I guess they're thinking along the lines of why spend money getting in a web company to change the website if you won't be around in a couple of months.
I guess they're thinking along the lines of why spend money getting in a web company to change the website if you won't be around in a couple of months.
Precisely.
If my company was going under, the last think to cross my mind would be a few confused people looking at my website. It's just not a priority in this situation.
If they were taking orders, that would be different!
Interesting how yourself, with the support of Everything Goes, have now turned Digital UK EPG expert.
It is clear I am not disputing BT Sports launch on DTT.
Your assumption however breaches section 4.1 of the Digital UK EPG policy.
It is also clear that the appearance of BT Sport on 41 and 42 the moment Sky Sports 1 and 2 cease breaches section 7.4, as the channels are "new channels" and given Sky Sports continues on other platforms cannot be excused as an "evolution of channels".
In order to try and clarify the situation and having looked at any possible precedents or any perceived "loopholes" in the policy, I understand that BT Sport 1 and 2 could be assigned 41 and 42 if DUK EPG Policy section 8.2-8.4 is invoked, whereby public service broadcasters, including Channel 5+1 and 4seven and any "associated channels" linked to channels higher up the channel rank decline the opportunity to change channel numbers to fill the vacated 41 and 42.
Otherwise, Digital UK would have to be able to provide a sound reasoning for its decision, in order to counteract any legal or regulatory complaints about the process. Chrisy mentioned Welsh and Scottish local TV providers earlier as an example of the type of group who might have cause to seek a legal remedy.
My earlier comment regarding who the licences where licenced to is relevant to a different rule in the Digital UK policy, which may have been used as a reason to allocate 41 and 42. As Sky hold the licence, it's not relevant.
And again.
BT have confirmed it will not be offering ESPN from 1st August via DTT to its own customers.
If there is an ongoing carriage agreement between ESPN (as a separate legal entity to BT) and Top Up TV which expires after 1st August, BT can not decide to dishonour the previous carriage agreement and yank ESPN off the DTT platform without consequences, whether this be in the form of financial compensation or legal/regulatory action. It is unwise to assume anything without having seen the legal text of any agreements or knowing when such agreements are due to expire.
And again. If BT withheld ESPN to Top Up TV, but made the channel available to other platform operators, it would be a competition issue.
It is however correct to assume that if ESPN was pulled, Top Up TV would be free to insert another channel using its assigned multiplex capacity. Whether it could inherit channel 34 would be subject to the complex rules of the EPG policy.
Let's get this clear: this post seeks to give the position based on the text of the EPG policy, clearly showing how BT Sport can't assume 41 and 42, unless certain conditions are met. Certain forum members seem to be only happy if Top Up TV is looking like it will close, while others are certain that it will continue. I am not going to be drawn into that argument, but am merely looking at the legal and regulatory framework that does actually need to be considered in detail before "assumptions" dressed as fact are posted. If some "factual assumptions" posted here were published anywhere else but these forums, you'd be seeking legal advice by now...
In light of recent developments I would like to see your "expert" opinion of the points you have made
Oh and don't even bother about LCN numbers as you are the only one who seems to care for them. They can always get allocated news ones!
If my company was going under, the last think to cross my mind would be a few confused people looking at my website. It's just not a priority in this situation.
If they were taking orders, that would be different!
That's now how the laws on advertising actually work. However, in practice I doubt TUTV will be taken to task over it, but it does demonstrate in my mind that the company no longer cares. The last one turn out the light.....
The TUTV website has a 'my account' section that allows customers to check statements etc. As the channels are still running I see it as perfectly reasonably.
And as per my response elsewhere TV Fav. and Picture Box will be running for the foreseeable future according to TUTV email recieved by my friend last night.
Given they said they were hopeful of getting BT Sports and were in negotiations I would be sceptical of anything they say. While it may run till November I think giving their own subscriber database to Sky and lettering their subscribers telling them to phone Sky for great sports and entertainment packages is a bit of an own goal!
We are used to vague and meaningless statements from TUTV :yawn:
Negotiations with BT are on-going and we are confident that a positive outcome will be reached in the very near future. Full details have yet to be finalized.
When they said they were in negotiations with BT they were really in negotiations with Sky
Oh your stretching it there. How do you know they weren't in negotiations with both? And BT's may or may not have failed. Though I agree its looking likely they have.
They're sending the letters to former customers aswell.
I cancelled a while back but still got the letter informing me of the cut off and opt-out time frame and so on...
