Use your influence to end Sky-Virgin row, Ofcom told

[Media Boy UK]

Ofcom's consumer panel has asked the regulator to intervene in the row between Sky and Virgin Media, which it said was causing "serious consumer detriment".

The panel, which was established when Ofcom was set up four years ago, said viewers were losing out in the dispute because they were not getting the channels they paid for.

Virgin Media customers have not been able to watch hit shows such as 24 and Lost since Sky pulled its basic channels including Sky One from the cable network at the beginning of this month.

More info here http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcas...033652,00.html

[AndyCambs]

I never watched them in the first place....

Originally Posted by TV Boy

Ofcom's consumer panel has asked the regulator to intervene in the row between Sky and Virgin Media, which it said was causing "serious consumer detriment".

The panel, which was established when Ofcom was set up four years ago, said viewers were losing out in the dispute because they were not getting the channels they paid for.

Virgin Media customers have not been able to watch hit shows such as 24 and Lost since Sky pulled its basic channels including Sky One from the cable network at the beginning of this month.

More info here http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcas...033652,00.html

The story appears to be inside the subscription section of the site.

[Media Boy UK]

Originally Posted by Chris T

The story appears to be inside the subscription section of the site.

But its FREE to join.

Originally Posted by TV Boy

But its FREE to join.

If you can be bothered ...

[punky]

There was a site that listed free pre-subscribed account information to sections like the Grauniad and the US papers. Can't find its address though.

I'm a bit ambivalent about all this. On the one hand, OFCOM are looking out for and protecting my best interests. That's good as far as I can see. But on the flip side, state interference into business affairs is bad. Companies & people should be able to value their goods and services at X, and be able to market it as such. Sky should be no different just because they are richer than most companies. Companies don't become rich by being unpopular.

Maybe its because I straddle the divide and run businesses and come from a family of business people, and appreciate the importance of capitalism.

[paul_hadley]

Is this the website - www.bugmenot.com? It's a great site.

[punky]

Originally Posted by paul_hadley

Is this the website - www.bugmenot.com? It's a great site.

[Gareth]

Originally Posted by Gavin

I'm a bit ambivalent <snip>

What he said.

I'm not bothered either...But no doubt a million and one will pile in behind me and say different.

[D0gleg]

"different"

Couldn't resist - Sorry

[Nikesh]

I don't see why Ofcom have to come in between this. Sky should just keep their own channels and Virgin Media shouldn't bother trying to get them back.

[GuestUK]

I think it would be good if Ofcom got involved - for those consumers that liked the Sky channels, to have them taken away is more than a minor inconvenience, but most importantly, we as customers have very little we can do about it. The situation that has edeveloped is clearly not in the interests for customers and there is little to be gained from it, and Sky and Virgin don't seem to want to try to get it sorted out, so having a third party intervene could prove to be a good thing, in my opinion.

If you do not like the channels, that is of course your own choice, but there are those that do, and while you may be able to dismiss it easily, for others this is not the case. This is especially true considering Sky has the exlcusive rights to some programs, as well as showing a lot of programs unobtainable elsewhere.

I don't see what has happened as a good thing, and thus if it is a bad thing, and something the customers have no real influence over, surely having a third party take a look at the situation is a good thing?

Originally Posted by GuestUK

I think it would be good if Ofcom got involved - for those consumers that liked the Sky channels, to have them taken away is more than a minor inconvenience, but most importantly, we as customers have very little we can do about it. The situation that has edeveloped is clearly not in the interests for customers and there is little to be gained from it, and Sky and Virgin don't seem to want to try to get it sorted out, so having a third party intervene could prove to be a good thing, in my opinion.

If you do not like the channels, that is of course your own choice, but there are those that do, and while you may be able to dismiss it easily, for others this is not the case. This is especially true considering Sky has the exlcusive rights to some programs, as well as showing a lot of programs unobtainable elsewhere.

I don't see what has happened as a good thing, and thus if it is a bad thing, and something the customers have no real influence over, surely having a third party take a look at the situation is a good thing?

Ah the fervour that a tv programme engenders...The misery I recall when Star Trek(the original) was cancelled.Puoff! just like that...No recource,no one to appeal to..my favourite programme was gone...

We only had two channels and the programmes available were poor when it came to the taste of teenagers and a SFer to boot...however I learned to deal with disappointment.I became a stronger person and as time went on I learned to live again.

Then of course through the power of pester power came the return of not only the ST films but MORE newer Star Trek.And more Star Trek...and more Star Trek and more Star Trek...And thus I learned a second lesson....That pester power can lead to big things but even more it can lead to over indulgance...and endless repeats.

Be very careful what you pester for.

[scrotnig]

How ironic that a site called "bugmenot" immediately bugs you to ditch Internet Explorer and use FireFox.