Sky Atlantic on Virgin Media

[Chad]

Originally Posted by ahardie

We are customers of their content though.

We are consumers of their content, not customers of their content. The one who buys the product is the customer, the one who uses the product is the consumer.

The prices we pay are set by Virgin. The prices we pay for SKY HD have apparently been set by SKY, but in reality if Virgin thought SKY was being unreasonable and the prices where too high for us their customers they wouldn't have completed a deal to bring SKY premium HD to Virgin.

Whatever we have access to just now is down to agreements reached between Virgin and SKY with and without the help of Ofcom. Are SKY really withholding services or are Virgin not offering enough to have access to them? Everything in business has a price, Virgin just need to offer enough to make SKY's head turn.

Actually come to think of it, don't SKY customers pay more than us for SKY Sports plus HD? It may only be in the region of about 75p. If that is accurate, SKY's customers are getting bloody good value for their money. 5 SKY Sports HD channels, SKY Mobile, SKY Player. Maybe Virgin should be reducing their pricing a little to reflect the gap in the service they provide to us when compared to SKY.

[howardmicks]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Think it's safe to say Sky Atlantic won't come to VM in either SD or HD read this

http://www.joe.ie/entertainment/what...shade-008684-1

For its director of programmes, Atlantic is seen as the biggest coup to ensure Freeview and Virgin Media customers or UPC customers in Ireland finally leave their service providers and sign up to Sky. "If this doesn't do it, we don't know what will." he adds.
Game Set+Match to sky

[1701-e]

We are paying them money.. and for the first time ever I got an e-mail from Sky Preview Screenings [support@skyscreenings.com] promotion as follows:

Brighten up your January with the glamour and charm of the 1920's as you get the chance to dig out your glad rags and see the first episodes of lavish Prohibition-era tale, Boardwalk Empire, before anyone else in the UK.

I may be a glass 1/2 full person, but where did they get my addy from -- got past a good filter!

the subject title btw is....

Exciting Preview in cinemas for Sky Customers!

[batchain]

Originally Posted by howardmicks

For its director of programmes, Atlantic is seen as the biggest coup to ensure Freeview and Virgin Media customers or UPC customers in Ireland finally leave their service providers and sign up to Sky. "If this doesn't do it, we don't know what will." he adds.
Game Set+Match to sky

It's amazing what people can be made to say if quoted out of context.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/orga...antic-x-factor

"It's the last piece of the jigsaw. We want them, Freeview viewers, to reappraise Sky. If this doesn't do it, we don't know what will."

Originally Posted by Chad

We are consumers of their content, not customers of their content. The one who buys the product is the customer, the one who uses the product is the consumer.

The prices we pay are set by Virgin. The prices we pay for SKY HD have apparently been set by SKY, but in reality if Virgin thought SKY was being unreasonable and the prices where too high for us their customers they wouldn't have completed a deal to bring SKY premium HD to Virgin.

Whatever we have access to just now is down to agreements reached between Virgin and SKY with and without the help of Ofcom. Are SKY really withholding services or are Virgin not offering enough to have access to them? Everything in business has a price, Virgin just need to offer enough to make SKY's head turn.

Actually come to think of it, don't SKY customers pay more than us for SKY Sports plus HD? It may only be in the region of about 75p. If that is accurate, SKY's customers are getting bloody good value for their money. 5 SKY Sports HD channels, SKY Mobile, SKY Player. Maybe Virgin should be reducing their pricing a little to reflect the gap in the service they provide to us when compared to SKY.

Ah thats OK then. It's OK for VM customers to pay full wack for Sky channels and not get a full service. Nice defence of consumer rights there. On pricing you do know that Ofcom has said that Sky are charging other platforms too much for reselling the channels. They have come to the same conclusion as you about Sky platform customers getting a good deal but strangely are blaming Sky whereas you seem to think it is VM's fault based on no facts at all. You seem determined to say that nothing is Sky's fault it is all their competitors fault.
The only defence for Sky, which isn't much good for us customers/consumers, is that any company would act like this if they were in Sky's dominant position. That just shows that we customers/consumers need protection from companies that have achieved this dominance.

