Could the recent move of `five' to a PSB multiplex have been an actof futility?

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
. com...
They need to get some decent stuff to put out or nobody would want to buy
it!

I agree.

Whilst there is stuff that I watch on "five" (2 progs this week), I wouldn't
miss it if I didn't have it.

I guess that they are hoping enough people want to pay for CSI which seems
to be on about 8 times a week!

tim

"Mark Carver" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 10:43:33 +0100
"Doctor D" wrote:
Pay for Five? ROTFL.

Five is among the better channels these days IMO, at least if you're into
gadget/machinery type programs.

Yes, I agree. I'm surprised, given the obvious interests of most folk
in this group, that C5 gets such a rough ride in here.

The Gadget Show is mainly a waste of time, thanks to its presentation
style and ridiculous testing techniques, but other programmes such as
Monster Moves and Megastructures are actually very good, and often beat
anything on the other four channels at the same time.

Yeah, but I won't pay a monthly sub just for them (and Hotel Inspector!)

tim

tim... wrote:
"Mark Carver" wrote in message

The Gadget Show is mainly a waste of time, thanks to its presentation
style and ridiculous testing techniques, but other programmes such as
Monster Moves and Megastructures are actually very good, and often beat
anything on the other four channels at the same time.

Yeah, but I won't pay a monthly sub just for them (and Hotel Inspector!)

No, nor me. In fact I can't think of much on any channel that I'd pay a sub
for, over and above the sub I already pay the Beeb.

--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

www.paras.org.uk

In article , Doctor
D wrote:
Pay for Five? ROTFL.

Pay for *any* channels when I've already paid the licence fee? ROTFL.

Rod.
--
Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/

Logo ridden fuzzy screened crap


"J G Miller" wrote in message
news

How much longer will `five' stay on a PSB multiplex if it decides
to embrace a subscription tv model?

From
http://www.broadcastnow.co.UK/news/broadcasters/five-mulls-switch-to-pay-tv/5006289.article

QUOTE

Five mulls switch to pay-TV

1 October, 2009 | By Kate Bulkley

Five is considering taking its main terrestrial channel into the pay-TV
market as it investigates radical survival strategies.

Sources close to the broadcaster revealed the plan is part of a potential
strategy to shift its *entire* channel portfolio (Five, Fiver, Five US)
to pay.

UNQUOTE

I think a lot watch GS just for Suzi Perry



"Nalla" wrote in message
...

"Zimmy" wrote in message
...

"Mark Carver" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2009 10:43:33 +0100
"Doctor D" wrote:
Pay for Five? ROTFL.

Five is among the better channels these days IMO, at least if you're
into
gadget/machinery type programs.

Yes, I agree. I'm surprised, given the obvious interests of most folk
in this group, that C5 gets such a rough ride in here.

The Gadget Show is mainly a waste of time, thanks to its presentation
style and ridiculous testing techniques, but other programmes such as
Monster Moves and Megastructures are actually very good, and often beat
anything on the other four channels at the same time.

I agree too, Five has improved a lot, even the Gadget show is OK if you
think of it as the 'Top Gear' of gadgets (i.e. uninformative but
entertaining). FlashForward looks promising so far.
However there is no way I'm paying for it when I can download stuff (in
better quality currently).

Z

What do you like better folks. The Gadgets show or Tomorrows World.