Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Hi, with the talk of channels going around the forums today i have been thinking about how VM could update there TV service and this is what I've come up with.

Remove the M+ Package altogether

Combine the channels from the old M+ package into the L package for £13.25 a month this would give over 135 channels including at least 6 HD channels

XL package keep the 165+ channels and introduce more of the Sky basic HD channels plus extra one's like ITV2 hd, ITV3 hd and ITV4 hd lower the price to £17.50 a month. This would give a minimum of 21 HD channels if you include the ITV HD channels

Introduce a new XXL Package this would include all of the above plus all the Sky Premium channels (Sky Sports + Sky Movies) and the HD versions for £26.50 a month this would give over 180 channels or over 190 if you include the Sports and Movies in HD. This would give a mimimum of 35 HD channels

That's just my opinion feel free to comment.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

I'd like to see the existing tiers stay but add an XXL HD pack with additional HD channels.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

sky charges an Ongoing Monthly cost of £47 for your XXL pack. how do you expect virgin to do it for £26.50

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Were does £47.00 come from and we're 26.50 come from ?

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Indeed, Sky's website see to indicate £62.25 per month for an equivalent package, unless I have misunderstood.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Sorry I've confused people here by using XXL I meant XL tv 23.50 plus a HD pack similar to sky maybe say 7.50 to enable VM to pick up more HD channels.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Well, the £26.50 is the price suggested in the OP. Not exactly sure about the £47 but Sky Sports & Movies pack is £29.50 and Sky Premium HD is £7, making £36.50 for just the sports and movie channels in SD and HD, which is £10 more than Gavin-D is suggesting as the price for his XXL pack.

So essentially Gavin-D's XXL pack would include 180+ channels, plus £36.50 worth of Sky channels for £26.50? Something doesn't quite add up there. ;)

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

http://shop.virginmedia.com/digital-...ky-sports.html


Sky Sports & Movies

With TV size: M+, L or XL:
£29.50 a month

With TV size: M:
£39.00 a month



Sky Premium HD

£7.00 a month
for each set top box you want to use for Sky HD channels


Not sure wher £47 comes from :confused:

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

True LOL :D

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Plus extra for ESPN or is that included as well ;)

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Would be nice, but no chance.

Sky Sports channels + HD costs almost £30 now, more than the total cost of your XXL TV package.

And Virgin have to pass most of that onto Sky.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

That's true, so add an extra £6 for that, making it 180+ channels plus £42.50 worth of premium channels for £26.50.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Where do I sign up?:D

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

£47 FROM HERE
Sky TV
£37
Monthly
Entertainment Packs
Variety Pack
Premium Packs
Movies 1
Movies 2
Sports 1
Sports 2
Upfront payment
10GBP off 1st months Sky TV

Initial Monthly cost £37
Ongoing Monthly cost £47
Upfront payment towards your first bill £10
This amount will be deducted from your first Sky bill.
http://www.sky.com/shop/boxes/sky-plus-box/

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Can't see that on the page linked to

http://www.sky.com/quickbuy/build;js...B60F4B796D9E62 sign up as new customer with HD

Initial Monthly cost £52.25
Ongoing Monthly cost £62.25
Upfront payment towards your first bill £10

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]

:D

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

I don't think that is a fair comparison with the contents of the XL pack as it only includes the variety pack. I think a much closer comparison is the £62.25 per month comparison with 6 packs.

---------- Post added at 22:27 ---------- Previous post was at 22:26 ----------

Aim high!

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

I would likt chose my package
HD package

Sky 1HD
all sky movies HD
ESPN HD
Sky sports 1 2 3 4 HD
Sky living hd
sky news HD
sky sports news HD
ccomedy centrel HD
nat geo HD
History HD
Discoery HD
syfy HD
TV choice on demand
MTVN HD and more HD CHANNELS
with v+ boxes
£35 a month

all sd channels with a v boxes
£20 a month

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Per ardua ad astra.....;)

---------- Post added at 23:17 ---------- Previous post was at 23:16 ----------

Do you think VM would pay you that much per month? ;)

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

How about leave everything how it is, including the prices, and just wait for VM to add some new regular and HD channels?

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Oh dear, you failed at this point.

Leave M+ alone. I dont want a more expensive L thanks, M+ is just fine. :cool:

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

I'd like Virginmedia to drop this silly M L XL XXL naming scheme for packages, and have whoever came up with the idea publicly on display for everyone to point and laugh at.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

I'd love to see a single channel selection package....
Just choose the individual channels you want to watch for
say 25p or 50p each/month.
Personally, I don't want Sports, shopping, cartoons, arts, God or +1 channels. I never watch them but I pay for them (TV XL). However, if I reduce my package I lose many of the channels that I do watch.
If such a system was introduced we'd see the demise of channels that are unpopular or a minority view. Wouldn't that be democracy in action rather than the current system of a multitude of superfluous garbage?

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

I don't see how that would be a good thing :(

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Would it be better to just have a separate HD pack, I would prefer this is if it finally meant VM could provide a wider choice of HD but that's just me but I understand you get what you pay for.

