Guardian: "Sky Atlantic won't be on Virgin Media soon, says BSkyB boss" - Page 7

**Paul** · 04-02-2011, 23:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digital Fanatic

10 million potential viewers and that is all the channel is achieving? It's been advertised to death too!

10 Million ? Not very realistic.

Skys main channel (Sky 1) only gets 1 million for its top programme. Once you get down the the 5th or so programme, then its 500,000.

A programme of limited appeal (a repeat) on at a late evening spot isnt going to attract many viewers - great for dramatic headlines tho. A much better guide of hows its really doing will be to check out its top 10 on BARB in about 2 months time.

mertle · 05-02-2011, 00:03

love the spin of Mike Darcey from sky what a load of piffle they need advertising revenue as much any. If they did not need it then why every sky channel including subscription based channels are not broadcasted like BBC. Go SKY if you dont need it then drop it you know why you cant you need it.

Thats right Mike Darcey you need revenue streams to pay for all those programmes you purchase and help pay all those premierstars wages. Why is that when advertisement revenue streams bottomed out in your VM spat with those pulled channels. Your company came back with your tails between the legs begging it back with VM.

You love the spin they spend possible million or more advertising this channel like mad.

Yet despite 10m catchment cant get its self off the ground while they killed established channels. I firmly believe they will have to rethink its strategy. I think you can say goodbye to it going subscription later on to be fair that would be distasteful to sky subscribers.

I no doubt if I was virgin would offer bottom ratecard its not popular enough to deserve top subscription from VM. Not worth 10p per VM customer. Tough if sky payed premium prices for there content.

Its less popular than Gold, it may improve but usually it gets a spike then stablises at X amount. So unless SKY change tact open it up for all they pretty much stuffed like a turkey with it. With a risk views could drop even further if they tried to push it to subscription later. Yes they get subscriptions but would it really justify covering its costs for it and the outlay doubt it very much.

IF I was VM this would put them in the driving SEAT in discusions on negotiations for it. Offer them pittance like they did when living had popularity but they offered disgraceful deal.

Ignitionnet · 05-02-2011, 09:33

Someone really dislikes Sky.

Obviously not a shareholder as, despite Sky being completely clueless about how their business works, those guys are pretty happy bunnies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul M

10 Million ? Not very realistic.

Skys main channel (Sky 1) only gets 1 million for its top programme. Once you get down the the 5th or so programme, then its 500,000.

A programme of limited appeal (a repeat) on at a late evening spot isnt going to attract many viewers - great for dramatic headlines tho. A much better guide of hows its really doing will be to check out its top 10 on BARB in about 2 months time.

What he said. Sky's customer base will, obviously, be split between not only Sky's content but also FTA / OTA content.

The picture on this channel will get much clearer as time goes on.

Awful lot of anger about this channel not being on VM though given how apparently rubbish it actually is.

**Hugh** · 05-02-2011, 09:52

Different sources of anger/rubbish, imho; some people want it, some others think the channel is sub-optimal - probably minimal overlap between the sets.....

peterjcat · 05-02-2011, 09:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

The picture on this channel will get much clearer as time goes on.

Why, are they switching to Super-HD?

Personally I think that there is at least one show on HBO that everyone would love if they gave it a shot -- they do a variety of great stuff. There's clearly a lot of filler on Sky Atlantic but it's the same with any channel. I don't feel it's worth moving to Sky for, but I do hope it comes to VM (in HD).

nialli · 05-02-2011, 11:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul M

10 Million ? Not very realistic.

Skys main channel (Sky 1) only gets 1 million for its top programme. Once you get down the the 5th or so programme, then its 500,000.

A programme of limited appeal (a repeat) on at a late evening spot isnt going to attract many viewers - great for dramatic headlines tho. A much better guide of hows its really doing will be to check out its top 10 on BARB in about 2 months time.

