Sounds like conjecture to me. They're probably paying for the transponder space but that's all we know.
I'd suspect Sky are covering EPG costs and carriage. Channel 4 will be responsible for delivering Film4HD to Sky Osterley where the C&M is carried out. That's the usual drill when it comes to Sky's HD services, they uplink and cover EPG costs and you, as a broadcaster, are responsible for programme delivery to the Compression Hub. The two ITV HD services on TP56 + ITV2,3 and 4HD are delivered to Sky via BT HD-SDI video circuits.
I'd suspect Sky are covering EPG costs and carriage. Channel 4 will be responsible for delivering Film4HD to Sky Osterley where the C&M is carried out. That's the usual drill when it comes to Sky's HD services, they uplink and cover EPG costs and you, as a broadcaster, are responsible for programme delivery to the Compression Hub. The two ITV HD services on TP56 + ITV2,3 and 4HD are delivered to Sky via BT HD-SDI video circuits.
Sounds like conjecture to me. They're probably paying for the transponder space but that's all we know.
You don't have that great-of an understanding of how it works if you think its conjecture.
If it wasn't for Sky, alot of HD channel on air in the UK right now would not be.
Channel 4's lot, Channel 5 HD, there'd of been no BBC Olympic HD streams and Channel 4 Paralympic HD streams...
Some broadcasters want to be on the HD ladder but do not have the money to be able to do it and that is fact, something you well know as you have been a DS member for how long?!
You don't have that great-of an understanding of how it works if you think its conjecture.
If it wasn't for Sky, alot of HD channel on air in the UK right now would not be.
Channel 4's lot, Channel 5 HD, there'd of been no BBC Olympic HD streams and Channel 4 Paralympic HD streams...
Some broadcasters want to be on the HD ladder but do not have the money to be able to do it and that is fact, something you well know as you have been a DS member for how long?!
Not quite sure how you make the analogy between SKY and HD,
as HD in it's first form was about before SKY TV!
You don't have that great-of an understanding of how it works if you think its conjecture.
If it wasn't for Sky, alot of HD channel on air in the UK right now would not be.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, this gets said all the time and we all know about it. This has nothing to do with current HD channel launches from major broadcasters. I find it very hard to believe that Channel 4 couldn't afford to launch Film4 HD as FTA in 2013 but I haven't seen their books, particularly when they are apparently planning to launch 2 HD channels on Freeview.
If it's not conjecture, provide evidence. If you can show me a Channel 4 document highlighting their reasons for staying behind a paywall then fair enough.
there'd of been no BBC Olympic HD streams and Channel 4 Paralympic HD streams...
Total BS. The BBC was planning to make them available online before Sky decided they wanted them on the satellite platform also and would thus pay for the privilege.
Some broadcasters want to be on the HD ladder but do not have the money to be able to do it and that is fact, something you well know as you have been a DS member for how long?!
Some broadcasters. How do we know this includes Channel 4? I suppose we could say that the fact that Film4 HD will not be FTA suggests it does but I still don't see why.
Total BS. The BBC was planning to make them available online
Hardly comparable though are they have you ever watched the streams the BBC calls HD on its BBC Sports app :eek: horrific in comparison to what we actually got during the Olympics.
Hardly comparable though are they have you ever watched the streams the BBC calls HD on its BBC Sports app :eek: horrific in comparison to what we actually got during the Olympics.
It was on Virgin Media and connected red button also, in HD.
I agree that the satellite versions were the best and I made extensive use of them but to say the only reason we got the coverage was because of Sky is ludicrous.
If it wasn't for Sky, alot of HD channel on air in the UK right now would not be.
Very true. It's hard to justify HD broadcasting without some form of subscription revenue to support the financial burden, unless you have serious money to burn like RT and NHK.
For instance, there's a HD version of the Travel Channel available on various Pay TV platforms across Europe. It won't be launching here though until if/when Sky agree to carry it. Until then we have the FTA feed, in 4:3 with appalling picture quality.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, this gets said all the time and we all know about it. This has nothing to do with current HD channel launches from major broadcasters. I find it very hard to believe that Channel 4 couldn't afford to launch Film4 HD as FTA in 2013 but I haven't seen their books, particularly when they are apparently planning to launch 2 HD channels on Freeview.
If it's not conjecture, provide evidence. If you can show me a Channel 4 document highlighting their reasons for staying behind a paywall then fair enough.
