Cable Forum
Page 34 of 126 « First 2430313233 34 353637384484 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Virgin Media TV Service (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=11)
-   -   General : Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2 (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33701059)

zantarous 07-08-2015 20:06
Re: Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2
 
If a single a boardcaster has all the rights there would be no incentive to make those games/channels available to rivals, costs would probably still go up and they would use their monopoly to dictate and run roughshot on smaller players in the market. In the long run multiple broadcasters in sport is very much a good thing. It makes companies innovate in making their product the best it can be, there is incentive to make sure their channels are on rival platforms.

The cost of football is what is driving up the game people seem prepared to pay ludicrous amounts to watch it, there has to come a time where the broadcasters think hang on a minute we can bid crazy sums for this but will people pay that price? I really can't understand the vast sums that get forked out for football.

passingbat 08-08-2015 01:07
Re: Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by zantarous (Post 35792490)
.

The cost of football is what is driving up the game people seem prepared to pay ludicrous amounts to watch it, .
If it were only the football fans paying for the inflated prices, then that would be fine --- let them knock themselves out doing so. But everyone is paying for football through things like increased line rental.

The only true competition is to make all football available to all providers. Then the providers would have to differentiate themselves through things like price and added extras.

And why, in this day and age, aren't these various football leagues available as a direct online subscription? And the reason is, by keeping things the way that they currently are now, they can continue to fleece the whole of the British public. Daylight robbery springs to mind.

theone2k10 08-08-2015 14:29
Re: Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2
 
Regarding a rumour awhile ago about vm teaming up with Sony to offer ps4s in bundles it looks like SKY have beaten them too it now http://www.sky.com/shop/offers/plays...affiliate=true ps4 £199 when taking out SKY broadband.

harry_hitch 08-08-2015 16:35
Re: Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by zantarous (Post 35792490)
If a single a boardcaster has all the rights there would be no incentive to make those games/channels available to rivals, costs would probably still go up and they would use their monopoly to dictate and run roughshot on smaller players in the market. In the long run multiple broadcasters in sport is very much a good thing. It makes companies innovate in making their product the best it can be, there is incentive to make sure their channels are on rival platforms.

The cost of football is what is driving up the game people seem prepared to pay ludicrous amounts to watch it, there has to come a time where the broadcasters think hang on a minute we can bid crazy sums for this but will people pay that price? I really can't understand the vast sums that get forked out for football.
I fully agree. People seem to want to watch every single game of football, and are willing to pay through the nose for it. It seems rather mental to me. BT offers a cheaper altnerative to Sky. If people voted with their wallets over the next few seasons, Sky will make a massive loss and only then will things change. People seem to love to moan, but don't want to do anything to change.

Personally, I would like to Sky offer a football only package, a football plus all other sports packages and, finally a sports package that covers all sports without paying over the top for 100's of boring games and the odd enjoyable game of football. If I want/get the chance and can afford to see my team live, I will go to the Abbey.

I base that last paragraph purely on the understanding that Sky will continue to convince people to pay them a small fortune each month. Obviously I would prefer FTA sports and football clubs to sell their own games via their own websites. I would, equally, happily pay the ECB and RFU a yearly sub for the right to watch England on TV. The PL can, frankly, do one.

muppetman11 08-08-2015 16:39
Re: Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2
 
Just seen an advert on BT TV which says 'Fear the walking dead' 1st episode will be shown on BT Showcase.

OLD BOY 08-08-2015 16:59
Re: Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by zantarous (Post 35792490)
If a single a boardcaster has all the rights there would be no incentive to make those games/channels available to rivals, costs would probably still go up and they would use their monopoly to dictate and run roughshot on smaller players in the market. In the long run multiple broadcasters in sport is very much a good thing. It makes companies innovate in making their product the best it can be, there is incentive to make sure their channels are on rival platforms.

The cost of football is what is driving up the game people seem prepared to pay ludicrous amounts to watch it, there has to come a time where the broadcasters think hang on a minute we can bid crazy sums for this but will people pay that price? I really can't understand the vast sums that get forked out for football.
I think we need to start thinking outside the box. Most of us on these forums want to see change but are not really looking at the full picture. Too many are shrugging their shoulders and saying 'that's the way it is' and are not prepared to think through how things could be made to change.

Your first point, Zantarous, is a case in point. If a single broadcaster had all the rights, the incentive to make the programmes available to competitors is to provide them with rights to broadcast at a price that allows a reasonable profit. However, I think regulation is required to prevent the likes of Sky from overcharging.

