General : Virgin Media & UKTV+ITV Channels

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by jfman

It’s not obvious at all.

Given that UKTV will be arguing over pennies per subscriber per month if ITV proposed adverse terms Virgin would have been better dealing with UKTV and kicking the can down the road again over ITV.

The fact there is a deal with ITV so quick makes it more likely it’s on terms the parties were close to anyway. It’d have been in ITVs interest to drag it out, arguing their content is more compelling than ever on the platform.

Do you really think that VM could have afforded to let the ITV channels go from from the service at this particular time?

Why on Earth would ITV have wanted to drag it out, it had been dragged out for 18 months already. The argument that their content was more compelling than ever is surely a reason to encourage VM to play ball and it obviously worked.

[Ddonald2016]

Originally Posted by Ultimate.Conj

I wouldn't say it was obvious.

Did you see what virgin also get in the deal?

Premium box sets
Extended on demand viewing
4k programming including sports

Not sure that is "giving in"

It’s really good news just wish itv or virgin would do into more detail

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by telegramsam

Looking at it from another point of view, ITV could of looked at Virgins hard stance with UKTV and thought "hey we don't want our channels withdrawn from the Virgin Media platform, we'll give in to what Virgin Media want". Just my opinion guys.

What VM wanted was to not start paying the retransmission fees that ITV wanted to start charging and had thus far always said that they would not pay them. The issue had been in deadlock for the past 18 months.

All things considered, I really don't think that ITV will have suddenly said, ok, you win, forget about the retransmission fees!

---------- Post added at 12:13 ---------- Previous post was at 12:07 ----------

Originally Posted by denphone

There was no ultimatum as that imaginary word is only in the pages of some newspapers who like to write banner headlines without any substantiation of proof.

---------- Post added at 11:51 ---------- Previous post was at 11:49 ----------



Retransmission fees were always part of the wider deal that ITV and Virgin signed so that was obviously not going to be announced until a full deal had been reached between the two on other matters.

Up until the deal was agreed, the VM stance was that they would not pay any retransmission fees point blank.

ITV gave VM an ultimatum to resolve the outstanding issues or they would switch off their feeds as early as the weekend. It can be no coincidence that this was done at this particular time.

Up until that point, VM had intended to broadcast an unauthorised feed from the Astra satellite intended for Freesat and Sky DTH customers.

---------- Post added at 12:19 ---------- Previous post was at 12:13 ----------

Originally Posted by Ddonald2016

It’s really good news just wish itv or virgin would do into more detail

That's unlikely to happen for reasons of commercial confidentiality, especially as VM wouldn't want to encourage the other eligible channels to make similar demands for retransmission fees, even though I now think that they will do anyway.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Do you really think that VM could have afforded to let the ITV channels go from from the service at this particular time?

Why on Earth would ITV have wanted to drag it out, it had been dragged out for 18 months already. The argument that their content was more compelling than ever is surely a reason to encourage VM to play ball and it obviously worked.

If ITV wanted to pressure VM they’d have pulled the channels full stop. That step would be unilateral.

You think the call centre is busy and discounts on the go just now are a lot, they’d be totally dwarfed by the complaints if ITV went off air.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by jfman

If ITV wanted to pressure VM they’d have pulled the channels full stop. That step would be unilateral.

You think the call centre is busy and discounts on the go just now are a lot, they’d be totally dwarfed by the complaints if ITV went off air.

It would have benefited neither party to pull the ITV channels without giving VM a chance to respond.

Oh yes, absolutely. The loss of the ITV channels would certainly have dwarfed the complaints about the loss of the UKTV channels, to the point where I think that it might have even threatened the continuing viability of the platform.

