• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Sky plea for advertisers to stay

pinkhelmets

VIP Member
VIP Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2001
Messages
5,187
Likes
89
#1
Sky is calling on advertisers and their agencies not to renegotiate £20m in ad deals affected by the pulling of its channels from Virgin, until after its financial year ends in June.

Sky Media's managing director Nick Milligan has been trying to persuade media agencies not to make any "knee jerk reactions" to the withdrawal, they want agencies to hold off until June to see how the situation plays out.

Not all agencies are sympathetic "Sky has taken a strategic business decision to land grab Virgin Media's customers and that has resulted in a loss of audience, which is unacceptable to us on behalf of our clients," Starcom UK's trading director Chris Locke told the Sunday Telegraph. "For the second half of this year we will review where those viewers have gone and move our money accordingly."

Viewing figures show that the loss of the basic channels from the Virgin cable service will see around a 12 per cent dip in audience, based on year-to-date viewing figures.

In terms of advertising revenue the loss of the 3.3m homes is predicted to impact Sky's total sales by around 8 per cent, according to media agency figures. However, on a channel-by-channel basis this impact is more pronounced. For example, Sky One has lost close to 30 per cent of its share of advertising; Sky News 18 per cent; Sky Travel 30 per cent and Sky Two 13 per cent.

Sky is said to be considering strategies to boost viewing figures - and appease agencies and clients - including the possibility of airing live football and quality film premieres on Sky One.
 

digidude

VIP Member
VIP Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2001
Messages
24,610
Likes
229
#2
good enough for them, i hope they either go completley bust or are forced to be broken up so consumers (especially trade ones) get more choice
 

digidude

VIP Member
VIP Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2001
Messages
24,610
Likes
229
#3
also this just to kick them on their way down :proud:

Licensees are being urged to write to Ofcom with their concerns about BSkyB after the watchdog announced an investigation into pay TV.

All Party Parliamentary Beer Group chairman John Grogan says the investigation, announced today, is a great opportunity for pubs.


Today’s announcement provides a big opportunity for pubs to put their concerns about Sky’s pricing policy directly to the regulator
John Grogan, MP for Selby.
He told the MA: “Today’s announcement provides a big opportunity for pubs to put their concerns about Sky’s pricing policy for premium sports directly to the regulator.

“The fact that Sky’s shares fell sharply on the announcement is an indication of how seriously the markets treat this investigation.

“For the first time in a decade, there is a chance of getting some good old competition into the market for pay TV in pubs and clubs.

“I would urge licensees to write with their views and opinions directly to Ofcom.”

Last month, Grogan called for Ofcom to look into a deal between Setanta and Sky which means pubs will not benefit from the break up of next season's Premiership football packages.

The media regulator was urged to look into pay TV after calls from a group including BT, Setanta, Top Up TV and Virgin Media.

A row erupted after 3.3 million subscribers who receive cable television from Virgin Media - formerly known as NTL:Telewest – had their Sky channels removed because the two sides could not agree a price.

A Sky spokesman responded by saying: "BT, Top Up TV and Setanta all have a commercial interest in preventing Sky from increasing customer choice by developing a new pay-TV service on the DTT (set-top box) platform.

"Recent events have also drawn attention to the fact that cable is a closed network with substantial protections. In any market investigation, we'd expect Ofcom to look at the physical and legal barriers and business practices that shield Virgin Media from true competition and prevent consumers from enjoying lower prices in broadband and telephony and greater innovation and choice in television."
 

pinkhelmets

VIP Member
VIP Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2001
Messages
5,187
Likes
89
#4
Sky's only reply was that "everyone else has commercial interest in stopping sky's monopoly" pmsl what a ridiculous reply! But whatelse can be said.... "yer we agree, the investigation is needed since we rip the country off" LOL

Its good that Virgin, Top-Up, Setanta, BT, ITV, Ch4, BBC, UK public, pub industry & Commercial Advertisers are at last standing together and in agreement that the monopoly is no good for anyone other than Sky. Lets hope Ofcom and the DTI finally smash the strangle-hold they have.
 

nara

Who?
VIP Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Messages
14,775
Likes
274
#5
Maybe it wasn't such a dumb move by Virgin after all. This could get interesting.
 

digidude

VIP Member
VIP Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2001
Messages
24,610
Likes
229
#7
could this be another big blow for them? i hope so

The solicitor who defended Portsmouth licensee Karen Murphy says he would like a High Court ruling on foreign satellite systems.

Paul Dixon of Molesworths Bright Clegg, is concerned that the ruling handed down by Judge Iain Pearson at Portsmouth Crown Court last week will only add to confusion because he says it contradicts an earlier Crown Court decision.

Dixon told MA: "The decision of His Honour Judge Pearson in Karen Murphy's appeal at Portsmouth Crown Court only serves to add confusion to this complex and technical area of law.

"In the Gannon appeal at Bolton Crown Court in March 2006 His Honour Judge Warnock said categorically that showing live FAPL matches using legitimate foreign satellite systems is not a criminal offence.

"Last week Judge Pearson decided that it is.

"The fact that two Crown Court Judges have made contradictory decisions merely supports the view that I have expressed on a number of occasions, namely that the sooner one of these cases reaches the High Court for a definitive ruling the better for all concerned."
 
Joined
Feb 28, 2007
Messages
1,017
Likes
11
#8
Maybe it wasn't such a dumb move by Virgin after all. This could get interesting.

