Quote:
|
Originally Posted by scastle
I don't know how much of the NTL network is capable of Multi screens. I suspect most of it is now..
However, I do agree with themelon: Sky should be required to seperate their channels and distribution system. They should not give preferential treatment to their own subscribers (which they would not be able to do if their distribution was a seperate company).
Maybe I am being a bit simplistic here, but I do think that if I pay money for a channel, I should get the exact same service across all distribution systems. Wether I am watching it on Cable or Satellite should be irrelevant. Subscribers to one system certainly shouldn't get this much less for the same price.
|
I agree with your thinking but do we know beyond doubt if the NTL network is capable of supplying the same multi screen service as Sky. Do we know what NTL have to pay Sky for the channels and is this payment the same whether multi screen facilities are given or not. Are Sky refusing to give NTL the multi screen capability or is it NTL that is refusing to take it.
It could be that NTL only want to pay Sky for the main Sports channels without their multi screen capabilities but want to charge customers the same price as Sky charge theirs with multi screen.
Without the full facts we can only guess or assume what is going on. It may be Sky or it may be NTL that is causing the differences in what we get on the different platforms.