UTV is now available free-to-air on digital satellite*

Pal

This is the Ad as it appears in today's newspaper. (Metro page 10)

UTV is now available free-to-air on digital satellite*

*UTV available without subscription. It is not provided by Sky: its availability is outside Sky's control. Manual tuning of your box required. Correct at print (December 2005).

Seems fair enough to me.


Now on the topic of ads, the clearly false RTE advertisement about RTE Free To Air Sport is still running. This bugs me because I have to pay for RTE (license and sub). There is nothing free about it.

Tony

Why not make a complaint to the advertising standards authority for Ireland?

BrianD

Pal wrote:

This is the Ad as it appears in today's newspaper. (Metro page 10)

UTV is now available free-to-air on digital satellite*

*UTV available without subscription. It is not provided by Sky: its availability is outside Sky's control. Manual tuning of your box required. Correct at print (December 2005).

Seems fair enough to me.


Now on the topic of ads, the clearly false RTE advertisement about RTE Free To Air Sport is still running. This bugs me because I have to pay for RTE (license and sub). There is nothing free about it.

RTE is Free To Air. There is no doubt about that whatsoever. The fact that you choose to pay for your RTE signal to delivered to your home via a commercial digital satellite platform is a separate issue.

In any case in house promos (unless they involve a commercial sponsor) don't constitute an advertisement for the purposes of the Advertising Standards.

watty

The Licence is an old Chestnut in all countries with a TV Licence:
1) A large proportion of Licence DOES go to RTE
2) The licence is a quite legal tax on viewing ANY TV stations at all. Via Aerial, Broadband, MMDS, Cable or Satellite. (clips and archive material via broadband does not count as TV, but a live feed of any TV station (even foreign) does.)

3) You can choose not to have TV at all, and pay no licence. But part of cost of RTE and other stations is in the big brand name products (esp. Kellogs, Coca Cola, Beers, Washing powers etc). Even if you don't watch ANY TV you still pay.
4) Being in receipt of TV licence funds makes RTE liable to do "Public Service" important stuff they otherwise would not do.

I can choose to watch RTE sport or not at no extra cost if I am entitled to watch ANY TV.

IF RTE charged 50 Euro a year for a FTV card on Sky it would qualify still is as Free on Satellite (technically).

I agree it is a disaster that the ONLY universally available Digital platform does not have FTA or FTV Irish TV. However RTE sport is free via an aerial and they have a lot better terrestrial coverage than TV3.

Tony

BrianD wrote:

In any case in house promos (unless they involve a commercial sponsor) don't constitute an advertisement for the purposes of the Advertising Standards.

Its in a newspaper Brian, how does this not constitute advertising?

watty

If it's in a newspaper it isn't in house.

Even promos in house can't be misleading or dishonest.

But technically RTE are correct.

From their own point of view they regard Sky as a "wireless cable". TO RTE the idea you can have Satellite WITHOUT a subscription is a mystry they don't understand. I have discussed it with them.

Tony

I dunno Watty, the term "Free to air" only came into being with the advent of satellite so how they can use it to describe programs delivered terrestrially is questionable especially since they themselves are not free on satellite. If anyone has the time I'm sure the ASAI would be happy to clarify this for us. When NTL (cablelink) last desribed a program as "live and exclusive" they lost the case.

BrianD

Tony wrote:

Its in a newspaper Brian, how does this not constitute advertising?

I thought you were referring to the RTE Sport Free To Air promos that they were running on RTE during the summer. I hadn't noticed their adverts in the press. As I said, there is absolutely no question that RTE is actually free to air. All the same, I would suggest that they are making a play on the term "free to air" that is generally not understood by the audience at large. The use of the term is correct as the sports content is available without the payment of a subscription and even without paying a TV licence.

Watty - Sky Digital is a delivery platform that's why you pay for it? The channel selection and whatever added value they offer. It's no different to a CATV company where you pay a sub. Why would it be any different? Obviously, D-sat is a newer platform (and not regulated here) so the rules are slightly different. The channel is available free once you subscribe to the right delivery package. I can never understand why satellite subscribers can not grasp that concept.

To be honest, unless there is some dramatic changes in technology and commercial rights, the chances of RTE going FTA via satellite are nil. I think that this is universally understood.

