Implications of the Broadcasting Bill 2008 on RTÉ and Sky

rlogue

Some of the proposed amendments to the Broadcasting Bill look quite interesting.

For instance the bill proposes that all satellite operators based in Ireland are obliged to carry the basic Irish terrestrial channels on a must-carry basis and at no extra cost to subscribers.

Now I realise BSkyB are not based in Ireland but if we were to apply the terms of the proposed bill to the RTÉ-Sky deal would that not mean that any Sky customer in Ireland would have RTÉ etc. at no cost? At present the minimum requirement is for the Entertainment mix before RTÉ etc. are made available.

If this were carried through would it not be possible then to take out the cheapest possible sub to Sky to be able to watch the Irish channels? It is a pity that the proposed legislation does not force a Free to View scenario on Sky though.

evilivor

rlogue wrote: »

all satellite operators based in Ireland are obliged to carry the basic Irish terrestrial channels on a must-carry basis and at no extra cost to subscribers.

What satellite operators are currently based in Ireland?

redout

evilivor wrote: »

What satellite operators are currently based in Ireland?

good question.

loyatemu

Sky Ireland could reasonably be considered to be based in ireland - they have sales and marketing here, they sell a product into the Irish market specifically tailored to that market, they have Euro pricing and prevent Irish customers from availing of the UK product and pricing. I don't know whether they file accounts here, so it all depends on what the govt defines as "Irish".

SamandFrank

Wait Sky dont charge for rte at the moment yea its not free to air but they give it as a bonus mix free when you get any of the packs

TheDriver

Indeed, it doesn't say anything must be given for free but merely they must be provided for no extra cost once the person is on a package which sky introduced last year anyways so don't see how it affects their business at all. Likewise, RTE etc is free anyways with an aerial and soon dtt

Widescreen

SamandFrank wrote: »

Wait Sky dont charge for rte at the moment yea its not free to air but they give it as a bonus mix free when you get any of the packs

Therefore they ARE charging for RTE. You cancel your minimum sub and you will get NO RTE....

When this DTT starts up the package will be so bad that most people probably won't go for it and will still end up paying SKY or UPC and therefore PAYING for RTE...

RTE should be free to view/or just free(UPC) on whatever digital platform they are on. ie if you cancelled Sky you should still get RTE...

This should be a basic right and if the BCI were tuned in this should have been the case since day 1 on satellite. TV Licences come to mind!

loyatemu

Widescreen wrote: »

Therefore they ARE charging for RTE. You cancel your minimum sub and you will get NO RTE....

if you cancel your minimum sub you're no longer a Sky customer.

Tony

If RTE becomes a "must carry" on sky (its unclear whether sky would be deemed to be based in Ireland) then RTE could in theory charge sky for its programming. I see no mention of electronic prgramme guide placement though which is crucial. The issue of cost is flawed in the legislation since all the operator has to do is incorporate whatever cost incurred carrying RTE into the package price. The devil is in the detail as usual

SamandFrank

loyatemu wrote: »

if you cancel your minimum sub you're no longer a Sky customer.

I agree. Sky has no responsibility to you if your not there customer.

You could argue that if you don't pay your TV license then you shouldn't get RTE either.

RTE has never been Free

AugustusMaximus

RTE should strike a deal for a FTV card setup similar to the one in the UK for the past number of year.

scruffy66

SamandFrank wrote: »

Wait Sky dont charge for rte at the moment yea its not free to air but they give it as a bonus mix free when you get any of the packs

SEMANTICS , the question is'nt whether RTE should be free to air on sky ,
it is whether RTE should be freetoair on satellite at all and the answer is a simple YES.If every other country in the world can watch there home grown channels freetoair on satellite , then why shouldn't we.I know all then programing rights issues reasons as to why rte cannot go freetoair but it still doesn't change the fact that we in ireland shouldn't be deprived of a freetoair satellite service for our national license fee paid channels. Can rte afford not to be freetoair especially with the growth of freesat / freesat HD and the new
freesat HD + recorder ,if they take off the way i think they will then will ,then RTE will lose out by not being on board

Tony

Strike a deal with whom?

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

RTE should strike a deal for a FTV card setup similar to the one in the UK for the past number of year.

watty

Sky aren't Irish. If the UK tried to regulate them they would move to libya, Morroco or Luxemberg.

The Irish Government and Regulator can do nothing about Sky. They only charge Irish VAT on Installs, subs are UK VAT.

