Follow us on...
Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Facebook
Register
Results 1 to 20 of 20
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    921

    I think I may have changed my mind on fee for carriage

    With the advent of so many other television options and the fact that so many people have PVRs and skip ads, I have come to the conclusion that ad revenue just isn't enough to keep most broadcast stations going.

    I think we have reached a point where networks like CTV, Global and City should become specialty channels. With that being said, I think Canadian networks have a real opportunity to reach out to cord cutters and allow subs of CraveTV and Shomi to have access to local news via one of these subscriptions. Heck the four biggest private networks have some kind of relation to either Shomi or CraveTV. Perhaps have a local add-on for a few extra dollars and you get access to Global GO, CTV GO, City GO and local news.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto area
    Posts
    1,048
    I'm not completely sure what you mean. Are you saying they should get out of the OTA business, or that the regulations should be changed?
    Quote Originally Posted by bigoranget View Post
    ... networks like CTV, Global and City should become specialty channels...
    There doesn't have to be any regulations changed for that to happen, other than them maybe applying to change the license conditions of some of their specialty channels or apply for new ones. That would be merely shifting their present brand names from their OTA networks, while presumably shutting off all of their OTA transmitters. There isn't anything stopping them if that's what they want to do. It's exactly what Quebecor did when they shut down SunTV (CKXT) and started Sun News.

    The term "fee for carriage" implies the U.S. system where BDUs must pay to carry OTA channels but there is no mandatory carriage. The Canadian system has mandatory carriage but no fees. The Canadian channels can choose to get mandatory carriage (as an OTA channel) or fees (as a specialty channel), but not both at the same time for the same channel.
    Quebecor stupidly thought they could somehow fool people into getting both, but then quickly realized they were the fools when no one would pay them for their specialty channel while exactly the same content could be freely seen on their OTA channel.

    And they can do anything on the internet -- be seen for free or charge subscription fees -- regardless of what they do with any TV channels they may or may not continue to operate.
    Last edited by Donovan's Monkey; 12-20-2015 at 12:36 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    921
    More saying the regulations should be changed. From a BDU perspective, OTA channels should be treated like category B channels AND get simsubs. I also think that in access to Canadian networks should not be tied to a BDU, so if you want access to your local CTV, Global and City affiliate, the broadcasts should be required to sell direct and/or continue to make the services available OTA. Since many Canadians don't have decent access to OTA channels, Internet delivery would be the alternative (Not necessarily free though).

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Greater Toronto Area
    Posts
    2,403
    In my opinion, we should look at reducing the number of specialty channels that are on the dial instead of making new specialty channels. Along with VFS/FFC or what ever its called now also requires a strong national advertiser base, but as long as these money sucking, no one watching specialty channels continue to exist they'll be nothing more that taking up the finite advertising dollars that conventional stations could use. Having 13 children cartoon channels, 11 basic movie channels and +30 plus sports channels where a great idea back in 1995 when the fastest internet speed for most users was 56k and downloading a 60MB file took 8 hours. But with Netflix, OnDemand and other ways we now consume news, weather and entertainment do we really need all these channels?
    "And Now for Something Completely Different..." - John Cleese (Monty Python).

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto area
    Posts
    1,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    ... Along with VFS/FFC or what ever its called now also requires a strong national advertiser base, but as long as these money sucking, no one watching specialty channels continue to exist they'll be nothing more that taking up the finite advertising dollars that conventional stations could use. Having 13 children cartoon channels, 11 basic movie channels and +30 plus sports channels where a great idea back in 1995 when the fastest internet speed for most users was 56k and downloading a 60MB file took 8 hours. But with Netflix, OnDemand and other ways we now consume news, weather and entertainment do we really need all these channels?
    As I've said in other threads, I'm not even sure how much longer the whole system of TV channels (specialty and OTA) will continue to exist, but I definitely have trouble envisioning all of the present specialty channels still being here in two years.
    That's a good point about advertising. I suppose a lot of the specialty channels disappearing could cause some amount of advertising to flow back to the OTA stations, but I would think more of it will continue to move to the internet.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    4,767
    One have to consider this...

    - Skinny basic capped at 25$/month (plus network fees, plus High-Def fees, plus terminal rental fee, plus taxes) is about to launch, at you guessed it, 25$ at Bell, 25$ at Rogers, 25$ at Shaw, 25$ at Vidéotron, and 25$ at Cogeco. Implementing fee-for-carriage will just eat away profits from those big BDUs, big complains will come up, and dummy fees like "local TV fees" will appear on the bill.

