[Toto]

Originally Posted by grabbi

VM was told to pay £260.6m (3p per customer) for the channels and that includes the VoD content and HD content also.

If Tiscalli paid £335.7m, you have to wonder what extra perks Tiscalli are getting...

Either that or Sky werent willing to budge.

I believe, personally, that there wont be any minimum payment clauses for these companies, as they only pose a minor threat to Sky's dominance. Plus, on the PR side of it, it looks good for Sky.

At the end of it all, just because one or two people in the Higher-Ups of VM think Skys Basics are crap, doesnt mean that everyone will think so, even if I do agree with them.

They havent utilised the opportunity to brand their own channels, therefore failed in that text, and the latest offer given to VM (must have been sometime ago now) was satisfactory especially with the HD content and so on.

I believe there is something amiss here. We know about the Minimum price thing, but I think there could be more that is keeping VM from signing this deal.

I wonder if the Carlysle Group would just stump up the cash. or if their lawyers would see why VM wouldnt stump up.

Where did you get that VM figure from?