BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
Sep 6th 2005, 9:29 pm
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
Family in a digital home
Freeview is received through TV aerials without paying a subscription
The BBC and ITV are to launch a free-to-view satellite TV service to
cater for viewers unable to receive Freeview digital coverage.
ITV announced plans for the service, to be called Freesat, on
Wednesday.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...io/4221722.stm
Freesat, to be launched early in 2006, will rival BSkyB and will carry
all BBC and ITV digital TV, interactive and radio services plus other
channels.
BBC director general Mark Thompson said the announcement "paved the
way" for nationwide free digital television.
Mr Thompson said he welcomed ITV as partners in the project "to
develop a consumer friendly, subscription-free satellite proposition".
"The huge success of Freeview, already in more than five million
homes, demonstrates how highly free digital television is valued by
many people," he said
Digital take-up
"Our long-stated aim has been to bring about an open market in
subscription-free satellite services so we can ensure free access to
all the BBC's services across the country in the run-up to switchover
and beyond."
The Government plans to switch off analogue TV signals,
region-by-region, by 2012.
ITV's chief executive Charles Allen said the company would also start
broadcasting its channels "in the clear" in the next few months,
meaning the channels can be watched through any satellite receiver.
ITV currently encrypts - or scrambles - its transmissions via
satellite, using the service provided by Sky.
He said: "We want our channels to be available to as many people as
possible, regardless of technological and geographical constraints.
"As we move from analogue to a digital environment, Freesat - and
Freeview - will enable every family in the UK to enjoy a wide range of
quality channels for free."
A recent Ofcom report said more than 60% of UK households now receive
digital TV.
Approximately a quarter of TV viewers live outside the Freeview
coverage area.
--
Martin
Family in a digital home
Freeview is received through TV aerials without paying a subscription
The BBC and ITV are to launch a free-to-view satellite TV service to
cater for viewers unable to receive Freeview digital coverage.
ITV announced plans for the service, to be called Freesat, on
Wednesday.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...io/4221722.stm
Freesat, to be launched early in 2006, will rival BSkyB and will carry
all BBC and ITV digital TV, interactive and radio services plus other
channels.
BBC director general Mark Thompson said the announcement "paved the
way" for nationwide free digital television.
Mr Thompson said he welcomed ITV as partners in the project "to
develop a consumer friendly, subscription-free satellite proposition".
"The huge success of Freeview, already in more than five million
homes, demonstrates how highly free digital television is valued by
many people," he said
Digital take-up
"Our long-stated aim has been to bring about an open market in
subscription-free satellite services so we can ensure free access to
all the BBC's services across the country in the run-up to switchover
and beyond."
The Government plans to switch off analogue TV signals,
region-by-region, by 2012.
ITV's chief executive Charles Allen said the company would also start
broadcasting its channels "in the clear" in the next few months,
meaning the channels can be watched through any satellite receiver.
ITV currently encrypts - or scrambles - its transmissions via
satellite, using the service provided by Sky.
He said: "We want our channels to be available to as many people as
possible, regardless of technological and geographical constraints.
"As we move from analogue to a digital environment, Freesat - and
Freeview - will enable every family in the UK to enjoy a wide range of
quality channels for free."
A recent Ofcom report said more than 60% of UK households now receive
digital TV.
Approximately a quarter of TV viewers live outside the Freeview
coverage area.
--
Martin
Sep 6th 2005, 10:20 pm
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
"Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
> Family in a digital home
> Freeview is received through TV aerials without paying a subscription
And was rescued by them when ITV Digital failed spectacularly
> The BBC and ITV are to launch a free-to-view satellite TV service to
> cater for viewers unable to receive Freeview digital coverage.
> ITV announced plans for the service, to be called Freesat, on
> Wednesday.
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...io/4221722.stm
> Freesat, to be launched early in 2006, will rival BSkyB and will carry
> all BBC and ITV digital TV, interactive and radio services plus other
> channels.
> BBC director general Mark Thompson said the announcement "paved the
> way" for nationwide free digital television.
