Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2011) Vol. I.

[spiderplant]

Originally Posted by alwaysabear

Content exactly that is what people are asking for. Where did you get 80 HD channels from I have never seen that figure mentioned?

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External...xUeXBlPTM=&t=1

"we are providing 300 standard definition channels, 30 HD channels at the moment, but with a path to grow to 80 HD channels over the next two years, or three years."

[LexDiamond]

Originally Posted by mersey70

Insist as some people do there is no evidence at all that Sky are 'withholding' Atlantic, if they were then lord knows what VM (who have confirmed they are) in negotiations for, now whether they are pricing competitors out is another matter altogether but I guess in theory they both conclude with the same outcome.

Let's also be clear that Sky Atlantic is only 'free' for a limited period of time, I think in August it becomes part of the Variety Pack and the HD version is only available to HD pack customers from launch. In my opinion 'free' is a very loose term that both VM and Sky use at times, a bit along the lines of the much mooted 'unlimited' word that ISP's and mobile operators often use.

Of course you are correct that Sky isn't a monopoly and it is a nonsense to suggest they are, however whether they are abusing their dominant market position in premium pay content is another argument altogether but that is upto the regulator to decide. A thorough review is needed perhaps when looking at the sale of BSkyB and if they decide all is in order then that's fine, if not then something needs to be done.

The way it seems to me is that Sky Atlantic is just a huge PR excercise for now. Eventually it will just become any old Sky channel that is nothing more special than the other Sky channels.

I'm still not clear why the regulator would look into Sky's dominant position specifically in reference to VM. Sure the position is dominant but why should VM be protected when VM are going ahead and selling Sky its channels anyway.

[Dave42]

Originally Posted by mersey70

Exclusive and withholding mean totally different things.

It could be all manner of reasons why it will be exclusive, I accept it has the same outcome for VM/BT viewers though.

sky exclusive means they never had any intention of letting anyone else have it meaning they withholding it look at there track record for withholding channels plain to see

[mersey70]

Originally Posted by Dave42

sky exclusive means they never had any intention of letting anyone else have it meaning they withholding it

Thanks for clearing that up, maybe you should tell Mr Berkett to stop wasting his time then.

---------- Post added at 09:15 ---------- Previous post was at 09:04 ----------

Originally Posted by LexDiamond

The way it seems to me is that Sky Atlantic is just a huge PR excercise for now. Eventually it will just become any old Sky channel that is nothing more special than the other Sky channels.

I'm still not clear why the regulator would look into Sky's dominant position specifically in reference to VM. Sure the position is dominant but why should VM be protected when VM are going ahead and selling Sky its channels anyway.

You make a very good point about VM selling their channels, of course they didn't have to.

What I think might be useful is if Sky did indeed enter an agreement (as they seem to have with VM, no one for sure knows though if this included future channel launches) where they agree access to all of their basic HD channels is that they are not circumventing such agreements by pricing them unreasonably and again I am speculating on whether that has happenned too, there could be all manner of reasons why certain channels are not available on VM, I really do not know. No one on here does.

[muppetman11]

As I always say on here why do virgin spend so much time chasing Sky channels when there are lots of other good HD channels out there.

[clinteastman]

I'm slightly confused at peoples reactions to the Telegraph article. He's talking about not going for Sky customers via the pay TV platform but via their digital network. He's not saying they have given up on pay TV just that Sky will always have more linear content (but not more on nonlinear).

As a side note (and I know it's a ways off) I personally see the death of linear content delivery, it's just such an old fashioned idea and highly inconvenient.

[LexDiamond]

Originally Posted by mersey70

You make a very good point about VM selling their channels, of course they didn't have to.

What I think might be useful is if Sky did indeed enter an agreement (as they possibly did with VM, no one for sure knows though) where they agree access to all of their basic HD channels (where OFCOM have not set a price unlike some of the sports channels) is that they are not circumventing such agreements by pricing them unreasonably and again I am speculating on whether that has happenned too, there could be all manner of reasons why certain channels are not available on VM, I really do not know. No one on here does.