How exactly are VM going to meet their target of 80 HD channels in less than 3 years with the status quo, in my opinion they cant.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

I think everyone would prefer that, but it would not work. VM would not get enough money through to pay for the channels

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

VM is making money out of the carriage fees it charges these unpopular minority channels. It's not in their commercial interests to expose them to the consumer marketplace in that way.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

I never got why with virgin media if your on the large package for example, you get watch but, not watch+1!!!

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

It's called "added value" :)

---------- Post added at 10:20 ---------- Previous post was at 10:19 ----------

:td:


That idea would kill choice in the end. The likes of Sky Arts, Current TV and EuroNews would be killed off as they wouldn't survive.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Another fan of picking your own channels individually, Channels dont survive because they are rubbish DF, there is only so much content out there to watch, better to have quality on limited amount of channels than spread about and mixed with garbage channels.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Hi, having looked at other members comments i realise i have under-priced the XXL pack i posted on review i feel a price around the £50 mark would be better this would include the 10Mb broadband package as sky include broadband for free in there top package, with the phone line charge extra so it would be around £63 per month.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

What's rubbish to you. may not be to others. You'd kill a lot of niche channels, this is why no platform allows you to do it.

And before you say it, yes I know Sky do variety, kids etc, but they are all still packs with channels you may not watch yourself.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

I would keep it the same as now but if extra charge need at some point add an XL+ package that could include say Sky Atlantic etc with Virgin paying sky on a by subscriber basis.


That way we get the choice stay as is or add content that requires extra payment only if we really want it.

---------- Post added at 12:02 ---------- Previous post was at 11:59 ----------



Plus sky's pricing model means that they most likely make a profit on all channels from the sub for just one pack, that's why it's so cheap to add to it as means a bit more profit.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

My main thing now DF is getting the HD counterparts to our SD range , i watched Rookie Blue the other day on.Universal and the PQ was awful , I know that's not VM fault but HD rocks on screens of 40 inch plus.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

yeah, I mostly watch HD now myself. More HD will be added.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Strange - I watched it on my Tosh 40" thru the V+ box, and it looked fine to me (not HD, but quite good quality).:confused:

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Think I'm just used to watching HD , I have a Samsung 6 series which isn't to shabby with SD and superb with HD.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Sky's pricing model means they make a profit on all channels regardless of it anyone even takes the pack they're in.
Every single channel on their epg has to pay them a platform contribution fee.
I'd be interested to see how much it costs the BBC to be on VM, as we know it costs them nearly £4.5m JUST for BBC one to be on Sky. Tempted to put in a freedom of information request to the BBC to find out.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

You are correct regarding Sky's platform charges, the procedure and charges are publicly available to view including EPG slot and encryption charges. The BBC rely on Sky to carry out their regional provisions even though it is not encrypted and they also have to pay licensing costs for red button etc although this may well be to Kudelski rather than Sky. They do not pay transmission costs as such to Sky as they rent capacity direct from the satellite operators. It is debatable if this is right as Murdoch made a hoo hah about the carriage of Fox in the US and got a carriage fee.

What is Virgin Media's procedure for inclusion on their EPG, carriage, encryption and interactve charges?. Genuine question as I have looked and looked but cannot find any information. I have read (cannot vouch for it's accuracy) the BBC do not pay anything (at least for the must carry channels) but I am more interested about other channels really to get a better understanding of the set up.

Freesat's EPG and other charges are also publicly available too if anyone is interested, and is owned of course by the BBC and ITV plc.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Plain and simple answer to the question:

" Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced "

NO

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Confirmed this, the BBC don't pay anything to VM for the carriage of any of their linear channels.

No wonder Sky can afford to offer so many more channels when the BBC alone send £8m their way and VM gets nothing.

I'd really love to see sky try to justify that charge as well.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Weres your proof of that I'm not saying your wrong , but would be interested to know.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

I guess it's merely a business decision. To be honest even as a licence fee payer I don't really see why the BBC with their £3.5bn plus guaranteed income shouldn't pay the same as ITV for provisioning regional services, EPG slots and the likes given that's the system in place right now. However on the other side of the coin I can also understand the argument (like Murdoch uses in the USA) that platforms should pay carriage costs for the network channels. However unlike in the US the networks benefit from due prominence rules in the EPG so you cannot have it both ways. It is interesting though that as far as I know the BBC have not complained about the fees they pay Sky.

Did you find out how much VM charge other broadcasters for the services I referred to in my original post, I have looked everywhere but cannot find them.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Interesting read

The PDF on the forum is from 2006 though.

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/s...d.php?t=502592

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

The platform charges are publicly viewable on the Sky corporate site, I beleive these are the current rates.

I cannot find VM's though.

http://corporate.sky.com/documents/p...hed_Price_list

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Sky's are published.
FOI request to the BBC showed they don't pay VM anything.

Sadly there's not really a way to do that. It's easy to find out what the BBC pay who because the FOI act covers pretty much everything they do. For other companies it's going to be neigh on impossible due to it being classed as business sensitive information.

