Channel 4 would like to turn Sky "retransmission fees" into programming
Brian Butterworth 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 “ludicrousâ€Â.
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".
7:36 PM
I find it amusing that an advert for Sky HD appeared below this article!
I wonder if the 3rd party that delivers the ads scans the page for keywords!!
| link to this comment |
Will: I can't say... AdWords - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia .
| link to this comment |
10:56 PM
Thanks Brian then they should do the same with Sky, IE stop paying.
| link to this comment |
11:09 PM
Hoho so channel 4 is getting in on the act. As I understood the Government were keen to drop the whole concept of a PSB. The whole idea of PSB has now become rediculous. I seem to recall that ITV no longer adheres to its PSB conditions in any case. It again comes down to why should Sky viewers have to pay for what others get free.
I thought there was an annual charge made by Freesat to finance the operation.
| link to this comment |
11:23 PM
For reference, VLV is Voice of the Listener and Viewer (VLV)- the campaign for Public Service Broadcasting. and the event was titled "UK Programme Production - Securing its Future".
| link to this comment |
trevorjharris: Channel 4 is clearly as "public service broadcaster" as it not-for-profit corporation which has no shareholders and makes programming supported by advertising and receives only the allocation of bandwidth (but not the costs of broadcasting) as a "gift".
The BBC has it's royal charter and Licence Fee funding (and therefore no adverts).
ITV1 and Channel 5 have to provide certain output (mainly news these days) to get their "PSB status".
There has never been any proposal for the government to "drop the whole concept of a PSB" as both parties support the PSB concept in their manifestos.
| link to this comment |
9:14 AM
trevorjharris: The point is not that Sky viewers are having to pay for what others get free, it is that *Sky is charging the broadcasters for what other platforms give away*.
Each Sky viewer costs the broadcasters money, money that they do *not* recoup from subscription revenue. Free-to-air channels don't receive any payments from Sky's subscriptions, nor do 'free-to-view' (encrypted, but available to anyone with a viewing card even without an active subscription). Only the channels actually listed in the Entertainment Pack or Entertainment Pack Extra do. Even for them, Sky's Platform Contribution Charges will often exceed the revenue earned.
| link to this comment |
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 |