General : Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2015) Vol. 2

[DaMac]

Originally Posted by Richc1977

I doubt there will be much content of interest on Extra anyway, I expect all the English and probably Scottish teams will be on the main channels, certainly from CL point of view.

I'm second guessing by putting two and two together, based on press releases, info on BT Sport lite and how the Europa League games are scheduled tomorrow but I think we will see the James Richardson Soccer Saturday style 'Goals' show on BTS1 or Extra and Showcase when no live match is on, then the first pick game on BTS Europe and second pick on BTS2, leaving the streams for the remaining matches featuring non British clubs. Would make sense from a ratings and ad revenue point of view anyway.

Not at all before VM got ss4&5 in hd sky had this habit of putting champions league matches involving Manchester United (the most watched team in Europe 2009 - 2010) on sky sports 4, now you don't even need to be cynical to see that play.

[Media Boy UK]

Channel 5 goes UK Wide on Virgin?

Media Boy HQ thinks Viacom has remove regional advertising from Channel 5 (Virgin Channel 105) since last night - it was remove on Sky on August 3rd.

Virgin Media viewers in northern England, London, Scotland and Northern Ireland are affected.

Media Boy HQ V+ Box stop working for 5 mins about 1am last night when back our Total Channels want down by one. and listing for Channel 5 AD (Channel 855) was unavailable.

[OLD BOY]

D

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

It's just capitalism. You get a lot of choice, but you can't get everything under the same roof. Same situation as iTunes, Amazon Prime, Netflix and NowTV not being on every device. Or Waterstones selling different books than WH Smith and Daunt Books.

Speaking personally, I wouldn't criticise capitalism. It's from capitalism you get the innovation and efficiency. However, in a mixed economy, this needs to be tempered with rules and regulation. It's the Government that is failing here, not capitalism.

---------- Post added at 18:40 ---------- Previous post was at 18:27 ----------

Originally Posted by Chad

BT are proving to be cut from the same cloth as SKY. Exclusive HD channels, an exclusive Ultra HD channel and of course AMC launching exclusively on BT later this month. BT Sports still hasn't even launched on Talk Talk! If anything, BT are withholding more channels and content from their competition than any other broadcaster in the UK.

Well, let's see how this pans out. They could be using the leverage they have to get Sky to the negotiating table.

---------- Post added at 18:43 ---------- Previous post was at 18:40 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

BT Sport subscribers on the Sky platform will get AMC as well.

---------- Post added at 22:15 ---------- Previous post was at 22:14 ----------

Good point, I guess TalkTalk doesn't have the same negotiating muscle as VM does.

...Or they won't pay the price. Don't forget that Talk Talk is an economy option and their main concern is to keep costs down so they can undercut the big boys.

---------- Post added at 18:49 ---------- Previous post was at 18:43 ----------

Originally Posted by Ultimate.Conj

Could there be a chance that VM have also agreed a deal for the AMC channel but are holding back on the advertising of it?

If Sky customers can get it with the BT Sports pack, wouldn't VM have tried to include this in the deal for their customers too?

Just a thought, that's all...

That would certainly be true to form and I do hope you are right!

[Richc1977]

Originally Posted by DaMac

Not at all before VM got ss4&5 in hd sky had this habit of putting champions league matches involving Manchester United (the most watched team in Europe 2009 - 2010) on sky sports 4, now you don't even need to be cynical to see that play.

Personally I think the ad revenue will dictate. if they have am choice of putting a repeat of the Claire Balding show or a CL game featuring an English team on BTS2 I'm sure that the Ad revenue and their need to prove to UEFA that they can still get decent ratings will be an influence.

Well we'll find out soon enough.

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Good point, I guess TalkTalk doesn't have the same negotiating muscle as VM does.

I'm not so sure it's to do with negotiating power , Talk Talk sell broadband using a BT phoneline these are the very customers BT are looking to attract they also offer Youview and offer a more budget friendly package just like BT. VM already offers BB speeds far greater than BT's FTTC product so the majority are happy to stay put unlike those from other ISP's like Talk Talk , Sky etc.

The only other ISP to offer BT Sport is PlusNet and we all know who owns them.

