Channel Capacity - what is the truth?

[dhlennon]

I am hoping that someone that truly knows rather than makes educated guesses can answer this question : "Has NTL run out of capacity to make more dig tv channels available?"

Now, I know that if the real answer is "Yes", this is probably very commercially-sensitive so no-one within NTL would want to confirm it?

If I knew that "yes" is then I would be considering switching platforms. As it happens I personally don't have the choice as I can't get telewest or Sky in my current property. So, for people in the same boat, I would then ask "Will NTL conduct a true commercial survey of channels that could be dropped in favour of new (currently available or new ones as and when they become available) according to viewing figures?"

I appreciate this kind of question always opens several cans of worms regarding channels people like, channels people would want, and channels that people don't watch but pay NTL for carriage (assuming shopping/travel perhaps?). This thread isn't the place to start yet another "I want channel xyz". "get rid of channel abc" discussion please. I could tell you what *I* want but who cares, that's just one guy's preferences.

I would just like some informed insight into whether NTL can or cannot currently add more channels; whether NTL are considering dropping channels for others (if they are at capacity), and again, if at capacity, what intentions, if any, NTL have to expand capacity?

Thanks folks.

[handyman]

There is room left, not lots but there is still room. IF ntl get some balls and drop analogue across the board this will free up space for 160 odd extra dtv channels.

[Ignition]

Originally Posted by handyman

There is room left, not lots but there is still room. IF ntl get some balls and drop analogue across the board this will free up space for 160 odd extra dtv channels.

Call me biased but shove the extra DTV channels, multiple wider downstreams and upstreams sets on single cable segments is where it's at

Originally Posted by JustAnotherN00b

Call me biased but shove the extra DTV channels, multiple wider downstreams and upstreams sets on single cable segments is where it's at

You're biased!!

[dhlennon]

thx handyman

it would be interesting to know how many of NTL's subscriber base uses analogue tv services.

I'm aware that it's the government's intention to switch off analogue anyhow within the next few years, but I would guess that in reality trying to predict that is akin to them saying we "will/might/have a referendum/dunno/won't (select an answer)" on joining the Euro. If it was set in stone that might help NTL make that kind of decision.
Personally, stress personally, I would happily live without all the radio stations as I want TV not radio but I am sure the radio services are very popular with a lot of customers, and I assume they consume negligible bandwidth anyway.

[Foo Fighter]

standard tv is dead, easier and quicker to download you tv episodes from the internet... analogue should be used to give us more bandwidth

[ntlrocks]

yeah would scrapping the radio give up space

Originally Posted by ntlrocks

yeah would scrapping the radio give up space

Analogue radio takes up a lot less space than a TV channel.
Digital radio takes up approx 200kb/s compared to approx 3.6Mb/s TV service.

[Ignition]

Originally Posted by Proppinupthebar

You're biased!!

Yup and I love it (not a TV watcher at all)

[MovedGoalPosts]

Originally Posted by dhlennon

thx handyman

it would be interesting to know how many of NTL's subscriber base uses analogue tv services.

I'm aware that it's the government's intention to switch off analogue anyhow within the next few years, but I would guess that in reality trying to predict that is akin to them saying we "will/might/have a referendum/dunno/won't (select an answer)" on joining the Euro. If it was set in stone that might help NTL make that kind of decision.
Personally, stress personally, I would happily live without all the radio stations as I want TV not radio but I am sure the radio services are very popular with a lot of customers, and I assume they consume negligible bandwidth anyway.

The government switching off analogue and ntl doing the same, are independent of each other, except for the five pass through cahnels BBC1, 2 ITV, CH4 &5). As you need an analogue STB to decode / unscramble the ntl signal, cable and terrestrial aerial transmission formats can be changed without reference to each other.

Sky a few years ago made the decision to drop analogue, hence they now have the capacity for all the digi channels (most of which are in any case a load of rubbish IMO). However they will have lost a proportion of customers who did not want to incur the costs of upgrade. For ntl the upgrade cost would be higher, as all the STB are provided by ntl, not as with SKy owned. As ever it's going to come down to economics.

