Freesat roll out - odd or what?

[mxs]

Having read on these forums that some high street stores are now holding stock of freesat boxes, that there has been no media coverage or advertising for Freesat?

I think this is a large step change for HD viewing without having to subscribe to a package, so why ar'nt BBC & ITV plugging the event?

Now am I the only one who thinks that this is a bit odd? :suicide:

http://www.freesat.co.uk/freesat_high_definition.php

[mxs]

I must be the only one who finds this issue to be strange - nearly 200 views of my original post and nobody else has made any comment? :eek:

[fernandez]

I agree that the whole business is very low key.
In fact I'm underwhelmed by all the publicity or do those behind it all consider that the vast majority of the public are too confused as it is?
There's also the fact that some of the details available from some well-known retailers (and other sources) are, to say the least, misleading, lacking in detail and some are even incorrect.

[mxs]

There is some good reading found on this site with a couple of pics!

http://www.freesatnews.co.uk/

[Bachstrad]

I agree that the whole business is very low key.
In fact I'm underwhelmed by all the publicity or do those behind it all consider that the vast majority of the public are too confused as it is?
There's also the fact that some of the details available from some well-known retailers (and other sources) are, to say the least, misleading, lacking in detail and some are even incorrect.

I'm wholly underwhelmed by the whole prospect of Freesat, both SD & HD. I just don't see what it can offer unless it becomes 'Paysat'.

I can understand why it would appeal to those people who can't get a good terrestial digital signal, or those people who can't get their heads around paying for a 'good' TV service. However, if it's only going to be the same channel offering as Freeview, but with BBC HD, CH4 HD and hopefully ITV HD then it just ain't gonna rock my boat!

ATB

Max

[hornydragon]

The low key launch is probably to avoid confusing consumers with the multimillion pound digital switch over campaign. Also coverage ocosts money and this is a very low revenue venture, let the peope who will make money out of it (Comet/Argos/Currys) worry about the promotion, I dont get what the big deal is TBH bc HD has been available via the pace DS810 for ages and you have always been able to buy out of contract sky boxes and not pay sky for FTA and FTV channels, Freesat is just a new name for the same thing Satellite broadcasting! The UK is almost unique with Satellite = Pay monthly the rest fo the world dont work like this.

[benraz69]

However, if it's only going to be the same channel offering as Freeview, but with BBC HD, CH4 HD and hopefully ITV HD then it just ain't gonna rock my boat!

No offence intended - but as a SkyHD subscriber, I can understand why it wouldn't.

[100%WHU]

Can I ask how much these boxes cost and can they run off my sky dish?? :oops:

[Bachstrad]

No offence intended - but as a SkyHD subscriber, I can understand why it wouldn't.

None taken! :grin:

I just don't see what there is to get excited about, Sky HD subscriber, or not! ;)

ATB

Max

[sibeer]

I dont get what the big deal is TBH bc HD has been available via the pace DS810 for ages and you have always been able to buy out of contract sky boxes and not pay sky for FTA and FTV channels, Freesat is just a new name for the same thing Satellite broadcasting! The UK is almost unique with Satellite = Pay monthly the rest fo the world dont work like this.

I think the difference is that many of these channels are not available via Freesat from Sky or any other Sky box without a sky subscription. E4, More 4, Dave, etc can only be received by those with Freeview or a full Sky sub. You also get HD compatibility, reasonable pricing, well designed menus and the ability to run the boxes of any Sky sat already installed at your house. For someone who cancelled Sky as it was barely getting used, but lives in a bad Freeview area, this should be ace :thumbsup:

[getdownmonkeyma]

Can I ask how much these boxes cost and can they run off my sky dish?? :oops:

Grundig SD - £50
Grundig HD - £150

Yes, it will run of your existing Sky dish.

[menz83]

For someone who cancelled Sky as it was barely getting used, but lives in a bad Freeview area, this should be ace :thumbsup:

Yup, away to cancel sky when I move house and get some free HD on the go. Sky HD is way too overpriced and what it offers doesn't really interest me, in fact, so do 99% of the channels on sky, its a complete waste of money.

