News Item - Hollywood in screen battle with BBC - satellite switch imperils viewers' choice of movies

In article , K wrote:
Um, no. Warner Bros and Universal have also expressed concerns that the
BBC being FTA will affect their ability to sell rights in Europe.
All the TV stations should get together and not give in to the greedy
film studios.

Purchasing cartels aren't technically legal.

Dave
--
Email: MSN Messenger:

Of course it will be commercial posturing - but by European broadcasters.
They'll use it simply as an excuse not to fork out as much for rights.



How?

Why would this affect European local markets?

Which markets?

I can't see how any EU broadcaster can leverage this? It is the studios who
control the negotiations.

"David Marshall" wrote in message
...
In article ,
NO LOGO wrote:
But knowing the facts means you can't blow it up into a Sky vs BBC
vendetta.
Again, I don't know what you are referring too? (scratches head).

I'm referring to the fact that it's not *just* Fox that has a problem with
the BBC showing their material FTA. All of the major studios are now
worried about what it'll do to their income.

Sky UK is merely one small subsidary within the Newscorp empire. It is
one
"object" in the system.
http://newscorp.com/operations/television.html

Despite what that page implies - rubbish. News Corporation only owns 40%
of BSkyB plc. For a time they weren't even the largest shareholder.

As you would expect with any large shareholder, there are board members in
common between the two, but to describe Sky as just a division of News
Corporation is flatly wrong.

Dave
--
Email: MSN Messenger:



That's not how it works.

If Newscorp owns 40% BUT sets the strategic direction and imitates the
shareholder growth AND the remaining 60% are held by passive Investment
Funds who will only step in when their interests are at stake, it still
leaves the 40% stake holder in the driving seat.

In this era of creative accounting, "Enron" style euphemism, and when in
2000 George Soros said he did not understand the logic of the bull run,
interpretation of corporate structures, is something in the eye of the
beholder and subjective.


SKY =

Call Centre UK / India
Some local channels UK

Satellites SES (which Newscorp were a small shareholder)

NDS encryption (US)
SSSL encryption management (UK servicing the US).

Movie and US acquisitions are obviously US and partly Fox / 20th / Newscorp
controlled.

Sports Rights - (UK)

Worth mentioning - it's biggest UK content partner is UK TV which is 50% BBC
and 50% US Flextech. The irony.


It is also of note that the biggest BBC productions of late, are designed
for the BBC Worldwide market. Conversely, Sky have never had a UK indigenous
production hit. Of course all FOX content over here is almost guaranteed to
be of a "hit" status.



Most large corporations adopt a complex n-tier matrix structure, with
insulated zones of contractors, the complexities of global capital markets,
and national accounting variances.

In article ,
NO LOGO wrote:
That's not how it works.

Wow! You just rant and can't even check basic facts! Sorry, I don't have
the time to correct your posts when you don't even have the courtesy to
check them yourself to start with.

Dave
--
Email: MSN Messenger:

"David Marshall" wrote in message
...
In article ,
NO LOGO wrote:
Of course it will be commercial posturing - but by European
broadcasters.
They'll use it simply as an excuse not to fork out as much for rights.
How?

Try "you're trying to sell me exclusive rights in my territory, but with
the BBC spilling over *in English* it's not really exclusive rights is
it..."

That would be a *good* bargaining tactic for a European broadcaster.

Dave
--
Email: MSN Messenger:



Nonsense.

It can not be received on indigenous satellite equipment or in the local
langauge.

Canal+ dishes are not even at the same direction as 28.2.

Rights fees are product of demand and supply. If 5 broadcasters bid, the
price goes up. If 1 bids, the price goes down.

May be in 2 years time when / if half of France is watching UK TV this might
have some credibility, but it about as likely as the UK deciding to drive on
the right side of the road.

"David Marshall" wrote in message
...
In article , K
wrote:
Um, no. Warner Bros and Universal have also expressed concerns that the
BBC being FTA will affect their ability to sell rights in Europe.
All the TV stations should get together and not give in to the greedy
film studios.

Purchasing cartels aren't technically legal.

Dave
--
Email: MSN Messenger:


Nor supply cartels / Hollywood restaurant meetings, nods, and notes under
the table.

;-)

On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 13:40:56 +0000 (UTC), "NO LOGO"
wrote:

Of course it will be commercial posturing - but by European
broadcasters.
They'll use it simply as an excuse not to fork out as much for rights.
How?

Try "you're trying to sell me exclusive rights in my territory, but with
the BBC spilling over *in English* it's not really exclusive rights is
it..."

That would be a *good* bargaining tactic for a European broadcaster.

Dave
--
Email: MSN Messenger:



Nonsense.

It isn't nonsense - I worked with a bunch of programme sales agents
for six months and this was exactly the sort of argument used by TV
stations when buying programmes where there was overlap. Good
examples of where this has been an issue are Mexico & Canada and
closer to home Benelux.

--
Hiram Hackenbacker

"Hiram Hackenbacker" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 13:40:56 +0000 (UTC), "NO LOGO"
wrote:

Of course it will be commercial posturing - but by European
broadcasters.
They'll use it simply as an excuse not to fork out as much for
rights.
How?

Try "you're trying to sell me exclusive rights in my territory, but
with
the BBC spilling over *in English* it's not really exclusive rights is
it..."

That would be a *good* bargaining tactic for a European broadcaster.

Dave
--
Email: MSN Messenger:



Nonsense.

It isn't nonsense - I worked with a bunch of programme sales agents
for six months and this was exactly the sort of argument used by TV
stations when buying programmes where there was overlap. Good
examples of where this has been an issue are Mexico & Canada and
closer to home Benelux.

--
Hiram Hackenbacker


For which Mexico is a Southern State of the US as part of the trading block.

Canada is a northern state of the US (unofficially) as part of the trading
block.

English is widely spoken, and 85% of Canadians live within 50 miles of the
US border.


And Benelux is a tiny country smaller than Kent and heavily integrated with
its European neighbours.

On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 14:25:47 +0000 (UTC), "NO LOGO"
wrote:

Nonsense.

It isn't nonsense - I worked with a bunch of programme sales agents
for six months and this was exactly the sort of argument used by TV
stations when buying programmes where there was overlap. Good
examples of where this has been an issue are Mexico & Canada and
closer to home Benelux.

--
Hiram Hackenbacker


For which Mexico is a Southern State of the US as part of the trading block.

You forgot the "unofficially" surely.

Canada is a northern state of the US (unofficially) as part of the trading
block.

English is widely spoken, and 85% of Canadians live within 50 miles of the
US border.


And Benelux is a tiny country smaller than Kent and heavily integrated with
its European neighbours.

Actually Benelux consists of three Countries. Combined population 27
million and covering an area somewhat larger than Kent.

--
Hiram Hackenbacker

On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 09:33:06 +0000 (UTC), "NO LOGO"
wrote:

OK: My initial thoughts.

Who owns Sky and the Twentieth Century Studios? Newscorp. This is Newscorp
attempting to coerce the BBC back in to using CAM technology.

That story is about WARNER and UNIVERSAL as well as Fox.

The fact remains that movie and programme rights are sold by
territory. No broadcaster anywhere in the world is allowed to
broadcast programmes outside the area which they have paid for.

The BBC has unilaterally decided that this provision does not apply to
them, and now it is coming back to bite them. Well, goodness me.. is
there ANYONE who didn't see that coming?