Kensington

scruffy66 wrote: »

If every other country in the world can watch there home grown channels freetoair on satellite , then why shouldn't we. I know all then programing rights issues reasons as to why rte cannot go freetoair but it still doesn't change the fact that we in ireland shouldn't be deprived of a freetoair satellite service for our national license fee paid channels.

It's not financially possible for RTE to go FTA on satellite though. They would have to pay many times more for programmes than they do at present in order to transmit in the clear and it just would not be possible for them to do so. It's a lot easier on the Continent for broadcasters to broadcast FTA because generally the overspill from the satellite would be into a country speaking a different language, so buying programmes in French for broadcast on a French network, for example, would generate little interest in viewers who can receive the overspill in Germany. Us being right next to Britain means we can't buy rights at a cost based on 4 million viewers, as RTE can presently do, due to the huge English speaking population present in the overspill.

scruffy66 wrote: »

Can rte afford not to be freetoair especially with the growth of freesat / freesat HD and the new
freesat HD + recorder ,if they take off the way i think they will then will ,then RTE will lose out by not being on board

Well at the end of the day, RTE still get your licence fee money so they'll still get income. At present, it costs them NOTHING to be carried on the Astra satellite. If RTE went independent of sky on satellite, then they would have to pay up an annual transponder lease fee to Astra and pay Sky an annual EPG carriage fee for appearing on sky guide. Sky presently covers both of these costs for them, aswell as providing encryption of their broadcasts with NDS. Any potential revenue they may gain from advertising on their channels would fall far short of these costs.

Tony

Kensington wrote: »

If RTE went independent of sky on satellite, then they would have to pay up an annual transponder lease fee to Astra and pay Sky an annual EPG carriage fee for appearing on sky guide. Sky presently covers both of these costs for them, aswell as providing encryption of their broadcasts with NDS. Any potential revenue they may gain from advertising on their channels would fall far short of these costs.

Nonsense, the annual transponder bill is negligible, how do you think dating channels get on there? Sky would not remove them from their EPG as it would make no financial sense to do so. All that is required is some imagination on RTE's behalf to satisfy rights holders in the same way as other broadcasters on Astra 2d have done.

Kensington

Tony wrote: »

Nonsense, the annual transponder bill is negligible, how do you think dating channels get on there? Sky would not remove them from their EPG as it would make no financial sense to do so. All that is required is some imagination on RTE's behalf to satisfy rights holders in the same way as other broadcasters on Astra 2d have done.

Dating channels get on there by cramming themselves in with many other channels onto a single transponder, using bitrates that often look on par with Youtube for picture quality. Backed up with whaever income they gain from silly text in competitions and polls. And how many dating channels actually survive a worthwhile amount of time on air?

As for rights on 2D, for the likes of BBC, ITV, Five etc., it's a lot easier when buying programmes to go to buy rights for 60m in the UK and have another 4m people in the footprint overspill, than it is to buy rights for 4m people in the Republic and have overspill of an additional 60m!!!

Tony

Kensington wrote: »

Dating channels get on there by cramming themselves in with many other channels onto a single transponder, using bitrates that often look on par with Youtube

Transponder lease fees are not the issue nor are bitrates

Kensington wrote: »

As for rights on 2D, for the likes of BBC, ITV, Five etc., it's a lot easier when buying programmes to go to buy rights for 60m in the UK and have another 4m people in the footprint overspill, than it is to buy rights for 4m people in the Republic and have overspill of an additional 60m!!!

I never suggested that RTE buy rights to 60m, I suggested they should use some imagination to satisfy rights holders, possibly as ITV HD have done. These arguements have been done to death on this forum with the same old irrelevant points being trotted out. It always comes back to one simple point, if RTE can satisfy their rights holders then they can become available on a satellite platform other than skys, everything else is irrelevant until that issue is resolved.

AugustusMaximus

Tony wrote: »

Strike a deal with whom?

Wouldn't Sky have to allow them to circulate an FTV card in Ireland to get all the four irish stations ? Joint deal between the 4 channels ?

chelseaaremagic

just to develop the original point how will it affect the sat4free setup. are they an epg provider or a satellite company?

GerardKeating

chelseaaremagic wrote: »

just to develop the original point how will it affect the sat4free setup. are they an epg provider or a satellite company?

They are neither, just a retailer...

Tony

I do not think sky would be obliged to do under the proposed legislation, it would not be in their interest to do so . There is also some question as to whether sky are subject to ROI jurisdiction.