Staying on topic, freesat really has been low key. I havent met anyone who has heard about but the people I have told have shown interest. The ability to plug the set top box into your existing sky dish is a real winner for me and I assume it will be others... if they ever hear about it!

[stooshee]

Thats vey interesting about being able to use your sky dish...can I assume that the cable (2 in my case, as I have SKY+) will also be able to connect to these new boxes? 1 last question, I would be looking to buy an HD PVR, do you think the PVR enabled boxes will be out at launch as well?

Thanks very much :)

[mxs]

Thats vey interesting about being able to use your sky dish...can I assume that the cable (2 in my case, as I have SKY+) will also be able to connect to these new boxes? 1 last question, I would be looking to buy an HD PVR, do you think the PVR enabled boxes will be out at launch as well?

Thanks very much :)

It is intended that PVR boxes should be available after launch.

[sibeer]

PVR's not available at the start would fit in with one of the worst product launches ever. Most people spending £150 on a HD Freesat would rather stump up another £50 for a 300 gig hard disk in it. Maybe they are having difficulty finalising the details of how it will work with series links, etc. Fact remains though that this is key functionality in the bid to rival Sky.

[mxs]

PVR's not available at the start would fit in with one of the worst product launches ever.

I am hoping that PVR's will be an option from the outset! but there is very little information available at present, hence the reason why I started this thread!

[benraz69]

I just don't see what there is to get excited about, Sky HD subscriber, or not! ;)

I think the simple answer to that, at least for the majority of AV enthusiasts around here, is free HD - albeit just two or three channels...

Many people can't afford/don't like $ky & are waiting for Blu-ray prices to come down. Even if you're lucky enough to live in a cabled area, Virgin Media's HD offering as almost non-existant. That leaves many HDTV owners with upscaled SD (and HD content via the internet) - not ideal. So I imagine the prospect of free HD broadcasts very appealing to many, at least around here :)

[Ferg7]

I don't get any HD channels at the moment on my nice HD telly. I don't get the sky sports or films packages, and therefore find the cost of the few HD channels i would get from sky unjustifiable.

I'm getting freesat as soon as it comes out for that reason.

[Bachstrad]

I think the simple answer to that, at least for the majority of AV enthusiasts around here, is free HD - albeit just two or three channels...

Many people can't afford/don't like $ky & are waiting for Blu-ray prices to come down. Even if you're lucky enough to live in a cabled area, Virgin Media's HD offering as almost non-existant. That leaves many HDTV owners with upscaled SD (and HD content via the internet) - not ideal. So I imagine the prospect of free HD broadcasts very appealing to many, at least around here :)

But have you seen the 'free' HD offering? :eek:

BBC HD has gone down the pan since the 'trial' ended. Luxe HD is about as interesting as watching paint dry and CH4 HD has a majority of upscaled not native HD programs. CH4 HD (and CH5 and other CH4 controlled channels) is unlikely to be available to Freesat before October due to exististing agreements in place with Sky. May be this is what's delaying the Freesat launch? (That's only my supposition though.)

As to ITV, it would be nice if they could get their SD PQ sorted out before they attempt to offer an HD service. :grin:

Basically I agree with you, I said in my previous post that this service will appeal to those who can't receive a Freeview signal and those who can't get their heads around paying for a TV service and are happy with the Freeview channel offering.

ATB

Max

[glugwine]

But have you seen the 'free' HD offering? :eek:

BBC HD has gone down the pan since the 'trial' ended. Luxe HD is about as interesting as watching paint dry and CH4 HD has a majority of upscaled not native HD programs. CH4 HD (and CH5 and other CH4 controlled channels) is unlikely to be available to Freesat before October due to exististing agreements in place with Sky. May be this is what's delaying the Freesat launch? (That's only my supposition though.)

As to ITV, it would be nice if they could get their SD PQ sorted out before they attempt to offer an HD service. :grin:

Basically I agree with you, I said in my previous post that this service will appeal to those who can't receive a Freeview signal and those who can't get their heads around paying for a TV service and are happy with the Freeview channel offering.