It does make me think though that maybe VM should operate more like Sky. Charge flat rates for channels to be on the EPG and appropriate platform contribution costs, and as long as they're competitive with Sky's then that should mean there's no reason why a channel shouldn't launch on VM?

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

And it's also easy to find out what the BBC and every single channel on the Sky platform pay because British Sky Broadcasting publish it, publicly.

So with respect (BBC, aside) how do you know VM don't operate the same as Sky? They might not, I don't know.

I'll ask again in case you misunderstood me. Do VM publicly display their platform charges? I have looked high and low and cannot find them. I merely googled 'BSKY platform charges' and found them immediately, it was the very first result!

I'd love to read them. It might give us a better understanding about why broadcasters feel the need to swap channels and other channel related issues. All I can find is very, very general info on the procedure of channel allocation.

I doubt we will find out though.

http://www.virginmedia.com/about/wor...#05-allocation

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

No, they don't.

Sky only publish them because their EPG is "open". Anyone can get an EPG slot, and they have to offer them on fair and reasonable pricing. As such it's all standardised pricing and completely transparent.

VM on the other hand, is an entirely closed system, and their carriage agreements (like Sky's where they pay the channels money to carry them or subsidise the platform costs) are confidential.

Sky's platform contributions are only half the story really. Sure all the channels "pay" these fees, but many of them will get more in return from Sky for them carrying them. So it's really only half a story, and the fees are only able to be taken at face value for FTA channels.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

If you are saying Sky's charges are unfair then that's fine, I would have some sympathy with that in the sense they perhaps charge too much, not that they charge at all though. That's the system.

But really you have no idea whether VM actually charge even more than Sky do you, by your own admission no one does. It would explain why so many FTA channels don't bother with VM if they do though and broadcasters swap rather than add channels from their portfolio.

Who knows but without the information regarding VM's charges there's no comparison to be made for me so I cannot really criticise Sky.

I'd be doing so half blind.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

You don't think it's at all unfair that Sky get to rake in £8m from the BBC, that's from license payers, every single year, and VM carry the channels for free? (and it wasn't that long ago that that fee was £85m when the BBC was using their CAS as well) I'm not saying that as a VM customer, I'm saying that as a license fee payer. Why should part of my license fee go towards providing a free to air channel on Sky? There is literally no justification why a public service broadcaster should have to cough up that sort of money to be carried on Sky. None at all (and incidentally the BBC also think that it should be sky paying the psb's), it's essentially profiteering from the BBC's universal service obligations.

Plus, I never stated it was unfair in it's entirety, or criticised Sky for it. I was just saying it's a reason why it's easier for a channel to launch on Sky than VM. You just give them the amount of money you're meant to give them, and bam, you're on the sky platform. It's a one size fits all system for any channel to launch on the platform, with VM every single channel launch is a lengthy negotiation, and whilst we don't know the details of the carriage contracts we do know it's not a nice easy simple process like Sky's due to the sheer amount of channels that seem to kick up a fuss about it with email campaigns to get VM to carry them. If VM had a price list with a take it or leave it approach to channel launches we wouldn't have the situation where channels want to launch on VM but seemingly can't come to any sort of agreement.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Sorry but as things stand I cannot really see why the BBC in their ever so piviledged position should be treated any differently to say ITV. let's agree to disagree on that. They have not complained about it as far as I know.

Looking at it merely from a customer point of view the system of gaining access to the Sky and indeed Freesat platforms seems better to me. VM's way of allowing access to their network sounds awfully complicated, it certainly explains a few things regarding channel availability and the swapovers.

Anyway it was interesting to discuss it with you, it goes to show we all have different opinions which is always good.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

Actually ITV are very vocal in their complaints to ofcom about the charges they have to pay sky (they pay more than the BBC).

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

I was referring to the BBC as their charges is what we were discussing!

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

But in the link TheDon supplied earlier, the BBC are not trying to get Sky to pay them (the BBC) for supplying their channels to the platform. They were making the case for Sky to pay all the other public service broadcasters, that is, ITV, C4 and C5.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

I know but maybe I am not being clear, it's isn't unusual!

I mean as far as I am aware the BBC have not complained about the charges Sky levy on them to be on their platform.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

They complained when Sky did their encryption, that's why they moved on to another satellite to avoid those charges.

I'm also not aware of a complaint from the BBC about Sky's current charges.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

They've backhandedly complained by making the case for ALL the PBS in the UK. They can't really come out and say "we don't like paying sky this money" because of their universal service obligations, but by coming out and saying that Sky should pay retrans fees to the PBS operators (and then qualifying it with "but we don't mind because you know, universal service obligations") they ARE complaining about the charges Sky levy on them, because they're the exact same charges that the other PBS have to pay.

Re: Would you like to see new TV Packs introduced
 

As I said earlier I can see an argument for Sky paying retrans fees, after all Fox get's them from operators in the US.

But my understanding is the likes of ITV and C4 are wary of the fact that they could lose their prominence priviledges in the EPG should that happen.