...Upcoming entertainment channel FX UK will broadcast daily between 10am and 4am, Digital Spy can confirm today.
Launching for Sky viewers at 8pm on January 12...
Rather pointless for Fox to launch a channel when they allready have sold out transmission rights for most of their flagship shows to other channels. A better move would have been to wait until something big like pay TV rights for The Simpsons are up for renewal and to launch the channel on the back of that.
Once again we just have another channel to spread the same programming out even more thinly over - I do wonder if there will come a time when every programme has it's own dedicated digital channel.
And before anyone asks, no this won't be appearing on Freeview - they've got the excitement of 'Daytime' from Disney to come.
I wonder why they are in at epg no. 289? Surely they could afford a better positioning than this.
And surely Sky are going to have to reorganise the main section, with this arrival they are only 11 away from the movies, and no new channel has launched right next to another one, unless they are connected in some way!
I wonder why they are in at epg no. 289? Surely they could afford a better positioning than this.
And surely Sky are going to have to reorganise the main section, with this arrival they are only 11 away from the movies, and no new channel has launched right next to another one, unless they are connected in some way!
There is only priority available to the five major channels. All other positions are on a first come first served basis - with a three channel gap.
200's are for general entertainment and 289 was the next available slot.
So how did the BBC manage to blag BBC Three & BBC Four from positions 160 & 161 up to positions 115 & 116? As even though they are the BBC, they are not the main five channels.
And then channels can add channels within the 3 channels, such as SKY ONE added SKY ONE MIX to epg no. 107, and how UK FOOD recently added UK FOOD +1 to channel 151.
Though that still doesnt explain how they lept up to 115 & 116.
Though if they are to continue like this, they will have to re organise them, bringing all of the channels closer as they are mightily close to the movie channels now.
I'm not expecting much from this new channel, it is fox after all...
Well Remember:
Quote:
Fox Nearly Sued Itself Over 'Simpsons' Parody
Rupert Murdoch's Fox News Channel threatened to sue the makers of "The Simpsons" over a parody of the channel's right-wing political stance, the creator of the hit US television show has claimed.
In an interview this week with National Public Radio, Matt Groening recalled how the news channel had considered legal action, despite the fact that "The Simpsons" is broadcast on sister network, Fox Entertainment.
According to Groening, Fox took exception took a Simpsons' version of the Fox News rolling news ticker which parodied the channel's anti-Democrat stance, with headlines like "Do Democrats Cause Cancer?"
"Fox fought against it and said they would sue the show," Groening said.
"We called their bluff because we didn't think Rupert Murdoch would pay for Fox to sue itself. So, we got away with it."
Other satirical Fox news bulletins featured in the show included: "Study: 92 per cent of Democrats are gay... JFK posthumously joins Republican Party... Oil slicks found to keep seals young, supple..."
While the lawsuit never materialized, Groening said some action was taken.
"Now Fox has a new rule that we can't do those little fake news crawls on the bottom of the screen in a cartoon because it might confuse the viewers into thinking it's real news," he said.
"The Simpsons," featuring the dysfunctional family of patriarch Homer Simpson and his rowdy brood, is now in its 14th year and is expected to become the longest-running situation comedy in US history in 2005.
The gaps are for associated channels - so Sky One had 106, so Sky One Mix got 107 - Sky Two (if it happened) could have 108.
UKTV had 150, 151 and 152 - so were able to have UK Food+1 on 151 following on from UK Food on 150. Paramount 2 got the next channel up from Paramount - Bravo +1 got the next channel up from Bravo - and so on. It is exactly why there is spacing between the channels.
Occasionally channels close and so gaps can appear - and later taken over again - which is how a gap appeared at 115 (I think this was Disney before they moved). Getting 115 also provided 116 and 117.
But surely nobody in their right minds is expecting Fox (owned by Rupy Baby) to have to follow any rules on channel numbering set down by Sky (owned by Rupy Baby), are they?
I do still wonder quite why this channel is happening. As it stands, it's just another new digital channel; not really worth the bandwidth talking about it on this forum is taking up.
But if they really get serious, they could potentially nab even more rights from Sky. Sky One has never really recovered from loosing Friends and ER to E4 (and how on earth they let that happen I don't know), what they'd be like if they lost more shows to Fox UK (such as their flagship The Simpsons) I hate to imagine.
Simulcasting the FNC here is one thing, but creating UK designed Fox branded channels to operate alongside Sky's channels seems a very ill thoughtout and downright bad move to take; it's effectively Rupert going into competition with himself.
Running two channels head-to-head will not just reduce the number of viewers on your original channel - but will reduce viewers on other channels as well.
The result is the News Corp. will end up with more viewers - spread over two channels.
The more products you have to offer - the bigger the market share - especially when you have two (or more products) aiming at the same market.
It has been happening in the grocery and household products market for a long time.
Well what do you think?
