The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Can't be bothered to go into detail. Google it to read more. It's worth it.
> For commercial stations more channels = more advertising = more money.
True, but how many more adverts could they fit in an episode of Lost? It's already a stream of adverts rudely interrupted by a programme.
Besides, if you concentrate on showing original programming on one main channel, that will surely get you more advertising revenue when you take away the costs of running and staffing another channel?
> Channel 4 premieres episodes on terrestial television.
Hmm. And there's a new episode every what, six months?
> That's a very narrow minded view; take BBC4 for example, which caters
> for a niche audience.
Exactly. Niche - as in "small". This ties in with the other thread about the license fee. Broadcasters campaigned to get 24-hour TV in the UK, then they fill it with repeats (and repeats of repeats), and introduce more channels that only start broadcasting at 7pm!
Take the repeats off, put the original programming in their place - overnight if it's "niche" stuff. Don't add extra channels broadcasting crap that only a handful of people want to watch and expect people to pay a £180 license fee for the privilege.
> ...because that's good marketing? Six Feet Under is only being shown
> on E4, not Channel 4. How's that for exclusive content?
Yes, it's exclusive, but it started out on Channel 4. They've moved it to E4 to ensure it (the channel, not the programme) gets some viewers. Good marketing it may be, but that still doesn't show any need for the E4 channel. Again, what's the point in E4 when they could quite easily show it on C4 in place of any number of repeats?
E4 seems to exist solely to show round-the-clock coverage of Big Brother. When that's not running (which is most of the time), they fill it with "exclusives" (which could easily be shown in place of repeated programmes on the main channel), and - yes - more repeats. And don't even get me started on channels like E4+1.
Our decoder currently gives us over 100 channels, and all but about 5 are full of repeats and s**t. Choice is a wonderful thing, as long as there are things worth choosing between.
> For example, as much as I love the show, do Channel 4 really need to
> be showing The Simpsons when the majority of them have already been
> shown on Sky One and BBC2?
Channel 4 premieres episodes on terrestial television.
> Most of the programming on the extra channels is sub-standard anyway.
> Let's face it, if the programmes were any good, they'd put them on
> their main channels instead of all the repeats!
That's a very narrow minded view; take BBC4 for example, which caters for a niche audience.
> They only put
> "first run" things on them (like Lost) because they know
> they'll get no viewers otherwise. Why not just start the show a week
> earlier?!
...because that's good marketing? Six Feet Under is only being shown on E4, not Channel 4. How's that for exclusive content?
I'd rather they spent money making sure that what's on existing channels is original programming that's worth watching.
For example, as much as I love the show, do Channel 4 really need to be showing The Simpsons when the majority of them have already been shown on Sky One and BBC2?
Most of the programming on the extra channels is sub-standard anyway. Let's face it, if the programmes were any good, they'd put them on their main channels instead of all the repeats! They only put "first run" things on them (like Lost) because they know they'll get no viewers otherwise. Why not just start the show a week earlier?!
Hilarious