Give it a couple of months!

[0101010101]

I predict:
The multiplex licences will be re-advertised.
Various providers will buy them up and re-start the service.
The BBC have something to do with the UKservices, Gold, Play etc.
Why don't companies like Nickelodeon consider becoming a "Free to Air"
operation? I'm sure their relatively low budget service could survive on advertising revenue alone! In fact it could demnd more cash if all viewers could see it! Sky may consider a mux for say Sport 1, 2 & 3, the two film channels and One. I believe we may see some rule changes. After all, the government would like terrestrial digital to continue. Given time it is the only way forward! This is only a hiccup. Seca 2 or Videoguard CAM's here we come?

 

[2old4this]

I expect that pay-tv platforms carrying those same premium channels you want to see FTA would resist, as it would erode the value of their own packages. If, say, Nickelodeon, Bravo, etc were all FTA on DTT then Sky would presumably have to lower her subscription charges or be accused of offering far less (that can not be obtained freely by other means) for the same money. And satellite providers do not have the option of transmitting regionally-copyrighted material FTA, since their footprint crosses those regional boudaries.
2old

 

[s1mply]

Terrestrial TV digitally transmitted, will be on two sepatately managed platforms, a free to air platform showing the programmes already being transmitted, probably plus a few others (not any existing pay to view prgrammes), this platform will be managed by the BBC or a BBC/ITV mix. The other Pay-to-view platfrom will be managed by another, no one has come forward yet with a serious formula, but given time and the splitting of the two services and Government help, there will be a pay platform, I personally think Murdock is keeping his powder dry at present, but I would expect he will have his mucky paws in there somewhere in the furture. So as you say all the On-Digital boxes will changed over to Videoguard encryption, but not with stand alone cams, oh, no no no, Murdock would never allow that, he would lose control, and for a control freak like himself that would never wash. It will some time yet before the picture is clear, remember we are in the close season for soccer, wait for the autumn before things get going again.

 

[2old4this]

What's the relevance of the soccer season? It was the preposterous notion that football should play a pivotal role in shaping the platform that got them into this mess in the first place. If we've learned anything from this fiasco it's that TV should kick football and its ridiculous escalating demands into touch. Those interested in the sport can go to the matches (hell, it's barely more expensive than PPV tariffs). The rest of us can enjoy a wider selection of TV built on some more sensible premise.

2old

 

[Burnt Chips]

2 old i`m more cynical than you: I remember Cable & Wireless. They spent that much money fitting the cable infrastructure,(borrowed of course)that it was inevitable they were going BUMP.After a few days
Ntl take over (Debts gone). ITV didge i thinks up to the same.Fitted most of there transmitters (TOOK ON)a unworkable footy contract didn`t
give a shit about being hacked senseless: WHY?????????????????????
THEY WANTED TO GO BUMP. I`d like to see who takes up the reins.
DAVE.

 

[s1mply]

It's a sad! fact, but in Britain football is the big draw for TV subscription (s_x a poor second), Sky's success has been solely based on being able to provide the football matches the punter wants. ITV tried to replicate this but the gulf between them and Sky was too wide, plus the heavily hacked ITV service, didn't help. Autumn has always ben the time that Britts look to settle in for the winter and TV is the prime source of entertainment .... sad.... We should get a life, or something??

 

[ckrys1]

I personally think its sad that anyone would pay £37/month for anything other than football but then we"re all different and Sky make a fortune because they appeal to people with different tastes - so good luck to them. To answer 2old above, dont think football made ridiculous demands - rather Itv digital made a ridiculous offer which the football league couldnt believe. But if someone offers to buy your house for 3 times what its worth youre not going to talk them out of it, are you?

Chris

PS Apologies for lack of apostrophes above - keyboard giving out on me!

 

[rolfw]

True Ckrys1, but if someone offered to buy your house for 3 times it's value, your Estate agent and or Solicitor would check to see if they had the where withall, this obviously wasn't the case and the League are now feeling the pinch because of it.

I believe the popularity of Sky has a lot to do with their general sports coverage, but also by nature of a very wide programme base, particularly children's TV, the pressure that kids apply can be huge.

Rolf

 

[ckrys1]

And your solicitor would also say that contracts are a binding legal guarantee - otherwise whats the point in having them? Carlton and Granada have behaved abominably in my opinion - theyve got the blood of many football clubs on their hands and I hope neither of them ever get a football contract again.

On a lighter note my heroes Rangers won the cup in Scotland today and Im getting totally obliterated right now - so have a drink on me tonight everyone!!

Chris

 

[rolfw]

Yes, well done Rangers, Celtic have been getting it all their own way recently.

Back to the other point though, the solicitors acting for the league should have checked out the guarantees, it's obvious (with hindsight) that ITV Digital didn't have the revenue to support such a deal without backing.

I actually know someone who lost nearly everything he had, because the buyer he had exchanged contracts with on a piece of land could not complete (He'd been telling porkies). A year later, he ended up losing not only the property he was buying, but also the property he thought he'd sold because of the huge interest charges and a subsequent downturn in the market.

Rolf