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

Wouldn't Sky have to allow them to circulate an FTV card in Ireland to get all the four irish stations ? Joint deal between the 4 channels ?

bk

watty wrote: »

Sky aren't Irish. If the UK tried to regulate them they would move to libya, Morroco or Luxemberg.

I have to disagree with you here Watty, if Sky really pissed off the UK government, there is plenty they could do to hurt Sky if they moved off shore.

For instance the UK government could then introduce legislation banning the advertising, promotion and selling of foreign Satellite services in the UK, that would make life very hard for Sky.

Or the British government could legislate that only UK registered companies can bid for UK sporting events.

Likewise in Ireland, if Sky don't play ball, there is plenty that the Irish government can do to exert some control over Sky if they wanted to.

bk

The more interesting question here is sat4free.

sat4free is almost certainly an Irish sat TV provider (sold in Ireland and marketed to Irish people, by an Irish company).

Therefore it would seem that RTE has to be carried on this platform. Will this force RTE to go partial FTA, perhaps via a ITV HD type hack.

evilivor

bk wrote: »

The more interesting question here is sat4free.

sat4free is almost certainly an Irish sat TV provider (sold in Ireland and marketed to Irish people, by an Irish company).

Therefore it would seem that RTE has to be carried on this platform. Will this force RTE to go partial FTA, perhaps via a ITV HD type hack.

Applies to "satellite operators based in Ireland". Sat4free is not an operator.

Tony

evilivor wrote: »

Applies to "satellite operators based in Ireland". Sat4free is not an operator.

Again it depends on how "operator" is defined. I can see lawyers making some money on this one. Certainly sat4free are portraying themselves as operators.

evilivor

Tony wrote: »

Again it depends on how "operator" is defined. I can see lawyers making some money on this one. Certainly sat4free are portraying themselves as operators.

Surely when they have no connection whatsoever with any satellite anywhere or any content they could not be considered to be operators? They are just selling re-badged Freesat boxes, they have no way of dictating what is transmitted or received on them. You could, by the same logic, call yourself an operator but I don't think you'll be broadcasting RTE from Satellite.ie Towers anytime soon (more's the pity).

Tony

On a technical level I fully agree with you but from a politicians or civil servants point of view they may be considered a broadcasting platform. The BCI would ceratinly consider their EPG placements fair game in the same way as the UK authorities assert control over sky's Uk epg. Word on the grapevine is that Freesat are looking at taking legal action over the use without permission of their EPG data by sat4free although this is pure hearsay at present. The main difference between myself and sat4free is I sell equipment capable of receiving the UK freesat service and make no claim to provide content whereas sat4free portray themselves as content providers.

wish i had a tower

evilivor wrote: »

Surely when they have no connection whatsoever with any satellite anywhere or any content they could not be considered to be operators? They are just selling re-badged Freesat boxes, they have no way of dictating what is transmitted or received on them. You could, by the same logic, call yourself an operator but I don't think you'll be broadcasting RTE from Satellite.ie Towers anytime soon (more's the pity).

evilivor

Tony wrote: »

wish i had a tower

Towers are nice.

rlogue

We have to look at how other countries in a similar situation to us provide their Public channels on satellite.

Take for instance Austria. Austria has a similar issue to us in that they are next door to Germany who also provide FTA TV via satellite. Now the ORF channels and the Austrian private channels are FTV on satellite, and apparently any satellite decoder for sale in Austria will decode the local Austrian channels for free.

The Dutch channels are FTV, as are the French.

I have specifically asked RTÉ about the possibility of making the Irish channels FTV on the Sky platform but as yet have had no reply. I note with interest that when the FTV suggestion was raised at various Dáil committees dealing with the Broadcasting Bill, RTÉ avoided answering the question.

This leaves us with the ongoing issue of the Diaspora channel. The Diaspora channel is intended to be FTA, which would allow those with a Freesat, Lidl or enthusiast box to watch some form of RTÉ TV on their receivers. It would seem for the sake of the cost of transmission RTÉ would rather not let everyone see their programming until they get the cost from the government. Legislation or not, I am quite sure RTÉ would rather play politics with the government than actually get their programmes out to a wider audience.

