BR
Very bad move all round - not just for Freeview, but for Sky.
It's presence on Freeview has enhanced Sky's reputation as a UK broadcaster, not just as a subscription based service.
Sky News and Sky Sports News are worthy additions to the platform, while Sky Three could be very benificial in allowing viewers to sample Sky programming before going on to subscribe.
It's one we need to keep an eye on - when the opportunity arises rather than just moaning here, we need to make sure OFCOM know our views.
Finally - I just don't think it sounds commercially viable really. It's not going to be priced attractive enough to lure people from Sky itself, so is probably at least going to cost around £15-£20 a month - which if people are willing to pay they might as well go the Sky/Cable route.
And when off-set with the loss of revenue from Sky News, Sky Sports News and Sky Three being on Freeview, I just don't see that there is money to be made.
It isn't Sky wanting to make DTT a viable alternative - it's just a dirty back handed trick aimed at weakening Freeview.
It's presence on Freeview has enhanced Sky's reputation as a UK broadcaster, not just as a subscription based service.
Sky News and Sky Sports News are worthy additions to the platform, while Sky Three could be very benificial in allowing viewers to sample Sky programming before going on to subscribe.
It's one we need to keep an eye on - when the opportunity arises rather than just moaning here, we need to make sure OFCOM know our views.
Finally - I just don't think it sounds commercially viable really. It's not going to be priced attractive enough to lure people from Sky itself, so is probably at least going to cost around £15-£20 a month - which if people are willing to pay they might as well go the Sky/Cable route.
And when off-set with the loss of revenue from Sky News, Sky Sports News and Sky Three being on Freeview, I just don't see that there is money to be made.
It isn't Sky wanting to make DTT a viable alternative - it's just a dirty back handed trick aimed at weakening Freeview.
MA
mark
Founding member
So another attempt by Sky to make some money out of DTT...
They've not done too well out of Freeview. Sky News has been losing badly to News 24 on that platform and Sky Three isn't really a credible entertainment channel - at least when you compare it to the likes of E4. I have no idea how Sky Sports News has fared.
Plus, with channels like E4 and Film4 proving that they can go free-to-air and succeed - Freeview isn't exactly that compatible with Sky's way of doing business.
I can see why it's not in their interests to keep those services running - they're basically making themselves look weak. And, as they're definitely not a public service broadcaster, they're not exactly going to lose sleep over the fact that freeview viewers will only have one news channel. In fact, if people are sad to lose Sky News - so much the better for Sky.
Whether there will be any sort of demand for this new idea, I don't know. It could all turn out to be a very expensive waste of time. I suspect this is more about hurting freeview than actually making money - but time will tell.
They've not done too well out of Freeview. Sky News has been losing badly to News 24 on that platform and Sky Three isn't really a credible entertainment channel - at least when you compare it to the likes of E4. I have no idea how Sky Sports News has fared.
Plus, with channels like E4 and Film4 proving that they can go free-to-air and succeed - Freeview isn't exactly that compatible with Sky's way of doing business.
I can see why it's not in their interests to keep those services running - they're basically making themselves look weak. And, as they're definitely not a public service broadcaster, they're not exactly going to lose sleep over the fact that freeview viewers will only have one news channel. In fact, if people are sad to lose Sky News - so much the better for Sky.
Whether there will be any sort of demand for this new idea, I don't know. It could all turn out to be a very expensive waste of time. I suspect this is more about hurting freeview than actually making money - but time will tell.
LO
very well by all accounts. It outrates the other two news channels.
Yes that is because it is the only real way on freeview to get any sports results. At work on a Saturday afternoon, Sky sports News is always on in the background. Although if they are putting sport onto this new service, Sky Sports news will become redundant.
Luke posted:
mark posted:
I have no idea how Sky Sports News has fared.
very well by all accounts. It outrates the other two news channels.
Yes that is because it is the only real way on freeview to get any sports results. At work on a Saturday afternoon, Sky sports News is always on in the background. Although if they are putting sport onto this new service, Sky Sports news will become redundant.
