Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 3 votes

Australian Channel 10/ ONE HD Coverage [merged]


  • Please log in to reply
843 replies to this topic

#201 wiligates

wiligates
  • Member

  • 2,785 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 16 April 2012 - 10:57

why would foxsports fill f1 with ads? i watch the a-league and there are no ads during the game, same for pretty much everything on there. As far as i know FOM don't put ads in the broadcast (like nascar and indycar do) so no reason for foxsports to put ads on. Foxsports has the monopoly on the a-league and socceroos games but no ads, so yeah....

Soccer has no ads because no one watches it :p
Anyone notice what ads fill the usual F1 broadcast since its been on Ten/One?Ashley and Martin hair replacement, Stilh grass trimmers and Mercedes Benz sports cars.Target market middle aged balding dreamers.



Advertisement

#202 Bartel

Bartel
  • Member

  • 887 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 16 April 2012 - 11:25

ONE HD will show Qualifying.

Ten will show the race live with the preview stuff.

This will be for the Euro races. Once we hit Canada, USA and the Asian/Brazilian races it will all change. To be honest this is Ten's best chance to claw some ratings against the lack of sport on Nine and 7. Also will be great to get some new people into the sport, you guys have to think bigger picture. Why would Ten want to put in the main channel? Because of the increase in viewings for F1 and now since Ten will be focused on that, that will give more viewers which in turn will make the sport popular which in turn will make it a mainstay on the FTA channels.

Although this is a good thing for Formula 1 in Australia, from my selfish point of view, I can't wait for it to be OFF FTA. No channel in Australia can do F1 right. Channel 10's target audience are reality TV buffs who like watching tv shows, not Live sport. Formula 1 on channel Ten won't gain any viewers, quite the contrary, alot of people who might stay up watching a late movie or late tv show will change the channel or switch off. Channel 10 and Formula 1 do not work together and I am sorry but I stand by what I have said and in my opinion they will lose more viewers than they will gain.

#203 Brother Fox

Brother Fox
  • Member

  • 4,299 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 16 April 2012 - 11:30

seriously get your eyes checked or buy a better tv, it really is a huge difference trust me.

Or perhaps you're just a marketer's dream?

So does foxtel have anything comparable at the moment? Ball sports aren't cause they have natural stoppages to squeeze in ad breaks.
Do they have any NASCAR or Indycar to see if they run uninterrupted? Asking for 90 minutes uninterrupted from any commercial network is an enormous ask.

Edited by Brother Fox, 16 April 2012 - 11:32.


#204 Adelaide

Adelaide
  • Member

  • 178 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 16 April 2012 - 11:40

I don't care about it being in SD instead of HD (makes no difference on my TV ) but I've only just realised that the move to channel 10 means that those not watching in the Eastern states won't get the races live now. What a step backwards. Bad enough for me here in South Australia but shocking for the poor fans in Perth.

#205 Bartel

Bartel
  • Member

  • 887 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 16 April 2012 - 11:52

Or perhaps you're just a marketer's dream?

So does foxtel have anything comparable at the moment? Ball sports aren't cause they have natural stoppages to squeeze in ad breaks.
Do they have any NASCAR or Indycar to see if they run uninterrupted? Asking for 90 minutes uninterrupted from any commercial network is an enormous ask.

Nascar/Indycar don't run interrupted in the states, therefore it won't run interrupted here. When MotoGP was on Foxtel only a few years ago, every race went uninterrupted with only an ad break between and after a race. So thats approximately 5 ad breaks in a total of 2 and a bit hours of motorsport? Barable, compare that with 1 ad break every 7 laps or so with onehd. I was watching the Masters last week, One went to an ad break (even though the Masters feed/commentary didn't, came back, Phil Mickelson took his shot, then they went to another 3minute ad break. So roughly 6mins of ad break and a minute at the very best, of live golf. I nearly through my weet bix at the tv in disgust.

#206 Lee Nicolle

Lee Nicolle
  • Member

  • 5,386 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 16 April 2012 - 12:35

There seems to be a lot of BS here. It was on the TV guide as being on 1. They reminded me on the 10 news!! and I switched over for the last 10 laps or so. That was live, not edited highlights at 10pm or whatever.
F1 is that contrived these days I really cannot get excited to watch it.
As is Nascar, V8 Thupercars.
Watch Speedweek, they sometimes have real motorsport,,, and Drag Racing without oildowns!

