Originally Posted by muppetman11 (Post 35239167)

The vast amounts of money they have made through massive initial outlays , don't forget when Sky started out they were losing money hand over fist. You speak like VM don't do anything wrong , can you tell me how I can view Film Four HD on my Sky box ? VM also never made Living HD available on Sky until Sky bought the channel.

Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35239183)

How has anything in my post got anything to do with VM?

sky is in the process of pinching a show from a freeview broadcaster. A show they didn't initially take a risk on and they are able to do it because they can weild their massive pot of money arround.

You should ask Sky why they haven't got film 4 HD. I don't know the reasons why Sky didn't get living HD from virgin; if VM were at fault, I'd critisize them.

but we know why Glee is going from C4 --- moneybags Sky who have zero principles in this area.

Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35239156)

Yes, we do. But an 'I'm alright Jack' attitude does nothing for freeview customers who previously had this (and other similar 'pinched') shows.

There's a principle here in my view; because of the vast amounts of money sky has, they can take just about any show they want, when smaller channels have taken the risk with the initial commisioning. Sky should be ashamed of themselves for such tactics IMHO.

---------- Post added at 11:56 ---------- Previous post was at 11:53 ----------



And well done to them and if any other channel tried to pinch a show sky took the risk on, i'd be just as critical of that channel. Not going to happen in reality, but the principle is there.

---------- Post added at 11:58 ---------- Previous post was at 11:56 ----------




Agains sky's masses of money. Surely, you are joking!? Nicking is the right word in my view.

Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35239183)

How has anything in my post got anything to do with VM?

sky is in the process of pinching a show from a freeview broadcaster. A show they didn't initially take a risk on and they are able to do it because they can weild their massive pot of money arround.

You should ask Sky why they haven't got film 4 HD. I don't know the reasons why Sky didn't get living HD from virgin; if VM were at fault, I'd critisize them.

but we know why Glee is going from C4 --- moneybags Sky who have zero principles in this area.

Originally Posted by muppetman11 (Post 35239205)

I take it you have no understanding of business , I'm not arsed whether its right or wrong its happened , as mentioned the studios are greedy as well. I mentioned VM because you constantly bang on about Sky and how there always in the wrong , I'll make it simple THEY ARE A BUSINESS .

Originally Posted by passingbat (Post 35239215)

I understand Buisinnes and I understand fairness. And if I see busines practices stampping all over fairness, I have the right to speak out about it (wheather it's Sky or the studios, and yes, the studios do deserve critisism)


You and me are fortunate in that we can afford pay TV; but we shouldn't forget those who are limited to freeview when moneybags Sky goes on the aquisitions prowl.

Originally Posted by alwaysabear (Post 35239223)

As much as you and I may not like what Sky is able to do, in the real world money talks.:(

Originally Posted by alwaysabear (Post 35239223)

As much as you and I may not like what Sky is able to do, in the real world money talks.:(

Originally Posted by pk1 (Post 35239228)

I thought this thread was about what channels were coming soon to Virgin not just programmes or have i got it wrong?

Not about how much money Sky throw at programmes when they realise they missed out on buying rights to a show, and they saw how popular it is, as with 24 and Lost.

Originally Posted by muppetman11 (Post 35239237)

Maybe its the whole acquisition of rights procedure what's wrong .

Originally Posted by muppetman11 (Post 35239237)

Maybe its the whole acquisition of rights procedure what's wrong .