    - Reducing total number of specialties ain't right. Reducing number of specialties owned by Bell and Shaw while independent-owned specialties should increase, with quality programming.
    "It's not a rerun if you haven't watched it yet." (© 2010 by TVViewer)
    "Ne jamais s'obstiner avec un épais. Il va vous abaisser à son niveau et vous battre avec l'expérience."

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,977
    Skinny basic capped at 25$/month (plus network fees, plus High-Def fees, plus terminal rental fee, plus taxes) is about to launch, at you guessed it, 25$ at Bell, 25$ at Rogers, 25$ at Shaw, 25$ at Vidéotron, and 25$ at Cogeco.
    My thoughts exactly. The Big BDU's will all probably charge the maximum for the skinny basic AND will launch it at the very last second. There was nothing stopping them from offering this new package back in September or even now if they wanted to, March 1, 2016 is the deadline, meaning that they have until that date to launch skinny basic- VMedia launched their skinny basic package months ago.

    I did not like this decision at all as $25 is still too high IMO, it should have been priced at $15 or if we go with the CRTC options ($15, $20 or $25), I would have taken the middle ground and picked $20. The traditional TV system is slowly dying out, a $25 basic package is not going to entice cord cutters or cord nevers to sign up for cable/satellite IMO. If you add in some specialty channels, depending on what you like, the price of the package will be up around $40-50 quite easily so you are pretty much paying almost as much as you pay now. I am waiting to see what the big boys (Bell, Rogers) have planned with regards to pick n' pay, I expect inflated prices that will not make it worth it to subscribe to any channels a la carte. I suspect they will favour packages, hopefully their customizable packages are reasonably priced?!

    Reducing total number of specialties ain't right. Reducing number of specialties owned by Bell and Shaw while independent-owned specialties should increase, with quality programming.
    I would like to see some consolidation with regards to conglomerate owned specialties, merging some together which will result in less overall channels but the ones that remain will be higher quality. Time for the current situation where you have hundreds of channels that are watered down with only a few quality shows on each channel, to come to an end- hopefully pick and pay will bring this about. I am not sure how many quality indie channels you could have as the smaller independents do not the have the resources or the $$ to produce or acquire a full schedule worth of high quality content.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    4,767
    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    I did not like this decision at all as $25 is still too high IMO, it should have been priced at $15 or if we go with the CRTC options ($15, $20 or $25), I would have taken the middle ground and picked $20. The traditional TV system is slowly dying out, a $25 basic package is not going to entice cord cutters or cord nevers to sign up for cable/satellite IMO.
    Ten years ago, Vidéotron's cable bill was around 15$/month for basic service, now it's 22$, plus the network fees, plus... The difference here is the amount of free content on the on-demand platform. Yep, I'm pretty sure Bell, Shaw and Rogers take their own cut for all on-demand content of CTV, Global and Citytv, both from the terminal and online ("Go" services). But Stingray Music ain't a necessity.

    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    I would like to see some consolidation with regards to conglomerate owned specialties, merging some together which will result in less overall channels but the ones that remain will be higher quality.
    Back in the 90's, CHUM launched their own brand of specialties instead of tapping into american brands : Space instead of Syfy, MuchMoreMusic instead of VH1, Star! instead of E!, etc. These channels could pick their own shows from different networks and add in canadian originals. Our canadian channels with US branding are simply looping with fillers until first-run primetime shows are on (FX/FXX is the best example). There's no reason to keep your TV turned on those channels all day, "It's not a rerun if you haven't watched it yet.". So yeah, back to basics with one canadian channel to cover two or three american networks, it's the way to go, but... those BDU-owned channels will still force bundling into pre-packages, and force you to pick-and-pay 30 channels (instead of 15) to get all those few shows you want.
    "It's not a rerun if you haven't watched it yet." (© 2010 by TVViewer)
    "Ne jamais s'obstiner avec un épais. Il va vous abaisser à son niveau et vous battre avec l'expérience."

