General : Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2018)

[cheekyangus]

Originally Posted by Frazz

Not really as one is a channel for the 10 Gaelic speakers in Scotland and the other will give more local news to the rest of the population who speak English

Whilst I get your point, in theory channels like Alba are launched not to cater for existing speakers, but to encourage more people to learn it.

So, like I said, in theory I'm their audience as I'm Scottish, live in Scotland and don't speak Gaelic. In practice I'm not interested in learning, and the only times I've had the channel on is to see the full replay football matches...which I've watched with the sound off/down. And anecdotally I get the impression I'm far from alone.

[Mad Max]

It's crazy, why should we fork out for stupid road signs etc in gaelic, when 90 odd % of the population can't read them, but the ones who can speak English anyway! Utter madness when the money could be spent on more critical needs like the failing health service in Scotland.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Spiderplant says that more space can be created. I'm not sure why this is a big deal for you. What are you trying to prove?

There must be something we are not understanding, so could you clarify your reasoning, please?

Not out to prove anything, just stating a fact. As previously explained, of course VM could create more capacity, but it would cost them more in terms of infrastructure.

I suspect that this is why they are phasing out the SD boxes so that they will no longer have to dual emit the channels broadcasting in SD and HD.

If nothing is done it is a concern as it could limit new channel additions.

---------- Post added at 01:16 ---------- Previous post was at 01:13 ----------

Originally Posted by Aguero9320

https://www.a516digital.com/2018/08/...k-worsens.html

Things are not looking good for VM this summer!

FFS, it isn't looking good is it. Maybe this will end up in the courts as the Sky dispute nearly did.

[SonicMaster]

It's odd that they haven't included logos for Paramount Network HD, Quest HD and Love Nature HD that have 'HD' on them, as viewers scrolling through the EPG can't immediately identify which are the SD and HD versions of those channels.

[cheekyangus]

Originally Posted by SonicMaster

It's odd that they haven't included logos for Paramount Network HD, Quest HD and Love Nature HD that have 'HD' on them, as viewers scrolling through the EPG can't immediately identify which are the SD and HD versions of those channels.

Many logos are that indistinct anyway without adding more detail to them. I switched to text labels after a couple minutes. Even if I had a bigger screen I don't think I would find it any better.

Just a personal preference though, everyone's different.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Not out to prove anything, just stating a fact. As previously explained, of course VM could create more capacity, but it would cost them more in terms of infrastructure.

I suspect that this is why they are phasing out the SD boxes so that they will no longer have to dual emit the channels broadcasting in SD and HD.

If nothing is done it is a concern as it could limit new channel additions.

---------- Post added at 01:16 ---------- Previous post was at 01:13 ----------



FFS, it isn't looking good is it. Maybe this will end up in the courts as the Sky dispute nearly did.

I would have thought that Virgin wouldhaveto invest in more infrastructure anyway before long, to accommodate its new UHD channels. I really don't think space is an issue for that reason.

As for the UKTV dispute landing up in the courts, I don't think there is a case for that.

With the Sky dispute, it was Virgin taking Sky to court because it wanted reasonable terms to carry the channels.

This time it's UKTV who appear aggrieved, but they can't force Virgin to take their channels.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I would have thought that Virgin wouldhaveto invest in more infrastructure anyway before long, to accommodate its new UHD channels. I really don't think space is an issue for that reason.

As for the UKTV dispute landing up in the courts, I don't think there is a case for that.

With the Sky dispute, it was Virgin taking Sky to court because it wanted reasonable terms to carry the channels.

This time it's UKTV who appear aggrieved, but they can't force Virgin to take their channels.

The calculations that showed that they only had space for four more HD channels included reserved capacity for UHD channels. The new channels added to replace the UKTV channels appeared to be borrowing capacity from the TSID normally added to pop up channels and the UHD TSID was temporarily switched off.

When the UKTV audio & video feeds were removed a few days ago, the UHD TSID was brought back into service and BT 4k appeared.

