General : Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2013) Vol. 4.

[colin25]

Originally Posted by Anypermitedroute

True Colin25 I cannot dispute the higher amount but would they realise that viewers via VM and Youview would now have disruption to premier league watching because of BT bidding. I guess it would be in the contracts I don't know just my feeling this was a bid to broadcast not for exclusivity of selected platforms

Maybe a lesson learned from them that as part of invitation to bid for rights they must allow all people the opportunity to view (e.g. Subscription) regardless of platform they use

yes, if that is their intention. Though it might affect the price.

---------- Post added at 20:21 ---------- Previous post was at 20:21 ----------

Oh, and no need to be formal, you can call me "25"

[MaverickJesus]

They would get an order of magnitude less at tender if it was a condition to make it available to everyone. Why would any company bid? They would make almost nothing.

[colin25]

Originally Posted by MaverickJesus

They would get an order of magnitude less at tender if it was a condition to make it available to everyone. Why would any company bid? They would make almost nothing.

yes, that is how i see it

[Anypermitedroute]

Ok I hold my hands up I even searched on Wikipedia order of magnitude and I dont get it could that be explained please, genuine really sorry i must be thick

I can't see how making it available to all would make less than say what they got now, they still got incentive of its free with BT broadband and will get customers taking up that way and be £££ and then gain watches of channel by other platform.

The only reason the bids are so high because we got a stupid rule stating no one broadcaster can have all rights which is suppose to drive monopoly and costs down not create them

Aaah I went to simple Wikipedia and I think I understood your point. I don't necessarily agree but respect your point so happy to agree to disagree

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by Anypermitedroute

Maybe a lesson learned from them that as part of invitation to bid for rights they must allow all people the opportunity to view (e.g. Subscription) regardless of platform they use

I'd imagine that if the sporting bodies involved were that concerned about viewing figures they'd just make the contracts available to the FTA broadcasters ie BBC , ITV , C4 etc let's not forget the Premiership highlights can still be seen FTA later the same night. The whole bidding process is about one thing and one thing only MONEY.

[Arthurgray50@blu]

Henkesghost, you talk a lot of sense, it a shame that other members think its stupid.

[spiderplant]

Originally Posted by Henkesghost

Would it have been so difficult for them to canvas Virginmedia subscribers to assess what we would be willing to pay

According to this, they did.

[Aguero9320]

Originally Posted by Media Boy

I think Sky will close Sky2 down to launch Sky Bravo.

As Sky2 is the only channel not to have an +1 or HD Channel as well as the main channel.

OK, if Sky2 closes to make way for Sky Bravo, does this mean Sky1 may also be renamed?

---------- Post added at 21:27 ---------- Previous post was at 21:26 ----------

Originally Posted by undertakereddie

Your Thinking of Live TV lol. Bravo Never Showed Topless Darts!


Other Channels I would Bring Back are TNT, ABC 1, Trouble and TCC Remember Those Channels?

SOMEONE RELAUNCH 'EM, PLEASE!!!!!!!!

[Arthurgray50@blu]

Well if VM had done that, l never saw it, and l am on there website literally everyday to see if they have changed anything.

The only thing that is on there website is a leaflet to say that 'it is coming to VM' NO Survey or anything.

And come to think of itm my email to Libert Global hasn't been replied to either.

Never mind still cannot wait till 17th August.
I HAVE registered my interest many timeas.

[Chad]

Originally Posted by Aguero9320

OK, if Sky2 closes to make way for Sky Bravo, does this mean Sky1 may also be renamed?

Probably not. SKY 1 has been called SKY 1 since 1989, a good 7 years before SKY launched SKY 2.

[ocav]

Thing is, BT are using the channel to bring in broadband subscribers. If they didn't have that arm of the business they would be up s*** creek without a paddle.

Sky Sports are available with a quick phone call to over 15 million people. 15 million people who already very likely have card details attached to their account and no need to fill in name, address etc. (not counting TalkTalk and BT Vision subscribers, or the ease of accessing it via Now TV albeit at rip off rates)

BT is not that easy to get access too. If you check the Sky forums there are so many people who don't have a clue how to access it and when they do find out they don't want to pay for it via a 3rd party, they want it all in one. Plus the 4 million who currently can't pay their premiums to access it without getting a new box to hook up to a dish, or switching to a different provider.

Unfortunately people don't want BTs TV offering, especially if they are used to Sky/BT as it is in effect a spruced up Freeview. BT will make a hell of a loss on these channels, and it's quite clear that the 500,000 people who have gained access to it (by paying or by being through BT Broadband) are not actually watching it, 1000viewers for a sports show with a high profile name as host.

Apparently next year, everyone will have too pay and it won't be with BT Broadband. Currently only 23,000 people think it's worth paying for, if I was a shareholder, I wouldn't be happy.

[harry_hitch]

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

Well if VM had done that, l never saw it, and l am on there website literally everyday to see if they have changed anything.

The only thing that is on there website is a leaflet to say that 'it is coming to VM' NO Survey or anything.

And come to think of itm my email to Libert Global hasn't been replied to either.

Never mind still cannot wait till 17th August.
I HAVE registered my interest many timeas.

The article clearly states they sent online surveys out to customers, it was not on their website. I did not get an invite to take part in this survey, but it would be interesting find out if that survey ever happened and to hear the results of that survey (if it happened obviously)!
Any of you fine people with the CEO'S e-mail interested in asking whether the alledged survey actually happened, and if it did, what the results were? (if not can someone post his e-mail address, so I send it)
Not fussed about the channels myself, but it would be interesting to see what people outside of this forum think on the matter

[spankysmagicpian]

Originally Posted by harry_hitch

The article clearly states they sent online surveys out to customers, it was not on their website. I did not get an invite to take part in this survey, but it would be interesting find out if that survey ever happened and to hear the results of that survey (if it happened obviously)!
Any of you fine people with the CEO'S e-mail interested in asking whether the alledged survey actually happened, and if it did, what the results were? (if not can someone post his e-mail address, so I send it)
Not fussed about the channels myself, but it would be interesting to see what people outside of this forum think on the matter

There was an online discussion from VM about it and I was sure that there was pricing questions involved but for the life of me I can't find it. I can find the discussions but not the question of pricing.

[harry_hitch]

Originally Posted by ocav

Thing is, BT are using the channel to bring in broadband subscribers. If they didn't have that arm of the business they would be up s*** creek without a paddle.

Sky Sports are available with a quick phone call to over 15 million people. 15 million people who already very likely have card details attached to their account and no need to fill in name, address etc. (not counting TalkTalk and BT Vision subscribers, or the ease of accessing it via Now TV albeit at rip off rates)

BT is not that easy to get access too. If you check the Sky forums there are so many people who don't have a clue how to access it and when they do find out they don't want to pay for it via a 3rd party, they want it all in one. Plus the 4 million who currently can't pay their premiums to access it without getting a new box to hook up to a dish, or switching to a different provider.

Unfortunately people don't want BTs TV offering, especially if they are used to Sky/BT as it is in effect a spruced up Freeview. BT will make a hell of a loss on these channels, and it's quite clear that the 500,000 people who have gained access to it (by paying or by being through BT Broadband) are not actually watching it, 1000viewers for a sports show with a high profile name as host.

Apparently next year, everyone will have too pay and it won't be with BT Broadband. Currently only 23,000 people think it's worth paying for, if I was a shareholder, I wouldn't be happy.

It would depend if the shareholders were more interested in the BB take-up, if so, they would probably be somewhat happier. Equally the shareholders must surely be aware that if you offer struggling families something for "free" or a monthly cost of £12/£15 a month, the majority of people will take the "free" option.
I would also think that die-hard football and rugby fans will pay for it next year, as they did with ESPN.
If I were a share holder though, I would be happy to take small amount of money from VM's reasonably large customer base, rather than a larger amount of nothing from none of VM's customer base.

[love Virgin2013]

My view is that we wont get BT Sports at all and Virgin are just not saying anything in the hope that people wont jump ship next week when the football starts as they can get it on Sky sports channels anyway via Virgin.

if it does and that is a big if then BT will have to redo all there ads that they have made for TV with the ones saying about sky only.

i do think that no talks have taken place this week and nothing will happen and we will lose out on BT sports.

VM must know by now if they will get it after all they have had months to come to a deal.