Questions about RTE hd

watty · 25-10-2010 10:16pm

Well, Irish HD channels free on Saorview and Saorsat

eventually ...

STB · 25-10-2010 10:41pm

Deleted User wrote: »

rte messeth with the sole living room provider of rte to 600,000 homes or roughly 2 thirds of the potential audience at it's peril.

RTE had to capitulate to sky before.
Nothings changed...in fact if anything sky's position is stronger than ever.

You are joking I presume.

Sky pay for everything. The cost to RTE may be as little as the uplink costs and even that is debatable. This is how much Sky need RTE. RTE are primarily concerned with getting the PSB muxes and satellite service up and running not Mr Murdochs empire. The point being you do not need to subscribe to pay services to receive RTE digitally regardless of whether they broadcast in HD or not. It will eventually become available on all platforms when RTE are ready I would imagine.

In the UK the PSB CH4 broadcasters dont have platform neutrality. Infact you do have to subscribe to Sky to get it on satellite, which is a very strange situation for a psb to be in.

26-10-2010 12:00pm

I'm not joking.
The only reason RTE agreed that deal with sky in the first place was they needed to get on sky fast as their own research showed they were losing viewers like a stone as people with sky weren't bothering to switch back to analogue.
Even with churn,Sky deliver programmes now to circa 50-60% of the population if theres half a million subs and there is that.
The beauty of the sky hd epg,their standard box now and probably soon to be their standard service is hard to break away from.

It's the freesat and free to air sat people who will either be using the combo boxes or investing in saorsat.
I doubt RTE want to be in a position where by they are off sky's epg and Sky have the power to take them off it as they are in the drivers seat in that relationship.
If Sky decided to dump RTE 2,how many people would bother adding a new lnb to receive it and worse even those that did would be in the same boat for RTE where by people would be too lazy to switch to a new epg everytime they wanted to watch RTE.
That scenario would see them lose viewers in the same way as they were losing them before they went onto sky.

Basically Sky have the power to reinstate RTE's problem.
Píssing off the controler of over half Irelands livingroom tv's would be a bad move by RTE so I would reckon despite the bluster...that when sky requests RTEhd,they will have it end of.
They won't be paying for it.

STB · 26-10-2010 1:04pm

RTE now have a DTT service which requires less ERP and covers a wider area. Infact early next year for the small minority of hard to reach places we will have a Free to Air satellite service running in parallel at a minimal cost. This will mean that there is no reason why one should sign up to subscription services in order to receive RTE/PSB stations.

RTE dont actually pay a cent for Sky's proprietary EPG, for the SES space or indeed the NDS encryption. Sky do.

It is in RTE's interest to be on all plaforms, but not absolutely necessary. They are mandated to be FTA to the public. RTE NL have invested heavily in the infrastructure for DSO.

Irish viewing habits place RTE1 in the number 1 position with 25% of viewing figures across all platforms. Infact RTÉ's two television channels accounted for 43% of the average rating generated by adults in peak-time... over 500 channels made up the remainder (Jan - June 2010).

So remove RTE from Sky and what will happen ? Contrary to popular belief people tighten their belts during a recession. Sky already have enough reasons to try and hang on to their subs in Ireland. Losing RTE would be a disaster.

Do you honestly think Sky would like risk finding out ? I am sure there is a reason that they are paying all the costs so far ? Good deal eh...

Thankfully for both organisations, neither you nor I will be doing the negotiating on eithers behalf Black Briar

Apogee · 26-10-2010 1:04pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not joking.
The only reason RTE agreed that deal with sky in the first place was they needed to get on sky fast as their own research showed they were losing viewers like a stone as people with sky weren't bothering to switch back to analogue.

And their subsequent research indicates that Sky benefit from this deal to a far greater extent than RTÉ do.

Deleted User wrote: »

If Sky decided to dump RTE 2,how many people would bother adding a new lnb to receive it and worse even those that did would be in the same boat for RTE where by people would be too lazy to switch to a new epg everytime they wanted to watch RTE.

And the following day nice Mr Craig Doyle will be on the airwaves advertising how all the Irish channels are available on UPC, along with HD, series link and broadband.

The claim that Sky can drop the some or all of the Irish channels and it will have no impact on their subscription numbers is bogus.

