ITV sport to charge !

[Prince Phillip]

Originally posted by Little Matt
Grumble. Yet another nail in the coffin of football as we know it. But people will still pay for it won't they.

Let's hope not, how many slices are they going to cut the Football cake into before the public screams "enough"

Watching a game on any non-terrestrial provider still fells like attending a Masonic meeting or being part of some sort of underground resistance movement. It's all so secretive and exclusive.
In playgrounds and offices across the country you can almost hear "Did you see the game on ITV Sport" "Nah, haven't got it mate"
Despite the cash, you have to worry about the future of the game.

Whereas, a free-to-air game on BBC, ITV or even C5 is there for everyone to talk about, share and cherish. This is the feeling that I hope that the public will demand again.

"Sport for All" anyone? Not bl**dy likely

[Jaffa]

I was once of the opinion that Sky was a bad thing for football, and in a way the money that it has generated does bring negatives to our game such as player greed and ludicrous transfer fees.

But you cannot argue that Sky`s coverage of Football has been absolutely top drawer, they have done the standard of football in this country justice.

For me, you only have to look at ITV`s appalling coverage of the Champions League to see how advanced Sky have become. BBC are the 2nd best football broadcaster, but unfortunately they have a public service agenda and so cannot devote large amounts of time to football.

It is far more sensible to have different types of programs on grouped channels so that people have choice of what to watch. This way you avoid the old bints moaning about how Eastenders has been delayed for an hour whilst they show England vs Germany in the World Cup or something.

By the way. These old bints are cretins.

[slowdog]

There are plans for ONdigital are to start charging for their set-top boxes, because they can't afford to keep giving them away.

So if you're going to get it, get it quick.

Of course, you ought to bear in mind that shareholders in Granada were calling on them to close down ONdigital a couple of weeks ago. See http://globalarchive.ft.com/globalar...d=010626012784

So if you're going to get it, wait.

Tricky, isn't it?

With regard to the ITV and ITV2 situation with Sky, the predictions are that they'll be available on Sky by the end of the year.

[Sweetpea!]

Have you been on Holiday? Was it the pet farm?

[slowdog]

No, I'm just so busy in my new job that I don't get much time to play on the BBS. Also, general close-season apathy has got the better of me so I've been on the BBS less in the evenings. :blue:

[James Varcoe]

Granada's threat to close Ondigital was a hollow one, what they actually want is permission to merge with Carlton to create a monopoly on TV airtime sales to hold advertisers on terrestrial TV to ransom.
They think that by threatening to close down the govts chosen digital provider that Blair will cave in (he will).

[Kevin T]

I moved from Telewest to ONDigital because Telewest was getting too pricety and my area wasn't covered by their new digital offering. Being in a block of rented flats, I couldn't fit a dish, so ONDigital it is.

I have to say though, the picture quality is excellent and it hasn't broken up once in the month I've had it.

Given the choice I'd have SKy though, much more choice.

[BaldEagle69]

From reading all the above it would appear that the sensible option for all of us with Sky is to wait until the end of the year when it is suggested that it will be possible to get ITV2 through them.

If ITV2 can show all the Sky programmes then it makes sense that Sky should be able to show theirs. If not then why cannot Sky just take away their programmes from ITV2 and let the nation decide which service they want? If that happened then I do not see ITV2 surviving until Xmas!!!!

[James Varcoe]

The Competition Act has made this programming withholding illegal. Both sides wait until they have maximised sign up for new services before releasing said programming to their competitors.
The real problem lies with Govt. They refused Murdoch the chance to pitch for the set top box/digital inbuilt licence and gave it to the Granada/Carlton consortium. The govt remain desperate not to upset Murdoch so they allowed him to press ahead with his own digital platform and with the infrastructure he already had in place clearly he has stolen the market. Granada and Carlton have been hit by a massive slow down in ad spends on terrestrial TV and have not promoted Ondigital correctly or well.
Their only hope is that the govt will subsidise them through to the switching off of analogue sometime in 2005 when all tv's sold will have the Ondigital facility. Failing that then I suspect they will sell to Murdoch.

[Martin H]

I got a phone call yesterday from sky offering me a Premier football season ticket!

Although sketchy, more of the Premier matches will be shown but on Box office at I think £8 a match (might have got that wrong). Instead for £30 you can buy a season ticket and watch them all.

As I already pay full whack for Sky (£30+), support Palace and begrudge paying more for what I have already bought I politely indicated no. Now if they were offering me a digital season ticket to see Palace, then that would be different!

See, we are all weak really!

[Bobby Woodruff]

The problem surely is that both Sky and On-Digital are both providers of the service into the home and providers of the programming. The government should force a split between the technology side and the programming side (they did it to the BBC when they were forced to sell off the transmitters). Then people will be able to decide which technology they want to use to receive the service (satellite, cable or digital terrestrial) and which programmes they want Sky sport, ITV sport etc) depending on their interests.

Of course this isn't going to happen because Tony Blair is not going to risk the wrath of Murdoch and the Sun.

[James Varcoe]

Very true Mr Woodruff, the real problem here along along is Mr Murdoch being a Sword of Damocles over every government.
All media decisions made by the last 4 governments have been with him in the forefront of their minds.

[Bobby Woodruff]

Yeah Isn't wonderful living in a democracy!

[Clapham Grand]

Though the Amsterdam tournament is on Sky Sports Extra only I believe

[paul of palace]

Marthin H, glad you did not take up the offer,its a shame people will buy it up though.If everyone said no to this offer then they would cancel the pay per view scheme altogether but like America our country lap it up.I remember paying to watch the Bruno-Tyson fight and falling asleep before the 4.30AM start.
With the Ondigital you can get all the pay per view premiership games plus the pay per view nationwide games for £3 a month.
Funny how people used to moan about paying the £100 quid license fee yet are quite happy to spend about £400 a year on channels which they only watch a few of.

[Jaffa]

But the difference between the £100 licence fee and Sky is choice.

You are not forced to pay for Sky. You can have it or you can skip it. You can also have varying levels of subscription, the lowest being £6.99 a month up to the £31.99 a month full whack one.

People have more opportunity to get TV that they want to watch. If you want to watch sport all day you cant do it on Terrestrial.

[Twyford Bee]

Originally posted by Jaffa
I dont recall Sky switching any events to Sky Sports Extra, except for where it is has been phsyically impossible for them to show them on other channels.

Copa America?

EDIT: Sorry I didn't notice the 2nd and 3rd pages.