Trying to second-guess Rupert Murdoch is a mug's game, but here's a theory: perhaps Murdoch actually does want to buy ITV.
In saying this, it has to be underlined that Sky has made it clear won't make such a bid and that under cross-media ownership laws the company can't buy more than 20%. (Although, less than a week ago James Murdoch was insisting that he wasn't worried about the NTL/ITV deal.)
The only way the cross-media ownership position could change would be for Murdoch to sell his newspaper business - which means the Sun, the News of the World, the Times, the Sunday Times and The London Paper.
Sounds unlikely? After all, this is the Fleet Street legend who has called the shots in the British newspaper industry for some 40 years, wielding fabled political influence with it.
Then again, Murdoch is nothing if not a ruthless, high-stakes gambler. The newspaper business is fading - and fast. Over the past year Murdoch has wised up to the web and outflanked his rivals by picking up MySpace for a fraction of its value. He has embraced free papers in London. He knows that paid-for newspapers could become a thing of the past.
Look at the red-top market - circulation is going only one way. The Sun and the News of the World increasingly look old-fashioned and hysterical. Yes, they have a long way to fall, but they are falling - and quite rapidly too.
As for the Times, it has never made money. Murdoch has always been prepared to junk it if he could buy the FT (which he might yet do once Pearson puts it on the block). Its circulation too, like its rivals, is locked into long-term decline, despite the spike in sales provided by the tabloid relaunch.
There are four objections, however, to the idea that Murdoch will perform the U-turn of his life. One, he is a newspaper man with ink in his veins, the son of a famed reporter and himself a hack first and foremost. Stories of his interest in Sun front pages are legion. But he is also a brilliant businessman and a pragmatist, and that may ultimately trump sentiment.
Second, Murdoch gets power from his papers. Newspaper barons have always prized propaganda over profit, and Murdoch has been the master, a copper-bottomed Lord Copper. However, in my view, the Sun is far less powerful than people think - many of its readers still voted Labour in the 80s - and its significance has been held in undue regard because of New Labour's timidity and Murdoch phobia among the liberal intelligentsia.
Thirdly, who would buy if Murdoch were selling - surely that would be a sign that the newspaper game would be up? But think back two years when a host of suitors queued up to buy the Telegraph: there is still a lot of appetite for "trophy assets", and no shortage of super-rich characters who might fancy a pop.
Finally, and most importantly, why buy ITV? It is a heavily challenged business, whose current free-to-air, advertiser-funded model is in the long term doomed. Paying 135p a share, as Sky did last week, looks expensive, but then Murdoch is able to care less about giving value to shareholders than most company chairmen.
Here we come to the crux of it: does Murdoch have a plan for ITV? He may have already seen off other bidders and given himself a free run at it if he does. It is just possible that he thinks Sky is capable of turning ITV into a plausible pay-TV proposition, introducing subscription and on-demand models. And ITV has assets that Sky lacks - an effective suite of channels and lots of valuable content outside its traditional area of premium sports rights.
Unlikely at this moment, perhaps. Sky's strike last week looks more like an opportunistic blow to NTL's hopes of merging with ITV than the first step to its own takeover. But you can never underestimate Murdoch's capacity to surprise - and take a risk.
