is RTE 2 HD Coming To Sky?

mickko · 08-03-2012 2:03pm

maggy_thatcher wrote: »

I hope RTÉ2HD does get transmitted on Sky, as that would save me the trouble in having to invest in a decent aerial...I can't get UPC as my house isn't on their network, and while the "bunny ears" aerial I have is fine for the SD channels, RTÉ2HD stutters somewhat. It would be beneficial for many others in a similar situation (out of range of Saorview and/or have Sky already).

The only reason I can see for not providing it is to favour one provider over another, which the "neutral" state broadcaster really shouldn't be doing!

This is a very fair argument from Sky's customers.

The issue here is really how Sky receive RTE's HD?
Will they be just given it in the same manner as the past, or will RTE exploit this opportunity for change.

Sky customers cannot deny the woeful situation under which Sky operate.
After all, it's their money leaving the state.

RTE and the state should only renew contracts with Sky, inclusive of HD services, under the following conditions....

a) Sky register a company office in the Republic and begin to pay 23% to our government.
b) They pay a royalty, per sub, that they must declare monthly, to the state, for the channels they are using.
c) They can only sell their product within Ireland, licenced and regulated by ComReg.

Regulation would...
a) cap Sky retail charges for packages at a max level.
b) allow complaints to be made to a comptroller.
c) lower Sky's prices, and Cable's prices.
d) enforce Sky's services onto other platform, ie: Sports HD on UPC

twinklerunner · 08-03-2012 2:08pm

maggy_thatcher wrote: »

I hope RTÉ2HD does get transmitted on Sky, as that would save me the trouble in having to invest in a decent aerial...I can't get UPC as my house isn't on their network, and while the "bunny ears" aerial I have is fine for the SD channels, RTÉ2HD stutters somewhat. It would be beneficial for many others in a similar situation (out of range of Saorview and/or have Sky already).

The only reason I can see for not providing it is to favour one provider over another, which the "neutral" state broadcaster really shouldn't be doing!

I wonder if Sky are keeping epg numbers 115-120 free in Ireland for the HD versions of the Irish channels, etc??

galtee boy · 08-03-2012 2:13pm

Guys, while I agree that the vat on Irish Sky subs at least should go to the Irish Govt, lets be honest, the average subscriber out there amongst the 650,000, doesn't give a monkeys where Sky's money goes to, as long as the picture is on the screen, when he/she gets home from work in the evening. We spend hundreds of millions on Amazon UK and other UK online shops each year, as a nation, and it doesnt bother us that, all that money is going to UK companies and the UK taxman.

watty · 08-03-2012 3:29pm

Er... Amazon is American and uses a lot of Affiliates. Is anything much more than Amazon UK VAT going to UK?

mickko · 08-03-2012 3:39pm

galtee boy wrote: »

We spend hundreds of millions on Amazon UK and other UK online shops each year, as a nation, and it doesnt bother us that, all that money is going to UK companies and the UK taxman.

Not sure that is correct. Amazon have offices in Blanchardstown. Another poster on this thread claims they get charged Irish VAT on purchases from the UK.

galtee boy · 08-03-2012 4:04pm

Ok, I understand where Watty and Mickko are coming from, but you get my drift, we as a nation do send millions out of this country every year on online shopping, when you could say we should be patriotic and spend our money in Irish shops etc ? Don't want to the thread to go off topic, so I wish Sky was Irish and they generated millions for the Irish Govt etc, but they are not and UPC will never be able match their all Ireland signal coverage or their channel choice etc, so for many SKY will be their only option for pay/subscription tv, regardless of the fact that SKY do very little, if anything for the Irish economy.

maggy_thatcher · 08-03-2012 4:10pm

mickko wrote: »

This is a very fair argument from Sky's customers.

The issue here is really how Sky receive RTE's HD?
Will they be just given it in the same manner as the past, or will RTE exploit this opportunity for change.

Sky customers cannot deny the woeful situation under which Sky operate.
After all, it's their money leaving the state.

RTE and the state should only renew contracts with Sky, inclusive of HD services, under the following conditions....

a) Sky register a company office in the Republic and begin to pay 23% to our government.
b) They pay a royalty, per sub, that they must declare monthly, to the state, for the channels they are using.
c) They can only sell their product within Ireland, licenced and regulated by ComReg.