The BBC is already available subscription free on SKY and freeview
I for one dont want two sat dishes, I see a flopperoo looming
at the license payers expense
Keith
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
news:[email protected]...
> BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
> Family in a digital home
> Freeview is received through TV aerials without paying a subscription
And was rescued by them when ITV Digital failed spectacularly
> The BBC and ITV are to launch a free-to-view satellite TV service to
> cater for viewers unable to receive Freeview digital coverage.
> ITV announced plans for the service, to be called Freesat, on
> Wednesday.
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...io/4221722.stm
> Freesat, to be launched early in 2006, will rival BSkyB and will carry
> all BBC and ITV digital TV, interactive and radio services plus other
> channels.
> BBC director general Mark Thompson said the announcement "paved the
> way" for nationwide free digital television.
The BBC is already available subscription free on SKY and freeview
I for one dont want two sat dishes, I see a flopperoo looming
at the license payers expense
Keith
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Sep 6th 2005, 10:42 pm
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 11:20:58 +0100, "Keith W"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
>> Family in a digital home
>> Freeview is received through TV aerials without paying a subscription
>And was rescued by them when ITV Digital failed spectacularly
>> The BBC and ITV are to launch a free-to-view satellite TV service to
>> cater for viewers unable to receive Freeview digital coverage.
>> ITV announced plans for the service, to be called Freesat, on
>> Wednesday.
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...io/4221722.stm
>> Freesat, to be launched early in 2006, will rival BSkyB and will carry
>> all BBC and ITV digital TV, interactive and radio services plus other
>> channels.
>> BBC director general Mark Thompson said the announcement "paved the
>> way" for nationwide free digital television.
>The BBC is already available subscription free on SKY and freeview
>I for one dont want two sat dishes, I see a flopperoo looming
>at the license payers expense
Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
to be constantly changing.
--
Martin
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
>> Family in a digital home
>> Freeview is received through TV aerials without paying a subscription
>And was rescued by them when ITV Digital failed spectacularly
>> The BBC and ITV are to launch a free-to-view satellite TV service to
>> cater for viewers unable to receive Freeview digital coverage.
>> ITV announced plans for the service, to be called Freesat, on
>> Wednesday.
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...io/4221722.stm
>> Freesat, to be launched early in 2006, will rival BSkyB and will carry
>> all BBC and ITV digital TV, interactive and radio services plus other
>> channels.
>> BBC director general Mark Thompson said the announcement "paved the
>> way" for nationwide free digital television.
>The BBC is already available subscription free on SKY and freeview
>I for one dont want two sat dishes, I see a flopperoo looming
>at the license payers expense
Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
to be constantly changing.
--
Martin
Sep 6th 2005, 10:47 pm
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 12:42:16 +0200, Martin wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 11:20:58 +0100, "Keith W"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>"Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]. ..
>>> BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
>>> Family in a digital home
>>> Freeview is received through TV aerials without paying a subscription
>>And was rescued by them when ITV Digital failed spectacularly
>>> The BBC and ITV are to launch a free-to-view satellite TV service to
>>> cater for viewers unable to receive Freeview digital coverage.
>>> ITV announced plans for the service, to be called Freesat, on
>>> Wednesday.
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...io/4221722.stm
>>> Freesat, to be launched early in 2006, will rival BSkyB and will carry
>>> all BBC and ITV digital TV, interactive and radio services plus other
>>> channels.
>>> BBC director general Mark Thompson said the announcement "paved the
>>> way" for nationwide free digital television.
>>The BBC is already available subscription free on SKY and freeview
>>I for one dont want two sat dishes, I see a flopperoo looming
>>at the license payers expense
>
> Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
> work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
> be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
> to be constantly changing.
Didn't they stop transmitting encrypted via the sky satellite, and moved to
an Astra(?) one, unencrypted, but focussed tightly on the UK?
--
Tim C.
> On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 11:20:58 +0100, "Keith W"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>"Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]. ..