Sad day when TUTV goes off. Bit of love, it could have worked and well but was run by idiots it seems
In olden times they would have been strung up by the balls for letting down the public and giving false hope to the poor of this country . How can they sleep at night ,letting down our only hope against Sky .The evil empire.
What is peoples problem with Sky, it is a choice. Sky & BT bid for the sports at considerable expense, and who they make it available to is there choice.
BBC could bid for these sports as well, nothing stopping them and making them available to all. The downside would probably be a hefty increase in the licence fee (which you don't have a choice).
That's the correct answer. Sky's Average Revenue Per User is £548 per year.
Based on 200,000 to 300,000 subscribers TUTV have that's an extra £109,600,000 to £164,400,000 per year alone! While they may get a lower take up no one is going to tun their nose up at that and extra 100 Million each year
That's the correct answer. Sky's Average Revenue Per User is £548 per year.
Based on 200,000 to 300,000 subscribers TUTV have that's an extra £109,600,000 to £164,400,000 per year alone! While they may get a lower take up no one is going to tun their nose up at that and extra 100 Million each year
These are somewhat fantasy numbers! There is no way that TUTV has that many existing live subscribers. Also, even if it did, the response and take- up rates from marketing to that number of people will typically be in single figures. Sky will have paid TUTV a 5 figure fee for access to the datbase, no more.
From posts on other threads, this does seem to be the end of the road. By July 31st the ESPN service ends and that will leave just TV Fav. which no one can access if they don't already have a suitable DTR/PVR unit. ....Sad but TUTV didn't adapt with the market so that's it.
So will this be the final nail in TUTV's coffin? Subscribers have been dwindling due to the poor content on offer and its only saving grace was a route to the pay sports channel on DTT.
I know there was speculation by some that BT could buy TUTV but in truth they don't really have much in the way of assets, other than a small subscribers base that could potentially transfer. I'm guessing BT will think those interested in sport will naturally jump ship to them anyway if they are against going the satellite dish route. If BT were to buy TUTV it would be more as a goodwill gesture but could help 'tidy things up' on the platform.
In my opinion, BT has a huge task ahead of itself to increase its audience, retain customers, keep subscriber prices / operating costs under control especially once the euphoria of its new sports channels dies down, criticism takes-hold, price increases are introduced, customers get out of contracts and churning begins.
People already seem confused by the BT broadcasting format / subscription model, the bottom line for me (and probably many more like me) is - and always will be - can I turn on the TV on and watch sports when I want to?
Equally, will I be able to walk into a pub & watch a BT Sports match on the big screen, I wonder? Despite the BT channels being offered via satellite, more than likely not, I think.
Likewise, sport in general is not just about subscriber numbers but also the demands of corporate sponsors who want to get their products out to the widest possible audience - these will certainly become displeased if viewing figures don't increase or even by some quirk, decrease.
So if BT Sports is going to succeed, it will need every home subscriber it possibly can get, early on in its existence.
BT is complicating things way too much. It's a bemusing situation for potential subscribers.
Sky is also rumoured to be increasing its subscription prices in the Autumn possibly by up to 10%, yet when you see the eye-watering amounts of money involved to secure these TV rights, it's no surprise at all.
There's ceratinly a lot of gloating going on right now, I just wonder what people will really think in 12-18 months time?
In my opinion, BT has a huge task ahead of itself to increase its audience, retain customers, keep subscriber prices / operating costs under control especially once the euphoria of its new sports channels dies down, criticism takes-hold, price increases are introduced, customers get out of contracts and churning begins.
People already seem confused by the BT broadcasting format / subscription model, the bottom line for me (and probably many more like me) is - and always will be - can I turn on the TV on and watch sports when I want to?
Equally, will I be able to walk into a pub & watch a BT Sports match on the big screen, I wonder? Despite the BT channels being offered via satellite, more than likely not, I think.
Likewise, sport in general is not just about subscriber numbers but also the demands of corporate sponsors who want to get their products out to the widest possible audience - these will certainly become displeased if viewing figures don't increase or even by some quirk, decrease.
So if BT Sports is going to succeed, it will need every home subscriber it possibly can get, early on in its existence.
BT is complicating things way too much. It's a bemusing situation for potential subscribers.
Sky is also rumoured to be increasing its subscription prices in the Autumn possibly by up to 10%, yet when you see the eye-watering amounts of money involved to secure these TV rights, it's no surprise at all.