Regulation would...
a) cap Sky retail charges for packages at a max level.
b) allow complaints to be made to a comptroller.
c) lower Sky's prices, and Cable's prices.
d) enforce Sky's services onto other platform, ie: Sports HD on UPC

Nobody has confirmed if RTÉ are allowed to have differential rates between the different providers (e.g. RTÉNL, UPC, BSkyB) - if they aren't allowed differential rates - then I'm not sure how the "Royalty per sub" would be measurable for RTÉNL! As for "only sell their product within Ireland" - I'm pretty sure that it's already in their contract already that they aren't allowed to sell access to RTÉ except to Irish customers!

I also don't see how charging a company extra will cause Sky to lower their prices?

Similarly - if the regulator can cap retail charges, and Sky are overcharging, how come UPC aren't capped (given they charge similar prices - UPC Max+ movies & sports+ESPN + HD = €94.44, Sky Entertainment Extra + movies & sports + ESPN + HD = €91).

The only real advantage "regulation" seems to give you is the ability to lodge complaints with some kind of oversight committee rather than directly.

Personally - I agree that Sky should be obliged to set up a local tax collection, even though it would mean our charges would go up (as I currently only have to pay UK rates), as well as be obliged to provide their services on other platforms (perhaps after a period of exclusivity), if they want them. However I also think a clause should be in place such that if the encryption of the "competitor" system is ever broken, the upstream provider reserves the right to cut the feed / tear up the contract with no penalty. This would then encourage the cable companies etc. to ensure that their system is secure (though it would also mean that it would be in upstream providers interest to try and break their competitors encryption!)

I believe that UPC, Sky and RTÉNL should be treated equally by RTÉ - whatever rules they apply to one should apply to them all...

mickko · 08-03-2012 6:37pm

maggy_thatcher wrote: »

As for "only sell their product within Ireland" - I'm pretty sure that it's already in their contract already that they aren't allowed to sell access to RTÉ except to Irish customers!

Sorry, I meant if Sky want to sell their product in Ireland with RTE included, they can do so only under license issued by ComReg.
Terms to be set out by the State, in their agreement with Sky.
No license = No RTE carriage.

You've said all carriers should be equally treated by RTE.
What qualifies Sky's exemption from this?

maggy_thatcher wrote: »

I also don't see how charging a company extra will cause Sky to lower their prices?

It wont. But Sky are clearly making vast profits from the Irish sub, many of whom are subscribers because of RTE. Some small slice of the cake would not be an unreasonable request, particularly because they are inevitably unwilling to help provide a FTV card system.

What would drive prices down is increased competition, by properly regulating Sky, whereby they cannot deny their programming to cable ops, (sportsHD, Sky Atlantic, etc), or make unreasonable terms of carriage with the cable operator.
Regulation could also bring about an encrypted service carrying Sky channels over DTT, much like the Top Up TV service over the UK's DTT, increasing competition again.
As this stands, it's the consumer who ultimately suffers.

Sky's wholesale charges to cable ops in Ireland are excessive.
Just like comparison between UK residential sub price v Irish residential sub price for same pack.
So UPC must charge at least equally or more. Sky maintain max price for themselves. They screw the customer directly, and they screw them indirectly via wholesale charges to operators.
Remember the Virgin v Sky issue over wholecharges for Sky's basic channels? I think OFCOM were involved there too.

maggy_thatcher wrote: »

I believe that UPC, Sky and RTÉNL should be treated equally by RTÉ - whatever rules they apply to one should apply to them all...

I agree 100%.

I've outlined already why I believe RTE should be available, to the Irish license payer, and on as many platforms as possible, including cable and sat for free.

Unfortunately there does not seem to be any solution for free carriage over Astra. The FTV card seems unworkable, but not impossible.
That's very convenient for Sky.

The legalities and issues with Sky are so complex and controversial, that it warrants reviewing RTE's carriage altogether, unless Sky were to comply with some version of the rough guidelines I've set out above.

These complex issues do not warrant just allowing them access to the RTE channels without complying with any rules or conditions.

RTE's obligation is to deliver RTE to the Island of Ireland.
Sky have helped them out for a few years because RTE did not have the solution themselves, and they've done very well out of it.

