Follow us on...
Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Facebook
Register
Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 178
  1. #121
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,967
    but they carry all the popular ones
    Are you saying the only popular channels are the ones owned by Shaw Media?! Attachment 68 The term 'popular' is very subjective and is based on people's personal tastes. Shaw Direct currently does not carry any of the following HD channels which are popular as well:

    Animal Planet HD
    Bravo HD
    Comedy Network HD
    Discovery Channel HD
    Family HD
    Teletoon HD
    W Network HD
    YTV HD


    If they carried Comedy Gold, Silver Screen Classics and Disney XD
    Shaw Cable currently carries Silver Screen Classics & Disney XD so this means that Shaw Direct will most likely add those channels to its lineup as well- once the much-anticipated new satellite launches.

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    921
    Shaw Direct will never have what other providers have. Anyone that thinks they will when G1 launches is in for a world of disappointment. They have ALWAYS lagged behind other providers in terms of hardware and HD.

    Shaw Direct customers can expect more HD locals (which is a good thing; not ripping that) and whatever HD specialties that are currently carried by Shaw.

    YTV
    Movietime
    W Movies
    Movie Central 3
    Encore Avenue 2
    Animal Planet
    Discovery Channel
    BNN
    Bravo
    Family
    Disney XD
    Sportsnet World

    That is it. Don't expect anything more then that unless of course Shaw Cable adds more. Keep in mind, Shaw has only added Sprotsnet World, FX Canada, National Geographic Wild and W Movies. Most other providers have added 20+ new HD channels this year alone.

    Take for example Hamilton, both Cogeco and Source Cable (a very small indie cable) have at least 20-30+ more HD channels then Shaw Hamilton. All three cable systems have similar networks and broadband offerings yet Shaw Hamilton has the least amoutn of HD services.

  3. #123
    Bell doesn't carry half of those you mentioned in HD either.
    Not available on Bell TV
    Animal Planet HD
    Science Channel HD
    HDNET
    Speed HD
    Sun TV HD
    Cartoon Net HD
    Travel HD
    OLN HD
    AXS HD
    Encore HD
    Superbowl commercials
    Skinny basic Bell package and internet tv.
    Waiting for BluSky HDTV.....

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,967
    That is it. Don't expect anything more then that unless of course Shaw Cable adds more.
    I think they will add more HD because they have to add more, not only for their regular subscribers but for the cable companies that still get their channel feeds from Shaw Broadcast. If they don't add more HD channels (everything on my list plus others) then they risk losing these customers as they will probably switch to Bell SRDU or get their channel feeds directly from the broadcaster. I expect them to add all Corus HD channels that exist, all Shaw Media HD channels including perhaps some new launches (H2 HD, Lifetime HD, Action HD, BBC Canada HD or Slice HD) as well as the Bell & Astral channels I listed above.

    One final comment as this discussion has veered way off topic, I don't understand why Shaw carries W Movies HD but not W Network HD- is W Movies more popular then W Network?!

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    921
    Folks, I was a Shaw Direct customer for 10+ years. The one thing I've learned about these guys is they over promise and wayyyyyyyyyy under deliver every time. Anyone that thinks that Shaw Direct will suddenly have a better HD line-up then Bell or any other provider is going to be disappointed...period. Mark my words!

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    12,204
    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    Are you saying the only popular channels are the ones owned by Shaw Media?! Attachment 68 The term 'popular' is very subjective and is based on people's personal tastes. Shaw Direct currently does not carry any of the following HD channels which are popular as well:

    Animal Planet HD
    Bravo HD
    Comedy Network HD
    Discovery Channel HD
    Family HD
    Teletoon HD
    W Network HD
    YTV HD

    No, you are right, these channels are popular and are currently not carried by Shaw Direct due to capacity.

  7. #127
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    12,204
    [QUOTE=CDN Viewer;59512]

    I expect them to add all Corus HD channels that exist, all Shaw Media HD channels including perhaps some new launches (H2 HD, Lifetime HD, Action HD, BBC Canada HD or Slice HD) as well as the Bell & Astral channels I listed above.
    I agree, I don't think that they will not make use of their investment. They have publicly stated that they will be adding about 200 new HD channels. I expect every channel you listed (and more) will have carriage once G1 launches. I think it's very reasonable to assume that they will add all the Shaw Media and Corus HD channels (along with upcoming Shaw Media and Corus HD channels which have not launched) along with the remaining highly rated HD channels they currently don't carry.

