Xpanded tv - General Chat & Discussion

Bloody hell their webstream is absolutely terrible, not sure if it's even worth recording to be honest. The pixels......my eyes o_O

(02-07-2015 20:34 )m100 Wrote:  SNIP

...the north korea of the babechannels...

SNIP

^

Like that one!

(02-07-2015 22:11 )pdc200 Wrote:  Bloody hell their webstream is absolutely terrible, not sure if it's even worth recording to be honest. The pixels......my eyes o_O

I thought Xpanded was bad, but the 'new' PBTV? Shocking!

Hi,
anybody watching Louise Porter on webcam? Would love to know if her levels are now more revealing? :-) I would like to watch but seems that xpanded tv is blocking my country and when i use proxy flash is not working :-( and i was ready to buy some credits and watch her.

(02-07-2015 22:28 )Censorship :-( Wrote:  

(02-07-2015 22:11 )pdc200 Wrote:  Bloody hell their webstream is absolutely terrible, not sure if it's even worth recording to be honest. The pixels......my eyes o_O

I thought Xpanded was bad, but the 'new' PBTV? Shocking!

So I wasn't the only one who noticed that the "new" stream is actually more shite than the current Xpanded one.

The OSG'S are quite reasonable on this channel, and the picture quality (on Sky) doesn't particularly look out of place in a bad way either.They have some great babes too it's just these fecking comfy beds isn't it?
Since they seem intent on trying to conquer the 900's, I was rather hoping they might push the boat out and attempt to become a proper channel with actual sets for the girls to work with.
It would appear not, and we continue to remain stagnant and refuse to acknowledge the final piece of the jigsaw.

Pity.

Can anybody explain why the Sky picture quality on these channels have always looked to me, as though you were using a lower setting than standard quality when using a DVD recorder.

Also are they intending to make use of all four channels at some stage.

Awful picture quality on the webstream us freeviewers have been screwed over

(02-07-2015 23:27 )Joey 27 Wrote:  Awful picture quality on the webstream us freeviewers have been screwed over

Xpanded has had awful picture quality since launch and even if you try to mention it on their forum you either get banned or a patronising reply like "Evolution not revolution".

Hopefully the other slots can be taken over by new company or Redlight.

I honestly don't understand why a massive company like Playboy would go into business with a shoddy excuse like Xpanded.

(02-07-2015 23:00 )Bandwagon Wrote:  The OSG'S are quite reasonable on this channel, and the picture quality (on Sky) doesn't particularly look out of place in a bad way either.They have some great babes too it's just these fecking comfy beds isn't it?
Since they seem intent on trying to conquer the 900's, I was rather hoping they might push the boat out and attempt to become a proper channel with actual sets for the girls to work with.
It would appear not, and we continue to remain stagnant and refuse to acknowledge the final piece of the jigsaw.

Pity.

I hope people will have patience. They have acquired the PBTV brand but are producing the shows to that standard will take time. Here's a post from the day after RLC started:

(06-10-2010 21:23 )Chilly Wrote:  

(06-10-2010 20:02 )cathybarry Wrote:  Hope you are enjoying the new channel

Not really. Rubbish graphics, average picture quality, and some of the girls look like they've seen better days (but then, haven't we all). Still, it's early days yet, so hopefully it will get better in time.

Sound familiar? And of course, things did get better in time.

As I've said repeatedly (and at the risk of being branded a fanboi), xxXpanded has been going strong for years as a phone sex, then phone sex + content, then phone sex + content + webcam, then phone sex + content + webcam + TV business.

It has been carefully managed and they have brought in some decent talent over the time both on the TV and phones - retaining many unlike the BS/RLC/S66/whatevercompetitorisntoutofbusinessthisweek merrygoround, all the while keeping prices reasonable. They have other features which competitors don't like reward credits you earn against a registered phone number which can be used on the site for free calls / webcamming - and Stream2Studio so the girls can see you while you call the TV channel.

Do things move slowly? Absolutely but that clearly isn't a bad thing since it has always improved and never really got worse.

I reckon in a month or two the PBTV channels will be established 'premium' channels while they retain xpanded TV as the 'budget' channel which can give new girls an entry level before moving on to PB channels.

Will there be day shows? Most likely - the PBTV website has a recruiting page for models and day shows is an option on it. Will they have new sets? Hopefully. But the deal has only been done for about a month - they're trying to run the existing station and introduce a top quality channel over and above from the same place. It can't be logistically easy for them.

(02-07-2015 23:46 )trax Wrote:  

(02-07-2015 23:27 )Joey 27 Wrote:  Awful picture quality on the webstream us freeviewers have been screwed over

Xpanded has had awful picture quality since launch and even if you try to mention it on their forum you either get banned or a patronising reply like "Evolution not revolution".

Hopefully the other slots can be taken over by new company or Redlight.

I honestly don't understand why a massive company like Playboy would go into business with a shoddy excuse like Xpanded.

Its funny people say this... I've been a site user for about 7 or 8 years now, and have been on their forum since it was brought in - one of many gradual improvements made. I have been critical as have many other regs there who have never been banned.

The forum mods / website designers and team are separate from the TV production arm of the business who don't take much to do on the forums right now. Therefore any messages from viewers to and from the producers are second hand. That isn't ideal but the forum mods do usually take any reasonable suggestions and pass it on to them.

FWIW I do agree that the picture quality on the TV channels and on the streams of those channels could be better. Some of the webcam-only girls streams are perfectly fine and better than competitors.

They are a small team, but in the last few months they've made some decent strides with the website making it mobile compatible and IIRC they have already or will be making it work on iOS / non Flash OSs. A lot of feedback from site users was given and acted upon over a few weeks and it is now looking pretty good.

There is nothing to suggest the streaming video quality won't improve in time. If the channels they now operate are profitable this could be re-invested and help the business grow and improve as it has done steadily over the past 10 years.

Give it time.