Quote:
Originally Posted by awesometeeth
hes nuts. hes brainwashed himself, VM CANT provide more HD channels, its not that there is no need! Hes just spinning a poor situation to make it out like its not a big deal at all.
They messed up hugely with mpeg2 boxes and now try and shrug it off. I suppose i wouldn't expect any less, but its such an arrogant standpoint. If people didnt want HD, sky HD wouldn't be up to the 400,000 mark and even thats with high box pricing and monthly sub...
|
That's less than 5% of their subscriber base, and there's no evidence that they have taken the HD service purely for HD, or that they would indeed consider the lack of such a thing a deal breaker. Some surely would, myself included, but we're in a minority.
There's no question that Virgin are providing an inferior, if not outright crappy service, but the reality is that Virgin do have HD content on their VOD service, and the issue here is about whether or not they
need more linear HD content. Seriously, how many customers do you think they're going to lose over this, if they didn't even lose a significant amount of customers over the basic Sky channels issue? Furthermore, with an increased popularity in time-shifted TV habits, you might even wonder if Virgin need more linear channels at all, or if VOD could be the future for them, as they currently have a considerable advantage over Sky in this area.