Cannot unnderstand the complaints about the Sky EPG being in a graveyard. Unless you are so dumb you don't know how to use it, which means you're always stuck on BBC 1 watching Eastenders & Strictly.
As for the channel being too restricted, well I would have thought that would be obvious as it's their official launch night. After all if they went OTT on their 1st night Ofscum would be down on them very quickly, and they wouldn't last long. You have to remember it's only BS that seem to get away with flouting the restrictions.
Myself I was very pleased with what I saw, although I must confess that I didn't see much of it as I spent most of the night watching another channel. I see no reason why they shouldn't be around for a long time, and if they're successful they might even decide to get a 2nd TV channel in the future. All we can do is wait and see.
Finally Ed Milliband, isn't he one of the stars of the new Teletubbies TV series
I always expect to be a minority of one in my posts.
People do seem to post with rose-tinted glasses and not see the deeper issues.
One point I was trying to make went over the heads of everyone. So, for the sake of clarity, I will state it again. Where was even the discreet promotion of the web service from the Sky channel last night ? There is little point on putting girls on webstreams if your casual viewer has no way to find them.
I guess they removed the higher bitrate stream to accommodate the attempt on having every available stream active. Yet even then the server could not cope. They had not, as far as I know, tried previously running all the streams in an active envoirement so to experiment on, for them, a very important night really is rolling the dice.
For the casual viewer, even if they found it, the website experience might well persuade them to give the service a wide berth.
DB83 - excellent post
Getting people onto the webstream is the perennial problem; no matter how quietly they might try and advertise they are always in danger of Ofcom finding out. We know a few companies have a track record of grassing competitors up.
Problem is all the normal routes to advertise (social media) are probably exactly the things the people that don't know about the webstreams also don't use
I think they just have to take a hit on low usage in the early days; keep rotating the girls, really make the webstreams something to watch and get a buzz going. I think they need to talk some of the girls to push the envelope of what they have previously done to start getting the trade across; not my cup of tea at all but Louise Porter (panties on the way down and a bit of 2-4-1 interaction) is exactly the kind of step up they need from the girls.
Problem is whether they can convince the girls (and give them a pay structure to support it as calls will be low to start with) and have the gumption to stick with it. MFC didn't become the huge cam site it now is overnight. I always laugh when I see "babeshow" and "strategy" in the same sentence (note the interview with the babestation guy that said he has a strategy meeting every week - if you have a strategy you don't need to meet every week to discuss it; that's the point of the pesky things!!!) but they need to be in this for the long haul or they will die off quite quickly.
I thought it had been established that the website can't be advertised directly on the TV feed due to Ofcom rules. (BS1 apparently get/got away with it due to being under a different regulator IIRC.) But yes they are assuming a little intelligence in their fellow man in knowing where the "OPT2" is to be found. Don't see they can do any different atm.
Launch night was pretty good TV wise I thought. Lots of energy and variety. Lack of full nude doesn't bother me one bit. I'd rather see all angles in a thong than side nakedness or that silly cross legged i need a piss look any day.
The web problems were disappointing particularly as they were entirely predictable (look back on stream comments on this thread for all the signs).Surely there is software that can test for load problems in advance? This issue always seems to catch people on the hop. At least Sin responded in the right way on the night with communication and the problems being address in a decent time. Other channels could learn from that.
Now just please don't compromise by dropping the HD altogether. It needs to return to help you stand above the others.
I am amused by all the comments supporting the sky show last night Maybe it was good if you like dom.
(18-04-2015 09:27 )iluvcathy Wrote: [ -> ]I see no reason why they shouldn't be around for a long time
Their wagebill would be the main reason, as they appear happy to forego profit in the short term, presumably in the pursuit of some long term goal (to buy up all the other channels?) The problem I can see is that surely losses can only be accepted for so long, unless they are really made of money, in which case they must be subject to fairly immediate financial pressures. Of course they could already be negotiating for another channel and what we're seeing at the moment isn't the full picture of their immediate plans.
DB83 you know they are not allowed to talk of the website on sky due to ofcom rules, they did all they could to tell people by saying stuff like girl x is going somewhere to have fun go find her guys keep an eye on our twitter hint hint, to day kara was saying look at her twitter to find out what she was up to when not on air at noon ( days naughty hour) and where to see her,
Has the HD streaming gone for good then? Even during the day when there's only one girl on?
That would be a disappointment.
If I was working for one of the rival channels I'd be laughing at this supposed new competitor the other channels had some duos and changes of themes but at sin just roll out tired dom shows until 3am yes the streams are there but for those of us who have no access sin is a big let down all you have done is deny us the chance to watch the girls.
You need to clean your camera, i believe theres a cobweb on it.