Originally Posted by Doug P (Post 35561486)

Wish they'd spell out their vision as to which platforms they want to be on and how much then I can say "too expensive" and move on...

Originally Posted by Doug P (Post 35561486)

Wish they'd spell out their vision as to which platforms they want to be on and how much then I can say "too expensive" and move on...

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35561530)

BT has already made clear that it wants to be on all platforms. We will be getting some more details soon, I believe, but whether this will include price I'm not sure, given the uncertainties arising from the lack of agreement with Sky.

Originally Posted by tvtimes (Post 35561623)

Surely it is going to have to release pricing details really soon. Fingers crossed.:tu:

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35561626)

You would have thought as many people want to know pricing and package details now and not just before it goes on air.

Originally Posted by Mobes (Post 35562018)

Im confused. BT vision already has the right to Sky sports 1 & 2 ?! Am i being thick?

Originally Posted by Mobes (Post 35562018)

Im confused. BT vision already has the right to Sky sports 1 & 2 ?! Am i being thick?

Originally Posted by Jameseh (Post 35562064)

1&2 have to be offered though don't they?

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35562172)

Well if it goes down this road then then Sky can go and jump off a cliff as they will really commit the biggest own goal that has ever been seen.

Originally Posted by Chad (Post 35562178)

The thing is none of SKY's current customers would probably care one bit if the channels are withdrawn, by hook or by crook, from BT and Virgin. SKY wouldn't care too much either as it would give them the chance to add a significant numbers of new subscribers at record sign up rates.

I seriously think we are about to see a bit of history repeating. In February 2007 Virgin Media launched which some suggested would shake the British pay TV market and become serious competition to SKY. Within weeks all SKY basic channels were withdrawn from the Virgin platform. This is viewed by many as SKY trying to stick the boot into Virgin right at their birth.

Within the next few months it looks like Liberty Global will enter the UK pay TV market by taking over Virgin whilst BT are set to launch a brand new TV service including BT Sports. I can see SKY repeating their "put the boot in at birth" exercise to both BT and Liberty Global but this time with SKY Sports. Just like in 2007 with Virgin, the mudslinging between BT and SKY has started in the press already.

Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35562190)

All the above is possible.

One thing I noticed when the Liberty takeover was announced, was that the head of Liberty specifically said that they had no intention of going into the Premium content acquisition market.

I think that may have been a message to Sky, that Liberty are leaving Sky's prime money making business alone, but the unsaid, but implied reciprocal requirement from Sky was that they would not try to withhold premium content from VM or that could change. I could be wrong and may have read into that something that wasn't there.

Originally Posted by Chad (Post 35562164)

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/media/ne...s-pricing.html

"The ruling potentially means that Sky no longer has to provide Sky Sports 1 and 2 to platforms such as BT Vision and Top Up TV through an Ofcom-regulated price. The satellite broadcaster could also look to recoup its lost revenue from the price cut over the last two years."

"Sky could look to hike up its wholesale prices and make it no longer viable for BT to continue offering Sky Sports 1 and 2 to its customers."

"Sky can, however, refuse to supply if they are unhappy with the offer the platforms propose."

Both BT's and Virgins carriage deals with SKY for SKY Sports expire in the summer. SKY are reportedly hanging back from negotiating with Virgin until they see what deal is agreed between Virgin and BT for BT Sports. If SKY don't like what they see they will make it very difficult for BT and Virgin when negotiating a new carriadge deal for SKY Sports. Sounds very familiar to what has reportedly happened with SKY Atlantic so it looks like SKY will know exactly what they are doing.

There is a real possibility that SKY will be the only place to watch all SKY Sports and BT Sports channels. BT have already confirmed their channels will definitely be on the SKY platform in the summer, just not on a wholesale basis via SKY. So what is the risk for SKY by not having SKY Sports on Virgin and BT? Well at first a drop of viewing figures, a drop in revenue from advertisers and other TV platforms plus a hit in reputation. I suspect however SKY would quickly make up the shortfall. If SKY is the only place where you can get SKY Sports I'd imagine a significant jump in subscribers moving to SKY from other providers. Get these customers on TV, broadband and phone deals and within no time SKY are no longer making a loss.

