I*V whingers

[groundsman]

So I*V Dig claim that Gold cards have cost them £100 million.
The rumours that I have heard from those who use the cards is that, had the cards not been available, they would never have subscribed to the service as, in its basic form, it is sh*t.
Perhaps if they offered a decent package people might pay for it.
I considered them but decided against it. £14/month for channels of repeats. No thankyou.

 

[rolfw]

Yes you're almost certainly right that many people subscribed purely to facilitate pirate card use, but there were also a huge amount of people who had quite happily been trudging along with the full package, until they were enlightened about the cheaper route and reduced to the minimum package.

What's really damaged ITV Digital, is the ridiculous amount they agreed to pay for football in a vain attempt to match Sky's pulling power.

Rolf

 

[pixey]

Absolutely. Are the rumours true that i*v sport channel is to close later this month?

 

[rolfw]

I could see them doing it, it must be a huge drain on resources, particularly given the viewing figures.

Rolf

 

[TB]

Yeah from what I understand, itv has benifited from goldcards, they wouldn't have had half as many customers, well perhaps half a bit exgarated, but certaintly many thousands!!

If it wern't for the football league rights, they things wouldnt be belly up, also the itv management is appling, as most management is in most places, its just jobs for the boys, they have no idea how to run the service, I'm sure many of us on here given the opportunity could have done much better!!

Football league, they should take the money after all 50 millions better than none, if itv can wriggle out of it by bankrupting itvdigital, but itv, whoever authorised that bid didnt they do the sums, how many subscribers would they need to get that sort of cash back?

If itv could sort out the football league, then they have a good chance of surviving, 800 million allready gone in, if they pull the plug now, they get nothing back, if they give it a while longer, and with the pace £99 box just round the corner, they could/should pick up a few thousand more subscribers, I dont know I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

 

[groundsman]

Additional:
I*V's bid problems surely stem from the greed of the football league and the absurd fees paid to the pampered premadonnas of the big teams.
If the players just realised that they were only doing a job (short lived as their career might be) and expect a supporter paid wage package which reflects this (the bonuses would be made up from publicity nonsense) everyone would benefit: lower gate prices and subscriptions.

 

[schematic]

Another of their downfalls is not making it more available,if they spend millions on football surly they can afford to give other parts of uk a signal !!

 

[bond]

Guys I think you are correct in your observations. I think ITV Digital have made some howling decissions such as zillions for dodgy footie matches. Come on ITV, wakey wakey the masses want bloody good entertainment at a realistic cost, you could have bank rolled a damn good oscar winning movie for what you splashed out on girly footballers. If you (ITV as they read these site)are serious about taking on Sky, provide good value entertainment. It can not be that hard, talk to the punters and ask what they want not what you think they want.

I hope that they survive as I truly think with a bit of common they could puul it around, but I think they are running out of time and lives!!!!

 

[TB]

I agree the gread of footballers will lead to their own demise, how are any business supposed to surviving when its paying 98% of its turnover in wages? Thats it ITV has always given us what they think we want not what we want, they've did it from day one!!

 

[sciros]

Best estimates say that piracy has only cost about 2-4 million, if you include what they spent trying to track down dealers, not including the legal costs at approx 50-100K per prosecution

 

[Channel Hopper]

If football is so popular in this country, why is it that watching it at home has been so poor in attendance.

1) If its piracy thats the problem then the medium of TV when compared to the real thing also plays a part. Those that would pirate to view from home are probably not the sort that would get up and go to a match either.

2) Poor Nationwide coverage of signals has a small part to play in this, and the competition from BSkyB an even greater one. The deal was struck in order to outbid, this was a grave mistake when the number of subscribers was at such a low figure, especially when it was known that the take up of boxes was not what the planners had hoped


3) Football clubs should have been doing their utmost to bring the spectators to the match rather than recommending bums on couches
The promise of money for old rope (new technology) was too attactive to miss out on, and this has been their downfall

4) Said it before but paying for a programme when the revenue by advertising is greed in anyones eyes. If it really does cost so much to operate a football club then this is first place that should be checked. Companies that run cannot show a profit are advised to shut down after three years by HM government, footie clubs are no different.

5) If Piracy plays a part in all of this, the parallel running drama of Canal+ and the claims of hacking show that whilst illegal viewers are walking through an open door, it was NDS that picked the lock in the first place.

 

[w hole]

My feelings.

I think that ITV Digital went for the wrong market.

If they had let Sky carry on with the football, it would have brought the cost of viewing the game down for those who want it.

I think they should have gone for a package that was attractive to the non football, non youth market (both of these are more than well catered for by Sky).

The package would consist of the usual ITV and ITV2 plus Discovery, History, Nat. Geo., Travel and UK Gold etc.

If this could be offered at a price which was better than the Sky Familly Package, I'm sure tha a lot of other non sports and non pop fans (like me) would take advantage of it, especially if it meant we could get out of the cluthches of Rupert Bear.

Lets face it the demographics show that the population is 'ageing', and the sector most resistive to digital is this one.

Regards

W. Hole.

 

[markexon]

I think I*V Dig had a good channel lineup before they introduced ITV Sport.

The channels they provided us was exactly what we need. Sport, News, Entertainment, Current Affairs, History and Science.

A nice collection of watchable channels. Whereas S*y Dig just put 100's of channels of absolute nonsense, where a great deal of their channels are probably never ever watched.

I dont want to watch a film in Hindi or have dozens of music channels all pumping out the same music.

What I want is 100 or so channels with viewing for everybody.

Thats my twopenny worth

 

[groundsman]

Total agreement.
Imagine the number and quality of movies, dramas, documentaries that could have been commissioned by I*V Dig for the absurd amount bid in a war they could only fail in.
There are already four sports channels (inc. Euro which is by far the better channel) which more than cater for the footie fan. No need for more.
So, I*VD, scrap your sports channel and improve your figures.

 

[markexon]

I am not particularly a football fan, and the S*y Sports channels show more than enough football.

Personally I like motor racing and there is lots of it on S*y Sports and Eurosport channels.

We dont need a 4th football channel.

Get rid of it