[Ben B]

Richard it seems to me like you are actually bothered whether or not Virgin has paid re-transmission fees. It's probably not going to have an effect on customers whether or not they have because they have to remain competitive in terms of pricing as otherwise people will just vote with their wallet and leave. The deal covers the entire ITV suite of channels and yes maybe there are details about re-transmission in the terms but this will have probably been on the proviso that Virgin receive 4K etc that they have managed to come to an agreement on (I will highlight this is my subjective opinion before anyone comments with 'were you at the negotiation table?' or similar). In terms of the other PSBs asking for re-transmission fees, the BBC probably won't because of the license fee. Channel 4 and Viacom both have commercial agreements for other channels so it might be brought to the table when negotiating for them but who knows.

With regards to the UKTV channels yes people will leave because they've gone if they don't come back. UKTV saying on Twitter that it's unlikely that the channels will return and pointing people in the direction of other providers could just be to put pressure on Virgin to reach a deal. I don't think Virgin are in that much of a weak position though given not everyone watches UKTV and the fact that they've just signed a multi year deal for BT Sport. Let's face it are sports fans who are Virgin Media customers going to want to spend £27.99 a month and upwards on top of a Sky package?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

It would have benefited neither party to pull the ITV channels without giving VM a chance to respond.

Oh yes, absolutely. The loss of the ITV channels would certainly have dwarfed the complaints about the loss of the UKTV channels, to the point where I think that it might have even threatened the continuing viability of the platform.

You are the one contending that Virgin are under pressure over a handful of minority interest channels leaving. Imagine the power that gives the UKs largest commercial broadcaster if they go off air?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

They have dug themselves into a hole and giving in to ITV was the least worse option, but this will have the effect of them now being viewed as an easy target to increase carriage costs.

The fact that ITV got nowhere after 18 months of negotiations and then, within 24 hours of giving VM an ultimatum after their platform had been weakened, VM agree a deal acceptable to them speaks for itself. Other channel operators will now be queuing up to inflate their carriage costs.

I have previously covered why the Sky basics issue was a whole different ball game on more than one occasion.

You would be saying that other providers will be queuing up to inflate their carriage costs had Virgin given into UKTV! I don't see how you make out that by letting UKTV go, this would embolden channel operators! On the contrary, it shows that VM believe that no deal is better than a bad deal.

Sky was a different ball game, because it was a more important issue than the UKTV issue is. This will blow over, and we will get more channels over the coming months to make up for the loss.

---------- Post added at 14:23 ---------- Previous post was at 14:20 ----------

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

As I said before, an already weakened platform could not not afford to also lose the ITV channels. It's pretty obvious that VM gave in to the requirements of ITV and this will not have gone unnoticed by the other channel providers.

How do you know the timing was not coincidental? This spat with ITV has been going on for a year now. It should not escape your notice that on demand provision was an important part of the dispute with UKTV. However, a deal with ITV on this has been achieved. This will improve our on demand content considerably.

---------- Post added at 14:28 ---------- Previous post was at 14:23 ----------

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Exactly. VM tried to get UKTV to accept less and it's always worth trying to get suppliers to provide things for less.

It didn't work, so VM thought that they'd push the issue and make the spat public. It's been handled appallingly and blown up in their face.

Customer discontent from a minority. I think Virgin would have expected that. The number of people viewing these channels on their V6 boxes will have been known to Virgin Media, so they knew there would be a limit to the number of cancellations that would occur.

Such a fuss for channels showing almost endless repeats.

---------- Post added at 14:33 ---------- Previous post was at 14:28 ----------

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Do you really think that VM could have afforded to let the ITV channels go from from the service at this particular time?

Why on Earth would ITV have wanted to drag it out, it had been dragged out for 18 months already. The argument that their content was more compelling than ever is surely a reason to encourage VM to play ball and it obviously worked.

They were already virtually ready to sign a deal, Richard. Anyway, this is good news, not bad.

[telegramsam]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

What VM wanted was to not start paying the retransmission fees that ITV wanted to start charging and had thus far always said that they would not pay them. The issue had been in deadlock for the past 18 months.

