General : Virgin Media & UKTV+ITV Channels

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Not so. One cannot help but believe that the only reason you are so cock-a-hoop about all this is that you can claim compensation. You are beside yourself with the idea that the ITV channels may disappear too!

Go read what you quoted again, then please explain to me how that conveys him being "cock-a-hoop", am I missing something

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Speaking personally, I am rather pleased that VM are finally making a stand on this. Being reliant on the content of others, this is the little guy standing up to the big guys.

Umm, you're pleased that everyone on VM is losing UKTV - really ?

Seems the only one "cock-a-hoop" here is actually you.

[spj20016]

On Saturday when I signed up for tv player Gold, W and Alibi were not available on Roku but now they are. Is this because of Virgin Media losing the channels?

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by spj20016

On Saturday when I signed up for tv player Gold, W and Alibi were not available on Roku but now they are. Is this because of Virgin Media losing the channels?

Does seem a coincidence ! Sky and other providers, will be rubbing their hands at VMs 'own goal'.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Does seem a coincidence ! Sky and other providers, will be rubbing their hands at VMs 'own goal'.

Well according to a few posters its not a own goal which to put it bluntly is frankly hogwash..

[Ultimate.Conj]

Is it possible that other providers may take the same stance as Virgin and play UK TV at their own game?

If Virgin don't feel they are getting the content or value for money from UKTV that they thought, Sky could look at their contract and also think they are paying too much for UKTV too?

Very dangerous game by both sides.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Ultimate.Conj

Is it possible that other providers may take the same stance as Virgin and play UK TV at their own game?

If Virgin don't feel they are getting the content or value for money from UKTV that they thought, Sky could look at their contract and also think they are paying too much for UKTV too?

Very dangerous game by both sides.

Quite the opposite having UKTV and VM not having will be a major selling point for other providers. Sky are already targeting VM customers with the UKTV carrot.....

[japitts]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

1. I have not claimed that the new channels are replacements. I am not Virgin Media!

2. That may be so, but getting the free channels back on VM concentrates the minds of the negotiators on the price to be paid for the premium channels.

3. Frankly, we don't know. If Virgin have made their position clear and UKTV won't give way, there is nothing to discuss.

I think UKTV will start feeling the pinch sooner rather than later.

Speaking personally, I am rather pleased that VM are finally making a stand on this. Being reliant on the content of others, this is the little guy standing up to the big guys.

Ok, some fair points there some just make me wonder..

You're right about not knowing whether VM/UKTV are actively trying to resolve this mess or just engaging in a PR war - but the latter certainly isn't going VM's way at the moment, that's for certain. And if one side isn't currently budging, then yes I guess the other does just need to see where the situation goes...UKTV win this one hands down so far.

So UKTV can't offer the BBC OD archive anymore which does devalue their rights, but I'm sure I read somewhere that they'd offered increased hours of other stuff.. maybe wrong, maybe right, but just putting it out there. It still doesn't alter the loss of 10 linear channels though (plus the HD/+1 variants) - which are indisputably popular.

As soon as the channels got pulled, we knew VM would save on carriage costs but risk losing on customer numbers and disounts - that is certainly happening, I would guess in significant numbers.

UKTV are going to be hit with lower advertising and outright loss of VM's carriage income - I do wonder how long this wil take to have an effect though, how far ahead are these things "banked" and measurable..

Someone else has alluded to the right thing not always being the correct thing, to do - never a truer word said. Whatever VM thought they could and should rightly save in overvalued channel costs, if even half of the "I'm going to cancel" stories are right - they must be sailing close to the wind with losing that in lost customers. And that's saying nothing for the reputational damage.

Only yesterday I was chatting to another relative who has VM TV but only really keeps it for Gold and a couple of others. I'm not sure how ADSL/BT fibre performs in their area, but that will have a large effect on whether all their services get reviewed or just the TV. They've not bothered to do the retentions call yet, but give it another week or so and that's potentially another customer lost.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I am not pleased about the situation, what a ridiculous thing to say. I would much rather have the channels that I want to watch than the £3 a month discount for 6 months.

I will not be receiving any net compensation at all as I will have to subscribe to a service costing £7.99 A month- do the maths. In addition, despite paying extra, I will not be able to record the programmes, nor watch them via VOD. I will have to try and watch the programmes when they actually air, it will be like going back to the mid 1970's before I got a VCR!

Your second paragraph is simply too ludicrous to respond to.

As previously explained, VM are tying me into a contract under threat of early exit fees. Until the matter of whether this contract is fair or not has been ruled upon, like many others, I am either stuck with them or will have to fight them in court to claim that their contract is unfair and unenforceable.

My solicitor has advised me to hold fire as any decisions made about this by various Government bodies will be critical to any cases taken by individuals against them.

Whilst it is the case that Sky are offering to pay any early exit fees, I won't necessarily be going to them.

