General : Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2013) Vol. 1.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Top banana

I think the issue for VM with Lovefilm/Netflix is that it conflicts with their On Demand stuff. Ie currently you pay VM for a film, if they make Netflix/Love Film available as an app, there is nothing in it for them as all the revenue goes to those companies

Virgin Media would still take their cut from the subscriptions. They will have to face up to Lovefilm/Netflix soon anyway, as these services are available already on 'connected' TVs.

VM should think seriously also about providing films from Virgin Movies on a subscription basis, either as an on demand feature or as a linear TV channel. I would be more likely to watch them then.

---------- Post added at 16:16 ---------- Previous post was at 16:09 ----------

Originally Posted by muppetman11

The VIP for many represents excellent value but because Sky premium is included your view is your not paying for it ? Sky World HD bundle includes the HD pack does that mean under your way of thinking that customers selecting that are not being charged for HD.

I did make the point that obviously the money required for VM to support HD is contained in the overall charge to its customers. The real issue is whether VM have an additional charge for HD, and I was reminding everyone that when the HD channels came in, the price of our packages was not increased as a result.

As for Sky Movies and Sky Sports, I am now getting HD (which I didn't before) and the cost has actually gone down! So where is this 'additional charge' that people keep talking about?

VM are quite right to say that they offer HD for no additional cost.

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Virgin Media would still take their cut from the subscriptions. They will have to face up to Lovefilm/Netflix soon anyway, as these services are available already on 'connected' TVs.

How much of a cut do you honestly think Netflix are willing to give up on a subscription that costs £5.99 , I'm sure the profit margins aren't massive too start with.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

VM should think seriously also about providing films from Virgin Movies on a subscription basis, either as an on demand feature or as a linear TV channel. I would be more likely to watch them then.

They would have to get the rights to do this , that's not easy when Sky , Netflix and Lovefilm have subscription rights deals signed.

[Chad]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

VM should think seriously also about providing films from Virgin Movies on a subscription basis, either as an on demand feature or as a linear TV channel. I would be more likely to watch them then.

I'm not sure if there is a rights issue however TiVo never automatically recorded a movie for me as a suggestion. If TiVo could do this, you'd quickly start to collate a decent amount of movies from the likes of Film 4, TCM, Channel 4, Channel 5, ITV 2 etc..... to watch when you want at no extra cost.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

As long as any new channels that come on are not +1 channels.

You don't have to watch them, Arthur. Some of us like to have the the +1 channels to give additional recording options. As it doesn't affect you, I don't understand why you are complaining about them.

Originally Posted by spiderplant

I tried Sam Knows, but sadly he doesn't.

I've a suspicion fibre will never reach here. It'll be overtaken by wireless technologies.

Possibly, or perhaps BT haven't fixed a date at this point in time.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jj20x

If they give the channels away to XL viewers on VM, it's hardly going to help them build the user base on their own platform.

Well, BT are not going to give it away after paying all that money for the football rights!

VM will negotiate a charge that BT are prepared to agree, and then what package that appears on and whether VM make an extra charge to their XL customers is really up to VM.

[andy_m]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

How much of a cut do you honestly think Netflix are willing to give up on a subscription that costs £5.99 , I'm sure the profit margins aren't massive too start with.

The only way it would work on that basis would be to bundle it into the xl pack so that Virgin could guarantee netflix a certain number of customers. That won't happen. I'm sure the real reason these apps haven't arrived yet is the fact that they compete directly with filmflex, and even if only from a cost point of view, they're better value.

Personally I think Blinkbox is the answer - ppv rather than subscription. The addition of this one service alone to TiVo would make the apps section market leading in my opinion.

[spj20016]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

You don't have to watch them, Arthur. Some of us like to have the the +1 channels to give additional recording options. As it doesn't affect you, I don't understand why you are complaining about them.

I don't mind HD or +1 channels coming to VM as long as we get other channels also. HD and +1 channels are obviously the same content that is available on the SD variant. I think the majority of customer's would prefer to have more different content rather than the same but in better quality or an hour later.

I would also like Netflix to become available on TiVo, I hate having to watch things on my ipad or laptop. I would use my Netflix subscription a lot more if I could watch it on the TV.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Well, BT are not going to give it away after paying all that money for the football rights!

Of course not, neither will they want to see VM claiming "BT Sports channels now available as part of the XL pack". They have paid out a lot of money for the rights. The only logical reason for paying that much would be to make them available on their own platform with the price set at a level which encourages users to switch to their platform. They won't want VM stealing their thunder and using the channels as a selling point for a competing platform.

VM will negotiate a charge that BT are prepared to agree, and then what package that appears on and whether VM make an extra charge to their XL customers is really up to VM.

Assuming that BT wants to make the channels available to XL customers and assuming XL customers want to start paying extra for sports channels initially added "at no extra cost". Clearly, the ESPN channels have been attractive to the sports fans on the XL package but it would be difficult to sell any increase in price to the many subscribers not interested in sport.

[andy_m]

Of course the counter argument to that is that if Bt want to challenge Sky Sports in the longer term they'll want to get the initial offering in front of as many viewers as possible.

The answer is that we just don't know what will happen, but it would be nice to have an idea.

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I did make the point that obviously the money required for VM to support HD is contained in the overall charge to its customers.

Exactly so you agree with my original point that we all pay for HD one way or another.

[Henkesghost]

Saying that Virgin customers do not pay for HD is one of those things that if repeated enough becomes fact. In truth it's nonsense. HD is best served with sport, movies and natural world. If you want that with virgin you pay for it.

Originally Posted by andy_m

Of course the counter argument to that is that if Bt want to challenge Sky Sports in the longer term they'll want to get the initial offering in front of as many viewers as possible.

Yes but that won't help them overtake VM to become the second largest pay-tv platform. They could have done something like that without starting their own platform if that had been the ultimate aim.

Perhaps they are just copying Sky. Sky use sports content to get additional subscribers (exclusive HD channels such as Sky Sports HD 3 / 4 / F1). It has worked for Sky...

[denphone]

Originally Posted by jj20x

Yes but that won't help them overtake VM to become the second largest pay-tv platform. They could have done something like that without starting their own platform if that had been the ultimate aim.

Perhaps they are just copying Sky. Sky use sports content to get additional subscribers (exclusive HD channels such as Sky Sports HD 3 / 4 / F1). It has worked for Sky...

What worked for Sky jj does not necessarily mean that it will work for BT as remember Sky have been at it 20 years and thus compared to Sky BT is still a amateur trying to play in the top division.

[Dave42]

Originally Posted by denphone

What worked for Sky jj does not necessarily mean that it will work for BT as remember Sky have been at it 20 years and thus compared to Sky BT is still a amateur trying to play in the top division.

plus bt not got as much money as sky have either so sky will always outbid them