The only thing that concerns me here is that we are actually talking about a position where pre Atlantic HD, Sky actually went ahead and weakened their own position. Sky 1 is an important channel for alot of people. And Sky actually charge their customers a sub of £10 per month to receive the the HD version of this channel.

Now Sky consolidated their position over BT Vision firstly removing SSN from Freeview in response to making SS1 and SS2 to BT Vision customers and then via the purchase of VM channels they will remove Channel One from Freeview which it would seem is an important channel for Freeview.

However in this process they weakened their position to VM as for the average viewer with no premium subs or HD subs they probably get a better deal on VM as they at least get some HD channels in their basic sub as well as actually get Sky 1 HD included. Sure Sky will always have more channels but for the average viewer VM does cover the basics.

Atlantic HD is Sky's strike back to this. It just seems to me specifically in relation to how things have transpired over the last few months, VM aren't actually the weaklings in this industry. If anything, VM have many advantages on their platform and Sky having to make its channels available under a structure where VM do not continue to sub their HD would be unfair. If HD content was charged the same way on both, then that would be fair but then inevitably VM customers would have to pay more and customers not wishing to do so would lose what they already have for HD.

[DaMac]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

As I always say on here why do virgin spend so much time chasing Sky channels when there are lots of other good HD channels out there.

I do agree to a point, Look at Film4 HD, what a scoop - shame it has adverts (that advertise sky broadband), virgin could target other very good channels and offer to operate and broadcast an HD variant at no extra cost to channel owner, with the right to pass stream on to other platform providers for a small carriage charge, or for access to other platform providers channels. Dont know if it is viable to do that, but offering VM exclusive HD channels would certainly be a thing to look at. I have to admit though some of the programs that are launching on atlantic hd do look good, but because im commited to supporting the best broadband around, i may need to find them and view them by other means

Originally Posted by LexDiamond

The quote you posted specifically referred to Sky Atlantic HD and not the SD version. There is no evidence from that quote that Sky want to withhold the content.

Sky isn't a monopoly though. And pay tv prices are very reasonable in the UK. Comparing it to other activities, it is cheap.

Taking the example of Sky Atlantic, it is free to Sky customers. It costs them nothing. Under regulation, if this was made available to all platforms at the same price then either Sky's sub would go up or profits go down. Either way Sky is worse off for paying for HBO content and putting it on to a channel.

Like I said Sky isn't a monopoly. Regulating a company that isn't a monopoly is like punishing it for being too successful. And regulation in non monopoly situations will inevitably be to weaken that company's position which will one way or another lead to higher prices.

Sky always say HD when they mention channels. I've seen sky customers complain that if you were to go by their advertising their content isn't available on sd channels. I really don't know how much clearer they could be when they say they are using this channel to further grow the content gap between themselves and other platforms.
The rest of your post and subsequent posts just seem to be taking the side of a company who are misusing their dominant position to the detriment of the general public. Like Mersey70 has said, with a bit of luck this might looked in to the competition commission who will hopefully take into account the interests of us customers and not Just Sky's interests. Whatever happens Sky will be laughing all the way to the bank. If they were to make this channel available to all platforms they would make more money out of it but they wouldn't be using their dominant position to poach customers off other platforms. And wouldn't that be more advantageous to us customers?

[LexDiamond]

Originally Posted by ahardie

Sky always say HD when they mention channels. I've seen sky customers complain that if you were to go by their advertising their content isn't available on sd channels. I really don't know how much clearer they could be when they say they are using this channel to further grow the content gap between themselves and other platforms.
The rest of your post and subsequent posts just seem to be taking the side of a company who are misusing their dominant position to the detriment of the general public. Like Mersey70 has said, with a bit of luck this might looked in to the competition commission who will hopefully take into account the interests of us customers and not Just Sky's interests. Whatever happens Sky will be laughing all the way to the bank. If they were to make this channel available to all platforms they would make more money out of it but they wouldn't be using their dominant position to poach customers off other platforms. And wouldn't that be more advantageous to us customers?

VM have been trying poach customers from Sky too though. That is just the way the market works.

