a worrying decline in viewership, particularly among young people.
The number of UK households paying the licence fee - branded an "anachronism" by Redmond - dropped by half a million last year.
After facing a repeated funding squeeze under successive Tory governments, Tim Davie, director-general of the BBC, will probably feel in calmer waters with the arrival of a Labour administration.
But he is still trying to plug a £500m black hole in the corporation's finances and will need to secure a long-term funding agreement once negotiations over the future of the licence fee kick off in January.
A BBC spokesman said: "While we wouldn't comment on speculation, as a general principle we are always open-minded to ideas that could strengthen the future of public service broadcasting and the UK creative economy."
A Channel 4 spokesman added: "It would be for the BBC to decide how to use its platforms. Channel 4 is focused on delivering distinctive and trusted British content for UK viewers - especially to young people - wherever they are."
Any move to expand iPlayer would undoubtedly come with complications. Smaller broadcasters would naturally fight any attempt to be subsumed into an all-powerful BBC service that Harrington warns could become a "beige blob".
"If you're Channel 5 or Channel 4, sure, you're part of this bigger-scale play, but you become a tile within someone else's player, which nobody wants," he says. "You're instantly marginalised."
There are more prosaic concerns, too. Any effort to incorporate adverts into iPlayer would draw fierce scrutiny from regulator Ofcom, while combining the different technology embedded within each existing streaming service is likely to prove complex.
However, TV bosses know that closer cooperation can be beneficial, with Davie setting out plans for more commercial partnerships earlier this year.
While each channel has its own distinctive brand, industry observers note that promoting shows to different audiences could be effective. One notable example is The Great British Bake Off, which started off on the BBC but only thrived following its move to Channel 4.
Ultimately, though, traditional broadcasters may not have the luxury of choice in joining forces. As pressure grows on TV bosses to find a sustainable future in the digital age, some think their hands will be forced.
"No bureaucracy ever deconstructs itself," says Redmond. "It needs an existential force to come and do that ... It's not their decision."
