Sky Plus commercials

"Dom Robinson" wrote in message
...


But surely it'll be somewhere in the T&Cs when you bought the machine,
that
it's something that could happen?
--


Doesn't every large company, have a clause in the contract with minions like
ourselves, kinda like a clause Z, that states, (along the lines of...)

"We reserves the right to changes any of the T&C's at any time, as long as
we give X period of notice"?

Most of the contracts you will have signed have similar.....

"Matthew Thompson" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 08:10:55 -0000, "Tumbleweed"
wrote:

This is all just bull****... 'being looked into', 'someone in a pub told
me', 'IIRC', its all rumour and innuendo, and also confusing whats
technically possible with what is financially and commercially possible.
You've got to look at the bigger picture.

Actually it's not bull****. Sky use NDS software for conditional
access and EPG functionality, as you'd expect this is a News Corp
company.

http://www.nds.com/personal_tv/xtv_pvr.html

One of the items they have previously sold as a benefit to the content
producers and network operators is the ability to restrict access to
fast forward controls during sections of programmes such as advert
breaks.

Where does it say that in that reference?

There are three huge problems with trying to stop people ffing through
ads
on Sky+. The first is, you'd have to put a marker into the signal so you
knew when the ads started and stopped so you could prevent ff. Once that
marker was there, it could (would) be used by other manufacturers (ie not
Sky) to produce video recorders and hard disc recorders that
automatically
skipped the ads without any effort on the users part at all. That would
kill
the Sky+ market in about 1 second. I'd be first in the q.

It wouldn't kill anything off - Sky's Videocrypt implementation is a
closed system and Sky and NDS are not about to let anyone have access
to it so a third party or non SKY branded PVR is not going to happen.
The markers are not output to the analogue realm so video recorders
are not able to see them.

Fair point

Follow on, second, and key problem, how many advertisers do you think
would
be really chuffed if Sky made it *easy* to skip the ads by broadcasting
such
a signal at the start and end? They actually fought against such a
proposal
many years ago and were probably the reason it never happened. Imnagine
SKy
trying to sell advertising space vs NTL or terrestrial. They'd be
creamed.

For the reasons I note above this is a moot point.

If viewers start leaving because you cant ff, then its not moot at all.


Third problem is the huge negative publicity that would ensue, at the
moment
-- snipped --

Yes this would be a problem - customer satisfaction would have to be a
key objective of Sky's during the initial roll out of the Sky + idea.

It aint EVER gonna happen. Worry about something that is happening now,
such
as DOGs all over the screen, adverts for crap programs you dont want to
see
being stuck on screen as a hug obtrusive DOG for up to a week in advance,
hikes in fees, and 5 minute ad breaks.

Never say Never. Once the bulk of receivers are Sky + boxes - possibly
5 years from now - it is likely that Sky will be able to add in more
restrictions to the package without risking large amounts of churn. If
there is no alternative - they've already managed to do away with TiVo
- then the restrictions will come and your protestations will fall on
deaf ears.

Since at the moment there are few PVRs that compete with Sky+, but in future
there are likely to be more, its hard to see why the bulk of receivers would
be Sky + boxes. BUt lets say there were. In which case, could sky afford to
alienate the bulk of its viewers for very little benefit?


Broadcasters will support Sky as the adverts are their only source of
income - indeed you may even find that targetted adverts are
downloaded to your box automatically and inserted into advert breaks
that you can't skip past or show, interruption free, at the beginning
of a pre-recorded show. They already know what you watch because they
can log your keystrokes.

[email protected] )

Lots of things are possible, but so is commercial suicide. Sky is not the
only sources of advertisers revenue. There is freeview and cable , there are
magazines, billboards, newspapers etc. If they alienate their audience,
then advertisers will go away.

re your last sentence, do you mean they do, or they can, record keystrokes?
Two very different things. They'd also have to xmit them back to sky. Do
they do that?

FWIW I suspect there would also be a case against them in law, for damaging
the equipment (by preventing it working, ie stopping fast forward working).

--
Tumbleweed

Remove theobvious before replying (but no email reply necessary to
newsgroups)

"rachel" wrote in message
...

"Dom Robinson" wrote in message
...


But surely it'll be somewhere in the T&Cs when you bought the machine,
that
it's something that could happen?
--


Doesn't every large company, have a clause in the contract with minions
like
ourselves, kinda like a clause Z, that states, (along the lines of...)

"We reserves the right to changes any of the T&C's at any time, as long as
we give X period of notice"?

Most of the contracts you will have signed have similar.....


They do, but often can be done under 'unfair terms' or something like that.
Depends.
If they changed the terms to say 'we reserve the right to kill your
firstborn and appropriate your possessions' for example, they wouldnt have
carte blanche just because they put that in the new Ts and Cs.

--
Tumbleweed

Remove theobvious before replying (but no email reply necessary to
newsgroups)

"Tumbleweed" wrote in message
. ..

They do, but often can be done under 'unfair terms' or something like
that.
Depends.
If they changed the terms to say 'we reserve the right to kill your
firstborn and appropriate your possessions' for example, they wouldnt have
carte blanche just because they put that in the new Ts and Cs.

--
Tumbleweed


I wish I had put it that eloquently TW!

I know what you mean, I should have been a bit more precise, sorry.