I doubt there's anything to stop UKTV taking VM to court for, what they believe to be, reasonable terms to carry their channels.

They could argue that the new proposed deal was so unreasonable so as to constitute effectively forcing them off the platform.

The same thing could have been said about Sky not being able to be forced to supply their basic channels to VM.

[Inactive Digital]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I doubt there's anything to stop UKTV taking VM to court for, what they believe to be, reasonable terms to carry their channels.

They could argue that the new proposed deal was so unreasonable so as to constitute effectively forcing them off the platform.

The same thing could have been said about Sky not being able to be forced to supply their basic channels to VM.

It won't go to court. Virgin took Sky to court (did they agree a deal before it actually got to court?) due to Sky's dominant position in the market. The same can't be said of either VM or UKTV. Virgin can't be legally forced to buy UKTV's channels any more than UKTV can be legally forced to give them away for free.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Inactive Digital

It won't go to court. Virgin took Sky to court (did they agree a deal before it actually got to court?) due to Sky's dominant position in the market. The same can't be said of either VM or UKTV. Virgin can't be legally forced to buy UKTV's channels any more than UKTV can be legally forced to give them away for free.

Indeed not a chance of it going to court as that is a figment of imagination which is very wide of the mark,.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

The calculations that showed that they only had space for four more HD channels included reserved capacity for UHD channels. The new channels added to replace the UKTV channels appeared to be borrowing capacity from the TSID normally added to pop up channels and the UHD TSID was temporarily switched off.

When the UKTV audio & video feeds were removed a few days ago, the UHD TSID was brought back into service and BT 4k appeared.

I doubt there's anything to stop UKTV taking VM to court for, what they believe to be, reasonable terms to carry their channels.

They could argue that the new proposed deal was so unreasonable so as to constitute effectively forcing them off the platform.

The same thing could have been said about Sky not being able to be forced to supply their basic channels to VM.

Well, you are entitled to your view, Richard, but in my opinion, UKTV has nil justification for taking VM to court. Like I said, they cannot force VM to accept their channels onto their platform.

As for your continuing alarmist posts about VM capacity, you will eventually have to draw the conclusion that VM had everything in hand after all.

[Ie we need more space? Let's create some!]

What a wonderful plot for a drama!

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Inactive Digital

It won't go to court. Virgin took Sky to court (did they agree a deal before it actually got to court?) due to Sky's dominant position in the market. The same can't be said of either VM or UKTV. Virgin can't be legally forced to buy UKTV's channels any more than UKTV can be legally forced to give them away for free.

Yes, a deal was reached before it went to court. Your post makes sense as to why it could have done in the Sky basics dispute, but probably won't with the UKTV dispute.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Yes, a deal was reached before it went to court. Your post makes sense as to why it could have done in the Sky basics dispute, but probably won't with the UKTV dispute.

We can agree on that.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Well, you are entitled to your view, Richard, but in my opinion, UKTV has nil justification for taking VM to court. Like I said, they cannot force VM to accept their channels onto their platform.

As for your continuing alarmist posts about VM capacity, you will eventually have to draw the conclusion that VM had everything in hand after all.

[Ie we need more space? Let's create some!]

What a wonderful plot for a drama!

I'm growing tired of your dramatic accusations in relation to your (claimed) perception my posts. I am entitled to my view of things, as are you.

As it stands, VM only have space for four more HD channels. This is a material fact.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I'm growing tired of your dramatic accusations in relation to your (claimed) perception my posts. I am entitled to my view of things, as are you.

As it stands, VM only have space for four more HD channels. This is a material fact.

And I am also entitled to respond. As I said, they will create more space.

Drama over.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I'm growing tired of your dramatic accusations in relation to your (claimed) perception my posts. I am entitled to my view of things, as are you.

As it stands, VM only have space for four more HD channels. This is a material fact.

Material fact with what proof?,