Should TVNZ 6 and 7 be available on Sky and not just Freeview?

Lucky you being able to buy the decoder from Sky. A few years ago, when I got sick of snakes and crocodiles on Animal Planet, and all of the never ending repeats on the other Sky channels, I asked Sky if I could buy the box to view the free-to-air channels – I found that the majority of my tv viewing was on them anyway. They said no, so I cancelled Sky.

I ended up getting a set-top box to view the free channels. It was a pity to miss out on Prime, but it went really down hill after Channel 9 (or whichever ozzie company) bought them out. It has got even worse now Sky runs it, so I’m probably not missing anything.

I am looking forward to the new channels on Freeview, and they, so far, appear better than I had expected. Perhaps Sky could also offer some of its subscription channels on FreeView for free? I would put up with the poor programming then.

Hi, I never said I own the box, But I have a Mysky decoder for which you have to pay for, also once again, I am a tax payer and so part own TVNZ, The channels are advert free so they are being paid from charter funding, my tax Dollars. So I should have a right to that content, from which ever medium I choose, not just from a FreeView box at a cost of $200+. Being from the UK, from my experience Digital TV’s will be sold soon and then it does not matter, well at least for the 70% of us lucky to live in towns. it is a content issue, I, as all tax payers own that content.

Hi, No because TVNZ is Government owned, as well as Kordia for that matter. May I add everyone keeps mixing TVNZ, TV3 and C4 etc. with FreeView. FreeView is just the consortium, not the end user product. being Tax funded TVNZ, it has to comply with the charter and I am sure, that I and the other 700000 of us Sky customers are not excluded in the charter.

Hi, I’m sorry but once again it is being confused, FreeView is a means of providing content for which I as a tax payer, as all tax payers are subsidising, I have a digibox capable of receiving all transmissions, just that TVNZ has decided it is now a commercial arm of decoder companies. TVNZ does not own FreeView it is just a partner and as such you have to detach the two, I have already paid via tax for TVNZ to by content, being the fact they made a loss, also yes they will be showing a lot of old reruns, for which all tax payers before me paid for. if TVNZ own the digibox companies I could see a point of view, I would still have the same thoughts on the matter but at least they would have an argument. This is why the SOE model does not work because you cannot run a state broadcaster but call it commercial. I own part of the company, I own a DVB-S capable digibox and I am included in the charter. I Guess alot of you have not thought about this but what if TVNZ decides it will not let its broacasts through a certain TV manufacurer with a built in DVB-T? they can’t so why not a Sky digibox.

Hi, Also I must apologise I though I read that NZ had a TVNZ Licence Fee, my mistake, then if all funding came only from commercials from day one then I suppose TVNZ does own all content through self funding. This admission still does not change my opinion though.

Hi, Just to make the point as simple as possibe from my personnel view, people here seem to be more worried about the carrier than the content, Freeview is just a means of delivering the content, as is Sky, all I want is the content I part own via a shareholding in the Government, SOE or Crown Owned Company which ever term suits. from which ever angle you look at it, TVNZ is. All I want, is the content that I am entitled too via the charter funding, for free. Freeview should be free, not $250+ from Dick Smiths. I own a Digibox able to decode ‘Freeview’. So I should be able to receive it for free.

The Government owns Air New Zealand. I’d prefer they give me free airfares than give Murdoch more channels to make a profit on. Oh, and Dick Smith has official Freeview boxes for under $200

Hmm, if TV3 broadcasts some extra channels on its other channel spaces on Freeview, but does not allow it on Sky, you would not be so concerned? TV3 receives a large pool of Government funding also (even more than Sky’s Prime).

What if they were simulcast on the Internet? Would that be a good compromise?

TVNZ is Government owned, but over 90% funded through adverts. The charter funding was around $15 million (is that 5 weeks of Shortland Street?). TVNZ has made the first loss in its history last year, and previously was returning a dividend to the Government.

While they may be getting heaps more funding for TVNZ6 and 7 to make them advert free (and with the express purpose of helping to establish Freeview), why should that be used to prop up Sky’s profits? Why doesn’t Sky just make some of its channels advert free and then everyone would be happy? Why all of the fuss about 2 TV channels when Sky has 15 or so other channels in the standard package?

Why doesn’t Sky just broadcast all of the free-to-air channels unencrypted for all to see? Then perhaps TVNZ might relent, and let them broadcast TVNZ6, although probably with adverts added.

Hi, To Richard, no comment, the Air New Zealand angle was a good try, but they do not tell Air New Zealand that they have to make flight’s on a non commercial route, like ‘Afghanistan’ 3 times daily because they feel it is in the countries best interest, like the charter. also TV3 is purely commercial so I have no influence, except when I was shareholder. Take a look at the BBC, it is fully Licence Fee funded, though can sell it’s programming comercially, it has grown since the UK went Digital, in fact some would say it was the best thing to happen to the BBC. They now have 8 TV channels and countless radio stations, when only 6 years ago they had 2 channels and 6 nationwide radio stations. Sky Digital has 400 channels and it has not hurt the FTA channels at all, to make the point BskyB brought a 17% stake in ITV. and guess what all FTA channels are on Sky UK but in the beginning ITV did not and lost Millions in advertising, so joined very soon after. TV has changed and all the old state broadcasters need to as well, yes Freeview has it’s place but as a complinentary system.

Well, we don’t want a licence fee here. On a population basis, shouldn’t the BBC have 60 channels to be as successful as TVNZ?

Besides, it is unfair to compare the BBC with TVNZ. TVNZ and the other NZ channels act ethically and do not make up the news, or indeed manipulate game shows to give prizes to relatives of their employees like the BBC.

BBC charges a licence fee of $385, TVNZ charges a licence fee of $0 (and can’t legally charge for one). In 2006 they paid the Government a dividend of $M85 and received about 30M in Government funding, in 2005 they paid $48M but got $25M, and in 2004 paid $98M, but got 23. Last year they got $33M in funding (of which the Charter funding was $15M for special interest programmes) but paid no dividend (I think). So, after paying the government a dividend since the Charter was introduced, TVNZ has returned more money to the Government than it has received (and of course, has paid tax as well).

In the years before that they paid a dividend of $3M, $8M, $17M, $136M, $31M, and $21M, but got an average of $12M in contestable government funding.

So, far from being a drain, over the last 10 years they have paid almost $450M in dividends to the Government, but received only $183M in funding, the majority of which has been contestable between FTA channels. They, of course, like everyone else, have paid taxes to the government as well.

In other words, your taxes have not contributed at all, and there is no licence fee

However, they have been granted an additional $79M over the next 6 years for TVNZ6 and 7 (or about $13M per annum).

Still no net drain though.

By hokey, New Zealand. Well, I guess after looking at the promos I can see why everyone wants it on Sky. Even the repeats look great. Could do without It’s in the Bag, but the rest looks great.

Jim Mora has been digging in and created a cartoon about Massey Ferguson! Pity it is on too early in the day.

All sorts of science series, docos, dramas, and repeats. Looks like a cross between TV One, UKTV, Sky Movies 2, Cartoon Network, and the Documentary Channel.

I am sure sooner or later it will be available on Sky.

If TVNZ loses the Olympics or the Commonwealth Games, there will hardly be any sport left on free-to-air (except the basketball on Maori).

Sounds to me like they are both just being petty.

Put TVNZ6 & TVNZ7 on Sky and put Prime & Vibe (Sky’s new entertainment channel should could have easily been called sky 2) on freeview.

Sounds like a fair swap to me!

Hi, That is not strictly true, most countries have a must carry clause, where all free to Air, have to be shown, the only cost is the FTA has to pay to be added to the EPG of the pay tv provider (who own the EPG). It should be the same here, maybe if National gets in it will, as keeping TVNZ vs Sky suits a left wing Government.

If these two channels are ad free then how come progams (at least on tv6 are the same length as they were on commercial?

For example:
It’s in the bag 6:00 – 6:30
Mercy Peak 9:30 – 10:30 and so on….

These are commercial length timeslots.

I think ALL channels labelled “free-to-air” should be available on ALL platforms.

However I have another solution. As happened with the two cricket tests, some of the best Prime content (like their sports coverage and Doctor Who for example) should be re-aired on Stratos under some sort of “Prime on Stratos” label so that Prime can reach a wider audience and Freeview viewers don’t have to miss out on the best they have to offer.