[TelevisionUser]

The current Ofcom wide ranging consultation 'Pay TV phase three document' consultation closes on 18 September so there's time for anyone to make a comment. It can be seen here http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/third_paytv/.

It covers a number of issues including content rights, encryption and the one that interests me is their plans for Freeview. From what I can see Ofcom would be quite happy for there to be more pay TV (even at the expense of free-to-air channels) on the Freeview/DTT platform.

People would, in effect, be conned by going digital with Freeview only to find that their favourite channels (like Dave, E4, ITV2) were then being converted to pay channels without their consent. They would have been lured to Freeview under false pretences. That is a pretty disgusting thing to do and, like the quiz channel scams, it will probably generate a huge public reaction.

They even appear quite happy to resurrect Sky's Picnic proposals again and shove them in this consultation which they hope will be a lower profile one. I happen to think that Ofcom are being mendacious and manipulative in this document.

They say that previous Sky Picnic consultation respondents agreed that sufficient safeguards could be put in to contain Sky if they had a pay service on Freeview/DTT. My recollection is different - I remember the great majority of people being against Sky being allowed to operate a service on Freeview/DTT.

I would welcome your comments on this document http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/third_paytv/.

For what it's worth, I think that market forces should be allowed to decide the fate of the current pay incumbent Top Up TV. If it fails then I am content for others to try to make a go of it subject to two criteria:
1. Under no circumstances should any existing pay-TV operator (BT Vision, Virgin Media and especially not monopolistic and brutal Sky) be allowed to operate the service because that would be thoroughly anti competitive;
2. That any pay operator just has the existing pay-TV places to play with and there should be no expansion at Freeview's expense or conversion of any existing free channels to pay ones.

[Nightdeamon]

Freeview should not have its service affected in favour of Pay channels and TUTV should be the only gatekeeper of encryption services on DTT.

[tghe-retford]

Wait until the Tories get in next year and if Cameron's threat to axe quangos, specifically pointing the finger at Ofcom, comes to pass then I can only fear of what could become reality come digital switchover if Sky are granted to launch Ofcom and with declining ad revenue, if subscription revenue becomes too tempting.

The document also confirms what I know and Sky knows, Freeview is impacting on Sky's profitability. Of course, all the best juicy bits about Picnic that we want to know about is [✂ - confidential - redacted].

[TelevisionUser]

Originally Posted by Nightdeamon

Freeview should not have its service affected in favour of Pay channels and TUTV should be the only gatekeeper of encryption services on DTT.

I agree with the highlighted bit and that Top Up TV should not be subject to any competition whilst in remains active.

Originally Posted by tghe-retford

Wait until the Tories get in next year and if Cameron's threat to axe quangos, specifically pointing the finger at Ofcom, comes to pass then I can only fear of what could become reality come digital switchover if Sky are granted to launch Ofcom and with declining ad revenue, if subscription revenue becomes too tempting.

The document also confirms what I know and Sky knows, Freeview is impacting on Sky's profitability. Of course, all the best juicy bits about Picnic that we want to know about is [✂ - confidential - redacted].

My fear is that Sky will launch Picnic modestly with something like Sky One, Sky Sports 1, Sky News and Sky Movies Premier. But that will just be the start of it. They will almost certainly try to recruit the ITV, UKTV, C4 channels and Quest to their Picnic pay service thus leaving the rest of us with a few BBC crumbs - extension of viewer choice? - I think not!

What Ofcom cannot see is just how profoundly anti competitive it is to allow Sky effective control of two platforms - satellite and digital terrestrial. That would give Sky enormous power and it is just totally out of order.

[tghe-retford]

Originally Posted by TelevisionUser

My fear is that Sky will launch Picnic modestly with something like Sky One, Sky Sports 1, Sky News and Sky Movies Premier. But that will just be the start of it. They will almost certainly try to recruit the ITV, UKTV, C4 channels and Quest to their Picnic pay service thus leaving the rest of us with a few BBC crumbs - extension of viewer choice? - I think not!

That is exactly the fear I stated to Ofcom in my consultation response to the first consultation into Picnic. They have previous history in this with the Sky Multichannels package on satellite back in 1993. We've already seen Channel 4 being romanced to go pay (and thankfully hasn't succeeded), and ITV's digital channels are still under threat (even if ITV is denying it at the moment). If ITV succeeds to remove its PSB commitments to ITV1 and its free-to-air requirement (far easier to do without Ofcom or the regulation Murdoch wants), ITV1 could go pay too. There is also potential sale of VMTV's channels to Sky, who have Freeview slots. It could be easy for some of these channels to switch to pay if Picnic is launched, as long as the choice doesn't cannibalise the satellite subscription base. Of course this would depend on whether having these premium channels on Picnic would do less damage to average revenue per user (ARPU) than what Sky says Freeview is inflicting on ARPU now.