>>> BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
>>> Family in a digital home
>>> Freeview is received through TV aerials without paying a subscription
>>And was rescued by them when ITV Digital failed spectacularly
>>> The BBC and ITV are to launch a free-to-view satellite TV service to
>>> cater for viewers unable to receive Freeview digital coverage.
>>> ITV announced plans for the service, to be called Freesat, on
>>> Wednesday.
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...io/4221722.stm
>>> Freesat, to be launched early in 2006, will rival BSkyB and will carry
>>> all BBC and ITV digital TV, interactive and radio services plus other
>>> channels.
>>> BBC director general Mark Thompson said the announcement "paved the
>>> way" for nationwide free digital television.
>>The BBC is already available subscription free on SKY and freeview
>>I for one dont want two sat dishes, I see a flopperoo looming
>>at the license payers expense
>
> Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
> work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
> be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
> to be constantly changing.
Didn't they stop transmitting encrypted via the sky satellite, and moved to
an Astra(?) one, unencrypted, but focussed tightly on the UK?
--
Tim C.
Sep 6th 2005, 10:58 pm
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 12:47:41 +0200, Tim Challenger
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 12:42:16 +0200, Martin wrote:
>> On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 11:20:58 +0100, "Keith W"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>"Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected] ...
>>>> BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
>>>> Family in a digital home
>>>> Freeview is received through TV aerials without paying a subscription
>>>And was rescued by them when ITV Digital failed spectacularly
>>>> The BBC and ITV are to launch a free-to-view satellite TV service to
>>>> cater for viewers unable to receive Freeview digital coverage.
>>>> ITV announced plans for the service, to be called Freesat, on
>>>> Wednesday.
>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...io/4221722.stm
>>>> Freesat, to be launched early in 2006, will rival BSkyB and will carry
>>>> all BBC and ITV digital TV, interactive and radio services plus other
>>>> channels.
>>>> BBC director general Mark Thompson said the announcement "paved the
>>>> way" for nationwide free digital television.
>>>The BBC is already available subscription free on SKY and freeview
>>>I for one dont want two sat dishes, I see a flopperoo looming
>>>at the license payers expense
>>
>> Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
>> work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
>> be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
>> to be constantly changing.
>Didn't they stop transmitting encrypted via the sky satellite, and moved to
>an Astra(?) one, unencrypted,
BBC web site says you are right - if it's up to date.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/digital/questions/index.shtml
"Can I get satellite TV without Sky?
Yes, you can choose from many types of satellite equipment from
different retailers and manufacturers. All the BBC's channels are
free-to-air (are not encrypted) so you do not need to subscribe to
anything to get them. Please contact your local retailer for advice
about different types of satellite receiving equipment."
and not if I believe this
Can I get BBC digital channels abroad?
No. The TV licence pays for them and they are limited by copyright to
UK audiences.
> but focussed tightly on the UK?
not that tightly focused :-)
--
Martin
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 12:42:16 +0200, Martin wrote:
>> On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 11:20:58 +0100, "Keith W"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>"Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected] ...
>>>> BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
>>>> Family in a digital home
>>>> Freeview is received through TV aerials without paying a subscription
>>>And was rescued by them when ITV Digital failed spectacularly
>>>> The BBC and ITV are to launch a free-to-view satellite TV service to
>>>> cater for viewers unable to receive Freeview digital coverage.
>>>> ITV announced plans for the service, to be called Freesat, on
>>>> Wednesday.
>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...io/4221722.stm
>>>> Freesat, to be launched early in 2006, will rival BSkyB and will carry
>>>> all BBC and ITV digital TV, interactive and radio services plus other
>>>> channels.
>>>> BBC director general Mark Thompson said the announcement "paved the
>>>> way" for nationwide free digital television.
>>>The BBC is already available subscription free on SKY and freeview
>>>I for one dont want two sat dishes, I see a flopperoo looming
>>>at the license payers expense
>>
>> Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
>> work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
>> be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
>> to be constantly changing.
>Didn't they stop transmitting encrypted via the sky satellite, and moved to
>an Astra(?) one, unencrypted,
BBC web site says you are right - if it's up to date.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/digital/questions/index.shtml
"Can I get satellite TV without Sky?