Originally Posted by Chad (Post 35562061)

SKY and BT agreed the deal for SKY Sports 1 & 2 on the 28th June 2010. For what I can gather, it was a 3 year carriage deal.

Originally Posted by Chad (Post 35562178)

The thing is none of SKY's current customers would probably care one bit if the channels are withdrawn, by hook or by crook, from BT and Virgin. SKY wouldn't care too much either as it would give them the chance to add a significant numbers of new subscribers at record sign up rates.

I seriously think we are about to see a bit of history repeating. In February 2007 Virgin Media launched which some suggested would shake the British pay TV market and become serious competition to SKY. Within weeks all SKY basic channels were withdrawn from the Virgin platform. This is viewed by many as SKY trying to stick the boot into Virgin right at their birth.

Within the next few months it looks like Liberty Global will enter the UK pay TV market by taking over Virgin whilst BT are set to launch a brand new TV service including BT Sports. I can see SKY repeating their "put the boot in at birth" exercise to both BT and Liberty Global but this time with SKY Sports. Just like in 2007 with Virgin, the mudslinging between BT and SKY has started in the press already.

Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35562190)

All the above is possible.

One thing I noticed when the Liberty takeover was announced, was that the head of Liberty specifically said that they had no intention of going into the Premium content acquisition market.

I think that may have been a message to Sky, that Liberty are leaving Sky's prime money making business alone, but the unsaid, but implied reciprocal requirement from Sky was that they would not try to withhold premium content from VM or that could change. I could be wrong and may have read into that something that wasn't there.

Originally Posted by tvtimes (Post 35562214)

What makes you think that when only a handful of VM customers and BT customers take sky sports anyway?:confused:

Originally Posted by tvtimes (Post 35562214)

No, the whoesale forced price is coming to an end. Sky are still required to supply Sky sports. If they massively inflated the price Ofcom would just regulate it again.

Originally Posted by tvtimes (Post 35562214)

Where's the basis for these record rates you speak of? Not many bt or Virgin customers take sky sports. The people that are bothered are already with Sky and their tv uptake is stagnating.

Originally Posted by Chad (Post 35562254)

You're not offering up any subscription figures for BT or Virgin so it's difficult for me to understand how big a handful really is. I know at the end of the last quarter Virgin reported 831,000 customers subscribe to SKY Premium channels. This of course includes both SKY Sports and SKY Movies. I think a safe bet would be to say anywhere between 400,000 to 500,000 people subscribe to SKY Sports via Virgin, based on the figures published, which is around 12% of all Virgin customers. If BT has a similar take up percentage wise then Virgin and BT could have around 550,000 SKY Sports subscribers in total. If SKY becomes the only place to watch all SKY Sports and BT Sports channels, that's 550,000 potentially unhappy sports fans on rival platforms that SKY can target. Even if 20% only moved to SKY that would be significant.



This article suggests SKY could hike prices to to make it no longer viable for BT to carry the channels. Competition lawyer Daniel Geey makes some interesting points in the article also including: ""Sky can, however, refuse to supply if they are unhappy with the offer the platforms propose."

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/media/ne...s-pricing.html

Virgin only have £3m tv customers on average and only 20% of these take sky sports so if they move to Sky it wouldn't be the massive uptake never seen before that you're saying. A lot of customers can't or don't want Sky.
BT only have £770,000 customers on BT vision full stop the majority don't take Sky sports.

Sky can't just hike the prices up to price BT out of the market, if they are found to be acting against competition laws then they will just be regulated yet again, maybe more so than last time.

In Quarter 2 of 2010/2011 SKY had 10,150,000 TV customers. In Quarter 2 of 2012/2013 SKY had 10,742,000 customers. That's 592,000 customers over 9 Quarters of business meaning on average 65,777 additions each quarter. If SKY is the only place to watch all SKY Sports and BT Sports channels come the summer, with some customers on Virgins XL and VIP package already unhappy about the removal of ESPN, it's a very real possibility that SKy could welcome a volume of new customers that quarter at a rate never seen before.

