BSkyB faces broader 'fit and proper' inquiry

[mertle]

Originally Posted by denphone

But the question is will Ofcom go far enough.

I always felt ofcom go around in false teeth never had enough bite.

So denphone unless we seeing a new ofcom with razor sharp teeth they will do just enough to make the MP's less squirmy but they wont remove murdocks licence to run tv.

Sadly this will drag on so the dominions forget newscorp scandel we will see them taking sky sadly.

In 5-10 years time we hear decision

[MovedGoalPosts]

Even if this "investigation" does prove to have some bite to it, you can bet it would soon be muzzled by lawyers. Bottom line Sky is now so big an entity that the UK population has become dependent on it. As such closure is unthinkable. The best one might hope for is that the network transmission (satellite TV, broadband) was split into one comapny with the broadcasting placed into the hands of a second company. That way the broadcasting organisation would need to market itself to as wide an audience possible via the widest possible number of carriers. The network side would be competing on a more even keel with BT, VM, etc.

[carlwaring]

I would be happy with that outcome.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by carlwaring

I would be happy with that outcome.

Yes me too carl.

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by devilincarnate

I like this bit?



http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/media/ne...-by-ofcom.html

Yes hopefully soon they'll be gone and Sky can continue to produce a great TV product.

[mertle]

Originally Posted by Rob

Even if this "investigation" does prove to have some bite to it, you can bet it would soon be muzzled by lawyers. Bottom line Sky is now so big an entity that the UK population has become dependent on it. As such closure is unthinkable. The best one might hope for is that the network transmission (satellite TV, broadband) was split into one comapny with the broadcasting placed into the hands of a second company. That way the broadcasting organisation would need to market itself to as wide an audience possible via the widest possible number of carriers. The network side would be competing on a more even keel with BT, VM, etc.

sadly agree entity's become way too big they have so much money they can drag through literally years of court hearings until favourable outcome. Knowing the state aint got infitally funds to take them on.

Therefore due to that alone would we even see them be told to split it. I am sure that would be challenged could the government afford a long winding process high courts.

So I should said there many teeth not just ofcom such as the government willingness to fight a court battle and the courts itself.

Like many this would be acceptable solution but I fear there will be just fine. Sadly the carry on regardless.

Some companies who so huge and clearly got power influence. These super companies its questionable should they be broken up that is for a poll on another thread. I cant make polls anybody could oblige.

[AndyCambs]

Originally Posted by Rob

Even if this "investigation" does prove to have some bite to it, you can bet it would soon be muzzled by lawyers. Bottom line Sky is now so big an entity that the UK population has become dependent on it. As such closure is unthinkable. The best one might hope for is that the network transmission (satellite TV, broadband) was split into one comapny with the broadcasting placed into the hands of a second company. That way the broadcasting organisation would need to market itself to as wide an audience possible via the widest possible number of carriers. The network side would be competing on a more even keel with BT, VM, etc.

I would be happy with News International split and forced to sell its newspapers and the news desk. So it would be tv or newspapers/ news.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Rob

Even if this "investigation" does prove to have some bite to it, you can bet it would soon be muzzled by lawyers. Bottom line Sky is now so big an entity that the UK population has become dependent on it. As such closure is unthinkable. The best one might hope for is that the network transmission (satellite TV, broadband) was split into one comapny with the broadcasting placed into the hands of a second company. That way the broadcasting organisation would need to market itself to as wide an audience possible via the widest possible number of carriers. The network side would be competing on a more even keel with BT, VM, etc.

I have never got what is a media company doing in the business of telecommuications (phone and broadband)?

The should sell they satellite TV/telelcommuncations assets (and keep the channels) not just in BSkyB (selling it to BT), but in Sky Italia (selling it to Telecom Italia), Foxtel (selling it to Telstra), Sky Network Television (selling it to Telecom New Zealand) and Sky Deutschland (selling it to Dechsche Telekom)

Telecomms is a way of transmitting the media - it closes the circle, and allows selling of packages, tying in the customers.

Good business sense.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Telecomms is a way of transmitting the media - it closes the circle, and allows selling of packages, tying in the customers.

Good business sense.

Yes, but like Virgin Media (until the UKTV sale), it is hard to run a media AND telecommunications at the same time, that is why I feel that Comcast wasted a lot of money buying NBCUniversal, when they could have sold their media assets to them and buy Time Warner Cable

They obviously disagree, and they, unlike you, are successfully running an extremely profitable multi-billion media company....

[LexDiamond]

The end product of capitalism is organisations like. The whole premise of capitalism is based on growth in to infinity.

Its how all companies work. Even Sky didn't have all VM HD channels before the sale. Even VM made sure that Tivo only existed in this country through them and as a result S1 owners were screwed over. Thats just the way the world works.

But thats beside the point because alot of the replies on this thread seem to be the generic anti Sky reply. Reading the article shows that the investigation doesn't focus on what alot of people in this thread assume.

Originally Posted by LexDiamond

The end product of capitalism is organisations like. The whole premise of capitalism is based on growth in to infinity.

Its how all companies work. Even Sky didn't have all VM HD channels before the sale. Even VM made sure that Tivo only existed in this country through them and as a result S1 owners were screwed over. Thats just the way the world works.

But thats beside the point because alot of the replies on this thread seem to be the generic anti Sky reply. Reading the article shows that the investigation doesn't focus on what alot of people in this thread assume.

So what is it focusing on?

[LexDiamond]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

So what is it focusing on?

It is focusing on 'fit and proper' which is quite narrow.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by LexDiamond

It is focusing on 'fit and proper' which is quite narrow.

We all know the answer to that question