    In fact, speaking of highly rated HD channels they don't carry, look at the HD channels currently not carried by Shaw Direct, let's subtract the channels currently carried by Shaw cable and subtract the HD channels owned by Shaw Media and Corus (ex. W, Teletoon, ABC Spark). There are very few highly rated HD simulcasts left without carriage, and most of them are owned by Bell Media (Comedy, E!, MuchMusic) and I don't think it's that unrealistic to assume that they will eventually be added (and they will likely be added together), I also don't think it's unrealistic to assume that some of the lower rated channels which target an HD audience (like NFL Network) will be added as well.

    So if Shaw Direct adds lots and lots of HD locals, all the HD specialty channels carried by Shaw cable, all the Shaw Media and Corus HD channels currently not carried, all the upcoming Shaw Media and Corus HD channels, and the last remaining popular HD channels I don't see how the vast majority of Shaw Direct subscribers will be at any disadvantage, especially when you add in the fact that Shaw Direct offers HD channels that Bell doesn't carry like Nat Geo Wild and FX Canada, along with locals from across the country, and allows you to buy channels in theme packs. So even IF Bigoranget is right in that Shaw Direct wont have as many HD specialty channels as their competitors even after G1 launches (this despite the fact that Shaw is saying they will add an additional 200 HD channels), is it really so bad if they are only missing a few HD simulcasts of low rated channels that few people watch? I know I would rather have slightly less HD channels with access to all the popular ones with Shaw Direct over access to a few more HD channels without access to some of the popular ones with Bell.
    Last edited by TVViewer; 12-10-2012 at 12:08 AM. Reason: correction regarding carriage of Bell Media's HD channels

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    921
    Shaw Direct customers are likely going to be waiting a bit longer for new HD specialty channels. The Russian space company that is suppose to launch Anik G1 had another launch failure recently; which is likely going to cause another delay in launching Anik G1. Shaw Direct really needs to starting thinking of a plan B such as converting all the HD to MPEG-4 and possibly even some of the SD locals.

    Also Cogeco, Rogers and Eastlink carry all the Bell Media HD specialties.

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    12,204
    Quote Originally Posted by bigoranget View Post
    Shaw Direct customers are likely going to be waiting a bit longer for new HD specialty channels. The Russian space company that is suppose to launch Anik G1 had another launch failure recently; which is likely going to cause another delay in launching Anik G1. Shaw Direct really needs to starting thinking of a plan B such as converting all the HD to MPEG-4 and possibly even some of the SD locals.

    Also Cogeco, Rogers and Eastlink carry all the Bell Media HD specialties.

    Thanks for correcting me, I wasn't able to find Comedy HD or E! HD on Rogers website.

    But if that's the case and they are carried on other providers then it is only a matter of time before they are carried on Shaw cable and Shaw Direct. I just don't see Shaw making this huge investment to launch G1 and then not carry popular channels carried by their competitors. Why add 200 HD channels and not include any of the popular ones they are missing?

    It took Bell over a year to switch to MPEG4 and it cost them nothing to do it (they used $60 million dollars in benefit money from Bell's purchase of CTV), unless the G1 launch is delayed for several years I don't see that as a viable option.

  10. #130
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    921
    They will have to do something because they have to have all the locals available by June 30th. If they don't; they will have to drop channels in order to add them. In other words, they are going to have to convert at least some of the transponders to MPEG-4 so that they can add the remaining locals should G1 not launch in time (which seems to becoming more likely).

  11. #131
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by TVViewer View Post


    It took Bell over a year to switch to MPEG4 and it cost them nothing to do it (they used $60 million dollars in benefit money from Bell's purchase of CTV), unless the G1 launch is delayed for several years I don't see that as a viable option.
    I am glad you are not my accountant. That $60 million didn't just fall from the sky like some satellite signals that was real money that was spent. To say that it cost them nothing is plain wrong. It is just that they publicly committed to spending the money on the MPEG4 conversion during the CRTC hearings. Whether it was benefit money or normal capital expenditures it cost them according to their accounting $60 million, a far cry from nothing.

  12. #132
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    921
    Thanks for correcting me, I wasn't able to find Comedy HD or E! HD on Rogers website
    Sorry, E! and Comedy are not on Rogers Cable BUT they are on Cogeco and Eastlink.

  13. #133
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    921
    Just a follow-up; Anik G1's new tentative launch date is May 27, 2013. This date could change again pending the outcome on the investigation of recent launch failures by the Russian space company.

