ITV FTA decision: Not before April...

byte

Yeah, seems so indeed!

djpaul

Colm80 wrote:

Looks like this saga is going to go on and on.

Yep!, not a good start to the new year.

I dunno.
[Hopefull]

The article is saying ITV want to pay the same as the BBC pay for EPG regionalisation for the encryption of ITV1...

Theres a hint there somewhere.

[/Hopefull]

Charles Slane

Yes. If they're talking about getting a similar deal to the Beeb's , then they must be only haggling about the price of regionalisation, not the price of encryption. That sounds positive to me.

channelsurfer

Ya i agree with charles it looks positive but if sky are forced to give them the deal for 4million then they might throw in encrytion as part of it so it may not be so positive either way it looks like it will take another 4 months to sort out so dont expect them to go fta until then.

Ulsterman 1690

Surely even if the programme rights holders started demanding more money if ITV went free to air the increaced audience and advertising revenue would offset the cost since Ireland is an important secondary market for most of ITV's advertisers

SkepticOne

Ulsterman 1690 wrote:

Surely even if the programme rights holders started demanding more money if ITV went free to air the increaced audience and advertising revenue would offset the cost since Ireland is an important secondary market for most of ITV's advertisers

But whatever is gained by the regional ITV's would be lost by UTV which is already available to most homes in Ireland via cable and MMDS.

I think UTV would have most to lose by an FTA ITV as a lot of their advertising is specifically targetted at the South. The other regional ITVs FTAs would gain a little but many of their advertisers (such as financial and insurance products) would not be interested in Irish advertising since their products aren't available here. Total advertising revenue would go down a little, I think.

However, overall, I think the FTA thing is only a bargaining ploy with ITV against Sky. The fact that they are going the regulatory route probably means that Sky have called their bluff on this. (imho)

Mossy Monk

SkepticOne wrote:

I think UTV would have most to lose by an FTA ITV as a lot of their advertising is specifically targetted at the South

i disagree as it isnt available on Sky in this country anyway

most of those on cable will watch it on cable anyway imo

Brian017

So really what you're all saying is that you don't having a effing clue?

DMC

Hold on while I contact Madam Zsa-Zsa to see if she can mind-read ITV executives. :rolleyes:

Yes, we are still in the land of wonder, but these are people's opinions on how it will pan out based on the facts (or the MediaGuardian's version of fact!) And dont say we dont have an effing' clue either... we've been right more times than we've been wrong!

Brian017

Not really

shoegirl

Charles Slane wrote:

Maybe if NTL make a big deal about the availability of the BBC channels and ITV, Channel 4 etc, Sky will eventually realise that they should put them on the EPG and/or negotiate carriage deals to attract more subscribers.....

No use for somebody living outside an NTL or Chorus area - which is a huge chunk of the country.

Until Chorus, NTL plus alternate operators start offering a nationwide alternative to SKY then Sky will have a captive audience in much of Ireland. I live an an area of Cork where the local MMDS deflector for Chorus is blocked by a forest, and the local terrestrial signal is unwatchable. The result is that 100% of all homes in the estate have to use Sky in order to get ANY tv at all.

Now I am sure this is not an uncommon occurence up and down the country, not to mention in areas where neither NTL nor Chorus operate. Its surprising that Comreg can attack eircom for market failure for broadband whilst ignoring the market failure for multichannel TV - which has far higher demand than broadband every will, judging by the takeup rate for Sky versus the takeup rate for broadband services.

Tony

It must also be asked why cable companies were very granted exclusive franchise areas in the first place. Eircom has been forced to open up its network why not the cable companies?

shoegirl

Tony wrote:

It must also be asked why cable companies were very granted exclusive franchise areas in the first place. Eircom has been forced to open up its network why not the cable companies?

Two word answer: Ray Burke (I don't think that takes much figuring out).

See http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/1998/05/30/ihead.htm for extensive details of this issue.

The main reason none of the companies have been forced to open up their networks is because nobody has extensive enough a network to force them to open up. However at the same time nobody has been encouraged to broaden coverage, and no new providers have been invited to take up the slack in parts of the country with no MMDS or cable coverage.

The eircom situation is slightly different as eircom has universal coverage.
Ironically the initial spat over broadband and eircoms initial witholding of broadband from the public was due to a dispute over eircoms rights to broadcast digital tv over the network. Ironically this would have given alternatives to existing services to many users who are currently faced with Sky Digital or nothing at all.

KeithMur

Its amazing, when I had sky and terr. aerial in an old apartment, I didn't even watch UTV or CH4. Now since only sky in new house, all i hear is "did you see... on utv last night." Would love to see progress between Rupert and the channels

Tony

shoegirl wrote:

Two word answer: Ray Burke (I don't think that takes much figuring out).