My fear is that we are heading towards a situation where Murdoch and News Corporation are starting a debate, not just in charging for news content, but how the BBC should be funded and whether Ofcom and the Government should be allowed to regulate competition in the media (presumably for Sky's own benefit). If they get their way, the consequences could be dire for free-to-air TV. Imagine if they succeeded in making the BBC a subscription service, who do you think will be administrating the subscriptions on Picnic and Sky? If Murdoch got his way, then there would be no BBC crumbs, or commercial crumbs either. They'd do the same for radio and non-news websites in my view too.

I hope things never get that far.

Originally Posted by TelevisionUser

What Ofcom cannot see is just how profoundly anti competitive it is to allow Sky effective control of two platforms - satellite and digital terrestrial. That would give Sky enormous power and it is just totally out of order.

Exactly, and the two most popular platforms by far. Another point I made to Ofcom.

[TelevisionUser]

Originally Posted by tghe-retford

Exactly, and the two most popular platforms by far. Another point I made to Ofcom.

It's clear I'm going to have to do a bit of a consultation response to this document (even if it means rehashing my old Picnic consultation response - got to go find it on the PC!).

I'm also minded to alert my contact at the House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee about this. I still remember the way the MPs ripped into Ofcom and Icstis over their total failure to stop the scam quiz channels - that made for entertaining viewing on the BBC Parliament channel.

[Tassium]

The old business model of ad-based commercial TV is falling down so what's the problem with Pay-TV?

If "Freeview" does not go that way then pay-TV will find another way, such as broadband.

Freeview will become a wasteland of shopping channels and the BBCs offerings.

[Charnham]

Pay TV already has a platform, it does not need DTT as well.

For the most part DTT was meant to be for free view digital TV, not to extend PayTV.

[Dj-Toonz]

does that mean if ofcom rules more Pay TV channels are allowed on digital TV / freeview (as only got 7 weeks to go before my region goes DSO) will the cam slot on my pannie still work or would I need to upgrade the firmware on the TV ?

[noise747]

[quote=Tassium;35354186]The old business model of ad-based commercial TV is falling down so what's the problem with Pay-TV?
[quote]

Nothing at all, that is of cause if people are not forced to pay for the BBC. I think it is a good idea, pay for what you want, not for what the BBc want you to.

the problem is tat at the moment there is one big monopoly in pay t.v and that is sky, bring more ways to get pay T.v and Make sky sell their chanels wholesale and then it would be fine.

If "Freeview" does not go that way then pay-TV will find another way, such as broadband.

I think it would a be a small market unless our broadband improved in this country

Freeview will become a wasteland of shopping channels and the BBCs offerings.

Not much better now, but then most t.v is rubbish.

[lstar337]

Originally Posted by Charnham

For the most part DTT was meant to be for free view digital TV, not to extend PayTV.

Not True.

Freeview might favour free Tv, but DTT has no specific rules on the matter.

DTT has had some form of pay Tv on it from its inception.

[Charnham]

well maybe it should be saved for free view digital TV

[ejstubbs]

Originally Posted by tghe-retford

My fear is that we are heading towards a situation where Murdoch and News Corporation are starting a debate, not just in charging for news content, but how the BBC should be funded and whether Ofcom and the Government should be allowed to regulate competition in the media (presumably for Sky's own benefit).

What do you mean starting a debate? They've been stirring it up for years now, mainly through the editorial pages of Murdoch's newspapers but also by taking advantage of virtually any opportunity they get to express an opinion on a public stage:

Murdoch attack on 'dominant' BBC

And it seems to work:

Murdoch sparks talks on TV future

The timing is convenient as well, with the Ofcom consultation coming to a close soon after...

[TelevisionUser]

Originally Posted by Charnham

Pay TV already has a platform, it does not need DTT as well.

For the most part DTT was meant to be for free view digital TV, not to extend PayTV.

That's an interesting story, Charnham. When Freeview arose from the ashes of ITV digital they thought they would have a clear run of things for free-to-air only channels.

They hadn't reckoned on Messrs. Chance and West stepping in with their pay-TV lite proposal of Top Up TV. They were able to do this because two of the six multiplexes' conditions allowed for pay-TV but no one else was willing to give it a go after the demise of ITV Digital.

