• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • Entertainment Services
  • Online Entertainment Services
Tiscali to offer Sky Pay channels
<<
<
3 of 4
>>
>
tv watcher
29-06-2007
dose anyone know who is suppling these channels
tiscali tv/homechoice
or sky by wire?
flashdisk
29-06-2007
Originally Posted by tomesy:
“I have to say... he's only listed a fraction of the VOD stuff on Tiscali...

Let me list the full VOD list:
C1, Movies Now, 4OD, HBO OD, Discovery Life OD, C2, Nat Geographic OD, Discovery Factual OD, MN Club, Picture Box, Film 4 OD, Scamp, Time for Bed, Disney Treasures, CN Now, Screenies, All the VMX channels, BBCi, ITV London, CNN OD, Club Zebra (and all the other "sponsored" channels), Adult Channels (inc Playboy, Adult, Spice), BOD Movies, BOD Music”

Which more or less covers what he already said (music videos, movies, hbo, 4od) plus a few extras which is basically means limited content from disney, discovery, nat geo plus a few news reports (or are you suggesting itv london's full schedule is available on demand), adult programming and let's throw in a bit of bollywood too. Still nothing to suggest it's substantially more than the 6,000 hours that Virgin has already announced.
Quote:
“I've left some out like Free OD, but as my mate has Virgin, I would say Tiscali at this moment has more content.”

Left out free programming but felt compelled to include "sponsored" programming which I assume are glorified adverts. It may well have more content but you've still listed nothing that suggests it actually does. How much free programming is available without paying for a tv or broadband sub? Will it carry the BBC iPlayer?
Quote:
“Dont get me wrong, Tiscali is not perfect... far from it, and I'd have Sky anyday for HD sport and a PVR (I cant flat issues).

But harping on about OD stuff, smells like an element of desperation to justify Virgin here, with Tiscali get the likes of Sky One, etc. Jealousy maybe??”

Hardly. It reeks of the poster I replied to trying to 'big up' an inferior platform.which was pretty dire in 2005 and it looks like very little has changed in that time. Sky One hardly makes up for the missing channels (both basic & premium), lack of pvr, the [vastly] inferior pq, the inferior vod service, inferior broadband etc.
jayko
29-06-2007
Well whats so great about Virgin that Tiscali hasnt got?
tomesy
29-06-2007
Originally Posted by flashdisk:
“Will it carry the BBC iPlayer?”

It already does... it's known as replay and has been there for years... It's very good, you'll enjoy it.

Anyway, I'm not going to sit down and count every hour... I have better things to do.
jon_ellacott
30-06-2007
Considering I am a former Telewest customer, and only changed just before Virgin Media came in to place, but the customer service hasn't changed from what I have heard. I had Telewest/ Croydon Cable since it's conception in the early 80's and the customer service gradually went down hill when Telewest joined forces with NTL. I left the service because it was a useless service. Went to Homechoice and there customer services were superb. No we don't have as many channels as Virgin, but then how many people watch every single channel that Virgin offer??? Tiscali, I think have the best of the channels covering a broad section. Tiscali offers quality rather than quantity, which I thing is its endearing quality. The VOD is far better than Virgin, and considering Homechoice/ Tiscali were offering this service far longer than Virgin it makes me laugh that Virgin customers are spouting off about how wonderful there service is compared to Tiscali's.
Tiscali don't play adverts on their VOD content, and if you subscribe to the larger package then about 70% of the VOD Content is free. The fact that we don't have all the Sky Movies channels doesn't bother me as to be honest, as a parent, I am only interested in the Family and Comedy films anyway so I am sorted.
I think that VOD is only the tip of the iceberg with Tiscali. Tiscali offers a cheaper alternative to Virgin and Sky. As I say Tiscali is more about the quality of channels than quantity.
Peter We
30-06-2007
Originally Posted by flashdisk:
“ Will it carry the BBC iPlayer?”


As said, Replay gives the same functionality via the STB, however Tiscali is in specific negotiations with BBC about the iPlayer. HC/Tiscali has always been in the lead for VOD, VM etc have being play catch up.

I find it surprising anyone could attempt to claim the VM service is in any way superior. The music service wins the music on demand award every year - last time I heard you had to pay per view! for music video's instead of paying £6/month for all music channels and on-demand video's.

However, having the best VOD service alone will not make it a success, its been missing the Sky channels and now that its got them and VM does not, the two companies can expect to swap market share.
As I said before Tiscali TV has the advantage of no cable network and its overhead and debt. Tiscali TV counts shareholders such as MS, Sony and several other movie studio's as part of its content deals - another potential advantage.
Zapomatic
03-07-2007
http://www.tiscali.com/our_news/press/1136d3bcec2.html
starsailor123
04-07-2007
I find it interesting that a week after signing the deal and some months after the deal was originally discussed tiscali have not said how the SKy basics will be marketed

a) within the current subscription
b) within the subscription which will be increased to cover the cover of Sky
c) as a premium package like Sky Sports and Sky Movies . effectively a PPV service from Sky

It will be interesting when it is revealed and wonder if the revealing of it on the 27th June had more to do with the final days before Judical review than a new Tiscali service
Sirius
04-07-2007
If they signed a deal 'on the same terms' but without Sky having any special requirements then a 90p a month price rise, for all channels on all packages, would be suffice.

I suspect we won't see Sky basics on Tiscali's basic pack.
Zapomatic
04-07-2007
I think these will be part of the Big Pack at the very most. There's a chance they could be in the basic pack too and used to pick up subscribers rather than as something to charge extra for.
dronkula
04-07-2007
I would expect the channels that are on Freeview (Sky Three, Sky News, Sky Sports News) would be on the basic pack with the other channels in the next one up.

