Whats involved in UPC offering HD channels.

bk · 10-05-2009 11:16AM

DingDong wrote: »

It will be around 6 HD channels to start with and a nice new HD DVR will be required for the service.

No offense DingDong, but that doesn't sound great to me.

It sounds like you won't have any of the Sky HD channels (all the sports and movie channels) and that is what most people want.

I expect Sky won't allow others to carry these channels or asking way too much for them to keep the advantage with Sky *.

I'm guessing UPC will end up with:
BBC HD
C4 HD
Maybe ITV HD
Discovery HD
History HD
National Geographic HD
Eurosport HD

Really nothing to get excited about, won't stop people churning to Sky.

* Since Sky pretty much have a monopoly on sports and movies, the UK government should regulate them and force Sky to wholesale their sports and movie channels for the same price to others as they sell them to themselves.

maggy_thatcher · 10-05-2009 07:26PM

bk wrote: »

* Since Sky pretty much have a monopoly on sports and movies, the UK government should regulate them and force Sky to wholesale their sports and movie channels for the same price to others as they sell them to themselves.

1. No they don't - for sport, there's Setanta as a subscription channel, as well as Eurosport/ITV/BBC/etc for the "free" channels. For movies, there's nothing to stop UPC creating a "UPC movie" channel, and bidding for access to the movies themselves.
2. Even if the UK government did force Sky to wholesale sports/movies to others at "the same rate", that wouldn't apply to UPC Ireland - that would be up to the Irish government to do that.

paulm17781 · 11-05-2009 08:06AM

bk wrote: »

I'm guessing UPC will end up with:
BBC HD
C4 HD
Maybe ITV HD
Discovery HD
History HD
National Geographic HD
Eurosport HD

I'd be happy with them to start. Sky movies is a waste of money, I'd rather not spend my time watching men in shorts run around so that rules out Sky. Granted, I'd prefer more HD channels but they'll come with time.

bk · 11-05-2009 09:00AM

paulm17781 wrote: »

I'd be happy with them to start. Sky movies is a waste of money, I'd rather not spend my time watching men in shorts run around so that rules out Sky. Granted, I'd prefer more HD channels but they'll come with time.

But all customers surveys have shown that the majority of people only want HD for sport and movies.

Virgin Media themselves have said there is no point in doing HD, until Sky makes its sports and movie channels available.

I personally have a 50" HD TV and most standard TV looks fine on it. Only sport really looks bad (due to fast motion and lots of green) and could really do with HD. I wouldn't pay an extra €15 per month for the soaps and reality TV BS on the likes of BBC, ITV, etc.

do you really want to see Vera Duckworth in HD?

Dcc channels, fair enough, they can also benefit from HD.

1. No they don't - for sport, there's Setanta as a subscription channel, as well as Eurosport/ITV/BBC/etc for the "free" channels. For movies, there's nothing to stop UPC creating a "UPC movie" channel, and bidding for access to the movies themselves.

I disagree, no other company is big enough to compete effectively for these rights.

Also when companies do compete, it usually leads to a worse situation for the customer. Just look at Setanta, before Setanta, you could get all your sports needs from Sky, but when Setanta came on the scene, you then had to get both Setanta and Sky if you wanted to watch all the sport.

The cost of watching sport effectively doubled for sports fans :mad:

paulm17781 · 11-05-2009 09:08AM

bk wrote: »

But all customers surveys have shown that the majority of people only want HD for sport and movies.

Perhaps, but I don't.

maggy_thatcher · 11-05-2009 09:18AM

bk wrote: »

I disagree, no other company is big enough to compete effectively for these rights.

BSkyB - 2008 Revenue £4.9bn
Virgin Media - 2008 Revenue $16bn

Surely if Sky can afford it, Virgin can too? Liberty Global (who own UPC) aren't exactly a little company either...

bk wrote: »

Also when companies do compete, it usually leads to a worse situation for the customer. Just look at Setanta, before Setanta, you could get all your sports needs from Sky, but when Setanta came on the scene, you then had to get both Setanta and Sky if you wanted to watch all the sport.