Yeah I knew about the Ray Burke thing but every time I talk about it I get libellous

legend99

Can I ask what might be an insane question. Everyone thinks RTE should be RTA over satelitte as many of us have poor to shocking terrestrial reception. But there is a problem because of rights. So one suggestion was for RTE to be FTA for all programmes where they would not have rights issues, which would be mostly news and current affairs but would be better than nothing.

But heres something I was thinking of.....why can't they do the UK equivilent and launch some kind of free to view card that you are entitled to buy say annualy or bi-annually when you renew your TV licence provided you have proof of your Irish address. Same as the £20 free sat cards in the UK....wouldn't this be at least a start for those of us who have to get bloody Sky in just to watch RTE1???

robert muldoon

What happens on Jan 20th - This a thread on Digital Spy

There is still an opinion over there (UK) that ITV might go FTA on 20 th Jan

Brian017

We hope.

Eurorunner

why can't they do the UK equivilent and launch some kind of free to view card that you are entitled to buy say annualy or bi-annually when you renew your TV licence

This would be great - cos all of those who opt out shouldnt have to pay for a shággin' TV license then

Colm80

robert muldoon wrote:

What happens on Jan 20th - This a thread on Digital Spy

There is still an opinion over there (UK) that ITV might go FTA on 20 th Jan

I read that ok but it depends how quick OFCOM deal with the complaint ITV lodged with them.

DMC

I reckon OFCOM will deal with this quickly, they (the ITC as it was) did deal quickly with a BBC complaint with Sky around the time of the BBC going FTA.

Tom Dunne

legend99 wrote:

why can't they do the UK equivilent and launch some kind of free to view card that you are entitled to buy say annualy or bi-annually when you renew your TV licence provided you have proof of your Irish address. Same as the £20 free sat cards in the UK....wouldn't this be at least a start for those of us who have to get bloody Sky in just to watch RTE1???

Because RTE neither have the initiative, incentive nor the cash to provide such a service.

JTMan

DMC wrote:

I reckon OFCOM will deal with this quickly, they (the ITC as it was) did deal quickly with a BBC complaint with Sky around the time of the BBC going FTA.

OFCOM will respond in early May ...

Article from Brand Republic:
http://www.brandrepublic.com/mediabulletin/news_story.cfm?articleID=231888&Origin=MB10012005

ITV could join forces with BBC as Sky deal breaks down

LONDON – ITV is set to work with terrestrial rival the BBC on a possible free-to-air satellite service after complaining to Ofcom about Sky's carriage charges, which saw it pay £17m last time.

ITV is holding talks with the BBC about launching its programmes on a free satellite service after complaining to media regulator Ofcom that Sky is overcharging the network by millions of pounds.

ITV insists the encryption fee it pays Sky should be more like the £4m rate the BBC pays, instead of the £13m-£15m offer currently on the table.

The proposed service, which users can take up after paying a one-off fee, could offer more channels than the 30 currently on Freeview and could also target areas where digital signals are limited -- making it a financially viable operation.

The service would operate in addition to Freeview and could seriously dent Sky's ambition of winning 10m customers.

Ofcom's investigation will take until early May to complete and ITV is under obligation to its viewers to look for new ways to broadcast its channels.

BSkyB launched its free-to-air satellite service FreeSat, which offers viewers 140 channels for a one-off payment of £150, in October. The service was launched to rival the BBC's Freeview service, which is already in more than 4m British homes.

BSkyB has high hopes for the free satellite service, which it believes will be an important source of subscriber revenue in years to come.

Colm80

And does any one think ITV will hold out for another 5 months.

Macy

tom dunne wrote:

Because RTE neither have the initiative, incentive nor the cash to provide such a service.

If all the FTA channels were on the epg, I think RTE could get away with charging enough that it would at least self financing. It would bug the crap out of me to have to pay for them on top of the licence fee, but the cable/MMDS areas show that there is a market for good quality reception of the Irish Channels, along with a selection of English stations (BBC and ITV hopefully). Some people won't tie themselves to a contract for sky, but would pay a bi-annual fee (for example) for the extra quality/channels

Macy

Colm80 wrote:

And does any one think ITV will hold out for another 5 months.

Well they've already held out for 2 additional months from November....

DMC

They may have signed up for another 2 months under the terms of the existing agreement, but that two month extension is the equivilant of almost £3m stg, they dont want to do that again for longer.

maisflocke

Fungus - Brand Republic article wrote:

http://www.brandrepublic.com/mediabulletin/news_story.cfm?articleID=231888&Origin=MB10012005

"ITV insists the encryption fee it pays Sky should be more like the £4m rate the BBC pays, instead of the £13m-£15m offer currently on the table."

That is a very poor report.

So, the BBC pay BSkyB £4m encryption fees then? even though they broadcast in the clear?

Doh!

Colm80

maisflocke wrote:

That is a very poor report.

So, the BBC pay BSkyB £4m encryption fees then? even though they broadcast in the clear?

Doh!

They only pay sky to be on the epg not for encryption.