That upset the Freeview partners and a row ensued when they wanted Top Up TV's EPG numbers to be relegated to the end of the DTT EPG [http://digital-lifestyles.info/2004/...v-lock-horns/]. Top Up TV objected to that as it could potentially disadvantage them [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/bu...e-569457.html] and Top Up TV then ran squealing to Ofcom.

That's how the current situation arose. With the exception of aggressive Sky, I cannot see anyone else trying to make pay-TV work again on Freeview/DTT in the event of the failure of Top Up TV.

[Charnham]

On Digital later ITV Digital is a very different set up to Freeview.

for the most part OnDigital was just another PayTV company, which failed, and DTT I assume was left baron, along came Freeview and the Digital switch over, and finally a use for DTT, a chance to use DTT for the common good, to both to encourage uptake of Freeview/Digital Switch Over, but also to give people who could not afford PayTV or simply didnt want it on princpal a chance to get so much more out of there TV sets, something that all the PSB spin-offs channels offer.

I just can not see a reason why we need a second platform for PayTV, it is not like we dont have a monopolistic PayTV company in Sky already, Freeview is the best way to combat it, allowing TUTV is lets face it a bit of a fudge, but to allow Sky to take even more of DTT (something 9/10 people on the street would call & consider to be freeview) totally defeats the point of freeview and the digital switch over.

Meanwhile TopUpTV has yet to fail, and whilst I said TUTV on DTT was a fudge, its also some competition to Sky, im not overly thrilled about TUTV (even if it mostly uses night time slots that no one else is interested in) but it is alot better to have that on DTT than to let Sky on it, TUTV takes little away from Freeview, Sky would take alot away from it.

[TelevisionUser]

Originally Posted by Charnham

On Digital later ITV Digital is a very different set up to Freeview.

for the most part OnDigital was just another PayTV company, which failed, and DTT I assume was left baron, along came Freeview and the Digital switch over, and finally a use for DTT, a chance to use DTT for the common good, to both to encourage uptake of Freeview/Digital Switch Over, but also to give people who could not afford PayTV or simply didnt want it on princpal a chance to get so much more out of there TV sets, something that all the PSB spin-offs channels offer.

I just can not see a reason why we need a second platform for PayTV, it is not like we dont have a monopolistic PayTV company in Sky already, Freeview is the best way to combat it, allowing TUTV is lets face it a bit of a fudge, but to allow Sky to take even more of DTT (something 9/10 people on the street would call & consider to be freeview) totally defeats the point of freeview and the digital switch over.

Meanwhile TopUpTV has yet to fail, and whilst I said TUTV on DTT was a fudge, its also some competition to Sky, im not overly thrilled about TUTV (even if it mostly uses night time slots that no one else is interested in) but it is alot better to have that on DTT than to let Sky on it, TUTV takes little away from Freeview, Sky would take alot away from it.

Indeed, Charnham. I get the distinct impression from that Ofcom consultation document that Ofcom are biased in favour of more pay TV on Freeview even if it mean letting Sky loose on DTT to hoover up any new channel spaces and convert existing free channels to pay ones. It gives us so much extra 'choice' apparently.

That is not something a supposedly 'impartial' regulator is supposed to do and I have no confidence in them whatsoever. I can only hope that the matter is eventually referred to the Competition Commission. They at least have teeth and have been willing in the past to stand up to Sky.

[chrisy]

Originally Posted by Charnham

for the most part OnDigital was just another PayTV company, which failed, and DTT I assume was left baron, along came Freeview and the Digital switch over, and finally a use for DTT, a chance to use DTT for the common good, to both to encourage uptake of Freeview/Digital Switch Over, but also to give people who could not afford PayTV or simply didnt want it on princpal a chance to get so much more out of there TV sets, something that all the PSB spin-offs channels offer.

DTT was left fairly barren (three multiplexes had completely stopped broadcasting, and pretty much half of what was left was subscription as well), but you may have over-dramatised a little. It does show the danger of a pay TV service having too much control over DTT - if it works OK, FTA viewers are liable to be missing out, if it collapses both FTA and subscription viewers lose. When ITV Digital handed back their licences there were suggestions from some quarters that DTT should be closed down as the platform would not recover.

It wasn't only ITV Digital that crashed at the time, there were a number of DTT pay TV services in other countries that failed. Pay TV on DTT just doesn't work, and if Sky try it you can bet they'll be quite happy to run it at a loss if it undermines Freeview.

Meanwhile TopUpTV has yet to fail, and whilst I said TUTV on DTT was a fudge, its also some competition to Sky, im not overly thrilled about TUTV (even if it mostly uses night time slots that no one else is interested in) but it is alot better to have that on DTT than to let Sky on it, TUTV takes little away from Freeview, Sky would take alot away from it.