The cost of watching sport effectively doubled for sports fans :mad:

So what do you suggest? They could introduce a law forcing everything "sporty" to be FTA (I know that they have that for certain events), but I don't think the sports associations would like the massive budget cuts that would result out of that...

Alun · 11-05-2009 09:19AM

paulm17781 wrote: »

Perhaps, but I don't.

Me neither. Not interested in sports, well at least not 99.9% of what Sky Sports et al serve up, and not too interested in the latest movies either. Nature documentaries would be more my thing so BBC HD would be more than enough for me. Whether it would be worth it for me to upgrade just for that though is another matter.

Mossy Monk · 11-05-2009 09:37AM

bk wrote: »

Also when companies do compete, it usually leads to a worse situation for the customer. Just look at Setanta, before Setanta, you could get all your sports needs from Sky, but when Setanta came on the scene, you then had to get both Setanta and Sky if you wanted to watch all the sport.

Before Setanta came along I could watch everything on Sky Sports?

bk · 11-05-2009 11:48AM

maggy_thatcher wrote: »

So what do you suggest? They could introduce a law forcing everything "sporty" to be FTA (I know that they have that for certain events), but I don't think the sports associations would like the massive budget cuts that would result out of that...

No, I'm just suggesting that the UK government (and the Irish government could do the same) designate them as having significant market power under EU law and therefore require them to wholesale their channels, pretty much like BT is forced to do with phone lines in the UK, Eircom here in Ireland and many other companies are in other industries.

There really isn't anything new or unusual about this process.

Sky wouldn't really lose much, they would still make the same money, they just wouldn't be able to use their position as a broadcaster of so much sport to hurt their competitors in other areas.

Basically this is using your monopoly in one area to win market in another area and I believe Sky are currently been investigated in the UK for this practice.

Mossy Monk wrote: »

Before Setanta came along I could watch everything on Sky Sports?

Well before Setanta came along you could watch all the premiership games on Sky Sports. Now you have to get both Sky Sports and Setanta if you want to watch all the matches.

Sure Setanta has a few relatively niche sports that weren't on Sky sports, but they were previously on other FTA channels anyway.

Setanta is pretty much the worst thing that happened to sports viewing in years from the customers POV. Formula 1 was a disaster on Setanta, their Rugby coverage is dreadful.

maggy_thatcher · 11-05-2009 12:23PM

bk wrote: »

No, I'm just suggesting that the UK government (and the Irish government could do the same) designate them as having significant market power under EU law and therefore require them to wholesale their channels, pretty much like BT is forced to do with phone lines in the UK, Eircom here in Ireland and many other companies are in other industries.

The difference between BT/Eircom and Sky is that the phone companies were able to (when they were owned by their governments) put a cable into (almost) every building in the country. The barrier-to-entry costs for a new player in the field here would be astronomical. Sky's just a media producing and distribution channel. Their sports channels are used by ~1% of the UK/Irish audience, so they certainly don't have a monopoly there. About the only thing they have a monopoly in is in subscription satellite services in UK/Ireland.
The barrier to entry for a new entrant into the premium sports/movies field is to rent a transponder frequency and to bid on the content.

bk wrote: »

Sky wouldn't really lose much, they would still make the same money, they just wouldn't be able to use their position as a broadcaster of so much sport to hurt their competitors in other areas.

Sky's agreements with their upstream providers may not allow them to re-sell HD content (I don't know if they can/can't - I'm just saying it's an option). UPC Ireland doesn't exactly have the best reputation when it comes to security on their network either - maybe the new security system is good, but maybe not, either way, it needs to be looked at.

bk wrote: »

Basically this is using your monopoly in one area to win market in another area and I believe Sky are currently been investigated in the UK for this practice.

If I recall correctly, this was due to Virgin Media objecting to Sky upping their wholesale rates on the Sky Entertainment packages (Sky1, etc.)...I don't know what ever happened with that though.

bk wrote: »

Well before Setanta came along you could watch all the premiership games on Sky Sports. Now you have to get both Sky Sports and Setanta if you want to watch all the matches.

