VM CEO: We don't need HD channels

[brundles]

VM finally come clean about the lack of HD channels

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitalt...d-channel.html

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by brundles

VM finally come clean about the lack of HD channels

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitalt...d-channel.html

Been saying that for months now but no one listened

[cimt]

What the?!?! Has he not realised how much people pay for HDTVs for HD channels? People will end up going to $ky... What an idiot.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by cimt

What the?!?! Has he not realised how much people pay for HDTVs for HD channels? People will end up going to $ky... What an idiot.

So no HD = First mistake.

Phorm Spyware system = Second mistake.

STM for most of the day to save money on upgrades = Third mistake

Excellent first few months in the job would you not say.

Will now wait for the retraction and the statement that he was taken out of context by the big bad press

[Bob]

They normally say one thing and do another...I hope this is the case with HD

[frogstamper]

VM have missed the boat on HD and this is Berketts way of saving face.

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by brundles

VM finally come clean about the lack of HD channels

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitalt...d-channel.html

Never the Same Colour is hardly never the same colour in this day and age of televisions powered by ICs not Valves. Good quality SD is not as good here as it is in the UK 480lines vs 525 lines but it is not that far off.
It is a stance that will have to change once ITV/4/5HDs all come on stream but for now he has a point.

[demented]

Let the exodus begin...

I wonder whether he literally said either of the headlines at any point. It just seems a very arrogant and in your face thing to say to people crying out for any more linear HD channels.

I really like VOD, it's great (although I don't think it's improved that much since launch a couple or so years back) but a few VOD offerings are needed ontop of a few HD channels. Soon Sky will have 15 proper hd channels (not counting luxe or box office). Having 4 or 5 HD channels on VM + vod would placate quite a few people but just 1 will lose customers.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by SMHarman

Never the Same Colour is hardly never the same colour in this day and age of televisions powered by ICs not Valves. Good quality SD is not as good here as it is in the UK 480lines vs 525 lines but it is not that far off.
It is a stance that will have to change once ITV/4/5HDs all come on stream but for now he has a point.

After all many companies just sell the same TVs in America that they do in Europe (which is why most modern TVs handle PAL and NTSC).

As for the CEO? While I agree that HD probably isn't the selling point that the industry appears to think it is (a lot of my friends aren't that bothered about quality of reproduction as long as the content is interesting, and I suspect this pattern is repeated nationwide), the CEO does appear to be sticking his head in the sand, and may well find that Virgin is left behind if HD does become a major selling point.

[LiamTG]

Does this chap even listen to customers? Ya know that one's that pay his wages and buy is service!

The VOD is brilliant, no doubt about it. However people want HD channels.

[Nedkelly]

It will not be long before he has to leave for family matters as most of the CEOs do

[v0id]

I think it's time VM found a new CEO

I am not trying to be controversial, but I couldn't find where, in the article, either of them said "We only need one HD channel" - in fact, the article states "The cable operator is currently running a major marketing campaign focusing on VoD and claims to be expanding content rapidly, including in HD"

[brundles]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

I am not trying to be controversial, but I couldn't find where, in the article, either of them said "We only need one HD channel" - in fact, the article states "The cable operator is currently running a major marketing campaign focusing on VoD and claims to be expanding content rapidly, including in HD"

That's a fair comment, but what the article IS saying is that they don't feel they need more HD channels. As they only have 1 now, that's essentially the same as saying they only need 1 HD channel.

Another article here. At the risk of asking a stupid question, can someone clarify what they're referring to by "sweetheart deals"?

[OLD BOY]

Howard Watson said: "I don’t think we’re losing customers because we don’t have the HD lineup that Sky has. It’s not causing us a churn problem..."

He has totally misread the situation. First of all, if he read the various forums on this subject he will realise that a lot of people are eagerly awaiting more HD channels from VM and when they hear this news, he may find egg on his face very swiftly.

Secondly, if VM are to get a fair share of the customers who have yet to switch to digital, who does he think they will turn to with their new HD ready TVs with an attitude like that?

I have said it before, but I'll say it again just in case Mr Watson wants to take a peek at the reaction. VM needs a minimum of the four terrestrial HD channels that will be broadcasting by the end of the year. If they do that and massively increase their HD choice on VOD, they might just get away with attracting customers from Sky by advertising their HD services as free.

If they continue to ignore what their customers and potential customers want, VM will never be able to compete with the likes of Sky.