ATB

Max


I agree with you on this, BBC HD is a few hours per day at the moment and C4HD is lacking in proper HD content. I cannot see the other channels when they do move to Freesat doing anything special in HD, I expect most of their programmes will still be SD:(
As to agreements with Sky, I doubt that is the case, I expect ITV when it launches its HD channel will also appear on Sky HD as the others will.
At the moment and for the foreseeable future the only supplier who gives over 16 channels of HD material with sports, docs, and movies is Sky HD, unfortunately you have to pay for it:thumbsdow

However being an avid footy watcher and movie buff I could never go back to watching it on SD, and at the end of the day, £50 a month is just a nite out these days, especially since GB's budget:devil:

I expect Freesat will be a dead duck with most people eventually going for Freeview HD starting in 2009....maybe.

[Grinnders]

Ok. I AM one of those people that can't justify the Sky HD subscription. :grin: I currently have a multi sky SD setup subscription free. I live on the side of a hill where terrestial analogue and digital is blocked to an ineffective level and Cablewest (NTL/Virgin/whomever) never dug up our road. I can ONLY get reasonable reception from a dish.

The majority of my viewing IS the BBCs, ITVs, C4 and Five and I would love to have the benefit of HD & PVR functionality too. Currently in order to do that I would either have to pay sky subs or invest in some serious hardware to watch one channel and record another on a spinny disk.

If I went back to the Sky route and then went non-subs again I'd lose PVR (or ending up paying them £120 each year for the privilege). This is why an HD multi-tuner PVR is a BIG DEAL in my eyes at least.

[rupees_al]

i agree with Grinnders.
i have sky+ atm but only 6mix. not interested in movie pack or sports pack and don't wanna pay (can't justify) the extra £10 for the few channels i will get and also the 200notes for a sky hd box (as exsisting subscribers rarely get cheap deals - not that i expect them).
but a one off payment for a HDpvr box to give me some HD content with the possibility of more in the future (and this might only increase futher as anyone who is going to put out HD on freeview would surely do it on freesat also) is a good option in my eye's.
i aslo think that there are many people who might think the same that have HDready tv's and no HD content. and the people on virgin might also buy a freesat box as one outlay gives them more chance of HD (as virgin don't seem to be in a rush).

[Silas Greenback]

I can pay out for SKY, but I choose not to as I find there offering very poor, I just don't see what the fuss is about,

The EPG is terrible,

why is that the channel name written in full, but what's on, is abbreviated so you have to press info to see what's on?

Why does it default back to BBC1 every time you press guide, so if the last channel you were on was in the 400s you have to scroll through 4 pages!

Why can you not customise the order of the channels so you can see an EPG of what you want to watch?

Why do people not object to paying £50 a month to watch repeats and L-o-n-g advert breaks?


I had SKY and its under the stairs now, I used to have cable and it was much better but unavailable in the area I live now..

I now use Freeview via a Toppy PVR and its a much better experience, but in my area the signal is a bit flaky, So I too cannot wait for freesat, to have what I have now with the toppy, but via Satellite

The big problem with sky, it that's its a locked system and its locked, not because of technological limitations, but because someone from "marketing" thinks its a good idea, so I can subscribe to more channels and keep in in a job (like the now dropped £10 a month to video TV I have already paid for!)

I don't think so,

I welcome the competition!

[mxs]

I totally agree with Silas - I am, and never have been interested in forking out £50 a month to get a few channels of HD. I am a fan of Freeview, although it has its faults (adverts & Repitition) and welcome a free HD sat system.