Tony

BrianD wrote:

I thought you were referring to the RTE Sport Free To Air promos that they were running on RTE during the summer. I hadn't noticed their adverts in the press. As I said, there is absolutely no question that RTE is actually free to air. All the same, I would suggest that they are making a play on the term "free to air" that is generally not understood by the audience at large. The use of the term is correct as the sports content is available without the payment of a subscription and even without paying a TV licence.

.

No the original post referred to the metro newspaper about ITV but RTE have run newspaper ads although not recently although I can see how you might have gotten that impression Brian having read back. My apologies for not making that clear. I see Sky have also modified their ads so I think they are just as guilty of misrepreentation. . I agree with you they are making a play with wording on this as most people who contact enquiring about satellite tv me are astounded when I tell them that RTE is not free on satellite and some have referred to the RTE ad's as their reason for thinking that as well as it being obviously free terrestrially.

BrianD

The OP dis say "on the topic of advertising" so I assumed they were no longer referring to the print advert (also in todays Irish Times).

I was a bit surprised to see Sky Digital promoting "off platform" channels. One wonders what the future of Sky Digital, the consumer orientated platform is? It seems now that they are now moving into promoting D-Sat as a generic platform as well as their own platform. In my view without the terrestrials on-board they are doomed in the long run. NTL would be in the same boat if they lost the terrestrials as well. All the extra channels are wonderful but they are extras on top of the primary channels. It will also be interesting to see how the niche channels react as well. Most of these channels have relied on being available alongside the big players. Now that the anchor tennants are gone will the small shops survive?

I seems that consumers can understand that CATV is a delivery service that you pay for why can't the grasp the same for satellite delivery. It's not that satellite delivery has had a history of being free (unless you were an enthusiast) and the only mass market satellite delivery service that has fired up consumers is Sky Digital.

watty

BrianD wrote:

Watty - Sky Digital is a delivery platform that's why you pay for it? The channel selection and whatever added value they offer. It's no different to a CATV company where you pay a sub. Why would it be any different? Obviously, D-sat is a newer platform (and not regulated here) so the rules are slightly different. The channel is available free once you subscribe to the right delivery package. I can never understand why satellite subscribers can not grasp that concept.

To be honest, unless there is some dramatic changes in technology and commercial rights, the chances of RTE going FTA via satellite are nil. I think that this is universally understood.

Can't see RTE being FTA or FTV on Satellite. It's not about technology but RTE.

Frequently and mostly I don't pay for any Satellite TV.

I have one analog receiver, 2 x digiboxs a motorised FTA system and 4 satellite LNBs on a PC Sat card.

Satellite unlike Cable is more than Subscription. If it works without a subscription on Satellite it is Free To Air or Free to View.

RTE is NOT free on satellite, as unlike BBC, ITV, Euronews, and 100s of TV and 70 radio you only get ti if your subscribe.

If it was a court case I think it might depend on how good RTE lawyers are. It *IS* misleading to describe RTE sport as "Free to Air".

maisflocke

BrianD wrote:

The channel is available free once you subscribe to the right delivery package. I can never understand why satellite subscribers can not grasp that concept.

I dont grasp your logic there Brian!

Once you pay for something, its free. But if you dont pay for something, you cant have it. So, one needs to pay to see something for free which in return means its not free really is it??!!??

Thats not a concept, thats a farce

Genghis

BrianD wrote:

The channel is available free once you subscribe to the right delivery package. I can never understand why satellite subscribers can not grasp that concept.

Thats the same logic that suggest that Sky Sports cost "only" €10 a month (or whatever). The point is that that charge is on top of what you paty for a qualifying basic package. The €10 is usually on top of a basic €50 charge.

In economist terms the marginal cost of receiving RTE, once you pay for a basic package, is zero. The actual cost of receiving RTE is the cost of the basic package. Therefore it is not "Free to Air" on satellite.

However, RTE is indisputably Free to Air to over 90% of the populaiton via terrestrial, so I would suggest they can defend their advertising claim.

BrianD

watty wrote:

Can't see RTE being FTA or FTV on Satellite. It's not about technology but RTE.

Frequently and mostly I don't pay for any Satellite TV.

I have one analog receiver, 2 x digiboxs a motorised FTA system and 4 satellite LNBs on a PC Sat card.

Satellite unlike Cable is more than Subscription. If it works without a subscription on Satellite it is Free To Air or Free to View.

