TV Home Forum

CBM pulled from Freeview

Crown Castle reconsidering options (August 2003)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
LU
Luke
cwathen posted:
So what has changed at CBM? Supposedly last time they have a carriage deal in place and were about to launch. And then Crown Castle decided that they weren't good enough and dumped them.

Whatever the moral implications and whatever anyone thinks about CBM's original proposal, this seemed to be illegal. Indeed, CBM were seeking legal advise over the matter.

And now they're suddenly all pally again and CBM are trying to launch a new channel?

What caused this turn of events to come about?


Maybe because CBM realised their original proposal was cheap, clumped together, and an insult to Freeview viewers. Now, their new proposal is cheap, and clumped together, but at least it's something different.
CO
Corin
cwathen posted:
And then Crown Castle decided that they weren't good enough and dumped them .


That is not the story being told by CBM Media's CEO designate, Simon Bazalgette.

From <http://www.c21media.NET/news/news_dtl.asp?id=17841&c=1>

Quote:
After we allowed the Crown Castle deal to lapse , it was clear to us that the key thing was not getting the Freeview slot, but to work on our proposition
ED
edward
well, i'm not optimistic on this channel - showing unwanted sports stuff - (possibly like Sky Sports 3). It might appeal to some people , but the majority will not watch it. The original CBM proposition had Bloomberg as well....

CBM now will be as popular as f tn.
PE
Pete Founding member
edward posted:
well, i'm not optimistic on this channel - showing unwanted sports stuff - (possibly like Sky Sports 3). It might appeal to some people , but the majority will not watch it. The original CBM proposition had Bloomberg as well....

CBM now will be as popular as f tn.


ftn is quite good actually. I watch Bob and Margaret and Dilbert on it. It's not too bad a channel although it has room for improvement.

Mind you it's been in a wierd zoom mode for the last two days. tsk @ automation.
CW
cwathen Founding member
Quote:
That is not the story being told by CBM Media's CEO designate, Simon Bazalgette.

Oh I dare say it isn't, but below is CBM's official response at the time the original channel collapsed:

CBM in August posted:
CBM Media Limited is disappointed but not surprised by Crown Castle's Announcement today in relation to Channel 22. CBM is also actively Considering its options, which include taking legal proceeding for breach of Contract by Crown Castle and making a formal complaint to the Independent Television Commission on competition grounds. CBM will make a decision on exactly how to proceed in the near future.

A CBM Media spokesman said, "As far as we are concerned Crown Castle are trying to renege on our contract signed in April last and there is no valid basis for termination. We have found Crown Castle almost impossible to deal with from the outset and lacking in goodwill towards our exciting new project. In fact Crown Castle have previously tried to use its termination rights in an attempt to force commercial concessions from CBM, concessions that ultimately we were not willing to agree. In addition, it appears from the terms of their press release that Crown Castle are now seeking to exploit the channel-broking concept that CBM have pioneered".

The spokesman continued, "in our opinion, based on our course of dealing, Crown Castle are behaving as a monopolist provider rather than as a fair and non-discriminatory gatekeeper of the DTT platform. This is just one of the conversations we may be having with the ITC in the near future."


A slight contradiction there. Now as I was saying. What has changed. How did CBM get from a 'Crown Castle have breached our contract and we're taking legal action' position into a 'well we let things lapse but now we have a new deal'. Something funny has been going on somewhere.
LU
Luke
cwathen posted:
Quote:
That is not the story being told by CBM Media's CEO designate, Simon Bazalgette.

Oh I dare say it isn't, but below is CBM's official response at the time the original channel collapsed:

CBM in August posted:
CBM Media Limited is disappointed but not surprised by Crown Castle's Announcement today in relation to Channel 22. CBM is also actively Considering its options, which include taking legal proceeding for breach of Contract by Crown Castle and making a formal complaint to the Independent Television Commission on competition grounds. CBM will make a decision on exactly how to proceed in the near future.

A CBM Media spokesman said, "As far as we are concerned Crown Castle are trying to renege on our contract signed in April last and there is no valid basis for termination. We have found Crown Castle almost impossible to deal with from the outset and lacking in goodwill towards our exciting new project. In fact Crown Castle have previously tried to use its termination rights in an attempt to force commercial concessions from CBM, concessions that ultimately we were not willing to agree. In addition, it appears from the terms of their press release that Crown Castle are now seeking to exploit the channel-broking concept that CBM have pioneered".

The spokesman continued, "in our opinion, based on our course of dealing, Crown Castle are behaving as a monopolist provider rather than as a fair and non-discriminatory gatekeeper of the DTT platform. This is just one of the conversations we may be having with the ITC in the near future."


A slight contradiction there. Now as I was saying. What has changed. How did CBM get from a 'Crown Castle have breached our contract and we're taking legal action' position into a 'well we let things lapse but now we have a new deal'. Something funny has been going on somewhere.


Maybe there was a bit of nudge nudge wink wink, a brown envelope here, a guarantee there, and A BETTER PROPOSAL

Newer posts