Originally Posted by OLDGOLD (Post 35146927)

If that happens and ESPN win an extra package of games (or two), isn't there a danger that ESPN will pull out of being part of XL package and make VM viewers subscribe independently, like they do on the Sky platform?

Originally Posted by richard1960 (Post 35146938)

Why when Setanta had the deal with vm that covered more packages then now 2 i believe ,its a wholesale deal that would last for ex number of years regardless of games available,why would ESPN pull out.

Originally Posted by Digital Fanatic (Post 35147033)

Plus ESPN (like Setanta before them) make more from VM subs in the XL pack than if they went standalone.

It works for VM and ESPN. :)

Originally Posted by borrissey (Post 35147124)

ESPN don't seem to have many live PL games less than Setanta had last season. When's the current PL deal run out?

Originally Posted by borrissey (Post 35147137)

Would be better IMO if VM did what Sky do and have more channel bundle options like tv packs.

Originally Posted by mersey70 (Post 35147132)

The rest of this season and the following two.

Personally I think ESPN is very average and would prefer if it wasn't in XL but the way VM package their channels I need XL to get the other channels I want. For me personally it's just a waste of money but overall XL is quite good value.

I have no doubt this arrangement works for VM and ESPN and probably a lot of subscribers but personally I would be interested to know how much of my sub goes towards a premium channel I have no interest in. I know this could be said for many channels but I am sure ESPN get a far bigger share of my sub than say the music channels which I also have no interest in.

If I want a premium channel I would like to be able to ask for it myself like on Sky.

Originally Posted by pauldavies83 (Post 35147142)

I'm not convinced your XL pack would decrease by the same amount as it would cost to pay for the premium channel individually, so for the subscriber base as a majority it probably isn't worth it.

VM obviously don't see ESPN as a premium channel, wheras Sky do. Given the lack of top rate sport on the channel (minimal Premier League, no major golf, England cricket etc) I'd be inclined to agree with VM. I suppose its a matter of taste. I'd be quite happy to have some of what I consider tripe removed from XL and made premium and the sub reduced, so its each to their own I suppose.

Originally Posted by pj 1984 (Post 35142512)

This might seem a really stupid and obvious question but whats stopping Virgin starting a couple of sports channels and start challenging Sky for the Broadcasting rights of the football and other sports.

Originally Posted by Horizon (Post 35147158)

Money, as already mentioned.

ntl's intention was to get involved in sports I believe, hence the 50/50 tie up with ITN to launch Setanta Sports News. But ntl never took it further and of course never made a bid with Setanta (or own its own) for premiership rights due to lack of dosh. They even left the first 10 places on the sports part of the EPG free for such a possibility of having ntl/virgin branded sports channels.

Originally Posted by telegramsam (Post 35147662)

... I did read somewhere that when ESPN got on board sky were quite worried as they know ESPN have got money to compete. The fact that sky are pushing their 3d football games very hard tells me that they`re trying to stay ahead of ESPN before the new premier league contracts are up for renewal. It will certainly be interesting to see how it all pans out.