[Stephen]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

If VM give in to UKTV it will indeed show other channel operators that they are able to put pressure on VM to make things benefit themselves. I've already explained why I think that this is now the least worse option.

I've already explained why J think that the Sky issue and the response by the previous owners was totally different.

If you think that a dispute that had been going on for so long in deadlock and had resulted in an ultimatum by ITV to threaten to weaken the platform even more within days resulted in a satisfactory outcome for ITV within 24 hours was simply a coincidence you must be extremely gullible. Obviously, VM would want as much value from these retransmission fees as possible and negotiated these extras as part of the deal.

VM claim to know how many people watch various channels, yet I was arrogantly told that I never watched them, which didn't go down well with me! Also, this would not be accurate as people often leave their STB switched on for various reasons and, when the STB is switched off, it doesn't actually switch it off, it only kills the video & audio.

In the sense that 43% is a minority and that the cancellation lines are impossible to get through to, attention from Ofcom, legal bods challenging the legalities of their contract, negative attention across the media, many disgruntled customers, the loss of any goodwill built up over the years both now and into the future think I think it realistic to say that VM management totally misjudged the whole situation and, if they could have foreseen everything that's happened, would have (hoprfully) handled things totally differently.

Again, I do not believe that they were ready to sign a deal. ITV saw that VM had put themselves in a weak position and fully exploited it. This news is a double edged sword for VM, but they simply had no other option and as ITV will have been well are. It will nog have gone unnoticed by the likes of Sky etc.

---------- Post added at 18:48 ---------- Previous post was at 18:45 ----------



Depends what the deal is. It was obviously acceptable to ITV whereas the previous VM stance on not paying any retransmission fees under any circumstances hadn't been. Seems obvious that VM have backed down.

---------- Post added at 19:01 ---------- Previous post was at 18:48 ----------



I don't personally think that the traditional cable companies should have to pay retransmission fees, however, my salient point is that the abysmal way that the UKTV issue has been handled has weakened the VM platform and put power into the hands of ITV and other significant channel providers to enable them to push up carriage costs.

These increased costs, coupled with the other expenses incurred by the UKTV issue, the loss of projected revenue from downgrades/cancellations/loss of future customers is bound to leave a hole in VM finances now and for years to come.

I predict that a deal will eventually be done with UKTV for at least a partial return of the channels, so they can't even offset UKTV carriage costs from this.

I think it likely that customers who remain will be expected to plug the gap, which will further weaken the platform as some people resist these price increases. Companies tend to rely on inertia of forgetfulness from customers.

VM will likely not be losing anywhere near the amount of money you are predicting. They have many other revenue generating sources and will still make a profit at years end.