Virgin Media News

[grabbi]

Originally Posted by Neptune

....would be like saying that Comet isn't interested in selling LCD tvs. Don't believe a word of it.

Actually they said something similar.

That they wouldnt sell Analogue TVs anymore, and only Digital TVs.

I believe that... So if Comet said they wouldnt sell LCD TVs Id believe that also.

[grabbi]

"There is no economic advantage for us in premium television, where there is a very strong competitor. There is no profit pool in premium TV," he said. "We believe we have a superior product in midrange television, so let's focus on that. That is where the profit is going to come from."

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/...3cc1cb0389d3e7

Would that be Virgins way of saying "Sky is too dominant?"

Its a good thing to say, when you consider the court case, at this moment in time, and who would argue?

---------- Post added at 22:43 ---------- Previous post was at 22:38 ----------

The Direct Debit charge debate rages on, also.

Last week, BT increased the penalty from £24 a year to £33. This, however, is dwarfed by Virgin Media, which has three million customers and charges £60 more.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../nbills109.xml

[grabbi]

Virgin Media in Rumors to Bid for Setanta

According to Digital Spy:

Setanta Sports is expecting takeover offers after a European media giant made a bid of more than £1bn, it has emerged.

The bidder has not been named but those expected to follow it include Disney-owned ESPN, BT, ITV and Virgin Media.

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/broadcas...bp1bn.html?rss

Very interesting, coming from a company that believes they havent got a future for the Premium Market.

£1bn is the price. And it looks like a very solid investment.

---------- Post added at 17:22 ---------- Previous post was at 17:10 ----------

The V Box and V+ Box trademark registration from Virgin Media has been removed.

They believe that BT will win the war, simply because they got there first.

Name Change? (Details from DS Forum)

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/s...d.php?t=744526

[starsailor123uk]

Originally Posted by grabbi

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/...3cc1cb0389d3e7

Would that be Virgins way of saying "Sky is too dominant?"

Its a good thing to say, when you consider the court case, at this moment in time, and who would argue?

---------- Post added at 22:43 ---------- Previous post was at 22:38 ----------

The Direct Debit charge debate rages on, also.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../nbills109.xml

Dont Sky also have a Non-DD Charge as well which when added to the BT would dwarf VM Outrageous £60 Charge. I seem to remember intheknow raised this on digitalspy some time ago and then ran off with his tail between his legs when he had to criticise Sky!

[Arthurgray50@blu]

I beg all customers, investors, shareholders, if rumours are true, that VM, are thinking of bidding to take control of Setanta, my advice is DON'T, Setanta at the moment are doing very well, and is successful, if you let VM, get hold of it, it will be ruined, VM can't run there own service properly, so surely they will ruin Setanta, the first thing they would do, is take Setanta of Sky, look what they are doing about Arsenal TV.

[grabbi]

Disagree completely.

Setanta would be owned by Virgin Media, but would be run by Virgin Media Television. VMTV (Living, Bravo etc) I would happily let that production company take over any TV Channels I have.

I know I keep rabbiting on about this, also, but if they managed to get Setanta, that would mean you could put WWE on Setanta, and keep the platform of Paying to have it on Sky Monthly, and leave it as is on VM. (Also, Setanta and the McMahon's have the Irish connection. Although so do the Murdoch's.)

[Toto]

Guys please, this is all pure speculation.

VM's share price is falling, the equity markets are all but closed.

Please look at paragrpah seven for a more than informed view of this news.

[grabbi]

A spokeswoman for Virgin Media, which carries Setanta's sports coverage on its cable TV services, also declined to comment on the report, but said it had already made clear its intention to focus on its broadband services.

That SHOULD say it all... but you could say VM got burned the last time they tried the public route of a takeover.

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/...3-22908911.htm

[lostandconfused]

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

I beg all customers, investors, shareholders, if rumours are true, that VM, are thinking of bidding to take control of Setanta, my advice is DON'T, Setanta at the moment are doing very well, and is successful, if you let VM, get hold of it, it will be ruined, VM can't run there own service properly, so surely they will ruin Setanta, the first thing they would do, is take Setanta of Sky, look what they are doing about Arsenal TV.

what makes you think that if there were a take-over bid (purely speculation) that they would take it off sky?

The only company that has lost channels is VM. It wouldnt make financial sense to remove a package from over half their customer base, especially when it is a subscription on sky, so everyone has to pay for it. Plus it would also half the advertising revenue from the channel making it less able to bid for new seasons.

Also if it isnt avaiable to half the UK then the people that sell the rights to the matches wouldnt be as inclined to sell to setanta.

The same as Virgin 1. This was put on the sky platform for the above reasons.

[daveetwo]

Originally Posted by Toto

Guys please, this is all pure speculation.

VM's share price is falling, the equity markets are all but closed.

Please look at paragrpah seven for a more than informed view of this news.

Its true there is far less money around but for good deals there is always money available. Look at virgin being able to get backers for northern rock and microsofts offer for yahoo (first time theve ever looked outside for money).
No matter what people at ground level think of branson he does have the ears of major financial backers.

[grabbi]

Take the channels off Sky?

Its not an option.

Fact is, you cant have Premier League games EXCLUSIVELY to a platform (Cable/Satellite) because then they would get taken to court.

Virgin did it to Sky, because of the Monopoly. That would mean Virgin have a monopoly of packages of Premier League games, as well as German Bundesliga, Golf etc...

[grabbi]

Illegal downloaders will be Banned?

http://www.computeractive.co.uk/comp...-ban-p2p-users

Dont think so.

Fact is, for companies to find out if we are downloading illegal content would mean searching through confidential files on our computers, looking for specific names of sites and/or files... and thats illegal in itself.

Fact is, even though Im not condoning illegal downloading, the whole selling point of getting triple play bundles, is downloading an watching content... illegal or legal.

This is simply a PR stunt to make the company look like its combating piracy, even thought there is not legal sure fire way of doing it... especially given you can download LEGAL films and music on the net now.

[matt_2k34]

its mainly that recent green paper, about as much use as toilet paper

Scare tactics by the media atm...

think about it, EVERY ISP has to use serious SPI hardware to monitor billions of files per day, and even then BitTorrent would be excluded (and similar) because its "packets" of data, not complete connections with files in, so this would be hard to trace anwyay. each isp would need databases for each customer (see where this is going) ?

I wouldnt worry about it - most ISPs cant run the service at a reasonable speed without this, if it does get in, maybe it will kill the likes of AOL and Tiscali tho

And most ISPs would need new kit / better training so that they could even define p2p apps by how they "look" rather than by port - (as i think Enta still use port restrictions?) and new services like 4od and BBC iplayer will make things very difficult

[grabbi]

Sky Appealing the Decision

The ITV Shares thingy-ma-bob. Sky think the CC got it wrong, and, as expected, they will appeal the decision, ivene if analysts say they havent got much of a chance.

Another wonderful waste of Sky Subscribers Money. First buyingshares in a flagging company, and now paying to appeal decisions etc and court costs if they lose.

What have Sky Viewers seen as SKy waste this money? Nothing...

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/broadcas...-decision.html

[matt_2k34]

What have Sky Viewers seen as SKy waste this money? Nothing...

Apart from further wasting money which should be invested in their now branced out business, but of course - you can read all about them in the many Media companies sLy owns. (recouping the costs? )