Total BS. The BBC was planning to make them available online before Sky decided they wanted them on the satellite platform also and would thus pay for the privilege.
Some broadcasters. How do we know this includes Channel 4? I suppose we could say that the fact that Film4 HD will not be FTA suggests it does but I still don't see why.
Like i am going to publish info like that, get real son!
Fact is this. Channel 4 DOES NOT have the cash reserves it would need to be able to launch Film4HD aswell as rights to boot! And anyone with even a basic knowledge of broadcasting will know that too!
If they were loaded, they wouldn't have had to go to Sky for help with launching their flagship channel in HD!
And yes, they have PLANS to launch 2 channels on DTT but there is nothing confirmed as yet.. Why? Cost!
And i know this because im employed by them!
And not total BS on the BBC HD Olympic at all.
There was no plans for additional HD Olympic channels untill Sky went to the BBC and agreed a deal where Sky picked up alot of the financial burden. Again, something that is widely known yet you feel the need to dispute everything and anything for what i can only assume is for a giggle.
It was Sky Box Office capacity and spare capacity that was used for the Olympics. The muxes used were poreviously used and still are used by Sky, and some for former ITV muxes uplinked by Sky.
EPG of Bid Plus on 665 showing programmes no longer available - I wonder whose bought their EPG...
Or possibly QVC. I heard there could be a QVC+1 launching, either as a permanent channel or to placeholder the slot and thus may potentially have bought it?
I'd have thought TLC+2 would more likely have bought LCN193 or 200, Channel 5 must have a slot eyed up and I'd have thought one of the other of these would be for them too.
Fact is this. Channel 4 DOES NOT have the cash reserves it would need to be able to launch Film4HD aswell as rights to boot! And anyone with even a basic knowledge of broadcasting will know that too!
You can't claim something is a fact without anything to back it up.
And not total BS on the BBC HD Olympic at all.
There was no plans for additional HD Olympic channels untill Sky went to the BBC and agreed a deal where Sky picked up alot of the financial burden. Again, something that is widely known yet you feel the need to dispute everything and anything for what i can only assume is for a giggle.
Yeah, if by "widely known" you mean "totally incorrect".
Mate, you're just getting angry without reading my posts. I didn't even know you worked for Channel 4 until your previous post and I never asked you to reveal some secret documents, I'm asking for a published document (like the one detailing Channel 4's plans for Freeview HD channels). If there isn't one then you're asking me to just take your word for it, which isn't good enough for me.
Mate, you're just getting angry without reading my posts. I didn't even know you worked for Channel 4 until your previous post and I never asked you to reveal some secret documents, I'm asking for a published document (like the one detailing Channel 4's plans for Freeview HD channels). If there isn't one then you're asking me to just take your word for it, which isn't good enough for me.
But it doesn't really matter anyway.
Its not exactly a secret, look at my profile.
And im sorry if taking word is not good enough for you but i don't have some things and what i do have, im not going to publish to make someone on a forum happy as it risks mine and many other peoples jobs aswell as anonymity of other sources i have that give me info knowing i wouldn't dream of blabbing my mouth off.
I gave you one bit, and that is that Channel 4's HD DTT plans are not set in concrete because of cost. yet you think Film4HD should be launchable FTA...
Believe me when i say 4 want their HD channels FTA, but money isn't something thats on tap. HD DTT & FTA HD isn't a priority because of cost.
You can either take my word for that or not. You're choice.
You can either take my word for that or not. You're choice.
I have no reason to think you're lying or wrong but if I believed every anonymous poster on internet forums I'd be believing a lot of things, most of them incorrect.
With the launch of Akaal channel, there's now only one EPG number left in the 'International' genre, so another "overspill section" could be needed soon, but the question is where would it be placed, presumably it'd start at something like EPG 876?
And im sorry if taking word is not good enough for you but i don't have some things and what i do have, im not going to publish to make someone on a forum happy as it risks mine and many other peoples jobs aswell as anonymity of other sources i have that give me info knowing i wouldn't dream of blabbing my mouth off.
I gave you one bit, and that is that Channel 4's HD DTT plans are not set in concrete because of cost. yet you think Film4HD should be launchable FTA...
Believe me when i say 4 want their HD channels FTA, but money isn't something thats on tap. HD DTT & FTA HD isn't a priority because of cost.
You can either take my word for that or not. You're choice.
I thought it was already widely known and accepted that C4's Freeview HD channels were going to be 4seven+1 and Channel 4+1 HD?
