How many rely on Saorsat?

marclt

Just interested how many viewers Saorsat might have?

If you were reliant on it, you’d be missing out on the Euros right now. With saorview overspill accepted in terms of rights, surely the same could / should apply in this case?

funkey_monkey

What is the reason for blocking the football?
My understanding was that the satellite has a tight footprint and that there is minimal overspill into GB.

Have they any plans to unblock the football?

byte

I guess it might be that they don't have rights to be FTA on satellite, regardless of footprint. Who knows?

It's an awful shame though, as if it wasn't bad enough not having the Virgin Media channels.

theguzman

My parents were reliant on it but pay Sky now instead, I got it setup for them in 2012 after the Digital Changeover, they have a 1m dish which has been out of action since Hurricane Ophelia, it would be the third time it was going for realignment. A 1m dish in an exposed place in the West of Ireland just hasn't got a hope of lasting beyond a few years. They should have perfect Saorview coverage but a nearby Wind Farm has decimated the signal since even Analogue days, RTE didn't give a toss either. Summer days like this the Saorview is perfect as the turbines don't spin, a different story when the wind is blowing which is 90% of the time.

Can't wait for them to get the NBI Fibre in and scrap Sky also and get some IPTV service. They are both elderly and only use Sky for RTE and my father EIR sports.

It should have been launched as Saorview via Satellite as a duplicate service or else go down the British route with a Free to View card issued with your licence based on Eircode and lack of Terrestrial signal.

Glaceon

It would probably be cheaper to give basic Sky subs to those who are stuck with Saorsat! I recently read about how they handle this in Australia; a qualified installer assesses the setup and if they confirm that terrestrial reception isn’t possible, then a satellite install is sanctioned.

actua11

It must be possible that some who can't receive Saorview, would just be using an alternative like Sky anyway, not from necessity but for choice. Such that "Not covered by Saorview" does not always equal "must rely on Saorstat"

Though on something like Sky... I have memories that Setanta Ireland were given funding to produce Irish content, and so had to make that available to the Irish public. So, anyone who asked them, would receive an FTV sat card to clear Setanta Sports on Sky. My memory is sketchy, but how might this have worked, and could RTE not use a similar system? Actually even for Saorstat, would FTV cards not just solve any footprint/rights issues as they'd only be issued to Irish residents?

Johnboy1951

Ireland needs a broadcasting system to serve Ireland, under Irish control.

It is a pity they choose (based on cost? and footprint) not to use a similar system to that of Sky.
It would be great is my FTA satellite dish could receive Saorview over Satellite instead of requiring a separate LNB etc..

decor58

actua11 wrote: »

It must be possible that some who can't receive Saorview, would just be using an alternative like Sky anyway, not from necessity but for choice. Such that "Not covered by Saorview" does not always equal "must rely on Saorstat"

Though on something like Sky... I have memories that Setanta Ireland were given funding to produce Irish content, and so had to make that available to the Irish public. So, anyone who asked them, would receive an FTV sat card to clear Setanta Sports on Sky. My memory is sketchy, but how might this have worked, and could RTE not use a similar system? Actually even for Saorstat, would FTV cards not just solve any footprint/rights issues as they'd only be issued to Irish residents?

It's an idea that has been around for some time, but what do you put the card into, Sky won't supply boxes for fta viewing, who would supply the box, so you have a box with 2 cams, one for sub and one for fta. I think I read in Austria viewing cards are or can be issued to tv license holders, smart cards could be switched on/ off as required. Then do you need a STB or does your tv would require a cam, such tvs were common enough a few years ago I don't think they are so common now. It would be great to get all your viewing through one source.

bronkobilly

decor58 wrote: »

It's an idea that has been around for some time, but what do you put the card into, Sky won't supply boxes for fta viewing, who would supply the box, so you have a box with 2 cams, one for sub and one for fta. I think I read in Austria viewing cards are or can be issued to tv license holders, smart cards could be switched on/ off as required. Then do you need a STB or does your tv would require a cam, such tvs were common enough a few years ago I don't think they are so common now. It would be great to get all your viewing through one source.

they do it in france

SeaFields

I have to use it. I'm not into soccer so having the euros or champions League blocked is no big deal personally. I'm more than happy with saorsat rather than sky. Most television I watch is Netflix anyway so a sky sub would be wasted

Johnboy1951

Whatever happened to the idea of BBC being carried on Saorsat?

