nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Debate: Does it annoy you that RTE are only Broadcaster on HD on Saorview?

carrolls

Just when the topic was gaining momentum on the terrestrial forum, it was closed down and we were told to use the UTV sticky here in Broadcasting. But the debate was far from complete.
This is a general question about independents, not just UTV.
So I pose the question again here. Any independents who would like to broadcast in HD on Saorview are required to pay RTE Networks €2.2 Million annually for the privilege of doing so.
This fee does not really matter to RTE, because their subsidiary 2RN have been given the job of ringmaster for the network and because they fund the network using license payers money.
Therefore, due to government granted monopolistic competition rules, RTE have a huge competitive advantage over other broadcasters like UTV, TV3 and TG4 when it comes to broadcasting in HD.
Is this fair?
I think more realistic fees should be charged to independents for access to HD, In other words create a level playing field.
I suggest that the part of the licence that funds RTE carriage should be shared equally between RTE, UTV, TV3 and TG4, So they can all afford to broadcast in HD.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

TAFKAlawhec

ardmacha wrote: »

This implies that the Saorview carriage fees are not pro rata with other places. This is not inevitable.

To determine the viability of how many services are capable of being supported on a DTT platform, the following variables come into play.

The size of the population to be served
The infrastructure in place to serve this population
The constraints of frequency spectrum availability
The percentage of the population that use DTT either for primary or an important secondary viewing platform

With the first, Saorview serves a potential 4.6 million people in the state, plus a potential additional 1.0 million north of the border. Within Europe this puts the ROI in a rough grouping with Finland, Norway, Croatia, Denmark, Slovakia & Bosnia among some others.

For the second, Saorview has a 64 transmission site network potentially serving over 4.5 million in the state. Compare this to the UK - the PSB multiplexes are broadcast from over 1,100 sites covering over 60 million people, the SDN and Arqiva multiplexes at 80 sites covering over 54 million, and COM7 from just 30 sites covering roughly 42 million people. A similar scenario exists in Germany where the ARD/ZDF DTT transmissions are much more widespread than those from commercial broadcasters.

In terms of frequency spectrum, at least going by the GE06 agreement which has since been revised and will likely be revised again (due to UHF spectrum sell-off for mobile telephony) Ireland has 8 UHF & 1 VHF layer. At present the demand for space on Saorview does not pose spectrum problems for Comreg.

Finally, only a small minority in the state rely solely on terrestrial reception for their viewing. Pay-TV subscriptions are very popular through a combination of cable, MMDS & Sky - I can't remember the exact figure but I think it's something like 60-65% if not higher. Saorview only households, which exclude those also with a FTA satellite system or Freeview overspill from the UK, is around the teens mark.

The case, unfortunate it may be to some, is that there is simply no business or commercial case at present to have a Saorview platform have an amount of services matching that to those in some other European countries that have significantly higher populations like the UK, France, Spain, Italy or Poland. For countries with population figures similar to the Republic of Ireland or even larger, free-to-air choice in these countries is (to the best of my knowledge) not hugely different to what is currently available on Saorview, around ten to twelve channels at the most FTA. In some cases (e.g. Netherlands, Sweden, Hungary) there is a pay-TV operation broadcast alongside available FTA channels. Now is not the time to go down the road over the history of potential Pay TV on DTT in Ireland.

Also worth remembering that in the UK, Spain, France & Italy, terrestrial television is the main platform of viewing in these countries. More than half of the households in the UK use Freeview as their main or sole TV platform. In Germany DTT as a sole viewing platform is only ~10%.

With the discussion over the carriage costs on Saorview, skewed as they may, take for example a channel wanting to broadcast in SD on a Saorview multiplex. Let's say a good scenario of cost per year for transmission fees are €600,000. Then take a similar channel looking to get access on to the Arqiva A multiplex on Freeview in the UK - these slots come around by a private auction and the actual figures aren't public, but are estimated to be around STG£3-5 million per year. Say for this example it's €3.5 million per year. Although the broadcaster is paying nearly six times more for Freeview carriage compared to Saorview, they're reaching around twelve times the potential viewing heads. Then factor in the percentage of viewers who rely on the platform for their viewing (more people = more chance they'll stumble across you among the smog of channels available) which is around 2.5-3 times higher as a percentage in the UK compared to the Republic of Ireland, then excluding advertising targeting it's much more cost effective on Freeview compared to Saorview.

