It is not possible to carry both BBC3 HD and BBC4 HD on Freeview Lite. BBC4 HD will be on one of the new HD muxes which aren't even going to be on all the main transmitters, and even the transmitters that do get it will be reduced power compared to the existing muxes.
Just that there are a range of high quality documentaries on BBC4 that would benefit from HD whereas BBC3 tends to have reality programmes, low quality comedies etc.
Just that there are a range of high quality documentaries on BBC4 that would benefit from HD whereas BBC3 tends to have reality programmes, low quality comedies etc.
Each have a different taste in shows. Just because its not to your liking doesn't make it 'low quality'
How very rude!
The main reason I am glad about the launch of BBC Three HD is due to the fact that I will be able to enjoy any brand new episodes of Family Guy or American Dad! to the full! :cool:
BBC3 is no better off on 105 than it would be on 107, so nobody benefits. Ultimately it will just lead to confusion, or worse still, C5HD never coming to Freeview.
BBC3 is no better off on 105 than it would be on 107, so nobody benefits. Ultimately it will just lead to confusion, or worse still, C5HD never coming to Freeview.
Completely illogical and backwards step.
Not in the slightest.
What IS the disgrace is the messing around Channel 5 has done in two previous space tenders, so why on gods green earth should Channel 5, after pissing around endlessly, still get to pick & choose their HD slot, should they ever finally pack in the stupidity and launch on DTT??
Fact is, if Channel 5 wanted to be in that 105 slot, they'd of been on DTT already and had two chances to do so yet decided to mess around.
First come first serve. I applaud DMOL
Not in the slightest.
What IS the disgrace is the messing around Channel 5 has done in two previous space tenders, so why on gods green earth should Channel 5, after pissing around endlessly, still get to pick & choose their HD slot, should they ever finally pack in the stupidity and launch on DTT??
Fact is, if Channel 5 wanted to be in that 105 slot, they'd of been on DTT already and had two chances to do so yet decided to mess around.
First come first serve. I applaud DMOL
They told DMOL as recently as May 2012 that they plan to launch on DTT within two to three years. (i.e. by Spring 2015)
Channel 5 strongly supports DMOL’s proposal to put HD channels in the 100s and for their order to mirror that of the established terrestrial channels. This would both free up space in the general entertainment genre and give HD channels listings positions that reflect viewers’ expectations. We also believe it is sensible to make this change now, when a relatively small proportion of Freeview receivers are capable of receiving HD signals.
If DMOL adopts this policy then we believe as part of it LCN 105 must be reserved for Channel 5 HD, in anticipation of the time it launches on the Freeview HD platform. There is a clear logic for the currently available HD channels to follow the established terrestrial order of BBC One, BBC Two, ITV1, Channel 4 – this logic also extends to the next LCN being reserved for Channel 5.
It would be perverse for DMOL to disrupt the current ordering of the HD channels in order to replicate the standard terrestrial order and not to apply the same logic in order to reserve LCN 105 for Channel 5 HD. DMOL’s proposal creates a precedent - for example, by placing BBC Two HD in second place in the LCN listing even though it will be the fourth extant HD channel to be launched – that should allow it to place Channel 5 HD at 105 whether or not it is the fifth HD channel to launch.
There have been sound regulatory and commercial reasons why Channel 5 HD has not yet launched on Freeview, but we have every expectation that we will do so within the next two to three years. It would clearly not be in consumers’ interests for Channel 5 alone, of all the main channels, to be out of position at 106 or 107 because of the sequencing of its launch, when the logic of DMOL’s proposed methodology (to follow the order of the established channels) is for it to be placed at LCN 105.
There is no sound justification whatsoever for the BBC being allocated 105.
C5's dithering over making 5HD available on Freeview HD is besides the point. The point is a first come first served policy makes absolutely no sense in this case.
Not in the slightest.
What IS the disgrace is the messing around Channel 5 has done in two previous space tenders, so why on gods green earth should Channel 5, after pissing around endlessly, still get to pick & choose their HD slot, should they ever finally pack in the stupidity and launch on DTT??
Fact is, if Channel 5 wanted to be in that 105 slot, they'd of been on DTT already and had two chances to do so yet decided to mess around.
First come first serve. I applaud DMOL
I have to agree with this. Far from being a disgrace I think it's fantastic and no less than Channel 5 deserve. Turning the opportunity down not once but twice and expecting other channels that are ready to get behind them in the queue. Right decision by DMOL.
Absolute disgrace that Channel 5's request to DMOL that 105 be reserved for C5HD in anticipation of its future launch has been ignored.
....
Completely illogical and backwards step.
No - it's Channel 5 that are the disgrace for being time wasters and putting in two applications for the fifth channel Freeview HD capacity only to withdraw at the last minute.
They wasted Ofcoms time, cost the BBC money in unused transmission capacity, and prevented all Freeview HD viewers from enjoying a fifth HD channel whilst they prevaricated.
