Samurai

Distinguished
Jun 20, 2002
443
0
18,780
Archived from groups: rec.games.computer.ultima.dragons (More info?)

I'm thinking of dumping SuperGravity and going back to FreeAgent, or
possibly giving XNews a try. It has several annoying elements, perhaps
the worst of which is its automatic deletion of posts I've read when I
switch newsgroups. This means if I'm reading one group and
inadvertently click another, the posts I was intending to reply to
disappear and I ah heck up the threading.

Because of that, I'm starting this new thread to reply to Cape Dweller,
and then I'm going to bed. :)

Cape Dweller wrote:
>Samurai wrote:
>> The simple fact is, television networks have four main sources of
>> revenue: sponsorship of programmes, normal commercial breaks, sale
>> of programmes and merchandise, and funding from the public (either
>> through tax or donation).
>
>You can add Pay-TV (Cable, Satellite) to the mix. How prevalent is it
>there?

Amongst television's main sources of revenue are such diverse elements
as sponsorship, commercials, subscriptions, donations and sales...!

;) I completely forgot about that one, because I don't subscribe to
any and I obviously had my stupid head on that day, but you're quite
right. Perhaps seven million households subscribe to Murdoch's
satellite service, BSkyB, and two or three million more have cable.
Far from the majority, but a substantial group, nevertheless.

>> The Beeb is AFAIK one of the few outside American PBS to rely mainly
>> on the last, but it still needs significant overseas sales to make
>> ends meet. The Teletubbies did it a power of good. :D
>
>I wonder how TVO (TV Ontario) stays afloat sometimes... They've
>produced some excellent programs over the years too.

Sales, I'd imagine, if their output is of sufficiently high quality.

>> The Beeb's own shows tend to be 27 or 28 minutes long in every half-
>> hour. It's only when it screens American shows where longer ad-
>> breaks are included in that time that extra padding is required.
>
>Well, I was curious from the other angle - what do you cut out of a 28
>minute program when you've sold 7 minutes of ad space?

Ah, I see. Well, it's possible the US commercial stations do some
judicious cutting -- given recent conversations on LiveJournal with
American readers of mine who didn't understand several localised
phrases I was using, it's possible they just chop out localised
references. <:)

Are the time-slots really the same? They don't have half-hour BBC
programmes on for 40 minutes or some such?

>Remember when they used to show complete credits at the end of movies
>on TV? No split screen or anything!

I find that quite annoying. Even ITV's approach of killing the credits
the moment the cast-list has rolled past is preferable, since you don't
feel you're missing good music because a continuity announcer is
telling you what you've already seen from the TV paper is on next.

Only one of our terrestrial free-to-air channels currently does the
split-screen thing, but I'm sure more will follow suit.
--
___________________________________________________________
\^\^//
,^ ( ..) Samurai Dragon -==UDIC Sig Code==-
| \ \ -==(UDIC)==- d++e+N T--Om+U146MA7'! L8u uC++
\ `^--^ \\\\\\\/////// uF-uG++uLB+uA+nC++uR nH+nP+++
\ \ \ (2 Attentive Points) nI--nPT nS+++nT--wM-wC y+ a29
ksj ^--^ ___________________________________________________________
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.computer.ultima.dragons (More info?)

Samurai wrote:

> Because of that, I'm starting this new thread to reply to Cape Dweller,
> and then I'm going to bed. :)

Sleep like a top!

>>You can add Pay-TV (Cable, Satellite) to the mix. How prevalent is it
>>there?
>
> Amongst television's main sources of revenue are such diverse elements as
> sponsorship, commercials, subscriptions, donations and sales...!

Not to mention selling the information gathered from the secret cameras
installed in all TV sets.

> ;) I completely forgot about that one, because I don't subscribe to any
> and I obviously had my stupid head on that day, but you're quite right.
> Perhaps seven million households subscribe to Murdoch's satellite service,
> BSkyB, and two or three million more have cable. Far from the majority,
> but a substantial group, nevertheless.

The vast majority of TV watchers here are cable and satellite subscribers
(whti the latter's market share rising dramatically). Of course pirate
satellite is a burgeoning business as well.