Moving onto ITV. I have now been advised by a contact that, whatever happens this weekend, a limited ITV service should be available on the VM network.

On cable, it is a condition of the cable licenses needed to operate such a service that they 'must carry' the PSB channels on a cost neutral basis.

However, the law was changed fairly recently because of an internet service called TV Catchup. This service argued that they could carry the PSB channels without paying anything for channels 1-5 as they should be regarded as a cable company.

The commercial broadcasters weren't happy about this as TV Catchup were making money by showing their own adverts in the breaks instead of theirs, whilst not paying anything towards their costs. It went to court and TV Catchup lost.

As a result, the Government amended a piece of legislation so as to now allow the commercial channels to levy a retransmission fee for anyone showing their channel. It was intended for the likes of TV Catchup, but it was pointed out to the Government that the broad definition of the legislation would now allow the commercial broadcasters to charge a fee to the tradition cable companies, such as VM. The Government responded by saying that they didn't think that this would happen.

ITV had other ideas and asked VM for money. When this was also pointed out to the Government, they simply said that it should be left to commercial negotiations.

So, this is why it's a grey area. On the one hand the law states that VM must carry ITV (1) SD, but if ITV don't get the retransmission fees that they are asking for, they have threatened to cut off their feed. ITV HD and all of their other channels have no such condition and are subject to normal commercial negotiations.

If the feed from ITV is cut off, VM have plans to take an unauthorised SD feed (probably ITV London) from satellite and pipe it through its cable network around the country. Their argument for being able to do this would be that they are required by law to show ITV as a condition of their licence. VM customers would be able to continue to watch ITV, but not in HD nor have acess to catch up or +1 services. Local news would be unavailable for the vast majority of the country. As far as I am aware, people in the STV area would not be affected.

Part of the can of worms opened as a result of VM no longer showing the UKTV channels is that their platform has been weakened. Other channel providers will be only too aware that VM cannot afford to lose another popular broadcaster from their platform and will use this to their full advantage.

The deal to continue carrying the Sky channels expires in May and I did think that (if the UKTV channels were still off VM), Sky would use this situation to weaken their strongest competitor, either by asking for exorbitant carriage fees or withdrawing their channels.

The situation would be much worse than the last time that Sky took their channels off cable, as this time Sky Sports would go too because it is no longer regulated. I'm not sure about the position of the Sky Cinema channels.

It looks like ITV are getting in there first...

Whether people watch UKTV or not and whether people think that VM have a case or not in the dispute is largely irrelevant now. The real damage is only just beginning.

Good post, Richard. Sorry about the compensation dig, though - I couldn't resist!

I don't think VM is surprised at UKTV's action to withdraw these channels. I suspect that VM have already calculated that they will back down due to the loss of income. It's just a shame that this appears to be the only way of resolving the problem. I don't think they should just stand by while they get ripped off by content providers, and this was definitely a rip off.

Maybe this will force a re-think by Liberty Global regarding its policy that its cablecos concentrate on taking content from other providers rather than be a provider itself. This does put them in a weaker position, IMO.

---------- Post added at 10:16 ---------- Previous post was at 10:10 ----------

Originally Posted by Paul M

Umm, you're pleased that everyone on VM is losing UKTV - really ?

Seems the only one "cock-a-hoop" here is actually you.

No, I'm not happy that the channels have been pulled. I said I was glad VM made a stand against being ripped off. If VM's move creates the dent in UKTV's finances that we think it will, I am sure they will get back to the negotiating table. After all, they are in this to make money, right?

[Gavin78]

I've not read the article but in my local paper the title read VM could lose ITV over the weekend? I know it's talked about in this thread but if it does go bye bye VM hello sky. I'll just keep the BB

[Gavin-D]

Originally Posted by Gavin78

I've not read the article but in my local paper the title read VM could lose ITV over the weekend? I know it's talked about in this thread but if it does go bye bye VM hello sky. I'll just keep the BB

Will Virgin Media lose ITV and force customers to miss the Love Island final?

https://metro.co.uk/2018/07/27/will-...final-7766743/

[Dave42]

Virgin Media’s reliance on third party content means it was unwise to force a public spat with UKTV

http://www.seenit.co.uk/virgin-media...pat-with-uktv/

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Gavin-D

Will Virgin Media lose ITV and force customers to miss the Love Island final?

https://metro.co.uk/2018/07/27/will-...final-7766743/

It simply won't happen is the blunt answer to that...

[oxfordmark]

Originally Posted by denphone

It simply won't happen is the blunt answer to that...

Why not?

[denphone]

Originally Posted by oxfordmark

Why not?

Because not having ITV's bouquet of channels on there would be like signing your own long suicide note IMO so it won't happen..

[Dave42]

Originally Posted by denphone

It simply won't happen is the blunt answer to that...

people would have said that before last weekend about uktv too