HD FTA

Wiggy

Why are ITV1 HD and Channel 4 HD FTA, but E4 HD, More 4 HD, ITV 2 HD, ITV 3 HD and ITV 4 HD not?

same ol sh1te

Wiggy wrote: »

Why are ITV1 HD and Channel 4 HD FTA, but E4 HD, More 4 HD, ITV 2 HD, ITV 3 HD and ITV 4 HD not?

Because they are exclusive to sky and encrypted, Itv Encore is another

Wiggy

same ol sh1te wrote: »

Because they are exclusive to sky and encrypted, Itv Encore is another

I know they are encrypted. That's why I asked the question.

radiowaves

Wiggy wrote: »

Why are ITV1 HD and Channel 4 HD FTA, but E4 HD, More 4 HD, ITV 2 HD, ITV 3 HD and ITV 4 HD not?

A combination of platform exclusivity contracts and revenue raising.

Wiggy

radiowaves wrote: »

A combination of platform exclusivity contracts and revenue raising.

It is understandable in that context. But why then are the SD versions of those channels FTA? Government regulation?

JDxtra

They earn money from Sky for them being exclusive on their platform. That is all.

The operators could do the same for most of their SD channels too if they wanted.

Wiggy

JDxtra wrote: »

They earn money from Sky for them being exclusive on their platform. That is all.

The operators could do the same for most of their SD channels too if they wanted.

If that is the case, what then is the rationale for not encrypting their SD channels?

radiowaves

Wiggy wrote: »

If that is the case, what then is the rationale for not encrypting their SD channels?

It's similar to the opposing rationale that charges extra for HD content.

Wiggy

radiowaves wrote: »

It's similar to the opposing rationale that charges extra for HD content.

I don't understand what you mean.

Sky charges extra for HD content. The rationale for that is that Sky customers are prepared to pay for it in sufficient numbers to make it very profitable.

If the rationale for ITV and C4 restricting access to HD content on some channels is that they do so because Sky pays them to so restrict it, why then do they offer their flagship channels (ITV1 HD and Channel 4 HD) for free?

And why do they offer their entire range of SD channels for free?

radiowaves

Wiggy wrote: »

I don't understand what you mean.

Sky charges extra for HD content. The rationale for that is that Sky customers are prepared to pay for it in sufficient numbers to make it very profitable.

If the rationale for ITV and C4 restricting access to HD content on some channels is that they do so because Sky pays them to so restrict it, why then do they offer their flagship channels (ITV1 HD and Channel 4 HD) for free?

And why do they offer their entire range of SD channels for free?

A fair number of subscribers with access to the SD Sky channels are willing to pay an extra subscription to receive the same channels in HD - that's the rationale.

Wiggy

radiowaves wrote: »

A fair number of subscribers with access to the SD Sky channels are willing to pay an extra subscription to receive the same channels in HD - that's the rationale.

The SD channels are not Sky channels, they are ITV and Channel 4 channels. They don't require a subscription at all.

The HD flagship channels don't require a subscription either. ITV1 HD and Channel 4 HD are not subscription channels.

My original question was why this is the case. If it makes business sense for ITV and Channel 4 to offer their flagship channels FTA with no requirement for any subscription to a third party, and to similarly offer all their remaining channels for free (which only have a fraction of the audience of the flagship channels), what is the point of restricting the access to the HD versions?

If it was a simple case of supply and demand, and market forces, then surely the flagship HD channels would be encrypted?

radiowaves

Wiggy wrote: »

The SD channels are not Sky channels, they are ITV and Channel 4 channels. They don't require a subscription at all.

Since when are SD Sky channels not Sky channels and belong to ITV and Channel 4

In fact I can see you've already worked out what I was saying and, indeed, the answer to your original question (yet still seem confused?)

Sky charges extra for HD content. The rationale for that is that Sky customers are prepared to pay for it in sufficient numbers to make it very profitable.

Wiggy

radiowaves wrote: »

Since when are SD Sky channels not Sky channels and belong to ITV and Channel 4

??

This thread is about the ITV channels, and the Channel 4 channels.

Not about Sky channels.

radiowaves

Wiggy wrote: »

??

This thread is about the ITV channels, and the Channel 4 channels.

Not about Sky channels.

Which is why I used the word "similar" (which you asked me to expand on and I did)

radiowaves wrote: »

It's similar to the opposing rationale that charges extra for HD content.

I suppose I can't also give you the Sky News example?

But, as you yourself realised yet are still asking (!), people are willing to pay for HD content even when they have the SD equivalent (whether that's FTA or via subscription the principle is exactly the same ).

This is why ITV and Channel 4 (and indeed Channel 5) encrypt some of their offshoot HD channels.

Wiggy

radiowaves wrote: »

But, as you yourself realised yet are still asking (!), people are willing to pay for HD content even when they have the SD equivalent (whether that's FTA or via subscription the principle is exactly the same ).

This is really getting away from the question that I originally posed.

People in the UK (or Ireland) who don't wish to pay a subscription to Sky have the option of FreeSat FTA.

They get a subscription free service, including some HD channels. There is no option to pay extra to get additional channels in HD.

This is in no way similar to a service provider like Sky charging extra for additional features in their subscription based service.

My original question is why do the terrestrial commercial TV companies, who offer all their channels for free, as well as their flagship channels in HD, not offer the rest of their channels in HD FTA as well?

It just seems a little unlikely that the answer is simply because Sky pay them not to. If it were indeed that simple, then they would surely not broadcast Channel 4 HD and ITV1 HD as FTA channels.

radiowaves

Wiggy wrote: »

This is really getting away from the question that I originally posed.

People in the UK (or Ireland) who don't wish to pay a subscription to Sky have the option of FreeSat FTA.

They get a subscription free service, including some HD channels. There is no option to pay extra to get additional channels in HD.

This is in no way similar to a service provider like Sky charging extra for additional features in their subscription based service.

My original question is why do the terrestrial commercial TV companies, who offer all their channels for free, as well as their flagship channels in HD, not offer the rest of their channels in HD FTA as well?

It just seems a little unlikely that the answer is simply because Sky pay them not to. If it were indeed that simple, then they would surely not broadcast Channel 4 HD and ITV1 HD as FTA channels.

Because people are willing to pay (extra) to receive content in HD.

Should I (or JDExtra; or even you yourself!!!) phrase it differently?

afatbollix

The answer is that Sky offer loads of money for HD channels yet charge for carriage for SD channels.


The channels receive money from sky for having the HD only on sky.

That €15 a month adds up.


It was a way for channels to fund the cost of up grading to HD as the viewers was not there for advertisements to cover the cost in the early years.