Agreed.

[Nightdeamon]

At least TUTV uses the space for watchable content rather than the hours of 23.00-06.00 be littered with dial a tart and gambling services.

[tvmad-alan]

government has for years planned to sell any object they can get a few quid.
This is keep the cover up of money losses due wastage in spending on contacts with the private sector.

The private sector has keep they share owners happy and give the companies bosses a cash bonus even if they have made bad deals in that year. ( look at the banks they covered up accounts and no one as been put in jail for it )

These private companies also pays big money to give MP's jobs on they management team. They also pay for meals with MP's to put over views about contacts & subjects that may give them a upper hand if they know want is in the next bill.

SO the likes of BskyB which owns many media companies which could damage a MP's name or job, will push with MP's that a private company would be best to run Freeview.

Also at a time when they have put £Billions into private owned banks to pay for bonus to they bosses for doing a very bad job.

They need money back to look good in the worlds money markets, so the Pounds does not get a run on it, like the Tories had.

Other private companies also need to gain money in anyway to please the markets and to give bonus and yearly share money to holders.

So TV still makes money for companies, so private company would get any MP's to sell Freeview & FreeSat like it has made MP's to make the BBC sell off studios & in house companies to private companies on the cheap.

BBC did own some transmitters in the pass but was told to sell them off. now BBC has pay money to private company to transmit from something they owned out right.

SO if you are in public company you will be sold off soon to get a few pounds to give the rich tax breaks. ( like MP's seconds homes can be sold at a time to save on tax's )

[ejstubbs]

Originally Posted by Charnham

I just can not see a reason why we need a second platform for PayTV

There is already PayTV on satellite (Sky), on cable (Virgin) and on broadband (BT Vision). as well as on DTT (TUTV). That makes four by my count.

Originally Posted by Charnham

it is not like we dont have a monopolistic PayTV company in Sky already

Sky has a effective monopoly of PayTV on satellite but it doesn't have a monopoly on satellite broadcasting per se - see Freesat, and generic FTA satellite receivers.

Originally Posted by Charnham

DTT ... 9/10 people on the street would call & consider to be freeview

That might (should?) change when analogue is finally switched off and DTT becomes the default "telly". As it is I reckon more and more people are learning to refer to their DTT STB as a "digibox" rather than a Freeview box.

Originally Posted by Charnham

totally defeats the point of freeview and the digital switch over.

Freeview was created to provided FTA DTT channels interleaved with the existing analogue channels as a means of sustaining the initial rollout of DTT technology in the UK after ITV Digital bit the dust.

The main "point" of DSO is to move away from analogue altogether in order to free up part of the UHF spectrum to be sold off to new licence holders. It does this by broadening the coverage of DTT so as to allow DTT's UHF channel usage to be consolidated. The fact that it increases the number of TV channels (either free or pay) which can be broadcast is something of a bonus.

If the Freeview consortium falls apart post-DSO because of commercial pressures to increase PayTV on DTT then it will still have fulfilled its original purpose IMO. I believe that the extra BBC digital channels will continue to be FTA for the foreseeable future (unless Murdoch achieves his "stretch" goal of getting the licence fee abolished altogether). Unless the other broadcasters turn in their PSB licences as well, you still get more FTA channels on DTT than you used to on analogue. I guess it comes down to how much people expect to continue to get for "nothing"? Remember that Freeview did not get a cut of the reveneue from the sale of your digibox.

Originally Posted by Charnham

TUTV takes little away from Freeview, Sky would take a lot away from it.

TUTV doesn't take anything away from Freeview, it is a separate DTT service (albeit using space that otherwise might be used by an FTA broadcaster). I'd agree that DTT would lose a lot of its current FTA channels if Sky were allowed to pursue what appear to be their current ambitions on the platform.

[2Bdecided]

Originally Posted by Charnham

I just can not see a reason why we need a second platform for PayTV, it is not like we dont have a monopolistic PayTV company in Sky already, Freeview is the best way to combat it

I think having Freesat ten years ago would have been the best way to combat it.

Sadly our PSB channels were too scared of the choice available on satellite to embrace it in that way, and stalled for a decade. The regulator didn't push them.

How much stronger could those ad supported channels have been if they'd been available to 98% of the country from day 1, rather than waiting for Freeview rollout (still incomplete).

How much weaker would Sky have been if it hadn't been the only way to get digital TV (including the BBC, ITV, and CH4 in widescreen + their extra channels) across 10%-25% of the country for the last decade?

Cheers,
David.