All things considered, I really don't think that ITV will have suddenly said, ok, you win, forget about the retransmission fees!
We honestly don't know what deal ITV and Virgin have agreed on regarding the retransmission fees. For all we know ITV MIGHT of given in on their demand for it.
---------- Post added at 12:13 ---------- Previous post was at 12:07 ----------



Up until the deal was agreed, the VM stance was that they would not pay any retransmission fees point blank.

ITV gave VM an ultimatum to resolve the outstanding issues or they would switch off their feeds as early as the weekend. It can be no coincidence that this was done at this particular time.

Up until that point, VM had intended to broadcast an unauthorised feed from the Astra satellite intended for Freesat and Sky DTH customers.

---------- Post added at 12:19 ---------- Previous post was at 12:13 ----------



That's unlikely to happen for reasons of commercial confidentiality, especially as VM wouldn't want to encourage the other eligible channels to make similar demands for retransmission fees, even though I now think that they will do anyway.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by jfman

You are the one contending that Virgin are under pressure over a handful of minority interest channels leaving. Imagine the power that gives the UKs largest commercial broadcaster if they go off air?

Correct.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Correct.

So it’s weak of the broadcaster to take a quick deal?

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

You would be saying that other providers will be queuing up to inflate their carriage costs had Virgin given into UKTV! I don't see how you make out that by letting UKTV go, this would embolden channel operators! On the contrary, it shows that VM believe that no deal is better than a bad deal.

Sky was a different ball game, because it was a more important issue than the UKTV issue is. This will blow over, and we will get more channels over the coming months to make up for the loss.

---------- Post added at 14:23 ---------- Previous post was at 14:20 ----------



How do you know the timing was not coincidental? This spat with ITV has been going on for a year now. It should not escape your notice that on demand provision was an important part of the dispute with UKTV. However, a deal with ITV on this has been achieved. This will improve our on demand content considerably.

---------- Post added at 14:28 ---------- Previous post was at 14:23 ----------



Customer discontent from a minority. I think Virgin would have expected that. The number of people viewing these channels on their V6 boxes will have been known to Virgin Media, so they knew there would be a limit to the number of cancellations that would occur.

Such a fuss for channels showing almost endless repeats.

---------- Post added at 14:33 ---------- Previous post was at 14:28 ----------



They were already virtually ready to sign a deal, Richard. Anyway, this is good news, not bad.

If VM give in to UKTV it will indeed show other channel operators that they are able to put pressure on VM to make things benefit themselves. I've already explained why I think that this is now the least worse option.

I've already explained why I think that the Sky issue and the response by the previous owners was totally different.

If you think that a dispute that had been going on for so long in deadlock and had resulted in an ultimatum by ITV to threaten to weaken the platform even more within days resulted in a satisfactory outcome for ITV within 24 hours was simply a coincidence you must be extremely gullible. Obviously, VM would want as much value from these retransmission fees as possible and negotiated these extras as part of the deal.

VM claim to know how many people watch various channels, yet I was arrogantly told that I never watched them, which didn't go down well with me! Also, this would not be accurate as people often leave their STB switched on for various reasons and, when the STB is switched off, it doesn't actually switch it off, it only kills the video & audio.

In the sense that 43% is a minority and that the cancellation lines are impossible to get through to, attention from Ofcom, legal bods challenging the legalities of their contract, negative attention across the media, many disgruntled customers, the loss of any goodwill built up over the years both now and into the future think I think it realistic to say that VM management totally misjudged the whole situation and, if they could have foreseen everything that's happened, would have (hopefully) handled things totally differently.

Again, I do not believe that they were ready to sign a deal. ITV saw that VM had put themselves in a weak position and fully exploited it. This news is a double edged sword for VM, but they simply had no other option as ITV will have been well aware. This will not have gone unnoticed by the likes of Sky etc.

---------- Post added at 18:48 ---------- Previous post was at 18:45 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

So it’s weak of the broadcaster to take a quick deal?