Yes, you can choose from many types of satellite equipment from
different retailers and manufacturers. All the BBC's channels are
free-to-air (are not encrypted) so you do not need to subscribe to
anything to get them. Please contact your local retailer for advice
about different types of satellite receiving equipment."
and not if I believe this
Can I get BBC digital channels abroad?
No. The TV licence pays for them and they are limited by copyright to
UK audiences.
> but focussed tightly on the UK?
not that tightly focused :-)
--
Martin
Sep 6th 2005, 11:18 pm
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
Martin a écrit :
> Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
> work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
> be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
> to be constantly changing.
Hahahahaha!!! I bought one in Paris with no problem at all :-)
G;
> Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
> work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
> be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
> to be constantly changing.
Hahahahaha!!! I bought one in Paris with no problem at all :-)
G;
Sep 7th 2005, 12:10 am
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
"Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 11:20:58 +0100, "Keith W"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>The BBC is already available subscription free on SKY and freeview
>>I for one dont want two sat dishes, I see a flopperoo looming
>>at the license payers expense
> Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
> work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
> be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
> to be constantly changing.
> --
> Martin
Why should they work in decoders outside the UK ?
Those people arent paying for the service. I dont see why
freeloaders should be subsidised.
Keith
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 11:20:58 +0100, "Keith W"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>The BBC is already available subscription free on SKY and freeview
>>I for one dont want two sat dishes, I see a flopperoo looming
>>at the license payers expense
> Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
> work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
> be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
> to be constantly changing.
> --
> Martin
Why should they work in decoders outside the UK ?
Those people arent paying for the service. I dont see why
freeloaders should be subsidised.
Keith
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Sep 7th 2005, 2:52 am
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
On 7 Sep 2005 04:18:25 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>Martin a écrit :
>> Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
>> work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
>> be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
>> to be constantly changing.
>Hahahahaha!!! I bought one in Paris with no problem at all :-)
You bought what and did it pick up ITV, Ch4 and Ch5?
The bad news is that in NL they are having a purge on people with
satellite dishes attached to their dwellings, so you had better give
me yours. (I start to sound like Mixi)
--
Martin
>Martin a écrit :
>> Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
>> work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
>> be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
>> to be constantly changing.
>Hahahahaha!!! I bought one in Paris with no problem at all :-)
You bought what and did it pick up ITV, Ch4 and Ch5?
The bad news is that in NL they are having a purge on people with
satellite dishes attached to their dwellings, so you had better give
me yours. (I start to sound like Mixi)
--
Martin
Sep 7th 2005, 2:54 am
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
>Dr. LelykadeOn Wed, 7 Sep 2005 13:10:46 +0100, "Keith W" <[email protected]> wrote:
>"Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 11:20:58 +0100, "Keith W"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>The BBC is already available subscription free on SKY and freeview
>>>I for one dont want two sat dishes, I see a flopperoo looming
>>>at the license payers expense
>> Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
>> work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
>> be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
>> to be constantly changing.
>> --
>> Martin
>Why should they work in decoders outside the UK ?
> Those people arent paying for the service. I dont see why
>freeloaders should be subsidised.
I pay for a TV license in UK. Next stupid question.
--
Martin
>"Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 11:20:58 +0100, "Keith W"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>The BBC is already available subscription free on SKY and freeview
>>>I for one dont want two sat dishes, I see a flopperoo looming
>>>at the license payers expense
>> Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
>> work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
>> be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
>> to be constantly changing.
>> --
>> Martin
>Why should they work in decoders outside the UK ?
> Those people arent paying for the service. I dont see why
>freeloaders should be subsidised.
I pay for a TV license in UK. Next stupid question.
--
Martin
Sep 7th 2005, 2:58 am
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
Martin a écrit :
> On 7 Sep 2005 04:18:25 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> >
> >Martin a écrit :
> >
> >> Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
> >> work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
> >> be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
> >> to be constantly changing.
> >
> >Hahahahaha!!! I bought one in Paris with no problem at all :-)
> You bought what and did it pick up ITV, Ch4 and Ch5?