Word is if you pay a bit extra to have your dish motorized, you will be able to pick up a lot of other 'free' channels and I quote:-

''Many people ask, "How many channels can you pick up from satellite.
The answer is very simple but it must be one of the worst kept secrets.
There are thousands upon thousands of FREESAT free-to-air channels
on satellites dotted across the Clark Belt (so named after the well known
scientist Arthur C. Clark) 33,000 thousand miles above the equatorial
line in outer space. Arthur C. Clark made possible the idea that if a
satellite could be placed at the 33,000 mile orbit above earth it would
remain in a geostationary position with respect to earth.
These satellites which are all around the earth are from all different
Countries.
When you install a satellite dish with a motor attached you are opening
up a whole new world of FREESAT or Free-To-Air channels that do not
need a subscription of any kind, although in all countries you can buy
subscriptions which usually consist of Films, Sport, etc, in fact some
subscription services ask you to pay again for programmes you have
already paid for with your Television Licence.
BBC and ITV are opening up a whole new world of Television for everyone
with their innovative FREESAT venture and the promise of 80 channels
with at least 8 HD initially is only the tip of the iceberg as far as FREESAT
is concerned. Anybody deciding to buy the FREESAT box will be able to
fill the box up to it's capacity(possibly unlimited?) with Free-to-air
channels simply by adding a motor (cost approx. £60) to the dish and
by using the same single cable from the receiver a simple press of a
button can get you thousands of choices for Free thanks to FREESAT.''

Sounds good to me!

[sibeer]

To my understanding, part of the reason for poor picture quality on ITV and a general lack of HD content is that the channels all pay Sky for the bandwidth they use. Surely this new Freesat deal must be setup with Astra direct? Am I naive for hoping that their new deal will include a much wider bandwidth allowance :thumbsup:

[derek500]

To my understanding, part of the reason for poor picture quality on ITV and a general lack of HD content is that the channels all pay Sky for the bandwidth they use. Surely this new Freesat deal must be setup with Astra direct? Am I naive for hoping that their new deal will include a much wider bandwidth allowance :thumbsup:

ITV pay Astra not Sky for their satellite space!! They only pay Sky for EPG listings and regionisation.

Nothing is changing. Same channels, same bandwidth, apart from the launch of ITV1 HD.

[derek500]

BBC and ITV are opening up a whole new world of Television for everyone
with their innovative FREESAT venture and the promise of 80 channels
with at least 8 HD initially is only the tip of the iceberg as far as FREESAT
is concerned.

Sounds good to me!

It might sound good, but it's a load of tosh!! What are the eight HD channels?? BBC HD, Luxe HD and ITV HD.......

[rdmbfossa]

I just wondered if anyone had received any email updates of information from the offiicial Freesat website, I signed up months ago but have not received any emails at all.

[benraz69]

I just wondered if anyone had received any email updates of information from the offiicial Freesat website, I signed up months ago but have not received anything emails at all.

Nope :suicide:

[Phlog]

"I just wondered if anyone had received any email updates?"

Nothing. But no great surprise - this is one terrible new product launch. On top of that I suspect a lot of people on this website are particularly interested in HD and HD PVRs - and it rather looks as though we'll be out of luck for perhaps months.

What does surprise me is that apparently it's going to be a locked system system? It makes little sense from the public's point of view. But I guess it might be more DRM crap. Let's hope some bright kid breaks it ... :)

[chrisys]

Freesat is different from just a Sky box without the card, isn't it?

I have noticed if you use a Sky box without the card, you miss out on some channels available on Freeview. I assume Freesat will include all those available on Freeview?

I'm someone who doesn't have Sky HD, but would like it. The prospect of paying £150 for a HD box which will only pick up channels which show mostly upscaled material doesn't seem worth it - I need the Discovery, Nat.Geo. and History if I'm getting HD! :grin:

[Bachstrad]

It might sound good, but it's a load of tosh!! What are the eight HD channels?? BBC HD, Luxe HD and ITV HD.......

But it's not a load of tosh to people who don't want to pay for their TV service Derek. ;)

I don't know about you, but since the end of the 'trial', I hardly ever watch BBC HD. There's been no HD football and the only programs I'm series linking at the moment are Gavin & Stacey (that's just finished) and Heroes (Series 2 is just about to start). BBC HD is now better at showing repeats than Sky these days! I watched Luxe HD on launch day for a few minutes, but it's about as interesting as watching paint dry IMHO.

If Freesat launches now with BBC HD, Luxe HD & ITV HD, just what exciting content are people expecting to see on the free HD channels? I think the maxim of "you don't get ow't for now't" still stands personally.