Sky have made available Sky 1 HD, SS1 and SS2 HD, Movies in HD and will be making red button available to VM soon. So contrary to popular belief Sky aren't actually hogging their material and the content did eventually be made available to VM.

Also please look at VM's pricing structure. It is not compatible with Sky's pricing structure. There can never possibly be competition wholly on a platform basis until VM drop its free HD to XL customers for basic channels. This will lead to either price increases for VM customers or loss of channels that are HD. The reality is that consumers are probably in the best place right now or possibly close to it.

And like I said before, VM sold its channels to Sky because it wanted to. No regulator is seriously going to look into basic packages knowing that the two main pay tv providers are happy with the market place and are offering competitive packages.

[Digital Fanatic]

Originally Posted by LexDiamond

VM have been trying poach customers from Sky too though. That is just the way the market works.

Sky have made available Sky 1 HD, SS1 and SS2 HD, Movies in HD and will be making red button available to VM soon. So contrary to popular belief Sky aren't actually hogging their material and the content did eventually be made available to VM.Also please look at VM's pricing structure. It is not compatible with Sky's pricing structure. There can never possibly be competition wholly on a platform basis until VM drop its free HD to XL customers for basic channels. This will lead to either price increases for VM customers or loss of channels that are HD. The reality is that consumers are probably in the best place right now or possibly close to it.

And like I said before, VM sold its channels to Sky because it wanted to. No regulator is seriously going to look into basic packages knowing that the two main pay tv providers are happy with the market place and are offering competitive packages.

This would never have happened without the sale of VMtv.

[alwaysabear]

Originally Posted by spiderplant

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External...xUeXBlPTM=&t=1

"we are providing 300 standard definition channels, 30 HD channels at the moment, but with a path to grow to 80 HD channels over the next two years, or three years."

Thank you SP for supplying the link.
I do hope VM are going to supply all these extra 50 HD channels over the next few years.

[eugene]

Right, I have to say something on this. If some people on here had their way Virgin would pay silly money for Sky Atlantic and all our bills would have to go up to pay for it. Instead Virgin are rightly waiting for the advertisers to have a go at Sky and force them to make it available to Virgin Media at a much lower cost sot that it can be included in the XL package for example. If you look desperate to get something from Sky they'll fleece you. We'll obviously get it in the end. I for one would be disappointed if our bills had to go up substantially just to please a few people who demand Sky Atlantic now and would probably then never watch it and demand something else we haven't got.

[Media Boy UK]

Originally Posted by alwaysabear

Thank you SP for supplying the link.
I do hope VM are going to supply all these extra 50 HD channels over the next few years.

Here is the list of channels that Virgin can go after RIGHT NOW (Bar the Sky Branded channels):

=== Own by AETN UK ===
Bio HD
Crime & Investigation Network HD
HISTORY HD

=== Own by ABC Television Group ===
Disney Cinemagic HD
Disney XD HD

=== Own by ESPN Inc. (The Walt Disney Company/Hearst Corporation) ===
ESPN America HD

=== Own by ITV Digital Channels Ltd ===
ITV2 HD
ITV3 HD
ITV4 HD

=== Own by NBC Universal Global Networks ===
Universal Channel HD

=== Own by NGC Europe Limited ===
Nat Wild HD

=== Own by Rainbow Media ===
Rush HD
Sundance Channel HD

=== Own by Scripps Networks Interactive (Run by Chello Zone) ===
Food Network HD*** (Soon to start broadcasting).

=== Own by Twenty Four 7 Ltd. ===
Luxury Life HD

=== Own by UKTV ===
Eden HD
Good Food HD

=== Own by Viacom ===
Nickelodeon HD


***Virgin Media are rumoured to be set to sell their 50% of UKTV to Scripps Networks Interactive so Virgin may launch Food Network Channels as part of deal.

http://www.newstatesman.com/broadcas...y-british-uktv

[muppetman11]

Out of that list Media Boy I would like to see ESPNA HD , Nat Wild HD, Universal Channel HD and the remaining ITV HD channels purely for the odd US series on them and movies.