100% of our residence's can/will receive RTE by DTT, SAT, Cable.

RTE have now met their obligations, and the whole availability of RTE under the current Sky arrangement needs to be very seriously reviewed.

mickko · 08-03-2012 6:48pm

maggy_thatcher wrote: »

I'm not sure how the "Royalty per sub" would be measurable for RTÉNL!

maggy, I'm not familiar with the details of the relationship between RTE and RTENL for carriage. Could you give a brief outline? I'd be interested to know, cheers

watty · 08-03-2012 7:29pm

RTE NL is the main Irish distribution company. RTE, TG4, TV3 pay for DTT carriage on the same basis. They also rent masts and other facilities to Independent Radio, RTE Radio, Wireless Internet, Mobile Phone & Eircom links. Arqiva is similar in UK. The Government insisted on the creation of RTENL around 1999 to 2001 and has been trying to get RTE to sell it (no-one is buying rather than RTE not selling) since about 2001. IMO it should be combined with eNet and ESB networks under permanent state control. The UK was crazy to privatise the IBA and BBC transmitters.

There is a MAJOR difference between RTENL and Sky/UPC. Sky & UPC are Pay TV providers. Sky has no distribution & transmission, nor owns any of the boxes. UPC own ALL the customer boxes and probably all of their distribution and "transmission" system. Sky really only sell subscriptions. Sky Sports and Sky News have limited production. Ideally Sky & UPC should be forbidden to own channels.

Eutelsat and Astra do Sky & Freesat Transmission on a similar basis to RTENL DTT. RTENL Saorsat is on a similar basis to BT, Arqiva, RRsat or other reselling of leased Satellite space.

Unlike Sky/UPC the RTENL only provides Transmission (like Arqiva in UK or SES-Astra and Eutelsat on Satellite). They don't interact at all with viewers/listeners and ALL RTENL transmission is Free To Air and un-encrypted.

Sky & UPC provide sell Pay TV.

MarkK · 08-03-2012 8:34pm

mickko wrote: »

I've outlined already why I believe RTE should be available, to the Irish license payer, and on as many platforms as possible, including cable and sat for free.

This is a contradiction surely?
If Sky have to pay a per subscription fee, that fee will inevitably be passed on to the consumer.
That means Sky subscribers will be paying more to watch RTE than their neighbours watching on Saorview.

It would be great if the UKs Ofcom would get tough with Sky about what they charge cable companies, but the way Murdoch holds British politicians in his thrall I would not hold out much hope of that happening.

mad muffin · 08-03-2012 9:13pm

So in a nutshell, we don't really know if Sky will have RTE 2 HD…

twinklerunner · 08-03-2012 9:30pm

mad muffin wrote: »

So in a nutshell, we don't really know if Sky will have RTE 2 HD…

watty · 08-03-2012 10:16pm

Of course Sky will have RTE2 HD

When Sky are ready ...

watty · 08-03-2012 10:19pm

MarkK wrote: »

That means Sky subscribers will be [are] paying more to watch RTE than their neighbours watching on Saorview.

B]My Edit[/B

Of course Sky or UPC customers pay more to watch RTE, BBC etc. 90% of Sky or UPC customer viewing is Free Channels, Channels FTA on Freesat or Saorview.

People choose to have Pay TV. It's poor value in terms of viewing time vs money of the channels that are Pay TV only.

MarkK · 08-03-2012 10:42pm

watty wrote: »

B]My Edit[/B

Of course Sky or UPC customers pay more to watch RTE, BBC etc. 90% of Sky or UPC customer viewing is Free Channels, Channels FTA on Freesat or Saorview.

People choose to have Pay TV. It's poor value in terms of viewing time vs money of the channels that are Pay TV only.

Thanks Watty, good point.

I meant to say, Sky and UPC customers would be paying more to RTE (Licence fee + extra fee as part of their Pay TV subscription) than their Saorview neighbours (Licence fee only)

The Cush · 08-03-2012 11:54pm

watty wrote: »

The Government insisted on the creation of RTENL around 1999 to 2001 and has been trying to get RTE to sell it (no-one is buying rather than RTE not selling) since about 2001.

