TJ
I understand that programme-wise ITV-1HD is a simul-cast of ITV-1 London. Will air-time though be sold separately?
My understanding is that ITV plc had to wait for the result of the CRR (advertising regulation) renegotiations before they could launch ITV1HD as a standalone channel, with its own advertising (which would have pushed ITV plc past its CRR limit of the market?), so I guess they are launching ITV1 HD on Freesat to co-incide with the Freeview HD consumer launch?.
I understand that programme-wise ITV-1HD is a simul-cast of ITV-1 London. Will air-time though be sold separately?
ST
I didn't realise that there were such significant differences in the cost of broadcasting via DSat rather than on DTT.
For some quite illogical reason I always thought that DTT might have been cheaper, if there was any difference at all.
Good news for SkyHD customers today that Five HD will be launching in July. I think that makes Sky the only platform to have all terrestrial channels' HD services.
I didn't realise that there were such significant differences in the cost of broadcasting via DSat rather than on DTT.
For some quite illogical reason I always thought that DTT might have been cheaper, if there was any difference at all.
NG
I didn't realise that there were such significant differences in the cost of broadcasting via DSat rather than on DTT.
For some quite illogical reason I always thought that DTT might have been cheaper, if there was any difference at all.
It's not as simple as just the costs of broadcasting.
1. Sky have more than (old figure 800,000) *** EDIT : 2million *** HD receivers installed - so Five HD can potentially broadcast at launch to these homes. Freeview HD have almost no HD receivers installed - so Five HD would reach almost no audience on Freeview HD initially. As the only thing that pays for Five is advertising and sponsorship (which are directly related to audience numbers) there is no initial return for a large investment in Freeview HD, whereas there will be a return on Sky.
All new Sky subscribers will be getting Sky+HD boxes from now on (they're the new standard Sky box) - and these will deliver BBC HD, ITV HD, C4 HD and Five HD in HD with no subscription if you have a Freesat from Sky card (or with a basic SD subscription - you don't need to pay the HD sub for the FTV/FTA HD services)
This is a VERY canny move on Sky's part - they get to be the only platform with all the main channels in HD, and the standard Sky box, even without an HD subscription, will get you all the main terrestrial broadcasters HD offerings, and with a basic subscription you'll get PVR functionality.
2. Five are likely to be FTV (i.e. Sky HD / "Freesat from Sky" HD only - and not on "Freesat HD"). This MAY mean that the terms agreed with Sky are advantageous to Five (i.e. Sky handling uplink, encoding and possibly providing a good deal on transponder capacity( - and in effect Sky are subsidising costs to get a mainstream HD channel exclusive to them (particularly good since Five have a lot of unique HD content - CSIs and other US imports, Neighbours, Home and Away etc.) Historically Five have used Sky space rather than leasing their own ISTR - unlike the BBC, ITV and C4.
noggin
Founding member
Good news for SkyHD customers today that Five HD will be launching in July. I think that makes Sky the only platform to have all terrestrial channels' HD services.
I didn't realise that there were such significant differences in the cost of broadcasting via DSat rather than on DTT.
For some quite illogical reason I always thought that DTT might have been cheaper, if there was any difference at all.
It's not as simple as just the costs of broadcasting.
1. Sky have more than (old figure 800,000) *** EDIT : 2million *** HD receivers installed - so Five HD can potentially broadcast at launch to these homes. Freeview HD have almost no HD receivers installed - so Five HD would reach almost no audience on Freeview HD initially. As the only thing that pays for Five is advertising and sponsorship (which are directly related to audience numbers) there is no initial return for a large investment in Freeview HD, whereas there will be a return on Sky.
All new Sky subscribers will be getting Sky+HD boxes from now on (they're the new standard Sky box) - and these will deliver BBC HD, ITV HD, C4 HD and Five HD in HD with no subscription if you have a Freesat from Sky card (or with a basic SD subscription - you don't need to pay the HD sub for the FTV/FTA HD services)
This is a VERY canny move on Sky's part - they get to be the only platform with all the main channels in HD, and the standard Sky box, even without an HD subscription, will get you all the main terrestrial broadcasters HD offerings, and with a basic subscription you'll get PVR functionality.