Tony

Exactly their (RTE) mindset is at odds with every other broadcaster I can think of who are pro active in making programmes available to as wide an audience as possible without restricting them to pay tv platforms.

rlogue wrote: »

It would seem for the sake of the cost of transmission RTÉ would rather not let everyone see their programming until they get the cost from the government. Legislation or not, I am quite sure RTÉ would rather play politics with the government than actually get their programmes out to a wider audience.

bk

evilivor wrote: »

Surely when they have no connection whatsoever with any satellite anywhere or any content they could not be considered to be operators? They are just selling re-badged Freesat boxes, they have no way of dictating what is transmitted or received on them.

But then neither does Sky in the UK, yet most people would consider them a UK satellite provider.

After all Sky don't own any of the satellites and they uplink Sky One, etc. from Luxembourg, the only thing Sky really add is their encryption and EPG.

If sat4free or another Irish company was to upload their own EPG for the UK channels, then they would be the same as Sky and then RTE would almost certainly be forced to be carried on this platform.

Seems like an interesting opportunity for an Irish company,

GerardKeating

bk wrote: »

Or the British government could legislate that only UK registered companies can bid for UK sporting events.

NO, they could regulate that only EU companies could bid, the whole "common market" thingy would stop them restricting it to UK companies.

Onikage

bk wrote: »

But then neither does Sky in the UK, yet most people would consider them a UK satellite provider.

After all Sky don't own any of the satellites and they uplink Sky One, etc. from Luxembourg, the only thing Sky really add is their encryption and EPG.

Ah, but Sky produce their own programming and channels. The same goes for the Freesat companies. Neither owns any satellite infrastructure. What programming does Sat4Free produce? That is why I can consider the first two as providers.

bk

Onikage wrote: »

Ah, but Sky produce their own programming and channels. The same goes for the Freesat companies. Neither owns any satellite infrastructure. What programming does Sat4Free produce? That is why I can consider the first two as providers.

But that makes them a content producer, which is completely separate from a satellite company.

After all RTE produces content and broadcasts it on Sky, but that doesn't make then a satellite provider does it?

Onikage

They provide content, EPG and hardware while outsourcing the infrastructure to a "multiplex contractor" (77.1.b). The language of the bill is kind of weird but it looks to me like they are referring to a logical network rather than hardware.

watty

bk wrote: »

I have to disagree with you here Watty, if Sky really pissed off the UK government, there is plenty they could do to hurt Sky if they moved off shore.

For instance the UK government could then introduce legislation banning the advertising, promotion and selling of foreign Satellite services in the UK, that would make life very hard for Sky.

Or the British government could legislate that only UK registered companies can bid for UK sporting events.

Likewise in Ireland, if Sky don't play ball, there is plenty that the Irish government can do to exert some control over Sky if they wanted to.

There is nothing UK or Irish gov can do.
Read the history of How Sky started (from OUTSIDE the UK) and destroyed the "official" UK based satellite operator.

UK can't at all prevent other EU operations marketing in UK without being in breach of EU. Practically they can do nothing about someone outside EU marketing a Satellite service. Are inspectors going to visit peoples homes and see who's viewing card is in use? I think not.

Sat4Free don't sell a service. They sell a box.
Sat4Free aren't a broadcaster. They sell a box.
No different to buying Kaon or Fortec. Just happens to be able to utilise Freesat EPG. No Doubt many others will soon.

Sky sells a PayTV service. You only need the Sky owned card to recieve. Sky don't own the satellites or the Receivers. Similarly in UK BBC is a Broadcaster but they don't any longer own transmitters, nor own TV sets.

Sky is also a broadcaster as well as a PayTV platform. (Sky1, Sky Sports etc sold on other pay TV platforms).

Tony

watty wrote: »

Sat4Free don't sell a service. They sell a box.

I disagree Watty, in technical terms of course they sell a box but in practical terms they are selling a service platform. They make no mention of Freesat on their website and portray themselves as service providers. In the interview on Newstalk their spokesman reinforced that perception.

scruffy66

Does this broadcasting act mention anything about the RTE international and when its coming on fta/ freesat . I heard that RTE international has been delayed because of financial reasons.The effect of rte international going onto the freesat platform might move the RTE going fta debate on a bit further . As i see it freesat with rte international on it will cause problems for RTE as people using freesat will have their home grown programs and nearly all the other rte programs are available on freesat channels anyway. With the recession bitting freesat is going to grow and i for one dont want to switch between two remote controls and two formats , analogue and digital.we must get rte international up and running[ in HD preferably ] and see how that effects freesat sales in the republic and in england.