26-10-2010 2:15pm

Why is it bogus?
I'm not saying that Sky would dump an RTE channel,I'm thinking they wouldn't but the fact remains they control the bulk of RTE's viewers so if they want RTE HD they will have it.
Theres not a hope of a charge or a refusal.
RTE can't ignore that.
A Blazé comment at a Dáil committee suggesting they would is exactly that Blazé.
(As for UPC,they haven't a hope of coming near sky's market share in Ireland because their system and offerings are inferior to be totally honest.)

Bskyb's control of the market is a mistake that was allowed to happen circa 2000 when stupidity derailed the first credible attempt at digital terrestrial here,a market that had a much bigger demand at the time for digital psb UK tv than there was for dtt pay tv in the UK.

Sam Russell · 26-10-2010 3:51pm

One big change that has taken place recently is the emergence of Freesat. For a $ky subsciber, all they have to do is pull their subsciption card out of their box and cycle the power and they can see how much free TV they have.

If they do not subscribe to Sky Sport, they have most of what they want for free. The only problem is that they must get RTe from an aerial. Given that 95% of the population will be able to avail of that, Sky could lose most of their subscribers. With Saorsat, all of their subscribers. A years subsciption at the average of €45/m would pay for a complete Freesat/STB setup, with change.

If I were $ky, I would be looking at plan B.

Gerry Wicklow · 26-10-2010 4:03pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

One big change that has taken place recently is the emergence of Freesat. For a $ky subsciber, all they have to do is pull their subsciption card out of their box and cycle the power and they can see how much free TV they have.

If they do not subscribe to Sky Sport, they have most of what they want for free. The only problem is that they must get RTe from an aerial. Given that 95% of the population will be able to avail of that, Sky could lose most of their subscribers.

Sadly the general public are unaware of this and in some cases badly misinformed by uneducated or over eager sales people.

Sam Russell · 26-10-2010 4:48pm

Gerry Wicklow wrote: »

Sadly the general public are unaware of this and in some cases badly misinformed by uneducated or over eager sales people.

I find it strange that the likes of Eddie Hobbs does not scream from the roof tops about this. People are spending an average of €45/month on something they can get for free. RTE have not mentioned DTT and it is less than a week from launch. Why?

Surely some of those paying out on Sky cannot afford it.

watty · 26-10-2010 5:36pm

Because the "real" full Public Launch is maybe 6 months away...

We will see next week what press releases there are. As I said before, don't expect a frenzy before Jan 2011!

Sam Russell · 26-10-2010 6:18pm

I am begining to wonder if it will ever launch. We have had so many false starts.:(

Kensington · 26-10-2010 7:27pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

I find it strange that the likes of Eddie Hobbs does not scream from the roof tops about this. People are spending an average of €45/month on something they can get for free. RTE have not mentioned DTT and it is less than a week from technical launch. Why?

Surely some of those paying out on Sky cannot afford it.

Fixed your post for you there

You'd be surprised the amount of people who have the full sky package - sports and movies - and don't really and truly know how much they're paying each month, let alone each year. The beauty of direct debits and e-billing!

If you ask most people how much they pay for TV, they'll probably tell you only €40 or €50 a month. Most would be shocked to learn that the full package costs over €900 a year, and nearly €1100 if you add HD on to that. And that's for your TV alone.

We have sky in the house, in contract until April. After that the whole lot will be taken out and replaced with Freesat and SaorView, foreign sat for sport and a monthly subscription DVD rental package for films. The whole thing would pay for itself within a few months.

Apogee · 26-10-2010 7:31pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Why is it bogus?
I'm not saying that Sky would dump an RTE channel,I'm thinking they wouldn't but the fact remains they control the bulk of RTE's viewers so if they want RTE HD they will have it.
Theres not a hope of a charge or a refusal.
RTE can't ignore that.

RTÉ can do what they like. It was their decision to go on Sky in the first place. If they don't want to provide Sky with their HD content, no-one can force them.

And Sky have long been f*cking over their Irish customers with an inferior line-up of channels at higher costs than the equivalent UK packages. Why would they even care whether their customers had RTÉ2 in HD or not?

Deleted User wrote:

A Blazé comment at a Dáil committee suggesting they would is exactly that Blazé.

Where's the evidence it was blasé?

Deleted User wrote:

(As for UPC,they haven't a hope of coming near sky's market share in Ireland because their system and offerings are inferior to be totally honest.)

