Yes but how are current bt vision customers going to react if they are thrown off sky sports in August purely because they live in areas not yet covered by infinity / multicast?[/QUOTE
A critical point. I am on a 'defunct' TV package with my provider. They won't kick me off because the 'new' package is more expensive and the TV provider risks losing a customer. Its just a slow 'phase out' process of the defunct package.
The cost of running DTT channels is a drop in the ocean compared to Prem league rights. TUTV are likely to be paying towards the running of DTT.
The naysayers were adamant SS1/2 was living DTT last year (search countless old threads). They were wrong, as they have been on so many other things TUTV related.
Yes but how are current bt vision customers going to react if they are thrown off sky sports in August purely because they live in areas not yet covered by infinity / multicast?
A critical point. I am on a 'defunct' TV package with my provider. They won't kick me off because the 'new' package is more expensive and the TV provider risks losing a customer. Its just a slow 'phase out' process of the defunct package.
The cost of running DTT channels is a drop in the ocean compared to Prem league rights. TUTV are likely to be paying towards the running of DTT.
The naysayers were adamant SS1/2 was living DTT last year (search countless old threads). They were wrong, as they have been on so many other things TUTV related.
All Broadcast TV will likely be replaced by IPTV 'in the end'. But is that worth worrying about?
Nope.
Because never mind TUTV, no ones even sure what BT's or ESPN's plans are until they are announced. And even if ESPN do withdraw from the market, that would mean a spare CH34 slot going. And who knows who would take that up?
Because never mind TUTV, no ones even sure what BT's or ESPN's plans are until they are announced. And even if ESPN do withdraw from the market, that would mean a spare CH34 slot going. And who knows who would take that up?
Actually moving everything over to IPTV has already been discussed by politicians. IE over the air be it 4G or 5G. Im sure you wont believe me so have a look.
In a report entitled Broadband for All - An Alternative Vision, the Committee writes: "We recommend that the government, Ofcom and the industry begin to consider the desirability of the transfer of terrestrial broadcast content from spectrum to the internet and the consequent switching off of broadcast transmission over spectrum."
Actually moving everything over to IPTV has already been discussed by politicians. IE over the air be it 4G or 5G. Im sure you wont believe me so have a look.
In a report entitled Broadband for All - An Alternative Vision, the Committee writes: "We recommend that the government, Ofcom and the industry begin to consider the desirability of the transfer of terrestrial broadcast content from spectrum to the internet and the consequent switching off of broadcast transmission over spectrum."
Yes, I'm aware of that report, which was just laughed at.
And the conclusions of which were about twenty years ahead of their time. As the broadband infrastructure in the UK is just so poor at the moment it could not possibly support such services. Whilst they are improving rapidly, not yet anywhere near the above recommendation.
But fibre is the future. For a multitude of reasons, not just IPTV.
Yes, I'm aware of that report, which was just laughed at.
And the conclusions of which were about twenty years ahead of their time. As the broadband infrastructure in the UK is just so poor at the moment it could not possibly support such services. Whilst they are improving rapidly, not yet anywhere near the above recommendation.
But fibre is the future. For a multitude of reasons, not just IPTV.
The poor broadband infrastructure is down to BT wanting to protect its traditional Voice Telephony and international calls for many years. Also the government has been reluctant to deal with BT with the firm hand that they need. Its a sorry state of affairs and has let the entire country down.
Still we have to take a Visionary point of view and look to the future and how things will change.
The poor broadband infrastructure is down to BT wanting to protect its traditional Voice Telephony and international calls for many years. Also the government has been reluctant to deal with BT with the firm hand that they need. Its a sorry state of affairs and has let the entire country down.
Still we have to take a Visionary point of view and look to the future and how things will change.
And I agree with every word of that.
And to be sure, for TUTV to continue with any kind of long term future, they will have to adapt to survive. But survive they can, if only the owners have the will to do so.
Because never mind TUTV, no ones even sure what BT's or ESPN's plans are until they are announced. And even if ESPN do withdraw from the market, that would mean a spare CH34 slot going. And who knows who would take that up?
I think BT will know! They'd be daft not to take it if ESPN leave.
I think BT will know! They'd be daft not to take it if ESPN leave.
Really, if SS1 and 2 are too expensive to broadcast over DTT what makes you think they'll continue with ESPNs stream, they could sent it 24hours over IPTV at a much reduced cost. However, they'd be daft not to offer some sort of Internet streaming, akin to Eurosport Player and an app, which shouldn't be too costly to do. This of course would be alongside offering it to cable and satellite homes.