Feb. 2010:

RTÉ TELEVISION channels and TG4 will be freely available throughout all of Northern Ireland from 2012, once the planned digital television changes come into force, Minister for Communications Eamon Ryan said yesterday.

Some BBC channels will equally be carried free on the system due to come into force in the Republic at the same time, under the deal signed yesterday in London between Mr Ryan and his British counterpart, Ben Bradshaw.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/rt%C3%A9-and-tg4-to-be-freely-available-in-north-in-2012-1.616339

bronkobilly

rte is only on saorsat 9''east short beam so we wont let other countries show wat were watching wat a waste of money i stick to free to air on satellite all bbc's itv's channel 5 s etc just to name a few

bronkobilly

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Whatever happened to the idea of BBC being carried on Saorsat?

Feb. 2010:



https://www.irishtimes.com/news/rt%C3%A9-and-tg4-to-be-freely-available-in-north-in-2012-1.616339

that was before brexit i guess

ClosedAccountFuzzy

Rather than Saor Sat, in an ideal world, it would have made sense to have just had an encrypted trainer on Astra using the same orbital position as Sky. It need not have been in the EPG or using VideoGuard. There are competing technology like ViaAccess and so on they have CI+ card integration into modern TVs too.

It’a done in France for example with TNT Sat, admittedly with a lot more support from Canal+ than Sky ever gave to FTA in the U.K. or here.

It’s leaky, in the sense that people around the neighbouring countries who want to watch French TV can get it without much fuss, but it seems to satisfy the rights holders that it’s not intentionally broadcasting into other markets.

decor58

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Whatever happened to the idea of BBC being carried on Saorsat?

Feb. 2010:



https://www.irishtimes.com/news/rt%C3%A9-and-tg4-to-be-freely-available-in-north-in-2012-1.616339

It came down to who would pay the transmission costs, BBC would be a real boost for SaorView/ Saorsat. VM have no real interest in SaorView, it's only a promo for their subscription service, not in HD on SaorView, not on Saorsat, no player without some form of subscription, RTE would be left to carry the cost.
Freeview and Freesat work because BBC and ITV are behind it, C4 has its issues there too.

marclt

bronkobilly wrote: »

they do it in france

I think in Italy, Sky satellite boxes have to include DTT access. So where there is a (political) will, there is a way….

TAFKAlawhec

FuzzyThinking wrote: »

Rather than Saor Sat, in an ideal world, it would have made sense to have just had an encrypted trainer on Astra using the same orbital position as Sky. It need not have been in the EPG or using VideoGuard. There are competing technology like ViaAccess and so on they have CI+ card integration into modern TVs too.

It’a done in France for example with TNT Sat, admittedly with a lot more support from Canal+ than Sky ever gave to FTA in the U.K. or here.

It’s leaky, in the sense that people around the neighbouring countries who want to watch French TV can get it without much fuss, but it seems to satisfy the rights holders that it’s not intentionally broadcasting into other markets.

There's little point comparing France to Ireland in this regard - France is a country of some 65 million people for whom in other nearby countries that also speak French as a first language, there's around 4.5 million in Belgium and 2 million or so in Switzerland. The consequence of natively French speaking viewers in Belgium & Switzerland, alongside others in places near France that speak French either as a first or as another language, viewing channels/programming for the French market, is not a major concern in most aspects. Indeed, most Francophone viewers in both Belgium & Switzerland get all the major French station via cable anyway, sometimes with localised ads.

There is a parallel in the UK & Rep. Ireland - there is 65 million in the UK, near 5 million in Rep. Ireland. The overspill reception of FTA channels on the "UK" spot beam to viewers in Rep. Ireland is also regarded as not generally consequential.

A more direct parallel for Rep. Ireland would be to Austria & Switzerland, both of whom are relatively small countries that have at least one neighbour that is substantially bigger that it shares a native tongue with. In both countries AFAIK, both countries sell FTV cards that are tied to a local TV licence to limit potential use outside of their territory - Switzerland has an additional way of obtaining a FTV card for SRG/SSR TV broadcasts by being a Swiss citizen abroad (though this involves an annual fee).

