[harry_hitch]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

A number of points here, but I'll be brief:

1. Yes, the discussion is how linear TV may be withdrawn or reduced in the future to be replaced by streaming services. However, this does not prevent discussions arising from that.

True, but that was not part of discussion before hand. Atlantic is a linear channel you clearly want. Are you saying VM should just get the Now TV app instead of Atlantic? By your argument getting Atlantic will, in future, be pointless because it may be withdrawn (along with a host of other channels) sooner than people may think. Why not just tr and get us the app and force those who want it to pay for the content?!?

2. Yes, advert free, but realistically, ads will always be present. I'd be happy fast forwarding through them or having two or three at the beginning of a streaming session, but not interrupted as we have to put up with now on the commercial channels.

Well that is an oxymoron in the first line, how can you want something ad free, but admit adverts will always there. Also, how do you fast forward through some of the ads online? I am frequently forced to hear/see adverts I don't want to whilst browsing websites or before trailers. Sure you get to skip the odd ad, but they are quite rare. You don't have to put with them on commercial channels, plan your viewing and recordings well enough and you won't need to see adverts. I will only have to start watching the recording of Broadchurch at 9:30 to skip the adverts.

3. I'm not blaming VM for not being able to get Sky Atlantic. I blame Sky for that, as most of us on here do.

Fair enough, I obviously misread your statement.

4. I don't think most people want to access their programmes from a whole range of equipment. Far better to have it on just one box. Now TV doesn't work for me at present as I've mentioned before.

True, I don't, but that is not an option currently

5. As far as free TV is concerned, we currently have to pay for the TV licence. If people only paid for what they watched (rather than be compulsorily charged for channels they may not watch), it would not necessarily be more expensive. Have you ever thought about what it would cost you if you only paid for the programmes you watched? I'd save a fortune on Sky Movies for a start!

I never said TV was free, I said it was FTA. How are some people going to pay extra for shows if they simply can not afford to? Lets say a series of CSI lasts 12 episodes (I have no idea how many it is) and each episode costs roughly £1.90 ()like it is an amazon/itunes). People would have to find roughly £6-£7 a month for just one show. Times that by 3 shows and you are looking at £20 a month. Many people simply can not afford that, or simply don't care enough, to pay that sort of money.

With regards Sky Movies, you could probably save quite a bit of money by going down the love film by post route. You can have two discs out at a time and if you are careful enough you can always one disc in the house and another in post coming to you. I appreciate it is a bit more inconvenient, but you get all the latest release long before Sky Movies and you get a much bigger selection of movies too.

---------- Post added at 17:19 ---------- Previous post was at 17:16 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Not sure what you mean, but I think the number of TV channels will reduce over time and eventually go altogether.

I think in the future you will just pay for what you watch, with a choice of subscription and/or pay per view. Commercial broadcasters are pretty unanimous in pleading that the TV licence system is out of date.

When you compare the instant access to the programmes you want to see with the likes of Netflix and Amazon Prime, with the tiresome wait for the programme you want to see on broadcast TV and those interminable advertisements, I think that most people, in time, will come to accept the inevitable.

I acknowledge I could well be wrong on the 10 years time span, but come it will, I'm convinced of that. Of course something even more startling may develop in the meantime which none of us have even contemplated!

Again, you are bringing up adverts, but you have just posted saying they will always be around.

I don't think many have disagreed things will change, It is just that they don't think it will happen the way you think it may happen.