RTÉNL was created out of the failed sale of 68% of RTÉ's network division (Netco) in late 2002. There were 3 final bidders but the price had dropped from approx €70m to €20-30m by the time "ItsTV" withdrew its bid for the multiplex licence. At that time the network sale was cancelled.

mickko · 09-03-2012 12:04am

MarkK wrote: »

I meant to say, Sky and UPC customers would be paying more to RTE (Licence fee + extra fee as part of their Pay TV subscription) than their Saorview neighbours (Licence fee only)

But UPC/Sky customers are already paying this "extra fee as part of their Pay TV subscription" and UPC/Sky pay nothing. No matter what way it's dressed up, the customer pays. There's just no clarity on exactly what they are paying.

I'm suggesting adding a royalty under the current circumstances under which RTE is distributed over these platforms

OR.......

If the carrier receives them for free, then the terms are that the carrier delivers them truly free, which in the case of cable, is possible and proven.

I favour the latter, because I feel every (license paying) citizen of the state should be entitled to the easiest possible access to the state's PSB.

If they can't provide them truly free, they pay a royalty, and needless to say, operate only under regulation in any scenario.

Either of these scenarios have clarity and make sheer common sense.
It's one or the other. But the current arrangement is rotten, particularly in Sky's case where they not only get them free, but enjoy unregulation and exploitation as a bonus.

MarkK · 09-03-2012 12:15am

mickko wrote: »

But UPC/Sky customers are already paying this "extra fee as part of their Pay TV subscription" and UPC/Sky pay nothing. No matter what way it's dressed up, the customer pays. There's just no clarity on exactly what they are paying.

No, they are not paying this extra fee (fee to RTE), they are paying extra compared to the UK but that money does not go to RTE.

If the RTE fee were implemented why wouldn't Irish subscribers continue to pay more (than the UK) to Sky plus the extra fee to RTE on top?
There would be no extra clarity, just extra cost for the subscriber.

maggy_thatcher · 09-03-2012 12:26am

watty wrote: »

Ideally Sky & UPC should be forbidden to own channels.

What's the difference between Sky/UPC owning their own channels in addition to transmitting them, and newspaper companies owning their own printing presses?

MarkK · 09-03-2012 12:28am

mickko wrote: »

If the carrier receives them for free, then the terms are that the carrier delivers them truly free, which in the case of cable, is possible and proven.

Is it proven? What country has this system?
How is it fair for a cable company to provide service to non subscribers?
Are they expected to provide customer service and maintain cables for free?

In reality they will have to hike the price for subscribers to cover the costs.

mickko wrote: »

Either of these scenarios have clarity and make sheer common sense.

I don't think it makes common sense at all.

maggy_thatcher · 09-03-2012 12:40am

One option Sky have, that would probably work for about 90% of their subscribers, is to do what they do in Italy - they have the "Sky Digital Key" which plugs into the decoder box, allowing you to receive the DVB-T broadcasts into the regular planner/PVR capabilities of the Sky box. Then they could stop broadcasting RTÉ altogether, while still providing the rest of the features of their system.

Except for those of us who don't have a decent rooftop aerial, this is probably the best of both worlds option that could be provided.

mickko · 09-03-2012 12:43am

MarkK wrote: »

No, they are not paying this extra fee (fee to RTE), they are paying extra compared to the UK but that money does not go to RTE.

That's what I mean. RTE are getting nothing but supply them free, and UPC/SKY are profiting from something that should be free, but isn't.

No matter what way you look at it, you have to pay either company for access.

So if it's really free, supply it truly free.
If its not, pay a royalty/contribution.

BTW, this would be a considerably small fee, just like what Cable ops pay for BBC, C4, etc..

maggy_thatcher · 09-03-2012 12:50am

mickko wrote: »

That's what I mean. RTE are getting nothing but supply them free, and UPC/SKY are profiting from something that should be free, but isn't.

They are only supplying it to people who already have a right to access the content already, but either can't (because of aerial/reception issues), or want a better user experience (e.g. built in PVR). We've already paid for our access once to RTÉ, why should somebody else have to pay for it as well? That doesn't make any sense.