The BBC can't even flag the audio properly on its' HD channel, with many programs conning amps into thinking they're getting DD5.1 when it's in fact only DD2!!!

I'd love to see a free satellite service to rival Sky, (who wouldn't?) But if it's going to be the same dross that's on Freeview there's no point, as I already have all of that via the Sky platform and don't watch it now. I don't see how Freesat can become a viable alternative to Sky unless it becomes 'Paysat'. Perhaps someone can explain to me how these 'free' channels will be able to afford to purchase content? I believe ITV are suffering badly at the moment with falling advertising revenue, so that method doesn't seem to be working!

ATB

Max

[rdmbfossa]

It is very poor that people have registered an interest in Freesat and requested information about it, yet the receivers are apparently now on sale and we have not even received an email from Freesat. It wouldnt take much to send everyone on a mailing list an standard email.

It is very strange how poorly advertised this has been. I live in an area where there is only 4 analouge channels, no cable, no freeview reception until late 2010, and when it arrives it will only be the minimum 3 muxes, yet nobody I have spoken to in my area (and this is mainly 20-35 year olds who are interested in technology) has ever heard of Freesat, yet we are the ideal target customers.

[richard plumb]

I find the whole thing a little confusing. You can already buy a subbed box from sky for a year with the minimum contract, then just cancel and have effectively a freesat box but with the ability to get PPV movies if you want.

Or you can buy freesatfromsky which is the same thing.

This is just another box, but I suppose with slightly better EPG etc. So what? I'm a little disappointed in the efforts the BBC seem to be putting behind this, with the argument about consumer choice. The consumer already has choice don't they?


I'm not convinced there is much new here apart from some marketing to try and bring satellite in line with freeview so digital coverage can speed up

[Hi-Def]

It was a project started by bbc + itv to show ofcom that sky are charging well over the odds for an EPG slot i think its around £200k a year per slot

there basically saying that the EPG was designed 8 years ago for peanuts and they are charging us through the roof for a slot but OFCOM disagree

Well what have BBC + ITV done? designed there own EPG which sounds like its ALOT better than skys, brought some manufacturers on board to design and sell there own boxes and get sat built into TV's(which isnt bad at all in the future have DVB-T and DVB-S built into a TV will save many people alot of hassle)

at the same time showing OFCOM hey we only spent £xm developing this EPG and it only costs x amount for the up keep so why does it cost us x amount to use the sky EPG, these 2 providers combinded have about 12 slots between them if not more so thats money to be saved

plus it will encourage the start up of smaller niche sat channel into the market which will not have to fork out the SKY EPG rates.

[BrianMc]

It was a project started by bbc + itv to show ofcom that sky are charging well over the odds for an EPG slot i think its around £200k a year per slot


Totally wrong on all counts! Freesat was always NOTHING to do with Sky's EPG charges (which the BBC and ITV never complained about!) and everything to do with being able to promote DSAT to the 25% of viewers out of range of Freeview- without telling them to go to FreesatFromSky!

Freesat EPG charges have ended up being about 50% of SKy's for an unknown audience!

[davemurgatroyd2]

It was a project started by bbc + itv to show ofcom that sky are charging well over the odds for an EPG slot i think its around £200k a year per slot

there basically saying that the EPG was designed 8 years ago for peanuts and they are charging us through the roof for a slot but OFCOM disagree

Well what have BBC + ITV done? designed there own EPG which sounds like its ALOT better than skys, brought some manufacturers on board to design and sell there own boxes and get sat built into TV's(which isnt bad at all in the future have DVB-T and DVB-S built into a TV will save many people alot of hassle)

at the same time showing OFCOM hey we only spent £xm developing this EPG and it only costs x amount for the up keep so why does it cost us x amount to use the sky EPG, these 2 providers combinded have about 12 slots between them if not more so thats money to be saved

plus it will encourage the start up of smaller niche sat channel into the market which will not have to fork out the SKY EPG rates.

What absolute bovine manure.

