TiVo Are Virgin going to cut normal channels

bowieboots · 01-08-2014, 04:05

Just has a survey asking how I would react if virgin cut BBC1, ITV1, CH4 and CH5 and would I pay more to keep them. We dont have an ariel so would lose these. Are virgin thinking of doing this?. We used to have sky but changed because whem we had bad weather, the picture went all screwed up, in fact in the end, some went off on there own. Quite happy with virgin quality wise, was ****ed they didnt hace Sky Atlantic, but got over that. Not sure how Id react if we lost the free to air ones

MalteseFalcon · 01-08-2014, 07:47

I wouldn't pay for FTA channels, I don't see how Virgin would be allowed to charge for them. Maybe they meant the HD variants, as in charge for the HD variants of the FTA channels.

MutleyF · 01-08-2014, 08:44

I cannot see Virgin dropping the FTA main channels. Certainly would not be allowed to charge for them !

johnathome · 02-08-2014, 12:50

They must be talking about the HD channels surely.

I'd ditch them and move over to Freeview TBH, been thinking about it for a while now.

OLD BOY · 02-08-2014, 14:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by bowieboots

Just has a survey asking how I would react if virgin cut BBC1, ITV1, CH4 and CH5 and would I pay more to keep them. We dont have an ariel so would lose these. Are virgin thinking of doing this?. We used to have sky but changed because whem we had bad weather, the picture went all screwed up, in fact in the end, some went off on there own. Quite happy with virgin quality wise, was ****ed they didnt hace Sky Atlantic, but got over that. Not sure how Id react if we lost the free to air ones

I can't see this happening, to be honest with you. It would be interesting to know who commissioned this survey!

RichardCoulter · 02-08-2014, 14:01

It is a condition of their franchise licences that Virgin Media must carry and cannot encrypt BBC1, BBC2, ITV and Channel 4. Some franchise areas also include Channel 5.

In practice VM carry and do not encrypt BBC1, BBC2, ITV, Channel 4 or Channel 5 in any of their franchise areas.

So, without a change in the contractual agreements with the franchise holders, this could not happen. I also think it unlikely to happen as the vast majority of cable viewing is related to these five channels and they are carried on a cost neutral basis.

Who commissioned this survey?

johnathome · 02-08-2014, 14:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

It is a condition of their franchise licences that Virgin Media must carry and cannot encrypt BBC1, BBC2, ITV and Channel 4. Some franchise areas also include Channel 5.

True but does this condition include the HD channels, or could they move them into a higher package?

Chad · 02-08-2014, 15:34

"Subscribers of pay-television channels could face higher bills if ITV succeeds in charging BSkyB and Virgin Media to carry its main channel, opponents of the proposal have warned."

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/busine...cle4165028.ece

Unfortunately you'll only be able to read the full article if you subscribe to The Times

Mad Max · 02-08-2014, 16:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chad

"Subscribers of pay-television channels could face higher bills if ITV succeeds in charging BSkyB and Virgin Media to carry its main channel, opponents of the proposal have warned."

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/busine...cle4165028.ece

Unfortunately you'll only be able to read the full article if you subscribe to The Times

If they start with this bolllox that'll be the last straw for me!

johnathome · 02-08-2014, 16:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chad

"Subscribers of pay-television channels could face higher bills if ITV succeeds in charging BSkyB and Virgin Media to carry its main channel, opponents of the proposal have warned."

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/busine...cle4165028.ece

Unfortunately you'll only be able to read the full article if you subscribe to The Times

Well there's our answer to the OP.

I, personally, wouldn't pay extra to receive them. That'd be the spur i needed to run a cable to the living room for Freeview and ditch VM tv and phone.

I wish they'd hurry up if they're going to do it, i'd save a stack of cash.

---------- Post added at 15:51 ---------- Previous post was at 15:45 ----------

Ok, found a story on it from last December. I think the transmission fees that ITV and BBC pay to sky were significantly reduced this year and may disappear altogether. ITV want to swing it the other way, as per the Times article.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...rogrammes.html

muppetman11 · 02-08-2014, 17:33

What a load of nonsense , how much ad revenue do viewers of ITV from the VM and Sky platform translate to ?

I'm sure if ITV were successful with this we'll see the likes of Channel 4 and the BBC expecting the same.

RichardCoulter · 02-08-2014, 17:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnathome

True but does this condition include the HD channels, or could they move them into a higher package?

This does not include the HD channels, so, in theory, the BBC, ITV and Channel 4 could follow Channel 5 in putting their HD variants behind a pay wall.

From what I've read though, these proposals aren't just confined to the HD variants, but include the SD channels too. ITV want the 'must carry on cable' on a 'neutral cost' basis to be changed, so that they can charge cable (and satellite operators) for their channels. Their argument is that the vast majority of viewing on all platforms is of channels 1-5, so they should be able to charge platform owners for providing such a popular service to their customers.

This all started when the BBC, after having both it's income and liabilities increased, started questioning why they were being charged 'Platform Contribution/retransmission' fees by Sky. Their argument was that them simply having a presence on Sky attracted and retained many customers, so, if anything, Sky should be paying the BBC for being on their platform. In the end, I believe that the retransmission/platform contribution costs were slashed voluntarily by Sky for channels 1-5.

I can't see the 'must carry' clause being retained if the channels are allowed to charge for transmission.

In the unlikely event that this change is enacted, VM could take the channels off the system (unthinkable), charge for them individually (unlikely) or, more likely, absorb the costs in and amongst other day to day running costs. Of course, this may lead to higher Pay TV bills in the future if these additional costs cannot be met by efficiency savings elsewhere.

andrew.shearman · 02-08-2014, 18:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnathome

They must be talking about the HD channels surely.

I'd ditch them and move over to Freeview TBH, been thinking about it for a while now.

I would keep VM for Sky sports HD and I would go to freeview for BBC STV channel 4 and 5 if vm do this don t see why they would do this

where did you hear about this what website

johnathome · 02-08-2014, 18:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrew.shearman

I would keep VM for Sky sports HD and I would go to freeview for BBC STV channel 4 and 5 if vm do this don t see why they would do this

where did you hear about this what website

There's a Times link in post #8 and a Telegraph link in post #10.

Seeing as they have to pay Freeview to be on there i can't see them winning it.

howardmicks · 02-08-2014, 18:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chad

"Subscribers of pay-television channels could face higher bills if ITV succeeds in charging BSkyB and Virgin Media to carry its main channel, opponents of the proposal have warned."

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/busine...cle4165028.ece

Unfortunately you'll only be able to read the full article if you subscribe to The Times

Can really see this happening now since lg have bought into itv and I wouldn't rule out a future takeover