#207 Wheels23

Wheels23
  • Member

  • 370 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 16 April 2012 - 13:19

Although this is a good thing for Formula 1 in Australia, from my selfish point of view, I can't wait for it to be OFF FTA. No channel in Australia can do F1 right. Channel 10's target audience are reality TV buffs who like watching tv shows, not Live sport. Formula 1 on channel Ten won't gain any viewers, quite the contrary, alot of people who might stay up watching a late movie or late tv show will change the channel or switch off. Channel 10 and Formula 1 do not work together and I am sorry but I stand by what I have said and in my opinion they will lose more viewers than they will gain.


You do realize that the AFL Grand Final is the main ratings draw for C10.

Also you will be surprised. I have had many friends who never even touched F1 suddenly getting really interested because they get it FTA and also that the news is bigger. I would rather gain more viewers, so that we get F1 rather than FOXTEL (Which I love for Cricket, tennis, Basketball, Football, AFL and pretty much everything sport)

They will gain more viewers because it is sport, Australians love sport and it is near prime-time. That's the problem with most F1 fans, they are too snobbish about the sport.

#208 Brother Fox

Brother Fox
  • Member

  • 4,299 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 16 April 2012 - 13:33

Seems theres moves ahead at Network Ten though, they have Channel 11 listed as #11 on their website (whereas it has been Eleven [the channel name] was on #12 [the spot on the dial so to speak] and #11 was a SD version of ONE)



Yeah couldn't agree more :up: :)

Quoting myself to point out that I noticed on my telly tonight that #11 (the One SD mirror) is coming up as 1080i and #12 is still 576i
So that means anyone with a SD only set top box cant get ONE at all, as both are now HD.
So, Id say Network Ten are finally aligning their channel names and numbers so that ONE is on #1, Ten is on #10 (both as before), Eleven will be moved to #11 and they'll move the ONE SD mirror to #12.

OLD
#1 ONE HD
#10 Ten SD
#11 ONE SD
#12 Eleven SD (?)

NEW
#1 ONE HD
#10 Ten SD
#11 Eleven HD
#12 One SD


If they didn't move the F1 to #10 for the next few weeks then anyone without an HD STB would not be able to watch it ... which would be even more unpopular methinks


#209 zztopless1

zztopless1
  • Member

  • 146 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 16 April 2012 - 13:33

If you care about losing HD, please take a few minutes to post a comments at http://community.ten...spx?PageIndex=3 and more importantly give them a call tomorrow:

http://ten.com.au/contact-us.htm

I plan to ask them why they are making the change, considering a good portion their F1 ratings would likely come from a loyal fan base. I will also be suggesting to them that I will be choosing to watch the race via alternative methods (and encouraging others to as well), as without HD, I may as well watch online without ad breaks.

There are plenty of examples of networks making changes based on enough negative feedback, but it required a heap of us to get off our asses and contact them. Yes, post in the forums, but also take five minutes to give them a quick call (this goes without saying, but remember to be polite to the person taking your feedback, they have nothing to do with TEN's decision on programming).

Personally, I am sick of FTA networks raping viewers (especially when it comes to showing sport in HD), whilst often being protected by anti-siphoning laws which give them cheaper access to the coverage in the first place (Although I don't think this applied to F1, other than the Australian GP?).

Not a fan of Murdoch by any means, but would happily pay for Foxtel if it meant getting all the Sky coverage in HD (ie all five sessions and the pre and post shows).

#210 Wheels23

Wheels23
  • Member

  • 370 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 16 April 2012 - 14:05

Really?

At least we get F1 live FTA, I mean that's better than nothing. I don't care if it is HD, SD or Ads inserted. As long as I get my sport, I don't care.

Also I wouldn't be too sure about One HD not showing it. They are showing ANZ Netball however if you look now, you will see a replay of yesterday's race.

#211 zztopless1

zztopless1
  • Member

  • 146 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 16 April 2012 - 14:12

Really?

At least we get F1 live FTA, I mean that's better than nothing. I don't care if it is HD, SD or Ads inserted. As long as I get my sport, I don't care.

Also I wouldn't be too sure about One HD not showing it. They are showing ANZ Netball however if you look now, you will see a replay of yesterday's race.


SD (TEN) = 704*576 which is 406,080 pixels

HD (ONE HD) = 1080x1440 which is 1,555,200 pixels

So nearly four times as many pixels.

HD vs SD makes a big different on my Projector and most people's 40"+ TV's that everyone seems to have now... :(


Edited by zztopless1, 16 April 2012 - 14:17.


#212 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 991 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 16 April 2012 - 15:02

It was only yesterday that F1 even became available in HD. How is the resolution suddenly that big of an issue?