Try actually quoting some facts instead of absolute rubbish.
Cost of Sky EPG slot £75.000 - auidence potential 10 million boxes - viewers have subsidised boxes
Cost of BBC EPG slot £30,000 - potential audience - estimated 2 million boxes in two years - viewers pay full retail for boxes.

Freesat's main charter is to provide non subscription television to areas without complete Freeview coverage after DSO.

[Shaggybert]

I think the maxim of "you don't get ow't for now't" still stands personally.

Unfortunately, it's not for now't!

We pay a small fortune for our TV licence, and some of that has gone into creating freesat and the content that it will provide.

We deserve a decent service for our money. Lets just hope we get it!

[Bachstrad]

Unfortunately, it's not for now't!

We pay a small fortune for our TV licence, and some of that has gone into creating freesat and the content that it will provide.

We deserve a decent service for our money. Lets just hope we get it!

But then you are expecting 'ow't for now't!'

The license fee funds the BBC ... nothing more nothing less! If you think that will provide good content across the board on Freesat ... good luck to you!

ATB

Max

[stooshee]

It is very poor that people have registered an interest in Freesat and requested information about it, yet the receivers are apparently now on sale and we have not even received an email from Freesat. It wouldnt take much to send everyone on a mailing list an standard email.

Where are they on sale though? I havent come accross any yet.

Thanks :)

[Smith2004]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is the fact that some Freesat HD PVRs will probably allow HD programmes to be copied from the HDD and be archived, as opposed to the Sky HD box which does not. I've been doing this with a Technomate 6900 box for a few months now, but as this box has no EPG or series link I'm going to move on to a Freesat PVR whenever they appear. Perhaps a year or two down the line there may even be HDD / Blu-ray recorders with Freesat tuners. I know archiving programmes may not be high on most people's priorities, but at least Freesat may offer the option.

[benraz69]

Where are they on sale though?

rd100 claims he picked-up a GufsatHD from Comet a couple of days ago. He's not saying much about it though :suicide:

See post 21 onwards in this (http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6882522) thread.

[Shaggybert]

But then you are expecting 'ow't for now't!'

Hardly. In fact I did not state that I was expecting anything.

I was merely saying that I am hoping that the licence fee will insure that we get at least some decent HD content from the BBC.

The BBC have a commitment to provide a service to their licence payers.

[Bachstrad]

Hardly. In fact I did not state that I was expecting anything.

I was merely saying that I am hoping that the licence fee will insure that we get at least some decent HD content from the BBC.

The BBC have a commitment to provide a service to their licence payers.

Well you didn't mention the BBC .... only Freesat & the license fee.

Also you obviously haven't seen any post 'trial' BBC HD either. Stand by to be disappointed! They're not even showing material on there that they have to hand in HD. Series 2 of 'Rome' and 'Life in Cold Blood' spring immediately to mind.

Of course if you're into endless repeats of Bleak House and Jools Holland you'll love BBC HD!!!! :grin:

ATB

Max

[BrianMc]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is the fact that some Freesat HD PVRs will probably allow HD programmes to be copied from the HDD and be archived, as opposed to the Sky HD box which does not. I've been doing this with a Technomate 6900 box for a few months now, but as this box has no EPG or series link I'm going to move on to a Freesat PVR whenever they appear. Perhaps a year or two down the line there may even be HDD / Blu-ray recorders with Freesat tuners. I know archiving programmes may not be high on most people's priorities, but at least Freesat may offer the option.
Actually it is an option on SKy-HD - just not an easy one! There is a public-domain program called +Extract which will extract FTA broadcasts from the HDD of a Sky+ (or Sky-HD) STB - but it obviously isn't as easy as just inserting a cable!

I did try it when I was changing my Sky-HD HDD but my PC was too weedy to play the HD programs I extracted (it was fine with SD)

[richard plumb]

Freesat's main charter is to provide non subscription television to areas without complete Freeview coverage after DSO.

why is that necessary when there is already the option of freesatfromsky or an out of contract sky box?

Just seems like unnecessary investment from the BBC for no obvious benefit.

[BrianMc]

why is that necessary when there is already the option of freesatfromsky or an out of contract sky box?