"Dom Robinson" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
Doesn't every large company, have a clause in the contract with
minions
like
ourselves, kinda like a clause Z, that states, (along the lines of...)

"We reserves the right to changes any of the T&C's at any time, as
long as
we give X period of notice"?

Most of the contracts you will have signed have similar.....


They do, but often can be done under 'unfair terms' or something like
that.
Depends.
If they changed the terms to say 'we reserve the right to kill your
firstborn and appropriate your possessions' for example, they wouldnt
have
carte blanche just because they put that in the new Ts and Cs.

My TiVo T&Cs didn't have that, but they did say that I should get a pig
every
month, and three comely lasses of virtue true.

Now I know why Jomtien is always recommending them!

--
Tumbleweed

Remove theobvious before replying (but no email reply necessary to
newsgroups)

People may accept it if they introduced it at the same time as a £5 or £10
reduction in subscription charges. Then they could sneak the subscription
fee back up over a number of years the same way they do now.

Chris Allen

"Tumbleweed" wrote in message
. ..


"Matthew Thompson" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 08:10:55 -0000, "Tumbleweed"
wrote:

This is all just bull****... 'being looked into', 'someone in a pub
told
me', 'IIRC', its all rumour and innuendo, and also confusing whats
technically possible with what is financially and commercially
possible.
You've got to look at the bigger picture.

Actually it's not bull****. Sky use NDS software for conditional
access and EPG functionality, as you'd expect this is a News Corp
company.

http://www.nds.com/personal_tv/xtv_pvr.html

One of the items they have previously sold as a benefit to the content
producers and network operators is the ability to restrict access to
fast forward controls during sections of programmes such as advert
breaks.

Where does it say that in that reference?

There are three huge problems with trying to stop people ffing through
ads
on Sky+. The first is, you'd have to put a marker into the signal so
you
knew when the ads started and stopped so you could prevent ff. Once
that
marker was there, it could (would) be used by other manufacturers (ie
not
Sky) to produce video recorders and hard disc recorders that
automatically
skipped the ads without any effort on the users part at all. That would
kill
the Sky+ market in about 1 second. I'd be first in the q.

It wouldn't kill anything off - Sky's Videocrypt implementation is a
closed system and Sky and NDS are not about to let anyone have access
to it so a third party or non SKY branded PVR is not going to happen.
The markers are not output to the analogue realm so video recorders
are not able to see them.

Fair point

Follow on, second, and key problem, how many advertisers do you think
would
be really chuffed if Sky made it *easy* to skip the ads by broadcasting
such
a signal at the start and end? They actually fought against such a
proposal
many years ago and were probably the reason it never happened. Imnagine
SKy
trying to sell advertising space vs NTL or terrestrial. They'd be
creamed.

For the reasons I note above this is a moot point.

If viewers start leaving because you cant ff, then its not moot at all.


Third problem is the huge negative publicity that would ensue, at the
moment
-- snipped --

Yes this would be a problem - customer satisfaction would have to be a
key objective of Sky's during the initial roll out of the Sky + idea.

It aint EVER gonna happen. Worry about something that is happening now,
such
as DOGs all over the screen, adverts for crap programs you dont want to
see
being stuck on screen as a hug obtrusive DOG for up to a week in
advance,
hikes in fees, and 5 minute ad breaks.

Never say Never. Once the bulk of receivers are Sky + boxes - possibly
5 years from now - it is likely that Sky will be able to add in more
restrictions to the package without risking large amounts of churn. If
there is no alternative - they've already managed to do away with TiVo
- then the restrictions will come and your protestations will fall on
deaf ears.

Since at the moment there are few PVRs that compete with Sky+, but in
future
there are likely to be more, its hard to see why the bulk of receivers
would
be Sky + boxes. BUt lets say there were. In which case, could sky afford
to
alienate the bulk of its viewers for very little benefit?


Broadcasters will support Sky as the adverts are their only source of
income - indeed you may even find that targetted adverts are
downloaded to your box automatically and inserted into advert breaks
that you can't skip past or show, interruption free, at the beginning
of a pre-recorded show. They already know what you watch because they
can log your keystrokes.

[email protected] )

Lots of things are possible, but so is commercial suicide. Sky is not the
only sources of advertisers revenue. There is freeview and cable , there
are
magazines, billboards, newspapers etc. If they alienate their audience,
then advertisers will go away.

re your last sentence, do you mean they do, or they can, record
keystrokes?
Two very different things. They'd also have to xmit them back to sky. Do
they do that?

FWIW I suspect there would also be a case against them in law, for
damaging
the equipment (by preventing it working, ie stopping fast forward
working).

--
Tumbleweed

Remove theobvious before replying (but no email reply necessary to
newsgroups)

Already being looked into in the USA apparently (Stopping the user fast
forwarding through ads/promos on DVD's and eventually TIVO)
No doubt Sky copied the USA,The technology is there via a software update so
it could well be in a couple of years that we'll be stopped from FF'ing
through their *glorious dogless ad breaks*

That would be a really good way to get people to go back to their
video recorders, or some third-party DVD or hard drive recorder,
rather than Sky's own.

You have to remember what TV is about, though. Don't be fooled into
thinking that it's about providing entertainment to the viewer. The
programme is not the product and the viewer is not the target. The
product is the audience that the TV company provide, for a fee, to the
advertiser.

Simon Kempster