 hm
@videotron.ca | reply to HeadSpinning
Re: VMedia fights mandatory channel carriage said by HeadSpinning:said by hm :said by Spare:By looking a vianettv web site, only cable in red zone no blue zone. So unless you team up with sombody in blue zone me no no go Lucy !
Vianet does FTTH and dsl, » fibre.vianet.ca/about/I've seen the name around in the past. Don't recall much about them though. They are Ontario only. Vianet.CA and VianetTV are different companies that are unrelated. This gets confusing, as Vianet.CA is a licensed BDU and offers TV service. Is it? I didn't notice this when I checked fast earlier. George said VMedia's was an affiliate of Vianettv. I know there is a vianet (ISP) so when I looked up their vianet's TV I got »vianet.tv/
So there's is a vianettv affiliated with Vmedia, and a vianet.tv owned by Vianet.ca (both Ontario).
How about that.
One for the lawyers 
lol I thought they were one in the same.
Seems too much like a coincidence to me. You sure Vianet.ca (or vianet.TV) isn't sub'ing this out to Vmedia who in turn is calling it VianetTV?
Maybe George will answer this one. Pretty funny coincidence. |
|
| Hi everybody, you are right about the similarity, to put it mildly, but it is sheer coincidence, and possible a slipup by regulators who approve corporate names, I don't know, it was before my time. Certainly they are in different markets both geographically and for the most part demographically, but the confusion is becoming irrelevant as we focus all our Canadian activities around the VMedia brand. |
|
hm
@videotron.ca | TY for clarifying the confusion on my part, George. |
|
| reply to GeorgeBurger
If these groups want mandatory channel carriage, perhaps the CRTC should require them to provide an over-the-air signal before making the BDUs carry them. At least that way, they would have to have some 'skin' in the game.
I watched Sun TV a few times when they did have an OTA signal in Ottawa. That Ezra Levant is a real douche... |
|
hm
@videotron.ca | reply to HeadSpinning
vianet.ca's vianet.tv | | 
Vmedia's vianet.com | |
said by HeadSpinning:Vianet.CA and VianetTV are different companies that are unrelated.
I'm still finding this hard to believe. I mean, it's possible... But...
Check the logo's even
Vianet.CA'a vianet.TV & Vmedia's VianetTV.com
They are practically the same.
I think Vmedia subs out Vianet.ca |
|
hm
@videotron.ca | Note to George on the logo post above.
I wrote that at like around 8:00-am, before you posted. It only got approved to show now. Safe to ignore it.
But the similarities are indeed funky!
No clue when this post will show, so in case you waste your time replying before this shows, sorry about that  |
|
 Spare
join:2004-04-14
min2p6 | reply to Guspaz
said by Guspaz:Huh? They do seem to have coverage in the blue zone (DSL from Bell).
Yes but blue cable would mean cogeco not blue dsl. And there's no freaking way I'm going back to a screaming sub 1 meg dsl connection |
|
| reply to hm
said by hm :said by HeadSpinning:Vianet.CA and VianetTV are different companies that are unrelated.
I'm still finding this hard to believe. I mean, it's possible... But... Check the logo's even Vianet.CA'a vianet.TV & Vmedia's VianetTV.com They are practically the same. I think Vmedia subs out Vianet.ca No. They are not. I know the guys at Vianet.CA, and although they do TV they are not related to the other Vianet. I've had this conversation with them.
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net |
|
|
|
 GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:19 | reply to GeorgeBurger
Errm, vianet.com is some business provider in France, so when people say "vmedia's vianet.com" I think they're talking about the wrong thing.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org |
|
| said by Guspaz:Errm, vianet.com is some business provider in France, so when people say "vmedia's vianet.com" I think they're talking about the wrong thing.
Ah, the picture caption. Typo. Rest is correct. Figured people would realize the typo between vianet.com and vianettv.com since vianettv.com is mentioned everywhere else... Guess not. |
|
| reply to old sparks
said by old sparks:If these groups want mandatory channel carriage, perhaps the CRTC should require them to provide an over-the-air signal before making the BDUs carry them. At least that way, they would have to have some 'skin' in the game.
I watched Sun TV a few times when they did have an OTA signal in Ottawa. That Ezra Levant is a real douche...