RTE is NOT free on satellite, as unlike BBC, ITV, Euronews, and 100s of TV and 70 radio you only get ti if your subscribe.

If it was a court case I think it might depend on how good RTE lawyers are. It *IS* misleading to describe RTE sport as "Free to Air".

When I mentioned technology I meant that unless there is some way of restricting RTE's signal to the RoI it will never be FTA on satellite. The simple resaon is that they can't afford to. Firstly, their GAA sports coverage would be gone (unless they bid for international rights) and that's something that would be a 'must have' for many living abroad. Secondly, they could never afford the increased programming rights charges. At the moment the pay for a market of 4 million people (lets assume everybody watches TV) with a preferential treatment on many series i.e. first showing. RTE simply could not afford the jump to pay rights to pay for 60 million people (UK + Ireland). A slimmed down version like Tara TV (probably launched before its time) might work but it would be of narrow appeal when compared with the RTE1 & 2 offering.

Free to Air may have started as a satellite term but it is now a general TV term particularly with the expansion of digital cable and terrestrial.

How come CATV subscribers don't kick up about the FTA or do satellite subscribers just have a chip on their shoulder?

Mossy Monk

do you really think that satellite and cable are the same thing?

watty

Cable is a Pay only system. Always has been and always will be.

Satellite is a mix of pay and free channels. In many countries there has ALWAYS been a good basic selection free, typically including those that come via aerial.

Sky would have liked Satellite to be regarded as "Wireless Cable". But it isn't and BBC Greg Dyke was determined that it would not be a pay only platform locked to Sky in the UK.

Satellite now makes much more economic sense than Cable or Terrestrial TV.

More use should be made of communal FTA and Pay TV systems. One dish per apartment block.

BrianD

Mossy Monk wrote:

do you really think that satellite and cable are the same thing?

What's the relevance of your question? Of course they are different in that they use different technologies and while cable is essentially a closed system, satellite can be open or closed. However, for the purpose of this discussion we are looking at Sky Digital as a TV delivery platform just like NTL is a delivery platform. Essentially from the consumers (the average consumer) point of view they are competing delivery platforms i.e. the same thing.

watty

That sound like a view from Montrose. Or from an NTL / Chorus user.

They are more different than similar. The only "real" competition to NTL cable would be a phone/ broadband/TV system in same area say by Metro or Wimax.

Satellite can't offer Phone, nor sensible two way internet on the DVB platform.

Cable is closed. Cancel and you have nothing and wait ages to get re-install.

Sky you cancel and you still have 70 great Radio and 20+ TV worthwhile. Add a motor and a FTA box for less than years cable sub and you have dozens more good channels out of 1400+ FTA TV and 1200+ FTA Radio.

Decide you want Sky again at Christmas? Ring up and in 10 minutes the pay channels are back, cancel again in Jan and have paid only 2 or 3 months.

The only Pay TV competition for Sky is other Satellite Pay TV. FTA Sat TV is a Sky competitor which is why Sky now promoting the FTV (Freesat from Sky), "once off" payment channels needing a Sky box.

Cable and Satellite arn't even similar.

BrianD

I'm a rabbits ears user though was a NTL subscriber in the past.

Watty, anybody who has a reasonable technical knowledge can understand the differences between the systems, shortcoming, what you can do by adding a motor etc. etc. However, for the vast amount of TV consumers Sky, NTL or Chorus is just a box on the telly that provides the channels. They don't care if it comes down a pipe or down from the heavens. Satellite TV was for anoraks, Sky Digital made it into a viable consumer product by providing the technology, services and installation meaning that it was now a realistic option to the average householder. So while they are totally disimilar technologies they provide the same solution in the mind of the consumer.

watty

Brain.. You are entitled to you opinion, C-Band or early Russian UHF may have be en "Anorak" land, and maybe big dishes still is.
But Ku Band DTH is now consumer technology world wide a long time. And while Sky is successful in UK, they are not at all responsible.

If you protest any louder that Satellite is effectively only Sky and the same in mind of consumer as Cable, you'll start to look very like a troll.

Certinally the sales and installers of FTA gear in UK and Ireland would not agree. Nor BBC and ITV.

When I was in Dublin I set TV aerial on the hedge pointed at Three Rock and Ditiched the analog Cable when I moved in as (A) I had no intention of paying, (B) It was nearly unwatchable.

Perhaps having grown up in an aera with no cable and all UK channels this has colour my perception of getting all the ITV and BBC channels and 70 radio stations via my dishes.

