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

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by carlwaring

C4 may have "had the chance to up their offer" but it was probably too much for them to justify spending on just the one show.

The point is that Sky have the money to be able to outbid any other channel if they want to. However, as has already been said, their strategy seems to be that they see how shows perform on other channels then, if they're a big hit, they'll swoop in with a bigger wad of cash and, essentially, nick the show.

Unfortunately in business Carl that's life , the highest bidder wins. It's like Wigan Athletic having a player since he was 8 and nurturing him through to the first team only for him to become a massive star and be bought by the likes of Chelsea and United.

[carlwaring]

True, but the point being that all his fans can still seem him play if they want to. No-one loses-out.

Now, in order for fans of Glee to (legally ) see the next season, they either have to spend more money or not see it.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by carlwaring

Now, in order for fans of Glee to (legally ) see the next season, they either have to spend more money or not see it.

Unless they already have Sky or VM (dependent on where it ends up)

Don't agree with the way Sky work, but lets not blow it out of proportion

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by carlwaring

C4 may have "had the chance to up their offer" but it was probably too much for them to justify spending on just the one show.

The point is that Sky have the money to be able to outbid any other channel if they want to. However, as has already been said, their strategy seems to be that they see how shows perform on other channels then, if they're a big hit, they'll swoop in with a bigger wad of cash and, essentially, nick the show.

Originally Posted by carlwaring

True, but the point being that all his fans can still seem him play if they want to. No-one loses-out.

Now, in order for fans of Glee to (legally ) see the next season, they either have to spend more money or not see it.

I will agree with you on that , however Sky is a business and they do what they feel is best to strengthen their own channels , whether we think it's right or wrong. At least most VM subscribers who are fans can still watch it ( well anyone on M+ or higher )

[devilincarnate]

Sky is expected to be the show's likely destination after reportedly offering more than double the amount Channel 4 paid for its first two seasons.

This what I was going from?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-13428649

---------- Post added at 23:42 ---------- Previous post was at 23:40 ----------

Originally Posted by Chad

What I don't understand is why Channel 4 and the BBC are caught out time and time again with this type of thing. When negotiating the initial deal they only seem to agree the first couple of seasons. Channel 4 had Lost for 2 seasons, then it went to SKY. BBC had 24 for 2 seasons, then it went to SKY. E4 had Glee for 2 seasons, now it looks like it's going to SKY. I think Channel 4 and the BBC need to be more aggressive and forward thinking whenever they snap up future TV rights from the States, just in case the programme becomes incredibly popular and runs for more than 2 seasons!

This is what I mean in the above quote? Due to the money offered

[denphone]

Originally Posted by carlwaring

C4 may have "had the chance to up their offer" but it was probably too much for them to justify spending on just the one show.

The point is that Sky have the money to be able to outbid any other channel if they want to. However, as has already been said, their strategy seems to be that they see how shows perform on other channels then, if they're a big hit, they'll swoop in with a bigger wad of cash and, essentially, nick the show.

And thats what they are doing is nicking these shows, its like a smaller football club bringing through a talented youngster and then as that youngster develops into a very good player one of the big teams comes in with a huge offer.

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by denphone

And thats what they are doing is nicking these shows, its like a smaller football club bringing through a talented youngster and then as that youngster develops into a very good player one of the big teams comes in with a huge offer.

Indeed it happens all the time in business.

[carlwaring]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

Unless they already have Sky or VM (dependent on where it ends up)

Reported as Sky1. And, as I said before, far more people have access to E4 than Sky1.

According to the latest BARB (May 2 - May 8) figures, "Glee" was E4's #1 show with 1.9m viewers. Sky1's #1 show in the same week was "Hawaii Five-0 with just 843k.

Okay, that's actually more than the rest of E4's Top Ten, which does blunt my point slightly, I suppose

---------- Post added at 09:31 ---------- Previous post was at 09:30 ----------

Originally Posted by muppetman11

I will agree with you on that , however Sky is a business and they do what they feel is best to strengthen their own channels , whether we think it's right or wrong. At least most VM subscribers who are fans can still watch it ( well anyone on M+ or higher )

Oh absolutely. But they're still a near-enough monopoly to worry about

[muppetman11]

VM to expand in Derry

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/4...-in-derry.html

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

VM to expand in Derry

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/4...-in-derry.html

Not expand as they are already there. In Derry/Londonderry it's the analogue overbuild to give them Digital TV

[muppetman11]

I really should read the article in full :-)

[Felim_Doyle]

Originally Posted by undertakereddie

I Just Heared That Sky 1 HD Have Got Some Big News They are Going To Reveal it Tomorrow Sometime Found Out On There Facebook Page.

Wow! That was really hard to read in first caps.! It may even be worse than all caps.! A bit more punctuation would help too.

[carlwaring]

Well their last "big news" was just a new season of "Mad Dogs" so I'm not holding my breath

[passingbat]

Originally Posted by Johnlouis

Why is this a problem? We all get Sky1, don't we? Now, if it was going to Sky Atlantic it would be different.

Yes, we do. But an 'I'm alright Jack' attitude does nothing for freeview customers who previously had this (and other similar 'pinched') shows.

There's a principle here in my view; because of the vast amounts of money sky has, they can take just about any show they want, when smaller channels have taken the risk with the initial commisioning. Sky should be ashamed of themselves for such tactics IMHO.

---------- Post added at 11:56 ---------- Previous post was at 11:53 ----------

Originally Posted by muppetman11

I can see your point , however this will always happen , don't forget Sky takes risks with shows as well.

And well done to them and if any other channel tried to pinch a show sky took the risk on, i'd be just as critical of that channel. Not going to happen in reality, but the principle is there.

---------- Post added at 11:58 ---------- Previous post was at 11:56 ----------

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Nicking is a bit harsh of a word , don't forget they've paid big money , Channel 4 had the chance to up their offer.

Agains sky's masses of money. Surely, you are joking!? Nicking is the right word in my view.

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by passingbat

Yes, we do. But an 'I'm alright Jack' attitude does nothing for freeview customers who previously had this (and other similar 'pinched') shows.

There's a principle here in my view; because of the vast amounts of money sky has, they can take just about any show they want, when smaller channels have taken the risk with the initial commisioning. Sky should be ashamed of themselves for such tactics IMHO.

---------- Post added at 11:56 ---------- Previous post was at 11:53 ----------



And well done to them and if any other channel tried to pinch a show sky took the risk on, i'd be just as critical of that channel. Not going to happen in reality, but the principle is there.

---------- Post added at 11:58 ---------- Previous post was at 11:56 ----------




Agains sky's masses of money. Surely, you are joking!? Nicking is the right word in my view.

The vast amounts of money they have made through massive initial outlays , don't forget when Sky started out they were losing money hand over fist. You speak like VM don't do anything wrong , can you tell me how I can view Film Four HD on my Sky box ? VM also never made Living HD available on Sky until Sky bought the channel.