I think you are right about SS1 & 2 but ESPN has many times more subscribers on Ch34 than there are on 41 & 42. The reasoning is as 1Andrew1 and I have previously posted. None of us know of course but comparing simply the cost of the channel without regard to the ready made market there is only half the picture. Of course if BT do take over 34 presumably they'd only do it for an interim period and try to switch former ESPN viewers over to their new platform.
BT can't take over and keep channel 34. If they launched a new service replacing ESPN on ESPN's part-time slot, it would be relegated to the bottom of the entertainment genre under Digital UK EPG rules.
I think you are right about SS1 & 2 but ESPN has many times more subscribers on Ch34 than there are on 41 & 42. The reasoning is as 1Andrew1 and I have previously posted. None of us know of course but comparing simply the cost of the channel without regard to the ready made market there is only half the picture. Of course if BT do take over 34 presumably they'd only do it for an interim period and try to switch former ESPN viewers over to their new platform.
What a fascinating thought that is. But thats not going to happen, IMHO. For the following reasons -
CH34 is only a part-time channel. BT don't pay for that slot, TUTV do. And BT also offer ESPN for free, to their own BT Vision customers.
Although I can see a possibility of BT approaching TUTV for their subscriber base (buying them out) and switching said users to the new YouView from BT service at a substantially discounted price, as an incentive for users to do so. Which is another reason they won't. As when the new YouView IPTV channels go live in the summer, BT will cease the provision of Vision boxes and only provide YouView ones. And they don't have a CI slot.
DTT slots £10 Million each per year. Sky Sports 1 + 2 = £20 Million.
Top Up Tv estimated 250,000 subscribers = Not ecomnically viable!
You View Boxes which BT are moving over to have no CI slot.
All the clues you need really!
Who are these unnamed members? I think you are arguing against a case that no one has made! The point that some including me have made is that BT will not suddenly switch off DTT capacity and leave its Sky Sports subscribers in the lurch. I've also suggested that BT might be interested in acquiring TopUp TV in order to quickly bolster its sports subscribers numbers.
What would be useful to know is when BT's DTT channel leases actually expire, it might solve a few debates!
BT can't take over and keep channel 34. If they launched a new service replacing ESPN on ESPN's part-time slot, it would be relegated to the bottom of the entertainment genre under Digital UK EPG rules.
Move Mix on channel 32 used to be the Bid Deal quiz channel so surely a move from ESPN to BT Sport with far more similar programming would not be an issue?
Who are these unnamed members? I think you are arguing against a case that no one has made! The point that some including me have made is that BT will not suddenly switch off DTT capacity and leave its Sky Sports subscribers in the lurch. I've also suggested that BT might be interested in acquiring TopUp TV in order to quickly bolster its sports subscribers numbers.
There's also quite a few unknowns at the moment including the future of ESPN UK (does not appear to be one at the moment) and crucially, when BT's DTT channel leases actually expire!
A number of UKTV channels will be supplied live via IPTV by BT Vision later this year and I assume that BT Vision will ensure that the IPTV capability is present for the streaming of Sky Sports 1 & 2 before they surrender the (expensive) leases on the two linear DTT channels. If I remember correctly, BT Vision haven't specified a precise date for the Sky Sports channels to go over to IPTV streaming but I assume that they'll want the switchover to ideally coincide with the start of the 2013/2014 Premiership football season.
Who are these unnamed members? I think you are arguing against a case that no one has made! The point that some including me have made is that BT will not suddenly switch off DTT capacity and leave its Sky Sports subscribers in the lurch. I've also suggested that BT might be interested in acquiring TopUp TV in order to quickly bolster its sports subscribers numbers.
What would be useful to know is when BT's DTT channel leases actually expire, it might solve a few debates!
Interesting thoughts. And whilst I don't know, here are mine on the matter.
BTVision's users only number at 750,000, and of those only an estimated 150,000 subscribe to the DTT Sky Sports channels. And at a cost of £10m per year, per channel. Is that sustainably viable? No, it isn't, IMHO.
BT fibre has now passed over 12m homes. With, at the last count, over 1.25m taking it up. And to broadcast over IPTV also has virtually zero 'broadcasting' costs compared to over DTT. And now the news BT is in alleged talks with ESPN to take over it's sports rights too. So I would wager one other broadcaster is perhaps slightly twitching at this.
Move Mix on channel 32 used to be the Big Deal quiz channel so surely a move from ESPN to BT Sport with far more similar programming would not be an issue?
Change of licence owner, change of name - would not be allowed.
Big Deal to Movie Mix has been a much more protracted affair, starting with Big Deal showing movies in the middle of the night, then renaming, then increasing the movie and US series content, but remaining under the control of Square 1 Management. Unless BT content appears on ESPN and it gradually changes over several months, it's unlikely to be allowed to change.