Depends what the deal is. It was obviously acceptable to ITV whereas the previous VM stance on not paying any retransmission fees under any circumstances hadn't been. Seems obvious that VM have backed down.

---------- Post added at 19:01 ---------- Previous post was at 18:48 ----------

Originally Posted by Ben B

Richard it seems to me like you are actually bothered whether or not Virgin has paid re-transmission fees. It's probably not going to have an effect on customers whether or not they have because they have to remain competitive in terms of pricing as otherwise people will just vote with their wallet and leave. The deal covers the entire ITV suite of channels and yes maybe there are details about re-transmission in the terms but this will have probably been on the proviso that Virgin receive 4K etc that they have managed to come to an agreement on (I will highlight this is my subjective opinion before anyone comments with 'were you at the negotiation table?' or similar). In terms of the other PSBs asking for re-transmission fees, the BBC probably won't because of the license fee. Channel 4 and Viacom both have commercial agreements for other channels so it might be brought to the table when negotiating for them but who knows.

With regards to the UKTV channels yes people will leave because they've gone if they don't come back. UKTV saying on Twitter that it's unlikely that the channels will return and pointing people in the direction of other providers could just be to put pressure on Virgin to reach a deal. I don't think Virgin are in that much of a weak position though given not everyone watches UKTV and the fact that they've just signed a multi year deal for BT Sport. Let's face it are sports fans who are Virgin Media customers going to want to spend £27.99 a month and upwards on top of a Sky package?

I don't personally think that the traditional cable companies should have to pay retransmission fees, however, my salient point is that the abysmal way that the UKTV issue has been handled has weakened the VM platform and put power into the hands of ITV and other significant channel providers to enable them to push up carriage costs & levy retransmission fees where applicable.

These increased costs, coupled with the other expenses incurred by the UKTV issue, the loss of projected revenue from downgrades/cancellations/loss of future customers is bound to leave a hole in VM finances now and for years to come.

I predict that a deal will eventually be done with UKTV for at least a partial return of the channels, so they can't even offset UKTV carriage costs from this.

I think it likely that customers who remain will be expected to plug the gap, which will further weaken the platform as some people will resist these price increases, though it's true to say that companies do tend to rely on inertia or forgetfulness from customers with regards to price increases.

Putting BT Sport into XL/Full House is certainly a plus for many customers in VM's favour, however, the whole business model relies on many people, whether sports fans or not, paying a little each month within the XL/Full House packs. If enough people downgrade, leave or fail to join, the BT Sport arrangement may become unsustainable.

If VM decided to keep it as a customer attraction tool, it would have to be subsidised, causing a further loss of revenue or price increases. If they decided to get rid of it, I think that would have a further detrimental effect on subscriber numbers as many people only pay for the top package (or are with VM at all) because of this perk.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

If VM give in to UKTV it will indeed show other channel operators that they are able to put pressure on VM to make things benefit themselves. I've already explained why I think that this is now the least worse option.

I've already explained why J think that the Sky issue and the response by the previous owners was totally different.

If you think that a dispute that had been going on for so long in deadlock and had resulted in an ultimatum by ITV to threaten to weaken the platform even more within days resulted in a satisfactory outcome for ITV within 24 hours was simply a coincidence you must be extremely gullible. Obviously, VM would want as much value from these retransmission fees as possible and negotiated these extras as part of the deal.

VM claim to know how many people watch various channels, yet I was arrogantly told that I never watched them, which didn't go down well with me! Also, this would not be accurate as people often leave their STB switched on for various reasons and, when the STB is switched off, it doesn't actually switch it off, it only kills the video & audio.

In the sense that 43% is a minority and that the cancellation lines are impossible to get through to, attention from Ofcom, legal bods challenging the legalities of their contract, negative attention across the media, many disgruntled customers, the loss of any goodwill built up over the years both now and into the future think I think it realistic to say that VM management totally misjudged the whole situation and, if they could have foreseen everything that's happened, would have (hoprfully) handled things totally differently.

