HD Should Virgin introduce an HD charge

Gavin-D · 03-09-2011, 16:23

The lack on HD channels on Virgin Media is a well discussed topic throughout cable forum so please you this topic for discussions.

My question is should Virgin Media now introduce an HD charge it seems fairly clear to me that holding off trying to get the HD channels on the cheap is not working out at all, now if they were to bring in a flat rate of say Â£8 or Â£10 per account per month that's surely going to generate more funds to get the HD channels we want but only Sky have.

The way VM are going on with the lack of HD channels more and more will just simply join Sky.

denphone · 03-09-2011, 16:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gavin-D

The lack on HD channels on Virgin Media is a well discussed topic throughout cable forum so please you this topic for discussions.

My question is should Virgin Media now introduce an HD charge it seems fairly clear to me that holding off trying to get the HD channels on the cheap is not working out at all, now if they were to bring in a flat rate of say Â£8 or Â£10 per account per month that's surely going to generate more funds to get the HD channels we want but only Sky have.

The way VM are going on with the lack of HD channels more and more will just simply join Sky.

There should be a set of HD packages that people can subscribe to starting with a free HD package then if people wanted more HD then there should be a package involving more HD in which they could subscribe to if they wanted too.

Ken W · 03-09-2011, 16:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by denphone

There should be a set of HD packages that people can subscribe to starting with a free HD package then if people wanted more HD then there should be a package involving more HD in which they could subscribe to if they wanted too.

I be happy with no HD and SD only

passingbat · 03-09-2011, 16:38

I haven't searched, but surely there was an existing thread similar to this that could have been used (it comes up so often)?

For the record, I'm against an extra HD charge on VM. Free HD is a selling point for VM and although we have to wait longer and have fewer channels than Sky. Keeping HD free, works for me.

Gavin-D · 03-09-2011, 16:42

I've quoted this from the coming soon thread

Quote:

But losing 36,000 customers in the last quarter suggest to me that their HD TV channel strategy is not working.

Now yes we know some will be students or simply can't afford to pay their bills if their cutting back ect, but how may of the 36,000 were TV subscribers? Surely with the TiVo box now out and with HD now taking over Virgin need to address there HD line up asap.

muppetman11 · 03-09-2011, 16:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gavin-D

I've quoted this from the coming soon thread

Now yes we know some will be students or simply can't afford to pay their bills if their cutting back ect, but how may of the 36,000 were TV subscribers? Surely with the TiVo box now out and with HD now taking over Virgin need to address there HD line up asap.

I was one of them

passingbat · 03-09-2011, 16:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gavin-D

I've quoted this from the coming soon thread

Now yes we know some will be students or simply can't afford to pay their bills if their cutting back ect, but how may of the 36,000 were TV subscribers? Surely with the TiVo box now out and with HD now taking over Virgin need to address there HD line up asap.

You're guessing as to why these customers were lost and you seem to be assuming it was due to lack of HD. But you have no proof of that (or maybe you do?)

Don't you think VM have a team of people analysing those figures to determine the reason? And if it is HD, they will start to do things about it.

Horizon · 03-09-2011, 16:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by denphone

But losing 36,000 customers in the last quarter suggest to me that their HD TV channel strategy is not working.

Agreed. It's very simple, if HD is the priority, Sky offer more of it.

Yes, vm have done a reasonable job with tivo, but tivo is a means to an ends. It's only there to navigate and record content, it's not the content in itself what's important despite whatever apps may launch.

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetman11

The problem is were does the money come from for these extra HD channels as VM offer HD for free on XL were Sky charges 10.25 a month giving them more scope to launch new content.

If just looking at the tv package on its own, this is true in a way, although vm don't offer anything for "free", it's just packaged differently.

Most people take a bundle from vm now and the last time I looked, vm charge Â£13.90 line rental just to have a bit of old copper wire connected to your house. Even Berkett calls it a connectivity fee. Pure profit.

So, I don't think we should be looking at HD pricing, one dimensionally, if I can put it that way. VM has its own network, it has more costs than Sky, but no rental fees. I think VM has far more flexibility in pricing than it lets on.

And don't forget the six billion debt vm is still in... That's the problem. To make money, you have to spend it first. VM has to be selective about what channels it chooses to launch, and even if there weren't any debts, it would still be selective over channel launches as it's a closed network, unlike Sky's.

To answer the OP's question, I don't think there should be an additional HD charge, cable tv costs enough as it is!

HDFootyMan · 03-09-2011, 16:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by passingbat

I haven't searched, but surely there was an existing thread similar to this that could have been used (it comes up so often)?

For the record, I'm against an extra HD charge on VM. Free HD is a selling point for VM and although we have to wait longer and have fewer channels than Sky. Keeping HD free, works for me.

I agree with the Batman.

The 'Free HD for no extra charge' has been a good USP for VM, if they did introduce a HD charge, that will only encourage channel providers to ask for even more money for their HD content.

Given enough time, we'll have a "Should Virgin increase the cost of their HD charge?" thread, after Sky announce that Virgin want Sky Atlantic 2 HD on the cheap.

passingbat · 03-09-2011, 17:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetman11

I was one of them

The responsibility for VMs financial ruin, due to lack of HD, falls firmly at your feet!

muppetman11 · 03-09-2011, 17:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by passingbat

The responsibility for VMs financial ruin, due to lack of HD, falls firmly at your feet!

LOL

nodrogd · 03-09-2011, 19:02

Some would see the activation charge for the VHD/V+/Tivo as type of HD "lump sum" anyway. VM have a better offering than anyone except for sky, and anyone who really wants "HD with everything" would go to sky anyway. I'm happy for VM to sit in the middle. It also seems for the most part, the quality of the SD channels on my V+ boxes are better than I've seen on the equivalent sky equipment, so I'm happy with the status-quo.

**Hugh** · 03-09-2011, 19:23

No.

(in response to the OP question).

03-09-2011, 19:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken W

I be happy with no HD and SD only

WHY, it's like comparing VHS with DVD. In 5-10 years SD channels on VM/SKY will be seen as taking unnecessary space on their respective platforms!!!

carmad · 03-09-2011, 19:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by nodrogd

Some would see the activation charge for the VHD/V+/Tivo as type of HD "lump sum" anyway. VM have a better offering than anyone except for sky, and anyone who really wants "HD with everything" would go to sky anyway. I'm happy for VM to sit in the middle. It also seems for the most part, the quality of the SD channels on my V+ boxes are better than I've seen on the equivalent sky equipment, so I'm happy with the status-quo.

Ditto!! The the V+ box is far superior to the Sky Boxes and I am happy to wait for more channels in HD. I have been with cable since the Nynex days and the only box changes that I have had are the change to a digital one and the upgrade to the V+ box, my brother has had around ten changes of the Sky boxes within the same time frame due to constant failures plus a basically useless broadband so much so the he is changing over to virgin next week and looking forward to it, plus it actually works out cheaper with Virgin for a similar package but with 30 meg broadband. Not their so called up to 20meg offering which only delivers around 1/2 meg
I certainly do not want a HD channel just for the sake of saying I have it in HD when it consists mainly of upscaled 4:3 black and white films or programs.