Long or short advert breaks

Zero Tolerance wrote:

On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 09:36:56 -0000, "Bingo99"
wrote:

If they put up the sub's by 13% and stopped showing ad's during the prog's
would anyone go for it?

Since that'd only cover the 'Sky' channels and not the legions of
other channels like UKTV ****, UKTV **** + 1, UKTV **** 2, etc, I
think I'll pass. It's not like it's hard to fast-forward though the
ads. Surely nobody watches television 'live' any more anyway.

--

we certainly try not to. My wife absolutely hates the drivel they fill
channels with and even when she watches some pap like "I'd do
anything" she likes to be able to wind through anything she finds
boring. Mind you, she prefers it if I record to our dvd's hard drive
and edit out all the ad breaks :O)

--
Paul (We won't die of devotion)
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/

Paul Heslop wrote:
Zero Tolerance wrote:
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 09:36:56 -0000, "Bingo99"
wrote:

If they put up the sub's by 13% and stopped showing ad's during the prog's
would anyone go for it?
Since that'd only cover the 'Sky' channels and not the legions of
other channels like UKTV ****, UKTV **** + 1, UKTV **** 2, etc, I
think I'll pass. It's not like it's hard to fast-forward though the
ads. Surely nobody watches television 'live' any more anyway.

--

we certainly try not to. My wife absolutely hates the drivel they fill
channels with and even when she watches some pap like "I'd do
anything" she likes to be able to wind through anything she finds
boring. Mind you, she prefers it if I record to our dvd's hard drive
and edit out all the ad breaks :O)

"And the next person to go is ... [half an hour later] ... after the
break ... [half an hour later] ... Gerty!"

if they wont just announce the results I won't watch! (Not that I care
enough to watch these shows anyway)

On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 at 09:36:56, Bingo99 wrote in
uk.media.tv.sky :

I once read that subs account for about 87% of Sky revenue, so that leaves
13% made up by ad's and other revenues

If they put up the sub's by 13% and stopped showing ad's during the prog's
would anyone go for it?

Not if they showed them in-between instead...
--
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett

In article ,
says...
Dom Robinson wrote:
In article ,
says...
product placement is already allowed on British TV (both BBC
and commercial channels) to add a sense of realism. But under the
current 'free supply' rules programme makers cannot profit from it,
and the brand has limited say over how it is featured on screen.

So basically as long as the programme makers "don't profit from it",
not only can manufacturers of goods and services get their products
shown on air (free publicity that is worth many thousands of pounds)
but they can even have a limited say in how it is featured!

And you say that "there *is* no PP on BBC shows" ?

How about 'The Apprentice' ? You think all those Amstrad products
turned up on screen by accident?


There's so much product placement on TV on all channels, not just the
BBC.

Coming soon we've got the "Flora London Marathon", then over the year
there's also the "888.com World Snooker Championship" and the
"Carling FA Cup Final", etc.

That's not PP; that's event sponsorship and is /nothing/ to do with the
channel it is being shown on; especially the BBC.

But the BBC shouldn't be promoting a product, like it's doing.

Look at the time when they couldn't mention the Radio Times without saying
"Other listings magazines are available".
--

Dom Robinson Gamertag: DVDfever email: dom at dvdfever dot co dot uk
/* http://DVDfever.co.uk (editor)
/* 1136 DVDs, 372 games, 401 CDs, 110 cinema films, 52 concerts, videos & news
/* burnout paradise, simpsons movie, duffy in concert, spiderwick chronicles
New music charts - http://dvdfever.co.uk/music.shtml
Youtube - http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=DVDdom

In article ,
says...
On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 at 14:44:37, Dom Robinson
wrote in uk.media.tv.misc :

In article ,
says...
On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 at 21:02:59, Paul Heslop
wrote in uk.media.tv.sky :

I always understood that the lack of adverts was the main selling point
of the Sky Movie Channels - after all, they charge ****ing enough for
them!

I have the same view for all sky channels, as in ones owned by them
not just ones they show.

Good point.

I wonder how much higher the basic (£21/mth) package would be if Sky
were totally advert free?

It simply wouldn't happen. A Simpsons episode comfortable fits within the 30-
minute slot on Sky One, whereas without ads they'd need to find some other
filler.

Why should the 30 minute time-slot be sacrosanct? Why not 25 minutes?

