Who's paying for SOHO???

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › Who's paying for SOHO???

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

kiwipearls

431 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 7

#555205 7-Dec-2011 20:43

JimmyH:
surfisup1000:
Elpie:
Sky didn't air those shows - they were aired by the standard free-to-air channels such as TV3. Those channels can still air those series whenever they like. Nothing stopping them except their own scheduling and greed.

My point being, Sky subscribers were always able to view the best shows for free (albeit delayed ).

But now Sky has bought the rights to a whole bunch of the best shows, so the other networks may no longer have broadcasting rights.

The money question is whether Sky and other channels still provide free broadcasts of the top shows on a delayed basis?

You pay either way.

On Sky you pay a subscription. On free to air you pay by having your eyeballs sold to advertisers, being bombarded by 4-5 minutes of screaming ads every 7 minutes, having bits butchered out of the show fit it in the slot after making room for the ads, and being miles behind the rest of the world. Personally, I don't regard $2.30 a week as an outrageous price to pay to watch some interesting shows while avoiding that cost. I never watched them on FTA as the ads, delays and constantly being jerked around by schedulers was just too annoying.

I have a number of gripes with Sky, but the concept of offering a premium subscription channel for current quality drama screened interruption free isn't one of them.

Great Post, couldn't have said it any better.

"In the real world as in dreams, nothing is quite what it seems" - The Book of Counted Sorrows

Senility Guild

tangerz

662 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 199

#555265 8-Dec-2011 00:50

JimmyH: You pay either way.

On Sky you pay a subscription. On free to air you pay by having your eyeballs sold to advertisers, being bombarded by 4-5 minutes of screaming ads every 7 minutes, having bits butchered out of the show fit it in the slot after making room for the ads, and being miles behind the rest of the world. Personally, I don't regard $2.30 a week as an outrageous price to pay to watch some interesting shows while avoiding that cost. I never watched them on FTA as the ads, delays and constantly being jerked around by schedulers was just too annoying.

I have a number of gripes with Sky, but the concept of offering a premium subscription channel for current quality drama screened interruption free isn't one of them.

Couldn't have said it better myself JimmyH! My biggest peeve with the FTA channels has always been unexpected/unexplained schedule changes that leave you wondering where a show has gone, only to find it weeks later in a graveyard slot or mid afternoons on the weekend.

I subscribed the first day, (my wife and I are both addicted to Game of Thrones) and don't see $10 a month as a huge price to pay. The fact that you can get it in HD is just the icing on the cake for me... after all, isn't picture/sound quality why we've all spent thousands of $$$$$$ on our TVs and sound systems???

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1684

ID Verified

Trusted

#555331 8-Dec-2011 09:41

surfisup1000:
Elpie:
Sky didn't air those shows - they were aired by the standard free-to-air channels such as TV3. Those channels can still air those series whenever they like. Nothing stopping them except their own scheduling and greed.

But now Sky has bought the rights to a whole bunch of the best shows, so the other networks may no longer have broadcasting rights.

That's not strictly true. Rights holders sell two different broadcasting rights. Free to Air, and Pay TV. Sky purchases Pay TV rights, obviously, but that still leaves the opportunity if a FTA broadcaster wanted to for purchasing the FTA rights.

kiwipearls

431 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 7

#555372 8-Dec-2011 10:42

Couldn't have said it better myself JimmyH! My biggest peeve with the FTA channels has always been unexpected/unexplained schedule changes that leave you wondering where a show has gone, only to find it weeks later in a graveyard slot or mid afternoons on the weekend.

This is what I hate about FTA. I hate it when they remove a show with huge ratings in the states to late hours, afternoons or weekends, or remove them all together.

Not every one wants fat reality shows and cooking shows to watch.

Soho seems far more sophisticated and I can't wait for them to add more shows. I love watching Dexter in HD. The opening scene you can see his fingerprints. So amazing.

"In the real world as in dreams, nothing is quite what it seems" - The Book of Counted Sorrows

Senility Guild

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2159

#555381 8-Dec-2011 11:22

kiwipearls:

Couldn't have said it better myself JimmyH! My biggest peeve with the FTA channels has always been unexpected/unexplained schedule changes that leave you wondering where a show has gone, only to find it weeks later in a graveyard slot or mid afternoons on the weekend.

This is what I hate about FTA. I hate it when they remove a show with huge ratings in the states to late hours, afternoons or weekends, or remove them all together.

Not every one wants fat reality shows and cooking shows to watch.

Soho seems far more sophisticated and I can't wait for them to add more shows. I love watching Dexter in HD. The opening scene you can see his fingerprints. So amazing.

I've never noticed a problem with schedule changes myself. Mysky handles recordings and you can fast forward ads at 30x speed.

Another thing I'm curious about, is how Soho will affect blu-ray release dates.

If the blu-ray releases will be earlier, then that would suit me just perfectly. The blu-ray package is far superior to the broadcast version and you get to watch at will.

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1528

#555400 8-Dec-2011 11:56

Kyanar:
surfisup1000:
Elpie:
Sky didn't air those shows - they were aired by the standard free-to-air channels such as TV3. Those channels can still air those series whenever they like. Nothing stopping them except their own scheduling and greed.

But now Sky has bought the rights to a whole bunch of the best shows, so the other networks may no longer have broadcasting rights.

That's not strictly true. Rights holders sell two different broadcasting rights. Free to Air, and Pay TV. Sky purchases Pay TV rights, obviously, but that still leaves the opportunity if a FTA broadcaster wanted to for purchasing the FTA rights.

pretty sure that isn't true. It it was, then TVNZ wouldn't need to bid against sky for rights to, say, the super 15.

there are different kinds of rights, but they aren't split by pay tv vs FTA, they are split by the window and ownership model
i.e. live, delayed, catchup etc, or pay per view vs download to own, that kind of thing

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1684

ID Verified

Trusted

#557518 13-Dec-2011 16:32

NonprayingMantis: pretty sure that isn't true. It it was, then TVNZ wouldn't need to bid against sky for rights to, say, the super 15.

there are different kinds of rights, but they aren't split by pay tv vs FTA, they are split by the window and ownership model
i.e. live, delayed, catchup etc, or pay per view vs download to own, that kind of thing

It appears to be up to the broadcaster, though from much scouring it looks like the most common arrangement is to sell free-to-air, radio, internet and pay-tv rights separately. Super XV is one of the (it looks like) few sporting events which does not.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4