Just seems like unnecessary investment from the BBC for no obvious benefit.
As Freesat is "just an EPG" it should be self-financing from EPG fees....or that is the theory!

The alternative to Freesat for the 25% of the country outside Freeview coverage would have been for the BBC etc. to promote FreesatFromSky. This both could not have been relied on (Sky could, in theory, discontinue it!) and would also have amounted to giving a competitor rather major promotion!

[davemurgatroyd2]

why is that necessary when there is already the option of freesatfromsky or an out of contract sky box?

Just seems like unnecessary investment from the BBC for no obvious benefit.

There is no guarantee whatsoever that FreesatFromSky will continue for any length of time (Sky were initially almsot forced by the govt to take over the Freesat card issuing and make no profit from it as such) and both the BBC and ITV need no longer pay Sky millions of pounds to appear on the Sky EPG if sufficient boxes are sold in time. BBC/ITV will recoup their expenditure on this venture with fees they are charging channels to appear on their own EPG (IIRC £30,000 per year per EPG slot)

[BrianMc]

both the BBC and ITV need no longer pay Sky millions of pounds to appear on the Sky EPG if sufficient boxes are sold in time.
That's total (and confusing) rubbish! There are no plans for BBC and ITV to leave the Sky EPG. In the case of the BBC they are "plaform neutral" -and both BBC and ITV cannot afford to lose 8 million households!

[Cpt Weirdbeard]

I just wondered if anyone had received any email updates of information from the offiicial Freesat website, I signed up months ago but have not received any emails at all.


Neither have I, unless my ISP has deemed the email spam and nuked it!

Unimpressed.

[Cpt Weirdbeard]

why is that necessary when there is already the option of freesatfromsky or an out of contract sky box?

Just seems like unnecessary investment from the BBC for no obvious benefit.

An obvious benefit of Freesat to me is that I do not have to send any money towards Richard bl**dy Murdoch in the form of royalties if I pay for the Sky hardware. As mentioned elsewhere, our own domestic and non-commercial channel, the BBC has an obligation to its licence payers.

I'd rather have all media supplied to my house via wholly British controlled companies such as this new BBC/ITV/Ch4 enterprise and Virgin Media. Currently, I am with VM and I would dearly love to leave but the rest of the household here whinges perceptibly at the prospect of terrestrial Freeview as it stands. I have Freeview in my bedroom and it is adequate but not very slick.

Don't get me wrong, I like the fact that our own Richard Branson is at the top of this organisation (VM). I especially love the fact that VM have taken Sky to court for price fixing back when ntl finally turned into the full blown Branson company that it is now. It's simply that I have ALWAYS objected to paying a licence fee AND additional fees.

I am a notoriously tight git, I know...

[Cpt Weirdbeard]

There is some good reading found on this site with a couple of pics!

http://www.freesatnews.co.uk/



I can't help laughing at the name that this Grundig box is supposed to have. Maybe it's just me but "GufSat" suggests a satellite receiver that is capable of rendering audible gaseous emissions (i.e. farts) right there in your living room.

Is this in fact a wind up?


still crying with laughter]

[BrianMc]

I'd rather have all media supplied to my house via wholly British controlled companies such as this new BBC/ITV/Ch4 enterprise and Virgin Media....
Branson is mostly a figurehead and Virgin is as little a British company as Sky is! It's shares are quoted on the NYSE, its Chairman is American (Jim Moody). It was allegedly too much control by the Chairman and large american investors which made the form CEO Steve Burch leave!

[Cpt Weirdbeard]

This is why I want to give Freesat a fair trial at home. There should be a lot less commercial interest interfering with my entertainment. Not many people buy a television because they actually want to be advertised at for twenty minutes of every hour! Freesat puts the Beeb back into the competition and that means that I might be able to go back to paying just one subscription (my TV licence) in order to legitimately watch television broadcast in England and at the same time upgrade to High Def reception. I really don't like to be paying through the nose. Just like a nose bleed, the monthly drip that is my cable subscription soon amounts to a significant quantity of blood, just for telly.