Of course, what could be structured is to develop Saorview into a two-tier structure similar to that for Freeview in the UK (which is itself presently on a 3 or 3.5 tier structure) whereby a third multiplex is made available at less sites than the current two - say only from the 'main' sites and from relays targeting denser populated areas e.g. Waterford, Tonabrucky, Collins Barracks. at around 20-24 sites or so which allows for cheaper infrastructure costs but still potentially covers around 85-90% of the population. A properly regulated pricing structure could see commercial broadcasters both inside and outside the state look for carriage on this third multiplex, but the predictable political outcry from viewers in areas that would lie outside of coverage would see this flounder quickly.

TAFKAlawhec

Thurston? wrote: »

I don't think the BBC or UK government feel they have the same 'cultural mission' down here, as what caused TG4, & then RTE to end up on NI transmitters.

I think some people here forget that RTÉ 1, RTÉ 2 and TG4 (excluding some programming blackouts) on Freeview in Northern Ireland is only transmitted from three sites at low to low-ish power, not all 44 of them. Coverage is helped by the use of a rugged transmission parameter set up. It's not a huge network by any account, and half of its costs are covered by the UK government. And certainly very different to the idea of relaying BBC 1 & BBC 2 across the whole Saorview network. It's also worth remembering that MoUs are not binding agreements - it was never mentioned how these two channels would be funded on Saorview given that the BBC themselves would never do so themselves, and once this was quickly pointed out changes were pretty prompt. I reckon it's time to move on from it, the nuances of it were very unlikely to be fully implemented in its original form in the first place.

Finally, on the question that is the subject of this thread - it doesn't 'annoy' me as such - to me the likes of TV3, TG4 and UTV are just aware that pouring extra transmission costs into Saorview to broadcast in HD at this stage is not a good way of spending their money when more people are likely to see them in HD on Sky or UPC potentially than Saorview. Even allowing for the strange cost of appearing on the platform, they'll more likely go HD on the platform only if the amount of viewers watching them on Saorview compared to other platforms were to increase.

Johnboy1951

Does it annoy you that RTE are only Broadcaster on HD on Saorview?

No.
WHat commercial stations do is their business and much as I would like to see them broadcast in HD, the fact they do not does not annoy me.

Neither do I have an expectation of other FTA channels, originating in another country, appearing on Saorview.

It cost very little investment to receive such channels and I am very grateful I can receive them at all.

What would make Saorview 'interesting' would be if the only TV space being sold on the muxes was HD and if a broadcaster already has a HD broadcast they could be offered an SD channel as a supplementary (for the likes of +1 or such).
But the primary contract should be HD.
It *could* be introduced if the will was there, and if a proper commercial pricing structure was allowed.

dublinman1990

TAFKAlawhec wrote: »

I think some people here forget that RTÉ 1, RTÉ 2 and TG4 (excluding some programming blackouts) on Freeview in Northern Ireland is only transmitted from three sites at low to low-ish power, not all 44 of them. Coverage is helped by the use of a rugged transmission parameter set up. It's not a huge network by any account, and half of its costs are covered by the UK government. And certainly very different to the idea of relaying BBC 1 & BBC 2 across the whole Saorview network. It's also worth remembering that MoUs are not binding agreements - it was never mentioned how these two channels would be funded on Saorview given that the BBC themselves would never do so themselves, and once this was quickly pointed out changes were pretty prompt. I reckon it's time to move on from it, the nuances of it were very unlikely to be fully implemented in its original form in the first place.

Finally, on the question that is the subject of this thread - it doesn't 'annoy' me as such - to me the likes of TV3, TG4 and UTV are just aware that pouring extra transmission costs into Saorview to broadcast in HD at this stage is not a good way of spending their money when more people are likely to see them in HD on Sky or UPC potentially than Saorview. Even allowing for the strange cost of appearing on the platform, they'll more likely go HD on the platform only if the amount of viewers watching them on Saorview compared to other platforms were to increase.

Actually it's both UPC and eVision have the majority of the Irish channels in HD with a total of 4 each with a HD subscription which are RTE One HD, RTE2 HD, TG4 HD and UTV Ireland HD.

There are over 500k viewers on Sky that still haven't yet received 3 of the RTE channels that are currently available on Saorview namely RTE One HD, RTE NN and RTE One +1. This is due to an issue of not paying the satellite transmission fees and the lack of extra space for a transponder.

Sky though are on the same count as Saorview with them currently have 2 HD channels although they have RTE2 HD and UTV Ireland HD.