Ofcom bent over backwards to try and reserve capacity for them, restricting applications to PSBs initially. But Channel 5 probably just saw this as a way of extracting a good deal on the transmission costs. When they didn't get that deal they took their ball home to play footie with Sky instead. They cite 'regulatory and commercial' reasons - now your guess is as good as mine as to what regulatory impediment they are thinking of given that the red carpet was being laid out for them, but we can all see the clear commercial motives for their games.
As expected no credible argument has been put forward by anyone for the BBC being allocated 105. It's all petty "they deserve what they get" type stuff.
I think your average Freeview HD viewer will find this to be a very strange carry on indeed. The platform is becoming a mismanaged mess.
Closing the door on or bullying Five out is not the way to go. It just makes the platform even more unattractive than it already is when basic channels like this are not provided but relatively obscure ones like Al Jazeera soon will be.
Bullying Five out is not the way to go. It just makes the platform even more unattractive than it already is when basic channels like this are not provided but relatively obscure ones like Al Jazeera soon will be.
Hang on - you do realise Five are stating they won't intend to launch Channel 5 HD for at least another 3 years anyway? It is Channel 5 themselves that are preventing it from being provided - nobody else.
Hang on - you do realise Five are stating they won't intend to launch Channel 5 HD for at least another 3 years anyway? It is Channel 5 themselves that are preventing it from being provided - nobody else.
They stated they intended to launch by Spring 2015, which isn't all that far away really.
But now they must settle for a very unattractive EPG slot for no sound reason if they choose to go ahead with the launch.
Without question your average viewer would expect the HD version of Five to appear at 105 after Channel 4, whilst 107 would make more sense for BBC3 with an SD channel number of 7. It's just common sense really, which unfortunately for most consumers isn't being applied.
They stated they intended to launch by Spring 2015, which isn't all that far away really.
But now they must settle for a very unattractive EPG slot for no sound reason if they choose to go ahead with the launch.
Without question your average viewer would expect the HD version of Five to appear at 105 after Channel 4, whilst 107 would make more sense for BBC3 with an SD channel number of 7. It's just common sense really, which unfortunately for most consumers isn't being applied.
So where is the HD capacity coming from for a Spring 2015 launch exactly? They have missed the opportunity for PSB3 capacity and Mux E & F will also be let by then.
So where is the HD capacity coming from for a Spring 2015 launch exactly? They have missed the opportunity for PSB3 capacity and COM E & F will also be let by then.
They didn't specify exactly when they intended to launch, just that they were aiming for it to happen before then.
Without question your average viewer would expect the HD version of Channel 5 to appear on Freeview as soon as possible. Given 2 opportunities by Ofcom and a further opportunity by the BBC, Channel 5 simply didn't bother to launch, preferring a commercial deal with Sky.
After giving the PSB channels an opportunity to launch, it is more than reasonable to offer the LCNs on a first come, first served basis if the PSB operators don't take that opportunity. Channel 5 had their opportunity to be served but didn't come to the platform. With continued procrastination, there's no guarantee that an HD slot will even be available, should they eventually decide to launch in 2015.
They stated they intended to launch by Spring 2015, which isn't all that far away really.
But now they must settle for a very unattractive EPG slot for no sound reason if they choose to go ahead with the launch.
Without question your average viewer would expect the HD version of Five to appear at 105 after Channel 4, whilst 107 would make more sense for BBC3 with an SD channel number of 7. It's just common sense really, which unfortunately for most consumers isn't being applied.
Five were given two opportunities to start their HD service on DTT and cried off both times. Even if they were to apply now, their LCN would be 109 though I suspect they will delay so much they will get 115.
Either way, they will now only be available in HD to more or less the same areas covered by their analogue service.
It seems probable this thread has now become more about individual prejudices and less about what is right for the platform.
That's a shame, and at this point I bow out. But I'll do so feeling confident that DMOL have got this very wrong. And I'm also confident most viewers would agree with me.
They didn't specify exactly when they intended to launch, just that they were aiming for it to happen before then.
Which is exactly what they need to do to keep Sky paying their satellite carriages fees for them (or whatever the exact deal is). It's all just a bargaining ploy- every time the contract is up for renewal Freeview HD gets a mention and out comes the cheque book again...
It seems probable this thread has now become more about individual prejudices and less about what is right for the platform.
That's a shame, and at this point I bow out. But I'll do so feeling confident that DMOL have got this very wrong. And I'm also confident most viewers would agree with me.
Translation: This thread doesn't agree with me about what I THINK is best for the platform. :rolleyes:
And then take your ball home. :rolleyes:
Channel 5 have pissed people about far too much for far too long. I don't see any of your responses actually addressing the disgusting way Channel 5 has behaved towards everyone including it's viewers.
Translation: This thread doesn't agree with me about what I THINK is best for the platform. :rolleyes:
And then take your ball home. :rolleyes:
Channel 5 have pissed people about far too much for far too long. I don't see any of your responses actually addressing the disgusting way Channel 5 has behaved towards everyone including it's viewers.
BBC3 is no better off on 105 than it would be on 107, so nobody benefits. Ultimately it will just lead to confusion, or worse still, C5HD never coming to Freeview.
Completely illogical and backwards step.
No, it's entirely understandable given Channel 5's track record in NOT progressing its DTT HD options having twice seemingly expressed an interest but having twice pulled back.