Yes I would much prefer F1 on HD on my large HD TV... But I would rather F1 in SD FTA than Foxtel. How many people seriously have HD Foxtel (not normal Foxtel, but people paying the extra for the HD box and channel pack) and then how many of them are F1 fans?

This isn't even the normal FTA vs Foxtel debate. This is an argument that if it is only FTA SD (that everyone gets), then it should go to Foxtel for the very small amount of F1 fans that have Foxtel HD. Does every FTA F1 fan have to miss out because a handful of people can't live without HD?

I'm glad that F1 has become available in HD. But I seriously don't enjoy the sport anymore than when I was watching it on a 20 inch CRT with a snowy analog feed. Isn't this all jusy a little bit fussy.

#213 Alfisti

Alfisti
  • Member

  • 26,002 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 16 April 2012 - 15:12

It was only yesterday that F1 even became available in HD. How is the resolution suddenly that big of an issue?


IMHO it's like night and day. I can barely watch SD anything, it looks HORRIBLE on a 50 inch screen even allowing for a pro calibration to yield the best results. it's just awful, a pixelated mess. Anyone who cannot tell the difference needs to look in their underwear cos in my experience it's normally women that cannot tell ;)



#214 Alfisti

Alfisti
  • Member

  • 26,002 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 16 April 2012 - 15:14

Admittedly my telly is only 720 but still I can't tell/don't care about the definition


HD is 720 and that is what is normally broadcast, 1080p is only really used if you run Blu Ray. Even on a 32 inch screen, SD looks absolute shit.

#215 teejay

teejay
  • Member

  • 3,329 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 16 April 2012 - 15:19

Who cares about resolution, the fact that it is not live angers me.

#216 Alfisti

Alfisti
  • Member

  • 26,002 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 16 April 2012 - 15:25

I'm lost, I thought it was still going to be live or are you expecting master chef big brother to run late?

#217 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 991 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 16 April 2012 - 15:30

IMHO it's like night and day. I can barely watch SD anything, it looks HORRIBLE on a 50 inch screen even allowing for a pro calibration to yield the best results. it's just awful, a pixelated mess. Anyone who cannot tell the difference needs to look in their underwear cos in my experience it's normally women that cannot tell ;)


Sure it is very noticeable and I can easily tell the difference. I don't see how it actually makes the race any better? When I watched the Japanese GP last year in a london hotel room (on what couldn't have been more than 15inch at best) I enjoyed it as much as any other race.

Yes I prefer having it in HD on the large screen. But the way people are going on in this thread it's as if they will stop following the sport unless they get it in HD. Again, HD is something that we only just got even though we enjoyed the sport for years in SD. Yes it's preferable not to go back to the bad old days, but it's hardly unwatchable.

#218 Alfisti

Alfisti
  • Member

  • 26,002 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 16 April 2012 - 15:42

But you SD on a 20 inch screen, no worries, stretch it 50 and you've got problems.

#219 slideways

slideways
  • Member

  • 3,078 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 16 April 2012 - 15:46

Looks like a 30 min delay for NT/SA and 2 hours for WA. In SD.

WTF just happened?

:down:

Advertisement

#220 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 991 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 16 April 2012 - 15:56

But you SD on a 20 inch screen, no worries, stretch it 50 and you've got problems.


I think you misread me. I said I don't enjoy the sport anymore than when I used to watch it on a 20 inch screen with a crappy analog feed. These days I watch it on a 50 inch full HD TV like you.

Edit: On second reading I think I may have misread you. I think you were saying SD on 20 inch in fine, but not on a 50. In that case I get what your saying, but I don't find SD that bad, even if it is noticeably different to a HD feed.

Edited by Jazza, 16 April 2012 - 16:12.


#221 lbennie

lbennie
  • Member

  • 1,530 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 16 April 2012 - 16:18

Or perhaps you're just a marketer's dream?

So does foxtel have anything comparable at the moment? Ball sports aren't cause they have natural stoppages to squeeze in ad breaks.
Do they have any NASCAR or Indycar to see if they run uninterrupted? Asking for 90 minutes uninterrupted from any commercial network is an enormous ask.


Ball sports have no ads until half-time. Even stoppages are covered in full. All live sport on the 3 fox sports channels runs uninterupted.

#222 lbennie

lbennie
  • Member

  • 1,530 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 16 April 2012 - 16:18

Or perhaps you're just a marketer's dream?

So does foxtel have anything comparable at the moment? Ball sports aren't cause they have natural stoppages to squeeze in ad breaks.
Do they have any NASCAR or Indycar to see if they run uninterrupted? Asking for 90 minutes uninterrupted from any commercial network is an enormous ask.