If I'm correct, some ntl areas, can't get reliable digi TV yet? If so, I expect that's where ntls TV priorities are likely to lie, along with getting everyone onto the same single platform (bromley, Lnagley, CR3), to ease the future maintenance and then upgrade paths.

Originally Posted by MovedGoalPosts

The government switching off analogue and ntl doing the same, are independent of each other, except for the five pass through cahnels BBC1, 2 ITV, CH4 &5). As you need an analogue STB to decode / unscramble the ntl signal, cable and terrestrial aerial transmission formats can be changed without reference to each other.

Sky a few years ago made the decision to drop analogue, hence they now have the capacity for all the digi channels (most of which are in any case a load of rubbish IMO). However they will have lost a proportion of customers who did not want to incur the costs of upgrade. For ntl the upgrade cost would be higher, as all the STB are provided by ntl, not as with SKy owned. As ever it's going to come down to economics.

If I'm correct, some ntl areas, can't get reliable digi TV yet? If so, I expect that's where ntls TV priorities are likely to lie, along with getting everyone onto the same single platform (bromley, Lnagley, CR3), to ease the future maintenance and then upgrade paths.

Sky changed satellites for their switch from analogue to digital, Astra 1 to Astra2. Their services were available from both sats for quite a while.
The cost to ntl in terms of new stb's to move from analogue to digital will be high.

[Escapee]

Originally Posted by MovedGoalPosts

The government switching off analogue and ntl doing the same, are independent of each other, except for the five pass through cahnels BBC1, 2 ITV, CH4 &5). As you need an analogue STB to decode / unscramble the ntl signal, cable and terrestrial aerial transmission formats can be changed without reference to each other.

Sky a few years ago made the decision to drop analogue, hence they now have the capacity for all the digi channels (most of which are in any case a load of rubbish IMO). However they will have lost a proportion of customers who did not want to incur the costs of upgrade. For ntl the upgrade cost would be higher, as all the STB are provided by ntl, not as with SKy owned. As ever it's going to come down to economics.

If I'm correct, some ntl areas, can't get reliable digi TV yet? If so, I expect that's where ntls TV priorities are likely to lie, along with getting everyone onto the same single platform (bromley, Lnagley, CR3), to ease the future maintenance and then upgrade paths.

Yes there is plenty of capacity if they turn off the analogues, but they will have to spend "money" to fill these with extra services. Apart from the equipment at the Digital headends it will also involve lots of cash being spent for the Media I/O's, ATM equipment and all the RF stuff at the regional headends. (Proppinup could confirm) I would guess that ntl are happy with things the way they are at the moment, as spending all that cash (If they pay the suppliers) will not gain them much extra revenue.

Originally Posted by Escapee

Yes there is plenty of capacity if they turn off the analogues, but they will have to spend "money" to fill these with extra services. Apart from the equipment at the Digital headends it will also involve lots of cash being spent for the Media I/O's, ATM equipment and all the RF stuff at the regional headends. (Proppinup could confirm) I would guess that ntl are happy with things the way they are at the moment, as spending all that cash (If they pay the suppliers) will not gain them much extra revenue.

Moved on from Media I/O's and ATM these days mate! Different supplier.

The question is how many channels are there out there which enough people want to make it viable for ntl to spend money? I reckon its currently between 10 and 20?

EDIT : And its good to see you here again.

[MovedGoalPosts]

Originally Posted by Proppinupthebar

Sky changed satellites for their switch from analogue to digital, Astra 1 to Astra2. Their services were available from both sats for quite a while.
The cost to ntl in terms of new stb's to move from analogue to digital will be high.

I'm sure the cost implications of the stb changes, plus all the other headend changes indictated by Escapee, put the dumping of analogue well down ntl's priority list. The only reason to change would be if Sky start to carry so many more desirable channels that ntl cannot possibly sqeeze into the existing cable, or extra other services like broadband need to expand and take more bandwidth. If ntl's market share / customer base shows sign of decline as it can't keep up with demand, the priorities would change, and analogue might become a casualty of that. For the moment analogue no doubt provides an important part of ntl's finances, and I'm sure they will wish to keep it that way.

Personally speaking, a large number of the existing digi channels are junk. Ntl could ditch many of those to make space for others if needed.