Comments
I'd suspect Sky are covering EPG costs and carriage. Channel 4 will be responsible for delivering Film4HD to Sky Osterley where the C&M is carried out. That's the usual drill when it comes to Sky's HD services, they uplink and cover EPG costs and you, as a broadcaster, are responsible for programme delivery to the Compression Hub. The two ITV HD services on TP56 + ITV2,3 and 4HD are delivered to Sky via BT HD-SDI video circuits.
I don't have Sky but thought I read on here it was removed some time ago.
Loaded TV was effectively dead since the start of June and likely in a repeated loop.
And several weeks before that they removed their own filmed shows, which was what the channel was intended for.
M60 is correct as usual.
You don't have that great-of an understanding of how it works if you think its conjecture.
If it wasn't for Sky, alot of HD channel on air in the UK right now would not be.
Channel 4's lot, Channel 5 HD, there'd of been no BBC Olympic HD streams and Channel 4 Paralympic HD streams...
Some broadcasters want to be on the HD ladder but do not have the money to be able to do it and that is fact, something you well know as you have been a DS member for how long?!
Not quite sure how you make the analogy between SKY and HD,
as HD in it's first form was about before SKY TV!
I know it was around long before Sky. Im saying that Sky have helped broadcasters in the UK get HD channels on air is all
In the week 33 thread it was mentioned that TLC+2 is launching mid September, maybe they bought the Bid Plus slot.
If it's not conjecture, provide evidence. If you can show me a Channel 4 document highlighting their reasons for staying behind a paywall then fair enough.
Total BS. The BBC was planning to make them available online before Sky decided they wanted them on the satellite platform also and would thus pay for the privilege.
Some broadcasters. How do we know this includes Channel 4? I suppose we could say that the fact that Film4 HD will not be FTA suggests it does but I still don't see why.
It was on Virgin Media and connected red button also, in HD.
I agree that the satellite versions were the best and I made extensive use of them but to say the only reason we got the coverage was because of Sky is ludicrous.
Very true. It's hard to justify HD broadcasting without some form of subscription revenue to support the financial burden, unless you have serious money to burn like RT and NHK.
For instance, there's a HD version of the Travel Channel available on various Pay TV platforms across Europe. It won't be launching here though until if/when Sky agree to carry it. Until then we have the FTA feed, in 4:3 with appalling picture quality.
Sky Sports Ashes (AshesHD) on various transponders now relabelled Sky Sports 2 (2HD) etc.
Like i am going to publish info like that, get real son!
Fact is this. Channel 4 DOES NOT have the cash reserves it would need to be able to launch Film4HD aswell as rights to boot! And anyone with even a basic knowledge of broadcasting will know that too!
If they were loaded, they wouldn't have had to go to Sky for help with launching their flagship channel in HD!
And yes, they have PLANS to launch 2 channels on DTT but there is nothing confirmed as yet.. Why? Cost!
And i know this because im employed by them!
And not total BS on the BBC HD Olympic at all.
There was no plans for additional HD Olympic channels untill Sky went to the BBC and agreed a deal where Sky picked up alot of the financial burden. Again, something that is widely known yet you feel the need to dispute everything and anything for what i can only assume is for a giggle.
Or possibly QVC. I heard there could be a QVC+1 launching, either as a permanent channel or to placeholder the slot and thus may potentially have bought it?
I'd have thought TLC+2 would more likely have bought LCN193 or 200, Channel 5 must have a slot eyed up and I'd have thought one of the other of these would be for them too.
Yeah, if by "widely known" you mean "totally incorrect".
Risk my job for you!?!?! LOL get real and im sorry, but i cannot take you seriously!
Unbelieveable
But it doesn't really matter anyway.
Its not exactly a secret, look at my profile.
And im sorry if taking word is not good enough for you but i don't have some things and what i do have, im not going to publish to make someone on a forum happy as it risks mine and many other peoples jobs aswell as anonymity of other sources i have that give me info knowing i wouldn't dream of blabbing my mouth off.
I gave you one bit, and that is that Channel 4's HD DTT plans are not set in concrete because of cost. yet you think Film4HD should be launchable FTA...
Believe me when i say 4 want their HD channels FTA, but money isn't something thats on tap. HD DTT & FTA HD isn't a priority because of cost.
You can either take my word for that or not. You're choice.
12.560 H, 27.500, 2/3.
"54066" has now been relabelled as 'Akaal Channel'.
Edit: 'Akaal Channel' now added to Sky EPG 858.