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Greater Toronto Area
    Posts
    2,403
    Quote Originally Posted by Donovan's Monkey View Post
    As I've said in other threads, I'm not even sure how much longer the whole system of TV channels (specialty and OTA) will continue to exist, but I definitely have trouble envisioning all of the present specialty channels still being here in two years.
    That's a good point about advertising. I suppose a lot of the specialty channels disappearing could cause some amount of advertising to flow back to the OTA stations, but I would think more of it will continue to move to the internet.
    OTA still has a advantage over web streaming since OTA broadcasts transmissions aren't effected by the number of users watching that channel.
    "And Now for Something Completely Different..." - John Cleese (Monty Python).

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    4,767
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    OTA still has a advantage over web streaming since OTA broadcasts transmissions aren't effected by the number of users watching that channel.
    True, but... CTV, Global, City and TVA are ~90% O&O by BDUs (10% are independent affiliates), they want you to use their app on your cellphone/tablet and authentificate yourself with your participating BDU username/password so you can... watch their channel live. They want cable providers, big or small, to pay for content aired on those networks, live or on-demand. They want their subscribers to take the fastest (and more expensive) internet packages which has a higher monthly cap in order to watch their channels and content.

    They no longer want to give it all away for free, not to forget the cost of broadcasting equipment, the rent, electric bill, maintenance, etc, which serves a small portion of low-income residents (good) and cord-cutters (which they want back on the payroll). The current PDG of SRC/CBC also made it clear he wanted to take those digital transmitters off and grab money from subscription fees while still forcing the public broadcaster on mandatory basic service. The CRTC allowed CBC/SRC to shutdown all 620+ remaining analog transmitters, but has listen to the public and ordered them to keep operating digital OTA transmitters.
    "It's not a rerun if you haven't watched it yet." (© 2010 by TVViewer)
    "Ne jamais s'obstiner avec un épais. Il va vous abaisser à son niveau et vous battre avec l'expérience."

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto area
    Posts
    1,048
    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    ... The Big BDU's will all probably charge the maximum for the skinny basic AND will launch it at the very last second...
    ... I am waiting to see what the big boys (Bell, Rogers) have planned with regards to pick n' pay, I expect inflated prices that will not make it worth it to subscribe to any channels a la carte ...
    I would like to see some consolidation with regards to conglomerate owned specialties, merging some together which will result in less overall channels but the ones that remain will be higher quality... hopefully pick and pay will bring this about...
    I still don't understand if the independent BDUs -- Cogeco, VMedia, etc. -- will be able to start offering pick-and-pay as soon as they want to after March 1, or will be forced to wait until December 1.

    I've read one comment elsewhere from someone who disagrees with our thoughts that there will be consolidation of specialty channels. He thinks they will continue to spread the small amount of new original worthwhile programming as thinly as they can to keep people continuing to subscribe to as many channels as possible. Most of us think we're not going to subscribe to any channel nowadays just for one or two shows, but we're the ones who already have (or soon will have) ditched cable and use the internet. The people who will continue with the BDUs are mostly the older techno-phobic ones (who won't use the internet), and the conglomerates are of the attitude that they might as well keep them paying for as many channels as possible, while consolidation of channels would probably not do anything to encourage the rest of us to keep subscribing.
    I suppose there could be some validity to that. But the main problem is that almost all of the specialty channels are going to suddenly lose a large percentage of their subscribers and their revenue, and may not be financially able to continue as they are now.

    In any case, it's going to be fascinating to see what develops and what has changed 18 months from now.
    Last edited by Donovan's Monkey; 12-28-2015 at 10:50 AM.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,977
    Quote Originally Posted by Donovan's Monkey View Post
    I still don't understand if the independent BDUs -- Cogeco, VMedia, etc. -- will be able to start offering pick-and-pay as soon as they want to after March 1, or will be forced to wait until December 1.
    As I mentioned above, VMedia already offers a skinny basic package, see here: http://www.vmedia.ca/tv/theskinny/

    There is nothing preventing any provider from offering skinny basic or pick and pay, they could launch it now or they could have launched it 6 months ago. The CRTC does not have any regulations that stipulate what kind of packages they should offer or how much they should cost- except for the basic package where they mandate that certain channels have to be included in the package. The new rules that come into play next year are about forcing the BDU's to offer more choice (smaller basic package, pick and pay, customizable packages) because they don't want to do it on their own even though they are starting to lose customers due to their high prices and the new internet streaming services that are now available.

    All providers do currently offer some pick and pay (Bell only recently launched this service in Ontario but they charge the highest of any provider- $4 per channel) but not all specialty channels are available to be purchased this way- that will change next year however.