[lstar337]

Originally Posted by 2Bdecided

I think having Freesat ten years ago would have been the best way to combat it.

Sadly our PSB channels were too scared of the choice available on satellite to embrace it in that way, and stalled for a decade. The regulator didn't push them.

How much stronger could those ad supported channels have been if they'd been available to 98% of the country from day 1, rather than waiting for Freeview rollout (still incomplete).

How much weaker would Sky have been if it hadn't been the only way to get digital TV (including the BBC, ITV, and CH4 in widescreen + their extra channels) across 10%-25% of the country for the last decade?

Cheers,
David.

That plan didn't turn out too well for BSB.

[SimonBlackham]

Originally Posted by 2Bdecided

I think having Freesat ten years ago would have been the best way to combat it..

Ten years ago we had ONdigital (which included 5 Sky channels) - and they had a constant battle trying to get the power of the transmitters increased so it would be a viable service.

We also had BSB (British Satellite Broadcasting) - who were made to use DMAC and failed in competition with the then analogue pirate TV Sky.

Sky can buy their way into DTT by purchasing some of the Digital Dividend capacity when it becomes available - that way it has to be viable on its own or compatible with the rest of Freeview or no-one will go there.

Letting Sky into the current DTT would enable them to monopolise capacity - downgrading content to divert people to Sky satellite so they can pay through the nose for what is currently available free on Freeview.

We have already seen what they have done with Sky Three and Sky Sports News (ie News about Sky Sports) - what makes anyone think that Sky's Freeview would not become wall-to-wall channels like these and worse?

[Stator]

Most people know that the channels on Freeview are subject to change. Any channels could decide tomorrow that they are not worth running any more and jump ship from freeview. If a few channels get replaced with Pay TV channels I don't really have any problem. As long as the BBC channels and ITV, C4 and five are all carried for free then you can't really complain. No one has promised people that freeview will carry anything spectacular now or in the future. Personally I would be sad to see Dave leave (even if it does have a stupid name) but I don't think Ofcom have a duty to ensure it is there. If they decide to switch Dave to a pay tv platform then it's up to them and good luck to them.

[Charnham]

Originally Posted by Stator

]Most people know that the channels on Freeview are subject to change. Any channels could decide tomorrow that they are not worth running any more and jump ship from freeview. If a few channels get replaced with Pay TV channels I don't really have any problem. As long as the BBC channels and ITV, C4 and five are all carried for free then you can't really complain. No one has promised people that freeview will carry anything spectacular now or in the future. Personally I would be sad to see Dave leave (even if it does have a stupid name) but I don't think Ofcom have a duty to ensure it is there. If they decide to switch Dave to a pay tv platform then it's up to them and good luck to them.

first of all there are view worth while channels on freeview that are not related to the PSB channels.

second the other channels, Dave, Virgin 1, Yesterday & Sky Three, have no shown no signs of going anywhere, I dont think people expect these channels to one day no longer be on freeview, ok they might be Sky Three, but not the rest. Quality channels do not leave freeview all that much.

all quotes below this are from ejstubbs:

There is already PayTV on satellite (Sky), on cable (Virgin) and on broadband (BT Vision). as well as on DTT (TUTV). That makes four by my count.

so why do we need to increase the amount of PayTV? if there is already so much where is the harm in DTT not having PayTV?

Sky has a effective monopoly of PayTV on satellite but it doesn't have a monopoly on satellite broadcasting per se - see Freesat, and generic FTA satellite receivers.

that is probaly because Sky do not care about freesat and other free platforms, those smallers platforms are not much competition and its only freeview that is any challenge to it.

As it is I reckon more and more people are learning to refer to their DTT STB as a "digibox" rather than a Freeview box.

yes they may call it a "digibox" as a slang term, but they still think of it as "freeview" you dont get TUTV on a standard "digibox" so they are not likely to think of there "digibox"s as anything other than a way to get freeview.

If the Freeview consortium falls apart post-DSO because of commercial pressures to increase PayTV on DTT then it will still have fulfilled its original purpose IMO.

if only the general public, were aware that all the extra channels were a total con job, to be yanked away from freeview when DSO was complete only for the heroic Sky to ride in on its white house in with a Pay platform on DTT which offers all of those channel, with a monthly subscription, all hail the brave & mighty Sky.

TUTV doesn't take anything away from Freeview, it is a separate DTT service (albeit using space that otherwise might be used by an FTA broadcaster).

I think you made my point for me.

I'd agree that DTT would lose a lot of its current FTA channels if Sky were allowed to pursue what appear to be their current ambitions on the platform.

oh good, you see that at least.