All relevant organisations have been very accommodating, but each time Channel 5 seemed to have stalled, costing time and money - it almost begins to look like delaying or spoiling tactics. There's only so much leeway that can be given before things have to move on.
And things have indeed moved on. The LCN cannot be "soft reserved" indefinitely.
Comments
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2013/bbchdchannels.html
Just that there are a range of high quality documentaries on BBC4 that would benefit from HD whereas BBC3 tends to have reality programmes, low quality comedies etc.
Each have a different taste in shows. Just because its not to your liking doesn't make it 'low quality'
How very rude!
C5 weekly reach: 26m; share: 4.2%
BBC3 weekly reach: 16m; share 1.6%
BBC3 is no better off on 105 than it would be on 107, so nobody benefits. Ultimately it will just lead to confusion, or worse still, C5HD never coming to Freeview.
Completely illogical and backwards step.
Not in the slightest.
What IS the disgrace is the messing around Channel 5 has done in two previous space tenders, so why on gods green earth should Channel 5, after pissing around endlessly, still get to pick & choose their HD slot, should they ever finally pack in the stupidity and launch on DTT??
Fact is, if Channel 5 wanted to be in that 105 slot, they'd of been on DTT already and had two chances to do so yet decided to mess around.
First come first serve. I applaud DMOL
http://www.dmol.co.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/78145/C5.pdf
Their arguments are entirely credible.
There is no sound justification whatsoever for the BBC being allocated 105.
C5's dithering over making 5HD available on Freeview HD is besides the point. The point is a first come first served policy makes absolutely no sense in this case.
I have to agree with this. Far from being a disgrace I think it's fantastic and no less than Channel 5 deserve. Turning the opportunity down not once but twice and expecting other channels that are ready to get behind them in the queue. Right decision by DMOL.
No - it's Channel 5 that are the disgrace for being time wasters and putting in two applications for the fifth channel Freeview HD capacity only to withdraw at the last minute.
They wasted Ofcoms time, cost the BBC money in unused transmission capacity, and prevented all Freeview HD viewers from enjoying a fifth HD channel whilst they prevaricated.
Ofcom bent over backwards to try and reserve capacity for them, restricting applications to PSBs initially. But Channel 5 probably just saw this as a way of extracting a good deal on the transmission costs. When they didn't get that deal they took their ball home to play footie with Sky instead. They cite 'regulatory and commercial' reasons - now your guess is as good as mine as to what regulatory impediment they are thinking of given that the red carpet was being laid out for them, but we can all see the clear commercial motives for their games.
So losing LCN 105 is small punishment indeed.
I think your average Freeview HD viewer will find this to be a very strange carry on indeed. The platform is becoming a mismanaged mess.
Closing the door on or bullying Five out is not the way to go. It just makes the platform even more unattractive than it already is when basic channels like this are not provided but relatively obscure ones like Al Jazeera soon will be.
Hang on - you do realise Five are stating they won't intend to launch Channel 5 HD for at least another 3 years anyway? It is Channel 5 themselves that are preventing it from being provided - nobody else.
But now they must settle for a very unattractive EPG slot for no sound reason if they choose to go ahead with the launch.
Without question your average viewer would expect the HD version of Five to appear at 105 after Channel 4, whilst 107 would make more sense for BBC3 with an SD channel number of 7. It's just common sense really, which unfortunately for most consumers isn't being applied.
So where is the HD capacity coming from for a Spring 2015 launch exactly? They have missed the opportunity for PSB3 capacity and Mux E & F will also be let by then.
After giving the PSB channels an opportunity to launch, it is more than reasonable to offer the LCNs on a first come, first served basis if the PSB operators don't take that opportunity. Channel 5 had their opportunity to be served but didn't come to the platform. With continued procrastination, there's no guarantee that an HD slot will even be available, should they eventually decide to launch in 2015.
Five were given two opportunities to start their HD service on DTT and cried off both times. Even if they were to apply now, their LCN would be 109 though I suspect they will delay so much they will get 115.
Either way, they will now only be available in HD to more or less the same areas covered by their analogue service.
That's a shame, and at this point I bow out. But I'll do so feeling confident that DMOL have got this very wrong. And I'm also confident most viewers would agree with me.
Which is exactly what they need to do to keep Sky paying their satellite carriages fees for them (or whatever the exact deal is). It's all just a bargaining ploy- every time the contract is up for renewal Freeview HD gets a mention and out comes the cheque book again...
Translation: This thread doesn't agree with me about what I THINK is best for the platform. :rolleyes:
And then take your ball home. :rolleyes:
Channel 5 have pissed people about far too much for far too long. I don't see any of your responses actually addressing the disgusting way Channel 5 has behaved towards everyone including it's viewers.
This...
Digital_UK_LCN_Policy_Version_5.2 (pdf)
Yes, they merged and use the Digital UK name.
All relevant organisations have been very accommodating, but each time Channel 5 seemed to have stalled, costing time and money - it almost begins to look like delaying or spoiling tactics. There's only so much leeway that can be given before things have to move on.
And things have indeed moved on. The LCN cannot be "soft reserved" indefinitely.