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

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by johnasimmons

Mark, a mod on VM forum, states that 'talks are going down to the wire' - does this mean down to 6pm today?

Mark_Wilkin wrote:
....The only thing I can say right now is that we're still talking to BT about this as we speak. And in my experience these things can sometimes go right down to the wire.

It looks like it's a case of who cracks first (from what I gather, it won't be VM, who are happy to call a channel providers bluff if need be).

If the channel does not appear on the opening night at some point, BT will know that VM mean business. BT will then have to consider a change of position before 17 August if they want their channels on VM.

It has not been unknown for a channel to suddenly appear when it was thought that it wouldn't...

Originally Posted by muppetman11

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...-rejected.html

Very interesting whilst good news for Sky what does this mean for wholesale deals of BT Sport ? VM already have all the Sky Sports channels in SD and two in HD while BT can currently only offer its own sports channels with its You view box will they want to strengthen its competitors sports offerings ?I guess we'll have to wait and see.

It could be argued all the pay TV platforms now have stronger sports offerings than BT's You view.

Also, at the moment, anybody who didn't buy their Youview box direct from BT will not be able to access BT Sports after tonights free showing.

As a consolation, don't forget that those who don't subscribe to Sky Sports will be able to watch some Sky games for free on Sky 2.

[thegrid]

Originally Posted by johnasimmons

Could be both UPC and VM done a joint deal...

Could be, they both have the same parent company?

[Gavin-D]

Originally Posted by thegrid

Could be, they both have the same parent company?

Yes Liberty Global

[thegrid]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

It looks like it's a case of who cracks first (from what I gather, it won't be VM, who are happy to call a channel providers bluff if need be).

If the channel does not appear on the opening night at some point, BT will know that VM mean business. BT will then have to consider a change of position before 17 August if they want their channels on VM.

It has not been unknown for a channel to suddenly appear when it was thought that it wouldn't...

That's exactly what I think too.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Gavin-D

Breaking from UPC Ireland

BT Sport 1 & 2, ESPN and @SetantaSports are available to order NOW here: http://www.upc.ie/television/channels/SS/ Just €16 per month (£13.97) with first 2mths FREE!

Interesting.

[Doug P]

Too expensive for me but yes interesting...

[clinteastman]

Originally Posted by Gavin-D

Breaking from UPC Ireland

BT Sport 1 & 2, ESPN and @SetantaSports are available to order NOW here: http://www.upc.ie/television/channels/SS/ Just €16 per month (£13.97) with first 2mths FREE!

Have they said when they start broadcasting? If it's today then the likelihood is that the channels in testing are BT Sports channels. I'm not saying that we will get them, just that they may be preparing so they can pull the handle sooner rather than later.

[Gavin-D]

Originally Posted by clinteastman

Have they said when they start broadcasting? If it's today then the likelihood is that the channels in testing are BT Sports channels. I'm not saying that we will get them, just that they may be preparing so they can pull the handle sooner rather than later.

No news on when BT launches in Ireland no news on HD channels (BT Sport) either (Setanta is in HD)

[Lostlam]

It would just be our luck we don't get them the day they are free to air. LOL!

[thegrid]

Originally Posted by clinteastman

Have they said when they start broadcasting? If it's today then the likelihood is that the channels in testing are BT Sports channels. I'm not saying that we will get them, just that they may be preparing so they can pull the handle sooner rather than later.

Well, asian channel did say last night that his 'source' said the test channels did have the BT Tower in them? Maybe that part of his scoop was correct?

[Mad Max]

Originally Posted by Doug P

Too expensive for me but yes interesting...

Very Doug! I don't think it'a all over yet, given the previous tweets etc that Virgin have posted about it may take until 17th August, as they say "it's not over till the fat lady sings"..............

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by seedybob

In the anger, panic and depression of the last 50 pages, as Denyo says there hasn't been much analysis on why this deal might have fell through. If we look deep enough the answer is probably already there.

Look at how BT dealt with Sky. We know they wanted to handle to transaction themselves. We know their business plan is solely based around getting broadband customers. The guardian article last week (link) wasn't really analysed to see how they might behave with Virgin Media. It says that only 23,000 people took up new Pay-tv offers and the majority of sign-ups are existing customers. In the region of 477,000 people are not paying for the channel.

So doesn't this mean that BT are just not interested in the £12-£15 per month subscribers? It'll only bring in £4m per year to them and that's peanuts. Clearly then, they don't care what price VM are going to offer whether its £3 x 1m XL customers or even £20 per month standalone. They can afford to pass up £30m-£40m per year because they are not targetting television customers. That's where they are different to ESPN and Setanta who needed that revenue to support their venture. VM actually had all the cards in those negotiations. This time its BT with all the cards. BT also mustn't care about the potential advertising revenue loss if VM viewers don't have the channel.

So what's the stumbling block? BT want to deal with the customers themselves, we know that. They've shown that they are not interested in volume of subscriptions they just want broadband customers.

So have they told VM that they can have the channel as long as they control the subscriptions? In other words, they could offer the channel to VM at £2 per month as long as they get the customer names and details of who signs up. Would VM be happy to supply them with the details of possibly 1m customers? Its probably business suicide to do so.

We cable customers are potential gold-dust to BT, we'd all be targets for Infinity, telephone and tv and while BT is not something I'd consider there will be plenty of biters out there if the offer was good enough.

I'm not saying I have the answer, but it doesn't look as if the battle is over money. This is a battle for control and a much, much bigger prize than £2/£3/£12/£15 per month poxy television packages.

An excellent and very perceptive post

Originally Posted by Chad

Feel free.

Remember however if you have a package for TV, phone and broadband you will only be able to cancel the TV part of your package.

Many people will find that just cancelling TV won't significantly reduce their bill due to the loss of triple play discounts etc.

The other services can be cancelled, but the normal contract cancellation fees will apply.

Originally Posted by neilo

You're quite right Chad. Others seem to think that something being outside of VM's control somehow means this term doesn't apply. Even though this is clearly covered off in the first section. If a lawyer would like to publish differing legal advice, they could do but I haven't seen it but its just down to an interpretation of 'significant'. Simples.

Very true, many cases go to court to (hopefully) obtain a fair and independent judgement, simply because two parties interpret the law differently.

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by Doug P

Too expensive for me but yes interesting...

I agree , my main interest with ESPN was US Sport which now doesn't have the dedicated ESPN America channel like before. The BT Sport package no longer represents value for me hence why I've decided not to subscribe.

[Dave42]

that page came up in reply tweet when someone asked about bt sports VM give that link in reply something happening ?

[neilo]

Nope, it's just a bad link