I bought a decoder and a Sky card, and it picks up (amongst others) ITV
Ch4 and Ch5 (probably you have to pay extra for one that doesn't pick
up Ch5).
> The bad news is that in NL they are having a purge on people with
> satellite dishes attached to their dwellings, so you had better give
> me yours. (I start to sound like Mixi)
I'll hide it in my cupboard!!
G;
> On 7 Sep 2005 04:18:25 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> >
> >Martin a écrit :
> >
> >> Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
> >> work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
> >> be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
> >> to be constantly changing.
> >
> >Hahahahaha!!! I bought one in Paris with no problem at all :-)
> You bought what and did it pick up ITV, Ch4 and Ch5?
I bought a decoder and a Sky card, and it picks up (amongst others) ITV
Ch4 and Ch5 (probably you have to pay extra for one that doesn't pick
up Ch5).
> The bad news is that in NL they are having a purge on people with
> satellite dishes attached to their dwellings, so you had better give
> me yours. (I start to sound like Mixi)
I'll hide it in my cupboard!!
G;
Sep 7th 2005, 3:24 am
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
On 7 Sep 2005 07:58:16 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>Martin a écrit :
>> On 7 Sep 2005 04:18:25 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>> >
>> >Martin a écrit :
>> >
>> >> Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
>> >> work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
>> >> be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
>> >> to be constantly changing.
>> >
>> >Hahahahaha!!! I bought one in Paris with no problem at all :-)
>> You bought what and did it pick up ITV, Ch4 and Ch5?
>I bought a decoder and a Sky card, and it picks up (amongst others) ITV
>Ch4 and Ch5 (probably you have to pay extra for one that doesn't pick
>up Ch5).
>> The bad news is that in NL they are having a purge on people with
>> satellite dishes attached to their dwellings, so you had better give
>> me yours. (I start to sound like Mixi)
>I'll hide it in my cupboard!!
I'll bring a crate of beer and watch.
--
Martin
>Martin a écrit :
>> On 7 Sep 2005 04:18:25 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>> >
>> >Martin a écrit :
>> >
>> >> Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
>> >> work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
>> >> be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
>> >> to be constantly changing.
>> >
>> >Hahahahaha!!! I bought one in Paris with no problem at all :-)
>> You bought what and did it pick up ITV, Ch4 and Ch5?
>I bought a decoder and a Sky card, and it picks up (amongst others) ITV
>Ch4 and Ch5 (probably you have to pay extra for one that doesn't pick
>up Ch5).
>> The bad news is that in NL they are having a purge on people with
>> satellite dishes attached to their dwellings, so you had better give
>> me yours. (I start to sound like Mixi)
>I'll hide it in my cupboard!!
I'll bring a crate of beer and watch.
--
Martin
Sep 7th 2005, 4:11 am
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
In the message news:[email protected]...
> "Keith W" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 11:20:58 +0100, "Keith W"
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>The BBC is already available subscription free on SKY and freeview
> >>I for one dont want two sat dishes, I see a flopperoo looming
> >>at the license payers expense
> >
> > Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
> > work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
> > be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
> > to be constantly changing.
> > --
> > Martin
> Why should they work in decoders outside the UK ?
> Those people arent paying for the service. I dont see why
> freeloaders should be subsidised.
It's not as simple as that. Many of "those people" are paying the
corresponding (usually more expensive) fee in the country where they live
and as they can only watch one programme at a time it's just like people
driving their car abroad without having to pay a second, duplicate 'road
fund' fee. And the marginal cost *to the broadcaster* of having one more TV
set tuned to its programmes is literally less than peanuts - *all that cost*
is incurred by the viewer (in getting the hardware etc.)
Furthermore, some of those people already pay a "rights" fee to the UK TV
companies as part of their subscription to a cable network that delivers
some (but not all) BBC TV programmes. Access to the UK news and current
affairs programmes is necessary for the UK citizens among these people to be
able to keep up to date with UK politics in order to participate actively in
the democratic process.