    Regarding how many specialty channels will continue to exist, I think this depends on how well received the packaging options will be? If a significant amount of subscribers move towards pick and pay or the customizable packages options then viewership might decline and result in some channels not surviving. My feeling is that the Big conglomerates will make pick and pay more expensive and offer new an all-in-one type of package like VMedia currently does where they include the basic channels plus a selection of the most popular specialty channels. VMedia calls it "Premium Basic" and some of the specialties it includes are: Bravo, Comedy, Discovery, Showcase, Space, TSN1-5, Sportsnet, Sportsnet One AMC, TLC & TCM. If Bell or Rogers were to offer something similar, I think many people might actually sign up for this type of package. However, VMedia charge $44.95 which I doubt highly Bell or Rogers would be able to match, they would probably charge over $50.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto area
    Posts
    1,048
    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    ... There is nothing preventing any provider from offering ... pick and pay, they could launch it now or they could have launched it 6 months ago...
    There is no CRTC regulation preventing them from doing it now, but agreements must be reached with channel distributors in order for the BDUs to be able to set the prices that will be charged to the consumers, and it seems the channel owners are (not surprisingly) procrastinating to delay it for as long as they can.
    Last edited by Donovan's Monkey; 12-28-2015 at 01:44 PM.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    4,767
    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    As I mentioned above, VMedia already offers a skinny basic package
    Vmedia is an Ontario-based IPTV operator owned by George Burger, but it's also an IISP. Because their service has high-bandwidth needs, they are restricted by Bell, Rogers and Cogeco's Capacity-Based-Billing, and TV is most of the time watched during primetime (7pm-midnight), same time as internet high usage. Add-in aggregated and disaggregated nodes, areas that Rogers neglected to upgrade where too many subscribers are sharing the same QAMs and slow them down... Anyways, apparently they decided to slow down some services like Youtube as watching an HD video is impossible. Business decision, they say.

    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    Regarding how many specialty channels will continue to exist, I think this depends on how well received the packaging options will be? If a significant amount of subscribers move towards pick and pay or the customizable packages options then viewership might decline and result in some channels not surviving.
    AFAIK, 50% of Vidéotron's digital TV customers are pick-and-pay, the others take packages (french, english, telemax, etc.). It's all about whether a subscriber wants to have many channels and somehow find something on, or a subscriber who knows what they like and where their fav shows are located.

    Channels will either have to either consolidate, or target something specific. Example, TSN 1-5 and Sportsnet each target a regional or national audience depending on the day and event, so I don't see them reverting back to two channels. AMC is american specialty that cannot be replaced. FX Canada is Rogers's only entertainment specialty but I see no future in FXX. Channel Zero's Silver Screen Classics is unique but if they don't launch in HD, they're doomed for a shutdown. BBC Canada's motto is "If someone speaks british in the show, it's on" and doesn't reflect the spirit of the UK's BBC, and pale in programming quality in comparaison with BBC America and should get replaced. ABC Spark has niche programming, but W Movies has no future. With the upcoming shutdown of american H2 (and Vice going to Rogers), there's no reason to keep that channel around, but its Cat A status gives it more leverage and penetration. Book and Fashion also need a shutdown but their Cat A has value. Much Vibe/Loud/Retro/Juicebox have no future in 24/7 music videos format.

    At this point, we're far away from the Fee-For-Carriage topic...
    "It's not a rerun if you haven't watched it yet." (© 2010 by TVViewer)
    "Ne jamais s'obstiner avec un épais. Il va vous abaisser à son niveau et vous battre avec l'expérience."

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,977
    Vmedia is an Ontario-based IPTV operator owned by George Burger, but it's also an IISP. Because their service has high-bandwidth needs, they are restricted by Bell, Rogers and Cogeco's Capacity-Based-Billing, and TV is most of the time watched during primetime (7pm-midnight), same time as internet high usage.
    Yes, I am aware of the problems they have been having with their TV service, I have been following an ongoing thread on another forum and things have been quite rough for them from the beginning shall we say. I hope the new rules regarding wholesale internet that the CRTC approved a few months back will help improve their service and create more competition. There are many more indie ISP's that have applied for approval to launch IPTV services but have yet to launch- I hope the new rules will even the playing field and allow more companies to launch their services.