2. Five are likely to be FTV (i.e. Sky HD / "Freesat from Sky" HD only - and not on "Freesat HD"). This MAY mean that the terms agreed with Sky are advantageous to Five (i.e. Sky handling uplink, encoding and possibly providing a good deal on transponder capacity( - and in effect Sky are subsidising costs to get a mainstream HD channel exclusive to them (particularly good since Five have a lot of unique HD content - CSIs and other US imports, Neighbours, Home and Away etc.) Historically Five have used Sky space rather than leasing their own ISTR - unlike the BBC, ITV and C4.
Last edited by noggin on 18 March 2010 3:59pm - 4 times in total
ST
I bet she didn't ask her landlord if she could tinker with the aerial!
I didn't realise that there were such significant differences in the cost of broadcasting via DSat rather than on DTT.
It's not as simple as just the costs of broadcasting.
Thanks for a very informative response as always, noggin!
The lucky bitch.
I bet she didn't ask her landlord if she could tinker with the aerial!
I didn't realise that there were such significant differences in the cost of broadcasting via DSat rather than on DTT.
It's not as simple as just the costs of broadcasting.
Thanks for a very informative response as always, noggin!
AB
Now a little bit of speculation and gazing into the crystal ball....
Clearly over the time a growing proportion of ITV1's audience will be watching ITV1 HD rather than the traditional channel on 3 or 103 - especially as more and more big shows move into native HD. Indeed on satellite, given the number who already have Sky HD and Sky's policy on new boxes, the proportion could become very substantial quickly.
I don't think anyone would seriously expect ITV to ever hire the space on Sky to replicate the current SD regional network - I bet it ITV1 HD will remain a single station for a long time to come, maybe forever.
The greater the proportion of viewers watching the HD service, at least on Sky and cable, the easier it starts to become to say that the channel 3 licences don't matter anymore, with all their obligations....
I'm not suggesting this is what ITV are up to. But imagine a point in, say, two years time where ITV1 HD accounts for maybe 40% of ITV1's audience. The higher the proportion, the less scary the risks of handing back C3 licences if they're restricting the business.
Clearly over the time a growing proportion of ITV1's audience will be watching ITV1 HD rather than the traditional channel on 3 or 103 - especially as more and more big shows move into native HD. Indeed on satellite, given the number who already have Sky HD and Sky's policy on new boxes, the proportion could become very substantial quickly.
I don't think anyone would seriously expect ITV to ever hire the space on Sky to replicate the current SD regional network - I bet it ITV1 HD will remain a single station for a long time to come, maybe forever.
The greater the proportion of viewers watching the HD service, at least on Sky and cable, the easier it starts to become to say that the channel 3 licences don't matter anymore, with all their obligations....
I'm not suggesting this is what ITV are up to. But imagine a point in, say, two years time where ITV1 HD accounts for maybe 40% of ITV1's audience. The higher the proportion, the less scary the risks of handing back C3 licences if they're restricting the business.
WE
I caught a bit of This Morning today(the bit with the human blow up doll being interviewed!) & saw it goto a break.
None of those ads were regionally specific AFAIK.
If Itv therorectically got rid of local news, how long would regional advertising continue?
Those are the 2 sticking points technically.
None of those ads were regionally specific AFAIK.
If Itv therorectically got rid of local news, how long would regional advertising continue?
Those are the 2 sticking points technically.
DV
If they handed back the Ch3 licence on Freeview they'd lose the HD slot too, as by handing back the license they would stop being a PSB. The revised arrangements currently in place for the DVB-T2 mux on Freeview prohibit non PSBs from operating HD channels on the platform.
AB
If they handed back the PSB licence, they would lose the HD slot on Freeview but not on Sky or Virgin. But there are still big questions over whether HD on Freeview will ever account for a significant share of the market... Personally I doubt if it ever will.
Also, you can easily imagine a time when Sky might carry, say, Channel 4 HD on 104 and five HD on 105 once the majority of their customers have HD ready boxes. Of course switching to national ITV1 HD on 103 would be more controversial... but impossible? Especially if an incoming Conservative government were to take a more relaxed view of broadcasting regulation?
Also, you can easily imagine a time when Sky might carry, say, Channel 4 HD on 104 and five HD on 105 once the majority of their customers have HD ready boxes. Of course switching to national ITV1 HD on 103 would be more controversial... but impossible? Especially if an incoming Conservative government were to take a more relaxed view of broadcasting regulation?