General ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news - Page 143

OLD BOY · 22-06-2013, 17:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by colin25

wait...you think the world is run to benefit the consumer?

What industry does that?

And yes, it is quite possible you might have to pay all providers.

As you do when you want to watch exclusives (eg netflix etc)[COLOR="Silver"]

Companies have to meet the expectations of the shareholders, but OFCOM and the Competition Commission are there to protect our interests. They are not doing a very good job of it.

---------- Post added at 17:24 ---------- Previous post was at 17:21 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by colin25

I have to pay to get ESPN...you get it for free

Do you hear me complaining?

No..if I want it free, I switch to virgin..I pay for it

That is the rules. Like them..or lump them

Yes, but you can at least get ESPN, whether you are on the Sky or VM platforms. We can't get Sky Atlantic even when we are prepared to pay for it unless we go to Sky. That's just barmy.

If you are happy with this situation, fine, but many of us on this forum are fed up with it. I hope this appears in the manifesto of one of the political parties at the next election!

colin25 · 22-06-2013, 17:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Companies have to meet the expectations of the shareholders, but OFCOM and the Competition Commission are there to protect our interests. They are not doing a very good job of it.

---------- Post added at 17:24 ---------- Previous post was at 17:21 ----------

Yes, but you can at least get ESPN, whether you are on the Sky or VM platforms. We can't get Sky Atlantic even when we are prepared to pay for it unless we go to Sky. That's just barmy.

If you are happy with this situation, fine, but many of us on this forum are fed up with it. I hope this appears in the manifesto of one of the political parties at the next election!

lol..I have no doubt lots would be happy with the manifesto of.."though shall not allow sky to broadcast"

Can't see it happening.

And I still don't get your complaint...why aren't you complaining when netflix shows exclusives?

They do that so you can buy their product too.

I see sky atlantic the same way

Mad Max · 22-06-2013, 17:34

Quote:

but OFCOM and the Competition Commission are there to protect our interests. They are not doing a very good job of it.

They are a bunch of fannies actually...........

denphone · 22-06-2013, 17:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Not everyone wants Sky, Colin. We're not asking for these channels free, we're prepared to pay for them!

TV channels should be available for all platforms at an appropriate price. If those channel providers are not prepared to share, then they shouldn't be allowed to buy programmes and films exclusively. That should be the law.

Summed up perfectly.

johnasimmons · 22-06-2013, 18:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Not everyone wants Sky, Colin. We're not asking for these channels free, we're prepared to pay for them!

TV channels should be available for all platforms at an appropriate price. If those channel providers are not prepared to share, then they shouldn't be allowed to buy programmes and films exclusively. That should be the law.

andy_m · 22-06-2013, 19:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Not everyone wants Sky, Colin. We're not asking for these channels free, we're prepared to pay for them!

TV channels should be available for all platforms at an appropriate price. If those channel providers are not prepared to share, then they shouldn't be allowed to buy programmes and films exclusively. That should be the law.

I hate to take issue with what is apparently a popular post, but we're not all prepared to pay for the missing Sky channels! If I was then I'd be doing so, direct to Sky, but I don't want Atlantic, etc, and certainly not at extra cost.

Wicked_and_Crazy · 22-06-2013, 20:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mad Max

They are a bunch of fannies actually...........

True, if they had anything about then sky would be either a distribution channel or a media provider. To be both is a monopoly and is wrong

muppetman11 · 22-06-2013, 20:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wicked_and_Crazy

True, if they had anything about then sky would be either a distribution channel or a media provider. To be both is a monopoly and is wrong

Its amazing how all these things should only apply to Sky , BT is both a content provider and platform as is Liberty Global , there are many more examples around the world Comcast , DirecTV , CanalSat , Rogers communications the list goes on so why should only Sky be hit with this stipulation. Only a couple of years ago VM was both a platform and content provider funny nobody had a problem with that.

passingbat · 22-06-2013, 20:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Only a couple of years ago VM was both a platform and content provider funny nobody had a problem with that.

But did VM withhold any of their SD channels from Sky though?

Maybe that's why.

Dave42 · 22-06-2013, 20:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Its amazing how all these things should only apply to Sky , BT is both a content provider and platform as is Liberty Global , there are many more examples around the world Comcast , DirecTV , CanalSat , Rogers communications the list goes on so why should only Sky be hit with this stipulation. Only a couple of years ago VM was both a platform and content provider funny nobody had a problem with that.

the problem is with the with holding of channels MM when VM had the channels they were all available on sky didn't withhold anything that the complain I got with holding channels no matter who with holds them

colin25 · 22-06-2013, 21:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by passingbat

But did VM withhold any of their SD channels from Sky though?

Maybe that's why.

Virgin were desperate for the money...to extent they sold the channels they had to ?..not sure..but some tv company

muppetman11 · 22-06-2013, 21:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by passingbat

But did VM withhold any of their SD channels from Sky though?

Maybe that's why.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave42

the problem is with the with holding of channels MM when VM had the channels they were all available on sky didn't withhold anything that the complain I got with holding channels no matter who with holds them

BT Sport is only available on BT and Sky (ordered through BT) currently.

Liberty Global have channels that are not available on VM and BT.

VM only has one Sky channels content that's not available , its arguably the best place for Sky content after the Sky platform itself.

Dave42 · 22-06-2013, 22:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetman11

BT Sport is only available on BT and Sky (ordered through BT) currently.

Liberty Global have channels that are not available on VM and BT.

VM only has one Sky channels content that's not available , its arguably the best place for Sky content after the Sky platform itself.

yes SA is only sky channels content not available on VM but you know it not only channel they with holding MM and VM is by far sky's biggest customer

Chad · 22-06-2013, 22:16

Groundhog Day

22-06-2013, 22:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by colin25

Virgin were desperate for the money...to extent they sold the channels they had to ?..not sure..but some tv company

That's not true, they did not have to sell them for the money. They sold them because they inherited them from the telewest, ntl merger and realised it was something they considered not to be a core part of their business.