The 500k who subscribe to UPC presumably don't think it's inferior to Sky (600k).

Deleted User wrote:

Bskyb's control of the market is a mistake that was allowed to happen circa 2000 when stupidity derailed the first credible attempt at digital terrestrial here,a market that had a much bigger demand at the time for digital psb UK tv than there was for dtt pay tv in the UK.

Why should RTÉ help to bolster Sky's "control of the market"?

The Cush · 26-10-2010 8:05pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

I am begining to wonder if it will ever launch.

It will next year as required by legislation i.e. by the end of Dec 2011.

This Sunday, the 31st of Oct RTÉ is required to have the national television multiplex "operational and available free-to-air to approximately 90 per cent of the population".

They have probably met or exceeded this requirement already.

I'm not expecting anything out of the ordinary from next Sunday, maybe press release next week, we might have something from Mary Curtis. Over the coming weeks and months a new/updated information website, information campaign etc. leading to the full national launch next year.

copacetic · 26-10-2010 8:07pm

Apogee wrote: »

RTÉ can do what they like. It was their decision to go on Sky in the first place. If they don't want to provide Sky with their HD content, no-one can force them.

Having a quick glance throught the thread a lot of people have posted similar opinion. I think people should read the relevant parts of the broadcasting act on 'must offer' obligations. It's also relevant to a lot of the threads where similar ideas come up.

eg the below may be relevant

http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/acts/2009/a1809.pdf

(11) Without prejudice to the requirements imposed under subsection
(4), RTÉ, TG4 and the television service programme contractor
shall ensure that their must-offer services are at all times offered
for re-transmission (subject to agreement as to fair, reasonable and
non-discriminatory terms of use) by means of any appropriate network
that is available for reception in an intelligible form by
members of the public in the whole of or in part of the State.

(12) RTÉ, TG4 and the television service programme contractor
shall ensure that their must-offer services are at all times offered for
broadcast or re-transmission (subject to agreement as to fair, reasonable
and non-discriminatory terms of use) by means of every satellite
television service.

and

(17) In this section—
“must-offer service” means a free-to-air television service provided
for the time being by RTE´ , TG4 and the free-to-air service provided
under section 70 by the television service programme contractor

STB · 26-10-2010 8:21pm

But

"subject to agreement"

Agreements can take forever.

Full on push will only happen when the mirror sat has been tested. I reckon Sky will have to wait until RTE NL at least have the public muxes and sat services launched.

Getting back to the point. Sky need RTE more than RTE need Sky. Given the current economic climate and looming bad news budget in December I forsee major takeup of FTA combo products in the first quarter of 11 - outside techie boards.

26-10-2010 8:21pm

Apogee wrote: »

RTÉ can do what they like. It was their decision to go on Sky in the first place. If they don't want to provide Sky with their HD content, no-one can force them.

And Sky have long been f*cking over their Irish customers with an inferior line-up of channels at higher costs than the equivalent UK packages. Why would they even care whether their customers had RTÉ2 in HD or not?

I said that RTE won't refuse them if they want it.They are too big a provider of RTE services.
RTE would need to get existing sky customers to pay for saorsat or aerial instalation if they were kicked off it..though thats not going to happen.
What will happen is,if sky want rtehd,they will get it and I've no doubt under the same arrangement as now.
You must have been replying to someone or something else.

Where's the evidence it was blasé?

See above for my view on that.I reiterated a view.Life would be boring if we all had the same opinion.

The 500k who subscribe to UPC presumably don't think it's inferior to Sky (600k).

I've seen it,it is inferior.It doesn't matter what most people who have it think.As said above,it's doubtfull most people who subscribe to pay tv know what they are paying anyway never mind what the rival offers.
There are people who turn the colour up to the last on their tv and think it's the greatest picture since sliced bread.Hopefully we as regulars on this forum are a different breed.
Sky hd certainly beats upc's epg hands down as does their anytime service and selection of hd channels.
I'd be bored senseless if I had to rely on Upc.
But I'm not here to bash upc.I'm more interested in lamenting the fact that actually now that you mention it,theres somewhat of a duopoly in rte/multichannel delivery and who's fault is that.
What I've said about sky

Why should RTÉ help to bolster Sky's "control of the market"?

