Pauper View

14567810»

Comments

  • jj20xjj20x Posts: 2,079
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    paul_m wrote: »
    Do you get all the channels you could receive on analogue on Freeview? Yes? Then Freeview has replaced it perfectly.

    Yes, it sucks that not everyone can get all the extra channels. But just like you don't expect to have a Westfield or airport or Virgin Media in your village, you can't expect to have the commercial TV channels as they are funded by adverts and it doesn't make commercial sense due to the lack of population there.

    I think people forget that initially, only the BBC, D3&4 and SDN multiplexes were classed as a public service. The other 3 multiplexes went to On Digital, a pay tv service which would never realistically have extended its service to the relay network. With the passage of time, On Digital collapsed, the BBC inherited one of the multiplexes gaining public service obligations. Meanwhile, SDN decided not to expand its network and PSB channels were transferred from it to the PSB multiplexes. It's crazy to imagine that a 4 channel analogue transmitter network should be replaced by a 6 multiplex digital network, especially at a time when frequencies are being given up to the mobile networks.

    The main site vs relay site argument for larger population areas does seem to be more convincing. There are many of the larger relay sites serving larger populations than the smaller main sites. However, more than 50% of the existing commercial multiplex coverage is achieved by the top 6 sites alone, 75% achieved by the top 15 and 90% by the top 30, 96% by the top 50. A basic cost benefit analysis would question the value of the smaller main sites, especially the 50 sites collectively contributing less than 10% of the existing coverage. So yes, the current system of main vs relay isn't particularly fair. Unfortunately, looking at it in too much detail is more likely to question the value of the smaller main sites than to provide a convincing argument to extend to the larger relays.
  • goldframedoorgoldframedoor Posts: 1,649
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jj20x wrote: »
    I think people forget that initially, only the BBC, D3&4 and SDN multiplexes were classed as a public service. The other 3 multiplexes went to On Digital, a pay tv service which would never realistically have extended its service to the relay network. With the passage of time, On Digital collapsed, the BBC inherited one of the multiplexes gaining public service obligations. Meanwhile, SDN decided not to expand its network and PSB channels were transferred from it to the PSB multiplexes. It's crazy to imagine that a 4 channel analogue transmitter network should be replaced by a 6 multiplex digital network, especially at a time when frequencies are being given up to the mobile networks.

    The main site vs relay site argument for larger population areas does seem to be more convincing. There are many of the larger relay sites serving larger populations than the smaller main sites. However, more than 50% of the existing commercial multiplex coverage is achieved by the top 6 sites alone, 75% achieved by the top 15 and 90% by the top 30, 96% by the top 50. A basic cost benefit analysis would question the value of the smaller main sites, especially the 50 sites collectively contributing less than 10% of the existing coverage. So yes, the current system of main vs relay isn't particularly fair. Unfortunately, looking at it in too much detail is more likely to question the value of the smaller main sites than to provide a convincing argument to extend to the larger relays.
    I never completely understood why up until September 2009, Channel 5 was on the SDN multiplex. Didn't they realize that they were annihilating viewers in post-DSO Freeview Lite areas like Whitehaven for example?
  • chrisychrisy Posts: 9,419
    Forum Member
    I never completely understood why up until September 2009, Channel 5 was on the SDN multiplex. Didn't they realize that they were annihilating viewers in post-DSO Freeview Lite areas like Whitehaven for example?

    Whitehaven had a temporary multiplex just carrying Channel 5. Ferryside has the full SDN multiplex. Between Whitehaven and the next DSO, Channel 5 was moved to mux B, so it has always been available on Freeview pre- and post-DSO in all areas.
  • kasgkasg Posts: 4,719
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Didn't they realize that they were annihilating viewers in post-DSO Freeview Lite areas
    I suspect they were merely alienating them rather than annihilating them, which I believe is illegal :)
  • MarkLS12MarkLS12 Posts: 1,128
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I never completely understood why up until September 2009, Channel 5 was on the SDN multiplex. Didn't they realize that they were annihilating viewers in post-DSO Freeview Lite areas like Whitehaven for example?

    Because SDN was meant to be one of the Freeview Lite muxes.
    It was demoted and replaced by the HD Mux.
  • goldframedoorgoldframedoor Posts: 1,649
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    kasg wrote: »
    I suspect they were merely alienating them rather than annihilating them, which I believe is illegal :)
    Sorry, I meant alienating them, but my web browser's spellchecker had other ideas, and I didn't realize it until it was too late to edit my post! :p
  • jj20xjj20x Posts: 2,079
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    kasg wrote: »
    I suspect they were merely alienating them rather than annihilating them, which I believe is illegal :)

    Although it might have helped reduce the number of complaints about freeview lite on certain forums. ;)
  • goldframedoorgoldframedoor Posts: 1,649
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jj20x wrote: »
    Although it might have helped reduce the number of complaints about freeview lite on certain forums. ;)
    Just as long as I am not one of the victims! :eek::D
  • Katharine_RangeKatharine_Range Posts: 2,490
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It would be much less pauper in my opinion if 5USA and 4Music etc were on the same multiplex as Film4 is, then 'Freeview Lite' won't seem as such a raw deal as it is currently.
  • Katharine_RangeKatharine_Range Posts: 2,490
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Winston_1 wrote: »
    How can any FREE service be a raw deal?

    If the quality of it is poor.
  • SteveMcKSteveMcK Posts: 5,457
    Forum Member
    If the quality of it is poor.
    You're still getting exactly what you pay for, more even :D
Sign In or Register to comment.