Mickey Mike

carrolls wrote: »

Just when the topic was gaining momentum on the terrestrial forum, it was closed down and we were told to use the UTV sticky here in Broadcasting. But the debate was far from complete.
This is a general question about independents, not just UTV.
So I pose the question again here. Any independents who would like to broadcast in HD on Saorview are required to pay RTE Networks €2.2 Million annually for the privilege of doing so.
This fee does not really matter to RTE, because their subsidiary 2RN have been given the job of ringmaster for the network and because they fund the network using license payers money.
Therefore, due to government granted monopolistic competition rules, RTE have a huge competitive advantage over other broadcasters like UTV, TV3 and TG4 when it comes to broadcasting in HD.
Is this fair?
I think more realistic fees should be charged to independents for access to HD, In other words create a level playing field.
I suggest that the part of the licence that funds RTE carriage should be shared equally between RTE, UTV, TV3 and TG4, So they can all afford to broadcast in HD.

You are absolutely right, share the licence fee in some fashion.
As of now TV3 has been sold to UPC. What an absolute disaster I can't see them going HD on saorview. They might even pull away from saorview altogether, its all badly managed at the moment and will end up doing damage to PSB broadcasting in the future.

STB.

dublinman1990 wrote: »

Actually it's both UPC and eVision have the majority of the Irish channels in HD with a total of 4 each with a HD subscription which are RTE One HD, RTE2 HD, TG4 HD and UTV Ireland HD.

There are over 500k viewers on Sky that still haven't yet received 3 of the RTE channels that are currently available on Saorview namely RTE One HD, RTE NN and RTE One +1. This is due to an issue of not paying the satellite transmission fees and the lack of extra space for a transponder.

Sky though are on the same count as Saorview with them currently have 2 HD channels although they have RTE2 HD and UTV Ireland HD.

The reason that Sky dont have RTE 1 HD or the other channels is that they didnt request them. It is nothing else. The BBC do not even pay for carriage on Sky, never mind RTE.

Sky should not be offering the RTE1 HD channel in Standard Definition as it is not broadcast natively in this format. The word unabridged in the legislation should most definitely be applied to the broadcast standard. RTE should insist on it.

STB.

Mickie Mike wrote: »

You are absolutely right, share the licence fee in some fashion.
As of now TV3 has been sold to UPC. What an absolute disaster I can't see them going HD on saorview. They might even pull away from saorview altogether, its all badly managed at the moment and will end up doing damage to PSB broadcasting in the future.

He is absolutely wrong infact.

Look up the definitions of Public Service Television. Then look up the definition of Commercial Television. Tv3 are and will forever be a commercial operation. They should get no money whatsoever from the public as they are a commercial entity. As it is they had €81 million written off and then bought their own remaining €70million debt back from IBRC at a considerable discount. All of this whilst being owned by a large private equity company. They have had enough from the taxpayer. Now UPC owns it.

RTE spent €61m in building the Saorview network. The least that the commercial operators can do is pay for carriage.

icdg

STB. wrote: »

Sky should not be offering the RTE1 HD channel in Standard Definition as it is not broadcast natively in this format. The word unabridged in the legislation should most definitely be applied to the broadcast standard. RTE should insist on it.

Why? That would have the perverse result of stopping Sky viewers with non-HD digiboxes from watching the channel. I can't think of who would benefit from that. The same goes with the SD version (and indeed the still extant analogue version) on UPC.

I have said this before: UPC and Sky are not like Saorview in this regard. All Saorview boxes are HD compatible and it doesn't matter that only a HD version is offered. On Sky and UPC only offering the HD version means SD users don't get the channel. SD viewers are licence fee payers too.

Sam Russell

icdg wrote: »

Why? That would have the perverse result of stopping Sky viewers with non-HD digiboxes from watching the channel. I can't think of who would benefit from that. The same goes with the SD version (and indeed the still extant analogue version) on UPC.

I have said this before: UPC and Sky are not like Saorview in this regard. All Saorview boxes are HD compatible and it doesn't matter that only a HD version is offered. On Sky and UPC only offering the HD version means SD users don't get the channel. SD viewers are licence fee payers too.

What should happen is that the whole of Saorview must be taken by each platform (by law), not just some channels. All BAI licensed channels that are part of Saorview should be included in this.

2RN (to be independant of RTE) should be the body that negotiates with the platforms in this regard, and the BAI should take the matter on. RTE NN is an orphan channel as a result, and RTE jr is the children's channel but RTE 2 is forced to broadcast children's programmes under Ministerial control. You could not make it up.

STB.

icdg wrote: »

Why? That would have the perverse result of stopping Sky viewers with non-HD digiboxes from watching the channel. I can't think of who would benefit from that. The same goes with the SD version (and indeed the still extant analogue version) on UPC.

I have said this before: UPC and Sky are not like Saorview in this regard. All Saorview boxes are HD compatible and it doesn't matter that only a HD version is offered. On Sky and UPC only offering the HD version means SD users don't get the channel. SD viewers are licence fee payers too.

Its not as simple as saying that people paying subscription companies are also licence payers and RTE should provide X.

The long and short of it is that this is not RTE's problem.

Sky and UPC are both commercial organisations. It is their problem if they are not in a position to offer the station unabridged having requested and after being offered it through the must offer rule because they are not replacing old technology from their paying customers.

RTE's mandate is to provide their channels free to air to those on the island of Ireland.

Subscription Television contracts are private agreements and a choice entered into by individuals with such companies. What service that company provides is between that individual and the respective company. These companies do not provide the channels free to air. Thankfully you do not need to be a subscriber to receive these channels as they are available in Ireland FTA via Saorview/Saorsat.

Saorview/Saorsat customers must use MPEG4 DVB-T/DVB-S2 boxes. A SD Sat box or Freeview box will not suffice. That is a known tech requirement for FTA customers and a choice they make.

People paying Sky should complain to Sky/UPC if their (legacy) proprietary boxes are not capable of receiving these unabridged HD channels that Sky request and are not entitled to charge any more for in the first instance. That RTE are possibly providing SD feeds here is a mockery and a tail wagging the dog scenario.

lgs 4

Bleeding sky subsidizing HD channels, if people seat down with a calculater and worked what they paying sky in one year , well that money is better in my pocket then Rupert Murdoch News International pocket

Mickey Mike

There have been alot of trending lately of RTE1 HD etc launching on SKY, now that its mostly done and dusted , what about our own Saorview! Nothing has changed since the first of January, Are 2rn comreg and the BAI going to leave it as it is. With TV3, TG4 and UTV Ireland still not in HD even with all that spare bandwidth capacity. I know RTE spend €60 odd million and this needs to be paid for. One solution is to sell off more of the UHF band ie. Ch 50 to 59 and move channels on it down, there's still loads of room given the few channels we have. Money made from sale should be channelled in to 2rn/RTE to pay off most of the new network.
In return it would make Saorview more affordable for commercial broadcasters to get there HD services up and running.
Or is there a simpler solution? The whole thing has stalled.

Sam Russell

Mickie Mike wrote: »

In return it would make Saorview more affordable for commercial broadcasters to get there HD services up and running.
Or is there a simpler solution? The whole thing has stalled.

The charge per channel for analogue was about three million euro, so why the problem with paying less for HD on Saorview? What makes it unaffordable?

The cost of two muxes is close to €12 million, and it is the same whatever the use of those muxes. The effect of the current situation is that RTE (us) have to pay €8 m instead of €6 m, and UTVi, TV3 and 3e, and TG4, pay €4 m instead of €6 m. In fact, if all three had one HD channel each, the cost per channel would only be €1.6 m, or if each had a SD and an HD channel, it would only cost them €2 m each.

The Cush

Mickie Mike wrote: »

One solution is to sell off more of the UHF band ie. Ch 50 to 59 and move channels on it down, there's still loads of room given the few channels we have. Money made from sale should be channelled in to 2rn/RTE to pay off most of the new network.
In return it would make Saorview more affordable for commercial broadcasters to get there HD services up and running.

The issue of releasing further spectrum, the 600 Mhz band (aka a third Digital Dividend), has been put to bed for at least 10 years at the recent WRC-15. The 700MHz band has been released at the same conference and is due for auction here maybe next year but highly unlikely any of that money will make its way to 2rn/RTÉ.

brick man

At last on saorview epg its now saying which programmes are in HD on RTE One and 2 . scrolling through a few days quite a lot on One a few during daytime on 2 during trte and a lot during evening . took RTE a long time to get to this stage .

Mickey Mike

brick man wrote: »

At last on saorview epg its now saying which programmes are in HD on RTE One and 2 . scrolling through a few days quite a lot on One a few during daytime on 2 during trte and a lot during evening . took RTE a long time to get to this stage .

Very true, but we still only have RTE 1 and 2 in HD, What's going to happen with the rest of them? Channel 14 is HD and showing some content from Dublin and Galway. I think its reserved for TG4 HD. Has anyone any idea what's happening?

Sam Russell

Mickie Mike wrote: »

Very true, but we still only have RTE 1 and 2 in HD, What's going to happen with the rest of them? Channel 14 is HD and showing some content from Dublin and Galway. I think its reserved for TG4 HD. Has anyone any idea what's happening?

LCN 4 is reserved for TG4 HD. (if they ever get around to having one).

LCN 14 is reserved for TG4+1 (if they ever get around to having one).