Originally Posted by tvtimes (Post 35562292)

As I said only a small percentage of Virgin customers take sports, anyone who is really bothered about sky sports has Sky.

Originally Posted by tvtimes (Post 35562292)

As I said only a small percentage of Virgin customers take sports, anyone who is really bothered about sky sports has Sky.

Originally Posted by tvtimes (Post 35562292)

As I said only a small percentage of Virgin customers take sports, anyone who is really bothered about sky sports has Sky.

Originally Posted by johnasimmons (Post 35562293)

That is not correct - as I live in a block of flats and not allowed to install a dish I have cable and subscribe to all the sports channels

Originally Posted by coulsontom (Post 35562345)

Correct. This isn't true. We used to be with Sky but went to Virgin (with sports) because Sky wanted £250 for a new box.

Now thinking of going back to Sky though due to current situation and likely higher cost with virgin

Originally Posted by johnasimmons (Post 35562293)

That is not correct - as I live in a block of flats and not allowed to install a dish I have cable and subscribe to all the sports channels

Originally Posted by Chad (Post 35562313)

When Virgin launched in February 2007 they had 3.4 million TV customers. Now 6 years later Virgin have 3.8 million TV customers, a growth of 400,000 customers. If around 400,000 to 500,000 Virgin customers do have SKY Sports clearly they are in the minority. If Virgin drops ESPN out of the XL package, and doesn’t replace it with BT Sports, sports fans with XL or VIP will be either disappointed or unhappy. If Virgin then aren’t able to agree a new carriage deal for SKY Sports 3 & 4 and SKY Sports 1 & 2 in HD, it’s not unthinkable that sports fans will be livid. The potential for 400,000 to 500,000 angry customers leaving to go to another provider would have a massive impact on Virgins business. It could wipe-out 6 years worth of growth.

Originally Posted by Henkesghost (Post 35562347)

Same for me, thats why I'd left Sky. ESPN free kept Virgin lower than Sky without any Sky initial offers but as ESPN is going to cease broadcasting looks like Sky may now be better value with a better TV service. Will keep my phone and b/band with Virgin though.

Originally Posted by andy_m (Post 35562372)

Isn't it the Saturday lunch time kick offs they've got?

Originally Posted by andy_m (Post 35562413)

In my opinion the Saturday lunch time kick off is the best way to ruin a potential classic.

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35562416)

Seconded.

Originally Posted by colin25 (Post 35562427)

Third, and another reason why i am not bothered if I don't get BT games

Originally Posted by cityfan247 (Post 35562445)

whether i subscribe to the new BT sports pack (assuming it comes to VM) is going to come down to cost and whether i think it represents value to me

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35562471)

Chad you do seem to have this doomsday scenario obsession lately.:sniper::sniper:

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35562172)

Well if it goes down this road then then Sky can go and jump off a cliff as they will really commit the biggest own goal that has ever been seen.

Originally Posted by Chad (Post 35562462)

Terrible state of affairs.

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35562471)

Chad you do seem to have this doomsday scenario obsession lately.:sniper::sniper:

Originally Posted by cityfan247 (Post 35562445)

whether i subscribe to the new BT sports pack (assuming it comes to VM) is going to come down to cost and whether i think it represents value to me.

Premier League footy? it wont have as many games as Sky so if its a choice of one or the other for people Sky (whilst more expensive) may be better value to some.

Bundesliga/serie A/Ligue 1- i like my footy but i have asked myself how many of these games do i actually watch ? to be honest i dont watch that many- i probably watch more La Liga games (on Sky Sports of course)

US Sports- assuming there is some type of ESPN America equivalent. I have subscribed since NASN first started up. But ESPN Americas rights have been diluted since they lost the NHL and and NFL programming. NFL is on Sky and i am not that overly bothered about NBA.

I like College sports and baseball but i have subscribed to MLB.TV for a few years so that sorts my baseball fix and last year i could watch all Notre Dame football games(my favs) perfectly legally on the NBC website.

i ask myself could i live without ESPN America right now - yeh i can and in fact if it wasnt part of the ESPN pack in XL i probably would pay for it these days tbh.

i question how many punters will be a) able and b) willing to fork out the potential £40+ pm for both Sky Sports and BT Sports. Whilst they have tried to increase their portfolio BT Sports is pretty much the same as Setanta & ESPN before it - and look at whats happened to them. BT may be a bigger beast but if they think some premier league games and other stuff is going to make jump from Sky or VM to their platform or choose BT sports over Sky Sports or in addition to it i wonder if they have over estimated their likely revenue from the UK market just as it seems Setanta and ESPN did (you could even include the ill fated ITV Sport deal in English Football a decade or so ago). If BT Sports doesnt make money (or enough of it) how long before they also pull the plug?

Originally Posted by coulsontom (Post 35562454)

I understand they have 19 first picks. (City v Utd, Utd v City, Che v Ars, Liv v Utd etc...)

And then 19 last picks.

I just assumed that the first picks meant in the 4pm sunday slots.

Even if sat lunch, they still have first picks for half the season.

Originally Posted by Chad (Post 35562484)

I'm just saying it as I see it.

Originally Posted by johnasimmons (Post 35562293)

That is not correct - as I live in a block of flats and not allowed to install a dish I have cable and subscribe to all the sports channels

Originally Posted by coulsontom (Post 35562345)

Correct. This isn't true. We used to be with Sky but went to Virgin (with sports) because Sky wanted £250 for a new box.

Now thinking of going back to Sky though due to current situation and likely higher cost with virgin

Originally Posted by muppetman11 (Post 35562515)

Who needs to watch drama when they can read this thread :D

People seem to be getting a wee bit carried away :p:

My personal opinion for what its worth is that this fiasco will get resolved before the start of the new football season I believe both sides are just using their financial muscle to make a statement , BT need Sky Sports and the Sky Entertainment channels for people to see its Vision platform as real competition to Sky and VM likewise Sky would like to wholesale the BT Sports channel on its own platform to ensure that Sport on Sky doesn't work out more expensive than on the Vision and VM platform.

Originally Posted by tvtimes (Post 35562516)

Problem is both companies have HUUUUGE ego's. I think the only this is going to get resolved is by a regulation/resolution through ofcom mediation.

Originally Posted by muppetman11 (Post 35562515)

Who needs to watch drama when they can read this thread :D

People seem to be getting a wee bit carried away :p:

My personal opinion for what its worth is that this fiasco will get resolved before the start of the new football season I believe both sides are just using their financial muscle to make a statement , BT need Sky Sports and the Sky Entertainment channels for people to see its Vision platform as real competition to Sky and VM likewise Sky would like to wholesale the BT Sports channel on its own platform to ensure that Sport on Sky doesn't work out more expensive than on the Vision and VM platform.

Originally Posted by Top banana (Post 35562530)

Wouldn't surprise me if Sky and VM improved their relationship. Eg reduce price of Sports to VM with the caveat that they don't carry BT sports. That would be interesting.

Originally Posted by Top banana (Post 35562530)

Wouldn't surprise me if Sky and VM improved their relationship. Eg reduce price of Sports to VM with the caveat that they don't carry BT sports. That would be interesting.

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35562518)

Hmmm Ofcom the regulator who are as toothless as they come.

Originally Posted by batchain (Post 35562537)

Hardly an improved relationship. Virgin would never accept and I'm pretty sure UK competition law prohibits such agreements. In any case Sky tried this before with Telewest & Nynex, like before this too would fall foul of the OFT.