I think they provided reason the day they signed up to the stupid deal that they did with sky in the first place rather than providing a ftv card scheme.
No lateral thinking.
They were well able to find the money for building a dtt network at the height of a recession but went ahead with the error of being a sky lapdog,a few years earlier at a time when they could have got the money to encrypt to licence holders easily.

STB · 26-10-2010 8:35pm

Deleted User wrote: »

theres somewhat of a duopoly in rte/multichannel delivery and who's fault is that.
What I've said about sky
I think they provided reason the day they signed up to the stupid deal that they did with sky in the first place rather than providing a ftv card scheme.
No lateral thinking.
They were well able to find the money for building a dtt network at the height of a recession but went ahead with the error of being a sky lapdog,a few years earlier at a time when they could have got the money to encrypt to licence holders easily.

But we dont have the cash to even operate an FTV card system. That was never an option. RTE's mandate is to provide FTA not FTV. Encryption was always going to be necessary as a result. It doesnt have to be going forward. It is up to individuals to remove themselves from Pay TV. You are right joe public dont know what they are paying for.

The new Eutelsat bird is the first time the FTA opportunity has presented itself. It is the way DTH will go in the next 10 years anyway with more and more HD content coming on stream and associated rigid conditions from rights holders. Less pan European, more DTH as a result.

26-10-2010 8:39pm

STB wrote: »

Getting back to the point. Sky need RTE more than RTE need Sky. Given the current economic climate and looming bad news budget in December I forsee major takeup of FTA combo products in the first quarter of 11 - outside techie boards.

I think at this stage that it's gone well beyond either party evaluating who needs who the most and I should imagine neither are such is the marriage of convenience.
Much of what I said,you said and others have said on these topics is all theoretical.
We may aswell introduce another elephant and we're fully down the road of theoretics then and suggest all uk services by whatever means are likely to be encrypted again subject to some sort of card fee,given that the recent spending review in the UK hammered the BBC... and Itv aren't immune from the recessionary drop in add income either.

I'd agree with your point regarding combo boxes though.
Hopefully some bright manufacturer is working on an eye candy epg solution for them that puts the terrestrial and sat channels all on the one epg.
I think some do don't they?

26-10-2010 8:44pm

STB wrote: »

But we dont have the cash to even operate an FTV card system. That was never an option. RTE's mandate is to provide FTA not FTV. Encryption was always going to be necessary as a result. It doesnt have to be going forward. It is up to individuals to remove themselves from Pay TV. You are right joe public dont know what they are paying for.

Yeah but RTE is not free to air,we all have to pay for it.
Those descriptions are a bit misnomerish in the way they are used by everybody.
I was talking about providing the service with a card you receive producing your licence,not a card you pay extra for.
The idea being to rule out the problem of rights issues.

The new Eutelsat bird is the first time the FTA opportunity has presented itself. It is the way DTH will go in the next 10 years anyway with more and more HD content coming on stream and associated rigid conditions from rights holders. Less pan European, more DTH as a result.

I suspect though,as always in these things,theres probably a vested interest thats been hard at work to engineer the scenario that has put us down that path.
There was another method that was just plain brushed aside.

Apogee · 26-10-2010 8:56pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I said that RTE won't refuse them if they want it.They are too big a provider of RTE services.
RTE would need to get existing sky customers to pay for saorsat or aerial instalation if they were kicked off it..though thats not going to happen.

Why would RTÉ need to get existing sky customers to pay for saorsat? If someone wants, they will have the option of getting the HD channels via Saorview or Saorsat - there is no obligation on them either way.

Deleted User wrote:

What will happen is,if sky want rtehd,they will get it and I've no doubt under the same arrangement as now.

I disagree.

Deleted User wrote:

You must have been replying to someone or something else.

No, the quote function works perfectly well.

Deleted User wrote:

See above for my view on that.I reiterated a view.Life would be boring if we all had the same opinion.

Deleted User wrote:

I've seen it,it is inferior.It doesn't matter what most people who have it think.

Or maybe the 500k have a different view to you.

Deleted User wrote:

I think they provided reason the day they signed up to the stupid deal that they did with sky in the first place rather than providing a ftv card scheme.
No lateral thinking.
They were well able to find the money for building a dtt network at the height of a recession but went ahead with the error of being a sky lapdog,a few years earlier at a time when they could have got the money to encrypt to licence holders easily.

