Star Cricket HD showing promos in between overs :(

[kooldude]

Yes if they charge a premium for their channel they should have no ads or atleast minimum.

 

[rajivkrishnan]

Oh No No No folks you are getting it all wrong here. You see the setup costs for the broadcaster in India is the same(maybe more wrt the rest of the world due to import of setup stuff) and corresponding "premium" that we are paying is peanuts. Well if you ask me every HD channel in the near future will be as infested with ads as the current SD broadcasts are. This is just a demo before the whole thing. Now I concur if you say you dont like the SD ads and all that (ala Ten and Neo). But I will still disagree with the basic premise that I am paying a "premium" and I deserve the ad-free broadcast like the rest of the world theory that you people are professing.

 

[Jaymin]

I still dont agree with the costs part. What setup costs are u talking about, can u please clarify? Coz these matches are being played in England so the equipment that catches live action is at ECB's expense, may be BCCI wud share some of it. Relaying from there - well they are just sharing the feed from Sky Sports HD. All they have done is - have their own sports bar & commentary team.All these guys have to do is - send the feed they receive, to the DTH players & from that point, its the responsibility of that particular player! SO WHAT COSTS OF IMPORTING EQUIPMENT ARE INVOLVED HERE?

 

[rajivkrishnan]

mate they are broadcasting from India(or HK). Getting the Sky feed is only one part of the story. The airing is absolutely another. The airing is being done on ESS equipment which is finally being recieved by the DTH. And this equipment has been setup by the broadcaster (ESS) from scratch. So ESS has spent huge money on this setup for airing. Now even if we take the idea that number of customers in India will be a significant number the costs that you are paying for receiving HD is peanuts as compared to the rest of the world. So it is obvious that the share of your subscription that finally reaches the broadcaster will not be enough for him to break even as fast as the worldwide counterparts. So stands to reason that they will broadcast ads.

 

[Jaymin]

Peanuts??? Take this......

Sky Digital offers a pack of 50 True HD Channels at just 10.25 pounds a month. Heres a link to that site..... Packages

That comes to around Rs. 758 per month. Check the exchange over here, if u want to confirm: XE: (GBP/INR) British Pound to Indian Rupee Rate

So, now 758/50 = Rs.15.16 per channel. Compare that to Rs. 88 pm that we pay for 2 HD Channels - ESPN HD & Star Cricket HD. So even a most CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE OF STAR CRICKET HD is Rs.44 per month.

Do u mean to say Rs. 44 pm is peanuts in front of Rs.15.16 pm?

 

[rajivkrishnan]

excuse me i didnt catch that.... 10.25 per month is only if u subscribe to the base package (SD channel that is) and the 10.25 is only the HD upgrade cost.Could you please check and confirm if my understanding is correct?

 

---

[Jaymin]

So do u think here in India we can do without Base packs?? Or can we just subscribe to an HD Addon directly?STILL, THATS NOT A POINT AT ALL!!Here, the point is from broadcaster point of view & not DTH point of view. U claimed the channels charge premium over there & in India, we pay peanuts.

 

[rajivkrishnan]

oh of course yes. I still stand by what I said. for a broadcaster to broadcast HD content takes the same cost amount worldwide. I hope we can agree on this. Now what I say here is that we dont pay as much as people around the world pay for the same-priced content. Obviously the broadcaster shows ads to cover up the rest of the cost incurred.

----------

and by the way with the 150 bucks limit aside, we in India can subscribe to HD content without base packs. I am not sure how many countries allow this. But thats obviously is besides the point. Just a sidenote

 

[Jaymin]

oh of course yes. I still stand by what I said. for a broadcaster to broadcast HD content takes the same cost amount worldwide. I hope we can agree on this. Now what I say here is that we dont pay as much as people around the world pay for the same-priced content. Obviously the broadcaster shows ads to cover up the rest of the cost incurred.

Huh??

Rs 44 per channel per month here, v/s Rs.15.16 per channel per month in UK?? Who pays more?

 

[rajivkrishnan]

mate I think you did not understand. Let me reiterate 40 bucks on alacarte for Star Cricket HD(TS pricing) versus 15 rupees + base pack costs which is a minima at 12GBP (from the link you give above). WHO PAYS MORE? ESPN and ESPN America is worth 12GBP