Babestation - General Chat & Discussion

(23-08-2010 17:56 )mrmann Wrote:  It's been more than four nights! Camilla is nude half of the time she's on, and it's been just after ten on many occasions I believe, and Jada was nude at exactly ten, a couple of days ago. I also noticed and appreciated the breasts on full display at 9:15 onward a few nights ago, but it seems strange that they'd frequently follow a no full nudity rule until midnight, even though they are allowed to. Mini rant over

I was referring to Freeview since that was what you specifically asked about. The point being that although a girl might be nude just after 10pm on SKY, her pants will be back on by the time Freeview starts at 11pm (hence my comment about Jada last night). Camilla herself spelled it out a few nights back. She kept her pants on throughout BS's 11pm-midnight session on Ch 96 but when BS opened on Ch 94 at midnight she said "It's midnight and that means I get naked."

(23-08-2010 21:30 )vila Wrote:  

(23-08-2010 17:56 )mrmann Wrote:  It's been more than four nights! Camilla is nude half of the time she's on, and it's been just after ten on many occasions I believe, and Jada was nude at exactly ten, a couple of days ago. I also noticed and appreciated the breasts on full display at 9:15 onward a few nights ago, but it seems strange that they'd frequently follow a no full nudity rule until midnight, even though they are allowed to. Mini rant over

I was referring to Freeview since that was what you specifically asked about. The point being that although a girl might be nude just after 10pm on SKY, her pants will be back on by the time Freeview starts at 11pm (hence my comment about Jada last night). Camilla herself spelled it out a few nights back. She kept her pants on throughout BS's 11pm-midnight session on Ch 96 but when BS opened on Ch 94 at midnight she said "It's midnight and that means I get naked."

That's cool. I still don't get the point in putting them back on at 11, as it's past the watershed time, and they don't need to play it safe.

(24-08-2010 22:17 )mrmann Wrote:  That's cool. I still don't get the point in putting them back on at 11, as it's past the watershed time, and they don't need to play it safe.

At the risk of sending everyone dizzy, the point is that 11pm is when BS1 starts on Freeview and, for reasons known only in the deepest recesses of Cellcast Command, they don't allow nudity before midnight on Freeview except on those few occasions when they specially sanction it.

Interesting.

(25-08-2010 11:43 )mr mystery Wrote:  I thought now that Cellcast are the parent company and sole licence holder of the channel and it is no longer leased from channel 5 that the content would be the same as the other channels but sadly it wasn't and i ended up being disappointed with the show yet again .

When did this happen? According to Ofcom's final report on the Participation TV Consultation, Ch 97 is still a sub-let from Channel Five. (Channel Five strongly objected to the original plan to take the babe shows off Freeview completely because of the loss of revenue that would result.)

(25-08-2010 11:43 )mr mystery Wrote:  I wonder why the show is still so tame , "Babestation" used to say it was because they leased it from another company and they had to put out the content that this other company wanted .

I don't think they ever said that - it's just what some of us have assumed as it seems to be the only logical explanation.

(25-08-2010 13:47 )vila Wrote:  

(25-08-2010 11:43 )mr mystery Wrote:  I thought now that Cellcast are the parent company and sole licence holder of the channel and it is no longer leased from channel 5 that the content would be the same as the other channels but sadly it wasn't and i ended up being disappointed with the show yet again .

When did this happen? According to Ofcom's final report on the Participation TV Consultation, Ch 97 is still a sub-let from Channel Five. (Channel Five strongly objected to the origial plan to take the babe shows off Freeview completely because of the loss of revenue that would result.)

(25-08-2010 11:43 )mr mystery Wrote:  I wonder why the show is still so tame , "Babestation" used to say it was because they leased it from another company and they had to put out the content that this other company wanted .

I don't think they ever said that - it's just what some of us have assumed as it seems to be the only logical explanation.

Babestation definitely said on this forum that they leased one of their babe channels from another company (channel 5) so that shows content was subject to what the owner/ licence holder wanted to show . All the info you require about channel 97 Partyland now being owned and licenced by Cellcast is on the broadcasting regulations part of this forum and titled Partyland licence transfer .

(25-08-2010 16:09 )mr mystery Wrote:  Babestation definitely said on this forum that they leased one of their babe channels from another company (channel 5) so that shows content was subject to what the owner/ licence holder wanted to show.

Could you post a link? When I mentioned it to 'babestation' he replied:

(08-07-2010 16:02 )babestation Wrote:  its not my place (or yours really) to speak about our licenses

(25-08-2010 16:09 )mr mystery Wrote:  All the info you require about channel 97 Partyland now being owned and licenced by Cellcast is on the broadcasting regulations part of this forum and titled Partyland licence transfer .

Thanks. I seem to have a mental block on monitoring that section. Maybe because there's an awful lot of dross to sift through.

For some reason licence info doesn't seem to be included in Ofcom's e-mail updates.

(25-08-2010 16:46 )vila Wrote:  [quote='mr mystery' pid='603371' dateline='1282748942']
Babestation definitely said on this forum that they leased one of their babe channels from another company (channel 5) so that shows content was subject to what the owner/ licence holder wanted to show.

Could you post a link? When I mentioned it to 'babestation' he replied:

(08-07-2010 16:02 )babestation Wrote:  its not my place (or yours really) to speak about our licenses

I can't remember were about on the Babestation section of this forum that Babestation posted this , it may have been on this thread or the Sky v freeview moaning thread , it was a few months ago but i am 100% certain they said this or words to that effect .

It definitely wasn't in the Sky vs Freeview moaning thread - that's where the reply I've quoted comes from. I have long held the theory that Channel Five's ownership of FV Ch 97 is the cause of its tame content and have striven to obtain confirmation of this, but without success. I'm certain I would remember if anything had been posted in the Babestation section to confirm it. Are you sure you're not recalling one of my many posts on the subject?

I have definitely read it some were but can't for the life of me remember were , it may have been on one of the girls own section were some one was mentioning that she was naked on partyland before 1am but had to cover up when the show is transmitted on freeview or even on one of the last nights review threads , i just can't remember it was some time ago . PS i wonder if Cellcast getting their own licence for Partylad has got something to do with channel 5 getting new owners , some one on this forum posted that Portland Enterprises the company that own TVX is supposed to be trying to or as already purchased channel 5 .