So they should further compound the error by capitulating to Sky on HD? Boll*x to that. At the time the initial deal was done, the DTT infrastructure was not in place and neither was the Freesat/Saorsat alt. If the availability of HD on either Saorview/Saorsat helps to increase knowledge among the general public of the channels available FTA via Saorview/Freeview and Saorsat/Freesat combinations, it will have done some considerable good imo.

The Cush · 26-10-2010 9:00pm

copacetic wrote: »

Having a quick glance throught the thread a lot of people have posted similar opinion. I think people should read the relevant parts of the broadcasting act on 'must offer' obligations. It's also relevant to a lot of the threads where similar ideas come up.

http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/acts/2009/a1809.pdf

Good post copacetic, clears up a lot of speculation.

Just to add to that there is no requirement to offer the HD versions of the channels also if the HD versions do become available on Sky they cannot charge subscribers extra to view them.

(13) Arrangements entered into under subsection (12) shall not
result in an additional charge on any subscriber to a satellite television
service by reason of the making available to that subscriber of
any must-offer service by way of the satellite television service.

tlaavtech · 26-10-2010 9:05pm

As far as I am concerned, the only thing that will change on the 31st of October is that you will have the right to bitch and moan at RTE if the transmission stops - all else remains the same until the build up to the proper launch :rolleyes:

Also, forget about RTE HD for now - how about having a full SD res for RTE One and TG4 - That would be far better place to start.

I would like to see a 7-day epg rather than a 5-day. It leaves a big hole in the PC EPG

26-10-2010 9:20pm

Apogee wrote: »

Or maybe the 500k have a different view to you.

I addressed that earlier.People get whats convenient,not always whats best.
I'm not even going down the road of comparing the two services because they are not like for like by a long shot.

So they should further compound the error by capitulating to Sky on HD? Boll*x to that. At the time the initial deal was done, the DTT infrastructure was not in place and neither was the Freesat/Saorsat alt. If the availability of HD on either Saorview/Saorsat helps to increase knowledge among the general public of the channels available FTA via Saorview/Freeview and Saorsat/Freesat combinations, it will have done some considerable good imo.

At the time of the initial deal [if we could call it a deal...I'd call it a transfer],the idea was to get on sky asap for as little expenditure as possible and from the way I see it,as little thought as possible.
Incidently,it seems,if RTE go all Hd on terrestrial,they'll have to do the same on all other distribution platforms.
That would be my reading of the legislation quoted above.

Regarding capitulating to sky,as I said,I think the marriage of convenience carries priority as to what will happen behind closed doors and not your view or mine.

Mind you that said,as a part owner via the licence fee of RTE,I'd like to know the specifics of the deal they have with sky and I think we should be entitled to know.
Your expressed view above as to how RTE and Sky do business [and could we do without the fowl language please] is as I said potentially just another ignored view in my opinion like mine in the matter.

Apogee · 26-10-2010 9:30pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I addressed that earlier.People get whats convenient,not always whats best.
I'm not even going down the road of comparing the two services because they are not like for like by a long shot.

Like UPC providing broadband and phone. Whereas Sky don't.

Black briar wrote:

Regarding capitulating to sky,as I said,I think the marriage of convenience carries priority as to what will happen behind closed doors and not your view or mine.

That may well be, but that tone of your posts suggested that it was also how it should be. The Irish PSB should not be prostituting itself out to foreign, non-taxpaying corporations.

Black briar wrote:

Mind you that said,as a part owner via the licence fee of RTE,I'd like to know the specifics of the deal they have with sky and I think we should be entitled to know.

Agreed on that. Put in an FOI request and they'll claim it's commercially sensitive though.

Black briar wrote:

Your expressed view above as to how RTE and Sky do business [and could we do without the fowl language please] is as I said potentially just another ignored view in my opinion like mine in the matter.

Chicken allergy?

Apogee · 26-10-2010 9:38pm

copacetic wrote:

(12) RTÉ, TG4 and the television service programme contractor
shall ensure that their must-offer services are at all times offered for
broadcast or re-transmission (subject to agreement as to fair, reasonable
and non-discriminatory terms of use) by means of every satellite
television service.

Does this apply to those companies not regulated in Ireland or not operating under a Comreg licence? If yes, then ...