[Ignitionnet]

The Ofcom decision regards Sky Sports 1 and 2. It contains nothing requiring Sky to sell every channel in their portfolio.

There was nothing stopping Virgin Media from purchasing content for themselves in this regard. If Virgin Media feel this is the case they are more than welcome to pursue Sky via the normal means.

Virgin Media evidently don't consider themselves too hard done by given that Sky charge for HD while Virgin are able to offer it for free.

Anyway we're going OT into a general Sky discussion which rarely ends constructively.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

The Ofcom decision regards Sky Sports 1 and 2. It contains nothing requiring Sky to sell every channel in their portfolio.

There was nothing stopping Virgin Media from purchasing content for themselves in this regard. If Virgin Media feel this is the case they are more than welcome to pursue Sky via the normal means.

Virgin Media evidently don't consider themselves too hard done by given that Sky charge for HD while Virgin are able to offer it for free.

Anyway we're going OT into a general Sky discussion which rarely ends constructively.

The thing that stops VM purchasing this content is money. They are heavily in debt and have been concentrating on upgrading a creaking tv network and upgrading broadband to compete with the likes of BT infinity. They are heavily in debt so where is this extra money you speak of?
They have just sold the channels they have to get a bit of ready cash. Even if they bid for content they would just be up against a company with far more money than them. It is a battle they couldn't win.
If you read my reply as a response to the poster I was quoting I think what I said about Ofcom is relevant. Sky is charging it's competitors too much for sports. He said Sky platform customers are getting a better deal. Quelle surprise.
Basically what I want Ignition is a fair deal for us customers and a level playing field across the tv platforms so that a tv provider who is such a dominant position as Sky doesn't force the vast majority of custors over to their platform and eventually achieve a monopoly. Not too much to ask is it?

[Ignitionnet]

Sky haven't done that so far, no reason to think they would now.

Sky have every right, given they are the ones investing in the content, to expect a return from it. If things were all that bad Sky would have no regulation at all and would be able to completely withhold all their content.

That Virgin Media are able to offer some HD for free, are paying down their debt and are quite robustly cash flow positive indicates the money is there if they choose to invest in content however the clear direction of the company has been towards being a carrier rather than provider of content.

It's pretty rich of Virgin Media to ask for access to anything given they refuse to offer either active or passive access to their network. Sky's content is their network really, they are a content business.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Sky haven't done that so far, no reason to think they would now.

Sky have every right, given they are the ones investing in the content, to expect a return from it. If things were all that bad Sky would have no regulation at all and would be able to completely withhold all their content.

That Virgin Media are able to offer some HD for free, are paying down their debt and are quite robustly cash flow positive indicates the money is there if they choose to invest in content however the clear direction of the company has been towards being a carrier rather than provider of content.

It's pretty rich of Virgin Media to ask for access to anything given they refuse to offer either active or passive access to their network. Sky's content is their network really, they are a content business.

Sky have never started up a general entertainment channel with the intentiion of keeping it purely to customers of the Sky platform before. That is new. This is in addition to customers paying Sky for sports but Sky keeping some content from them which is a spiteful act IMO. To get any access to Sky's premium HD VM had to sell their channels to them. Now customers are paying £7 a month for premium HD but Sky is still holding back some HD. From a customer/consumer point of view, this is wrong.
Access to VM's network is another matter. I am argueing this purely from a customer/consumer rights position. It doesn't harm the customer considering that one of their competitors has such dominance. I think I read that Ofcom had investigated this and come to that very conclusion.
I don't accept the rosy picture you paint of VM's financial position and giving some HD for free is to compete with Sky. It is actually things like this that I like about competition. The longer VM don't charge for HD the more pressure will be on Sky to drop the charge.
How much cash have Sky got and how much are VM in debt? Trying to compete with Sky on content would be like me going up against Lord sugar at a sotheby's auction.
I am arguing all this from a consumer/customer pov. If the position reversed tomorrow and VM started to act like sky, which I have no reason to believe they wouldn't, I would immediately start posting in favour of Sky customers rights. That is the thing though it will never happen becayuse although to an extent the cable industry has started to get it's act together, we have long since passed the tipping point where anyone can compete with Sky on a level playing field.

