The VM HD Discussion Thread

[sherer]

I thought it would be a good idea to setup a new thread to discuss the merits of HD and the differences between Sky and VM in a new thread.

As I stated in a previous thread Sky, although they are the market leaders for HD, only have a take up of 8.4% based on the last figures they released

This shows that even Sky don't have a great take up yet and HD is still a new market, VM can't afford to take a loss of this at present and so are waiting for the market to mature before investing further.

Feel free to add any comments you would about VM and HD

[alexcopeland]

You know what it's the fact that picture quality is already OK on my TV using scart RGB connection to my HDTV. I would love HD but can't afford to pay a monthly subscription for it. The Sky+HD box is now affordable so I feel Virgin Media should lower the up front price for their box and I'd have one. £49 would be about right without any other subscription. I have XL TV package too so no fee for me.

[sammyjayuk]

8.4% isn't *that* bad when you consider that they're all being forced to pay £10pcm extra. Especially since it's the same £10pcm whether you take premium packages or not - I expect that uptake would increase if the HD sub was reduced for customers taking standard packages only.

We've also yet to see the results from the £49 Sky+HD box offer - it might be enough to sway some people, although there's still the matter of the expensive HD sub.

Then you've got the cost of the HDTV itself. It's obviously an awful lot cheaper to buy an HDTV nowadays, what with 32 inch sets available for under £300 - but that's still a lot of money compared to what a 32 inch CRT used to cost, before everywhere seemed to stop selling them.

I wonder how well Freesat HD boxes are selling. Hopefully well enough to destroy the myth that the majority of people interested in HD are mainly interested in HD movies and sports - i.e. those customers who already pay a heavy premium for their TV service. BBC HD isn't doing too badly, given that it receives almost no promotion - something like "available on iPlayer" is sorely needed for programmes also on BBC HD.

Also, VM *need* to invest in HD, as a priority, to try and grab the customers who aren't interested in paying a £10pcm premium. I don't really think it's worth them trying to take on the premium market, not as a priority anyway, because the £49 offer probably means that Sky will soon have most of that market cornered.

I look forward to the eventual arrival of ITV's HD content, although seeing as a similar announcement was made ages ago with regards to Channel 4's HD content I won't be holding my breath for *any* new HD! Which is a shame...

Sam

[Toto]

Originally Posted by sherer

I thought it would be a good idea to setup a new thread to discuss the merits of HD and the differences between Sky and VM in a new thread.

As I stated in a previous thread Sky, although they are the market leaders for HD, only have a take up of 8.4% based on the last figures they released

This shows that even Sky don't have a great take up yet and HD is still a new market, VM can't afford to take a loss of this at present and so are waiting for the market to mature before investing further.

Feel free to add any comments you would about VM and HD

Only 8.4%, you sure? Link please.

[ShadowTD]

Originally Posted by sammyjayuk

Then you've got the cost of the HDTV itself. It's obviously an awful lot cheaper to buy an HDTV nowadays, what with 32 inch sets available for under £300 - but that's still a lot of money compared to what a 32 inch CRT used to cost, before everywhere seemed to stop selling them.

I'm sorry, but that's simply not true. When I was in retail 8 or so years ago, the basic 50hz Sony 'flatscreen' WEGA CRT was retailing around the £800 for the 32". You could buy a Samsung for around £500, and a no-name supermarket brand for £350-£400.

Now you can grab a genuine Sony 32" for easily less than £400. It's never been cheaper to own a big telly.

[demented]

I found this interesting, a survey on HD conducted for Channel 4 (sections 6 and 8)

Programme genres viewers are most interested in watching in HD

Films 60%
Wildlife Programming 49%
UK Dramas 47%
UK Comedies 47%
History Docs 46%
Science Docs 42%
News 41%
Sport 40%
Soaps 40%
Current Affairs 29%
US Comedies 28%
Leisure/Lifestyle 28%
Education 26%
US Dramas 26%
Kids Programming 19%
Reality tv 18%
Arts programming 17%
Religion 9%

I think this shows that demand is there for high definition and it's quite interesting that people are interested in a lot of stuff that might not be the top priorities of enthusiasts. That or people haven't got a clue what they want, who knows.

Anyway I don't agree with calling High Definition a new market any more. Since about the middle of 2008 High Definition is gossiped about by non-enthusiasts whereas it wasn't before that. This suggests to me there's vast amounts of untapped potential. For VM this suggests to me they need about 6 HD channels to carry them into 2010 otherwise they're going to get slaughtered next year when freesat gets the content rammed up.

[EBD3000]

Hopefully we'll find something out tomorrow with the quartely review due.

[demented]

Or not. With the broadband upgrade news and ITV on demand I'm a bit skeptical we'll hear that much at all. Sounds a bit too much good news at once to mask disappointment on the HD front. I think we'll get 1 HD channel, but miss the deadline on the other 2 or 3.

[sherer]

Originally Posted by Toto

Only 8.4%, you sure? Link please.

Based on the latest figures from Sky

http://corporate.sky.com/documents/0...eb126b6c09c7e1

The take up is 8.4%.

A lot of people have bought a new TV to replace the old CRT set and been more than happy with the freeview channels they get.

With the take up of HD being so small and VM being smaller than Sky anyway i'm not sure they can really afford to chuck money at HD without seeing the returns.

[demented]

8.4% is from a gigantic base of people. I just don't agree with playing the numbers game. When Sky+ HD breaks through a million in the next quarter or the one after there'll still be people saying that there aren't a million gazillion HD subscribers so HD is a niche product for lunatics with good eyesight. There'll still be people saying that when sky reaches 2 million HD subs.