    Channels will either have to either consolidate, or target something specific. Example, TSN 1-5 and Sportsnet each target a regional or national audience depending on the day and event, so I don't see them reverting back to two channels.
    That's interesting because I have noticed that the trend in recent years (at least with the conglomerate owned channels) is to go more towards the mainstream instead of focusing on a niche. The new focus is on content, the younger generation is accustomed to watching shows not channels so if the old model is to survive it most adapt and in the traditional system of TV channels this means that you need channels with strong content- 2 or 3 channels with better quality shows as opposed to 4 or 5 channels with a few good shows and endless repeats & filler junk thrown in to meet quotas and to round out the schedule.

    TSN has acquired a lot of content and I feel that the 5 feeds are now justified and should remain. They have done a great job utilizing these feeds IMO, especially during tournament style events (Grand slam Tennis, World Cup soccer, NCAA basketball) where they air different games at the same time across the different feeds. Sportsnet, on the other hand, never made the best use of the different feeds as they always seem to air the same content on all the different channels. I hope Bell creates a TSN pack where they sell all 5 feeds together as a separate add-on for skinny basic subscribers.

    I am surprised that Bell has not shut down their music channels (MuchVibe, MuchLOUD, MuchRetro & Juicebox), especially seeing as how they have removed all of them from their TV services?! I get that these channels cost next to nothing to run but in this day and age with YouTube, how many people actually watch them?! Regarding H2, I have heard that some consider the Canadian channel to be better than the American one?! If this is true then I say keep H2 Canada going, supplement it with some old library content from History USA & H2 USA that has never aired here before.

    I agree about FXX Canada, that channel is a perfect example of the current system of greed employed by broadcasters, whereby they spread out content among multiple channels to get more $$ out of subscribers. This channel should never have been launched in the first place IMO, Rogers does not have enough content for FX let alone for a second channel.

    The basic movie channels (IFC, MovieTime, Rewind, Silver Screen Classics) should either upgrade their services to air movies uncut & commercial free or just shut them down. With the advent of streaming services as well as DVDs which can be found dirty cheap these days due to people moving on to blu-ray, who is going to subscribe to a channel that airs movies in an edited format with tons of commercials inserted throughout?! Also, I doubt very much that these channels have a deep library of films, Hollywood Suite is much better alternative to these channels and is a better value even with all 4 channels being sold together.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,077
    I think it will be interesting to see what happens with the American networks and channels like A&E/Amc.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    921
    Many of those channels are available as pick n pay options on certain TV providers so I don't see much changing. Even FOX saw the value of having FOX Sports Racing in Canada even if the channel is not carried in high penetration packages. The other thing that could happen is channels like AMC might pull out of Canada and sell their rights to streaming services like Netflix. I know Better Call Saul is exclusive to Netflix in many European markets.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    4,767
    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    I hope Bell creates a TSN pack where they sell all 5 feeds together as a separate add-on for skinny basic subscribers.
    I'm gonna take the example of Vidéotron. All 5 TSN count as one pick-and-pay channel. 4 regional Sportsnet count as one. Sportsnet One count as one. Sportsnet 360 (was The Score) count as one. All this due to being seperate CRTC licences. TSN2 launched as a multiplex.

    Since Vidéotron serves in francophone majority market, RDS count as one, RDS2 count as one, but are bundled together. RDS Info count as one. Same thing for TVA Sports 1 and 2. It means if you take a pick-10 à la carte, you are RDS2 is forced when you pick RDS, and you have 8 selections left. Pick-5 also exists, but Sports channels are NOT part of the selection. When you consider TSN climbed to ~3$ per subscriber per month, the low subscription revenues for other channels you'll select will offset their profit margin, so the more channels you get...

    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    I am surprised that Bell has not shut down their music channels (MuchVibe, MuchLOUD, MuchRetro & Juicebox)
    Not sure if it was this forum or another, but those Bell channels were supposed to fade away when Stornoway's bpm:tv has expected to shutdown in Dec 2014. bpm:tv continued on for another 6 months. Probably a contract thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    I agree about FXX Canada, that (...) channel should never have been launched in the first place IMO, Rogers does not have enough content for FX let alone for a second channel.
    Vidéotron still hasn't pick up FXX.
    Bell added both FX and FXX (their slogan was previously "not available on Bell") when Rogers dumped some national NHL games on those. Come to think about it, there doesn't seem to be any hockey game anymore on FX Canada since 2015-2016 season. They got 'em good with leverage (Blue Jays games on Sportsnet One, august 2010, anyone?)

