General : Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2013) Vol. 2.

[denphone]

The trouble is these big companies abuse their market position all too often in buying these rights and this in the end will always be at the detriment of the customers as he or she will always end up paying more in the end and most important secondly will have no chance of seeing some of their favourite series because of Protectionism by certain companies.

The idea solution would to have a more rigorous regulator as the current one has less bite then a 1 month old puppy.

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Really !!!! I'm sure many first run US series are on channels like Alibi , Watch , Fox , Comedy Central all of which are behind a paywall so to me it seems the money is more the deciding factor for the studios.

He does have a point though, 24, Lost and House (Glee?) all started on terrestrial and ended up with larger audiences than fellow Sky1 shows. Though I think Channel 5 must have started doing better deals because I fail to see why The Mentalist hasn't been snatched up by Sky or Universal.

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by Jameseh

He does have a point though, 24, Lost and House (Glee?) all started on terrestrial and ended up with larger audiences than fellow Sky1 shows. Though I think Channel 5 must have started doing better deals because I fail to see why The Mentalist hasn't been snatched up by Sky or Universal.

I agree with the point that on terrestrial they get bigger viewing figures , I was merely pointing out that the studios don't seem to be overly bothered about this as they sell many first run series to the pay TV providers presumably for the money.

Oh no doubt, maybe if BBC and ITV with their far bigger budgets were in the bidding we'd get some on terrestrial but they're too busy finding britain's next children's party singer.

[Chad]

Originally Posted by Dave42

it all comes down to money Chad mate and terrestrial channels cant compete with sky it that simple and sky know they will always outbid them so it not them dropping the ball it the money

---------- Post added at 13:29 ---------- Previous post was at 13:24 ----------



are you surprised Den sky will never ever do anything wrong in there eyes

That is a bit of a sweeping dismissive statement.

Does that mean my views may be dismissed by some on here purely because of who I get my TV service from? If I post anything negative about Virgin it’ll be put down to having SKY. If I post anything positive about SKY it’ll be because I’m a fanboy. If I don’t agree with others views on SKY I’m seen to be leaping to their defence.

What is the point of trying to engage in debate, or offer an alternative point of view, if people judge you on your profile information ahead of your post?

[colin25]

Originally Posted by Chad

That is a bit of a sweeping dismissive statement.

Does that mean my views may be dismissed by some on here purely because of who I get my TV service from? If I post anything negative about Virgin it’ll be put down to having SKY. If I post anything positive about SKY it’ll be because I’m a fanboy. If I don’t agree with others views on SKY I’m seen to be leaping to their defence.

What is the point of trying to engage in debate, or offer an alternative point of view, if people judge you on your profile information ahead of your post?

lol..that is because you are arguing with virgin fanboys...they would never allow bad words about virgin..and think sky are trying to steal theirs

[passingbat]

Originally Posted by Chad

What is the point of trying to engage in debate, or offer an alternative point of view, if people judge you on your profile information ahead of your post?

There are some posters who are biased towards the service that they use; so much so, that they appear to have blinkers on. To me, those peoples' views are worthless.

Chad isn't one of them and I value the points you puts across in your posts.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Chad

That is a bit of a sweeping dismissive statement.

Does that mean my views may be dismissed by some on here purely because of who I get my TV service from? If I post anything negative about Virgin it’ll be put down to having SKY. If I post anything positive about SKY it’ll be because I’m a fanboy. If I don’t agree with others views on SKY I’m seen to be leaping to their defence.

What is the point of trying to engage in debate, or offer an alternative point of view, if people judge you on your profile information ahead of your post?

Come on Chad stop throwing the dummy out of the pram as most of us respect yours and other Sky customers opinions but of course we are going to disagree but remember even if we do disagree remember the stuff aimed at you boys is just pure lighthearted banter.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by colin25

lol..that is because you are arguing with virgin fanboys...they would never allow bad words about virgin..and think sky are trying to steal theirs

Fanboy oh l don't think so dear chap.

[johnasimmons]

I thought this was the Coming Soon to Virgin TV thread, not 'lets slag off VM/Sky'...

[denphone]

Yes indeed and one wonders when MB will give us some more good news as to when some of these HD channels will arrive.

[passingbat]

Originally Posted by colin25

lol..that is because you are arguing with virgin fanboys...they would never allow bad words about virgin..

Have a [few] bad words on me

The selection of channels on MRS stinks!

---------- Post added at 16:25 ---------- Previous post was at 16:22 ----------

Originally Posted by johnasimmons

I thought this was the Coming Soon to Virgin TV thread, not 'lets slag off VM/Sky'...

You've not been around here much then?

Think of it as a bit of light relief between new channels appearing. And trust me; there are many times when we need a lot of light relief

[denphone]

Yes l quite agree and the 100's of so called apps that were supposed to come are still stuck in the coming soon part of Virgin's future plans.

[Dave42]

Originally Posted by Chad

That is a bit of a sweeping dismissive statement.

Does that mean my views may be dismissed by some on here purely because of who I get my TV service from? If I post anything negative about Virgin it’ll be put down to having SKY. If I post anything positive about SKY it’ll be because I’m a fanboy. If I don’t agree with others views on SKY I’m seen to be leaping to their defence.

What is the point of trying to engage in debate, or offer an alternative point of view, if people judge you on your profile information ahead of your post?

im just saying it not the terrestrial channels dropping the ball it because they not got the money to compete against sky so sky will always win on content they want it not because your with sky you got right to chose whatever platform you want like everyone else mate was only saying sky will win because of the money that's all and I have criticized VM before and will do again when the need arises

[harry_hitch]

Originally Posted by ocav

I doubt that, considering.BlinkBox rent them at £1.99 per episode.

Plus Now TV is a subscription service, not a rental service, so you'll probably pay £5-£10 a month to watch Atlantic, Sky1, Sky Living, and Sky Arts, which is bad considering for an extra fiver you can get a Sky Go Pass and watch UKTV channels, National Geographic, History, the Channel 4 channels and some kids channels with On Demand

Was not aware of BlinkBox prices (forgot it existed, truth be told.) Still £2 per episode is rather expensive for a internet streaming service. Assuming there are 20-24 episodes per season you are looking at £40-£48 per series. roughly the price of a blu-ray boxset. Is the picture quality of BlinkBox is up to HD standard? If it is I will stand corrected, if it is not it seems very expensive.
I would hope you are right with regards the £5-£10 per month (for the people who want it) however Sky Sports is a £10 daily charge and I fear Sky will choose this type of deal (£x per episode) for Atlantic.