In the past 7 years of Satellite viewing I have maybe had a Sky sub about 20 months total. I will likely cancel again for a while in Feb if they raise the price.

My first analog system, no Sky sub, (with Five, CNN, Sky News and other free channels) cost less than 6 months of Chorus.

BrianD

Watty, your comments are out of order. I am not "protesting" as you say. I am merely pointing out the facts of the matter - primarily from the point of a consumers point of view and not that of someone like you who has a technical knowledge of the subject. I am entitled to my opinion and yes I will continue to express it. I have raised some topics about the future of satellite that would be worthy of discussion but now we bogged down in a discussion on cable v sat.

Do you think that the average Sky Dig subscriber in rural idea knows or cares how to adjust their dish and there is actually other programming on other satellites out there? Course not. They've been sold a package that does and gives them the same thing that their city cousins have. You may argue that satellite has been around for a long time. I would agree but it was Sky's marketing push in Ireland that made it a mass market product. I doubt that there have been too mant sat installers sticking in FTA systems around the country when there was Sky installs to be done. Now with the BBC and ITV going FTA there is going to be a seachange

Tony

BrianD wrote:

I doubt that there have been too mant sat installers sticking in FTA systems around the country when there was Sky installs to be done.

actually it has always been the opposite Brian, installers will always do FTA in preference to sky installs, less work and better pay. Even sky itself was FTA when it started

channelsurfer

will the imminent launch of the bbc/itv fta satellite system be widely promoted here or do most installers make their money from sky installs? I know sky pay a fixed amount per install/contract but is it less or more than if an installer charges for a fta system? .

BrianD

Tony wrote:

actually it has always been the opposite Brian, installers will always do FTA in preference to sky installs, less work and better pay. Even sky itself was FTA when it started

Fair enough, you're the installer and I am not. But prior to BBC and ITV going FTA how many people would ring up and ask for a FTA dish? Plus the Sky that started out is a different beast to what it is now. In fact you could argue that isn't Sky at all, it's BSB. The majority of people want the terrestrials and the sports channels. Everything else is a bonus. This is why I understand that in NTL land, subscribers have been slow to move from analogue to digital and almost need to be forced to do it.

Obviously the landscape is changing. I've just bought the parents a FTA kit for Christmas and they would have never thought of going with the satellite option before. But if ITV and BBC weren't there it would be of zero interest and we'd be hoping that there wouldn't be too much high pressure during the summer!

Tony

BrianD wrote:

Fair enough, you're the installer and I am not. But prior to BBC and ITV going FTA how many people would ring up and ask for a FTA dish?

Well lots actually, free to air sold in big numbers even before BBC came on .

L1011

Before the BBC was FTA, there was still gobs of kids stuff - Turner's block was FTA - and the God Squad channels. Theres always been a massive market for FTA

In the analogue days, even more so.

BrianD

Tony wrote:

Well lots actually, free to air sold in big numbers even before BBC came on .

In Ireland????????

fignon03

BrianD wrote:

RTE is Free To Air. There is no doubt about that whatsoever. The fact that you choose to pay for your RTE signal to delivered to your home via a commercial digital satellite platform is a separate issue.

In any case in house promos (unless they involve a commercial sponsor) don't constitute an advertisement for the purposes of the Advertising Standards.

RTE is Not free to air on digital satellite, dont know why they cant follow the BBC example

watty

RTE preceptions, Money, Sports rights and Hollywood.

FTV might happen now that Sky sees it as a way to fight FTA competiton. Previously Sky charged millions for FTV. (It costs them nearly nothing). Then a card might be 30Euro for 3 years to 50 Euro a year. If RTE goes FTV rather than subscription, it wil be becuase Sky decides so. RTE virtually gave away broadcast rights to Sky in exchange for free Carriage. Sky can charge nothing or 100 Euro a month, what ever they like for the Irish channels. Their only commitement to RTE is to encrypt and charge RTE nothing.

It is obvoiusly advantagious to Sky to offer RTE1, RTE2 and TG4 as part of Variaety mix in N.I. I have no idea if RTE get paid for that. BBC pays to be on UK EPG but gets PAID by SKy for being on Irish EPG!

Tony

BrianD wrote:

In Ireland????????

