General : ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news

[Arthurgray50@blu]

Hi Madmax, It absolutely ridiculous to think that they don't have anything to say yet, l think they are waiting to see what happens. BUT, VM should at least them them know that BT Sports will be on the system by testing the channels, such as Sky are doing.

This is very typical of VM to keeps it customers waiting.

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

Hi Madmax, It absolutely ridiculous to think that they don't have anything to say yet, l think they are waiting to see what happens. BUT, VM should at least them them know that BT Sports will be on the system by testing the channels, such as Sky are doing.

This is very typical of VM to keeps it customers waiting.

Arthur they haven't done a deal with Sky, they have an epg slot and they will be selling it direct to Sky customers. Anyone taking BT sports on Sky will get a bill from BT.

Virgin don't want to go that route and want to be a reseller of BT sports. BTs marketing guy John Petter was interviewed today and actually said that they are still in discussion with VM but no deal had been done as yet.

Really don't understand what you don't get about this situation?

[passingbat]

Originally Posted by Chad

Out of curiosity, do you work for Virgin?

No I don't work for VM.


I just find this bringing up of capped speeds as a 'problem' crazy.

If the capping caused problems, then fair enough. but they don't.

They do not prevent people downloading as much as they want. Capped VM speeds are faster than most other BB speeds. VM do not hide the fact that they exist and I personally believe that the vast majority of people are not affected by them.


You refered to VM BB as:

The big problem is the 30mb connection has really tight usage restrictions

And this simply isn't the case.

[Chad]

Originally Posted by passingbat

No I don't work for VM.

Just wondering as you seem to know your stuff and your passionate about it.

Originally Posted by passingbat

I just find this bringing up of capped speeds as a 'problem' crazy.

I suppose it comes down to what your opinion on the subject is. I think that people not having a problem with this is crazy

Originally Posted by passingbat

If the capping caused problems, then fair enough. but they don't.

Again it's all about opinion. There will be hundreds of thousands of Virgin broadband who never suffer capping. For me personally it was a problem when I had Virgin broadband. I wasn't happy with the speeds I was getting through the day, due to my usage of the service, in reflection to what I was paying.

Originally Posted by passingbat

They do not prevent people downloading as much as they want. Capped VM speeds are faster than most other BB speeds. VM do not hide the fact that they exist and I personally believe that the vast majority of people are not affected by them.

It's a good point I can't argue with.

Originally Posted by passingbat

You refered to VM BB as:

The big problem is the 30mb connection has really tight usage restrictions

And this simply isn't the case.

Again it's all about personal opinion. When I was having financial issues I moved from 100mb to 30mb for a short period. The download limits and speed restrictions for me where a problem and difficult to get used to. I suppose coming down from 100mb might have exaggerated my perception of the issue.

When it comes right down to it each and every customer will decide what is right for them. What I view as a problem, others might find acceptable and visa versa.

[Doug P]

If BT won't play ball then there is little VM can do.

[Arthurgray50@blu]

VM should be looking after there customers, and giving there customers up to date info of whats happening.

We are going to have the whole scenario with Sky all over again - except this time it will be BT. The customer is going to end up paying for it, so l cannot see why VM wont play ball.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

VM should be looking after there customers, and giving there customers up to date info of whats happening.

We are going to have the whole scenario with Sky all over again - except this time it will be BT. The customer is going to end up paying for it, so l cannot see why VM wont play ball.

Virgin will give updates, when there are updates.

The current situation is on www.virginmedia.com/btsport

[andy_m]

The June update assures you that you'll keep ESPN until the end of the current football season! Seriously, who writes this stuff?

[Doug P]

True but you cannot argue with Ben's point that there will be updates when there are updates!

[andy_m]

Originally Posted by Doug P

True but you cannot argue with Ben's point that there will be updates when there are updates!

I actually think that depends - if they manage a deal I'm sure they'll be shouting from the roof tips, but if they don't it'll be in their interests to keep quiet for as long as possible.

[DaMac]

Why can't bt not get a slot on virgins epg, charge us, then pay VM an upkeep? If it is good enough for sky then why not us? Cable companies the world over allow local access, it doesn't seem to be too technical to do.

[bubblegun]

Originally Posted by DaMac

Why can't bt not get a slot on virgins epg, charge us, then pay VM an upkeep?

Virgin wouldn't want to do this as it would mean opening-up precise details of their customer base to a direct competitor which would be crazy. BT could then specifically target just those customers to switch.

Originally Posted by DaMac

If it is good enough for sky then why not us? Cable companies the world over allow local access, it doesn't seem to be too technical to do.

I don't think that's the issue. BT will (probably) be looking for full retail value for each customer on the Virgin network like they will get on the Sky platform and I am sure Virgin have a policy of not selling channels on their platform without a certain % profit margin. So the ongoing negotiations will be over who gives up what?

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by DaMac

If it is good enough for sky then why not us?

Have a feeling Sky wouldn't do it if they weren't forced to.

[coulsontom]

Originally Posted by bubblegun

I don't think that's the issue. BT will (probably) be looking for full retail value for each customer on the Virgin network like they will get on the Sky platform and I am sure Virgin have a policy of not selling channels on their platform without a certain % profit margin. So the ongoing negotiations will be over who gives up what?

Agree. Which is why Sky sports and movies is more expensive on virgin than sky.

But virgin would be mad to charge more for BT than BT are doing on Sky platform.

They'd be better off not making anything off it, because they'd lose out elsewhere.

[BexTech]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

Have a feeling Sky wouldn't do it if they weren't forced to.

Yes, they are only forced to allow anyone who wants an EPG number to be offered one.

Sky don't own any satellites, so the broadcasters go to the satellite owners (Astra or Eutelsat) to lease capacity. (This for other members, who don't know how things work with satellite or think Sky own satellites etc)

Hence BT are bypassing Sky for everything except for EPG slots.