What I find astonishing is the amount Sky is obviously spending on marketing the channel, and yet it's delivering these numbers at the height of their advertising campaign? Strewth. Boardwalk's figures will take a tumble as it takes about four episodes to get going, and I don't believe anything on Atlantic's schedules will be something that picks up an audience mid-run. HBO drama needs to be seen from the start - it would be like reading a novel from page 200...
Advertisers will not be impressed. If only they could reach an extra 3.7m homes it might stand a chance...

OLD BOY · 05-02-2011, 12:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

I've said it before: VM is looking at a future in which linear TV is of little significance. They seem to believe that they can secure non-linear rights to a lot of the stuff people want to watch, quickly enough to neutralize the fact that the linear broadcast is exclusive somewhere else.

VM is focusing on making a robust, high-capacity network that will allow subscribers to get whatever content they want, whenever they want it.

...And I agree with that. However, the plain fact is, I can't get Broadwalk Empire or any other of the Sky Atlantic shows on VOD! I will miss Mad Men when the new series comes out later this year, and I have been following this from the start.

So until I can access the content I want, then I want the Sky Atlantic channel please!

Tezcatlipoca · 05-02-2011, 13:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Awful lot of anger about this channel not being on VM though given how apparently rubbish it actually is.

Although I accept that some people here simply don't like the kind of programming shown on Sky Atlantic and/or are just not bothered about it, I do think that there have been some people in this thread & the other Atlantic thread who appear (to me) to dislike it due to:

a) Being ignorant of the point of it and what it's actually showing.

b) "Sour grapes" because it isn't on VM.

---------- Post added at 13:26 ---------- Previous post was at 13:19 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by nialli

What I find astonishing is the amount Sky is obviously spending on marketing the channel, and yet it's delivering these numbers at the height of their advertising campaign? Strewth. Boardwalk's figures will take a tumble as it takes about four episodes to get going, and I don't believe anything on Atlantic's schedules will be something that picks up an audience mid-run. HBO drama needs to be seen from the start - it would be like reading a novel from page 200...
Advertisers will not be impressed. If only they could reach an extra 3.7m homes it might stand a chance...

I agree with you about having to see these shows from the start. HBO dramas etc. aren't things you can dip in & out of each week like e.g. Generic Fast Paced Cop Shows (not that I have anything against Generic Fast Paced Cop Shows). Story arcs, slow build up of the story & the characters, etc. ... These shows need to be seen from the beginning.

WillPS · 05-02-2011, 14:51

Low Ratings does not mean the channel is rubbish. Peep Show consistently receives sub-par ratings, that doesn't make it rubbish though.

So far they've only showed repeats, I suspect when we get to first-run content things will change.

05-02-2011, 16:30

Well in my opinion sky started off this debate by saying "sky atlantic won't be on virgin media soon",i really could not care as virgin managed in the months after the sky basics were lost,proving the sky channels are not the be all and end all they would like us to think they are,sky saying about the channel virgin needs it well why? the content is freely available via other methods and a good BB connection.

Sky upped the anti themselves so i am not supprised about all the negative comments here seeing also as it has been advertised to near death in the past couple of weeks to the point of ad neauseum,only time will tell if sky need vm to carry sky atlantic, rather then virgin themselves need it to be on cable i suspect the former rather then the latter.

Pster72 · 05-02-2011, 16:42

This is a tactic by Sky to get more money from VM for the channel, Sky are very good at this type of thing

Tezcatlipoca · 05-02-2011, 16:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillPS

So far they've only showed repeats, I suspect when we get to first-run content things will change.

Apart from Boardwalk Empire, Entourage, and Blue Bloods...

**Hugh** · 05-02-2011, 16:46

I would love to see those programmes, but it's not the end of the world if I don't (this reflects the atttitude I had during the previous Sky channels furore).

sherer · 05-02-2011, 17:34

I think this shows that with Sky 1-3 and Sky Atlantic there isn't really enough content to cover 4 channels.

Out of interest what are the current top 20 channels according to Barb ?

**Chris** · 05-02-2011, 17:51

The data is on their site ... you should go have a look.

www.barb.co.uk