[Richc1977]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

But they don't wholesale to Talk Talk either another of their competitors who use the Openreach network for their Broadband service , they aren't involved in the content war.

I'm not defending BT and I never disagreed with the statement BT are just as bad as SKY, my post was just more to say why they are just as bad.

SKY have built a business and grown a market which is largely down to securing premium exclusive content giving them USPs and bargaining power. They dictated and sowed up the UK market for many years and BT have played them at their own game in order to compete. So yes, definitely cutting from the same cloth at the moment.

Very brave to take on SKY and while I'm no fan of BT I am glad that at long last someone is having a go.

..... Obviously I'm totally bias being anti SKY.

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by Richc1977

I'm not defending BT and I never disagreed with the statement BT are just as bad as SKY, my post was just more to say why they are just as bad.

SKY have built a business and grown a market which is largely down to securing premium exclusive content giving them USPs and bargaining power. They dictated and sowed up the UK market for many years and BT have played them at their own game in order to compete. So yes, definitely cutting from the same cloth at the moment.

Very brave to take on SKY and while I'm no fan of BT I am glad that at long last someone is having a go.

..... Obviously I'm totally bias being anti SKY.

To be honest I have one friend my wallet , I agree with your points there are many things that infuriate me about Sky in fact too many to list.

I must admit though I'm getting equally concerned about BT in my opinion with the takeover of EE they have the potential to rule the roost and it's worrying the control they'll have over fixed line and mobile networks I think Vodafone and the other players have every right to be concerned.

I say this as a customer of both.

[Bananaman_007]

Vodafone already have a strong relationship with Sky and i fully expect Now tv to be at the front of this new TV service from Vodafone.

As for AMC i am convinced that VM would not have signed up BT Sports without that being part of the deal.

[vincerooney]

Originally Posted by Richc1977

I'm not defending BT and I never disagreed with the statement BT are just as bad as SKY, my post was just more to say why they are just as bad.

SKY have built a business and grown a market which is largely down to securing premium exclusive content giving them USPs and bargaining power. They dictated and sowed up the UK market for many years and BT have played them at their own game in order to compete. So yes, definitely cutting from the same cloth at the moment.

Very brave to take on SKY and while I'm no fan of BT I am glad that at long last someone is having a go.

..... Obviously I'm totally bias being anti SKY.

I agree with your sentiment in a sense but all I know is I paid a lot less when sky owned all the football. sure they dictated the price but I got all EPL football, champions league, fa cup and England games under one subscription.

Now in theory I pay for two.

In a way Ofcom should be investigated for the crime they committed at giving another multi million pound company the opportunity to steal money from us all (I'm sure it was Ofcom who said sky couldn't have all the epl rights anymore?).

"we're doing this to provide choice and value for the tv viewer"

yeah sure you were. nice fat little lunches and bonuses from sky and bt executives for getting two companies onto the football rights gravy train!

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by vincerooney

I agree with your sentiment in a sense but all I know is I paid a lot less when sky owned all the football. sure they dictated the price but I got all EPL football, champions league, fa cup and England games under one subscription.

Now in theory I pay for two.

In a way Ofcom should be investigated for the crime they committed at giving another multi million pound company the opportunity to steal money from us all (I'm sure it was Ofcom who said sky couldn't have all the epl rights anymore?).

"we're doing this to provide choice and value for the tv viewer"

yeah sure you were. nice fat little lunches and bonuses from sky and bt executives for getting two companies onto the football rights gravy train!

It was the EC that required the Premier League to sell its rights to more than one bidder. It was not Ofcom.
In a way, the sports pay-TV market was artificially skewed in Sky's favour by government regulation. Firstly, BT was not allowed to sell its own payTV service until 2001. Secondly, the cable companies were licensed on a town-by-town basis, not nationally. This kept them distracted by mergers and without the scale and buying power to purchase sports content successfully in the long term.
As a result of this regulation, Sky was able to keep a large number of sports rights for a long time and to use the rights to develop its market share at the expense of its competitors and to secure a 64% market share of the pay TV market. This dominant position is the reason for the must-wholesale obligations that it has placed on it for SS1 and SS2.