MA
very well by all accounts. It outrates the other two news channels.
Yes that is because it is the only real way on freeview to get any sports results. At work on a Saturday afternoon, Sky sports News is always on in the background. Although if they are putting sport onto this new service, Sky Sports news will become redundant.
Interesting to hear that it's doing so well. Still, I guess that alone doesn't make Sky's current freeview offering worthwhile for them.
Good news for the BBC's Score Interactive on a Saturday afternoon, though...
mark
Founding member
LONDON posted:
Luke posted:
mark posted:
I have no idea how Sky Sports News has fared.
very well by all accounts. It outrates the other two news channels.
Yes that is because it is the only real way on freeview to get any sports results. At work on a Saturday afternoon, Sky sports News is always on in the background. Although if they are putting sport onto this new service, Sky Sports news will become redundant.
Interesting to hear that it's doing so well. Still, I guess that alone doesn't make Sky's current freeview offering worthwhile for them.
Good news for the BBC's Score Interactive on a Saturday afternoon, though...
BR
But bad news for customers - the BBC is arguably too dominant on Freeview as it is already!
This news doesn't just stink for Freeview, it's also a slap in the face for Top Up TV too. Having Sky One as part of their service, and perhaps Sky Sports or Sky Movies available additionally, could have made a huge difference - but now instead they're future doesn't look very bright.
This news doesn't just stink for Freeview, it's also a slap in the face for Top Up TV too. Having Sky One as part of their service, and perhaps Sky Sports or Sky Movies available additionally, could have made a huge difference - but now instead they're future doesn't look very bright.
TE
tesandco
Founding member
Clearly there's a lot of guesswork still going on somewhere about what's closing and what's replacing it, and I don't think the press office has even been properly informed. They're supposed to be using MPEG4 and yet we're told 'BSkyB's new DTT pay-TV offering will use compression technology to squeeze four services out of the spectrum currently used by its three Freeview channels'. My maths isn't brilliant, but they surely could get a lot more than 4 channels in MPEG4 from the space freed by losing 3 in MPEG2, especially given it'll happily be blockified to hell as they'll not want to be harming their Sky HD market. I do still hope the service gets blocked of course, as it'll be solely detrimental to the platform, and sounds like a desperation move. Certainly Sky wont be doing it in the hope of making much profit off the service. They'll be happily rolling it at a loss solely to make Freeview less attractive.
AJ
It's confirmed on the Sky News Viewpoint Blog (http://skynews3.typepad.com) that Sky News will be leaving Freeview.
tesandco posted:
Clearly there's a lot of guesswork still going on somewhere about what's closing and what's replacing it, and I don't think the press office has even been properly informed. They're supposed to be using MPEG4 and yet we're told 'BSkyB's new DTT pay-TV offering will use compression technology to squeeze four services out of the spectrum currently used by its three Freeview channels'. My maths isn't brilliant, but they surely could get a lot more than 4 channels in MPEG4 from the space freed by losing 3 in MPEG2, especially given it'll happily be blockified to hell as they'll not want to be harming their Sky HD market. I do still hope the service gets blocked of course, as it'll be solely detrimental to the platform, and sounds like a desperation move. Certainly Sky wont be doing it in the hope of making much profit off the service. They'll be happily rolling it at a loss solely to make Freeview less attractive.
It's confirmed on the Sky News Viewpoint Blog (http://skynews3.typepad.com) that Sky News will be leaving Freeview.
MA
mark
Founding member
Yes - I agree. Freeview is a platform that thrives on the fact that everyone wants something for nothing. That's good for the BBC, as it's the obvious environment for a public service broadcaster - but it's also proved fruitful for commercial broadcasters due to all the extra potential viewers.
Subscription services are obviously contradictory to the spirit of Freeview - so three channels being turned into a number of subscription channels is bad news for the platform - which is probably the idea.
Subscription services are obviously contradictory to the spirit of Freeview - so three channels being turned into a number of subscription channels is bad news for the platform - which is probably the idea.