>>I wonder how TVO (TV Ontario) stays afloat sometimes... They've produced
>>some excellent programs over the years too.
>
> Sales, I'd imagine, if their output is of sufficiently high quality.

The (cerebral) quality is high but the content tends to be fairly
local-based so I wonder how much they could sell.

> Ah, I see. Well, it's possible the US commercial stations do some
> judicious cutting -- given recent conversations on LiveJournal with
> American readers of mine who didn't understand several localised phrases I
> was using, it's possible they just chop out localised references. <:)

I see - so you scored a duck with your American readers? You could always
salt away those phrases for your compatriots.

> Are the time-slots really the same? They don't have half-hour BBC
> programmes on for 40 minutes or some such?

Not as far as I know, unless they're on public TV. Usually it's slash and
burn. Was Who's Line Is It Anyway a BBC program? It's always been shown
as a half-hour program here.

> Only one of our terrestrial free-to-air channels currently does the
> split-screen thing, but I'm sure more will follow suit.

It's a plague... Speaking of which, it's become normal for stations here
to place a small identification symbol in the bottom right corner of the
screen - has this caught on too?

--
Cape Dweller Dragon
 

Samurai

Distinguished
Jun 20, 2002
443
0
18,780
Archived from groups: rec.games.computer.ultima.dragons (More info?)

Quoth Cape Dweller <usenet@ciotog.net>:
> Samurai wrote:

> > Because of that, I'm starting this new thread to reply to Cape
> > Dweller, and then I'm going to bed. :)
>
> Sleep like a top!

I can cheerfully say I've never before heard that idiom in my life.
Appropriate, though, considering how often I turn over before I doze
off. <:)

> > Amongst television's main sources of revenue are such diverse elements as
> > sponsorship, commercials, subscriptions, donations and sales...!
>
> Not to mention selling the information gathered from the secret cameras
> installed in all TV sets.

Not if you wear your trusty tinfoil hat!

> > ;) I completely forgot about that one, because I don't subscribe to any
> > and I obviously had my stupid head on that day, but you're quite right.
> > Perhaps seven million households subscribe to Murdoch's satellite service,
> > BSkyB, and two or three million more have cable. Far from the majority,
> > but a substantial group, nevertheless.
>
> The vast majority of TV watchers here are cable and satellite subscribers
> (whti the latter's market share rising dramatically). Of course pirate
> satellite is a burgeoning business as well.

As is the spam promoting it. :p I was vaguely aware that cable was
far more prevalent than satellite in the States, but thinking about it,
I'm rather surprised. I'd have thought, particularly in remote areas,
getting a telecomms satellite up into space wouldn't have been any more
expensive than laying a thousand miles of optical fibre.

Here in Britain, Murdoch almost got a stranglehold on subscription TV
when he launched Sky. There was initially a competitor, but the
service wasn't as good and Sky eventually bought it out. Fortunately,
we don't have to rely purely on the cable companies to save us from
NewsCorp, at the moment. There are enough free-to-air channels that
many people are content with that, though Sky's subscriptions continue
to increase.

....
> > Sales, I'd imagine, if their output is of sufficiently high quality.
>
> The (cerebral) quality is high but the content tends to be fairly
> local-based so I wonder how much they could sell.

Hmm. That does rather limit the potential. And the organisation
doesn't get sponsorship or financial support from anyone?

> > Ah, I see. Well, it's possible the US commercial stations do some
> > judicious cutting -- given recent conversations on LiveJournal with
> > American readers of mine who didn't understand several localised phrases I
> > was using, it's possible they just chop out localised references. <:)
>
> I see - so you scored a duck with your American readers? You could always
> salt away those phrases for your compatriots.

Heh -- quite so. Co-incidentally, it was a cricketing metaphor that
first brought this to light; I used "pitch up" to mean arrive, and got
called on it. Only after I thought about the etymology did I realise
why it wasn't a universal phrase. <:)

> > Are the time-slots really the same? They don't have half-hour BBC
> > programmes on for 40 minutes or some such?
>
> Not as far as I know, unless they're on public TV. Usually it's slash
> and burn. Was Who's Line Is It Anyway a BBC program? It's always been
> shown as a half-hour program here.

No, Whose Line... was produced by an external company for Channel 4,
which is owned by HM Government but run like a normal commercial
station, so there were ad breaks.

> > Only one of our terrestrial free-to-air channels currently does the
> > split-screen thing, but I'm sure more will follow suit.
>
> It's a plague... Speaking of which, it's become normal for stations here
> to place a small identification symbol in the bottom right corner of the
> screen - has this caught on too?

None of the analogue terrestrial channels has done so as yet, but most
of the digital ones do. I find it very annoying, perhaps because I
don't watch enough television these days to adjust to the fact they're
there.
--
___________________________________________________________
\^\^//
,^ ( ..) Samurai Dragon -==UDIC Sig Code==-
| \ \ -==(UDIC)==- d++e+N T--Om+U146MA7'! L8u uC++
\ `^--^ \\\\\\\/////// uF-uG++uLB+uA+nC++uR nH+nP+++
\ \ \ (2 Attentive Points) nI--nPT nS+++nT--wM-wC y+ a29
ksj ^--^ ___________________________________________________________
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.computer.ultima.dragons (More info?)

Samurai wrote:

>> Sleep like a top!
>
> I can cheerfully say I've never before heard that idiom in my life.
> Appropriate, though, considering how often I turn over before I doze off.
> <:)

Apparently it has to do with the way a top appears to be absolutely still,
so not quite appropriate :)

>> Not to mention selling the information gathered from the secret cameras
>> installed in all TV sets.
>
> Not if you wear your trusty tinfoil hat!

Make sure you make it yourself - commercial AFDBs can contain
backdoors/pinholes or even integrated psychotronic circuitry.

> As is the spam promoting it. :p I was vaguely aware that cable was far
> more prevalent than satellite in the States, but thinking about it, I'm
> rather surprised. I'd have thought, particularly in remote areas, getting
> a telecomms satellite up into space wouldn't have been any more expensive
> than laying a thousand miles of optical fibre.

It wasn't so much a matter of the satellite, but that the dish antennas
used to be massive. Cable saturated the market first before they were
reduced to a reasonable size, but even still sometimes it's difficult to
find a location to place the dish (especially for apartment dwellers). I
think the impression is that installing and orienting a dish is too
difficult. Besides, the satellite TV companies are still trying to get
piracy under control.

> Here in Britain, Murdoch almost got a stranglehold on subscription TV when
> he launched Sky. There was initially a competitor, but the service wasn't
> as good and Sky eventually bought it out. Fortunately, we don't have to
> rely purely on the cable companies to save us from NewsCorp, at the
> moment. There are enough free-to-air channels that many people are
> content with that, though Sky's subscriptions continue to increase.

Interesting... I've never

>> The (cerebral) quality is high but the content tends to be fairly
>> local-based so I wonder how much they could sell.
>
> Hmm. That does rather limit the potential. And the organisation doesn't
> get sponsorship or financial support from anyone?

Government grants, mostly, as well as the semi-regular "pledge drive"
which does attract some corporate sponsors. Just like PBS, there's
occasionally a short blurb at the beginning and/or end of a show
mentioning a corporate sponsor.

> Heh -- quite so. Co-incidentally, it was a cricketing metaphor that first
> brought this to light; I used "pitch up" to mean arrive, and got called on
> it. Only after I thought about the etymology did I realise why it wasn't
> a universal phrase. <:)

I read a rugby match summary a few hours ago that made my head spin!

> No, Whose Line... was produced by an external company for Channel 4, which
> is owned by HM Government but run like a normal commercial station, so
> there were ad breaks.

Ah, I really don't know which shows are BBC. Absolutely Fabulous? Are You
Being Served? Benny Hill? The private investigator chick with the short
skirts?

> None of the analogue terrestrial channels has done so as yet, but most of
> the digital ones do. I find it very annoying, perhaps because I don't
> watch enough television these days to adjust to the fact they're there.

In that case you should expect to see them everywhere soon :)

--
Cape Dweller Dragon