The fact that they are testing HD on LCN 14 would be an indication that the first of these is likely. I think the second is unlikely.

Mickey Mike

Now with still plenty of room on Saorview platform its time for RTE to upgrade its HD services from 1440+1080 to 1920+1080 since nothing else is happening. Why HD when you could have Full HD.

Sam Russell

Mickie Mike wrote: »

Now with still plenty of room on Saorview platform its time for RTE to upgrade its HD services from 1440+1080 to 1920+1080 since nothing else is happening. Why HD when you could have Full HD.

It would be better to upgrade SD from 504 by 576 to 720 by 576.

The HD upgrade would only increase the cost to RTE of Saorview while reducing it for the others to no real benefit to the viewers in comparison to the improvement the SD upgrade would bring.

The other three broadcasters offer HD on other platforms, so they do have higher resolution video to offer - even if it would not improve the quality of their content.

[Deleted User]

Sam Russell wrote: »

It would be better to upgrade SD from 504 by 576 to 720 by 576.

The HD upgrade would only increase the cost to RTE of Saorview while reducing it for the others to no real benefit to the viewers in comparison to the improvement the SD upgrade would bring.

The other three broadcasters offer HD on other platforms, so they do have higher resolution video to offer - even if it would not improve the quality of their content.

Agreed. It's an absolute joke that TG4 has better picture quality in NI than it does on Saorview.

Mickey Mike

Does anyone think with the merger of TV3 and UTVi will Virgin Media bring about a HD channel to Saorview? I'm sure they'll be interesting times ahead.

byte

Mickie Mike wrote: »

Does anyone think with the merger of TV3 and UTVi will Virgin Media bring about a HD channel to Saorview? I'm sure they'll be interesting times ahead.

Sadly, I doubt it.

Sam Russell

Mickie Mike wrote: »

Does anyone think with the merger of TV3 and UTVi will Virgin Media bring about a HD channel to Saorview? I'm sure they'll be interesting times ahead.

It will only happen by ministerial order which has not been forthcoming in 6 years. Also, RTE should be allowed to run their four channels as they see fit and not be hamstrung by Ministerial interference.

Comreg should make it a minimum requirement that each broadcaster goes HD on their main channel and SD at 720 by 547i on all others.

The Cush

Sam Russell wrote: »

Comreg should make it a minimum requirement that each broadcaster goes HD on their main channel and SD at 720 by 547i on all others.

Won't happen unless the broadcasters agree and the broadcasters won't agree as it'll cost more.

Sam Russell

The Cush wrote: »

Won't happen unless the broadcasters agree and the broadcasters won't agree as it'll cost more.

To go 720 by 576i will not cost much more if they all go that way. The unused bandwidth is just burnt off, so if it used by all SD channels there will be a small variation of charges with RTE paying slightly less and the others paying slightly more (currently RTE pay about €8m of the €12 million cost of Saorview). RTE have 2 HD channels and two SD channels, while TV3, UTVi, and TG4 have four SD channels between them. If RTE improved the bitrate on the HD channels, there might be no extra cost.

I have not done the sums but I think that is the case.

Mickey Mike

Wonder will this new minster for communications change anything, 6 years is a long time to be dragging along. It wouldn't surprise me if VM wanted to pull their 3 channels off saorview in favour of their own platform leaving saorview down to 1 mux, it can be a vicious business. Minster Naghton must pull in all concerned, sort it out and give the platform some meaning.

political analyst

Mickie Mike wrote: »

Wonder will this new minster for communications change anything, 6 years is a long time to be dragging along. It wouldn't surprise me if VM wanted to pull their 3 channels off saorview in favour of their own platform leaving saorview down to 1 mux, it can be a vicious business. Minster Naghton must pull in all concerned, sort it out and give the platform some meaning.

TV3 would be in breach of its licence if it ceased to be available on Saorview.

Carawaystick

political analyst wrote: »

TV3 would be in breach of its licence if it ceased to be available on Saorview.

Does tv3 need a license to be broadcast on Sky?

icdg

Yes, well a content contract to be precise. I think what the OP is suggesting is that it could hand back the television programme service contract and replace it with a content contract. That would free it of all its public service obligations, but it would lose any entitlement to the 103 slot.

However, as a free to air channel, it's in its best interests to be available across all platforms at as high an EPG position as possible.

Mickey Mike

Now with the Olympic games in full swing, wouldn't you imagine RTE or 2rn open up that spare HD channel on mux2 instead of the fuzzy rubbish picture on RTE News Now, good picture on RTE2. The BBC opened 7 HD channels on Freesat to cover the games, we could at least run 2 HD channels while there taking place. They can surely do better than that.