Ball sports have no ads until half-time. Even stoppages are covered in full. All live sport on the 3 fox sports channels runs uninterupted.

#223 Brother Fox

Brother Fox
  • Member

  • 4,299 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 16 April 2012 - 23:37

Alright, stop banging on about it :)

Thing is even then its only 40 mins till a break, so over 90 mins thats 2 breaks during the race and they get 10-15 mins over halftime, so youre talking about 20-30 mins of break over the race timeframe.
Like i said, 90 minutes uninterrupted is a BIG ask ... and im curious does anything get that? What about foxtel movies, are they completly ad free?
Its quite a weird sport in that regard to go so long continuously.


And yes Fisti, you can almost guarantee that whatever reality show is flavour of the month on sunday night will run over time. Starting at weird times (not on the hour or half hour) to pick up and hook in casual viewers and then running late to pick up the people switching over for the scheduled program.


#224 Bartel

Bartel
  • Member

  • 887 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 16 April 2012 - 23:44

HD is 720 and that is what is normally broadcast, 1080p is only really used if you run Blu Ray. Even on a 32 inch screen, SD looks absolute shit.

OneHD broadcast in 1080i, which is worse than 720p. I have a 60inch on m wall in my room, and if F1 goes SD it will look like my tv is behind a fishtank!

And you cannot compare AFL to Formula 1, AFL is an Australian game, Australia wide. It is THE game of Australians. Most Australians I know, do not watch Formula 1, and don't even consider it a sport, which annoys me, but when it comes to matters like this, can back up my point. If its not about losing weight, cooking food, singing or dancing, then channel 10 viewers won't watch. Also, I don't think it is 'snobby' at all, I think people who knows, understand. In the 17 years I have followed the sport sure its grown in Australia, but it grew because it could not possibly have gotten any unpopular than it was. F1 has only really grown in Australia since Mark Webber started doing well, even when he entered in 2002 it got some viewers but there was no BOOM until he started winning in 09. When comparing Australian viewing figures to those of other parts of the world, then you can definitely say we make up a mouse fart of said statistics. Formula 1 is a European sport being shown in a foreign land, how many people in Europe do you think would watch the AFL if it was broadcast over there at 10pm local time?

#225 lbennie

lbennie
  • Member

  • 1,530 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 16 April 2012 - 23:47

yeh all movies are completely ad free.
any motor sport accept indy/nascar runs from start to finish without ads if it is live. pretty much any live sport, you don't miss anything (even stopages/ safety cars, that sort of thing)
feeds from america come with the ads for some reason though.



#226 Bartel

Bartel
  • Member

  • 887 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 16 April 2012 - 23:47

Alright, stop banging on about it :)

Thing is even then its only 40 mins till a break, so over 90 mins thats 2 breaks during the race and they get 10-15 mins over halftime, so youre talking about 20-30 mins of break over the race timeframe.
Like i said, 90 minutes uninterrupted is a BIG ask ... and im curious does anything get that? What about foxtel movies, are they completly ad free?
Its quite a weird sport in that regard to go so long continuously.


And yes Fisti, you can almost guarantee that whatever reality show is flavour of the month on sunday night will run over time. Starting at weird times (not on the hour or half hour) to pick up and hook in casual viewers and then running late to pick up the people switching over for the scheduled program.

There is no ads on foxtel movies, none, only previewers before and after movies.

#227 Bartel

Bartel
  • Member

  • 887 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 16 April 2012 - 23:48

yeh all movies are completely ad free.
any motor sport accept indy/nascar runs from start to finish without ads if it is live. pretty much any live sport, you don't miss anything (even stopages/ safety cars, that sort of thing)
feeds from america come with the ads for some reason though.

Thats because American motorsport depends on its sponsors, just look at Nascar, you couldnt fit any sponsors on any of their cars they are covered. Compare that to European motorsport...

#228 Brother Fox

Brother Fox
  • Member

  • 4,299 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 16 April 2012 - 23:53

AFL is an Australian game, Australia wide. It is THE game of Australians.


No! Its a VIC/SA/WA game. Sydney and Brisbane still dont give a shit about it, despite what the league tells you. The only true national sport thats popular is cricket, but i dont know what thats got to do with this???



yeh all movies are completely ad free.
any motor sport accept indy/nascar runs from start to finish without ads if it is live. pretty much any live sport, you don't miss anything (even stopages/ safety cars, that sort of thing)
feeds from america come with the ads for some reason though.


OK cool, but what motorsports are you talking about? Do they last the length of a Grand Prix? Youve got to consider the fact its 90 mins at a miniumum uninterrupted, and thats a lot of wasted revenue if you look at it from a business point of view.