Change of licence owner, change of name - would not be allowed.
Big Deal to Movie Mix has been a much more protracted affair, starting with Big Deal showing movies in the middle of the night, then renaming, then increasing the movie and US series content, but remaining under the control of Square 1 Management. Unless BT content appears on ESPN and it gradually changes over several months, it's unlikely to be allowed to change.
Movie Mix is a clever way to push the boundaries and to explore potential loopholes. As an aside, it's not a bad channel, either!
As I understand it, Square 1 has exited the broadcasting business but has seen the value in its low-numbered channel 32. So it keeps the licence in its name to retain the slot, Sony runs the channel and Square 1 picks up a commission cheque from Sony for its troubles in retaining th slot and dealing with correspondence from Ofcom. The licence remains in Square 1's name.
No reason this model can't be applied to other channels in the future.I genuinely don't think there's a problem in channels changing names. An example is Channel 20:
Pre 1/10/2007 FTN (Flextech then Virgin Media)
1/10/2007 Virgin One (Virgin Media)
4/6/2010 Channel One (BSkyB)
1/2/2011 Bravo (BSkyB)
Movie Mix is a clever way to push the boundaries and to explore potential loopholes. As an aside, it's not a bad channel, either!
As I understand it, Square 1 has exited the broadcasting business but has seen the value in channel 32. So it keeps the licence in its name to retain the slot, Sony runs the channel and Square 1 picks up a commission cheque from Sony for its troubles in retaining the high EPG slot and dealing with correspondence from Ofcom.
No reason this model can't be applied to other channels in the future.
...except Square 1 is about to face sanctions for multiple BCAP breaches last year, relating to the service that used to be on channel 32...
...except Square 1 is about to face sanctions for multiple BCAP breaches last year, relating to the service that used to be on channel 32...
Interesting, wonder what they would be v revenue from Sony. Sony may well have taken legal advice and have covered them for this eventuality.
What do you think about the channel 20 history which I just appended, changes of name and ownership but same EPG number?
Interesting, wonder what they would be v revenue from Sony. Sony may well have taken legal advice and have covered them for this eventuality.
What do you think about the channel 20 history which I just appended, changes of name and ownership but same EPG number?
UKTV and any other broadcaster can apply to swap their own channels around once a year. Channel 4 did it a few years back when they launched Channel 4+1, moved More 4 to E4's number and E4 got moved to 28.
Channel 20 was of course, originally Virgin 1/Channel One. When it was replaced by Challenge, Challenge had to go down to 46.
A number of UKTV channels will be supplied live via IPTV by BT Vision later this year and I assume that BT Vision will ensure that the IPTV capability is present for the streaming of Sky Sports 1 & 2 before they surrender the (expensive) leases on the two linear DTT channels. If I remember correctly, BT Vision haven't specified a precise date for the Sky Sports channels to go over to IPTV streaming but I assume that they'll want the switchover to ideally coincide with the start of the 2013/2014 Premiership football season.
I could be wrong, but I don't think DTT licences are like, for example, library books which you hand back when you've finished with them, they're taken out for a contracted period of time. In the past when DTT capacity was rising in price, some form of surrendering may have worked but with the recession, IPTV capacity including Connect TV coming on stream and some short-term DTT capacity becoming available soon, I doubt BT would be able to do this. I suspect its DTT licencess have a bit of slack in their duration which it might as well use.
UKTV and any other broadcaster can apply to swap their own channels around once a year. Channel 4 did it a few years back when they launched Channel 4+1, moved More 4 to E4's number and E4 got moved to 28.
Channel 20 was of course, originally Virgin 1/Channel One. When it was replaced by Challenge, Challenge had to go down to 46.
Thanks. You're well clued-up so let me pose this to you! In 2010 Virgin 1 changed both its name and its ownership. How different would this be to ESPN changing to BT Sport if it bought ESPN UK?
Pre 1/10/2007 FTN (Flextech then Virgin Media) 1/10/2007 Virgin 1 (Virgin Media)
4/6/2010 Channel One (BSkyB)
Comments
Agreed. But it will happen in the end, you know.
How long that will be? Who knows?
Nope.
Because never mind TUTV, no ones even sure what BT's or ESPN's plans are until they are announced. And even if ESPN do withdraw from the market, that would mean a spare CH34 slot going. And who knows who would take that up?
Actually moving everything over to IPTV has already been discussed by politicians. IE over the air be it 4G or 5G. Im sure you wont believe me so have a look.
