Nialli's HD Petition

[sammyjayuk]

Given the complete and utter dearth of any new information regarding HD, I feel that it's an appropriate time to highlight Nialli's HD petition.

Since June last year, the petition has gathered over 1600 signatures, but it appears that more are needed for Virgin Media to start taking us seriously.

So please sign the petition!

My personal feelings on this matter are that VM are treating their customers with an abhorrent amount of contempt by constantly using such flimsy statements as "coming soon."

I also ought to draw attention to the fact that VM have had the right to broadcast Channel 4 HD since launch, in addition to putting some of C4's HD content on VOD, for well over a year - but even this has yet to appear. It would seem that it's been forgotten about completely!

It has been said that, as an emerging market, VM can't afford to invest heavily in HD. However, the fact that their main competitor is investing so heavily, in what could be considered the future of television, means that VM can't afford not to.

VM appear to be purposefully ignoring the fact that most of their customers chose them over Sky, which makes the way we're being treated all the more offensive.

So again, I urge you to please sign the petition in the hope that Virgin Media will start taking us seriously.

Thanks,
Sam (with apologies for the liberal use of formatting!)

[MovedGoalPosts]

Unfortunately, Virgin Media will probably take no notice of this.

What they will take notice of is customer churn. If they start to see too many people giving up TV, or significantly downgrading, that will be when they prick up their ears. It's not that long ago when the Mr Berkett (I think it was him) basically suggested HD was not important. VOD is the kingpin for VM. Whether that is the right choice in the long term remains to be seen, given that broadband accessibility is generally increasing so internet subscribers can get a lot of Player type stuff anyway.

[sammyjayuk]

Originally Posted by Rob

Unfortunately, Virgin Media will probably take no notice of this.

I have no wish to risk my account here so I won't respond to that...

Originally Posted by Rob

What they will take notice of is customer churn. If they start to see too many people giving up TV, or significantly downgrading, that will be when they prick up their ears.

That's part of the problem, I think. VM *do* have some unique services, like VOD, and I can't be the only one staying with them because of that uniqueness. It's also cheaper for me, I think, to take all three services (TV, broadband and phone) together rather than go to Sky for TV, even if I didn't take HD.

Originally Posted by Rob

It's not that long ago when the Mr Berkett (I think it was him) basically suggested HD was not important. VOD is the kingpin for VM. Whether that is the right choice in the long term remains to be seen, given that broadband accessibility is generally increasing so internet subscribers can get a lot of Player type stuff anyway.

I think it was him too, but I'm not sure. Someone important, certainly.

VM are right to throw a fair bit of money at VOD because it's something they can offer, in HD no less, to every single digital customer. That's something Sky will *never* be able to match - DSL could probably support SD VOD to a significant proportion of their customers, but it will likely be years before it could carry HD VOD to anything but a tiny minority. Taking bandwidth away from the internet connection, probably only being able to support one STB using VOD at a time, and not knowing exactly which customers have speeds capable of sustaining it.

*However,* DSL speeds are only going to get better. If BT implement fibre to the cabinet on a large scale then the average attainable speed will skyrocket, and VOD over DSL will suddenly become very viable indeed. There may also be more incremental advancements to DSL technology, providing extra speed.

Basically, at some point the VOD playing field is going to look a lot more level - and what are VM going to do then? They *need* to be planning ahead, making sure they offer at least as much as Sky, for their own sake as much as their customers'.

Sam

[nialli]

What's surprised me about the petition (and thanks for promoting it again) is that it still has folk signing up on a fairly regular basis - couple of dozen here, another few there. As Sky raise the public's awareness with their almost incessant advertising demand grows. And Berkett & co stick their heads even more firmly into the VOD repeats fest.
I can't find the words to express my disappointment at today's lack of any statement about high definition services on cable. Even the previous quarter's presentations promised more. I'm not sure a petition does any good, but it's better than staying silent and few will actually jump ship and be attributable to the churn numbers VM are so proud of.
The odd thing missing from today's VM speak was any firm numbers for 50mb broadband customers. Still "coming soon" I guess, or could it be that there isn't much demand after all?

[KnightRider]

does everyone not think that this is the horses for courses argument. As you stated you chose virgin media over sky so you have the choice to choose sky over VM for HD if you want. These two companys are a totally different business model to each other. Sky being a TV base with BB & phone with VM being a broadband phone base offering TV with VOD . VOD being broadband based. They are not being unreasonable to customers regarding HD their priorities are differently based to Sky. Better to be a master of one than a jack of all trades. And as was said at the begining of the post everyone has choice of which service to choose.


ps: i do'nt work for VM But these are my thoughts & reasonings for joining VM

[sammyjayuk]

Actually, I chose to allow VM to force me not to be able to (reasonably) choose Sky, for 12 months.

That was last October, so I still have 8 months of the contract to go. Forgive me but, when we hear about concrete plans to put HD channels on Freeview, I expect to hear statements from VM (a company which, contractually, will have had over £700 of my money by this October) with a little more rigidity than a soggy Kit Kat - "coming soon" or "in due course," which seem to be all we hear these days, are completely unacceptable.

What's worse was the lie last December about having HD channels, plural (or perhaps he "misspoke"), and what is increasingly looking like the lie of more HD channels in the next 3 months (or perhaps he, umm... is..... did.... meant... has.. got...... urrr... aha! Maybe he has this tragic degenerative brain disease, the only current symptom of which is to confuse months with years. Eventually however, everything will be 12 times more or less to him, or take him 12 times longer. SIXTY - that's FIVE to you and me - might make a 14-hourly series about it. Watching him cook will be mildly entertaining, until 12 fire engines arrive and order the cameras to be shut off - which is just as well because they'll be about to run out of tape. In the end it gets recursive, and I'm afraid my calculator skills aren't up to that...)

Right, at some point I had a, well, a point. Oh yeah.

Think about how much you're paying/have paid/have to pay/will pay VM, especially if you're still within contract. If, like me, you value many parts of the service but think being fobbed off and potentially lied to by the most important people in the company (or at least the most highly paid) is unacceptable, please consider signing the petition.

Oh and KnightRider, while I mostly agree with you on basic principles (taking into account what I said in the first line of this post), in a rather short amount of time HD channels are going to become as much a basic requirement of a digital TV service as an EPG is now. Both Sky and Freeview will have as many as is (are?) possible - in Sky's case as many HD channels as can possibly exist, in Freeview's case as many as can be carried while the government still insist on using the entire "digital dividend" as a cash cow (and boy, are they going to need to!). Freesat is a little more complicated, due to it being so young and the need for channels to be FTA (and I wonder how much a Freesat EPG slot costs...), but I'm sure we'll see more HD channels once the service becomes more established.

I suppose that VM (to continue with my seemingly relentless tirade of negative adjectives aimed towards them) are therefore also being irresponsible with respect to their shareholders, to allow themselves to fall so far behind.

Sam

[bayards]

Hi

If you look at digitalspy London will be recieving HD Freeview later this year along with the Granada region (at time of DSO). London is using a spare frequency that will be OK until we reach DSO in 2012.

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitalt...ial-tests.html

Ofcom have given their blessings to this trial which could also be used in other areas ahead of full DSO where possible.

The thread (with Ofcom links) is at http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/s...d.php?t=987167

H

[Arthurgray50@blu]

I signed the petiton, for several reason's, We are always getting this claptrap rubbish from VM, that they are launching soon, Up to date SKY are launching yet another HD channel, and this makes it nearly 40 channels in HD, how many does VM have approx TW0, Sky are even having there own EPG.

VM have to honest (and they never are) to there customers, we are always getting infor from various people, that this is going to start,. They cannot keep on treating the customer with comtempt. l fully support any customer who speaks there mind on this matter. Will VM listen to the customer on this, the answer is a DEFINATE NO.

I have a feeling that VM will wait, until a decision about selling the TV side, as reported in The Financial Times, before putting the HD on.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by KnightRider

does everyone not think that this is the horses for courses argument. As you stated you chose virgin media over sky so you have the choice to choose sky over VM for HD if you want.

I see where you are coming from, KnightRider, but some of us want VOD and HD. Why should we have to choose between them?

There was a cable advert on TV just before VM took over, featuring Ruby Wax, remember it? "I want it all!" That was my view at the time and it remains so today.

---------- Post added at 15:47 ---------- Previous post was at 15:42 ----------

Originally Posted by nialli

I can't find the words to express my disappointment at today's lack of any statement about high definition services on cable. Even the previous quarter's presentations promised more. I'm not sure a petition does any good, but it's better than staying silent and few will actually jump ship and be attributable to the churn numbers VM are so proud of.

I'm very firmly in your camp on your HD campaign, nialli, but don't get too upset about the lack of news from VM on HD since the announcement was made about a limited number of HD channels within three months - that period isn't up yet so there is still scope for that promise to be met.

The slow pace of VM when it comes to providing its subscribers with what Sky already have can be very frustrating for everyone and I have little doubt that we will eventually get a good crop of HD channels. It is just so painfully slow....

---------- Post added at 15:51 ---------- Previous post was at 15:47 ----------

Originally Posted by Rob

Unfortunately, Virgin Media will probably take no notice of this.

What they will take notice of is customer churn. If they start to see too many people giving up TV, or significantly downgrading, that will be when they prick up their ears.

Surely though, that's only part of the picture. What about the potential new customers who decide to take Sky instead of VM to get the best pictures on their new HD ready sets?

If you go to most electrical shops - from Comet to John Lewis - HD is heavily promoted and that means that all the conversation that you get from the sales people is about Sky. Virgin Media is not even mentioned!

[frogstamper]

The real joke is Berkett's claim in the last minuets of 09 first quarter report is, "we don't intend to let competitors leave us behind in the HD stakes".
Holy hell is this guy for real? VM have been left on the starting line asleep with bloody amnesia in comparison to Sky on HD, if Berkett expects the shareholders to believe this ridiculous claim he must think they are soft in the head.
As regards the three or four HD channels Berkett promised on the 15/12/08 at the 50mb launch what have we heard since? absolutely bupkis...as far as I'm concerned the guy is full of pee and wind, if you can't deliver VM tell us!!! don't fill the air with BS.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by frogstamper

The real joke is Berkett's claim in the last minuets of 09 first quarter report is, "we don't intend to let competitors leave us behind in the HD stakes".
Holy hell is this guy for real? VM have been left on the starting line asleep with bloody amnesia in comparison to Sky on HD, if Berkett expects the shareholders to believe this ridiculous claim he must think they are soft in the head.
As regards the three or four HD channels Berkett promised on the 15/12/08 at the 50mb launch what have we heard since? absolutely bupkis...as far as I'm concerned the guy is full of pee and wind, if you can't deliver VM tell us!!! don't fill the air with BS.

I don't disagree, but remember, VM just don't communicate much, which is what leaves us so frustrated.

We heard sweet nothing following the article telling us that we were getting the ITV Player, but it did arrive, and quite timely too. Let's hope the HD channels start appearing this month as well, otherwise some of us will start really fuming!