[article] RTE poised to charge Sky to carry channels

Apogee

Sunday Times wrote:

Denis Naughten, the communications minister, is planning new legislation that would allow RTE to charge Sky, Virgin and Eir to carry its programmes.

Naughten will also bring proposals to government in September to increase the amount of licence fee funding paid by the Department of Social Protection to the national broadcaster, and to restore the full state subsidy to TG4, which would give back the station €9.24m in licence fee revenue.

The minister is also in discussions with the data protection commissioner about giving An Post access to ESB and property tax household databases to boost enforcement of the TV…

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rte-poised-to-charge-sky-to-carry-channels-6l9mh337z

First mooted by Curran a while back:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=92947483

And similar moves in the UK:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=85729819

jackinthemix94

Who even watches RTE? Let them drop it...

icdg

Well over 30% audience share and 15 of the top twenty programmes last year, is the answer to that...

It would appear that the collolary of this will be that the "must offer" and "must carry" rules will also be removed, which is a significant change.

A history lesson.

In the early days of digital TV, the ITV companies decided that they wouldn't allow their service on Sky. This was at a time when Carlton and Granada were running the Ill fated DTT service, ONdigital, in direct competition. Sky kept a space on the EPG with a message "press TV then 3 for ITV". ITV found that it's viewership dropped considerably in Sky homes. People no longer casually tuned into the channel; they'd still watch "appointment to view" programmes, but lost out on "flicking". Eventually they relented and joined Sky.

That's the risk you take, going off the pay TV EPG, and relying on households to change platforms from their default. It will result in a loss of viewers. Even more so in urban cable or ex-cable homes, who don't have rooftop aerials.

Harry Palmr

This is a very low risk change in the Irish market, sure plenty don't watch RTE beyond the news and some sport but plenty more do so SKY Ireland, Virgin and Eir (whatever that is) presumably will pay up lest subscribers discover they have soarview in HD for the RTE channels for free.

gordongekko

jackinthemix94 wrote: »

Who even watches RTE? Let them drop it...

Seriously????

jackinthemix94

Yeah just old people that don't have news apps lol. Who waits all day for some second rate TV presenters to tell them thew news?! 24 hour world now .

icdg

Rather than feeding the troll, lets maybe address the topic at hand

galtee boy

But don't Sky give RTE free carriage ? So if RTE want, say 3m per year from Sky, what's stopping Sky saying , " fine here's your 3m, but by the way, it's 4m for the transponder costs that we've been paying all along for you " ?

Sam Russell

If the minister is serious, he might start by freeing RTE from the strictures imposed by Minister Carey in the dying days of the ill-fated FF regime the died in 2011. This might allow RTE to decide whether children's programmes have a place on RTE 2 when RTE Jr already carries them. Also advertising on RTE NN might allow a proper news channel to carry proper news.

He might also consider strengthening the 2RN offering of Saorview by making the HD resolution obligatory for public service channels (RTE 1, RTE 2, TV3, TG4, and UTV i). He also might free-up the constraints on the charging structure on Saorview - the emphasis on bandwidth has cause poor PQ.

He might also require Saorview to drop all its sneaky ways and allow series link, and other tricky bits to be dropped.

He might now, so he might.

BoJack Horseman

If it came down to a price rise vs dropping the RTE channels I'd much prefer the latter.

Probably will be the former though, retaining these channels are a key aspect of Sky's offering.

STB.

icdg wrote: »

Well over 30% audience share and 15 of the top twenty programmes last year, is the answer to that...

It would appear that the collolary of this will be that the "must offer" and "must carry" rules will also be removed, which is a significant change.

Do you think so ? I'd say it will only be slightly amended to say agreed charge.

Of course this means that Eir and Virgin are next.

For years I have been of the view that subscription companies shouldn't be getting free content to bolster their numbers, especially when waiving the platform neutrality flag.

The UK stations started the ball rolling some time back when they got the carriage fee dropped.

icdg

The repeal of "must offer" is explicitly mentioned in a more detailed piece in yesterday's Sunday Times, which if I could find on their awful website (and it's a pity is so bad, because their iPad app is the best newspaper app I've ever seen) I'd link to - it's behind a paywall anyway.

You have to remove the rule for this idea to work. Otherwise who decides what the fair price is? Platforms are barely regulated any more, and Sky's not regulated in this jurisidiction anyway

As I say, I personally don't think it's a good idea, although the Sky-RTE deal was originally done at a point when the rule only applied to cable (and, for TV3 only, MMDS).

Sam Russell

I think the 'must offer, must carry' should apply to the whole Saorview product. That is - the broadcast platform must take all Saorview channels as is - or nothing. This could result in the payTV platforms paying sufficient to cover the Saorview transmission charges, thus allowing all major channels to be in HD with perhaps +1 variations.

10000maniacs

Sky should call their bluff. Remove RTE from the epg.
They called the BAI's bluff when they tried to regulate Sky content to Ireland in 2005.
Sky just said "go away" and the BAI just went away. Didn't have a leg to stand on legally.

mikeym

If Rte is removed from the Sky Epg I will certainly not be paying for a tv licence.

We would be going back to the dark ages if Rte is removed from Sky.

channelsurfer2

It would just mean Sky/Virgin etc would hike the subscription by 2-3euro per month if it happens. Who would blink first though in terms of the pricing charged. They would hardly drop RTE from the platforms for very long if they loose custom.

Harry Palmr

mikeym wrote: »

If Rte is removed from the Sky Epg I will certainly not be paying for a tv licence.

We would be going back to the dark ages if Rte is removed from Sky.

RTE will still be there you know - stick a bit of co-ax in your tv aerial input and you'll have RTE in HD.

lertsnim

mikeym wrote: »

If Rte is removed from the Sky Epg I will certainly not be paying for a tv licence.