Yes of course, I've little knowledge of any other market

Ulsterman 1690

Looking out the window here I can see a fair number of dishes pointed at satellites other than 28 East. Given that a lot of people from overseas live in my neighbourhood. I would assume that most of these are FTV systems. I daresay the situation is similar in many parts of the Republic

Conclusion FTA systems are not just for "anoraks"

BrianD

Tony wrote:

Yes of course, I've little knowledge of any other market

Ah Tony! Come on! I know you are in industry but I just don't accept that FTA sales even register when compared with the roll out of SKy Digital over the past few years. Given the number of TV households and the number of Sky subscribers, I just can't see where the numbers are. Now I do accept that this is changing rapidly, firstly because of the number of migrant workers living here and that now BBC and ITV are in the clear. Even my Iraqi neigbours are in the business - I've dishes arriving in the hallway from Germany every other week!

Tony

BrianD wrote:

Ah Tony! Come on! I know you are in industry but I just don't accept that FTA sales even register when compared with the roll out of SKy Digital over the past few years. Given the number of TV households and the number of Sky subscribers, I just can't see where the numbers are. Now I do accept that this is changing rapidly, firstly because of the number of migrant workers living here and that now BBC and ITV are in the clear. Even my Iraqi neigbours are in the business - I've dishes arriving in the hallway from Germany every other week!

Brian why is it when someone tells you something they know to be true you either say something like "Come on" "Where are the numbers" or you simply dont respond at all (as with the sky vat issue).

You seem to forget that I make a living selling satellite so I know what sells and what does not and these trends seem to be the norm from talking to my colleagues in the industry in Ireland.

You can choose to accept my view or not but I'm not going to waste time digging up research given your past propensity to ignore the facts as presented to you. There are no figures AFAIK for FTA before sky because it served no commercial interest to know this information, all I can impart is my own experience. If FTA did not sell before sky I would have been out of business a long time ago.

L1011

Going on probably the roughest figures possible here:

Theres more non-Sky Toy Dishes on houses in my estate than Sky Toy Dishes. Most of them are on 28.2

Most people who have Sky use a Toy Dish. However, lots of people with 28.2 FTA also use a Toy Dish, as well as the people using real dishes.

BrianD

Tony, I find it very hard to believe that there are more FTA dishes installed than Sky dishes. At least not until recent times and I'm sure FTA sales are now as healthy as Sky packages were in their heyday. What do you mean by selling? In excess of the number of subscribers that sky claim to have? Lets have some figures here please. Is it a case of 2 out of every 10 sales are FTA? More?

In regard to the Sky VAT issue you wanted to dodge the issue by not responding. As far as I am aware the VAT on a Sky Digital subscription goes to her Majesty. This has been quoted widely in newspaper articles and online. I've never seen a Sky bill so I can't verify it first hand. You never disagreed apart from stating that Irish VAT was charged on your installation.

Merry Christmas.

Tony

Brian you are simply proving my point. Previously I asked you to explain how the VAT I paid to the revenue on behalf of sky could be reclaimed since you deemed it not to be payable, you did not answer this question. A review of the thread will confirm this. I'd be grateful if you could as it would make me several thousand euros richer if what you say is correct. Do you seriously ask me to explain what selling is? look up a dictionary I dont have time for your time wasting somantics. As for your FTA question I have already given my view of the market, you ask for figures which I have already told you I do not believe exist. Do you have statistics to act as rebuttal to my view? All I have read from you is your belief (based on what exactly)

There are none so blind as those who will not see. There are none so deaf as those who hear but will not listen.

BrianD wrote:

Tony, I find it very hard to believe that there are more FTA dishes installed than Sky dishes. At least not until recent times and I'm sure FTA sales are now as healthy as Sky packages were in their heyday. What do you mean by selling? In excess of the number of subscribers that sky claim to have? Lets have some figures here please. Is it a case of 2 out of every 10 sales are FTA? More?

In regard to the Sky VAT issue you wanted to dodge the issue by not responding. As far as I am aware the VAT on a Sky Digital subscription goes to her Majesty. This has been quoted widely in newspaper articles and online. I've never seen a Sky bill so I can't verify it first hand. You never disagreed apart from stating that Irish VAT was charged on your installation.

Merry Christmas.

Paddy20

Here is my 2c's worth.

I used to be a Sky subscriber, but when I found out that after the first 12 month contract period expired, the Skybox and Satellite became mine.