On the 'Smallworld' cable network (the only cable network left that I think that's not part of Virgin now and it still carries the Sky channels) Sky News and Sports News are in their basic pack and the Sky 1,2 and 3 are in their entertainment pack.
Feed The Reaper
05-07-2007
Just to add to this thread that its been announced they are paying 81.5p a subscriber for 50,000 Tiscali subscribers to Sky for the Basics package
Rufus Londinii
05-07-2007
Originally Posted by starsailor123:
“I find it interesting that a week after signing the deal and some months after the deal was originally discussed tiscali have not said how the SKy basics will be marketed

a) within the current subscription
b) within the subscription which will be increased to cover the cover of Sky
c) as a premium package like Sky Sports and Sky Movies . effectively a PPV service from Sky

It will be interesting when it is revealed and wonder if the revealing of it on the 27th June had more to do with the final days before Judical review than a new Tiscali service”


Spot on!


http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitalt...p-for-sky.html

Details of the deal made between Sky and Tiscali TV have been revealed, showing that Tiscali were happy to pay what Virgin Media wasn't for the carriage of Sky's basic channels on the IPTV platform.

Earlier this week, Sky filed its defence at the High Court as part of its legal battle with Virgin Media, after Virgin refused to pay the amount Sky wanted for carrying its basic channels, disputing the cost as "anti-competitive." Sky One, Two, Three, News and Sports have not been shown on the Virgin Media cable platform since the end of February.

The Tiscali deal was agreed on June 27 at a price reported to be "broadly similar" to the offer Sky made to Virgin Media on May 10.

Reports suggest IPTV provider Tiscali paid 81.5p per subscriber, equivalent to £335.7 million annually. This works out slightly more per customer than Virgin Media, as Tiscali has 50,000 customers, while Virgin Media has 3.4 million.

Additionally, Sky has agreed new carriage deals for its basic channels with regional cable operators Newtel, Smallworld and Wightcable. Outside of the Virgin Media network, the operators cover Jersey, the Borders and the Isle of Wight.

Mike Darcey, chief operating Officer, Sky, said: “Sky has always sought to achieve wide distribution for its channels and we’re pleased to extend our relationships with three valued and long-standing partners. All three have recognised the increasing value of Sky’s basic channels and we welcome their decision to invest in bringing their customers the TV they enjoy.”
CD_VM
05-07-2007
DS reports that "Tiscali paid 81.5p per subscriber, equivalent to £335.7 million annually. This works out slightly more per customer than Virgin Media, as Tiscali has 50,000 customers, while Virgin Media has 3.4 million."

Either this article contains a typo or I have forgotten my basic maths skills. In my book, 81.5p per subscriber for 50,000 customers equals £40,750. A that price, VM would have had to pay £2.7m, hardly a sum they would have argued about. Tiscali on the other hand could not afford to pay £335m annually if they have only 50,000 subscribers to recoup that investment.

Anyone able to shed any light on who got their sums wrong?
M_at
05-07-2007
Originally Posted by Rufus Londinii:
“Reports suggest IPTV provider Tiscali paid 81.5p per subscriber, equivalent to £335.7 million annually. This works out slightly more per customer than Virgin Media, as Tiscali has 50,000 customers, while Virgin Media has 3.4 million.”

Not sure what this £335.7m figure has to do with Tiscali.

£0.815 per subscriber per month comes out at £489,000 annually when working with 50,000 subscribers.

The £335.7m is more likely how much Virgin were going to have to pay for the same channels.
CD_VM
05-07-2007
Now we're getting somewhere. Taken as a monthly amount (a crucial detail omitted from the original article), 81.5p per subscriber would amount to around £33m annually for VM. DS simply got the decimal point wrong.
Sirius
05-07-2007
The price is only that if all 50 000 subscribers get the channels - which I doubt!
Peter We
05-07-2007
Last Offcom figures for the Tiscali service was 62K, is that figures in the equation.

Isn't the 81.5p figure per month?
M_at
05-07-2007
Originally Posted by Peter We:
“Last Offcom figures for the Tiscali service was 62K, is that figures in the equation.

Isn't the 81.5p figure per month?”

That still only comes to £606,360 annually.
Cadire
05-07-2007
Originally Posted by CD_VM:
“Now we're getting somewhere. Taken as a monthly amount (a crucial detail omitted from the original article), 81.5p per subscriber would amount to around £33m annually for VM. DS simply got the decimal point wrong.”

That looks about right, though the original, rather disjointed, piece still states £335.7million for Tiscali rather than VM.

The origin of the 81.5p figure is probably Sky themselves, but I'd be interested to know what 'broadly similar' actually means (has an 8 in it, is within 10%?).
Martin Aurer
06-07-2007
Those 81.5p
Is it per day? Per week? Per month?
crane grove
06-07-2007
any news on the dates for SKY/the new stb?
M_at
06-07-2007
Originally Posted by Martin Aurer:
“Those 81.5p
Is it per day? Per week? Per month?”

Sky's original PR when virgin dropped the service claimed that it was just under 3p per subscriber per day.

81.5p would appear to be per subscriber per month figure.
Martin Aurer
06-07-2007
And this is for all channels?
Can't understand why Virgin said no in that case.
M_at
06-07-2007
Originally Posted by Martin Aurer:
“And this is for all channels?
Can't understand why Virgin said no in that case.”

Becasue Sky's viewer share is decreasing in multi-channel homes. Especially so in cable homes.

More people are flocking to the UKtv and other Flextech stations such as Living and Bravo but Sky offered a much smaller amount for these channels.

Virgin own Flextech, Sky own Sky - it's all just a tit for tat fight.

Sky can't drop the flextech channels as they have no control over who is and isn't allowed onto the platform but there are no such restrictions on cable.
<<
<
3 of 4
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map