All posts by Briantist
Below are all of Briantist's postings, with the most recent are at the bottom of the page.
ned: Please see Freeview reception has changed? | ukfree.tv - independent free digital TV advice for help.
| link to this comment |
Steve P: Let me just go though those points
"Clearly BBC has an interest in getting its broadcasts offered via satellite, and should be prepared to pay a proper price for the service of broadcasting them. "
Yes, the BBC does, that is why it has a contract with SES Astra, who own the satellites to provide them with the capacity.
SES Astra is a Luxembourgian company and has nothing at all to do with Sky.
"But if that can be done WITHOUT automatically making them available to Sky subscribers I can see no reason why BBC should pay anything to Sky. Rather Sky should be paying BBC a great deal to be allowed to include BBC channels in its service. "
Yes, the BBC's services can be watched as they are free to air. Any MPEG2/DVB-S (or MPEG4/DVB-S2) receiver connected to a dish pointing at Astra 2D can receive them - that is a Sky box with or without a subscription, a Freesat box or a "generic" receiver.
"I simply do not understand the EPG issue. Does Sky have a satellite EPG monopoly? We have one TV on Freesat (NOT from Sky) and it certainly has an EPG. Where from? "
| link to this comment |
Steve P: ...contined
Yes, Sky have a monopoly in so much as a "monopoly" does not mean "100% of the market", just that the market is dominated by a single supplier.
The Freesat EPG is provided by Freesat (backed by the BBC) and costs a few thousand pounds to run. The Sky EPG is "claimed" to cost an fortune to run, but this money goes a) to Sky's profits and to b) the encruption company which happens to be another part of NewsCorp (NDS Datacom).
"I would certainly think that including BBC in an EPG was a very small thing compared to the benefit to Sky, who would certainly lose huge numbers of subscribers if they did not include BBC channels in their offer."
I would think a substantial number of viewers would stop subscribing to Sky if the PSBs had their channels erased from the Sky Guide.
| link to this comment |
michael: "We hear nothing of provision for a national emergency"
That bit is actually addressed, as the mobile phone system has a special "emergency" protocol built into it. At one point in the past my phone was one of those devices allocated for emergency priority, for reasons I am not able to disclose.
I can't quite see the logic is saying that MW or LW is needed in "an emergency" as I can't think of many people who would have such a device.
There is no logical reason why an analogue network would be needed "in an emergency" given that everyone has access to Freeview...
| link to this comment |
NottsUK: I understand this to be the case, but as ever I guess we will only see when it happens.
| link to this comment |
+ BBC wants to force Sky to drop retransmission fees | What Satellite & Digital TV +
| link to this comment |
+ ITV backs retransmission fee review | News | Broadcast +
"ITV has said it would back a review into whether public service broadcasters should be compelled to pay premium platforms to carry their channels.
The commercial broadcaster stopped short of supporting the BBCs repeated calls to completely drop retransmission fees to the likes of BSkyB.
However, it confirmed it would throw its weight behind a review of the current arrangements.
ITV would not be drawn on what it hoped to achieve from such a review, which could be carried out by the government or Sky itself. A spokesman simply said: We are supportive of the need for a review of the current arrangements.
Commercial PSB broadcasters are understood to be interested in actually reversing the fees by charging Sky for the right to show their channels, although the BBC has distanced itself from this move.
Mathew Horsman, director of media research and advisory firm Mediatique, said that based on arrangements in the US - where Fox has retransmission agreements with cable operators - the broadcasters could collect up to £120m a year in retransmission consent fees.
The issue could be examined by the government in the new communications bill or through secondary legislation, Horsman said, paving the way for ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5 to negotiate terms with Sky.
The issue is being revisited on the back of a report commissioned by the BBC, which claims the UK is the only territory in which PSBs pay for their channels to appear on platforms.
The report, which has not yet been published, was cited by director of public policy and strategy John Tate in a blog post this morning.
| link to this comment |
Thursday 13 October 2011 10:06AM
Andy gardiner: If you use the Bromsgrove transmitter, you now need a wideband aerial to see those channels.