I decided to cancel my subscription, as I can receive all the digital FTA TV & Radio stations 'I need' without paying Sky one cent, and I am more than happy with the selection available .

Tony and Watty gave me free sound advice, about how to receive the FTA channels, and I have never had any reason to doubt anything either of them have posted on Boards.ie.

I personally find their generosity of spirt, in sharing their knowledge quite openly and honestly without a profit motive, very heartening in this era of greed in Ireland.

P.:cool:

channelsurfer

have to agree as well. I have been on these boards for over a year now and have found both tony and watty very informative and genuine..

Sponge Bob

Legally SKY should not only charge us Irish Vat but should reimburse this VAT to the exchequer here not the one in England . I could find the link on the Renue site were I so inclined.

Paddy20 partly explained why the rise in FTA systems in inexorable, its because

a) many subscribers lapse after the first year but keep their gear operational
b) many subscribers sell the gear second hand thereby allowing new sat users to get a sky service with no subscription payable , FTA only . eBay is rotten with them.
c) most of the population growth here in recent years has comprised of some 200,000 non native english speakers from eastern europe coming to live here , they are not interested in sky or anything on 28e but in a mix of 13e Hotbird / Astra 1 and other sats further west .
d) I have no reason in the world to doubt anecdotal evidence from Tony who is on the ground and hears these things. Recently ITV going FTA was confirmed by Tony soon after BigPaddy first announced it. They were absolutely right , scoop of the year in here.
e) astra 2 is easy 'to find' , I would simply use a compass if it was an 80cm dish pointing at astra2 . It is easy to install for the amateur , slightly more complex than an aerial.
f) watty knows everything

BrianD

Paddy20 wrote:

Here is my 2c's worth.

I used to be a Sky subscriber, but when I found out that after the first 12 month contract period expired, the Skybox and Satellite became mine.

I decided to cancel my subscription, as I can receive all the digital FTA TV & Radio stations 'I need' without paying Sky one cent, and I am more than happy with the selection available .

Tony and Watty gave me free sound advice, about how to receive the FTA channels, and I have never had any reason to doubt anything either of them have posted on Boards.ie.

I personally find their generosity of spirt, in sharing their knowledge quite openly and honestly without a profit motive, very heartening in this era of greed in Ireland.

P.:cool:

I am certainly not questioning either Tony's or Watty's technical knowledge of the topic - certainly many times greater than mine. I know from browsing this board that they are more than generous in imparting their knowledge to those who frequent here.

This thread has certainly covered many bases. Tony I find it hard to believe that more FTA dishes have been supplied than Sky dishes in recent times. As I have said this is definitely changing. There may be plenty of people now using Sky equipment in a FTA capacity but it was Sky who built the satellite market in Ireland. You haven't given us a feel for how many dishes were sold on a FTA basis before the Beeb jumped ship as to how many are now. Let's face it, until the BBC and ITV became available FTA there wasn't exactly a mass market selling proposition in FTA. Now there is. I am of course ignoring the population of non-nationals (if that's a fair term) who are seeking programming from their own home countries.

In regard to the VAT issue. I am not referring to the installation invoice. I am referring to the sunscription that is paid on an ongoing basis.

Guys less of the antagonism,it is after all Christmas.

As regards Vat,I know for a fact that In fact UK VAT is charged on the Subs. How do I know this? Because a relative in the pub trade tried to reclaim the Vat on his sports sub and was told this by the revenue.
They had suggested that he ask sky to deduct the UK Vat as being VAT registered in a third country he's entitled to that concession.
It was when this inquiry was made that it transpired that UK VAT is being paid.

Any VAT registered club, pub or premises in ROI can request that this be deducted from what they pay and must indicate this on their VAT 3 form.
They will have to give sky their full ROI Vat number to make the change.

ethernet

On a happier note, I feel absolutely delighted!

I downloaded the December Dr. Dish programme a few days ago. Only watched it last night and, to my absolute shock, realised I'd won a PVR. What an excellent Christmas pressie! I felt obliged to share my happiness!

L1011

BrianD wrote:

but it was Sky who built the satellite market in Ireland.

You clearly have no comprehension of just how many people had satellite kit in Ireland prior to Murdoch even thinking up moving Sky from one FTA channel to a 4 channel 'package'. In the mid 1980's there were still tens of thousands of people who had satellite kit as there was still a lot of stuff out there. Sky just came along providing a nice, initially cheap way of getting a lot of English stuff in one block

Either that or you have a totally selective memory. Not sure which.