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35562497)

And this forum is all about different opinions and yours are welcomed just as much as anybody elses.:)

Originally Posted by muppetman11 (Post 35562515)

Who needs to watch drama when they can read this thread :D

People seem to be getting a wee bit carried away :p:

My personal opinion for what its worth is that this fiasco will get resolved before the start of the new football season I believe both sides are just using their financial muscle to make a statement , BT need Sky Sports and the Sky Entertainment channels for people to see its Vision platform as real competition to Sky and VM likewise Sky would like to wholesale the BT Sports channel on its own platform to ensure that Sport on Sky doesn't work out more expensive than on the Vision and VM platform.

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35562610)

Yes there are a few Drama Queens on here and they know who they are.:D;)

Originally Posted by johnasimmons (Post 35562787)

I am a dancing queen :hyper:

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35562796)

Indeed and some of the others strike me as tantrum Queens.;):D

Originally Posted by colin25 (Post 35562798)

Or Virgin queens :D

Originally Posted by bobcf (Post 35563125)

How will the 'first picks' system work. How is it decided who gets first pick in a particular Premier League week?

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35563491)

BT wants a broadband bounce from sport, but may have scored an own goal.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/medi...ghts-broadband

Originally Posted by BexTech (Post 35563496)

I thought the subscription for BT Sports on satellite was being handled by BT themselves, so would have the customer details when you call them up to subscribe.

Originally Posted by paultrademark (Post 35563602)

Debateable its profit when most clubs are still in massive debt due to overspending on wages

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35563491)

BT wants a broadband bounce from sport, but may have scored an own goal.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/medi...ghts-broadband

Originally Posted by Gavin-D (Post 35563720)

BT sport beer mats are now appearing in pubs across the UK

Originally Posted by Gavin-D (Post 35563720)

BT sport beer mats are now appearing in pubs across the UK

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2013/04/14.png

Originally Posted by tvtimes (Post 35563754)

That Logo really is dire.....

Originally Posted by paultrademark (Post 35563875)

Whats the PQ like Chad?

Originally Posted by paultrademark (Post 35564479)

I doubt it, but until BT and Sky sort out the mess they are in, I don't think VM will announce anything

Originally Posted by smallclone (Post 35564440)

If I get rid of ESPN as an add on now, what are the implications?

I am a M+ tv customer. They're not likely to say at the end of this season "all current ESPN subscribers have access to BT sport" or something are they?

Originally Posted by Doug P (Post 35564528)

As people keep mentioning not everyone can or wants to join Sky...

Originally Posted by coulsontom (Post 35564512)

Join Sky. Plain and simple.

Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35564536)

Tut Tut... didn't you know? It's a plain and simple solution to just join Sky. Those of us who don't get that, must just be stupid :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by coulsontom (Post 35564562)

A choice of pay more for less at Virgin or less for more at Sky?

Originally Posted by coulsontom (Post 35564562)

No.

But if you view things pragmatically, and logically, why wouldn't you?

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35564568)

Well it or depends what you think value is as many believe Virgin overall are much better value then Sky are but other people might think differently.

Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35564578)

Because there are far more aspects to consider when choosing a service provider than purely content and price. Therefore it is not a 'simple' decision.

I find posts that claim it is 'simple' irritating.

Originally Posted by coulsontom (Post 35564579)

When you say "overally value" though, what do you mean?

Here's our cold facts:

current package:

Virgin TV XL, Sky Sports & Movies, ESPN, Broadband 100mb, full Unlimited Phone, 1 x Tivo, additional V+hd.

Cost: £113.99

Sky package:

Sky World, Sports & Movies(full HD), Full Phone, Unlimited 20mb bb (no throttling), additional HD box.

Cost: £107

Virgin pro's: 3 tuners on TiVo, recording facility on multiroom box, faster bb, ESPN.

Sky pro's: Atlantic, full HD F1 & Sports & Movies on demand.

Sky's multiroom won't let you record but we never record on extra box anyway.
ESPN is going, and we never get the full BB speed.

The only benefit to Virgin therefore, is the 3 tuners.

---------- Post added at 16:15 ---------- Previous post was at 16:15 ----------



Such as what?

!

Originally Posted by coulsontom (Post 35564579)

Sky's multiroom won't let you record but we never record on extra box anyway