We would be going back to the dark ages if Rte is removed from Sky.

Unfortunately for you it doesn't work that way.

The Cush

Apogee wrote: »

First mooted by Curran a while back:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=92947483

And similar moves in the UK:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=85729819

The UK situation changed earlier this month when the government published a report on the issue of retransmission fees which basically closed the door on pay TV platforms paying the PSBs for retransmitting their channels at this time.

The report basically says the commercial PSBs are fairly compensated by their prominent position in the epgs and guaranteed access to spectrum, with reserved capacity on DTT multiplexes, in effect zero net fees.

If the situation changes in future the government reserves the right to look at it again. To allow for this they are to repeal section 73 of the Copyright, Design and Patents Act 1988 which allowed cable operators to retransmit PSB programming without payment. The Bill to repeal the section was published on July 5th.

Decent Skin

I'd have no real issues if it were dropped; almost never watch RTÉ on Sky, because the HD version on Saorview is a million times better than Sky's HD-Ready version.

Elmo

The report basically says the commercial PSBs are fairly compensated by their prominent position in the epgs and guaranteed access to spectrum, with reserved capacity on DTT multiplexes, in effect zero net fees.

This should be enforce here, BAI are very week when it comes to EPG positioning. AFAIK the EPG guidelines are only developed for Saorview and not other providers. and rather than being regulations they are only guidelines. pointless really for saorview.

PSB in the UK could ask for payment for addition channels outside bbc 1, 2, itv, c4 and c5?

gordongekko

Of course this is all up in the air now. With Brexit there may be restrictions placed on uk stations broadcasting into the remaining EU states.

Capt'n Midnight

gordongekko wrote: »

Of course this is all up in the air now. With Brexit there may be restrictions placed on uk stations broadcasting into the remaining EU states.

Aren't SKY based in Luxemburg for tax avoidance reasons ?

The Cush

gordongekko wrote: »

Of course this is all up in the air now. With Brexit there may be restrictions placed on uk stations broadcasting into the remaining EU states.

Brexit will have no effect on frequency coordination and the services carried. This is done bilaterally and multilaterally between national administrations, both inside and outside the EU, under ITU Radio Rules. It will be up to the UK to decide, post brexit, what EU broadcasting, spectrum regulations, etc. they wish to implement. Much of this work is already done within CEPT, the pan-European telecoms body, for the EU.

icdg

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Aren't SKY based in Luxemburg for tax avoidance reasons ?

Not true - Sky are a public limited company incorporated under the laws of England and Wales, and their headquarters is in Iselworth, Middlesex.

SES, who own the actual satellites are based in Luxembourg . There is no suggestion this is for tax reasons , and as I understand it, is because the Luxembourg state played a part in their founding - their liberal broadcasting laws may have helped.

Brexit won't have a major effect on broadcasting IMO, and in any case no political boundary can defeat the laws of physics. The satellite hasn't been invented that will cover the entirety of the U.K. and not also Ireland.

gordongekko

There may be a tax on the importation of goods and services from the UK unto Europe which may make these channels not viable for broadcasting a irish opt out service.

icdg

icdg wrote: »

SES, who own the actual satellites are based in Luxembourg . There is no suggestion this is for tax reasons , and as I understand it, is because the Luxembourg state played a part in their founding - their liberal broadcasting laws may have helped.

OT I know but, if I recall, their co-founder Candace Johnson was married to an ambassador of Luxembourg so that would have played a big part too.

Apogee

Sunday Independent wrote:

Pay-TV operators Sky and Virgin Media should pay RTE up to €30m a year in order to carry its channels, according to a report by UK experts.

TG4 and TV3 could also benefit to the tune of €8m annually, based on a detailed analysis of the financial benefit to Sky and Virgin of carrying free-to-air stations, the most watched channels on these platforms.

Communications Minister Denis Naughten is reviewing Irish broadcasting legislation and is considering introducing retransmission fees.
The report, by London-based media consultants Mediatique, commissioned by RTE, was released to the Sunday Independent under FOI after an initial refusal was appealed.
...

http://www.independent.ie/business/media/sky-and-virgin-should-pay-rte-30m-to-carry-its-tv-channels-35424101.html

Sam Russell

Perhaps Sky at al could pay for Saorview and then all channels would be in HD.

€12 m per year it costs to run two muxes. We could afford three muxes if Sky paid for it, then all channels would be in super HD.

The Cush

Apogee wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/business/media/sky-and-virgin-should-pay-rte-30m-to-carry-its-tv-channels-35424101.html

Flashback to 2014

Irish Times, Nov 2014

A UK consultancy firm called Mediatique was hired earlier this year to conduct research that will help the broadcaster – and the Government – “understand much more clearly who creates value for whom in the relationship between Irish terrestrial broadcasters and the major pay-TV platforms operating in Ireland”.

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/rt%C3%A9-seeks-new-deal-on-transmission-fees-1.1992826

_Kaiser_

Sam Russell wrote: »

Perhaps Sky at al could pay for Saorview and then all channels would be in HD.

€12 m per year it costs to run two muxes. We could afford three muxes if Sky paid for it, then all channels would be in super HD.

I'd rather they spent the money on channels rather than picture quality myself. Let's face it, anyone who values HD content/channels isn't relying on Saorview for it

I'd prefer to see Saorview be a real Freeview/Sat-style alternative to pay TV than the 2/3 OK-ish channels.. and the rest... that it is now.

If they could come to some arrangement for the addition of BBC, ITV (unlikely with Virgin/Sky I know!) and C4 and worked with hardware providers on a proper Sky+/Humax HDR style box and EPG then it might actually be worth the €12m.

Do we know what proportion of households use it as their primary/only viewing means anyway?