Because it's a rare occasion when a primetime programme doesn't start/end on
the hour or half-hour and they try to avoid it.
--

Dom Robinson Gamertag: DVDfever email: dom at dvdfever dot co dot uk
/* http://DVDfever.co.uk (editor)
/* 1136 DVDs, 372 games, 401 CDs, 110 cinema films, 52 concerts, videos & news
/* burnout paradise, simpsons movie, duffy in concert, spiderwick chronicles
New music charts - http://dvdfever.co.uk/music.shtml
Youtube - http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=DVDdom

In article ,
says...
"Carl Waring" wrote:


So basically as long as the programme makers "don't profit from it",

Well yeah. I was talking about the type of PP that others were meaning; it
anything /but/ the use of every-day objects in scenes.

Like DAB radios in every house on Eastenders?

Good job they don't build DAB into washing machines...
--

Dom Robinson Gamertag: DVDfever email: dom at dvdfever dot co dot uk
/* http://DVDfever.co.uk (editor)
/* 1136 DVDs, 372 games, 401 CDs, 110 cinema films, 52 concerts, videos & news
/* burnout paradise, simpsons movie, duffy in concert, spiderwick chronicles
New music charts - http://dvdfever.co.uk/music.shtml
Youtube - http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=DVDdom

"Rob." wrote:


"And the next person to go is ... [half an hour later] ... after the
break ... [half an hour later] ... Gerty!"

if they wont just announce the results I won't watch! (Not that I care
enough to watch these shows anyway)

and that Phillip Schofield, why does he have to SHOUT!!!?

--
Paul (We won't die of devotion)
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/

On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 at 21:36:34, Dom Robinson
wrote in uk.media.tv.sky :

Why should the 30 minute time-slot be sacrosanct? Why not 25 minutes?

Because it's a rare occasion when a primetime programme doesn't start/end on
the hour or half-hour and they try to avoid it.

What does that have to do with the length of timeslot on a subscription
channel, though?
--
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett

Dom Robinson wrote:
In article ,
says...
Dom Robinson wrote:
In article ,
says...
product placement is already allowed on British TV (both BBC
and commercial channels) to add a sense of realism. But under the
current 'free supply' rules programme makers cannot profit from
it, and the brand has limited say over how it is featured on
screen.

So basically as long as the programme makers "don't profit from
it", not only can manufacturers of goods and services get their
products shown on air (free publicity that is worth many thousands
of pounds) but they can even have a limited say in how it is
featured!

And you say that "there *is* no PP on BBC shows" ?

How about 'The Apprentice' ? You think all those Amstrad products
turned up on screen by accident?


There's so much product placement on TV on all channels, not just
the BBC.

Coming soon we've got the "Flora London Marathon", then over the
year there's also the "888.com World Snooker Championship" and the
"Carling FA Cup Final", etc.

That's not PP; that's event sponsorship and is /nothing/ to do with
the channel it is being shown on; especially the BBC.

But the BBC shouldn't be promoting a product, like it's doing.

They're not. They're just covering an event. That's it. I think there'd be
more of a fuss (certainly from Snooker fans) if they /didn't/ cover the
event!

--
Carl Waring
DigiGuide:
Full: http://getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=1495
Freeview (free): http://getdigiguide.com/?p=4&r=1495
Web-based: http://getdigiguide.com/?p=3&r=1495

"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 10:20:46 -0000, "Carl Waring"
wrote:

So, like I said, there *is* no PP on BBC shows.

Doesn't sound like you read that article at all.

product placement is already allowed on British TV (both BBC
and commercial channels) to add a sense of realism. But under the current
'free supply' rules programme makers cannot profit from it, and the brand
has limited say over how it is featured on screen.

So basically as long as the programme makers "don't profit from it",
not only can manufacturers of goods and services get their products
shown on air (free publicity that is worth many thousands of pounds)
but they can even have a limited say in how it is featured!


If you're doing the props for a TV show you show the stuff people are
most likely to buy. You just go to a supermarket and buy the popular
brands. The market leaders. That's how you achieve realism.

The same doesn't go for the beer in Stenders or Corrie (although the
rules may have been tighter when Corrie started anyway) as there's no
one market leader in tied pubs or brewers.

Kellogs or Nestle(Shredded Wheat etc) don't pay the BBC anything.
If the BBC want to portray "normal" people eating breakfast cereal then
they'll be eating either a Kellogs or a Nestle product as they're the
market leaders. If they started featuring obscure brands, or identifiable
supermarket own brands that weren't market leaders then maybe you'd
have a point.

As it is you don't.


michael adams

....