Elite TV / Studio 66 - General Chat & Discussion

No Katie or Sasha on the stream

Nobody in the control room? Must be preoccupied with something.

(29-11-2012 12:32 )jimmyt73 Wrote:  ...
or they could change one of the existing channels into a rival for bsx
...

But BSX is on freeview only, and Studio66 don't have a freeview channel (and the general consensus seems to be that it would be economically unviable to run this kind of channel on Sky) so it's a non-starter.

RLC are probably in a better position to do such a thing, they already have a freeview channel, and have access to an archive of playboy material to fill the schedule with alongside live shows. The fact they don't do it probably says a lot about the economic viability compared to running a standard phone channel.

(01-12-2012 10:26 )munch1917 Wrote:  

(29-11-2012 12:32 )jimmyt73 Wrote:  ...
or they could change one of the existing channels into a rival for bsx
...

But BSX is on freeview only, and Studio66 don't have a freeview channel (and the general consensus seems to be that it would be economically unviable to run this kind of channel on Sky) so it's a non-starter.

RLC are probably in a better position to do such a thing, they already have a freeview channel, and have access to an archive of playboy material to fill the schedule with alongside live shows. The fact they don't do it probably says a lot about the economic viability compared to running a standard phone channel.

I don't get what you mean when you say "economically unviable to run this kind of channel on Sky" why is it any different to freeview ? , there is currently 19 encrypted pay per view/subscription adult channels on Sky and 2 on Freeview (TVX and BSX). So that suggests to me that it is cheaper overall to run encrypted channels on Sky than Freeview, At present non of the Sky encrypted channels are showing live material, but the cost of encryption, air time, EPG slots etc is the same for a live show as it is for showing pre recorded films, when BSX/Xtreme first started up they showed no live segments, it just showed recorded films, as time went by they started doing a few short live segments, they now do just under 3 hours, so presumably they have found that live shows are a bigger draw revenue wise than just showing films, my guess is Cellcast didn't want to compete with 19 other channels on Sky, some of which are better value for money than them , so decided to put the BSX show on freeview were they have only one channel to compete with .
RLC looks to have finished on freeview any way , so that's a non starter, STD 66 currently hold a freeview licence that they renewed on the 30th of October this year by the way .
After saying all that if the channels thought that it would be a good idea to do a few hours a night of live encrypted stuff then surely they would already be doing it , but BS clearly think it's a good idea .

(01-12-2012 11:32 )mr mystery Wrote:  I don't get what you mean when you say "economically unviable to run this kind of channel on Sky" why is it any different to freeview ?
...

There has been much discussion about why is BSX on freeview only, not on Sky. As I recall, one part of the argument was that Sky probably charge too much for running an encrypted channel.
I have no idea if that is actually correct, but it has been mentioned several times in that argument by people more knowledgeable then me, so I am assuming there is some substance to it.

One example :

http://www.babeshows.co.uk/showthread.ph...#pid807634

Yes just checked the link and dirk362 says it costs between 14k and 65k for a encrypted channel, some channels actually pay more in Ofcom fines than that by the way, but he doesn't say Sky costs more than freeview, I have not seen it mentioned anywhere that freeview encryption costs less than Sky, my own opinion is that to run a encrypted channel on Sky is possibly overall cheaper than on freeview.
That debate was concerning BS putting BS Xtreme on Sky as well as freeview, so BS would then have to purchase a new channel, licence, Sky EPG slot and encryption to show what they are already showing and paying for on freeview, like i said my view is that BS decided on putting BSX/Xtreme on freeview because it has less competition and also freeview is a larger viewing platform than Sky , plus many Sky viewers have freeview as well so it's possibly the best option if you want to maximise the most possible subscribers .

I personally would like to see Elite/STD 66 or another channel try a few hours of encryption to see how it goes, to start with they could just use a channel from TVX/Red Hot or Playboy that is already encrypted, they could just show live stuff say from 9pm - 11pm or 10pm -12pam and then let the channel show it's own recorded films , Elite used to have a good relation ship with TVX at one time so maybe they could come to a agreement .

As noted in the RLC thread, RLC were off the air on freeview last night and it looks as if a midnight - 6.00am slot is up for grabs to the highest bidder.

The last time S66 (Elite) were on freeview they took over the old Bangbabes slot but that was only 01.00 - 04.00 and probably uneconomical which is why they gave it up.

A six hour slot with a midnight start is another proposition entirely and with the digital switchover complete there is a very big potential audience out there.

Wouldn't be suprised to see a bid!

As far as I'm concerned I reckon every channel on the SKY EPG should have an encrpted channel. To hell with this freeview only option. Back in the day we had TX Callgirls, LiveXXX and SportXXX so why not something similar now.

There is an obvious gap in the market. And I'm more than sure Studio66 has the right babes to do it. Caty Cole and Sophia Knight spring to mind here.

Don't kid yourself into thinking that none of the babes would be prepared to go that bit further if given the opportunity. At the end of the day they are glamour models and all have done an explicit shoot at some time.

(01-12-2012 18:24 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  ...
Don't kid yourself into thinking that none of the babes would be prepared to go that bit further if given the opportunity. At the end of the day they are glamour models and all have done an explicit shoot at some time.

Yes, many have done harder stuff in the past, but doesn't mean they choose to do it now, or may have done photoshoots, but not feel comfortable doing it on live tv (many of the girls appearing on babestations channel apparently aren't going full frontal).
Besides, they already have a web show where the girls can go further, but reading some of the posts about that, doesn't sound like it is living up to peoples expectations, why would an encrypted channel be any different.

(01-12-2012 18:24 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  As far as I'm concerned I reckon every channel on the SKY EPG should have an encrpted channel.

I agree with you in principle but then freesat/FTA viewers wouldn't be able to watch the channels.

Not everybody wants to be forced into having to sign up to Sky's bullying monopoly of satellite provision in this country.

(01-12-2012 18:24 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  Don't kid yourself into thinking that none of the babes would be prepared to go that bit further if given the opportunity. At the end of the day they are glamour models and all have done an explicit shoot at some time.

Can you pass all these shoots onto me, I'd be very much interested in seeing them