A theoretical FTV card scheme for Rep. Ireland at 28E would almost certainly have to be tightly tied similarly to the Austrian & Swiss FTV systems to obstruct as far as is practical reception of such services outside of the state in order to satisfy rights holders.

ClosedAccountFuzzy

TNT SAT & Fransat are both encrypted with ViaAccess.

TNT SAT is just piggybacked on Canal+ satellite services, much like FreeSat, but it’s encrypted.

FranSat is a bit odd, being on Eutelsat 5 West A 5°W and is a spot beam, but also encrypted.

You just pay a €14.00 charge every 4 years, but the cards seem to be very much a fig leaf as they’re often just sold in your average electrical retailer.

My point is that SaorSat might have been better off just going in 28.2°E, on their own transponder, encrypting it themselves and issuing cards & not bothering about Sky too much. VideoGuard is expensive, proprietary and controlled by Sky. You could feasibly encrypt it with other systems that would be totally acceptable to rights holders. Nagravision, ViaAccess etc etc

People could then combine any 28.2°E free to air services on a sat tuner (tv or stb of their choice) with a CI+ slot and a Saorsat card.

It would have made it a very viable product.

It would just mean the RTÉ / TG4 and VM feeds would be on Astra twice, and in two encryption system - independently and as part of Sky.

Johnboy1951

FuzzyThinking wrote: »

TNT SAT & Fransat are both encrypted with ViaAccess.

TNT SAT is just piggybacked on Canal+ satellite services, much like FreeSat, but it’s encrypted.

FranSat is a bit odd, being on Eutelsat 5 West A 5°W and is a spot beam, but also encrypted.

You just pay a €14.00 charge every 4 years, but the cards seem to be very much a fig leaf as they’re often just sold in your average electrical retailer.

My point is that SaorSat might have been better off just going in 28.2°E, on their own transponder, encrypting it themselves and issuing cards & not bothering about Sky too much. VideoGuard is expensive, proprietary and controlled by Sky. You could feasibly encrypt it with other systems that would be totally acceptable to rights holders. Nagravision, ViaAccess etc etc

People could then combine any 28.2°E free to air services on a sat tuner (tv or stb of their choice) with a CI+ slot and a Saorsat card.

It would have made it a very viable product.

It would just mean the RTÉ / TG4 and VM feeds would be on Astra twice, and in two encryption system - independently and as part of Sky.

I wonder what the relative costs of the present system and doing the above would be.

They could have done so at launch of digital, IMO, but it is too late now to change.
The other question that would arise would be households having more than two TVs ...... and the inconvience and cost of more than one decryption system and card ..... if they changed now.

frozenfrozen

What resolution is tg4 on saorsat? If its hd I will try receive it, the saorview quality is poor

mackersdublin

frozenfrozen wrote: »

What resolution is tg4 on saorsat? If its hd I will try receive it, the saorview quality is poor

Only RTÉ One and RTÉ2 are in HD on Saorview and Saorsat

theguzman

TG4 is in HD on Sky but not on Saorview, RTE the PSB really are a joke.

frozenfrozen

Thanks, what a pity. Tg4 hd should be available to watch with an out of subscription sky box since its not available in HD otherwise. I'd watch so much more tg4 if it was HD

mackersdublin

TG4 HD is available on their new player. I have the app on my LG TV

funkey_monkey

frozenfrozen wrote: »

I'd watch so much more tg4 if it was HD

It has some great content. The documentaries on it are excellent.

marclt

mackersdublin wrote: »

Only RTÉ One and RTÉ2 are in HD on Saorview and Saorsat

TG4 have previously stated they have no interest (plans) to broadcast in HD on Saorsat.

marclt

funkey_monkey wrote: »

What is the reason for blocking the football?
My understanding was that the satellite has a tight footprint and that there is minimal overspill into GB.

Have they any plans to unblock the football?

Not sure they have a reason, although RTE News Now (in awful resolution) seems to be showing the MKD v NED game unblocked now.

Has anyone asked RTÉ what the deal is?

StreetLight

marclt wrote: »

Has anyone asked RTÉ what the deal is?

RTE tends not to bother replying to queries from us mere mortals.

Capt'n Midnight

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Ireland needs a broadcasting system to serve Ireland, under Irish control.