As I have said before, you can still have elements of exclusivity. For example, Sky might choose to keep Sky Atlantic an exclusive channel but would be prevented from exclusivity of the content (so that other channels could show the programmes from that channel that it chose to buy).

Alternatively, Sky might want to negotiate exclusive rights (for example to HBO programmes) for broadcast on Sky Atlantic, but then it would be required to permit other platforms to offer Sky Atlantic at a reasonable price.

This still allows companies to differentiate their offerings from other providers but in a way that doesn't affect the customer adversely.

The current situation is manifestly unfair to the consumer and needs to change. While I understand that the current Government would prefer a laissez faire approach to business, I do think it needs to intervene in this kind of situation where it is clear that the private sector will not act in the interests of the punters.

---------- Post added at 15:59 ---------- Previous post was at 15:49 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stop It (Post 35792399)
But there aren't any monopolies to tackle.

Channel exclusivity is not a monopoly. All of the content on the channel must be either produced by the network who owns it, which is fair play, or bought from the content producers on the open market.

In fact, market differentiation is a sign of a good market, not the other way around. if everyone had all channels and content, there would be no need for competition and a monopoly would likely emerge, as we basically had with Sky in the football TV market until BT came along.

Also, there is no such thing as "required content". Pay TV is a luxury item, outside of the PSB there is no right, nor requirement for customers to have all content from a single source. If you want the content, you have the ability to buy it. The fact that it isn't from one box is frankly irrelevant.
Well, it seems that you are one of those people who are ecstatic about the present situation and don't want change. Of course, you may be perfectly happy to pay through the nose for content, but I, for one, am not.

Given the number of protests on this forum regarding price increases, I think there are many who would agree with me on this.

theone2k10 08-08-2015 17:19
Re: Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetman11 (Post 35792579)
Just seen an advert on BT TV which says 'Fear the walking dead' 1st episode will be shown on BT Showcase.
Saw that ad on btsport1 at half time on spurs match thought i was seeing things at first lol.

Harryn9000 08-08-2015 17:35
Re: Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2
 
The walking dead one on BT showcase

telegramsam 08-08-2015 17:49
Re: Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by theone2k10 (Post 35792588)
Saw that ad on btsport1 at half time on spurs match thought i was seeing things at first lol.
Only the first episode?

harry_hitch 08-08-2015 18:00
Re: Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35792583)
I think we need to start thinking outside the box. Most of us on these forums want to see change but are not really looking at the full picture. Too many are shrugging their shoulders and saying 'that's the way it is' and are not prepared to think through how things could be made to change.

Your first point, Zantarous, is a case in point. If a single broadcaster had all the rights, the incentive to make the programmes available to competitors is to provide them with rights to broadcast at a price that allows a reasonable profit. However, I think regulation is required to prevent the likes of Sky from overcharging.

As I have said before, you can still have elements of exclusivity. For example, Sky might choose to keep Sky Atlantic an exclusive channel but would be prevented from exclusivity of the content (so that other channels could show the programmes from that channel that it chose to buy).

Alternatively, Sky might want to negotiate exclusive rights (for example to HBO programmes) for broadcast on Sky Atlantic, but then it would be required to permit other platforms to offer Sky Atlantic at a reasonable price.

This still allows companies to differentiate their offerings from other providers but in a way that doesn't affect the customer adversely.

The current situation is manifestly unfair to the consumer and needs to change. While I understand that the current Government would prefer a laissez faire approach to business, I do think it needs to intervene in this kind of situation where it is clear that the private sector will not act in the interests of the punters.

---------- Post added at 15:59 ---------- Previous post was at 15:49 ----------


Well, it seems that you are one of those people who are ecstatic about the present situation and don't want change. Of course, you may be perfectly happy to pay through the nose for content, but I, for one, am not.

Given the number of protests on this forum regarding price increases, I think there are many who would agree with me on this.
Why should my taxes be wasted by the government, to interfere in a situation that does not really need changing i.e. Sky Atlantic? If they interfere there, where does it stop? Do they then stop Netflix, Amazon etc having no exclusives? What would they do to survive with out ads and old repeats?

As a punter, I am pretty happy with the set up. I get the choice to have freeview or pay tv from a number of providers. If I want SA, it's available from two of those options. I have the choice of paying for OTT service's Netflix, Amazon etc - all of which are available on my smart TV. I have a subscription to Mubi and am seriously considering a sub for Curzon. The only OTT service, I don't think I can get via my tv is NOW TV (which I don't need as Sky offered a great deal.) If I wanted NOW TV as a VM customer, all I had to do was buy a box and plug that into my third HDMI socket.
If I want BT Sport and AMC, all I need to do is cancel my VM BB and get the free TV service from BT with their BB and phone.