#229 Ian G

Ian G
  • Member

  • 1,021 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 17 April 2012 - 00:08

No! Its a VIC/SA/WA game. Sydney and Brisbane still dont give a shit about it, despite what the league tells you. The only true national sport thats popular is cricket, but i dont know what thats got to do with this???


I think his post overall is close to the mark,AFL is humming along well in Sydney,they are making big inroads into Schools and are sponsoring the maintenance of council grounds providing the 8 posts are standing during the winter months.They are looking at a 3rd Qld. Team and whilst i'm a NRL fan i think in the decades ahead they will have to merge with the ARU to survive as a main stream sport.
Getting back on track it will be interesting to see if F-1 coverage ends up back on Foxtel,i'm sure Lachlan Murdoch has plans for the future considering Rupert was interested in purchasing the World-wide TV rights before the NOtW scandal broke.

Edited by Ian G, 17 April 2012 - 05:26.


#230 Bartel

Bartel
  • Member

  • 887 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 17 April 2012 - 00:34

No! Its a VIC/SA/WA game. Sydney and Brisbane still dont give a shit about it, despite what the league tells you. The only true national sport thats popular is cricket, but i dont know what thats got to do with this???





OK cool, but what motorsports are you talking about? Do they last the length of a Grand Prix? Youve got to consider the fact its 90 mins at a miniumum uninterrupted, and thats a lot of wasted revenue if you look at it from a business point of view.

I live on the Gold Coast, I lived here during Brisbane's domination, I live here now, it is very popular up here still, maybe not further north, and Queensland IS a Rugby League state, but even so, the game is popular and it is still growing, especially now after Hunt and Folau have switched codes. NSW I can't really comment on, but the fact that another NSW has entered the competition to me speaks for itself.

Australia is AFL dominated when it comes to ball sports.

#231 zztopless1

zztopless1
  • Member

  • 146 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 17 April 2012 - 02:39

From mischeif racing on the ten forums:

I urge everyone to email Formula 1 letting them know what Channel 10 is doing with their broadcasts (No more HD).

business@formula1.com
admin@formula1.com

#232 repcobrabham

repcobrabham
  • Member

  • 9,164 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 17 April 2012 - 03:29

on the SD/HD question: i've got a standard 40" HD TV but i was indifferent to the alleged difference in quality until i flicked back and forth between the ten and one coverage of the australian GP. it was genuinely striking.

OK cool, but what motorsports are you talking about? Do they last the length of a Grand Prix? Youve got to consider the fact its 90 mins at a miniumum uninterrupted, and thats a lot of wasted revenue if you look at it from a business point of view.


i'm guessing foxtel could run banners designed not to obscure the graphics during the race or something similar rather than standard commercial spots: ad people are pretty creative. as always, it's a question of money. bernie would prefer FTA but he may not have a choice in a few years. don't forget foxtel is closely linked to bskyb - they have the same units and remotes, i was using IQ in the UK years before it was introduced in australia - so there's a whole set of commercial guidelines and practices they could adapt for the local market. also, getting the feed in the first place would be much cheaper.

#233 zztopless1

zztopless1
  • Member

  • 146 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 17 April 2012 - 03:41

on the SD/HD question: i've got a standard 40" HD TV but i was indifferent to the alleged difference in quality until i flicked back and forth between the ten and one coverage of the australian GP. it was genuinely striking.



i'm guessing foxtel could run banners designed not to obscure the graphics during the race or something similar rather than standard commercial spots: ad people are pretty creative. as always, it's a question of money. bernie would prefer FTA but he may not have a choice in a few years. don't forget foxtel is closely linked to bskyb - they have the same units and remotes, i was using IQ in the UK years before it was introduced in australia - so there's a whole set of commercial guidelines and practices they could adapt for the local market. also, getting the feed in the first place would be much cheaper.


If Sky can manage to not show ads on F1 during the race in the UK (the show ads before and after), then so can Foxtel, being owned by the same company with similar access charges for customers.

#234 Bartel

Bartel
  • Member

  • 887 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 17 April 2012 - 04:00

on the SD/HD question: i've got a standard 40" HD TV but i was indifferent to the alleged difference in quality until i flicked back and forth between the ten and one coverage of the australian GP. it was genuinely striking.



i'm guessing foxtel could run banners designed not to obscure the graphics during the race or something similar rather than standard commercial spots: ad people are pretty creative. as always, it's a question of money. bernie would prefer FTA but he may not have a choice in a few years. don't forget foxtel is closely linked to bskyb - they have the same units and remotes, i was using IQ in the UK years before it was introduced in australia - so there's a whole set of commercial guidelines and practices they could adapt for the local market. also, getting the feed in the first place would be much cheaper.

