No loss to me as with the night of the launch.. i had numerous errors with 3 different mobiles i used to retrieve my P.I.N ... All fones 18 activated, I gave up after 2am altho I did get a PM from BS admin. And after a few negative views i did not bother afterwards and was certainly not gonna pay for crap!
So i wish i could say sorry too losing the channel but i have not experienced it to comment.
(01-05-2010 20:41 )Josh187 Wrote: [ -> ]They certainly are not scraping the channel, as they continue to advertise it multiple times every night (which is very annoying)
Your argument is devoid of logic. Of course they will advertise the channel so long as it's still broadcasting. Why wouldn't they?
I'd be surprised if Babestation Xtreme was still broadcasting in 2 weeks time.
(01-05-2010 21:23 )aaron Wrote: [ -> ] (01-05-2010 20:11 )sweetsugar007 Wrote: [ -> ]not the best product.
sweetsugar007 is obviously a master of the understatement!
Lol! Just trying to be diplomatic!!
(01-05-2010 21:31 )cosmonaut Wrote: [ -> ] (01-05-2010 20:41 )Josh187 Wrote: [ -> ]They certainly are not scraping the channel, as they continue to advertise it multiple times every night (which is very annoying)
Your argument is devoid of logic. Of course they will advertise the channel so long as it's still broadcasting. Why wouldn't they?
I'd be surprised if Babestation Xtreme was still broadcasting in 2 weeks time.
It wasn't an argument, it was a statement of fact. I know they are going to continue to advertise, they want to get more and more people to buy into this. I just don't like how much they advertise something that really isn't good at all, they hype up and pass it off as the greatest thing ever, when in fact the show is terrible (judging by the reviews on here).The annoying part is they interrupt our Babestation viewing, and take us away from the babes we want to watch, by advertising this multiple times every night it.
(01-05-2010 19:20 )admiral decker Wrote: [ -> ]If Sky channels can be successful by being in 32% of homes, why can't Freeview channels be sucessful when you admit they are in more homes than Sky?
I would guess that the Sky
subscriber is more inclined to pay for a premium service, as they are already paying a premium for their standard viewing.
(01-05-2010 23:20 )vostok 1 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-05-2010 19:20 )admiral decker Wrote: [ -> ]If Sky channels can be successful by being in 32% of homes, why can't Freeview channels be sucessful when you admit they are in more homes than Sky?
I would guess that the Sky subscriber is more inclined to pay for a premium service, as they are already paying a premium for their standard viewing.
but doesn't everyone in this S.H. of a country pay for a TV license, sky subscribers just pay a second premium (notice i said subscribers, there are probably equal numbers who don't subscribe, but can still view babe channels, and anything remotely worthwhile (as if, tv sucks)
and onto the fee & content issues, i agree with what has been said about £5 a night, far too much, for that i would like a whole new type of porn, that is better than anything ever. the fee on its own sounds bad enough, but airing repeats within days of opening is a dire state to be in, surely in the massive hype build up they remembered to make material for the show...didn't they? or were they too busy playing cyber pimp?
now, i'm off back to my corner...
(02-05-2010 00:17 )kimosabi Wrote: [ -> ] (01-05-2010 23:20 )vostok 1 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-05-2010 19:20 )admiral decker Wrote: [ -> ]If Sky channels can be successful by being in 32% of homes, why can't Freeview channels be sucessful when you admit they are in more homes than Sky?
I would guess that the Sky subscriber is more inclined to pay for a premium service, as they are already paying a premium for their standard viewing.
but doesn't everyone in this S.H. of a country pay for a TV license, sky subscribers just pay a second premium (notice i said subscribers, there are probably equal numbers who don't subscribe, but can still view babe channels, and anything remotely worthwhile (as if, tv sucks)
and onto the fee & content issues, i agree with what has been said about £5 a night, far too much, for that i would like a whole new type of porn, that is better than anything ever. the fee on its own sounds bad enough, but airing repeats within days of opening is a dire state to be in, surely in the massive hype build up they remembered to make material for the show...didn't they? or were they too busy playing cyber pimp?
now, i'm off back to my corner...
If you follow Admiral Decker's logic or probably lack of it he is suggesting that the Freeview community can create enough demand for this service on its own. However it will die on its arse if it doesn't change its pricing policy quickly if you watch it for one week then it will cost £35 or £140 for a month which is the annual subscription plus £25 change for 4 channels of Television X
(02-05-2010 05:58 )sweetsugar007 Wrote: [ -> ]However it will die on its arse if it doesn't change its pricing policy quickly
The channel won't die on its arse, because it has died already. You seem to be one of the few people who haven't noticed that yet. Are you expecting to be still broadcasting in say 2 weeks time?
(02-05-2010 05:58 )sweetsugar007 Wrote: [ -> ]If you follow Admiral Decker's logic or probably lack of it he is suggesting that the Freeview community can create enough demand for this service on its own.
Yes that is what he is suggesting and he's almost certainly correct. There were adult channels on Sky even in the days when only 10% of homes had Sky. The current Freeview audience is huge in comparison.
