Irish free sat in th UK

radiowaves wrote: »

That's weird. I said they were Sky channels, you argued that they weren't and now you're saying that they are!!!

Make up your mind ::rolleyes:

I guess you're confusing Sky the provider with the Sky branded TV channels - an easy mistake to make.

You are, of course, right about subscription money but, naturally, under the FTV scheme they pass on nothing - that's the point of it. There's nothing to pass on

I thought I was quite clear. They are not sky channels. They are channels that have decided to employ sky to encrypt and collect subs for. No doubt sky charge for this service and hopefully the income from subs pays for this.

winston_1 wrote: »

I thought I was quite clear. They are not sky channels. They are channels that have decided to employ sky to encrypt and collect subs for. No doubt sky charge for this service and hopefully the income from subs pays for this.

OMG now you're saying they AREN'T Sky channels - please, please make up your mind. You appear to be very

As I originally said, they are Sky channels (ie provided by Sky) and you've jumped back and forth since :rolleyes:

The income from what subs exactly?
FTV channels are not subscription channels; there is no income coming in there. The channels themselves would be paying Sky to be provided on their EPG and for the use of their encryption.
They have chosen to be funded by an advertising only model.

Let's be clear about this: the outlay for a card is a payment for a use of the hardware - I think you expect Sky and NDS to produce the cards and provide them for nothing? Do you?

When those cards are replaced (by NDS btw) for necessary security reasons every few years it appears that you again seem to believe that this hardware should be given out free of charge to people who only want the FTV channels. And because there is a charge for the hardware you appear to believe this makes the FTV model as provided via Sky a subscription model? I know you don't really believe that.

I've rarely seen anybody get so confused by the difference between Sky provided channels and Sky branded channels and I certainly have never seen such confusion over the FTV v subscription models.

You also need a Sky receiver to receive the FTV channels - are you seriously suggesting Sky should provide these for free to people using them for FTV channels only?

Obviously nobody would but if somebody wanted to use the Skybox for FTA channels only (perhaps to make use of the EPG for example) would the fact that Sky charge them for the receiver make those channels subscription?

Please think before you type mate

winston_1 wrote: »

I've said all along they are NOT sky channels. They are channels who have chosen sky to distribute and encrypt. To receive they there is an ongoing cost, approx £5 per year, effectively a subscription, not good value in my opinion for what you get.

If they have chose to be provided by Sky they are Sky channels when talking about the satellite platform mate.

Sky-owned channels is where I believe you are getting mixed up between the terms

So now you admit it is "effectively" a subscription in your opinion as opposed to actually a subscription :rolleyes:

So what you have been doing is arguing your opinion as if it was fact against somebody who was actually giving the facts. :rolleyes:

I must admit I've had some strange tete-a-tetes across a number of forums but this is right up there with the strangest I've either been involved in or seen.

It's been weird (to say the least) debating with you, have a nice day

winston_1 wrote: »

They are not provided by Sky. Sky just provide the encryption. By your argument RTE are sky channels. Wonder what RTE would say about that.

The RTÉ channels as provided on Astra at 28,2 are Sky channels mate :rolleyes:

Again you appear to be confusing Sky the service provider with Sky branded channels.

And considering RTÉ were delighted to jump under the Sky umbrella what do you think they'd say about that?

azzeretti wrote: »

This statement is a bit ambiguous. The actual channel isn't a Sky channel, it's an Irish owned and run channel. It it's provided on the Sky platform (EPG location, encryption etc) via Sky services . The same channel, and broadcast content, is viewable on SoarSat or SaorView unrelated to Sky.
As it's part of a subscribed Sky package it can get confusing as to it being a Sky channel.
!

That's exactly what I'm saying - absolutely nothing ambiguous about it (especially as you actually quoted me specifying the version on 28.2)

I really don't know why you come to argue with me and then actually agree with me - apart from you too seem to be confusing Sky the service provider with channels owned by Sky directly. I can't see how it is in the slightest bit confusing but maybe that's nitpicking?

If there's another way of getting RTE on Astra apart from through Sky please share.

http://www.lyngsat.com/packages/Sky-UK.html (third transponder)

http://en.kingofsat.net/pack-skydigital.php (third transponder)

Note that in the main frame most FTA channels are classed as both Sky and Freesat channels - of course a lot of these channels are on other platforms too (much like your RTE example).

Let's makes this simple - there is Sky the distribution platform and Sky the content owner. It seems to be the case that for some people you need to specify which one you're referring to.

azzeretti wrote: »

By saying "RTÉ ... are Sky channels mate" you are explicitly stating that RTE ARE Sky channels. So, can we agree this far? That what you said
explicitily means: RTE are Sky channels (although you meant when on Astra but that is irrelevant in this context)

I love the way you left out the very, very relevant in the context "the" before RTÉ and the "as provided on Astra" bit and then refer to pedantry - wonderful stuff

Let me make it simple for you

There is Sky the platform and there's Sky the channel owner.

You are still (for some very strange reason even despite me linking to satellite listing sites that make it just as obvious) confusing the first with the second.

The RTÉ channels are Sky channels (provided via Sky on Astra 28.2) but not Sky-owned channels (in the same way as - say - Sky1 is).

The RTÉ owned RTÉ channels are (FYI) also UPC channels, Saorsat channels and Saorview channels - ie they are also distributed on those platforms.

I didn't think the explanation needed to be made on a dedicated satellite forum but there you go

Mmm nitpicking eh!


But clever trick though - changing

"The RTÉ channels as provided on Astra 28.2 are Sky channels" to "RTÉ are Sky channels"

Gives you an excuse for a Friday evening rant.

azzeretti wrote: »

You seem to think that because some third party website lists something that it's gospel. Here (and this really is my last word on this because it's absolutly meaningless in any context and changes nothing).

You said (and it's verbatim)

This, in it's literal sense, is just wrong. RTE channels, on any platform, are RTE channels. The are just delievered via a platform (Sky, UPC etc). The channels legal ownership doesn't change. Therefor, RTE channels are RTE channels under any circumstance.

Especially from a legal standpoint it's blantantly obvious that (on any platform) the source of the transmission is the legal owner. To suggest that Sky - even when a channel is broadcast on their platform - own that channel is just wrong. Any legal issues are mitigated completly from Sky but remain on RTE. Your understanding is flawed I'm afraid and quoting a listing from a third party website doesn't change anything.

If Ryan Tubridy stands up on the next Late Late show and inflicts a libelous then he (and almost certainly RTE) are accountable. Do you beleive that Sky would be liable? That they have legal ownership and accountabilty for RTE's content? Well, they don't on any platform because RTE IS NOT A SKY CHANNEL

To be clear; I was not [and am not] ranting. I just felt the avenue the thread was going down was completly pointless and you seem to be labouring a point that doesn't really have any bearing on this thread, nor general satellite issues in general. The net result is - who really cares!?

Have a good weekend.

At no point did I say that the RTÉ channels on the Sky platform are owned by Sky. Not once. At any point.

Of course I did say that the links to websites only served to offer a further explanation for you but if you need to twist quotes to engage in some strange points-scoring contest then that's par for the course, I suppose.

Aertv?

azzeretti wrote: »

Therefor this is ambiguous

Because from the point of view of English being a first language, this statement, that you wrote, means exactly that.
"....ARE SKY CHANNELS" - means (whether you meant it or not) channel's having ownership, tending to Sky.

There's no twisting of anything. I was replying to your quote. Like I said, there is a difference between what you meant to say/write and what you actually wrote.

Just for the laugh - when you said "The RTÉ channels as provided on Astra at 28,2 are Sky channels mate". What do you mean, specifically the "...are Sky channels". How is this not ownership of they are Sky channels!?

Sometimes it's hard to gauge the tone of posts etc. I just want to make sure that what I'm saying in my posts are not meant to be anyway aggressive or derisory. Just healthy debate.
Like I said - it doesn't really matter, does it? Who really cares?

Last sentence is spot on I have to say but...

...the beauty of the language we speak is that words and sentences can mean a great many things and many meanings can be taken.

If I'd said: the RTÉ channels as provided on Astra at 28,2 are Sky's channels then your point would be on the money

The RTÉ channels as provided on Astra at 28.2 are Sky channels could be taken to mean that they are owned by Sky but in the context of a discussion about satellite and platforms and service provision (which is how this all started) then the second meaning can also be inferred - and is the more obvious.

Let's face it if anybody on this forum needs explaining that RTÉ's channels are owned by RTÉ but are provided by Sky then we're all in trouble.

Pedantry reigns.

azzeretti wrote: »

Ah Jaysus, that's clutching! Anyone, seemingly we're on the hymn sheet.

You are inferring a single meaning from a sentence that can have more than one meaning and I'm clutching

You are struggling to apply context to a sentence and I'm clutching :eek:

You can't see the difference between Sky the channel owner and Sky the platform and are boasting about it? (For the record both companies are called Sky)

The rest of your sentence I have no idea what it means - which is kind of ironic in a weird way

There's a couple of so called posters here on this thread that need to stfu. Talk about derailing a thread. I seen kids at school behave better.