Murdoch owns Foxtel, so I think, depending on how successful Sky is in the UK with its coverage, then he will be desperate to bring it to Foxtel in Australia, I think I read somewhere that Australia is the country that has the most pay tv subscriptions per average house hold or something like that. Maybe second to America, and if that is the case, then Murdoch will be wanting to buy into that if he can.

#235 Bartel

Bartel
  • Member

  • 887 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 17 April 2012 - 04:02

If Sky can manage to not show ads on F1 during the race in the UK (the show ads before and after), then so can Foxtel, being owned by the same company with similar access charges for customers.

Qualifying and Race sessions are the only uninterrupted sessions, Free Practice sessions have ads but still not NEARLY the amount as OneHD. The only real company that sponsors Sky F1's coverage is Santander (who sponsor everything these days).

#236 Brother Fox

Brother Fox
  • Member

  • 4,299 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 17 April 2012 - 04:23

So a hypothetical to the Foxtel subscribers, or those who would subscribe if F1 went to Foxtel - would you cancel your subscription if there were ads?

Im going to guess you all say no, you'll just whinge a bit about it on a forum but in the end, you want to see F1. So, the boffins at Foxtel will prove this through market research and eventually stick ads in the coverage.

Forget the idealistic view that they are there to provide an entertainment experience for you, they're a company who are out to make money, which comes from advertising revenue and subscriptions.
If they've already got subs revenue and have paid the rights to Bernie for the feed, then any second they can sell to Mercedes or Castrol goes straight to the bottom line. And thats what shareholders demand, and therefore what managers will deliver.

Id be willing to bet its a lot harder to loose a subscriber than to gain a new one, so once theyve got a couple of years inthe bag with no ads and built up a nice little market, they can do whatever they want to you.
If they dont maximise revenue, shareolders will demand action - and they will get it.


I think I read somewhere that Australia is the country that has the most pay tv subscriptions per average house hold or something like that. Maybe second to America

Curious to see that backed up, I always understood that our take up of pay tv was appalling by world standards - hence we couldnt even satisfy 2 networks.



#237 Bartel

Bartel
  • Member

  • 887 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 17 April 2012 - 04:50

So a hypothetical to the Foxtel subscribers, or those who would subscribe if F1 went to Foxtel - would you cancel your subscription if there were ads?

Im going to guess you all say no, you'll just whinge a bit about it on a forum but in the end, you want to see F1. So, the boffins at Foxtel will prove this through market research and eventually stick ads in the coverage.

Forget the idealistic view that they are there to provide an entertainment experience for you, they're a company who are out to make money, which comes from advertising revenue and subscriptions.
If they've already got subs revenue and have paid the rights to Bernie for the feed, then any second they can sell to Mercedes or Castrol goes straight to the bottom line. And thats what shareholders demand, and therefore what managers will deliver.

Id be willing to bet its a lot harder to loose a subscriber than to gain a new one, so once theyve got a couple of years inthe bag with no ads and built up a nice little market, they can do whatever they want to you.
If they dont maximise revenue, shareolders will demand action - and they will get it.



Curious to see that backed up, I always understood that our take up of pay tv was appalling by world standards - hence we couldnt even satisfy 2 networks.

For someone who doesn't have PayTV you seem to know alot about it lol.

In 1999, Pay Tv subscriptions made up 12% of Australians viewing market. I would be willing to say they would have at least tripled this in 10 years, and with Foxtel subscriptions becoming more customised and for the viewers and more affordable once tailored to the person, id say its more than tripled. I am trying to find a recent study but 1999 is all I could find, I came accross a percentage number when I was reading about the Foxtel/Austar takeover not long ago I am trying to find it.

FYI, AFL on Fox Footy or FoxSports is uninterrupted siren to siren. Only ads that take place are between quarters. So thats one ad break every 30mins. Maybe 2 at half time due to the longer break but even then I can't be sure it would not be more than 2. So in two hours of Live AFL, not one moment is missed.

#238 Bartel

Bartel
  • Member

  • 887 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 17 April 2012 - 04:58

Okay just did some further research, it seems I may have been a little overboard with my stat estimates, apparently PayTv Subscriptions in Australia is around the 30% mark, but IPTV has risen 20% in the last year, something Sky offers its subscribers.

The site also shows, MUCH to my surprise, that in 2011, 2.4million Australians hold PayTv subscriptions.

http://www.budde.com...and-Pay-TV.html

Thats the site that has the research available, some interesting things in there.

Edited by Bartel, 17 April 2012 - 05:04.


#239 repcobrabham

repcobrabham
  • Member

  • 9,164 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 17 April 2012 - 05:29

Forget the idealistic view that they are there to provide an entertainment experience for you, they're a company who are out to make money, which comes from advertising revenue and subscriptions.
If they've already got subs revenue and have paid the rights to Bernie for the feed, then any second they can sell to Mercedes or Castrol goes straight to the bottom line. And thats what shareholders demand, and therefore what managers will deliver.


it's not idealism, it's pragmatism: of course foxtel are a commercial organisation and they get money where they can - inserting ads into news bulletins, music clip shows and programming made for commercial TV - but they understand uninterrupted live coverage of sporting events is their NUMBER ONE selling point and driver of subscriptions, no contest. NRL games (a sport much better suited to TV coverage than AFL or just about anything else, hence the super league war) are their highest rating programs by a country mile for that reason.

i don't doubt they'd come up with tricks like shrinking the coverage to a smaller screen-within-a-screen once or twice a race to show an ad in tandem with banners and tickers over the live coverage, but i'd be prepared to guarantee you'd NEVER be totally disconnected with a race in progress. sports (and movies) subscribers have come to expect that for 15 years now, it would be a breaking point if they crossed that line. there might well be commercial and even regulatory obligations to maintain uninterrupted coverage too.

Curious to see that backed up, I always understood that our take up of pay tv was appalling by world standards - hence we couldnt even satisfy 2 networks.


take up is reasonable. we're just not a large enough population and we didn't pick it up fast enough to make two channels work, plus the epic corporate bastardry that went on during that phase. the NRL/ARL beat super league but foxtel beat optus.

Edited by repcobrabham, 17 April 2012 - 05:30.


Advertisement

#240 Bartel

Bartel
  • Member

  • 887 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 17 April 2012 - 05:41

it's not idealism, it's pragmatism: of course foxtel are a commercial organisation and they get money where they can - inserting ads into news bulletins, music clip shows and programming made for commercial TV - but they understand uninterrupted live coverage of sporting events is their NUMBER ONE selling point and driver of subscriptions, no contest. NRL games (a sport much better suited to TV coverage than AFL or just about anything else, hence the super league war) are their highest rating programs by a country mile for that reason.

i don't doubt they'd come up with tricks like shrinking the coverage to a smaller screen-within-a-screen once or twice a race to show an ad in tandem with banners and tickers over the live coverage, but i'd be prepared to guarantee you'd NEVER be totally disconnected with a race in progress. sports (and movies) subscribers have come to expect that for 15 years now, it would be a breaking point if they crossed that line. there might well be commercial and even regulatory obligations to maintain uninterrupted coverage too.



take up is reasonable. we're just not a large enough population and we didn't pick it up fast enough to make two channels work, plus the epic corporate bastardry that went on during that phase. the NRL/ARL beat super league but foxtel beat optus.

This has me interested, what makes you say that?

#241 Brother Fox

Brother Fox
  • Member

  • 4,299 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 17 April 2012 - 05:49

For someone who doesn't have PayTV you seem to know alot about it lol.

In 1999, Pay Tv subscriptions made up 12% of Australians viewing market. I would be willing to say they would have at least tripled this in 10 years, and with Foxtel subscriptions becoming more customised and for the viewers and more affordable once tailored to the person, id say its more than tripled. I am trying to find a recent study but 1999 is all I could find, I came accross a percentage number when I was reading about the Foxtel/Austar takeover not long ago I am trying to find it.

FYI, AFL on Fox Footy or FoxSports is uninterrupted siren to siren. Only ads that take place are between quarters. So thats one ad break every 30mins. Maybe 2 at half time due to the longer break but even then I can't be sure it would not be more than 2. So in two hours of Live AFL, not one moment is missed.



It's got nothing to do with pay tv as such, its Introductory Commerce - don't give away what you can sell.
They may do it with the methods that Repco metnions (picture in picture, tickers and banners, or the dreaded 'inserted into commentary' like gambling gets on footy covereage) but they'll do it somewhere and somehow.

However youre still missing my point about 90 minutes of uninterrupted coverage. Apart form movies, no one can show that they would do that. Its not 2 hours of AFL, its 4 x 30 minutes of AFL, how can i make it any clearer??? 90 minutes without an ad break is all but unheard of here - I doubt they'd pioneer that for a niche show.
What about cricket? Do they show any sessions in full? Not one break for 30 overs so you can see the field position changes inbetween overs?