Sponge Bob

BrianD wrote:

it was Sky who built the satellite market in Ireland.

OMFG BrianD is right on.

You haven't given us a feel for how many dishes were sold on a FTA basis before the Beeb jumped ship as to how many are now. Let's face it, until the BBC and ITV became available FTA there wasn't exactly a mass market selling proposition in FTA. Now there is.

Looking all the way back this thread you never asked for the history or FTA vs SKY installs , ratios of subs to installs after 2 years etc etc and tipping points to and from t'other .

In regard to the VAT issue. I am not referring to the installation invoice. I am referring to the sub that is paid on an ongoing basis.

Said VAT (or any other VAT charged by Sky) should be paid over to Brian Cowen .

Pal

this thread is now off topic. I was talking about advertising.

BrianD

MYOB wrote:

You clearly have no comprehension of just how many people had satellite kit in Ireland prior to Murdoch even thinking up moving Sky from one FTA channel to a 4 channel 'package'. In the mid 1980's there were still tens of thousands of people who had satellite kit as there was still a lot of stuff out there. Sky just came along providing a nice, initially cheap way of getting a lot of English stuff in one block

Either that or you have a totally selective memory. Not sure which.

Clearly I don't. But I would find it hard to accept that "tens of thousands" of people had a FTA system receiving TV content that would of little interest to the average soap watching TV consumer. Just what exactly were they watching? A lot of stuff? I think not. Bear in mind that many of the niche channels that are now available (FTA, FTV or subscription) have gown on the back of both Sky and digital cable. Your analysis of the development of Sky is pretty simplistic at the least.

So even if we believe you when we say there was tens of thousands of FTA dishes out there. There well may be I have no idea. Even if they are, there's still a huge leap to the number of satellite households that now exist and we know who's responsible for that. So Sponge BoB, I am as you say, right on.

I am glad that the VAT question is resolved. Her majesty does do well out of TV viewing in Ireland.

Finally, in regard to advertising. There is no case against RTE for using the term FTA in their advertising as they are actually FTA. You have to pay a subscription to receive them on delivery platforms. FTA while originally a satellite TV term is a general term used in the industry across many platforms. The ultimate FTA broadcasting platform is analogue terrestrial TV.

L1011

I can barely see the point of arguing with you as you never move from your set position even when you're entirely wrong in many cases

Prior to the existance of Sky as a platform, we had, FTA:

*A number of the UK cable stations such as Bravo and The Childrens Channel being backhauled to various parts of the delivery network. Only real backhaul tech then was FTA satellite
*Sky Channel - Sky One itself.
*Superchannel. Became NBC Europe, but was pretty decent in its day

I could go on. There were tens of thousands of people viewing them, wheter you want to let that fact get at you or not

We now have a situation where Sky have what, 400K susbscribers here? They're most certainly no longer providing even 50% of the satellite TV in this country, even if more than 50% is pay-TV.

Satellite is not a "delivery platform" any more than analogue terrestrial TV is. In case you didn't know, or aren't willing to accept it, theres pay-TV on analogue terrestrial in many parts of the world too, including Sky Aus/NZ in New Zealand and Canal+ in France.

Its false advertising to use the term FTA when they're not FTA on satellite, like it or not. Something else you're just not willing to accept.

Mossy Monk

can we all please move back to the subject of UTV being advertised by Sky in other channels

BrianD

Sorry, I almost forgot what the topic was!

It's an odd manoeuver o promote a product that is not available in your shop in your advertising. If I buy a Sky Digital receiver (either sub based or the freesat version) and I can manually tune in it then there is nothing wrong with the advert. There is nothing false about the RTE adverts either. It is available FTA, that's the fact of the matter.

Define FTA:
Free-to-air is a phrase used to describe television and radio broadcasts which are available without subscription and without decryption (pay-TV).

FTA has been assumed to be a satellite only term when actually it isn't. The arguement is that you pay Sky Digital for the carriage of the signal to your home as you do NTL/Chorus. Sky can decide where and how they price it in their subscription packages. I fear that this arguement might be restarting.

Mossy Monk

BrianD wrote:

I fear that this arguement might be restarting.

fear not, this thread is now closed

watty

I was thinking that might be a good idea soon! Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!