Quote:
Originally Posted by MatthewEastaugh
And many, many other things. Such as saying they wouldn't negotiate in public, after trying to negotiate literally in the middle of a BBC News video, which they then clipped and posted from their own corporate account. Like their various C&P statements repeated as infinitum from their own Twitter channels. Like their own comments on The Media Show, their community forum, in their press releases and elsewhere.
Come on, OB. Youre better than that. Lying isn't necessary.
I get that you're more in line with Virgin's side of things, that's fine. People are allowed different opinions. I'm slightly more on UKTVs side, but agree that both were at fault in a variety of ways. But to say that they only commented to say they wouldn't comment in public is blatantly untrue.
|
Why the hysterical response? You did see the grin emoji, didn’t you? It was meant to be a joke.
That one obviously fell flat!
---------- Post added at 09:38 ---------- Previous post was at 09:27 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter
Very true, maybe you should think about that when you ask for proof of things thst others post  Just because a link exists doesn't mean it's necessarily true and just because one isn't available it doesn't always follow that something isn't true either.
The VM stance changed depending on what suited them. They said that they wouldn't pass comment in public, yet frequently did so. |
I think what they said is that they would not negotiate in public. From what I read VM did not say very much apart from alerting us to their reasons for not wishing to settle with UKTV (ie too expensive for channels with so much repeated old material, not enough OD, insufficient access to the BBC archives, etc.) Of course, they also had to participate in the occasional media interview, but I didn’t hear those.
From what I picked up, VM wanted to keep the details of their negotiating position close to its chest, whereas UKTV was really quite vocal about the whole thing. I’m not sure what is meant in the remark that VM kept changing position. Wasn’t the constant complaint that they just kept quoting the corporate line?
---------- Post added at 09:44 ---------- Previous post was at 09:38 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter
I'm not so sure that there aren't still a lot of people leaving, there's still a lot of complaints being made about long wait times to get through to disconnections/retentions and people immediately being disconnected as soon as they get through!
One was from a former VM employee who said that this was a disciplinary offence when she worked there.
It's a good start as a damage limitation excercise to get the channels come back, but I think that the way it was handled and the fact that It has now been brought to the attention of the public that VM is the least secure of all the main platforms for channel continuity will be of detriment to VM for a very long time.
|
I don’t buy this recurring comment about the long term damage done over the UKTV issue. Most people will forget about this with a little time, and most of those thinking of leaving last week, in the end will not be bothered to do so. They now have more channels and more OD than before, so why should they?