Finally, access to the programmes abroad may well be in the UK's national
interest by spreading information about British culture, policies and
commercial activities among potential visitors and business partners, and
in influencing administrative officials. In the case of advertising-funded
channels, this overspill audience may represent a substantial revenue
stream.
Regards,
- Alan (in Brussels)
> "Keith W" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 11:20:58 +0100, "Keith W"
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>The BBC is already available subscription free on SKY and freeview
> >>I for one dont want two sat dishes, I see a flopperoo looming
> >>at the license payers expense
> >
> > Even though it's free you need a decoder card. Decoder cards don't
> > work in satellite receivers bought outside UK and the decoder has to
> > be enabled by phone from within UK. I may be wrong the situation seems
> > to be constantly changing.
> > --
> > Martin
> Why should they work in decoders outside the UK ?
> Those people arent paying for the service. I dont see why
> freeloaders should be subsidised.
It's not as simple as that. Many of "those people" are paying the
corresponding (usually more expensive) fee in the country where they live
and as they can only watch one programme at a time it's just like people
driving their car abroad without having to pay a second, duplicate 'road
fund' fee. And the marginal cost *to the broadcaster* of having one more TV
set tuned to its programmes is literally less than peanuts - *all that cost*
is incurred by the viewer (in getting the hardware etc.)
Furthermore, some of those people already pay a "rights" fee to the UK TV
companies as part of their subscription to a cable network that delivers
some (but not all) BBC TV programmes. Access to the UK news and current
affairs programmes is necessary for the UK citizens among these people to be
able to keep up to date with UK politics in order to participate actively in
the democratic process.
Finally, access to the programmes abroad may well be in the UK's national
interest by spreading information about British culture, policies and
commercial activities among potential visitors and business partners, and
in influencing administrative officials. In the case of advertising-funded
channels, this overspill audience may represent a substantial revenue
stream.
Regards,
- Alan (in Brussels)
Sep 7th 2005, 4:33 am
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 18:11:33 +0200, "Alan \(in Brussels\)"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Those people arent paying for the service. I dont see why
>> freeloaders should be subsidised.
>And the marginal cost *to the broadcaster* of having one more TV
>set tuned to its programmes is literally less than peanuts - *all that cost*
>is incurred by the viewer (in getting the hardware etc.)
No, the marginal cost to the broadcaster is an awful lot more than
that, because they require the licence of the copyright owner to
broadcast the content in the extra territories, this woulc cost miles
more than peanuts, in fact miles more than pistachio or cashew nets...
Ignoring that, then certainly there's no cost, but that's a huge cost
to ignore.
Jim.
<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Those people arent paying for the service. I dont see why
>> freeloaders should be subsidised.
>And the marginal cost *to the broadcaster* of having one more TV
>set tuned to its programmes is literally less than peanuts - *all that cost*
>is incurred by the viewer (in getting the hardware etc.)
No, the marginal cost to the broadcaster is an awful lot more than
that, because they require the licence of the copyright owner to
broadcast the content in the extra territories, this woulc cost miles
more than peanuts, in fact miles more than pistachio or cashew nets...
Ignoring that, then certainly there's no cost, but that's a huge cost
to ignore.
Jim.
Sep 7th 2005, 5:13 am
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
In the message news:[email protected]...
"Jim Ley" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 18:11:33 +0200, "Alan \(in Brussels\)"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Those people arent paying for the service. I dont see why
> >> freeloaders should be subsidised.
> >And the marginal cost *to the broadcaster* of having one more TV
> >set tuned to its programmes is literally less than peanuts - *all that
cost*
> >is incurred by the viewer (in getting the hardware etc.)
> No, the marginal cost to the broadcaster is an awful lot more than
> that, because they require the licence of the copyright owner to
> broadcast the content in the extra territories, this woulc cost miles
> more than peanuts, in fact miles more than pistachio or cashew nets...
> Ignoring that, then certainly there's no cost, but that's a huge cost
> to ignore.