[Dave42]

Originally Posted by vincerooney

I agree with your sentiment in a sense but all I know is I paid a lot less when sky owned all the football. sure they dictated the price but I got all EPL football, champions league, fa cup and England games under one subscription.

Now in theory I pay for two.

In a way Ofcom should be investigated for the crime they committed at giving another multi million pound company the opportunity to steal money from us all (I'm sure it was Ofcom who said sky couldn't have all the epl rights anymore?).

"we're doing this to provide choice and value for the tv viewer"

yeah sure you were. nice fat little lunches and bonuses from sky and bt executives for getting two companies onto the football rights gravy train!

that was a EU ruling Vince that no one platform can have all the games

[Richc1977]

Originally Posted by vincerooney

I agree with your sentiment in a sense but all I know is I paid a lot less when sky owned all the football. sure they dictated the price but I got all EPL football, champions league, fa cup and England games under one subscription.

Now in theory I pay for two.

True but I paid a lot less when all the sport was on FTA.

You want one subscription, I want sport back on FTA. Both are pipe dreams whose boats have long since sailed.

SKY created a premium sports market and ultimately gave birth to a beast of a market in the UK. Multiple subscriptions was an inevitable outcome, it's simple economics and it will continue to grow (perhaps a third sometime in the near future). However just be mindful of who got the ball rolling and who fuelled the demand when Sky Sports subscribers moan about multiple subs .

I actually hope to see many more multiple subscriptions in the future, e.g. divided by sport such as a cricket, tennis etc...

Just as XL customers are unhappy about paying an extra £3 for sport they don't watch the same goes for Cricket Fans, F1 fans, Tennis fans, NFL fans, etc.. who have to subscribe to SKY SPORTS who's price is over inflated due to the ridiculous amounts they have paid for PL. If you broke down a £35 (no idea of current cost) SKY Sports subscription by sport/competition you will probably be paying £25 for PL Football and about £2 for the cricket, £1 for F1 etc...

I like the growing US trend for MLB, NFL, NHL passes. You pay for the sport you watch and often can have an option to follow your team. However all the time SKY dominate the market it's unlikely to happen here, they have already restricted the NFL UK game pass by having them exclude many games SKY show and all the playoffs.



I know it's anti SKY chat again, I can't help myself they make it so easy

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Speaking personally, I wouldn't criticise capitalism. It's from capitalism you get the innovation and efficiency. However, in a mixed economy, this needs to be tempered with rules and regulation. It's the Government that is failing here, not capitalism.

What would you propose the Government does?

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

...Or they won't pay the price. Don't forget that Talk Talk is an economy option and their main concern is to keep costs down so they can undercut the big boys.

Good point. And most of their TV subscribers just access the basic channels and don't pay for premium content.[/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

That would certainly be true to form and I do hope you are right!

Fingers crossed! Slight irony that it was VM that sold its stake in the CBS-Zone channels to AMC in the first place, thus bringing them to the UK market.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

What would you propose the Government does?
.

In my view, the Government should look closely at exclusivity contracts and ensure that the needs of the consumer are taken into account.

It is ridiculous that we have to pay multiple subscriptions and have numerous devices to ensure that we have all the content that we want.

I know that some on this forum seem happy with this situation, despite the fact that the current state of affairs is hitting them in the pocket as well, but we're not all made of money!

Virgin Media have the opportunity to rectify some of these issues by allowing multiple streaming services on their Tivo boxes, but so far have declined to do so. If this straight forward solution to achieve John Malone's stated goal of bringing maximum content to cable viewers from multiple providers cannot be achieved, surely there is an urgent need for the Government to step in and sort the problems of exclusivity and the existing situation of having to buy multiple devices just to access your required content.

If the Government won't step in, our only hope seems to be the EU, who seem less hesitant to tackle big business monopolies. Not that I'm a big fan of the EU!

[ozsat]

But 10+ years ago the public were crying that the rights should not be with one broadcaster (Sky) and should be shared.

At the time the only other broadcasters were really BBC and ITV.

But those who complained got what they asked for - even if it wasn't what they meant.