In a report entitled Broadband for All - An Alternative Vision, the Committee writes: "We recommend that the government, Ofcom and the industry begin to consider the desirability of the transfer of terrestrial broadcast content from spectrum to the internet and the consequent switching off of broadcast transmission over spectrum."
http://www.reghardware.com/2012/08/01/house_of_lords_call_for_the_end_of_broadcast_tv/
http://advanced-television.com/2012/07/31/uk-lords-propose-online-terrestrial-broadcasting-switch/
Yes, I'm aware of that report, which was just laughed at.
And the conclusions of which were about twenty years ahead of their time. As the broadband infrastructure in the UK is just so poor at the moment it could not possibly support such services. Whilst they are improving rapidly, not yet anywhere near the above recommendation.
But fibre is the future. For a multitude of reasons, not just IPTV.
The poor broadband infrastructure is down to BT wanting to protect its traditional Voice Telephony and international calls for many years. Also the government has been reluctant to deal with BT with the firm hand that they need. Its a sorry state of affairs and has let the entire country down.
Still we have to take a Visionary point of view and look to the future and how things will change.
And I agree with every word of that.
And to be sure, for TUTV to continue with any kind of long term future, they will have to adapt to survive. But survive they can, if only the owners have the will to do so.
I think BT will know! They'd be daft not to take it if ESPN leave.
Really, if SS1 and 2 are too expensive to broadcast over DTT what makes you think they'll continue with ESPNs stream, they could sent it 24hours over IPTV at a much reduced cost. However, they'd be daft not to offer some sort of Internet streaming, akin to Eurosport Player and an app, which shouldn't be too costly to do. This of course would be alongside offering it to cable and satellite homes.
What a fascinating thought that is. But thats not going to happen, IMHO. For the following reasons -
CH34 is only a part-time channel. BT don't pay for that slot, TUTV do. And BT also offer ESPN for free, to their own BT Vision customers.
Although I can see a possibility of BT approaching TUTV for their subscriber base (buying them out) and switching said users to the new YouView from BT service at a substantially discounted price, as an incentive for users to do so. Which is another reason they won't. As when the new YouView IPTV channels go live in the summer, BT will cease the provision of Vision boxes and only provide YouView ones. And they don't have a CI slot.
DTT slots £10 Million each per year. Sky Sports 1 + 2 = £20 Million.
Top Up Tv estimated 250,000 subscribers = Not ecomnically viable!
You View Boxes which BT are moving over to have no CI slot.
All the clues you need really!
What would be useful to know is when BT's DTT channel leases actually expire, it might solve a few debates!
A number of UKTV channels will be supplied live via IPTV by BT Vision later this year and I assume that BT Vision will ensure that the IPTV capability is present for the streaming of Sky Sports 1 & 2 before they surrender the (expensive) leases on the two linear DTT channels. If I remember correctly, BT Vision haven't specified a precise date for the Sky Sports channels to go over to IPTV streaming but I assume that they'll want the switchover to ideally coincide with the start of the 2013/2014 Premiership football season.
Interesting thoughts. And whilst I don't know, here are mine on the matter.
BTVision's users only number at 750,000, and of those only an estimated 150,000 subscribe to the DTT Sky Sports channels. And at a cost of £10m per year, per channel. Is that sustainably viable? No, it isn't, IMHO.
BT fibre has now passed over 12m homes. With, at the last count, over 1.25m taking it up. And to broadcast over IPTV also has virtually zero 'broadcasting' costs compared to over DTT. And now the news BT is in alleged talks with ESPN to take over it's sports rights too. So I would wager one other broadcaster is perhaps slightly twitching at this.
Big Deal to Movie Mix has been a much more protracted affair, starting with Big Deal showing movies in the middle of the night, then renaming, then increasing the movie and US series content, but remaining under the control of Square 1 Management. Unless BT content appears on ESPN and it gradually changes over several months, it's unlikely to be allowed to change.
As I understand it, Square 1 has exited the broadcasting business but has seen the value in its low-numbered channel 32. So it keeps the licence in its name to retain the slot, Sony runs the channel and Square 1 picks up a commission cheque from Sony for its troubles in retaining th slot and dealing with correspondence from Ofcom. The licence remains in Square 1's name.
No reason this model can't be applied to other channels in the future.I genuinely don't think there's a problem in channels changing names. An example is Channel 20:
Pre 1/10/2007 FTN (Flextech then Virgin Media)
1/10/2007 Virgin One (Virgin Media)
4/6/2010 Channel One (BSkyB)
1/2/2011 Bravo (BSkyB)
What do you think about the channel 20 history which I just appended, changes of name and ownership but same EPG number?
Channel 20 was of course, originally Virgin 1/Channel One. When it was replaced by Challenge, Challenge had to go down to 46.
Pre 1/10/2007 FTN (Flextech then Virgin Media)
1/10/2007 Virgin 1 (Virgin Media)
4/6/2010 Channel One (BSkyB)