The Cush wrote: »

(13) Arrangements entered into under subsection (12) shall not
result in an additional charge on any subscriber to a satellite television
service by reason of the making available to that subscriber of
any must-offer service by way of the satellite television service.

.. how can this be enforced? How can Irish law regulate what a foreign-based satellite service charges?

[edit] The obligation is pushed on to RTÉ to enforce section 13??

copacetic · 26-10-2010 9:52pm

Apogee wrote: »

Does this apply to those companies not regulated in Ireland or not operating under a Comreg licence? If yes, then ...

.. how can this be enforced? How can Irish law regulate what a foreign-based satellite service charges?

[edit] The obligation is pushed on to RTÉ to enforce section 13??

definition from the act:

“satellite television service” means a service which consists in or
involves the distribution or transmission of television broadcasting
services from a satellite, such services then offered to the public with
the intention that such services be used by a significant number of
the persons in the whole or part of the State by whom the broadcasts
are received in an intelligible form as their principal means of receiving
television programmes

and I assume (ianal) that

subject to agreement as to fair, reasonable
and non-discriminatory terms of use

in the bit you quoted is where the no extra cost bit is.

The Cush wrote: »

Just to add to that there is no requirement to offer the HD versions of the channels also if the HD versions do become available on Sky they cannot charge subscribers extra to view them.

Again, ianal, but thats not my reading of it. Once a HD service becomes available free to air in Ireland it is then a must offer service within the definition in the Act.

I wouldn't get excited about the cost thing either, imo it only means they can't charge extra over and above the cost of getting their HD box. The same way BBC HD is the only channel you currently get if you have sky HD box but not the €15 a month HD sub. Which is very unusual in Ireland since the boxes and install are so heavily subsidised when you take the HD bundle.

rlogue · 26-10-2010 11:43pm

to make available the broadcasting services of RTE´ in so
far as reasonably practicable by any and all means of
transmission, relaying or distribution, whether by way of
broadcast (which includes terrestrial sound and television
broadcasting networks, cable networks or satellite
networks), or by any form of electronic means (which
includes fixed terrestrial networks, mobile terrestrial networks,
including the Internet and other electronic
communications networks) and whether now known or
hereinafter invented on a linear or non-linear basis,

This is exactly the scenario that the Broadcasting Act was meant to control;

To enable satellite operators other than Sky to enter the Irish market, and to ensure that all, not some, Irish channels would be made available.

Yet again RTE NL are trying to distort the market by going against both the spirit and the word of the Broadcasting Acts by restricting the provision of Irish HD television services to their own offerings as if somehow they are in competition with Sky, UPC and any other operators who may enter the market.

They are not in competition. But why won't RTE NL see that? Are they truly deluded or just short sighted? RTE effectively killed off DAB Radio by locking out the UK channels and the commercial stations and I wonder if Saorview and Saorsat will be the same expensive white elephant DAB is thanks to RTE's dead hand.

RTE themselves are openly defying the Broadcasting Acts by:
1: Restricting the HD transmission to Saorview and Saorsat
2: continuing to refuse to provide the overseas satellite TV service but instead are now pouring money into a satellite service that locks out the Irish outside Ireland from our TV.

Apogee · 26-10-2010 11:52pm

copacetic wrote: »

Again, ianal, but thats not my reading of it. Once a HD service becomes available free to air in Ireland it is then a must offer service within the definition in the Act.

I don't see any requirement to offer the HD feed.

copacetic wrote:

I wouldn't get excited about the cost thing either, imo it only means they can't charge extra over and above the cost of getting their HD box. The same way BBC HD is the only channel you currently get if you have sky HD box but not the €15 a month HD sub. Which is very unusual in Ireland since the boxes and install are so heavily subsidised when you take the HD bundle.

The question is whether Irish law can force Sky to set the rates it charges for its subs. I can't see how it can be enforced.

Bob_Harris · 26-10-2010 11:58pm

rlogue wrote: »

RTE themselves are openly defying the Broadcasting Acts by continuing to refuse to provide the overseas satellite TV service but instead are now pouring money into a satellite service that locks out the Irish outside Ireland from our TV.

If the Irish people outside of Ireland want to watch Irish TV, they can move back to Ireland.

I don't understand at all the need to cater for "expats". They don't pay the license fee so why should they be provided a service at a greater cost to the people who actually pay that license fee?

Questions about RTE hd

Comments