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

Pal · 21-12-2005 10:06AM #1

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 · 21-12-2005 12:03PM

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

BrianD · 21-12-2005 12:41PM

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 · 21-12-2005 01:32PM

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 · 21-12-2005 01:55PM

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 · 21-12-2005 02:13PM

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 · 21-12-2005 02:24PM

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 · 21-12-2005 05:31PM

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 · 21-12-2005 06:14PM

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 · 21-12-2005 06:52PM

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 · 21-12-2005 07:52PM

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 · 22-12-2005 10:36AM

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 · 22-12-2005 11:28AM

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 · 22-12-2005 12:48PM

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 · 22-12-2005 03:15PM

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

watty · 22-12-2005 05:47PM

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 · 22-12-2005 06:01PM

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 · 22-12-2005 07:23PM

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 · 23-12-2005 01:20PM

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 · 23-12-2005 03:11PM

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 · 23-12-2005 09:05PM

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 · 23-12-2005 09:13PM

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 · 23-12-2005 09:23PM

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 · 23-12-2005 09:47PM

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 · 23-12-2005 09:58PM

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 · 23-12-2005 10:01PM

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 · 24-12-2005 02:17AM

Tony wrote:

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

In Ireland????????

fignon03 · 24-12-2005 02:33AM

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 · 24-12-2005 10:47AM

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 · 24-12-2005 11:24AM

BrianD wrote:

In Ireland????????

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

Ulsterman 1690 · 24-12-2005 12:52PM

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"

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

Comments