In the words of Stone Cold, Sky have opened up a massive can of whoop ass and served it to themselves. There is only so much the industry can take, sure they are big and powerful and at the beginning worked hard to get there, now all they do is throw their weight around.

Virgin Media is backed by one of the hardest nosed negotiators in the game, you dont become successful by laying down to bigger companies. Sky are going to get what is coming to them, I disagree that companies should be penalised for being too big and successful, but when they employ tactics Sky have then they should be manhandled into a suitable submission.
 

witchy

Banned for good!
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
18,282
Likes
293
#9
What I'd love to see is some multi-billionaire Saudi Sheiks joining forces with Virgin and anyone else thats interested to launch a new UK based satellite/cable service, people who have the kind of money to piss all over the offer that Sky makes to the FA and bid more for the latest US tv shows, all it takes is for Sky to lose the football contracts and they'd start to crumble.

I wonder if Sir Richard has employed a team of hackers to try and hack Videoguard, lol

A euro wide paytv service is what we really need, it would be amazing if a few of the foreign providers joined forces and were allowed to advertise and sell subscriptions to the uk market, maybe after skys recent bully tactics they might reconsider the paytv laws.
 
Last edited:

digidude

VIP Member
VIP Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2001
Messages
24,610
Likes
229
#10
it would be amazing if a few of the foreign providers joined forces and were allowed to advertise and sell subscriptions to the uk market, maybe after skys recent bully tactics they might reconsider the paytv laws.

there isnt actually a law that says this cant be done, this is how the xxx subscriptions are sold in this country. sky do twist civil laws to secure convictions in criminal courts for preople showing foreign TV in pubs but this in itself is illegal and is always being bounced around courts without a proper outcome ever arising from it as sky know to quit pushing when it looks like they might lose
 
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
996
Likes
3
#11
I think some people are forgetting before Sky we had 3 channels then yippee alone came channel 4 and to be left in the third world they then tried showing 24 hour TV, well sky changed that even took over the mess that Maxwell created, remember that big fat slimy moron who nicked all that pension money, If you dont wont sky dont buy it get a free view box and as for Virgin Media what do you think they are going to do to give us choice
Come on you all keep saying choice so what will be the choice Virgin Movies or Sky Movies your still going to watch the same movies and if you think it will get cheaper think again, because who is going to pay for this stupid fight between two mega rich morons
 

pinkhelmets

VIP Member
VIP Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2001
Messages
5,187
Likes
89
#12
i mean no offence and respect you have a different view, but the phrase 'ignorance is bliss' is the only sensible reply to this.
Do you read the Sun & News Of The World, watch Sky News, and easily believe what someone tells you without proof? Honestly Corinadeva, I dont think people are forgetting how many channels are available by satellite, but you should try to understand that sky did not invent it, nor do they own ANY satellites, nor do they own all the channels available in the uk.
Yes sky have successfully created a powerful business but Murdoch Methods are just wrong in the eyes of those who understand more. A fact that you maybe dont understand is that with your 'Movies' example, all the movies are cheaper and released earlier on other sat systems in europe, but generally the uk public dont know this. If you want cheaper tv the options are there but thats all irrelevant, the hatred of sky is due to their pure domination and control of the british public, more than you obviously realise.
Best intentions.



-------------------------------edit
ps. I have moved the thread into the Sky room if people want to discuss both sides & different views. I know not everyone agrees with the different points of view so this original 'news thread' could easily become unsuitable for the main forum homepage, so now better suited in here. :)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
996
Likes
3
#13
I fully understand what you are saying and at the core of it is the cost "movies are cheaper and released earlier on other sat systems in Europe" well not only movies cost more here so do DVD's, CD's ,Cars ,Reebok's, Nike's the list is endless you must have heard rip off Britain.
Richard Branson and Virgin media are just jumping on the band wagon and Joe public are going to pay for it, nothing branson has done has made anything cheaper but he gets richer every year, but likes to parade himself as the peoples champion and as for Murdoch we have to blame the government for allowing an Australian with an American passport so much media power in our country
 

gooner71

VIP Member
VIP Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2005
Messages
1,911
Likes
24
#15
The fact that we live in the "West" means that regardless of where anyone is from or what passport they hold everyone has the same opportunity to "make it" here!! So The aussie wth the american passport comment is irrelevant!!

At the end of the day Murdoch has made a success of his media empire by employing bright people in marketing and at least on the tv side, snapping up the rights to things the British public want to watch!! Remember it was considered madness the amount he paid for premiership footie and Sky just goes from strength to strength.

In a free market economy everything is worth what people will pay and generally the British public are not interested that most of Sky's content is available cheaper on European satellites - they just want a one stop shop with one small dish - easy and convenient!!

Branson is not "jumping on the bandwagon" he is simply a business man trying to make a success of a cable industry that has been dogged with financial problems since day one!! His marketing methods are pretty aggressive and the "row" with Sky has given them more free publicity than they could have hoped for!!

The facts are - yes we can get all get most things cheaper if we look around and use some initiative but British apathy prevents the majority from bothering.

Murdoch v Branson can only be a good thing in the long run as competition will force prices down !!

And, until us Brits learn to vote with our feet, things will remain the same - we will always pay high fuel duty, more for DVD's etc...
 
Last edited: