Originally Posted by Peter We:
“>The stats are based on Homechoice's figures I believe, with KiT for these purposes excluded.
False.
Why would they exclude KIT? it says 'TV over ADSL' . KIT and HC have always been combined in the OFCOM reports.”
Because KiT didn't give definitive figures. I've already explained and shown that this is the case.
Try actually reading the things I quote before accusing me of lying.
Originally Posted by Me:
“Homechoice in September 2005 had 34,000 customers according to Homechoice. TV over DSL had 40,000 homes by December 2005, 48454 to March 2006. KiT's 4,200 customers are not included at any point. See the Ofcom PDF for Q4 2005.”
Unless of course you're suggesting that between September and December Homechoice managed growth of 1,800 customers? Ofcome PDF released Q4 2005 covering year to September 2005 specifically mentions 34,000 as being Homechoice
only.
Originally Posted by Ofcom:
“HomeChoice offers the service in the London area and has now passed 2.4m homes for the service. The last reported take-up of the HomeChoice service was 34,000 subscribers as at September 2005. Meanwhile Kingston Interactive
Television (KIT) is available to 105,000 homes in the Hull area of East Yorkshire.
However, Kingston has indicated its intention to close its TV business in April 2006, citing anticipated increased competition in the digital TV market. Take-up of KIT is around 4,200 homes at present.”
Actually looking at this what are you talking about with regard to Homechoice increasing their customer base? You're looking at figures to end
March 2006 and suggesting that Homechoice's business has grown faster than suggested due to a closure that happened in
April 2006?
Quote:
“>Wouldn't want to point out that Homechoice cover 10% of the UK and have 0.45% of the pay TV market, would he?
We know know the existing market share and I posted the figures above. Sky has more than Cable which has more than IPTV. You and others have pointed it out, again and again and again.
I'll re-iterate again, Homechoice had 8% of NEW CUSTOMERS with 1/5th the coverage area of Sky or cable.. This means HC are being successfull at getting NEW CUSTOMERS agains both Sky and Cable given HC's limited availability.”
Already dealt with, a pretty unfair comparison. Again as I showed above cable had more than 5 times the signups of Homechoice indicating that cable proportionately to coverage was more successful at gaining new customers.
Try comparing like for like, as I mentioned HC doubled network coverage and have blanketed with advertising their covered area for ages. That will, of course, have an effect on customer numbers. This doesn't mean anything longer term.
Quote:
“You keep claiming HC are doing badly because of their limited customer base. Tell me, would you give up on a business that has a 20% growth per quarter, equivalent to 100% growth per year?
Existing customer base doesn't matter if its stagnating or growing slowly growth is what investors are interested and its what drives share market prices.”
Evidently the finance professionals don't agree else HC would have raised the capital for their nationwide rollout, wouldn't they?
I see articles from 2004 mentioning that HC were trying to raise capital. If they were that much of a better investment than Sky and cable (which you are implying with the above statement regarding how customer base doesn't matter) surely it wouldn't have taken them upwards of 18 months to find investment, would it?
A dead cert for growth and profit like Homechoice shouldn't have any trouble raising finance, surely?
Going by using the catchphrase 'Exclusively available within the M25' in advertising they aren't optimistic about that finance or national rollout coming any time soon either.
You really need to start answering the questions that you don't want to rather than PR stylie avoiding the things you can't spin and twisting the things you can to suit.
However.. just for your benefit incase you forgot.
Originally Posted by pobrien100:
“Peter, what I genuinely am puzzled about is that if HC is doing as well as you seem to claim, why do you think they have failed to expand outside M25 after saying that has been their plans for so long?
Reports state that they have been up for sale for a long time, as money is running out. They also point to the failure to secure new funding. Do you believe these reports to be lies?”
Last edited by BBRealist : 09-08-2006 at 15:26