Paying for the right to distribute something to people who already have paid for the right to access seems weird. It's certainly not a "royalty" - that's normally for the right to use something that hasn't already been paid for.

mickko · 09-03-2012 12:52am

MarkK wrote: »

Is it proven? What country has this system?
How is it fair for a cable company to provide service to non subscribers?
Are they expected to provide customer service and maintain cables for free?

It's in use on cable ops in several European countries, in an unencrypted format carrying the PSB's. There's a link to UPCs Czech Republic page.
Although I don't know if it's truly free by hooking up non paying subs, I've outlined reasonable suggestions how this could work on a previous post on this thread.
Go back a couple of pages and you'll find somewhere. Should cover all you're queries.

mickko · 09-03-2012 1:05am

maggy_thatcher wrote: »

They are only supplying it to people who already have a right to access the content already, but either can't (because of aerial/reception issues), or want a better user experience (e.g. built in PVR). We've already paid for our access once to RTÉ, why should somebody else have to pay for it as well? That doesn't make any sense.

Surely you don't think that Sky or UPC are not profiting from the free use of RTE on their nets.
Granted, there's no direct charge, but the customers are been charged for them, and paying.
Sky in particular are doing a bomb thanks to RTE carriage.

As one poster correctly pointed out earlier in the thread, having RTE is as important as the Premier league rights. Yet they pay nothing for them.

maggy_thatcher · 09-03-2012 9:37am

mickko wrote: »

Surely you don't think that Sky or UPC are not profiting from the free use of RTE on their nets.
Granted, there's no direct charge, but the customers are been charged for them, and paying.

I do think that Sky/UPC are profiting from the free use of RTÉ on their nets, but similarly, I don't think that DHL should give a kickback to Amazon every time somebody buys something from them, which is the same thing.

I pay RTÉ for their content, and Sky for the carriage of that content. Why should Sky be obligated to pay a second time for the content?

I believe that were RTÉ to turn around and start charging Sky for it, Sky would do one of two things:

Pass the charge on to customers who want RTÉ from Sky (maybe make it an optional extra package)
Use a DVB-T USB key the same way that they do in Italy to avoid the whole thing, and pass the buck of carriage of RTÉ to RTÉNL

mickko · 09-03-2012 1:06pm

maggy_thatcher wrote: »

Pass the charge on to customers who want RTÉ from Sky (maybe make it an optional extra package)

This would certainly never happen.
RTE is the golden egg in Sky's basket, and they would not want to jeopardize the manner in which it's included as standard with any pack.

Personally I feel Sky would gladly absorb any reasonable fee to keep this scenario going.

chris_ie · 09-03-2012 4:09pm

So you can now get RTE HD via Saorview for free if you want RTE. Therefore people cant complain about having to pay Sky in order to get it. Those who want sport, movies etc can still get Sky. I dont have Saorview (I have SkyHD) so I'd love RTE HD to come on Sky, although I don't watch it an that much. But I don't see the problem. You'd think Sky were the only way to receive the channel and they were charging you massively for it...

Markdub2000 · 11-03-2012 1:35am

The subscribtion price didn't change when they added RTE, therefore, they are not charging anything additional for it.

The reason RTE are on the platform now, is as a previous poster mentioned, the decline of advertising revenue at RTE due to their absence on the platform.

With the ability to control epg line up and channels, sky and others were able to stream dubplicate channels to different card regions with regional advertising.

It started to eat heavily into rte's revenue stream as market research indicated people did not switch platforms during normal viewing, i.e. if you were using a sky box, you were highly unlikely to switch to terrestrial tv, unless there was a significant event on.

RTE found it had to worm its way onto the platform.

Hopefully Saorview and Saorsat will fix the gap - RTE for Saorview, Sky for Sky, in my opinion RTE are not worthy of their present position on the epg, or the platform for that matter.

The good news is that they are now FREE on Saor Sat and Saor view - there is no longer a need for their presence on sky, but I bet their advertisers will have a different opinion if they were pulled.

watty · 11-03-2012 10:09am

RTE gets highest viewing figures in Ireland.
82% of people have Pay TV (UPC, Sky and some smaller ones).

So your post is unfounded.

pegasus1 · 11-03-2012 11:03pm

Are sky not setting up their own call center here, dropping the 3rd party icall center in cork.
And if so won't they then have to pay Irish vat for Irish subscriptions, being that will have to set up a sky Ireland company?

muffler · 11-03-2012 11:40pm

From reading previous posts I dont believe anyone knows for sure where Sky pay there VAT at present.