It is pretty hard to get spectrum for an OTA signal these days but you are totally on the right track. The fact is mandatory carriage is potentially very valuable if you have a service people want to watch because you are jammed into every cable, satellite and IPTV home, so you get instant penetration of over 10 millions homes. It takes a lot of gall to actually ask to be paid for being granted that privilege. |
|
| reply to old sparks
said by old sparks:If these groups want mandatory channel carriage, perhaps the CRTC should require them to provide an over-the-air signal before making the BDUs carry them. At least that way, they would have to have some 'skin' in the game.
I watched Sun TV a few times when they did have an OTA signal in Ottawa. That Ezra Levant is a real douche...
Hi, I just wanted to give credit where it is due I was thinking of your comment when I did the interview with MacLean's linked below. I hope people will have a look, it is I think a clear brief discussion about what is wrong with these mandatory carriage proceedings.
»www2.macleans.ca/2013/03/14/not-···channel/ |
|
hm
@videotron.ca | A few years ago Videotron was arguing with the CRTC about how much money the CRTC gets from them for Canadian Content. It was in the tens or hundreds of millions (I forget).
All these millions (not only from Videotron, but all the major players) are to help produce and promote Canadian content, apparently.
George (or anyone else), do you happen to know what the figures are that go to Canadian Content (or to the CRTC from the big players to pay Canadian Content) yearly? I was under the impression that there is a fund that they all have to give into yearly. Is this correct? Videotron raised quite the stink about it.
Another question, that 775-million dollars... Is that only to Starlight? ~111-million a year for 7 years?
I can't think of any Canadian Content I would watch regularly. Can anyone here think of any?
I can only think of one or two movies that were a decent watch ("Bon Cop, Bad Cop" likely being the best, and best known). How many times do they expect someone to watch that?
What else is there? Re-runs of Trailer park boys and Corner gas which is already on other channels that are not mandatory. |
|
hm
@videotron.ca | said by hm :A few years ago Videotron was arguing with the CRTC about how much money the CRTC gets from them for Canadian Content. It was in the tens or hundreds of millions (I forget).
All these millions (not only from Videotron, but all the major players) are to help produce and promote Canadian content, apparently.
George (or anyone else), do you happen to know what the figures are that go to Canadian Content (or to the CRTC from the big players to pay Canadian Content) yearly? I was under the impression that there is a fund that they all have to give into yearly. Is this correct? Videotron raised quite the stink about it.
The above fund was called the Canadian Television fund. Now called the Canadian Media fund. This was/is supposed to already support Canadian production & TV (and now "new media" as well). »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_T···ion_Fund
So seems to me they already get tens of millions of dollars.... I wonder how much they got and will continue to get from this fund, on top of this 775-million dollars from mandatory carriage.
Or am I confused here? |
|
 elwoodbluesElwood BluesPremium
join:2006-08-30
HarperLand | reply to GeorgeBurger
The point about "me' paying for Starlight to make movies and then they still own the rights to them, is a good one.
They can license those movies out to other broadcasters for cheap "canadian content" filler. |
|
MHunt
join:2013-03-05
Thornhill, ON
2 edits | reply to HeadSpinning
. |
|
MHunt
join:2013-03-05
Thornhill, ON | reply to GeorgeBurger
Just saw your response. Thanks.Please keep me posted. |
|
| said by MHunt:Just saw your response. Thanks.Please keep me posted.
Hi MHunt, sorry again for the delay, this launch process is both exciting and exhausting. We look good to go for March 27, and expect to be providing some advance detail about what we are offering before then, but the new website will offically go live at 12:01am March 27. We will be launching with our Basic Package, as well as several other theme packs. We are getting down to the wire in finalizing details on some channels, technicalities at this point(making transport arrangements), but if a theme pack is missing a channel or two we will likely hold off on the launch of that package until it is complete. An alternative we are considering is offering those incomplete packages for a discount, adjusted to the regular price when they are complete. Either way pretty much all our pakcages will be up and running by mid-April, together with nearly 40 UChoose pick a pack channles, and nearly 60 standalones. With a Basic at a great price, we let you customize as much as our channel suppliers will allow and keep your TV costs down.Stay tuned. |
|
GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:19 | reply to GeorgeBurger
Is there any word yet about what ISPs the service will be available on (IE, who you are peering with)?
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org |
|
| We will be providing a list of ISPs who are currently offering our service to their customer on our new site next week. |
|