I think sky's nearly 800 000 subs is good because
(a) of the £10 subs
(b) how pricey the box was until fairly recently
(c) the recession
(d) saturation of the market by PVRs already.

Non-enthusiasts mention HD quite often now to ask questions. They say something along the lines of I have already got/am getting a HD television how do I get some HD channels/ how many HD channels are on freesat/freeview/virgin media and then they get what is a very disappointing response to them of 1 (+1 red button service)/0/1. Oh they say, that's awfully disappointing I don't want to pay sky loads of money, I'll wait a few years in that case when BBC1/2/ITV/C4/Five are in HD. I don't think this is complete disinterest I think this is healthy interest, it's something people are interested in but don't want to pay a fortune for. I think the public are actually ahead of some of the broadcasters and waiting for the content. Broadcasters and providers are doing the classic in the information age of not providing any content (apart from sky) and then throwing a tantrum and saying bleakly that there's no interest because the public are skeptical about shelling out vast amounts of money for virtually non-existent content. We've seen this many times.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by demented

Broadcasters and providers are doing the classic in the information age of not providing any content (apart from sky)

Actually, I was basing my comments about lack of interest on Sky's own figures.. However, I think the main problem that Virgin have (and they have hinted as much, but not directly said it) is simple. Sky. Sky have spent a fortune licencing channels for HD, and ensured they had exclusivity clauses put into the contracts.

I personally think that if our government is serious about ensuring competition in the pay and subscription TV market, they need to ensure these clauses are banned from ALL providers.

[demented]

Originally Posted by Stuart C

Actually, I was basing my comments about lack of interest on Sky's own figures.. However, I think the main problem that Virgin have (and they have hinted as much, but not directly said it) is simple. Sky. Sky have spent a fortune licencing channels for HD, and ensured they had exclusivity clauses put into the contracts.

I personally think that if our government is serious about ensuring competition in the pay and subscription TV market, they need to ensure these clauses are banned from ALL providers.

My comments about HD content is not just as limited as you might think. With blu-rays people were not going to pay £23 for a BD of a tiny catalogue, now the content is getting out there and the price has dropped a lot people are buying them. High Definition games sold on XBOX 360 as the content was there, if it hadn't been that console would be dead. Their download service on theirs and other consoles is poor content wise and overpriced - so it's not doing roaring business. Just about whatever new idea someone has the first question the public ask is how much content is there. They are always skeptical of these things as companies usually take the biscuit releasing tiny amounts of content and vastly overpricing it.

I wasn't talking to you personally I was just saying the numbers game could carry on forever. People used to say similarly daft things about freeview as the numbers crept (faster past 2,3,5 million mark). I was talking about broadcasters as well as providers. The BBC are very behind the times in my opinion restricting themselves to 9hrs a day (which they haven't even quite reached yet) and just banging on the same repeats and thinking people will somehow magically watch a non-simulcast channel that is barely ever mentioned and is rammed full of repeats. Five had a virtual silence on HD until the other day where they've suddenly decided they'd like some of the action. ITV somehow manage to actually put on content that people want to watch on a platform virtually nobody could get.

While virgin are blocked out of many of the channels Virgin could surely have managed to bag ITV HD before now? Eurosport HD? The rate card needs looking at very badly. Unfortunately even some cable subscribers on discussions on this think that for example the Basic HD channels should not be included in the basic rate card. I think it's where virgin made a big mistake signing away their life till 2011 for the SD versions.

[sherer]

Originally Posted by demented

While virgin are blocked out of many of the channels Virgin could surely have managed to bag ITV HD before now? Eurosport HD? The rate card needs looking at very badly. Unfortunately even some cable subscribers on discussions on this think that for example the Basic HD channels should not be included in the basic rate card. I think it's where virgin made a big mistake signing away their life till 2011 for the SD versions.

ITV HD is exclusive to freesat as ITV are one of the backers of that service. Channel 4 HD isn't even on freesat but I thought they were one of the backers of freesat too !!

I'd love to see Eurosport HD on cable but i'm not sure the viewing figures for curling in HD would warrant the investment VM would to make to broadcast it

[demented]

Originally Posted by sherer

ITV HD is exclusive to freesat as ITV are one of the backers of that service. Channel 4 HD isn't even on freesat but I thought they were one of the backers of freesat too !!

I'd love to see Eurosport HD on cable but i'm not sure the viewing figures for curling in HD would warrant the investment VM would to make to broadcast it

It's not exclusive for very much longer though, however much people pretend - it's going on freeview this year. ITV are cash strapped and receptive to ideas, if virgin had waived some money in their face and explained that ITV HD would get all those extra viewers I'm sure ITV could have been brought round sooner than the probable announcement tomorrow about getting it.

C4 is similarly going onto freeview and onto freesat. Again 2009. More disturbingly virgin need to start talking to them if Film4 comes about in any format in 2010.

Eurosport is a proper channel showing proper content. People do actually watch it. It may not be everybody's cup of tea but neither is Sky1 my cup of tea and I don't go round knocking other people's tastes or proclaiming that as I don't watch it we shouldn't have it. Other people have other tastes, I will be thrilled for those with other tastes if we got sky1HD just as I will be if there's something I watch.

[toady]

Originally Posted by sherer

i'm not sure the viewing figures for curling in HD would warrant the investment VM would to make to broadcast it

What investment do they need to make, I'm sure when they added the extra capacity recently I'd hope they would have planned for HD