That's not Sky's fault - blame that on the FA for splitting the contract. They could've given all the premiership games to one side or the other...

bk wrote: »

Sure Setanta has a few relatively niche sports that weren't on Sky sports, but they were previously on other FTA channels anyway.

Setanta is pretty much the worst thing that happened to sports viewing in years from the customers POV. Formula 1 was a disaster on Setanta, their Rugby coverage is dreadful.

I'll take your word for it - I don't really watch sports on TV (if I got HD, it'd be more for movies or the Discovery-style programming).

Mossy Monk · 11-05-2009 01:14PM

bk wrote: »

Well before Setanta came along you could watch all the premiership games on Sky Sports.

That's not true. You could watch all televised games provided you payed extra for Prem Plus

watty · 11-05-2009 02:47PM

Mossy Monk wrote: »

Before Setanta came along I could watch everything on Sky Sports?

Before Cable & Satellite I could get everything on BBC/ITV/C4 on my aerial. Except no RTE.

Of course the brain dead regulators thinks it helps the consumer to concentrate ONLY on supplier competition, so They thought it was good to force sports rights holders to split packages between bidders.

Stupidity.

This is same philosophy that results in Irish Energy regulator keeping prices high (before regulator we were cheap for electricity) to encourage "so called" Competitors in to resell Electric. Hence Bord Gais selling electric 10% cheaper.

Idiots.

deanh · 11-05-2009 03:13PM

The allocation of premiership tv rights was fixed to support two groups. Murdoch's sky was losing €2 million a week(1980s) and needed to secure the rights so they could continue to screw more money out of their subscribers ever since. After the Taylor report(post Hillsborough), Premiership clubs had to invest in all-seater stadia and needed rights money to do so. If Sky had lost the first round of rights they would have gone bankrupt so the F.A. would have lost future revenue. ITV actually bid more for the first sealed round of rights but,only Sky were given an extension to outbid them.Sky may have improved the quality of soccer coverage (Andy Gray? Jamie Rednapp??) but consumer benefit has never been what this is about.

gashead · 11-05-2009 07:10PM

Jamie Rednapp

Ho Ho Ho. Tottenham played reallly well today (didn't they Dad)...

I object to paying sky money to listen to muppets like JR. Sh1te footballer, sh1te pundit. Thats another of skys problems. Spend all the money on the clubs but give feck all to the consumer. At least Setanta gave us the 3.00 kick offs.

Mossy Monk · 11-05-2009 08:31PM

gashead wrote: »

Jamie Rednapp

Ho Ho Ho. Tottenham played reallly well today (didn't they Dad)...

I object to paying sky money to listen to muppets like JR. Sh1te footballer, sh1te pundit. Thats another of skys problems. Spend all the money on the clubs but give feck all to the consumer. At least Setanta gave us the 3.00 kick offs.

Not just Spurs. Can't have anyone say a bad word about his cousin Frank Lampard or any of his other friends who play football. He is an absolute pain in the arse.

bk · 11-05-2009 11:36PM

maggy_thatcher wrote: »

If I recall correctly, this was due to Virgin Media objecting to Sky upping their wholesale rates on the Sky Entertainment packages (Sky1, etc.)...I don't know what ever happened with that though.

No, that was a separate issue, but another example of Sky using it's content to bully other companies.

VM have specifically said that Sky would not sell them HD channels.

maggy_thatcher wrote: »

That's not Sky's fault - blame that on the FA for splitting the contract. They could've given all the premiership games to one side or the other...

No it was the regulators who told the FA to do that.

Also both Setanta and Sky's Rugby coverage is dreadful. RTE offer vastly better coverage of Rugby when they have it.

Slutmonkey57b · 08-06-2009 07:53PM

watty wrote: »

I have a 16 outlet "multiswitch" that takes FOUR "quattro" LNBs, the 1st one is pointed at 28.2E (Sky/Freesat), The Sky boxes have no LNB selection feature, so they see the Sky signals. My PCs (3 each with 2 tuners) and other sat boxes can select an LNB via "DISEQC" commands. The "multiswitch" responds and will connect the correct one of 4 LNBs and the correct one of four coax for low + Vert, low + hor, Hi + vert OR Hi +hor of satellites at 28.2E, 13E, 19E, or 23.5E.