See this:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/steve-burch-the-virgin-soldier-435836.html
A quote from the above says; "Burch is an Anglophile American who has forsaken coffee in favour of tea, but who still struggles to understand what is happening on the rugby pitch."
The same article implies that the change of figurehead is, as you say, superficial. Commerce these days make it necessary for any large company to invest overseas so your statement, although true, is unecessary.
Burch is described as an "Anglophile" in the article linked above. Now that a true Brit is in the chair, I am a whole lot happier. Brian... EVERY chairman is a figurehead. Branson is a British one, that's all.

Branson, started a school magazine from his bedroom. As he left his teens he and a friend ran a discount mail order record business. Their cult success with recording artist Mike Oldfield launched both their careers and Mike's.

See also:
http://www.woopidoo.com/biography/rupert-murdoch.htm
and
http://www.woopidoo.com/biography/richard_branson.htm

I will not pay money directly to any of Murdoch's enterprises. Chr1st knows, the bugger gets enough of my cash indirectly! He has enough wealth to be able to influence world politics already so he really doesn't need my tuppence worth. I am sure that Branson could be manipulative too but just like Murdoch, he would have his home country's welfare at the top of his list of priorities above all others. No disrespect to anyone but this is NOT Australia.

Of course, I also am a strong supporter of the BBC because they are non commercial (as far as it is possible for any company to be these days). Now that Freesat, is live, I may well blow out VM in favour of it and leave VM and Sky to bicker in court over television rights while I get on with real life.

[twisteddeeds]

i would rather prefer a quiet launch, but there could be a reason behind it, maybe they are afraid of another itv digital fiasco lol.... but i think its just "hardcore av buffs" get it first because we are in the know... so to speak, and when the service is up and running fully then they will target joe bloggs :rotfl:.. Although i have seen a few "bbc adverts" with freesat in small txt on tv.

[Cpt Weirdbeard]

I'm wholly underwhelmed by the whole prospect of Freesat, both SD & HD. I just don't see what it can offer unless it becomes 'Paysat'.


I'd just like to point out that it IS as you quaintly put it - "paysat". It is paid for by my licence fee, and I'd like very much to avail of it and get as far away from the two big media moguls as is possible. Thank you.

[Jonstone]

There is no guarantee whatsoever that FreesatFromSky will continue for any length of time (Sky were initially almsot forced by the govt to take over the Freesat card issuing and make no profit from it as such) and both the BBC and ITV need no longer pay Sky millions of pounds to appear on the Sky EPG if sufficient boxes are sold in time. BBC/ITV will recoup their expenditure on this venture with fees they are charging channels to appear on their own EPG (IIRC £30,000 per year per EPG slot)

I'm surprised the BBC pay anything to sky to appear on their EPG.

You would have thought that not having the BBC on their EPG would do sky a lot of harm, maybe the BBC should play hardball and refuse to pay it or maybe even demand a fee from sky for the privilage of having their channel on the sky platform, afterall sky wouldn't give their output to virgin for nothing would they so whats the difference?

[Bachstrad]

I'd just like to point out that it IS as you quaintly put it - "paysat". It is paid for by my licence fee, and I'd like very much to avail of it and get as far away from the two big media moguls as is possible. Thank you.

And my license fee too!

I used the term 'Paysat' to suggest that it would need some 'extra' income to source content to rival that of Sky. Unless Freesat can do that, as I said in the rest of my post that you didn't quote, 'Freesat won't rock my boat'.

Freesat is great for people who don't want to pay for a TV service, or can't get Freeview. It won't do for someone who likes movies and sport, particularly in HD. I wish it would, I could save myself £65 a month and get full value from my license fee.

ATB

Max

[Cpt Weirdbeard]

Freesat is great for people who don't want to pay for a TV service, or can't get Freeview.

It is especially good for those of us who dislike all of the hyperbole and advertising that saturates "popular" TV channels. I'm sorry to sound like an old fogey but there is little of interest to the "mature" viewer on the subscription channels.

[...quietly slips downstairs to the flame proof bunker]

So there.