The Cush · 11-03-2012 11:59pm

This from an Oireachtas Committee discussion back in 2008

Senator Joe O’Toole: ... I have written to RTE many times and Mr. Goan will be pleased to hear that I have a letter ready to go to the Chairman of the committee. It says that the amount of VAT that Irish people are paying to Sky for satellite is €100 million, all of which is going to the UK and only because RTE has done a deal with Sky preventing any other provider——

Mr. Cathal Goan: That is absolutely wrong.

Senator Joe O’Toole: I would be happy to be contradicted. The fact that Sky is the only company that can provide RTE on satellite is depriving this jurisdiction of €100 million in VAT. Many people receive satellite because of the better reception and would like to receive RTE in this way. Money that would go to the State is being lost. RTE is at the end of its contract with the providers, Sky, and there should be an open market in providing free-to-air satellite access to RTE, TV3 and TG4.

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/MAJ/2008/11/05/00003.asp

lawhec · 12-03-2012 12:24am

Because of the nature of such deals requiring commercial confidentiality between Sky and the likes of MTV, Discovery, UKTV etc. along with RTÉ, TV3 and TG4, no one in the public domain can really know what exactly is stated in the terms between the Irish (Republic) terrestrial broadcasters and their agreement to be broadcast on the Sky platform.

The only thing that is known is that Sky rent capacity from SES Astra to broadcast the four respective channels to subscribers and that there is other, non-Irish content on that transponder as well. This is unlike the UK PSBs of the BBC, ITV Network, Channel 4 and Channel 5 who directly negotiate with SES Astra and Eutelsat for capacity and then deal with Sky and Freesat for EPG placement.

Since RTÉ1, RTÉ2, TV3 and TG4 all appeared on Sky at around the same time, it may be possible that there are clauses in the respective contracts that cannot be changed unless all parties involved agree - for example, RTÉ may well wish to offer Sky RTÉ2 HD for the platform, but TV3 have a clause allowing them to object to any new RTÉ TV services appearing for the remainder of the period of the deal (before anyone starts, this is hypothetical - I am not saying that TV3 actually are blocking it!). Another one could be that Sky are interested in carrying RTÉ2 HD, but RTÉ insist that if they want to, it should be available all subscribers without the additional HD charge of €15 (as is the case in the UK with the PSB channels in HD and BBC HD) and as the current deal doesn't give specific clauses, it's deadlock.

Might also be the case that RTÉ would also want carriage of RTÉ1 +1, RTÉ Jr & News Now etc. We can only guess until press releases are made or leaks get into the wild.

mickko · 12-03-2012 12:24am

€100 million! Per Annum?
Does this mean the total amount leaving the state per annum is about half a billion?!

twinklerunner · 12-03-2012 12:39am

mickko wrote: »

€100 million! Per Annum?
Does this mean the total amount leaving the state per annum is about half a billion?!

How does 100 million equal half a billion?

byte · 12-03-2012 12:45am

twinklerunner wrote: »

How does 100 million equal half a billion?

He's including the whole subscription fee, not just the 100m VAT at 20%.

So yeah, 500m is leaving the country, 400m to Sky, 100m to UK Exchequer.

John mac · 12-03-2012 12:49am

if 100 mil = 20% 100% would = ?

Edit:- Beaten to it

200motels · 14-03-2012 7:46pm

I see that UPC are getting RTE2HD tomorrow, I'll bet Sky will have it soon.

Gonzo · 14-03-2012 8:51pm

Any word on when RTE will switch to HD broadcasting on most of it's programming across both channels, such as news, documentarys and live tv broadcasts?

Ranicand · 15-03-2012 12:50am

200motels wrote: »

I see that UPC are getting RTE2HD tomorrow, I'll bet Sky will have it soon.

I bet you they don't.

I switched to Sky last year I was fed up after UPC lost the ITV channels.

UPC now have the ITV channels and now the extra RTE channels plus a better EPG running order.

However Sky has way more HD.

