« Topics
1234...28293031
dbl8,047 posts since 11 Jun 2004
London London
They are Sky's little pet. Crying or Very sad

Pfft.. from someone on the inside, it's not how you're describing it. It's actually laughable.




Sounds like a compromise to me.

Bingo!



I really don't understand what you are trying to say. What does PFFT mean?

How would you describe it, a 12 billion pound company tries to bluff and fails, while at the same time having their face rubbed in it by Sky.


'Pfft' an expression you make, when someone is potentially talking utter guff.
2
Neil Jones3,473 posts since 23 Dec 2001
Central (West) Midlands Today
I suspect there is more to this on both sides than Sky and Discovery are letting on. Whether those who claimed they'd leave would have done so is open to debate, after all not every Sky subscriber has access to social media so those who responded was probably less than a tenth of a percent of the total Sky subscriber page.

A compromise has clearly been reached, whether Discovery accepted less or Sky agreed to less (or same amount over a longer period possibly) is also up for debate. We may never know.
1
MY83118 posts since 16 Nov 2016
Will serve Discovery right if all their viewers have already left Sky and their viewing figures collapse in the weeks ahead.


Your logic isn't sound. If Discovery's viewers have left Sky, it's to seek Discovery, Eurosport et al on alternative platforms.
5
Stuart6,513 posts since 13 Oct 2003
Westcountry Spotlight
I wonder of the offer (£) from Sky was the same, but the terms are different eg EPG positions, a couple more HD channels, more on-demand content etc - for example at the moment content from Eurosport can take days to appear on demand and doesn't stick around for long - perhaps we will see Eurosport 360 on Sky UK&ROI.

Those would be difficult for Sky to use as a negotiating tool.


They don't control the EPG positions, and they don't own any higher up in the Documentaries section that they could 'swap' with any discovery channels.

On demand services are operated by the individual broadcasters, so Discovery could add more content at any time if they wished, just as they could add more HD channels if they chose to do so.
2
bilky asko4,546 posts since 9 Sep 2006
Tyne Tees Look North (North East)
People are giving Discovery too much credit. It sounds like to me a fully orchestrated campaign to drum up a bit of publicity, and they were never actually expecting a better deal out of it. They get to spite Sky by making them lose some customers, and they'll get a small boost in viewers.
2
TellyTime15 posts since 9 Jan 2017
I wonder of the offer (£) from Sky was the same, but the terms are different eg EPG positions, a couple more HD channels, more on-demand content etc - for example at the moment content from Eurosport can take days to appear on demand and doesn't stick around for long - perhaps we will see Eurosport 360 on Sky UK&ROI.

Those would be difficult for Sky to use as a negotiating tool.


They don't control the EPG positions , and they don't own any higher up in the Documentaries section that they could 'swap' with any discovery channels.

On demand services are operated by the individual broadcasters, so Discovery could add more content at any time if they wished, just as they could add more HD channels if they chose to do so.


That's not entirely true.

Sky have agreements in place for various channels to use slots higher up the EPG, and this includes TLC which is on 125 and would otherwise be on 145.
robertclark125904 posts since 13 Jan 2009
STV Central Reporting Scotland
And to further what tellytime has said, I refer back to the post I made, with the example of when ITV were launching ITV3 on all platforms in 2004. Initially, I used it as an example of how talks can go down to the wire, as happened there and with the Discovery/Sky talks.

Sky do control the EPG positions. In the ITV3 example, ITV wanted ITV3 to be higher up the EPG than the 140s. ITV2 was on 145 at the time. By agreeing to buy Sky's 49.5% stake inn GSB for £10 million, they were getting full control of the two remaining GSB channels, which came with, in one case, a much higher EPG position. ITV closed Plus on 118, and put ITV2 in there. As part of the sale of their stake, Sky also gave ITV3 a much higher EPG position than originally planned, 119.
Stuart6,513 posts since 13 Oct 2003
Westcountry Spotlight
That's not entirely true.

Sky have agreements in place for various channels to use slots higher up the EPG, and this includes TLC which is on 125 and would otherwise be on 145.

I'm aware many companies swap channels around within their own EPG allocations, and Sky agreed to a swap between Discovery's TLC and Challenge to move t up to a higher slot when it launched.


However, most of the Discovery channels occupy the highest slots in the Docs genre, and Sky don't have any they own outright (such as the jointly owned History) that they could allow a lower-placed Discovery channel to occupy as a swap.

The point I was making, was that Sky have no authority to randomly move channels higher up the EPG.

Even when the EPG is reorganised to remove gaps, it's done in strict order, so that no channel gains an advantage that they didn't previously have.

The only time this happens, is if a new PSB launches, and that gets the 'next highest' vacant slot (eg when BBC HD and BBC Alba launched). But that's not likely to ever happen again.
1