Again, I do not believe that they were ready to sign a deal. ITV saw that VM had put themselves in a weak position and fully exploited it. This news is a double edged sword for VM, but they simply had no other option and as ITV will have been well are. It will nog have gone unnoticed by the likes of Sky etc.

---------- Post added at 18:48 ---------- Previous post was at 18:45 ----------



Depends what the deal is. It was obviously acceptable to ITV whereas the previous VM stance on not paying any retransmission fees under any circumstances hadn't been. Seems obvious that VM have backed down.

Well, the ITV deal has been done and most of what you have observed on here is complete speculation on your part.

The issue now is UKTV, and my take on that is that unless UKTV back down, we’ve kissed their asses goodbye. New channels coming soon!

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

If VM give in to UKTV it will indeed show other channel operators that they are able to put pressure on VM to make things benefit themselves. I've already explained why I think that this is now the least worse option.

I've already explained why J think that the Sky issue and the response by the previous owners was totally different.

If you think that a dispute that had been going on for so long in deadlock and had resulted in an ultimatum by ITV to threaten to weaken the platform even more within days resulted in a satisfactory outcome for ITV within 24 hours was simply a coincidence you must be extremely gullible. Obviously, VM would want as much value from these retransmission fees as possible and negotiated these extras as part of the deal.

VM claim to know how many people watch various channels, yet I was arrogantly told that I never watched them, which didn't go down well with me! Also, this would not be accurate as people often leave their STB switched on for various reasons and, when the STB is switched off, it doesn't actually switch it off, it only kills the video & audio.

In the sense that 43% is a minority and that the cancellation lines are impossible to get through to, attention from Ofcom, legal bods challenging the legalities of their contract, negative attention across the media, many disgruntled customers, the loss of any goodwill built up over the years both now and into the future think I think it realistic to say that VM management totally misjudged the whole situation and, if they could have foreseen everything that's happened, would have (hoprfully) handled things totally differently.

Again, I do not believe that they were ready to sign a deal. ITV saw that VM had put themselves in a weak position and fully exploited it. This news is a double edged sword for VM, but they simply had no other option and as ITV will have been well are. It will nog have gone unnoticed by the likes of Sky etc.

---------- Post added at 18:48 ---------- Previous post was at 18:45 ----------



Depends what the deal is. It was obviously acceptable to ITV whereas the previous VM stance on not paying any retransmission fees under any circumstances hadn't been. Seems obvious that VM have backed down.

---------- Post added at 19:01 ---------- Previous post was at 18:48 ----------



I don't personally think that the traditional cable companies should have to pay retransmission fees, however, my salient point is that the abysmal way that the UKTV issue has been handled has weakened the VM platform and put power into the hands of ITV and other significant channel providers to enable them to push up carriage costs.

These increased costs, coupled with the other expenses incurred by the UKTV issue, the loss of projected revenue from downgrades/cancellations/loss of future customers is bound to leave a hole in VM finances now and for years to come.

I predict that a deal will eventually be done with UKTV for at least a partial return of the channels, so they can't even offset UKTV carriage costs from this.

I think it likely that customers who remain will be expected to plug the gap, which will further weaken the platform as some people resist these price increases. Companies tend to rely on inertia of forgetfulness from customers.

VM will likely not be losing anywhere near the amount of money you are predicting. They have many other revenue generating sources and will still make a profit at years end.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Well, the ITV deal has been done and most of what you have observed on here is complete speculation on your part.

The issue now is UKTV, and my take on that is that unless UKTV back down, we’ve kissed their asses goodbye. New channels coming soon!

As an example, there are details like this available for your perusal to back up my claims regarding the number of dissatisfied customers, the concerns about the contract being deemed to be unfair and how people cànnot even get through to cancel and Ofcom involvement.

https://twitter.com/Ofcom/status/1022136683104481282

Yes, there are new channels coming; Food Network +1 and Travel Channel +1.