Virgin Media prepares to offload its content division - Page 2

**Chris** · 01-03-2009, 21:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

You should try reading articles on the internet and in the media, As that is where l get my info from.,

Respect to you Arthur, but reading articles isn't enough. You have to understand them. You totally misunderstood the FT article that you used to start this thread, and it's not the first time you've done that.

gadge · 03-03-2009, 18:10

Seems sky maybe intrested.
http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/88...V-acquisition/

**Chris** · 03-03-2009, 18:42

Threads merged

ncfc1902 · 03-03-2009, 23:42

If Virgin's channels have been up for sale for so long why did they rebrand ftn as Virgin 1?
Surely it will have to be rebranded again following a sale?

Media Boy UK · 03-03-2009, 23:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by ncfc1902

If Virgin's channels have been up for sale for so long why did they rebrand ftn as Virgin 1?
Surely it will have to be rebranded again following a sale?

As far as I know in 2007 Virgin Media did put them up for sale but they removed them from sale the few months later due to bids from other broadcasters not being high for Virgin to say ''Yes'' to them.

Then last weeks some media web sites posted that ''Virgin are expected to begin the sale of its content division.''

**Chris** · 05-03-2009, 18:41

Thread moved to a more appropriate location

sparky621 · 05-03-2009, 18:46

Thanks Chris, when I looked if a thread already existed I couldn't find one so that's why I started my own. Old news I can see now!

Horizon · 05-03-2009, 22:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Broadbandings

Or maybe as he heard his division may well be being sold he wanted to move on.

Indeed. Whoever buys VMtv will want their own people in charge.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

There may be implications for the company when they sell their channels, however. They will get in the order of Ã‚Â£500m for that sale, and the question is, how will they use that money? They could use it to bring down their debt, to improve services to VM customers, to invest in HD or IPTV, or perhaps to buy ITV shares.

In light of Malcolm Wall leaving VM's tv division today, I go with the last option on that. But before then, Sky have got to fail in their appeal in having to forcibly sell off their stake in ITV.

As you say, ITV's shares are dead cheap, so if Sky does depart it would be a good opportunity for VM, but they're not the only ones who may make a move. RTL being the most obvious one, but also other media/telecoms companies like BT may try to buy ITV too.

Whether this would ultimately improve ITV's fortunes, who can tell. At least they would have their own guaranteed distribution platform, if VM did buy them. But making better programmes would help ITV too.

Ignitionnet · 06-03-2009, 09:29

Why sell a profitable and successful business, VMTV, to pick up shares in an unprofitable and unsuccessful one, ITV, even at a discount?

There's a good reason why ITV's shares are cheap.

I will still run with that VM are as a whole clearing the decks to be sold and the TV division may not have been as attractive to other cablecos / private buyers as the rest of the company.

jab1990 · 08-03-2009, 13:14

sorry could someone just clear up the situation for me. Are they selling the tv platform or just the channels they own?

m419 · 08-03-2009, 18:12

They are planning to sell the share in the UKTV channels which they partly own with the BBC, these channels include UKTV Food,UKTV Style,Blightly,Dave,DaveJaVu,Yesterday,Watch,Alibi and G.O.L.D. Channel 4 is most likely to buy them.

Virgin Media Television Limited formerly Flextech and United Artists TV which owns Living,Bravo,Challenge,Trouble and Virgin 1 has been planned for sale but dont think they will now.

But those UKTV channels definately have to go!!! They are useless!!! Constant repeats from the BBC,hopefully under Channel 4's ownership, more content will be added.

Virgin Media have recently sold off there shopping channels.

Arthurgray50@blu · 08-03-2009, 18:23

I have said all along, that VM has to be taken over, by someone else.
It needs to give the Tv side a boost to give its customers hope, When VM took over, they came with all this rubbish of what it was going to be, and all this was just hype, even l fell for it, if VM sell there channels, then it has to put the money into a major change, that will take on Sky and get more customers, give the customers what they are crying out for more HD channels, better customer service and better quality channels.

m419 · 08-03-2009, 18:47

The thing is, Virgin Media's wholly owned channels such as Living have more decent programmes on then Sky Real Lives,Sky 2 and Sky 3, Sky show far too many repeats.

So now we have BBCi player,4OD,ITV Net player,Bravo OD,Living OD,Virgin1 OD and soon.......Five on demand and Warner TV.

Wonder if we'll ever see Sky player! just a thought!

jab1990 · 08-03-2009, 19:20

Thanks for clearing that up m419. I also think that the whole tv platform should be taken over. The only thing for me virgin's takeover brought was the brand. The cs has gone downhill, along with my internet. Granted they made strides with VOD but that has little of interest to me now as they have a lack of quality of shows, and do not update reguarly. (in mine own opinion)

m419 · 09-03-2009, 18:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by jab1990

Thanks for clearing that up m419. I also think that the whole tv platform should be taken over. The only thing for me virgin's takeover brought was the brand. The cs has gone downhill, along with my internet. Granted they made strides with VOD but that has little of interest to me now as they have a lack of quality of shows, and do not update reguarly. (in mine own opinion)

Well its up to the broadcasters,they choose what goes on NOT Virgin Media! Virgin Media are only responsible for the on-demand content from Living,Bravo,Challenge,Trouble and Virgin 1.

Furthermore, its mostly down to Sky that is holding back Virgin Media from offering good content, since most of the channels are in control or owned by Sky, there is no fair competition and Sky is holding back its rivals,this is unfair competition as they have created a near enough monopoly and keep refusing to provide content or keep rising prices to the point where rivals cant afford,there are also many channels such as Flaunt which have signed a contract saying that ''if you want your channel to be broadcasted across Sky TV, then you must make it available to Sky TV only and not Cable or Freeview.

This is a bad deal for consumers and is bad for the economy and will lead to more job losses,less content on TV and expensive subscription costs.

Furthermore, if Sky did create a 100% monopoly, they would charge such high subscription costs too! similar to how BT did it when they were privatised and didnt really have a competitor until 1986.

There should be regulations on providers that hold a 30% market share or more.

Virgin Media have provided good content on Living and Virgin 1 over the last year with new exclusive shows, remember, it will take longer than over night to do! Some work needs to be done with Challenge TV though!

Sky's channels vs Virgin Media's???

Well I did a poll and people prefered Virgin Media's!

Far too many repeats on the Sky channels!

Airline which has been repeated millions of times on ITV2 and millions of times on Sky Real Lives, Far too many repeats!!! And Sky wanted Ã‚Â£48 Million per year for it! No wonder Virgin Media plus 4 million customers said no to Sky channels!!!