Another separate receiver controls a motorised dish. It only has a single outlet LNB as a PVR would need TWO motorised dishes, as the recorded channel might be a separate satellite. The 110cm motorised dish I think receives 22 different satellite positions between 42E and 50W

How many men in white coats with clipboards live at your house?
Which button controls the sliding cover for the underground volcano lair?

Koloman · 13-07-2009 01:57AM

Interesting news regarding Virgin and HD in the UK.

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitaltv/a164766/4-hd-channels-to-launch-on-virgin-media.html

Will UPC be next I wonder?

bk · 13-07-2009 09:32AM

Koloman wrote: »

Interesting news regarding Virgin and HD in the UK.

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitaltv/a164766/4-hd-channels-to-launch-on-virgin-media.html

Will UPC be next I wonder?

But still noticeable that no Sky HD (including Sports and Movies on Virgin).

watty · 13-07-2009 10:29AM

There is no connection between UPC & Virgin.

How many men in white coats with clipboards live at your house?
Which button controls the sliding cover for the underground volcano lair?

I have a clipboard. But I don't bother with a white coat. There is a picture of my "secret lab" and aerials + dishes on Boards.

There is no sliding cover. A yale lock controls access.

Koloman · 13-07-2009 06:49PM

watty wrote: »

There is no connection between UPC & Virgin.

Never said there was. I just thought it was interesting that another digital tv provider other than Sky was forging ahesd with it's own HD offering.

So if Virgin can do it then why not UPC?

Mossy Monk · 13-07-2009 08:35PM

UPC do offer HD in Europe. It is only a matter of time before it is offered here.

watty · 13-07-2009 09:16PM

Lots of places have HD.
Not much content in UK yet. Is the BBC HD even a non-trial service?

So when there is more commercial value (Content that Sky isn't charging an Arm & leg for) and sufficient people have HD sets I'm sure they will launch HD.

At the minute there is zero Irish content.

Cupart · 14-07-2009 11:42AM

Mossy Monk wrote: »

UPC do offer HD in Europe. It is only a matter of time before it is offered here.

You are most certainly right.

So far there are three sHD treams on the UPC grid so I guess it's just around the corner.

So far Eurosport HD, NGT HD and Discovery HD are testing...

Mountjoy Mugger · 14-07-2009 12:50PM

I wish they'd add Eurosport 2, never mind EurosportHD

lensman · 15-07-2009 08:57AM

Cupart wrote: »

You are most certainly right.

So far there are three sHD treams on the UPC grid so I guess it's just around the corner.

So far Eurosport HD, NGT HD and Discovery HD are testing...

do you mean on UPC Ireland ? what freq's ? surely we could pickup the TP & or epg info even on a standard UPC box just to verify they are testing,..if I knew for defo UPC were to roll out HD soon I would not make the jump to sky

dangerousdavid · 15-07-2009 09:13AM

FWIW - A film crew were filming outside my work recently, we got an e-mail telling us what they were doing.

They were making a HD documentary series and it is scheduled to be shown on RTE in January 2010

Ice_Box · 15-07-2009 09:25AM

dangerousdavid wrote: »

FWIW - A film crew were filming outside my work recently, we got an e-mail telling us what they were doing.

They were making a HD documentary series and it is scheduled to be shown on RTE in January 2010

Interesting. That documentary about Oliver Cromwell was shown on the History channel HD recently. Also Irelands Nazis was in HD so maybe all documentaries are shot in HD so they can sell them the these channels.

watty · 15-07-2009 09:55AM

TG4 made everything in WS from the beginning. They still are not on WS on terrestrial officially till DTT launches.

The HD program may very likely be shown in SD in 2010. Obviously Production in HD will long predate any RTE/TG4 HD launch.

fbradyirl · 18-07-2009 06:32PM

Great that they seem to be doing some testing

So does anyone know - will we need to pay extra per month fo HD or will it just be a matter of getting a new box from UPC?

Whats involved in UPC offering HD channels.

Comments