It is a pity they choose (based on cost? and footprint) not to use a similar system to that of Sky.
It would be great is my FTA satellite dish could receive Saorview over Satellite instead of requiring a separate LNB etc..

BBC and ITV and Channel 4 and Channel 5 don't use SKY's system. The encryption and card costs were too expensive so they just went FTA.

marclt wrote: »

I think in Italy, Sky satellite boxes have to include DTT access. So where there is a (political) will, there is a way….

TivuSat uses a Free To View system. You need a card and you need a PPS number to get it. And you have to buy the card with some hardware.

DTT in Italy has a rake of local channels. Nothing like here.

Capt'n Midnight

frozenfrozen wrote: »

What resolution is tg4 on saorsat? If its hd I will try receive it, the saorview quality is poor

And VM don't even transmit on SaorSat so the bandwidth excuse doesn't stack up.

byte

marclt wrote: »

I think in Italy, Sky satellite boxes have to include DTT access. So where there is a (political) will, there is a way….

Ah yes, there was a DTT USB stick you could insert into Sky Italia boxes to get the DTT channels.

https://www.telekitalia.com/guide/sky/skydigitalkey-digitale-terrestre shows how it works/worked. Interesting how they handled LCN's.

rogue-entity

FuzzyThinking wrote: »

My point is that SaorSat might have been better off just going in 28.2°E, on their own transponder, encrypting it themselves and issuing cards & not bothering about Sky too much. VideoGuard is expensive, proprietary and controlled by Sky. You could feasibly encrypt it with other systems that would be totally acceptable to rights holders. Nagravision, ViaAccess etc etc

From what I remember hearing about it, Sky made a deal with RTÉ whereby in exchange for only being available on Sky's basic package, Sky waived the fees for both EPG position and Encryption and provided transponder space. How much of that was true, or remains true today, I have no idea though.

VideoGuard was never owned, exclusive to or controlled by Sky but by a subsidiary of News Corp. It's been twice sold, to Cisco in 2012 and to an investment firm in the UK in 2014. Whether this means the possibility of a VideoGuard CAM may ever come to pass is anybodies guess however (as much as I would like to it happen).

FuzzyThinking wrote: »

It would just mean the RTÉ / TG4 and VM feeds would be on Astra twice, and in two encryption system - independently and as part of Sky.

It wouldn't need to be on Astra twice, a little known fact is that channels on Sky, channels on Canal+ etc are all encrypted with DVB-CCS; all VideoGuard and friends do is control access to the decryption keys (in a very simplistic view) so so-called simulcrypting is possible where you could transmit a programme and implement VideoGuard to have it available on the Sky platform but also ViaAccess to have it available on a different platform using the same satellite feed.

If RTÉ wanted, they could make ViaAccess CAMs available for purchase along with viewing cards tied to an address and valid TV licence, then any satellite receiver besides Sky's could be used to watch those channels without having to pay twice for the privilege.

theguzman wrote: »

TG4 is in HD on Sky but not on Saorview, RTE the PSB really are a joke.

If I recall reading here before, that's a function of 2RN charging based on bandwidth used, HD uses more bandwidth so comes at a higher cost. DTT in Ireland is a joke in general but not for anything RTÉ have done in and of themselves but rather how the regulators made a complete pigs ear of it.

dulpit

rogue-entity wrote: »

If I recall reading here before, that's a function of 2RN charging based on bandwidth used, HD uses more bandwidth so comes at a higher cost. DTT in Ireland is a joke in general but not for anything RTÉ have done in and of themselves but rather how the regulators made a complete pigs ear of it.

I've asked before, but can't ever remember seeing a definitive answer. For Saorview or Saorsat, is the cost to transmit a channel of content or nothing at all the same from 2RN's point of view? Is it not a fixed charge regardless of whether all capacity is used or not?

Glaceon

dulpit wrote: »

I've asked before, but can't ever remember seeing a definitive answer. For Saorview or Saorsat, is the cost to transmit a channel of content or nothing at all the same from 2RN's point of view? Is it not a fixed charge regardless of whether all capacity is used or not?

Yes, with digital the running cost of a multiplex is the same whether it’s full or transmitting empty packets. But TV3 got the law changed to allow them to pay as little as possible (they wanted to pay nothing at all) so it’s down to them why we’re in this mess. Even TG4 has a higher resolution on the NI mini mux than it does on Saorview!

dulpit

Glaceon wrote: »

Yes, with digital the running cost of a multiplex is the same whether it’s full or transmitting empty packets. But TV3 got the law changed to allow them to pay as little as possible (they wanted to pay nothing at all) so it’s down to them why we’re in this mess. Even TG4 has a higher resolution on the NI mini mux than it does on Saorview!

So if the cost is the same, surely the minister could charge each channel the same amount, and leave it up to them to decide whether they want full HD or not - I assume the cost to the broadcaster would be the same either way then?

Glaceon

dulpit wrote: »

So if the cost is the same, surely the minister could charge each channel the same amount, and leave it up to them to decide whether they want full HD or not - I assume the cost to the broadcaster would be the same either way then?

Not necessarily. If you have, for example, three channels on a mux at the lowest quality possible, there would be a fair bit of empty space left. This would either be left null or filled with test cards (as it is at the moment). So 2RN are covering the cost of the empty space. Whereas if you split the cost of the mux in three, the broadcasters would most likely be paying more. But, on the flip side with that system, the more broadcasters you can attract to the platform, the lower the cost for everyone.

dulpit

Glaceon wrote: »

Not necessarily. If you have, for example, three channels on a mux at the lowest quality possible, there would be a fair bit of empty space left. This would either be left null or filled with test cards (as it is at the moment). So 2RN are covering the cost of the empty space. Whereas if you split the cost of the mux in three, the broadcasters would most likely be paying more. But, on the flip side with that system, the more broadcasters you can attract to the platform, the lower the cost for everyone.

On that basis, why is RTÉ One +1, RTÉ2 +1 and RTÉ News all in SD? If they end up paying more because of increased bandwidth share, surely that means they end up paying themselves?

Realistically, make it so that each channel pays the same regardless of whether they broadcast in SD or HD as a first step. Then change rules so that they must broadcast in HD. Doesn't seem to be a logical reason not to (apart from Virgin Media being tight with the money)

TAFKAlawhec

FuzzyThinking wrote: »

TNT SAT & Fransat are both encrypted with ViaAccess.

TNT SAT is just piggybacked on Canal+ satellite services, much like FreeSat, but it’s encrypted.

FranSat is a bit odd, being on Eutelsat 5 West A 5°W and is a spot beam, but also encrypted.

You just pay a €14.00 charge every 4 years, but the cards seem to be very much a fig leaf as they’re often just sold in your average electrical retailer.

My point is that SaorSat might have been better off just going in 28.2°E, on their own transponder, encrypting it themselves and issuing cards & not bothering about Sky too much. VideoGuard is expensive, proprietary and controlled by Sky. You could feasibly encrypt it with other systems that would be totally acceptable to rights holders. Nagravision, ViaAccess etc etc

People could then combine any 28.2°E free to air services on a sat tuner (tv or stb of their choice) with a CI+ slot and a Saorsat card.

It would have made it a very viable product.

It would just mean the RTÉ / TG4 and VM feeds would be on Astra twice, and in two encryption system - independently and as part of Sky.

The reason you can go into a shop in France (TNTSAT & FRANSAT), or Italy for that matter (Tivúsat) and purchase a receiver or CAM with respective access card is from what I said earlier - their size of population is many times that of those which speak the same tongue in neighbouring or nearby countries & territories. The likes of Switzerland and Austria don't have that luxury - and neither would Ireland. Interestingly ORF's HD terrestrial transmissions are also encrypted.

As for 28E, one of the reasons for not going down that road would be the likely cost of the operation. It's alleged that the cost of hiring a transponder on the 28E UK/Ireland beam from SES is among the most (if not thee most) expensive of all broadcast geostationary satellites in the world**. You would then almost likely require at least two CAS systems - simply using Videoguard only would quite unlikely be politically unacceptable, but at the same time there would likely be an outcry (Liveline? Hello...) if it weren't possible for people to use their Sky receiver*** to access this service and having to replace it with a new receiver. Then you'd have to add on the cost of a call-centre & relevant operations to process & send out cards. This could of course be contracted out, but it is still a cost.

On a rough calculation, we're talking at least several million Euro per year. The current Saorsat setup was claimed when it was first set up to cost 2RN about 1 million Euro per year** - maybe with the transmission parameter changes made on Saorsat a few months ago which has allowed the platform to take up a smaller amount of bandwidth compared to what it had previously, this cost has possibly reduced.

Ultimately, it begs the question "Who pays"? And that springs up many different possible answers - wherever any of them are acceptable is another matter. You could in theory shave some costs off by using only one CAS if it was deemed to be acceptable, but if this was Videoguard does this then affect the commercial agreement Sky has with Irish broadcasters on their platform?** Another method would be to come to a transponder-sharing agreement with another broadcaster (e.g. split a 50/50 bitrate data & rental costs for capacity with say the BBC or Sky) or use a third party distribution provider. But again, it's like when someone occasionally chirps up about the Memorandum of Understanding concerning the BBC for Saorview - who pays? etc.

Also, the Conditional Access system used means nothing with respect to the broadcasting rights of the channels on such a platform (as long as the CAS itself is secure) - what matters is the distribution of descrambling cards (or cardless CAMs for some systems). It would have to follow a system similarly implemented to that in Austria or Switzerland, likely tying it to TV licencing to help prevent registration & use outside the state.

Finally, you'd likely have another political issue regarding access to such a platform to viewers/residents in Northern Ireland. That would be another theoretical issue that I'd leave for another time.

Overall, I'd say that if an Irish FTV system at 28E was to be put in place, it would have been done by now. The fact that it hasn't suggests to me to be a combination of a lack of will from some/all of RTÉ, TG4 & Virgin Media, a lack of an acceptable answer from all involved into the costs of such a project, or (quite likely) a combination of both - especially with most linear television now in a slow but ultimately terminal decline against IP delivered content.




**Commercial confidentiality of course means that openly published details aren't available.
***Excluding Sky Q, of course.

TAFKAlawhec

dulpit wrote: »

On that basis, why is RTÉ One +1, RTÉ2 +1 and RTÉ News all in SD? If they end up paying more because of increased bandwidth share, surely that means they end up paying themselves?

Realistically, make it so that each channel pays the same regardless of whether they broadcast in SD or HD as a first step. Then change rules so that they must broadcast in HD. Doesn't seem to be a logical reason not to (apart from Virgin Media being tight with the money)

It wouldn't be so bad if the SD channels broadcast on Saorview were broadcasting on full D1 (720x576) resolution rather than 544x576 that they are at present for 16:9 content - the difference between TG4 on Saorview and the RNI_1 multiplex in NI, where it is transmitted with D1 resolution, is quite noticeable especially on on-screen graphics. The Saorview pictures just look very soft in comparison.

Full 1080i resolution for HD would be nice, though personally I notice less of a difference between it and the 1440x1080 resolution used for HD on Saorview compared to the SD example above.

Glaceon wrote: »

Not necessarily. If you have, for example, three channels on a mux at the lowest quality possible, there would be a fair bit of empty space left. ---(snip) 8<

You should see some of the Italian channels on Hot Bird - VCD resolution (352x288) with a fixed video bitrate of 512 kbps!

Johnboy1951

dulpit wrote: »

On that basis, why is RTÉ One +1, RTÉ2 +1 and RTÉ News all in SD? If they end up paying more because of increased bandwidth share, surely that means they end up paying themselves?

Realistically, make it so that each channel pays the same regardless of whether they broadcast in SD or HD as a first step. Then change rules so that they must broadcast in HD. Doesn't seem to be a logical reason not to (apart from Virgin Media being tight with the money)

If all broadcasters were only offered sufficient bandwidth for full HD for their first channel, and then maybe for +1 channels a lesser bandwidth, that might force the issue.
Would we lose some channels?
Maybe, but what would be left might be worth watching!

Would there be uproar iF rte announced the closure of saorsat for cost cutting reasons?

EdmondShiels3

Saorview will never change. Even if all channels are in HD no other channels are going to ever want to join. The main issue is it started too late when most people had a pay service or if the did not want one had freesat. Virgin Media not being in HD is stupid as they must be loosing viewers. For example someone who has freesat will watch the same ITV program on ITV in HD on freesat. I did on SKY when I did not have HD.