It's only "a huge cost" because of the absurd way that broadcasting rights
are bought and sold : one *whole national territory* at a time. It would be
far more rational to deal in them in terms of eg one satellite transponder
(with specified characteristics) at a time. It's a historical relic that
happens to suit some operators, but is inevitably a gross distortion of
competition and should be outlawed as such.
Regards,
- Alan (in Brussels)
"Jim Ley" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 18:11:33 +0200, "Alan \(in Brussels\)"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Those people arent paying for the service. I dont see why
> >> freeloaders should be subsidised.
> >And the marginal cost *to the broadcaster* of having one more TV
> >set tuned to its programmes is literally less than peanuts - *all that
cost*
> >is incurred by the viewer (in getting the hardware etc.)
> No, the marginal cost to the broadcaster is an awful lot more than
> that, because they require the licence of the copyright owner to
> broadcast the content in the extra territories, this woulc cost miles
> more than peanuts, in fact miles more than pistachio or cashew nets...
> Ignoring that, then certainly there's no cost, but that's a huge cost
> to ignore.
It's only "a huge cost" because of the absurd way that broadcasting rights
are bought and sold : one *whole national territory* at a time. It would be
far more rational to deal in them in terms of eg one satellite transponder
(with specified characteristics) at a time. It's a historical relic that
happens to suit some operators, but is inevitably a gross distortion of
competition and should be outlawed as such.
Regards,
- Alan (in Brussels)
Sep 7th 2005, 5:14 am
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: BBC and ITV to start Sky TV rival
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 19:13:09 +0200, "Alan \(in Brussels\)"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>In the message news:[email protected]...
>"Jim Ley" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 18:11:33 +0200, "Alan \(in Brussels\)"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> Those people arent paying for the service. I dont see why
>> >> freeloaders should be subsidised.
>> >And the marginal cost *to the broadcaster* of having one more TV
>> >set tuned to its programmes is literally less than peanuts - *all that
>cost*
>> >is incurred by the viewer (in getting the hardware etc.)
>> No, the marginal cost to the broadcaster is an awful lot more than
>> that, because they require the licence of the copyright owner to
>> broadcast the content in the extra territories, this woulc cost miles
>> more than peanuts, in fact miles more than pistachio or cashew nets...
>> Ignoring that, then certainly there's no cost, but that's a huge cost
>> to ignore.
>It's only "a huge cost" because of the absurd way that broadcasting rights
>are bought and sold : one *whole national territory* at a time. It would be
>far more rational to deal in them in terms of eg one satellite transponder
>(with specified characteristics) at a time. It's a historical relic that
>happens to suit some operators, but is inevitably a gross distortion of
>competition and should be outlawed as such.
It can't be such a huge cost otherwise 3 BBC channels wouldn't be
available on the local cable along with 27 other international
channels here for sod all per month.
--
Martin
<[email protected]> wrote:
>In the message news:[email protected]...
>"Jim Ley" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 18:11:33 +0200, "Alan \(in Brussels\)"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> Those people arent paying for the service. I dont see why
>> >> freeloaders should be subsidised.
>> >And the marginal cost *to the broadcaster* of having one more TV
>> >set tuned to its programmes is literally less than peanuts - *all that
>cost*
>> >is incurred by the viewer (in getting the hardware etc.)
>> No, the marginal cost to the broadcaster is an awful lot more than
>> that, because they require the licence of the copyright owner to
>> broadcast the content in the extra territories, this woulc cost miles
>> more than peanuts, in fact miles more than pistachio or cashew nets...
>> Ignoring that, then certainly there's no cost, but that's a huge cost
>> to ignore.
>It's only "a huge cost" because of the absurd way that broadcasting rights
>are bought and sold : one *whole national territory* at a time. It would be
>far more rational to deal in them in terms of eg one satellite transponder
>(with specified characteristics) at a time. It's a historical relic that
>happens to suit some operators, but is inevitably a gross distortion of
>competition and should be outlawed as such.
It can't be such a huge cost otherwise 3 BBC channels wouldn't be
available on the local cable along with 27 other international
channels here for sod all per month.
--
Martin