The greatest irony of your comments is the fact that you are desperate for streaming services to evolve over the next few years. If they ever come in the way you hope, there will be numerous TV networks/providers all charging an arm and a leg to watch the latest first run shows live (exclusive on their service) and keep all the best on-demand content as their own exclusives. The average TV shows will still be sold to Netflix etc for the extra revenue.

If HBO GO ever launches over here, can you seriously see HBO letting other streaming services (or channels) have their content? No. they will want as many customers as they can get. Sky will lose their rights too. Ultimately, if you want HBO content - it's first run rights are pretty much exclusive to whoever they sell it to. The government will never change that, HBO (and pretty much anyone else) just won't deal with UK TV providerss if the government interfere and say they can't have exclusive rights for the maximum amount of money they can get.

OLD BOY 08-08-2015 18:13
Re: Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by harry_hitch (Post 35792596)
Why should my taxes be wasted by the government, to interfere in a situation that does not really need changing i.e. Sky Atlantic? If they interfere there, where does it stop? Do they then stop Netflix, Amazon etc having no exclusives? What would they do to survive with out ads and old repeats?

As a punter, I am pretty happy with the set up. I get the choice to have freeview or pay tv from a number of providers. If I want SA, it's available from two of those options. I have the choice of paying for OTT service's Netflix, Amazon etc - all of which are available on my smart TV. I have a subscription to Mubi and am seriously considering a sub for Curzon. The only OTT service, I don't think I can get via my tv is NOW TV (which I don't need as Sky offered a great deal.) If I wanted NOW TV as a VM customer, all I had to do was buy a box and plug that into my third HDMI socket.
If I want BT Sport and AMC, all I need to do is cancel my VM BB and get the free TV service from BT with their BB and phone.

The greatest irony of your comments is the fact that you are desperate for streaming services to evolve over the next few years. If they ever come in the way you hope, there will be numerous TV networks/providers all charging an arm and a leg to watch the latest first run shows live (exclusive on their service) and keep all the best on-demand content as their own exclusives. The average TV shows will still be sold to Netflix etc for the extra revenue.

If HBO GO ever launches over here, can you seriously see HBO letting other streaming services (or channels) have their content? No. they will want as many customers as they can get. Sky will lose their rights too. Ultimately, if you want HBO content - it's first run rights are pretty much exclusive to whoever they sell it to. The government will never change that, HBO (and pretty much anyone else) just won't deal with UK TV providerss if the government interfere and say they can't have exclusive rights for the maximum amount of money they can get.
In my opinion, our taxes are already being wasted! If the Government were to tackle this problem, it would not cost you a penny more in taxes.

Where I agree with you is that the Government will not intervene. However, the EU might, they have already taken on Microsoft and Google.

As for HBO not dealing with UK TV providers if they were forced to play fairly, do you really think any commercial organisation would make such a decision if there is still money to be made, Harry?

Once again, we are looking at the existing arrangements and legal framework and assuming it will never change.

harry_hitch 08-08-2015 19:01
Re: Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35792598)
In my opinion, our taxes are already being wasted! If the Government were to tackle this problem, it would not cost you a penny more in taxes.

Where I agree with you is that the Government will not intervene. However, the EU might, they have already taken on Microsoft and Google.

As for HBO not dealing with UK TV providers if they were forced to play fairly, do you really think any commercial organisation would make such a decision if there is still money to be made, Harry?

Once again, we are looking at the existing arrangements and legal framework and assuming it will never change.
Are you being serious? The EU interfering because of exclusive content? Wow. Once again, I will ask what will happen to Netflix etc if exclusive content is forced to stop?

LOL, did I say taxes will go up?!? I don't recall saying taxes would go up. No, of course the government would not put taxes up, but it would mean the money raised from current taxes being put to irrelevant use, when it could used better. They have not interfered so far, because they do not need to. It happens everywhere in life, why should TV content be any different?

There you go changing your argument again - If you think Europe will need to intervene, why bring up the government in the first place?

I don't recall saying nothing will change in the future either. Don't put words in my mouth please. I am simply saying you have all the options available to you now. The government or EU do not need to interfere either. What a waste of money it would be. As previously stated by someone else, if all things are equal, the company with the deepest pockets will undercut all it's competitors until they are the only company left, then it becomes more of a massive issue.