#242 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 991 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 17 April 2012 - 05:51

Bartel,

Because the camera just follows the ball, and therefor the few players who are near the ball. But in AFL most of the action is happening everywhere else on the field. Watching the game live and watching on TV are two very different experiences. Watching live you see the whole game, while TV can only focus on 1 part of the game.

(Funny enough this is the opposite of motor sport. On TV you see the entire race, while at the track you only see one corner or straight with cars going past. At the track you miss most of the action, while with AFL TV misses most of the action)

Edited by Jazza, 17 April 2012 - 05:52.


#243 lbennie

lbennie
  • Member

  • 1,530 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 17 April 2012 - 06:18

It's got nothing to do with pay tv as such, its Introductory Commerce - don't give away what you can sell.
They may do it with the methods that Repco metnions (picture in picture, tickers and banners, or the dreaded 'inserted into commentary' like gambling gets on footy covereage) but they'll do it somewhere and somehow.

However youre still missing my point about 90 minutes of uninterrupted coverage. Apart form movies, no one can show that they would do that. Its not 2 hours of AFL, its 4 x 30 minutes of AFL, how can i make it any clearer??? 90 minutes without an ad break is all but unheard of here - I doubt they'd pioneer that for a niche show.
What about cricket? Do they show any sessions in full? Not one break for 30 overs so you can see the field position changes inbetween overs?


mate, much respect for going down swinging, but let it go. foxtel don't interrupt live sport with ads, full stop. its been around for 10+ years now, and this hasn't changed, why would it change in the future? if they are showing a live event and there are no stoppages for 90+ minutes, you won't get ads for 90+ minutes that is how it has been since the beginning and its what people sign up for.

#244 Brother Fox

Brother Fox
  • Member

  • 4,299 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 17 April 2012 - 06:20

An example then?


#245 lbennie

lbennie
  • Member

  • 1,530 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 17 April 2012 - 06:32

An example then?


A-league grand final from last season. from half time right through second half + 30 mins of extra time + penalties + post match

roughly 110 mins without an ad.

still have it on my IQ (was at the game at the time - what an epic evening)



#246 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 991 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 17 April 2012 - 06:47

mate, much respect for going down swinging, but let it go. foxtel don't interrupt live sport with ads, full stop. its been around for 10+ years now, and this hasn't changed, why would it change in the future? if they are showing a live event and there are no stoppages for 90+ minutes, you won't get ads for 90+ minutes that is how it has been since the beginning and its what people sign up for.


When I signed up for pay TV in the mid nighties there was no commercials at all on any channel. That was the big sales pitch at the time. Then they started cross promoting other shows and other channels. Then they started a few Harvey Norman commercials. By the start of the last decade it had as many commercials as FTA.

How can you say that what people sign up for is what they get? Foxtel can change their plans at any moment, just like they have done in the past.

#247 Brother Fox

Brother Fox
  • Member

  • 4,299 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 17 April 2012 - 06:53

OK technically you've got me, but you surely see thats an extraordinary set of cirmstances? Grand Final, overtime etc? I seriously doubt any channel showing a major sporting event live would break in that situation.


#248 lbennie

lbennie
  • Member

  • 1,530 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 17 April 2012 - 07:03

When I signed up for pay TV in the mid nighties there was no commercials at all on any channel. That was the big sales pitch at the time. Then they started cross promoting other shows and other channels. Then they started a few Harvey Norman commercials. By the start of the last decade it had as many commercials as FTA.

How can you say that what people sign up for is what they get? Foxtel can change their plans at any moment, just like they have done in the past.



absolutely but their attitude towards live sport has never changed. if it did it would be suicide for subscription numbers, and they know it.

I don't really pay enough attention to the rest of the content to comment, but i am aware there are a ton of ads on other channels.

Edited by lbennie, 17 April 2012 - 07:04.


#249 lbennie

lbennie
  • Member

  • 1,530 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 17 April 2012 - 07:06

OK technically you've got me, but you surely see thats an extraordinary set of cirmstances? Grand Final, overtime etc? I seriously doubt any channel showing a major sporting event live would break in that situation.


true, but isn't any sporting event longer than 90 minutes without stoppages an extraordinary set of circumstances?

seriously can't think of anything other than a motor race that fits that description.

#250 Brother Fox

Brother Fox
  • Member

  • 4,299 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 17 April 2012 - 07:20

Thats kind of my point, theres nothing to compare it to to see if they would go 90 mins week in week out ad free.

The only similarities would be NASCAR/Indy/V8's etc and there either imported with ad breaks as has been said or on FTA. Just had to check, MotoGP races seem to go for about 40-45 mins so theyre no different to a half of footy, thats more easily done ad free.