  14. #134
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    12,204
    Quote Originally Posted by LOSat View Post
    I am glad you are not my accountant. That $60 million didn't just fall from the sky like some satellite signals that was real money that was spent. To say that it cost them nothing is plain wrong. It is just that they publicly committed to spending the money on the MPEG4 conversion during the CRTC hearings. Whether it was benefit money or normal capital expenditures it cost them according to their accounting $60 million, a far cry from nothing.
    I'm also happy I don't have to work for you. There is a major difference between a benefits package and a normal capital expenditure. It cost Bell nothing to upgrade to MPEG4 because they had to spend that $60 million to purchase CTV. It's the equivalent of Bell spending nothing to upgrade to MPEG4, Which is why Bell was only willing to do the upgrade with benefit money.

  15. #135
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    885
    Quote Originally Posted by TVViewer View Post
    The CRTC insists on 3:1 carriage rules for digital specialty channels (which don't even work since Bell refuses to carry CityNews Channel because it competes with CP24, and refuses to carry Nat Geo Wild because it competes with Animal Planet, despite the fact that Nat Geo Wild's ratings are higher than Animal Planet's)
    You're right the system isn't working. Maybe it should be 4:1.
    Quote Originally Posted by TVViewer View Post
    well maybe they should impose a 1:1 rule for stations that operate in the same market with satellite providers
    Not a bad idea for HD OTA stations. The CRTC hasn't done much to regulate HD.

  16. #136
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,967
    You're right the system isn't working. Maybe it should be 4:1.
    Why don't you just make it 5:1, the more the merrier!? Attachment 70

    The rule should be 2:1 because there are not enough independent owned specialty channels out there so there would be no way any provider could comply with this rule if it was 4:1 or 5:1. The CRTC changed the structure of this regulation last year, stating that 1 out of every 3 channels that a BDU has to add must be from an independent AND must be in the same language as the owned & operated channel (either English or French), so that prevents BDU's from adding a bunch of ethnics to satisfy the rule. Thanks to the CRTC rubber stamping all these purchases by the big conglomerates, there are now only a few independent owned broadcasters out there (Blue Ant Media, Channel Zero, Hollywood Suite, Stornoway, Zoomermedia & Groupe Serdy) and those might eventually be bought up by one of the big boys as well?! The biggest independent broadcaster (Astral) is about to be swallowed by Bell so that reduces the amount of indie-owned channels even further.

  17. #137
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    885
    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    The rule should be 2:1 because there are not enough independent owned specialty channels out there so there would be no way any provider could comply with this rule if it was 4:1 or 5:1.
    Don't you think that Bell is being anti-competitive by not carrying channels like aux, CityNews Channel and Nat Geo Wild?

  18. #138
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    12,204
    Quote Originally Posted by SportsFan View Post
    Don't you think that Bell is being anti-competitive by not carrying channels like aux, CityNews Channel and Nat Geo Wild?

    You know what else is anti-competitive? Forcing BDU's that own broadcasters to carry a bunch of unpopular channels just to carry the popular ones they own.

    Unless you give every digital channel mandatory carriage (which would be absurd) there is no way to get Bell to carry channels like CityNews Channel. A 4:1 rule would just punish companies like Shaw for spending billions to buy broadcasters and save thousands of jobs.

    I agree with CDNViewer that a 2:1 rule is the way to go, 3:1 just forces carriage of unpopular channels, it doesn't serve its purpose of prohibiting anti-competitive behavior.

  19. #139
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    885
    Letting the market decide is one way to go. It could be argued that if Nat Geo Wild, FX Canada and CityNews Channel are so popular, Bell will lose enough customers who are willing to switch providers to get these channels, that they'd be better off adding them.

    The Canadian TV industry is an oligopoly, not competitive enough to be good for consumers without regulation. The big players have bargaining power but the little guys have very little to launch new channels.
    Last edited by SportsFan; 12-14-2012 at 05:55 PM.

  20. #140
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    12,204
    Quote Originally Posted by SportsFan View Post
    Letting the market decide is one way to go. It could be argued that if Nat Geo Wild, FX Canada and CityNews Channel are so popular, Bell will lose enough customers who are willing to switch providers to get these channels, that they'd be better off adding them.

    The Canadian TV industry is an oligopoly, not competitive enough to be good for consumers without regulation. The big players have bargaining power but the little guys have very little to launch new channels.
    3:1 or 4:1 requirement is the exact opposite of letting the market decide.

    A 2:1 requirement would ensure channels people want, including channels from the independents would continue to be carried. Most of the independent channels aren't even remotely competitive with Bell/Shaw specialty channels, having them compete with their channels is not their concern, it's about carrying channels their subscribers want, If Shaw doesn't carry independents people want others like Telus will and they will lose subscribers. Some regulation is certainly needed but the 3:1 rule has gone too far and doesn't even serve its purpose

 

 

Posting Permissions

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