Breaking NTO 2.0 partially upheld by Bombay HC

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vadirocks
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies: Replies 709
  • Views Views: Views 94,491
Status
Not open for further replies.
Here some people are saying that they used to get almost all channels in 200 before NTO. Other say, almost all HD channels were available in 300 before NTO.

I think either i was in different world
OR
V3Y7QcW.jpg

Actually operators used to offer suspension, retention offers which gave such pricing for chs
 
One count as one. Not two. When you go and buy one pineapple. You don't pay extra for a good looking one. When both weighs same.
You always talk about Bandwidth and how broadcasters are misusing it and certain channel launches are a waste of bandwidth. The broadcasters are using twice as the bandwidth on HD channels compared to the SD channels, then why couldn't the DPO's charge the same according to the bandwidth used. It doesn't go both ways as per your wish.
 
You always talk about Bandwidth and how broadcasters are misusing it and certain channel launches are a waste of bandwidth. The broadcasters are using twice as the bandwidth on HD channels compared to the SD channels, then why couldn't the DPO's charge the same according to the bandwidth used.
I think ₹130 should provide unlimited access to any number of channels as the DPO's makes profit off the à-la-carte and bouquets too along with NCF.
 
Meanwhile ₹130 must mean nothing to major operators. What about smaller companies with few customers? How would business be sustainable there?

I think ₹130 should provide unlimited access to any number of channels as the DPO's makes profit off the à-la-carte and bouquets too along with NCF.
 
⤴️Can't quote own post because of limitations in software.

There is a difference between big pan India operators and operators in small towns. Here customer is the one biggest loser.
 
You always talk about Bandwidth and how broadcasters are misusing it and certain channel launches are a waste of bandwidth. The broadcasters are using twice as the bandwidth on HD channels compared to the SD channels, then why couldn't the DPO's charge the same according to the bandwidth used. It doesn't go both ways as per your wish.
Can't help you. If you want to watch same content in over 10 channels. It would help the viewers if channels starts providing closed captioning and multiple language feeds instead of launching channel after channels every year.

And about bandwidth. Almost all broadcasters are indeed wasting bandwidth. What's stopping them from switching to HD only? Ask DPO's to slowly downgrade for SD users. Most have been in simulcast mode since NTO. I don't see any difference in content or ads. Tata Sky as a sensible operator have starting to hide channels which are simulcasting after purchase of the SD channel or it's HD counterpart.
 
Can't help you. If you want to watch same content in over 10 channels. It would help the viewers if channels starts providing closed captioning and multiple language feeds instead of launching channel after channels every year.

And about bandwidth. Almost all broadcasters are indeed wasting bandwidth. What's stopping them from switching to HD only? Ask DPO's to slowly downgrade for SD users. Most have been in simulcast mode since NTO. I don't see any difference in content or ads. Tata Sky as a sensible operator have starting to hide channels which are simulcasting after purchase of the SD channel or it's HD counterpart.
I agree with this, and you can check my views earlier as well I had said that they can downgrade the channels multiple times. And I'm talking about why DPO'S can treat a HD channel as 2 SD channels in the post you quoted me..

Ps. You are straight out trying to change the topic for the sake of winning an argument. Seriously, it's not even worth sometimes. It's a waste of time for you, me and others here if we don't stand on the topic we were discussing.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom