DS Forums

 
 

New Channels


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 14-11-2012, 13:15
wombler
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Narnia
Posts: 829
never heard such a pile of rubbish ever .... who says people with V+ boxes will record only HD !!
wombler is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 15-11-2012, 21:21
Auld Reekie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 189
That wont wash,what happened to the delete button then dunno about you but i delete any prog Ive watched straight away...
Spot on.
The answer was a load of bollocks.
Auld Reekie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-11-2012, 00:52
TomGrant
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: London
Posts: 4,093
Woopee! (NOT!) Rupert Murdoch gets his FOX News Like Agenda and forum in the UK in HD on Virgin...
Sky News is NOTHING like Fox News.
TomGrant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-11-2012, 09:01
Pete Grain
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 940
Where did you get the idea that we were not getting any more HD channels this year? It's only November and VM only ever let us know about any new channels a few days before they launch.

Too early to start making assumptions, methinks.
Did you actually read my reply before you typed & posted your patronising response to it..?

If you had, then your synapses would have kicked into gear, and a cognitive connection resulted, whereby it became apparent that I 'got' the idea from a poster here, who was speaking to a VM rep regarding forthcoming HD content. ..ergo I was assuming nothing, merely commenting in response to what I had read here.

The poster pasted a direct link to the response from a VM rep, who stated what I mentioned. I then elaborated on this by actually stating 'according to a VM rep'

Hopefully this answers your patronising question, and in future you will have the common courtesy to both read a reply properly before responding..and..not reply to a poster in such a condescending manner ...as if you are wiser by default of your own self-perception, choice of nick or other factor I may know nothing about.

So methinks.. your 'query' has been suitably addressed.
Pete Grain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-11-2012, 12:46
martine93
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,834
Whereas Sky's strategy is to promote exclusive channels such as Sky Atlantic
Looks like have changed their strategy on Sky Atlantic
BSkyB, based in Isleworth, England, will also focus on investing in original content for the U.K. and Irish market and on expanding HBO’s streaming service HBO GO as well as wholesaling Sky Atlantic, a TV channel that airs programming from the U.S
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-1...t-margins.html
martine93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-11-2012, 13:29
wombler
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Narnia
Posts: 829
Looking at the program listing on Atlantic, I still say there is nothing overtly interesting for me. That's not to say others may not like it, but I just don't think its a "must have" channel that maybe it once was
wombler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-11-2012, 13:48
dids858
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 3,837
What a letdown,I thought we would have had,at least,all the ITV channels by now specially ITV2 HD for the football.
Wouldnt you rather have ITV4 in HD?
dids858 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-11-2012, 17:09
OLD BOY
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Wokingham
Posts: 2,035
Did you actually read my reply before you typed & posted your patronising response to it..?

If you had, then your synapses would have kicked into gear, and a cognitive connection resulted, whereby it became apparent that I 'got' the idea from a poster here, who was speaking to a VM rep regarding forthcoming HD content. ..ergo I was assuming nothing, merely commenting in response to what I had read here.
Blimey, a bit of over-reaction there, what?

Yes I did read your source, and maybe I should have pointed out the thing that led to my scepticism, which is that VM reps know even less than we do about what is coming up on VM.

Sorry that I didn't make this clear.
OLD BOY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-11-2012, 06:51
EuroChris
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,650
Hindi channel Star Life OK is due to be added soon, presumably for those subscribing to Asian Mela.
There's now a holding slide on Channel 804.
EuroChris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2012, 14:16
Felim_Doyle
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, UK
Posts: 99

The comments about older boxes not being able to cater for additional HD channels may be more to do with a lack of memory to store the EPG and, as somone mentioned, an MPEG2 / MPEG4 issue if some channels are only available in the latter but some boxes only support the former.

I have an ageing Pace Di4000-N non-HD, non-PVR box and there are other boxes out there which are close to capacity. When the additional SD and HD channels for the Olympics and Paralympics were introduced, changes had to be made to the EPG to reduce the level of detail on the i-button and to adjust the frequency of updates to the EPG in order to reduce memory usage. These memory austerity measures are still in place!

However, those special channels are now available for re-use and so we could have some more SD and HD channels now without having to replace older boxes with V HD or TiVo units just yet.
Felim_Doyle is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2012, 16:40
Felim_Doyle
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, UK
Posts: 99

Historically there have been a number of ways in which channels were owned and supplied to us. I would classify them as follows but I am open to correction or additional suggestions.

Independent - mandatory (e.g. BBC, ITV)
Independent - optional (e.g. MUTV, Discovery)
VM owned - optional
Sky owned - optional

The VM owned channels are now either Sky owned or defunct and so we now have a situation where, in addition to negotiating contracts with independent broadcasters, the cable, satellite, terrestrial and internet service providers also have to negotiate with Sky for the channels that Sky own. This gives Sky-the-service-provider a distinct advantage over other service providers.

When mobile phone networks were first introduced in the UK, the networks themselves were not allowed to sell airtime directly to customers but instead had to sell it wholesale to service providers who then sold retail tariffs to customers. This practice was ultimately abandoned and, for reasons I never fully understood*, my CarPhoneWarehouse account was transferred to Vodafone and so I became both a Vodafone network customer and a Vodafone service provider customer. Of course I could now become a CPW customer again if I wished. *I suspect that CPW where acting as a retail front for Vodafone as the helpdesk number for my account was answered as “Vodafone Customer Care”.

Although in some ways introducing similar regulations forcing Sky to separate their two businesses might seem anti-competitive, it would ensure that all platforms were able to negotiate deals on a more equal basis for channels from Sky-the-broadcaster in the same way as they do with other broadcasters without Sky-the-service-provider automatically getting a family discount. This would surely be fairer and better for customers.

As things stand, there is some advantage in Sky making some channels available on the capacity-limited terrestrial platform as it gives customers a taste of what is available on Sky's satellite service and may entice them to ‘upgrade’ to a Sky satellite subscription. There is less of an advantage to them making all of their channels available to cable and internet platform providers though. Why sell wholesale when you can sell retail and possibly tempt customers into taking additional subscription channels and services too? They get some income from a VM customer having a Sky channel or package but they get more from a Sky customer having a Sky subscription, various Sky packages as well as telephone and broadband services.

Also, Sky-the-service-provider already have the advantage of almost complete coverage of the UK whereas VM have have to install infrastructure wherever they wish to offer services and compete for custom and will continue to have a limited coverage area for some time to come. I don't have comparative figures for the up-front and running costs of providing a satellite service over a cable based one but the point is that Sky's catchment area is much greater than VM's or that of other cable operators.

Sky were going to divest themselves of Sky News in order for News Corp. to take a majority share or total ownership of Sky but Sky News is a loss making channel so nobody wanted it and anyway ‘other events’ have prevented the takeover from going ahead for now. However it does show that Sky could split ownership of channels, be they news, sport or entertainment, in order to have greater separation between its businesses. It would be interesting to see a situation where a Sky channel won the rights to a sporting event or season but a non-Sky platform won the bid to air it - “Sky Sports F1 exclusive to Virgin Media”!
Felim_Doyle is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2012, 16:56
blueisthecolour
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 10,839
Historically there have been a number of ways in which channels were owned and supplied to us. I would classify them as follows but I am open to correction or additional suggestions.

Independent - mandatory (e.g. BBC, ITV)
Independent - optional (e.g. MUTV, Discovery)
VM owned - optional
Sky owned - optional

snip

Although in some ways introducing similar regulations forcing Sky to separate their two businesses might seem anti-competitive, it would ensure that all platforms were able to negotiate deals on a more equal basis for channels from Sky-the-broadcaster in the same way as they do with other broadcasters without Sky-the-service-provider automatically getting a family discount. This would surely be fairer and better for customers.

As things stand, there is some advantage in Sky making some channels available on the capacity-limited terrestrial platform as it gives customers a taste of what is available on Sky's satellite service and may entice them to ‘upgrade’ to a Sky satellite subscription. There is less of an advantage to them making all of their channels available to cable and internet platform providers though. Why sell wholesale when you can sell retail and possibly tempt customers into taking additional subscription channels and services too? They get some income from a VM customer having a Sky channel or package but they get more from a Sky customer having a Sky subscription, various Sky packages as well as telephone and broadband services.

Also, Sky-the-service-provider already have the advantage of almost complete coverage of the UK whereas VM have have to install infrastructure wherever they wish to offer services and compete for custom and will continue to have a limited coverage area for some time to come. I don't have comparative figures for the up-front and running costs of providing a satellite service over a cable based one but the point is that Sky's catchment area is much greater than VM's or that of other cable operators.

Sky were going to divest themselves of Sky News in order for News Corp. to take a majority share or total ownership of Sky but Sky News is a loss making channel so nobody wanted it and anyway ‘other events’ have prevented the takeover from going ahead for now. However it does show that Sky could split ownership of channels, be they news, sport or entertainment, in order to have greater separation between its businesses. It would be interesting to see a situation where a Sky channel won the rights to a sporting event or season but a non-Sky platform won the bid to air it - “Sky Sports F1 exclusive to Virgin Media”!
In case you're interested, I raised this in a separate thread.

http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showt...658&highlight=

The main problem is that what is to stop Sky the broadcaster agreeing an exclusive agreement with Sky the provider, much the same way HBO did with Sky.
blueisthecolour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2012, 04:16
tvmad-alan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Wickford, Essex, England,UK,GB
Posts: 1,820
YM will add more channels at one time, but I feel that as December comes close it's too late for 2012 as there was freeze on movement on TV platforms over Xmas month over years pass.

