General : Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2013) Vol. 3.

[passingbat]

Originally Posted by BomberAF

BT Sports will be announced to arrive on VM 1 week before the 1st of August when BT Sport is due to air. The reason they aren't announcing it now is because BT and Sky and VM have agreements with VM to get people to leave VM and switch over to sky or BT. When this time has elapsed as part of this deal BT sport will be announced as arriving on VM when stated and Atlantic shortly after. There will therefore be no reason not to offer Atlantic to VM customers on the XL package as they will lose advertising revenue with people downloading GoT via torrents. I believe that VM will have a wholesale price for VM customers, so it may only cost a little bit more for XL customers than prior with ESPN. It isn't going to cost an extra subscription just the XL price as far as I am aware.

And you know all this how?

[BomberAF]

Originally Posted by Qtx

Insider information?

.

[Qtx]

I can't see VM in an agreement that take customers away from them...

Would be good for VM customers if it was true, but im skeptical.

[BomberAF]

VM are always cutting deals to ensure they get TV channels. Why would sky for instance allow VM to use it's channels when it could say no and keep them all themselves. Also why do you think there has been very little printed in the papers about BT sport not being available to VM customers?

[passingbat]

Originally Posted by BomberAF

Also why do you think there has been very little printed in the papers about BT sport not being available to VM customers?

Because no one apart from forum users are aware or care?

[DaMac]

Because there has to be a perceived amount of competition, if sky was the only provider of most channels they wouldn't be ble to do half the stuff they do because the monopolys commission would cripple them.

[BomberAF]

Originally Posted by passingbat

Because no one apart from forum users are aware or care?

Loads of people who are customers are aware and do care but don't vent their spleen on the interweb. Instead those that can afford jump ship and go to Sky and BT respectively and the ones who can't afford stay put and prepare to do without. But by time people have jumped ship then VM will announce that they have an agreement with BT for their sports channels.

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by andy_m

In reply to Chad, I have thoroughly enjoyed some of Sky's original programming. Ironically it's those shows that they have made and then put on Sky Atlantic that have been worse, IMO.

Which shows Andy ? We've also enjoyed a few of Skys original programming.

[BomberAF]

Originally Posted by DaMac

Because there has to be a perceived amount of competition, if sky was the only provider of most channels they wouldn't be ble to do half the stuff they do because the monopolys commission would cripple them.

This is true but VM cannot also run rough shod over Sky's products and can therefore not dictate to Sky and BT what they should do with their products. They are also gentlemen and understand that it would be quite snobby if hard working people were priced out of watching their new shiny sports channel. Then there are also the workers at VM.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by BomberAF

BT Sports will be announced to arrive on VM 1 week before the 1st of August when BT Sport is due to air. The reason they aren't announcing it now is because BT and Sky and VM have agreements with VM to get people to leave VM and switch over to sky or BT. When this time has elapsed as part of this deal BT sport will be announced as arriving on VM when stated and Atlantic shortly after. There will therefore be no reason not to offer Atlantic to VM customers on the XL package as they will lose advertising revenue with people downloading GoT via torrents. I believe that VM will have a wholesale price for VM customers, so it may only cost a little bit more for XL customers than prior with ESPN. It isn't going to cost an extra subscription just the XL price as far as I am aware.

Well something's going to happens that's for sure and the sooner we know the better.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Henkesghost

Less than 4 weeks until we lose Premiership, SPL, Europa Cup, domestic cup, German, Italian, French and lower league football from ESPN plus the other ESPN channels from the XL package. Don't you think we deserve to know what if anything Virgin plan to do by way of compensation for this?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that I don't appreciate your anxiety over this. I'm just pointing out that Virgin Media are in the middle of negotiations with BT, so what do you expect them to say? Face it, we are not going to know the answer until one or two weeks before the start, so you need to respond accordingly.

The reason for the delay is that VM want the best deal for their customers. VM must accept that they are going to lose a few customers who can't wait, but I do believe that it will be worth the wait for those who have patience, and the eventual deal for customers will ensure that people are attracted to VM in the future.

We will get these channels. The question, and the only question, is at what cost.

---------- Post added at 20:15 ---------- Previous post was at 20:09 ----------

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

I have been told by a Sky customer, that Sky have advised him (when he could them to ask about the price).

It will be £12.00 per month and that BT Sports, will NOT be on VM, unless a price is agreed, and it could cost more for VM customers. This is why there is a delay.

BT Sports wants a separate charge, where the fee is paid direct to BT and not VM.

He doesn't have a problem as he has gone in for the channels.

Arthur, you are going round and round in circles. Virgin Media cannot tell you what will happen because they are in the middle of negotiations with BT. The invitation from VM to sign up to get more information is a very good sign - do you think they would have done this if they don't expect to get these channels?

If you believe what Sky employees tell you about VM, I'm afraid you are a little gullible. Wait and see is my advice, but if you are really unhappy, why not take a second punt with Sky? I can guarantee that you still won't be happy and we will see you coming back to the fold soon!

And still, I think, you will complain.....

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by JustaBloke

For me it's nothing to do with agreeing a price. The problem is more fundamental. BT insist on invoicing the customer directly. They are able to do this on their own platform and Sky's supports it too. However VM doesn't support such an arrangement with all charges for premium channels appearing on our VM bill.

That is not my understanding. The problem with subscriptions for the BT channels on satellite are with Sky, who refuse to play ball with BT. There are no problems with VM, who are only trying to get the best deal for their customers.

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

Originally Posted by denphone

No surprise with this announcement because in my humble opinion 3D was always nothing more then a passing fad which would only interest a small minority.

The problem is with the glasses. Holographic 3D is the answer. A few years to wait for that, unfortunately.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by BomberAF

BT Sports will be announced to arrive on VM 1 week before the 1st of August when BT Sport is due to air. The reason they aren't announcing it now is because BT and Sky and VM have agreements with VM to get people to leave VM and switch over to sky or BT.

Well, the bit in bold may well be true. VM will be able to get a better price if BT have sucked this for all its worth just prior to the first day of broadcasting. They will know that if people haven't jumped ship by then, they probably won't, so they'd rather get a reduced price from VM from that time than nothing at all.

VM will then appear to be an attractive platform for new business.

The bit not in bold is ridiculous. Why would VM sign up to that?

---------- Post added at 20:32 ---------- Previous post was at 20:29 ----------

Originally Posted by denphone

Well something's going to happens that's for sure and the sooner we know the better.

You're getting twitchy, Den....

Originally Posted by Media Boy

It just an rebrand in my eyes.

Maybe it all down to channel numbers -

Virgin Media may want to put Drama on Channel 206 but UKTV may want an lower channel number.

I would consider a rebrand to be giving an existing channel a new image, new on screen graphics and perhaps a change of name but staying in broadly the same genre. Blighty was a documentary / lifestyle genre channel, Drama is entertainment / drama, so a different product altogether. People only consider it a rebrand because of the timing. If Drama launched on the 8th and Blighty closed the following month, they would see it differently.

I don't really see why VM would want to have an entertainment channel with no documentary content at the top end of their documentary section in the EPG. Although the limited number of slots left in the entertainment block is becoming a problem.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jj20x

I would consider a rebrand to be giving an existing channel a new image, new on screen graphics and perhaps a change of name but staying in broadly the same genre.

I agree. This is a substitute channel, not a re-brand.