[GuestUK]

In addition to my post above, I just wanted to add there's also the issue of Sky taking the chance to try to gain access to the cable network, giving them control over satellite, digital terrestrial and cable, makiing them both rather powerful and rather monopolistic if Virgin let them, or if it is granted by ofcom, which I think Sky is hoping on, or at least trying.

--------------------

Originally Posted by andygrif

However, I am not sure about your allegations of minimum fees, could should provide some additional evidence for these claims please?

Unfortunately, I cant find the original place where I read it, and I'm not sure if its true as it has not been confirmed directly by Sky, however, it is mentioned in numerous news reports by Virgin spokespeople, such as this one and others

Originally Posted by Article

A Virgin Media spokesman said last night: "This price per subscriber calculation is real smoke and mirrors. Basically, it's a flat-fee deal." She claimed the contract offer retained a minimum payment. On Virgin Media calculations, this is believed to push the annual price north of £40m.

Not the best phrasing, but the meaning is conveyed that basically the 3p per customer was nothing more than nice PR speak, the minimum fee was greater than that, and thus that would have been what they paid regardless of it being 3p, 2p or 1p per customer. Such a term, however, is also referred to by Sky here

Originally Posted by Article

Sky refutes Virgin Media's statement that its revised offer "specifically provides for a minimum guaranteed annual payment that is twice the current annual payment."


"Importantly, the minimum guarantees of future revenue which form part of Sky's offer take into account estimates of future subscriber growth provided by Virgin Media during negotiations."

Confirming that a minimum payment was there but denying it is double th current annual payment. Was it more than the 3p per customer Sky was touting so loudly?

But then again, they also entered into negotiations various times and gave different offers, and even went as far as to offer HD and VOD content for their channels, something which would have only strengthened Virgins position, doesn't sound like they were trying to be overly anti-competitive, especially offering VOD content which Virgin can do much better than Sky presently

Originally Posted by Article

"Moreover, Sky is offering Virgin Media substantially more value in the new deal than in the one set to expire, including the option for Virgin Media to carry high definition (HD) and video on demand (VOD) services for these channels.