There many be some trouble with some boxes RAM or other that may stop new channels coming to VM. BUT I feel it's down to costs to VM & TV companies as we are in bad times from banks cut backs.

VM are spending money on many parts at this time, like taking over filmflex fully, added other content and broadband ( Broadband has had the double speed over the year and the adding Tivo boxes that use the Internet too per box ) The Tivo box has had updates to it's software and app's added too, which all cost. We also have had some channels over the year join the system and next year we have BBC2 HD, that may lead to a EPG move around as BBC HD is away from BBC One HD and the ITV2, 3, 4 HD that may come next year would mess the EPG a bit.

Also we have look at channels that are around at this time and they all on satellites that BskyB work from. So it's down to contacts to Sky and cost of a TV channel to be put on cable with EPG data.

VM could look at SD channels which would take less bandwidth, like CBS which own Horror+1 CBS Action CBS Drama and TV shopping with Betting too.

Most people have talked about these and other channels ( ITV2 HD + sister channels, History HD, MGM HD, Disney HD. ) for some time now and many reports that talks are taking place for such channels. BUT a year or more of talking is just to costly for all.
tvmad-alan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2012, 10:16
Felim_Doyle
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, UK
Posts: 99

As I mentioned, VM could negotiate with Sky-the-broadcaster for an exclusive deal to have the Sky Sports F1 channel on an equal playing field with Sky-the-service-provider and others. Just like a rail franchise, if the channel went to Sky-the-service-provider but VM felt they had made the better bid then they could complain and questions would be asked in Parliament and, worse still, in these forums!

One would hope that over time the two Sky businesses would diverge and end up being under different ownership with shareholders' greed dictating business policy.

I'll take a look at your thread on the subject although I had raised this over on CF a few years ago myself.
Felim_Doyle is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2012, 13:48
R410
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Guisborough, North Yorkshire
Posts: 2,878
As I mentioned, VM could negotiate with Sky-the-broadcaster for an exclusive deal to have the Sky Sports F1 channel on an equal playing field with Sky-the-service-provider and others. Just like a rail franchise, if the channel went to Sky-the-service-provider but VM felt they had made the better bid then they could complain and questions would be asked in Parliament and, worse still, in these forums!

One would hope that over time the two Sky businesses would diverge and end up being under different ownership with shareholders' greed dictating business policy.

I'll take a look at your thread on the subject although I had raised this over on CF a few years ago myself.
Never going to happen. Sky are not going to allow VM to have Sky Sports F1 as a standalone channel.
It won't be available on Sky itself without the Sky Sports pack for much longer either. It is a Sky Sports channel it will be a Sky Sports pack exclusive, maybe not next year but it will.

In an ideal world Sky the content provider and Sky the TV provider would be split, but this is not going to happen.
R410 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 22-11-2012, 15:41
mersey70
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 4,996
YM will add more channels at one time, but I feel that as December comes close it's too late for 2012 as there was freeze on movement on TV platforms over Xmas month over years pass.

There many be some trouble with some boxes RAM or other that may stop new channels coming to VM. BUT I feel it's down to costs to VM & TV companies as we are in bad times from banks cut backs.

VM are spending money on many parts at this time, like taking over filmflex fully, added other content and broadband ( Broadband has had the double speed over the year and the adding Tivo boxes that use the Internet too per box ) The Tivo box has had updates to it's software and app's added too, which all cost. We also have had some channels over the year join the system and next year we have BBC2 HD, that may lead to a EPG move around as BBC HD is away from BBC One HD and the ITV2, 3, 4 HD that may come next year would mess the EPG a bit.

Also we have look at channels that are around at this time and they all on satellites that BskyB work from. So it's down to contacts to Sky and cost of a TV channel to be put on cable with EPG data.

VM could look at SD channels which would take less bandwidth, like CBS which own Horror+1 CBS Action CBS Drama and TV shopping with Betting too.

Most people have talked about these and other channels ( ITV2 HD + sister channels, History HD, MGM HD, Disney HD. ) for some time now and many reports that talks are taking place for such channels. BUT a year or more of talking is just to costly for all.
Virgin Media have not taken over Filmflex, it has merely been rebranded as Virgin Movies. It is still a joint venture between Sony and Disney.

That's the path Filmflex are following, they now see themselves as a 'white' brand.

They are leaving the operators to promote their own branded services, much the same as HMV On Demand, Film4oD and EE, whose services are all provided by Filmflex.
mersey70 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-11-2012, 13:55
Auld Reekie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 189
YM will add more channels at one time, but I feel that as December comes close it's too late for 2012 as there was freeze on movement on TV platforms over Xmas month over years pass.

There many be some trouble with some boxes RAM or other that may stop new channels coming to VM. BUT I feel it's down to costs to VM & TV companies as we are in bad times from banks cut backs.

VM are spending money on many parts at this time, like taking over filmflex fully, added other content and broadband ( Broadband has had the double speed over the year and the adding Tivo boxes that use the Internet too per box ) The Tivo box has had updates to it's software and app's added too, which all cost. We also have had some channels over the year join the system and next year we have BBC2 HD, that may lead to a EPG move around as BBC HD is away from BBC One HD and the ITV2, 3, 4 HD that may come next year would mess the EPG a bit.

Also we have look at channels that are around at this time and they all on satellites that BskyB work from. So it's down to contacts to Sky and cost of a TV channel to be put on cable with EPG data.

VM could look at SD channels which would take less bandwidth, like CBS which own Horror+1 CBS Action CBS Drama and TV shopping with Betting too.

Most people have talked about these and other channels ( ITV2 HD + sister channels, History HD, MGM HD, Disney HD. ) for some time now and many reports that talks are taking place for such channels. BUT a year or more of talking is just to costly for all.
Maybe if VM dropped all these crap music channels they could replace them with some decent channels.
Auld Reekie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-11-2012, 20:59
OLD BOY
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Wokingham
Posts: 2,035
Maybe if VM dropped all these crap music channels they could replace them with some decent channels.
Music channels are dirt cheap. It is a common misconception that VM is short of bandwidth. It's not true.

Just remember all those Olympic channels that they were able to provide earlier this year. Come on, smell the coffee!
OLD BOY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-11-2012, 14:49
weetomuncher
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Erskine, Scotland
Posts: 289
Maybe if VM dropped all these crap music channels they could replace them with some decent channels.
I can't agree with that.

I'd like to see Scuzz, MTV Classic and MTV Music on Virgin, along with some of the other music channels that are around on satellite.
weetomuncher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-11-2012, 15:01
weetomuncher
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Erskine, Scotland
Posts: 289
There are a few other channels that could be picked up, including Sony Movies, Movies 4 Men, Men and Movies, CBS Drama, Food Network, MGM HD, TCM 2 and of course, Sky Atlantic. There are a lot of niche channels which would interest some people on satellite too which are small but quite well produced and could be picked up for buttons.

There are a lot of +1 and HD variants that would be decent additions too.
weetomuncher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2012, 15:41
Auld Reekie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 189
Music channels are dirt cheap. It is a common misconception that VM is short of bandwidth. It's not true.

Just remember all those Olympic channels that they were able to provide earlier this year. Come on, smell the coffee!
I didn't say they were short of bandwidth.
I wasn't aware that the music channels were dirt cheap.
Anyway they are still crap.
Auld Reekie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2012, 15:44
Auld Reekie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 189
There are a few other channels that could be picked up, including Sony Movies, Movies 4 Men, Men and Movies, CBS Drama, Food Network, MGM HD, TCM 2 and of course, Sky Atlantic. There are a lot of niche channels which would interest some people on satellite too which are small but quite well produced and could be picked up for buttons.

There are a lot of +1 and HD variants that would be decent additions too.
Agreed.
It would appear that VM don't give a sook about adding channels to often.
Auld Reekie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2012, 22:33
steven123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Teesside, England
Posts: 2,898
Maybe if VM dropped all these crap music channels they could replace them with some decent channels.
a ridiculous statement, if you don't like them don't watch them but they aren't stopping VM acquiring new channels or harming your viewing. Can't imagine why people actually want VM to carry less channels We already get far fewer music channels than on Sky, though thankfully the excellent music on demand goes some way towards making up for this, though IMHO there will always be a need for music channels you can just have on in the background, at least until MOD develops enough to let you build custom playlists.
steven123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2012, 22:40
steven123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Teesside, England
Posts: 2,898
We also have had some channels over the year join the system and next year we have BBC2 HD, that may lead to a EPG move around as BBC HD is away from BBC One HD and the ITV2, 3, 4 HD that may come next year would mess the EPG a bit.
I'd say 2012 has been a bit poor for new channel launches, with much speculation, which admittedly you can't actually blame VM for and very little positive action on acquiring new channels, which you can blame VM for, still won't do much good though.

Sure there will be BBC2 HD but this isn't a new channel it is (IMHO a poorer) replacement of BBC HD, the number of channels we have will be just the same, nothing added, merely a channel replaced and considering Freeview/Sat users will have it too it hardly helps to justify the subscription fee.
steven123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-11-2012, 01:40
Richardcoulter
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,700
VM have just launched three new music on demand barker channels on channels 302,303 & 305.
Richardcoulter is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:23.