[howardmicks]

Any chance of of vm competing we sky have long gone and now relying on a overpriced tech(tivo) to keep customers and try and get new ones instead of getting new hd channels will probably be there downfall,One of my friends as just gone back over to sky and when he mentioned tivo the sky sales person replied we arent concerned about it.We dont just invest in new tech but channels also and that what customers want.
Sky are not my favourite company but at least they know what customers want also he got a 1tb sky box for £100

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by devilincarnate

You know why DF you got shouted down you are staff and i think that there are people on here who think that it is open season on VM staff no matter what has been said

That's the reason i don't generally get involved in VM threads because someone will throw the "you work for VM so you are biased" remark in your face.

Originally Posted by howardmicks

Any chance of of vm competing we sky have long gone and now relying on a overpriced tech(tivo) to keep customers and try and get new ones instead of getting new hd channels will probably be there downfall,One of my friends as just gone back over to sky and when he mentioned tivo the sky sales person replied we arent concerned about it.We dont just invest in new tech but channels also and that what customers want.
Sky are not my favourite company but at least they know what customers want also he got a 1tb sky box for £100

So isn't that a reason why we customer/consumers should be protected from the company that has almost total dominance?
Not sure where the getting the 1Tb box for £100 comes in to this thread. Virtually all companies do deals and the current price for existing customers is well over £200. I would guess though that if VM gave this new customer a better deal than existing customers you would be argueing that was a bad thing?

[howardmicks]

Originally Posted by ahardie

So isn't that a reason why we customer/consumers should be protected from the company that has almost total dominance?
Not sure where the getting the 1Tb box for £100 comes in to this thread. Virtually all companies do deals and the current price for existing customers is well over £200. I would guess though that if VM gave this new customer a better deal than existing customers you would be argueing that was a bad thing?

Agree with what yer saying,Just concerned that vm are pushing and expecting tivo to keep people happy and try and get new customers.Its the channels most people want and if they aint got em people are going to go elsewhere unfortuntly that being sky,Vm need to wake up fast!!!!!!!

[Digital Fanatic]

Originally Posted by howardmicks

Agree with what yer saying,Just concerned that vm are pushing and expecting tivo to keep people happy and try and get new customers.Its the channels most people want and if they aint got em people are going to go elsewhere unfortuntly that being sky,Vm need to wake up fast!!!!!!!

It's nice to have a good balance of both though. TiVo and VM's VOD, HD, Channels etc are a big draw for customers.

There's not many popular channels on Sky that VM customers don't have access to now.

VM are well aware of Sky's tactics

Sky has it's sights on Freeview viewers to be honest, any VM customers will be a bonus no doubt!

Originally Posted by howardmicks

Agree with what yer saying,Just concerned that vm are pushing and expecting tivo to keep people happy and try and get new customers.Its the channels most people want and if they aint got em people are going to go elsewhere unfortuntly that being sky,Vm need to wake up fast!!!!!!!

I disagree. Cable's major selling point has always been the broader range of services the platform can deliver (and in many cases the desire not to have a dish on the side of the house).

Virgin Media has an active TV subscriber in about 30% of all the serviceable households in the UK. Sky's penetration is about 40% (it has a lot more actual customers, but then it is accessible to all UK homes, not just the ones where they can lay a cable). If 'most' people were interested in channels, then we could reasonably expect Sky to be far further ahead of VM than it actually is.

In fact, 'most' people in the UK aren't interested in quantity at all. They don't have any kind of subscription TV and have upgraded to Freeview or Freesat because there's no longer any choice to stay with the basic analogue five.