EdmondShiels3

EdmondShiels3 wrote: »

Saorview will never change. Even if all channels are in HD no other channels are going to ever want to join. The main issue is it started too late when most people had a pay service or if the did not want one had freesat. Virgin Media not being in HD is stupid as they must be loosing viewers. For example someone who has freesat will watch the same ITV program on ITV in HD on freesat. I did on SKY when I did not have HD.

Totally agree. It feels like saorview has less choice now than it did 10 years ago, Back then 3e was a youth channel that had American Dad , south park and other such shows but now Virgin Media 1,2 and 3 feels like the one channel.

EdmondShiels3

Johns nephew wrote: »

Totally agree. It feels like saorview has less choice now than it did 10 years ago, Back then 3e was a youth channel that had American Dad , south park and other such shows but now Virgin Media 1,2 and 3 feels like the one channel.

I agree about Virgin channel, they do feel like the one channel. There has to be some cheep programs that the could show instead of the repeats of ITV programs over and over again. 3e was a better channel when they took over it first but
then became like the main channel. It should go back to being like channel 6 which it was before tv3 owned it. This still would not chance saorview as it does not have enough channels to be a main tv service like freeview in England is.

decor58

EdmondShiels3 wrote: »

Saorview will never change. Even if all channels are in HD no other channels are going to ever want to join. The main issue is it started too late when most people had a pay service or if the did not want one had freesat. Virgin Media not being in HD is stupid as they must be loosing viewers. For example someone who has freesat will watch the same ITV program on ITV in HD on freesat. I did on SKY when I did not have HD.

What is to be achieved by most channels joining Saorview, most are broadcast into the country by satellite at present, then you have the rights issues, other than the main 5 channels, viewing numbers would be small in the UK, why incur extra cost for little or no return from the Irish market.

athlone573

decor58 wrote: »

What is to be achieved by most channels joining Saorview, most are broadcast into the country by satellite at present, then you have the rights issues, other than the main 5 channels, viewing numbers would be small in the UK, why incur extra cost for little or no return from the Irish market.

That goes without saying. I guess the other poster was thinking of other channels from VM or RTE ( aren't there some channels on Virgin By Wire that we don't get on Saorview) or of TG4HD / VM HD which would be handy for the football the odd time.

marclt

Johns nephew wrote: »

Would there be uproar iF rte announced the closure of saorsat for cost cutting reasons?

Probably not and because of the rights issues with football (which I don’t fully understand) it can’t be used as a back up feed for saorview transmitter sites. I think RTE use sky boxes for that anyway. So unsure of the long term value.

khumbu

marclt wrote: »

Probably not and because of the rights issues with football (which I don’t fully understand) it can’t be used as a back up feed for saorview transmitter sites. I think RTE use sky boxes for that anyway. So unsure of the long term value.

I'm sure people in non saorview coverage areas wouldn't be happy if saorsat was shutdown. Football rights excluded saorsat is a good alternative for areas with non saorview coverage.


I've seen it used in pubs (remember those) in 2 different areas that had no saorview coverage.


Its a pity TG4 is not on saorsat in HD. The cost of going HD on saorsat only would hardly break the bank.


Not having VM channels is a positive in my opinion.


If the size of dish required for saorsat could be reduced by increasing FEC etc. it would make installation along with FTA Astra2 much simpler. For end user no switching between terrestrial/satellite tuners etc. Channels can be integrated into one channel list.

dulpit

If all existing channels on Saorview were obliged to broadcast on Saorsat also, and all were obliged to broadcast in HD, with an even split in cost being paid is there capacity for that? Realistically, is there any new channels ever going to join either service at this stage?

[I wonder how much it would actually cost Virgin Media annually to broadcast their 3 stations on saorsat? Are we talking hundreds of thousands or millions?

Capt'n Midnight

dulpit wrote: »

If all existing channels on Saorview were obliged to broadcast on Saorsat also, and all were obliged to broadcast in HD, with an even split in cost being paid is there capacity for that? Realistically, is there any new channels ever going to join either service at this stage?

Because of the pandemic lots of transponders taken over on the satellite for data.

So that's not going to happen any time soon. Bandwidth practically halved. Which goes to show that they could have had TG4 , News Now and Junior in HD the whole time.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058088564

Frequency: Currently 20190.0Mhz changing to 20192.5MHz
Symbol Rate: Currently 25000 changing to 12500
FEC: Currently 2/3 changing to 5/6