menuMENU    UK Free TV logo TV

 

 

Click to see updates

Channel 4 would like to turn Sky "retransmission fees" into programming

The Channel 4 corporation has joined the BBC, ITV plc and Channel 5 in asking Sky to remove the fees that the satellite gatekeeper charges the public service providers for their schedule data.

The Channel 4 corporation has joined the BBC, ITV plc and Chann
published on UK Free TV

According to C4 breaks 'retransmission fees' silence - News - Broadcast, Channel 4's Dan Brooke told a VLV event that:

"At the moment, we don’t have a say in it – we are given a rate card, which is agreed by Ofcom and Sky. If that money wasn’t going out of the door we’d be delighted, and would put that money back into programming. Fees were introduced to give Sky a leg up when they first launched here – I don’t think anyone would say they need a leg up anymore. "

Brooke was joined on the panel by academic Steven Barnett, who pushed fervently for retransmission fees to be dropped, describing the current situation as “ludicrous”.

He called for existing "must offer" rules that apply to all the PSBs to be matched by "must carry" rules from platforms at "zero terms".



Help with Which system?
Can I use an existing sky dish with a freeview box? and if so can the two servic1
what is the difference between normal Co-axial cable and satellite grade? Can I2
i will never be able to get Sky reception (my house is surrounded by trees) an3
Do I need to get an aerial or can I connect my old sky dish straight to an aeri4
Why are many channels (such as TCM) on fSfS or Freesat but not on Freeview?5
[][][
In this section
BBC sets out plan to inform, educate and entertain during unprecedented times1
Why are there so many +1 channels on TV?2
The BBC wants to stop paying Sky ten million pounds a year for EPG listing3
BBC "Delivering Quality First" changes to transmissions4
Broadcasting territorial exclusivity with a decoder card is contrary to EU law 5
Ofcom provides Product Placement logo6

Comments
Wednesday, 19 October 2011
D
David
sentiment_satisfiedGold

9:21 AM

Can we be clear here, do these PSB broadcasters pay Sky to transmit thier programs on the satellites used by Sky?
Or do the PSB broadcasters pay the owners of Astra ans Eurobird direct?
Are these payment we are talking about just the money to be on the Sky EPG?

link to this comment
David's 306 posts GB
D
David
sentiment_satisfiedGold

10:10 AM

Thanks Kate.
So if the PSB refuse to pay the fees to be on Sky EPG what do we think would happen?
If Sky took them off thier EPG then it might be Sky being the looser of customers, so it is in Skys interest to leave them on for free.

link to this comment
David's 306 posts GB
K
KMJ,Derby
sentiment_satisfiedGold

12:46 PM

Surely the cost of providing the EPG should be shared out among all the channels appearing in it, at so much per channel. It should not be treated as a transmission levy as Sky do not incur transmission costs on other companies' channels. Sky could bear the cost of providing an EPG as a service to their customers, but that does not seem to be the way of working, not only at Sky but in telecommunications in general as custommers are charged large fees for services that cost little extra to provide.... example call baring on landline phones!

link to this comment
KMJ,Derby's 1,811 posts GB
M
Mike Dimmick
sentiment_very_satisfiedPlatinum

1:10 PM

Kate: Sky charge the BBC and therefore the 60% of licence-fee payers who DON'T use Sky a 'Platform Contribution Charge' that Sky use to subsidise their boxes. This charge is related to the percentage of viewing of each channel. It is in no way fair, reasonable or non-discriminatory and should be eliminated.

The charges for appearing in the EPG should be related only to the costs directly incurred in running the EPG, and should be shared fairly between all channels, the PSBs should not be charged more than other channels as they are now. I do not believe that it costs an average worker's salary to maintain an EPG slot, even allowing for other costs of employment - Sky should be forced to account for the actual costs incurred.

link to this comment
Mike Dimmick's 2,486 posts GB
Briantist
sentiment_very_satisfiedOwner

2:31 PM

kate: The article title is a quotation, it can't be wrong.

You may have another opinion; however the title reflects what was said by Dan Brooke, who in a position to speak on behalf of the Chnannel 4 corporation, which of course you are not:

"Fees were introduced to give Sky a leg up ... If that money wasn't going out of the door we'd be delighted, and would put that money back into programming."

link to this comment
Briantist's 38,844 posts GB
Ian Grice
sentiment_satisfiedGold

4:21 PM
Hinckley

Well considering the 5 PSB channels occupy the first 5 slots in the EPG then yes they should pay, Would they be happy if they got it for free but were put in the 900s ?

link to this comment
Ian Grice's 497 posts GB
T
Tony Hill
sentiment_satisfiedBronze

4:27 PM

I have very recently purchased a Sagecom Freesat HD PVR to replace my old (but good) generic satellite Humax HD receiver and also a new HDMI-enabled Yamaha AV amp to replace my old (but good) non-HDMI Yamaha amp. Connecting all - these two boxes plus another motorised satellite receiver + DVD player - not my favourite job, went OK. Starting to use Freesat/new Amp, video was fine but audio another matter. A major benefit of HD is Dolby Digital 5.1 surround sound but I was not receiving it from BBC HD/BBC One HD. It took me a little while to realise that the Sagecom box was not transferring Dolby via the HDMI route. Installing a (coax) S/PDIF cable remedied that but watching lots of BBC HD output I only got Dolby 2.0 and not 5.1 - what to do? My old pairing of Humax/old Amp had produced 5.1 correctly before so I looped through to the Humax and connected it to the old amp. I thus could compare new v old set-ups. Lo and behold - identical outputs with 2.0 for even Jules Holland. This morning I tuned to BBC HD for the HD preview session and for the whole several hours I got 5.1 (on both set-ups). As soon as the preview ended and regular programming started, the audio dropped back to 2.0 So, I conclude that both my old and new boxes are operating correctly and the problem was with the BBC who, no matter the preview and trailers extolling the merit of Dolby Surround sound, seem to broadcast (on their HD channels) nearly all the time in 2.0 Am I right or do I have some technical problem with my new boxes?

link to this comment
Tony Hill's 62 posts GB
K
KMJ,Derby
sentiment_satisfiedGold

5:47 PM

Ian Grice: If everyone knew that 901, 902 etc gave the familiar BBC?ITV channels many people would go straight to 900 and skip everything before it.After all a Sky Sports fan does not work through every channel from 101!

link to this comment
KMJ,Derby's 1,811 posts GB
Briantist
sentiment_very_satisfiedOwner

8:49 PM

Tony Hill: The BBC only transmit programmes that have 5.1 sound with 5.1 sound, using 2.0 for everything else.

If you watch the BBC HD channel in the morning there during the previews, just before the top of the hour it will show a "testcard" which features a beep that goes Left, Right, Centre, LFE, Back Left, Back Right.

Freeview HD broadcasts BBC One and BBC HD in 2.0, Freesat HD uses 5.1 when the source is 5.1.

The BBC does not believe that the consumer is well served by making a pseudo-5.1 mix.

link to this comment
Briantist's 38,844 posts GB
D
David
sentiment_satisfiedGold

9:37 PM

I have my AV amp set to Dolby Prologic when getting a left and right stereo source this gives the center and rear channels in addition to the left and right.

link to this comment
David's 306 posts GB
Select more comments

Your comment please
Please post a question, answer or commentUK Free TV is here to help people. If you are rude or disrespectful all of your posts will be deleted and you will be banned.







Privacy policy: UK Free Privacy policy.