Sky & Ch5 two fingers to Freeview HD viewers?
With the increase in HD capability on Freeview with Com7 & Com8 multiplexes available on the MAIN UK transmitters is it about time CH5 & SKY stopped putting two fingers up to Freeview viewers.
The main Broadcasters eg; BBC, ITV, CH4 now all broadcast HD on their prime (or all of their channels in the case of the BBC). This now seems to put Sky and CH5 to shame with their approach of "If you want HD you have go to pay us for it" and screwing every last penny out of its viewers.
Sky should at least broadcast it's News Channel in HD on the Freeview platform and give something back in return for the cash the main networks gave them to show their channels on the Sky platform.
The main Broadcasters eg; BBC, ITV, CH4 now all broadcast HD on their prime (or all of their channels in the case of the BBC). This now seems to put Sky and CH5 to shame with their approach of "If you want HD you have go to pay us for it" and screwing every last penny out of its viewers.
Sky should at least broadcast it's News Channel in HD on the Freeview platform and give something back in return for the cash the main networks gave them to show their channels on the Sky platform.
0
Comments
Sky still see HD as a USP which they want people to pay (them) for. They are not going to do anything to help rival platforms get more HD content - they are probably quite enjoying the fact that Freeview HD has limited content provision.
Freeview is getting there. The movie channels are starting to appear and well if some sports content starts to appear, the sky bubble will begin to burst.
It needs someone like discovery to take Eurosport FTA and just watch the whole freeview bubble grow. However a few HD versions of what people already have isn't really a selling point to most viewers.
Channel 5 is up for sale by Desmond so no changes likely at present. Sadly looking at the ITV/ITVHD viewing figures on the BARB website you can see why he hasn't bothered with HD yet.
You are right about Sky, if the BBC is forced to go subscription their free output, if any, will be similar including loss of service from most relay stations.
in both cases, the sky and cable pay platforms have the advantage. imo the bbc would b doomed.
Yes but "what they think" is what sells it. Sky have used that model for years and charged a lot of money for more channels - same rubbish.
That's because on Virgin & Sky ITV HD is not on 103 yet.
A massive rise will occur when the channel number changes!!!
A disproportionate service is needed where HD is available to drive up
This is exactly the reason why the BBC won't go subscription only. Until terrestrial becomes the smallest viewing platform behind online, I doubt they'd consider encryption. Until then, if they really are hell-bent on scrapping the licence fee, I think it's more likely the funding will come from direct taxation and will go to all the PSBs instead of just the BBC. It'll still result in less income for the BBC, though.
...and FWIW, anyone who actually says they really don't watch BBC content and all their favourite shows are on $ky, please, don't breed. Just stick to reading the Daily Fail... ;-)
If you're referring to me? Nope, quite happy with the material paid for by my licence fee + a smattering of content provided by the other advertising funded PSB's. Sky's a bit 'council house content' for me, thanks.
Even with two SD streams on COM7, there is still full capacity for a fifth HD stream on it judging by the bitrates in use on it. Whilst I'd rather have C5 HD go on PSB3, COM7 would be the next best thing (and would probably save them a little money due to reduced coverage).
We've got COM8 as well coming online over the next few months... it has to be filled with something. A few weeks ago I saw a test signal for it one day from Pontop Pike so the equipment is in place there, it seems a shame not to use it. I'm a bit confused as whether it will provide another five or six HD channels (of what?) or another fifteen or twenty SD channels (of shopping/advertising channels?).
I was reported 5 years at the time - or shall I say someone posted this was the standard length of such deals.
People might want better quality
People might want better content.
All of which (including your unsourced assertion) is purely anecdotal of course.
My suspicion is that Sky probably wanted out on FTV terms as were in effect subsidising C5's RedBee HD sole playout as well as the usual free carriage deal. They possibly told C5 that to continue, whether tied in to a new deal or not (for which we don't know) they would have to go behind the paywall which C5 did as Desmond didn't want to fork out dosh to fund it all himself. He's probably pissed off that the BBC nabbed LCN 105 on DTT but what do you expect when he's messed DMOL, Ofcom, the BBC and Freeview around three times in the past!
And you have just stated the very reason why the BBC couldnt go subscription! there would be an uproar as a lot of people wouldnt want to get Sky or Cable on principle and they may very well still want the BBC!
Also freeview and freesat would kick up a huge stink!
We could also loose freeview and freesat, as they might become obsolete if the BBC can no longer be on them!
I think it would be one of the most unpopular move any UK government could make to make the BBC subscription!
If the BBC goes subscription you will need a dedicated box/recorder tied to a phone line or broadband connection for system security just like Sky. After what happened to OnDigital no one will ever trust CAM slots.