Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDon
It wouldn't be "for the sake of it", it'd be for the same reasons it does now, providing content, driving subscriber numbers, and raising revenue.
There's an argument that they'd have MORE incentive as a stand alone content provider, more potential revenue from both subscriptions and advertising. The potential audience for a non-sky exclusive channel is many times that of a sky exclusive one, this drives revenue, increases profits, and makes shareholders happy.
Businesses always have to look at how to strengthen their offerings, so new channel launches would always happen. There's no reason why a separate channel provider would allow their product line up to stand still.
|
I would have thought it would be just for the sake of it.
The truth behind Sky Atlantic HD is that the sale of Virgin channels to Sky has merely lead to a rearrangement of content to other channels. Sky just closed some channels, made a new one and then added HBO content into this one channel whereas they could just have signed an HBO deal and added the shows to existing channels.
It is just a marketing excercise where VM customers feel worse off and Sky customers feel better off. In a few months both will probably be about the same again.
But the point is that Sky customers do feel better off. Sky used their initiative to make this happen. And this happens specifically because Sky have an incentive to do so through the way they currently operate.