    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    The basic movie channels (IFC, MovieTime, Rewind, Silver Screen Classics) should either upgrade their services to air movies uncut & commercial free or just shut them down.
    Again taking the french-speaking market as an example. TVA network understood this like 10 years ago, they start the movie, let's go with let's say 25 to 30 minutes, then you have a long 5-6 minutes of commercials, and again with long segments. Being cutoff every 6 minutes of film for 3 minutes of commercials is just damn annoying. Cutting off segments for time, without telling the viewer, is stupid, specifically when it's followed with a filler like a Big Bang Theory strip rerun. C'mon !!! You edit down the movie to fit in more commercials, you stretch my time watching your channel because of those, then you expect me to keep watching for a filler show ?

    But commercial-free movie channels is much more interesting. For Vidéotron, CinéPop and TMN Encore (Pix) count as one à la carte selection each. Uncut, commercial-free, in HD and on-demand. At this point, it's a no-brainer, MovieTime is the last thing on your mind.
    "It's not a rerun if you haven't watched it yet." (© 2010 by TVViewer)
    "Ne jamais s'obstiner avec un épais. Il va vous abaisser à son niveau et vous battre avec l'expérience."

  19. #19
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Greater Toronto Area
    Posts
    2,403
    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    That's interesting because I have noticed that the trend in recent years (at least with the conglomerate owned channels) is to go more towards the mainstream instead of focusing on a niche. The new focus is on content, the younger generation is accustomed to watching shows not channels so if the old model is to survive it most adapt and in the traditional system of TV channels this means that you need channels with strong content- 2 or 3 channels with better quality shows as opposed to 4 or 5 channels with a few good shows and endless repeats & filler junk thrown in to meet quotas and to round out the schedule.

    [...]

    I am surprised that Bell has not shut down their music channels (MuchVibe, MuchLOUD, MuchRetro & Juicebox), especially seeing as how they have removed all of them from their TV services?! I get that these channels cost next to nothing to run but in this day and age with YouTube, how many people actually watch them?! Regarding H2, I have heard that some consider the Canadian channel to be better than the American one?! If this is true then I say keep H2 Canada going, supplement it with some old library content from History USA & H2 USA that has never aired here before.

    I agree about FXX Canada, that channel is a perfect example of the current system of greed employed by broadcasters, whereby they spread out content among multiple channels to get more $$ out of subscribers. This channel should never have been launched in the first place IMO, Rogers does not have enough content for FX let alone for a second channel.

    The abundance of channels is more not only just another cash cow for the conglomerates, but a way to import more American programming while meeting Cancon rules, remember that even specialty channels have Cancon requirements, when they can't fit anymore non-Cancon programming on one channel, they spill it over to another, and another.

    Specialty channels on both sides of the border are dying on the vine from competition from pay-tv channels like HBO and streaming services like Netflix, Hula, YouTube and Apple iTunes/Google Play who are taking over the market that specialty channels where once for; movies, specially shows and classic movies and tv series.

    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    The basic movie channels (IFC, MovieTime, Rewind, Silver Screen Classics) should either upgrade their services to air movies uncut & commercial free or just shut them down. With the advent of streaming services as well as DVDs which can be found dirty cheap these days due to people moving on to blu-ray, who is going to subscribe to a channel that airs movies in an edited format with tons of commercials inserted throughout?! Also, I doubt very much that these channels have a deep library of films, Hollywood Suite is much better alternative to these channels and is a better value even with all 4 channels being sold together.
    To simply put, they exist so Bell, Rogers, Shaw and Corus can own the channels they have. The CRTC policy states that no single owner can owned more that ~50% of specialty channels viewership. In theory, Bell can own 90% of all Specialty channels in Canada, as long as the viewership is below 50%. SO if Rewind, MovieTime or Silver Screen Classics where to shutdown, their viewership will increase and they could be in trouble.
    "And Now for Something Completely Different..." - John Cleese (Monty Python).

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,977
    I'm gonna take the example of Vidéotron. All 5 TSN count as one pick-and-pay channel.
    That would be great but I doubt Bell will offer all 5 together as one channel here. I think it will be like RDS is in Quebec, whereby TSN1, 3, 4 & 5 will count as one channel and TSN2 will count as a separate channel. I have Bell TV and do not receive TSN2, only the other 4 feeds.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •