The UK Babe Channels Forum

ok people its been nearly a month since the launch of babestation on freeview well sure its not up to party girl standards yet will it get up to them probably not the problem i see with the current set up is the sky viewers has the better performances from the babes in the 9:00 to 12:00 slots so when they see the show at 12:00 they will be thinking wow must be freeview time lets get the hell out here thus leaving the freeviewers with an below par performance from the babes leaving people dissappointed. thankfully i watch tvalways before the sky to freeview switchover. And partyland is at the same level of performance as babestation already and they have had a couple of months advantage so i can see babestation overtaking partyland in performance stakes sooner rather then later, dissapointment will be short lived and people will say woo party girls is back camilla has her baby oil and partyland will thus have to up there game.

optimism is a good thing

Deb x Wrote:This got me thinking - could it be an overall Cellcast strategy to make the channels more niche? What if they're deliberately pitching BSFreeview right between PP and PartyLand in terms of content?
They've got three different and specific levels and audiences; arguably maximum appeal, overall - the viewer can pick what level they want...?

If there’s any truth in that, they must have at least five different specific levels, because all their Sky output is stronger than any of their Freeview output and Sex Station is stronger than Babestation. I don’t buy it.

Why do they feel the need to show material on Freeview that is any different from what they show on Sky? The girls on Partyland are the same as appear on Sex Station and the girls on Party People 3am Show are the same as appear on Babestation 1 & 2. So they have three channels going out on Sky and three channels available on Freeview. Somebody please tell me why they can’t just simplify the whole thing and show the same three channels on both platforms.

Apart from anything else, as well as avoiding all this aggro, it would be CHEAPER for them to do it that way.

G@Z! Wrote:And partyland is at the same level of performance as babestation already

I can’t agree with that. Partyland is nowhere near as strong as what I’ve seen of the Sky version of Babestation on TVAlways and the videos posted in this forum. The girls just lounge around in pretty poses with no attempt at any kind of erotic, sexy or suggestive movement. The whole Freeview operation is a ridiculously dumbed down shadow of what is available on Sky.

Sudden thought: Rupert Murdoch couldn’t be paying them a backhander, could he? No, silly me! What a foolish thought, he’s a straightforward, honest businessman, isn’t he?

i meant freeview wise this is the freeview section isn't it so i'm comparing partland freeview with babestation freeview

vila Wrote:If there’s any truth in that, they must have at least five different specific levels, because all their Sky output is stronger than any of their Freeview output and Sex Station is stronger than Babestation. I don’t buy it.

Sorry - I wasn't clear. I was confining the 'levels' to freeview alone - i.e. three channels, each with a different level of content strength.
To be honest, I'm not completely convinced by my own argument - I was just throwing the idea out there as a possibility.


The more I read about this the more I'm convinced that the Freeview channels are just some kind of 'Sky lite'

G@Z! Wrote:i meant freeview wise this is the freeview section isn't it so i'm comparing partland freeview with babestation freeview

Deb x Wrote:Sorry - I wasn't clear. I was confining the 'levels' to freeview alone - i.e. three channels, each with a different level of content strength.

Well that’s a bit odd – the whole debate about the Freeview content is based on comparison with the Sky output from the same broadcaster and that’s what I’m talking about.

Quote:The more I read about this the more I'm convinced that the Freeview channels are just some kind of 'Sky lite'

Dunno about that, but my take would start with the same letter and finish with the same three!


Edit:

@G@Z!: I think I can see what you were getting at now - that the channel would move towards and eventually reach PG standard and we'd at least be back to where we left off. I don't think that's enough and anyway I don't think it looks like happening. One or two of the girls had started to push a little but last night they were knocked back quite decisively.

vila Wrote:Well that’s a bit odd – the whole debate about the Freeview content is based on comparison with the Sky output from the same broadcaster and that’s what I’m talking about.

Ah - I think we've been discussing at cross-purposes, then - I was writing more from the perspective of someone who (normally) only has Freeview...and comparing the three (free) channels primarily within that context.

We're not just discussing at cross purposes, we're posting at cross purposes! See above.

Edit: I also have only Freeview - that's why I get so pissed off when I see what the Sky viewers get!!!

lol vila - I find you a very confusing person, but you do make some interesting points
I don't mind that Freeview is 'tamer' - doesn't bother me at all, really. I would like it if they'd put at least one of the shows on a bit earlier, though.

Confusing? Moi? I'm an open book!