SD Premier Sports on Virgin Media (2013 thread) - Page 3

MalteseFalcon · 07-10-2013, 22:25

What a shock. Two companies pointing the finger of blame elsewhere. Personally, having looked at what Premier actually broadcast, I would rather it launched as a pay monthly service rather than included in XL package.

Doug P · 08-10-2013, 12:46

Still convinced that BT Sports going into XL has scuppered any version of Premier on VM....

Arthurgray50@blu · 08-10-2013, 13:22

As said it is one word against the other - but l do blame VM on this, as soon as BT was arranged, that was the end of Premier Sports.

Sadly again it the viewers that lose and and VM trying to dictate. They are known for being stubborn.

I think that as BT sport has got conference football, VM will think 'where can we make any money' this is what its all about.

VM customers are always the losers in this. The directors at VM should look at two points - shall we make it a stand alone channel where we can make some money, or put it on the XL package and try and make money.

I don't know what other sports in on PS. but l think that VM should give customers 'that choice' at the moment, they don't.

Anypermitedroute · 08-10-2013, 13:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

As said it is one word against the other - but l do blame VM on this, as soon as BT was arranged, that was the end of Premier Sports.

Theres alot I can blame Virgin, but I really dont think this was one of them.

Premier Sports demise is down to emergence of BT Sports and their power to do business deals.

I see Premier sports operating in same area as Eurosport picking up the niche items that the major ones are not totally interested in and although Eurosport is in XL premier sport does not have enough "mainstream" content to warrant inclusion (queue angry fans of NRL, NHL etc I apologise but thats how I see it). Its life could depend on its ability to hold on to these niche sports but their future is in the balance if BT continue to chip away at these rights.

passingbat · 08-10-2013, 13:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

I don't know what other sports in on PS. but l think that VM should give customers 'that choice' at the moment, they don't.

They've offered to do that by offering to add it as a Premium channel, which is what it is. PS have said no to that.

Adding BT sports to XL made sense as it is a high profile sports channel and will bring in extra customers.

Adding PS to XL will just mean that XL customers are subsidising sports fans with no upside. If you want more Premium sport on XL, you should be prepared to pay extra for it. VM did the right thing in this instance.

Doug P · 08-10-2013, 14:17

Spot on Passingbat....

TonyM19 · 08-10-2013, 19:24

No problem with paying for the channel. I accept that it covers relatively niche sports. I would pay purely to watch the NRL coverage. You can see why PS are a bit peeved if they thought they were in with a shot for a space in XL but then got dropped like a stone when BT came through. I wonder what the different terms are that Sky offer compared to VM for hosting premium channels.

Incidentally, I tried the online PS streaming service. I know others have had success going down this route, but it was unwatchable for me.

city3000 · 08-10-2013, 19:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyM19

Incidentally, I tried the online PS streaming service. I know others have had success going down this route, but it was unwatchable for me.

Yes, I signed up for their online service last year for the NHL playoffs (which I was happy to do) as they blackout all games they show on NHL's own online player but the quality was awful. I didn't mind the SD despite their claims of HD which were way off the mark but the main issue was the picture was choppy and would stutter a lot which makes watching ice hockey near impossible. I don't get this issue with other streaming services I use.

If you look at their facebook page you will see a number of comments not just about online player being poor but also their overall coverage of the NHL being poor also.

The only good thing I would say for them is they gave me a refund very quickly but I won't be going near their online player again.

spiderplant · 08-10-2013, 20:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyM19

I wonder what the different terms are that Sky offer compared to VM for hosting premium channels.

Premier Sports sell their satellite subscriptions directly, totally bypassing Sky, so they get 100% of the revenue. This isn't possible on VM. VM would have to resell it, and would expect to take a share.

Wire Man · 08-10-2013, 21:11

I asked Virgin about PS on Sunday when I was on the phone cancelling Sky Sports and the guy told me they was in negotiations and that I should call them! I did this via email and got this response
" Hello Paul,

Thank you for contacting Premiersports – Channel 428.

To be noted that we Premier Sports is currently not available to view on Virgin. We are endeavouring to change this situation at the moment and hopefully we can get the channel available on Virgin platform shortly"

All I want is the choice to pay for it at least! Its not on, I feel Virgin have really let me and other Rugby League/NHL fans down with this!

OLD BOY · 09-10-2013, 13:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wire Man

I feel Virgin have really let me and other Rugby League/NHL fans down with this!

No they haven't! It's Premier Sports that won't allow the channel to be made available as a premium channel! Don't blame VM for the decisions of others!

---------- Post added at 12:49 ---------- Previous post was at 12:47 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

The directors at VM should look at two points - shall we make it a stand alone channel where we can make some money, or put it on the XL package and try and make money.

They have, and they concluded they could offer it as a stand alone premium channel. It's Premier Sports that have decided not to go there, it's not VM's fault.

TonyM19 · 09-10-2013, 21:36

What cut do VM take? If it was 20% PS could just charge an extra £2 per month - it covers sports that people would probably pay that for. What exactly do they have to lose by not becoming a premium package?

OLD BOY · 10-10-2013, 13:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyM19

What cut do VM take? If it was 20% PS could just charge an extra £2 per month - it covers sports that people would probably pay that for. What exactly do they have to lose by not becoming a premium package?

The only thing I can think of is that demand for this programming (and therefore the channel) is so low, Premier Sports think it's worth holding out for a place on XL. From VM's perspective, why pay good money on XL for a channel that only a small minority of viewers will ever tune into?

You can see the dilemma!

Arthurgray50@blu · 10-10-2013, 16:05

I believe that VM should give its customers the choice of having it.
But there again VM are a law onto themself. Whateve happened to 'we endeavour to give our customers the best choice of channels'.

passingbat · 10-10-2013, 16:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

I believe that VM should give its customers the choice of having it.
But there again VM are a law onto themself. Whateve happened to 'we endeavour to give our customers the best choice of channels'.

Do you actually read any posts or articles Arthur? You obviously don't or you would know that PS were given the opportunity to have PS on VM if they were added as a pay for Premium Channel, which is what they are; a pay for Premium channel.

PS refused to do this. So why not bombard PS with complaints instead of VM?