I always feel I am missing out no-matter what provider I pick.:)

STB · 15-03-2012 1:24am

lawhec wrote: »

Another one could be that Sky are interested in carrying RTÉ2 HD, but RTÉ insist that if they want to, it should be available all subscribers without the additional HD charge of €15 (as is the case in the UK with the PSB channels in HD and BBC HD) and as the current deal doesn't give specific clauses, it's deadlock.

Might also be the case that RTÉ would also want carriage of RTÉ1 +1, RTÉ Jr & News Now etc. We can only guess until press releases are made or leaks get into the wild.

This is the basis of the must carry rule under Section 77 of the Broadcasting Act having passed must offer. Sky in this instance must pick up all carriage costs. They cant be recovered from the subscriber!

Broadcasting Act 2009 Section 77 (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.

Good question about the pick and choose scenario that may arise.

(4)An appropriate network provider shall re-transmit each national sound broadcasting service provided for the time being by RTÉ and each sound broadcasting contractor and which RTÉ or the contractor concerned requests the holder to so re-transmit.

franciec · 14-05-2012 12:14pm

Supposed to be launching today.

http://www.siliconrepublic.com/new-media/item/27191-rt-two-hd-to-launch-today/

No sign on my EPG yet, maybe it'll appear later on.

Johnboy1951 · 14-05-2012 2:57pm

Originally Posted by lawhec
Another one could be that Sky are interested in carrying RTÉ2 HD, but RTÉ insist that if they want to, it should be available all subscribers without the additional HD charge of €15 (as is the case in the UK with the PSB channels in HD and BBC HD) and as the current deal doesn't give specific clauses, it's deadlock.

Might also be the case that RTÉ would also want carriage of RTÉ1 +1, RTÉ Jr & News Now etc. We can only guess until press releases are made or leaks get into the wild.

From what I read RTÉ have the right to insist that each of their FTA channels are carried.

STB wrote: »

This is the basis of the must carry rule under Section 77 of the Broadcasting Act having passed must offer. Sky in this instance must pick up all carriage costs. They cant be recovered from the subscriber!

Broadcasting Act 2009 Section 77 (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.

Good question about the pick and choose scenario that may arise.

(4)An appropriate network provider shall re-transmit each national sound broadcasting service provided for the time being by RTÉ and each sound broadcasting contractor and which RTÉ or the contractor concerned requests the holder to so re-transmit.

I understand that to refer to audio (radio) broadcasts and not TV.

It is showing as (6) on the copy I accessed

Where a retransmission under must offer/must carry occurs, it appears that the re-transmitter must also carry other channels such as the Houses of the Oireachtas Channel and the Irish Film Channel as well as possibly some community channels, if appropriate.

The act clearly indicates that EACH FTA channel must be carried

Sect. 77

(4) An appropriate network provider shall ensure the re-transmission, by or through his or her appropriate network, of each freeto-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 which that body or contractor requests the appropriate network provider to so re-transmit.

The interpretation of this part is what really interests me .....

(11) Without prejudice to the requirements imposed under subsection (4), RTE´ , 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.

I am not sure how the emboldened part should/could be interpreted.

For instance is it discriminatory that a Sky subscriber, whose sub has lapsed, cannot access the FTA Irish channels using the same equipment which was used while his sub was current?

MarkK · 14-05-2012 3:11pm

Sky is regulated in the UK not here, so they do not need to abide by the Broadcasting Act 2009.

Whether or not RTE 2 SD and RTE 2 HD are two "services" or one is debatable.
Saorview and Saorsat only provide one version of RTE 2, to me that implies there is only one "RTE 2" service, not two.

Johnboy1951 · 14-05-2012 3:17pm

MarkK wrote: »

Sky is regulated in the UK not here, so they do not need to abide by the Broadcasting Act 2009.

It is my understanding that Sky gets access to the Irish channels under the terms of the Broadcasting Act ...... and so they must be governed by the terms of that act where applicable.

Whether or not RTE 2 SD and RTE 2 HD are two "services" or one is debatable.
Saorview and Saorsat only provide one version of RTE 2, to me that implies there is only one "RTE 2" service, not two.

icdg · 14-05-2012 7:25pm

Thread closed. No dragging up old threads and NO MORE THREADS ON RTE TWO HD PLEASE.

is RTE 2 HD Coming To Sky?

Comments