HBO can do what they want with their content. Why should they be forced to share the stuff they buy and/or make. Would you like to be forced to share something you have made/bought, if it meant you could not get the money you want for it? What happens if HBO make a loss selling the content to other TV stations, and can not have their own app/channel? Why would they then launch over here?
I imagine they need to sell it on their own terms to survive, they do not have to launch it over here on all providers, especially if they don't want to be forced to play fairly.

I am dropping out of this already, seeings as you have put words in my mouth, ignored relevant questions and changed your argument - all in the space of one reply. Shame really, but I should know better from you by now.

theone2k10 08-08-2015 19:29
Re: Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by telegramsam (Post 35792594)
Only the first episode?
Think so yeah, when i enquired about BT TV they did mention fear the walking dead will be exclusive to AMC Global in the uk.

OLD BOY 09-08-2015 14:34
Re: Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by harry_hitch (Post 35792610)
Are you being serious? The EU interfering because of exclusive content? Wow. Once again, I will ask what will happen to Netflix etc if exclusive content is forced to stop?

LOL, did I say taxes will go up?!? I don't recall saying taxes would go up. No, of course the government would not put taxes up, but it would mean the money raised from current taxes being put to irrelevant use, when it could used better. They have not interfered so far, because they do not need to. It happens everywhere in life, why should TV content be any different?

There you go changing your argument again - If you think Europe will need to intervene, why bring up the government in the first place?

I don't recall saying nothing will change in the future either. Don't put words in my mouth please. I am simply saying you have all the options available to you now. The government or EU do not need to interfere either. What a waste of money it would be. As previously stated by someone else, if all things are equal, the company with the deepest pockets will undercut all it's competitors until they are the only company left, then it becomes more of a massive issue.

HBO can do what they want with their content. Why should they be forced to share the stuff they buy and/or make. Would you like to be forced to share something you have made/bought, if it meant you could not get the money you want for it? What happens if HBO make a loss selling the content to other TV stations, and can not have their own app/channel? Why would they then launch over here?
I imagine they need to sell it on their own terms to survive, they do not have to launch it over here on all providers, especially if they don't want to be forced to play fairly.

I am dropping out of this already, seeings as you have put words in my mouth, ignored relevant questions and changed your argument - all in the space of one reply. Shame really, but I should know better from you by now.
Well, I'm sorry you feel that way, Harry, but I have legitimate views on this subject, as you have. Your decision to walk away from this argument will be a loss to all those reading these exchanges who stand on either side of the opinions that you and I express.

Just to clear up one or two things from your post, you certainly didn't say that taxes would go up. However, you did refer to the waste of money my proposed actions would bring about and I merely said that such actions would not increase taxation.

I have not changed my argument, Harry. I have consistently said that the Government should act on this. To add that if the Government decides to take no action, the EU should step in does not amount to a change of argument, surely! Come on, this is pedantic in the extreme, I would respectfully suggest.

As a consumer yourself, Harry, I am a little surprised that you appear to support the status quo so strongly (I hope I haven't put words in your mouth here - I am trying to understand your reasons for arguing with me). Not everyone has such deep pockets into which we can delve every time more exclusive material is released which requires a new subscription. Once again, the less well off are being prevented from watching the content they desire through the exorbitant costs involved. This will only get worse with time, and we can expect more outlay, no doubt, in being able to access AMC.

Yes, some of your arguments on the practicality of controlling exclusivity deserve to be looked at very carefully, but I don't share your fatalistic approach to this subject.

Anyway, I shall miss you as my sparring partner on this topic! :hugs:

1andrew1 09-08-2015 22:27
Re: Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35792598)
In my opinion, our taxes are already being wasted! If the Government were to tackle this problem, it would not cost you a penny more in taxes.

Where I agree with you is that the Government will not intervene. However, the EU might, they have already taken on Microsoft and Google.

As for HBO not dealing with UK TV providers if they were forced to play fairly, do you really think any commercial organisation would make such a decision if there is still money to be made, Harry?

Once again, we are looking at the existing arrangements and legal framework and assuming it will never change.
What precisely are you proposing that the Government does? We can all say the existing situation is imperfect but how would the Government remedy it?

---------- Post added at 21:27 ---------- Previous post was at 21:26 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by telegramsam (Post 35792594)
Only the first episode?
Makes total sense; if you want to see the rest - subscribe.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:25.
Page 34 of 126 « First 2430313233 34 353637384484 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum