General Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2013) Vol. 5. - Page 120

ocav · 25-10-2013, 19:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaverickJesus

Everyone else seems to have picked this one up for me, so I suggest you read the other replies and try again.

Maybe be a little less rude next time. I wasn't trying anything so don't be so presumptuous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spankysmagicpian

It's a commercial arrangement to the financial benefit of VirginMedia Business which although part of the same group, as far as I am aware, nothing to do whatsoever with the consumer side. Same with BT. BT Openreach provide circuits back to VMB POPs where VMB have no fibre presence, it doesn't mean that BT consumer side and VM consumer side are going to jump into bed together when they are both vying for the same customers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Or maybe just Virgin Media business met Sky's requirements the best , its a 5 year deal at around £50 million so basically £10 million a year. Its a financial transaction that's beneficial to both sides nothing more nothing less. Some of the missing Sky channels may very well arrive at some stage but that's still dependant on the two companies reaching a commercial agreement which is beneficial to both parties.

I wasn't arguing it, I was just pointing out he wasn't saying the Fibre Deal was giving us new channels, I was saying that OB said that it was showing a strengthened relationship between the companies

RobboEdin · 25-10-2013, 19:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by howardmicks

it launches on the 4th november sadly on vm on sd channel sky have hd (exclusive for the moment )

Source that channel will be only SD on Virgin Media?

I suspect the channel is HD only.

howardmicks · 25-10-2013, 19:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by blue666666

cheers for information

no probs bud

---------- Post added at 18:31 ---------- Previous post was at 18:28 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobboEdin

Source that channel will be only SD on Virgin Media?

I suspect the channel is HD only.

lifestyle owners on facebook and a vm insider,all thou its worth pointing out that lifestyle did say it has plans for it to turn up in the future (polite way of saying exclusive to sky short term )

RichardCoulter · 25-10-2013, 19:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by ocav

I'm not going to mention again how the letters MP were used in the article to make it stand out. It just happened to be that the leader of a Rugby Group was an MP. His request to Virgin Media was not in a government capacity, and it was a single MP and MPs

It would be worrying if the Parliamentary Rugby League Group were to be able to force VM to carry a particular channel, but I've no doubt that their influence did help as MP's do have a lot of power.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anypermitedroute

Premier Sports need Virgin far more than Virgin needs Premier Sports IMO

Absolutely, VM always had the upper hand during negotiations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Of course they don't, Dave, but behaving in the way they have been doing in the past is not cricket. In fact, it's downright uncompetitive. What other companies resort to such tactics?

The only thing preventing a deal involving the other missing Sky channels (particularly Sky 3D) is Virgin Media itself. Given that all new large screen TVs are now providing 3D as standard, I don't think Virgin would pass off the opportunity to add Sky's 3D offering because Virgin's is not awfully good at the moment.

So I am pretty optimistic, despite Media Boy's thinking that Sky 3D is not part of the likely Sky deal. We will know for sure within weeks.

It is certainly not Cricket where Sky are concerned, they do not know the meaning of how to behave like gentlemen.

VM are to increase their VOD 3D offering, so I would be surprised if they didn't try to obtain Sky 3D to improve their niche offering.

Doug P · 25-10-2013, 19:44

From the posts on here other things have people's priorities rather than 3D...most not all of course...

vincerooney · 25-10-2013, 19:56

i've never seen the need for 3D coverage and i dont think it'll last in its current format to be honest. i watched the 3d football in a bar once and it was most underwhelming. respect to those who do like it and would want sky 3d but i'd just be happy with the missing HD channels and atlantic.

RichardCoulter · 25-10-2013, 20:14

Many broadcasters have thrown in the towel as far as 3D is concerned.

VM have decided to pursue 3D (I assume as a niche market) via VOD. Sky are keen to increase viewing figures for Sky 3D, so I am surprised that Sky and VM don't appear to be in negotiations regarding this channel.

Chad · 25-10-2013, 20:19

Been following a conversation on Twitter between a Virgin Media customer and Premier Sports.

Virgin Customer: "absolutely over the moon about this. We have the xl package so will we have to pay for it next year?"

Premier Sports: "at some point yes."

Virgin Customer: "any idea how much it will be?"

Premier Sports: "probably same as SKY. £9.99 p/m"

And in reply to SKY customers kicking up a fuss about being free on Virgin Media:

Premier Sports: "we were free for 3-4 months on SKY back in 2010."

denphone · 25-10-2013, 20:35

It seems those good old Sky customers have short memory's then.

£9.99 is just absolutely a rip off because in my mind a more reasonable price would be around £4.99 per month.

Dave42 · 25-10-2013, 20:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by denphone

It seems those good old Sky customers have short memory's then.

£9.99 is just absolutely a rip off as in my mind as a more reasonable price would be around £4.99 per month.

yes agree £9.99 is a pure rip off for whats on PS

Chad · 25-10-2013, 20:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by denphone

It seems those good old Sky customers have short memory's then.

£9.99 is just absolutely a rip off because in my mind a more reasonable price would be around £4.99 per month.

I suppose it comes down to what you enjoy.

I pay £10.00 per month for Boxnation because I love boxing. I can understand why others would think £10.00 per month for a non-HD channel dedicated to boxing is a rip off.

For some Premier Sports coverage of Nascar and NHL is worth £9.99 per month.

I know your a big fan of the horses Den. Die hard racing fans probably think Racing UK is a must at £20.00 per month whilst other would think

Tricky Trevor · 25-10-2013, 20:52

And also a rip off for pathetic picture quality

Chad · 25-10-2013, 20:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tricky Trevor

And also a rip off for pathetic picture quality

The picture quality on SKY isn't great either.

I've often found that some of these stand alone "premium channels" like MUTV, Boxnation and even SKY Box Office fail to deliver on picture quality. It's a shambles really when you think you're paying a premium price to watch. SKY Box Office used to really bug me. £14.99 to watch a PPV boxing event which at times would become terribly blocky and jerky.

Apparently the guys at Premier Sports love feedback. You can tell them how disappointing their picture quality is via this e-mail:

support@premiersports.tv

paultrademark · 25-10-2013, 21:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tricky Trevor

And also a rip off for pathetic picture quality

Agreed it is poor, though am now thinking it might just be my perception of it as I only watch HD channels 99% of the time.

denphone · 25-10-2013, 21:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chad

I suppose it comes down to what you enjoy.

I pay £10.00 per month for Boxnation because I love boxing. I can understand why others would think £10.00 per month for a non-HD channel dedicated to boxing is a rip off.

For some Premier Sports coverage of Nascar and NHL is worth £9.99 per month.

I know your a big fan of the horses Den. Die hard racing fans probably think Racing UK is a must at £20.00 per month whilst other would think

Yes you are right Chad as it depends how much someone really wants to subscribe to a channel because at the end of the day its their money and compared to tobacco and alcohol and many other things it certainly represents better value.