There's ceratinly a lot of gloating going on right now, I just wonder what people will really think in 12-18 months time?
Absolutely agree.
I already have a perfectly serviceable piece of kit that is capable of receiving encrypted ESPN broadcasts, but I'm expected to throw that out, and sign up to BT vision without any clear indication of the hardware I will receive and use (I'm non infinity).
Lots of people throw brickbats at Sky, but it seems to me the competitors hardly help themselves!
Comments
As you say, you cannot process an order.
Probably the best option.....
I guess they're thinking along the lines of why spend money getting in a web company to change the website if you won't be around in a couple of months.
If my company was going under, the last think to cross my mind would be a few confused people looking at my website. It's just not a priority in this situation.
If they were taking orders, that would be different!
In light of recent developments I would like to see your "expert" opinion of the points you have made
Oh and don't even bother about LCN numbers as you are the only one who seems to care for them. They can always get allocated news ones!
That's now how the laws on advertising actually work. However, in practice I doubt TUTV will be taken to task over it, but it does demonstrate in my mind that the company no longer cares. The last one turn out the light.....
So you can take that anyone of a number of ways.
We are used to vague and meaningless statements from TUTV :yawn:
When they said they were in negotiations with BT they were really in negotiations with Sky
They also said BT had nothing to do with TUTV! Who owns the streams then for Sky Sports?!
Here you go
Original posted by freetoview33
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showpost.php?p=65802664&postcount=19
Oh your stretching it there. How do you know they weren't in negotiations with both? And BT's may or may not have failed. Though I agree its looking likely they have.
I cancelled a while back but still got the letter informing me of the cut off and opt-out time frame and so on...
Sad day when TUTV goes off. Bit of love, it could have worked and well but was run by idiots it seems
The Conservatives (Sky) were seriously interested, but Labour (BT) didn't really give a damn.
So it probably was a negotiation, just somewhat one-sided and not getting very far!
Ha ha ha! Funny CoL.
Which begs the question why would Sky be interested in such a small DTT user base? Thats a conundrum, to be sure.
And if anyones wondering, the user base is estimated to be between 200 - 300,000.
Because they want everyone to be with Sky!!!!
BBC could bid for these sports as well, nothing stopping them and making them available to all. The downside would probably be a hefty increase in the licence fee (which you don't have a choice).
That's the correct answer. Sky's Average Revenue Per User is £548 per year.
Based on 200,000 to 300,000 subscribers TUTV have that's an extra £109,600,000 to £164,400,000 per year alone! While they may get a lower take up no one is going to tun their nose up at that and extra 100 Million each year
These are somewhat fantasy numbers! There is no way that TUTV has that many existing live subscribers. Also, even if it did, the response and take- up rates from marketing to that number of people will typically be in single figures. Sky will have paid TUTV a 5 figure fee for access to the datbase, no more.
I know there was speculation by some that BT could buy TUTV but in truth they don't really have much in the way of assets, other than a small subscribers base that could potentially transfer. I'm guessing BT will think those interested in sport will naturally jump ship to them anyway if they are against going the satellite dish route. If BT were to buy TUTV it would be more as a goodwill gesture but could help 'tidy things up' on the platform.
People already seem confused by the BT broadcasting format / subscription model, the bottom line for me (and probably many more like me) is - and always will be - can I turn on the TV on and watch sports when I want to?
Equally, will I be able to walk into a pub & watch a BT Sports match on the big screen, I wonder? Despite the BT channels being offered via satellite, more than likely not, I think.
Likewise, sport in general is not just about subscriber numbers but also the demands of corporate sponsors who want to get their products out to the widest possible audience - these will certainly become displeased if viewing figures don't increase or even by some quirk, decrease.
So if BT Sports is going to succeed, it will need every home subscriber it possibly can get, early on in its existence.
BT is complicating things way too much. It's a bemusing situation for potential subscribers.
Sky is also rumoured to be increasing its subscription prices in the Autumn possibly by up to 10%, yet when you see the eye-watering amounts of money involved to secure these TV rights, it's no surprise at all.
There's ceratinly a lot of gloating going on right now, I just wonder what people will really think in 12-18 months time?
Absolutely agree.
I already have a perfectly serviceable piece of kit that is capable of receiving encrypted ESPN broadcasts, but I'm expected to throw that out, and sign up to BT vision without any clear indication of the hardware I will receive and use (I'm non infinity).
Lots of people throw brickbats at Sky, but it seems to me the competitors hardly help themselves!