On 17/06/2010 07:58, Mike Henry wrote:
, (Brian Mc) wrote:

Mike wrote:
:...yes, I do know that. What I'm talking about is the £10/month I pay
:for the HD package - I don't get as much as someone in England on the
:same viewing pack as I have. It is irrelevant as to what I get for free.

I did not write the above; George did. Please take more care when
trimming! :-)

How so - none of your £10 goes towards these cchannels (which you would
get by paying $0/month!)

: What did Sky customer services say when you put this point to them?

Just exactly `WHAT would you expect them to say?????

I would expect them to say something similar to the technical and factual
answers already posted, but in a considerably more polite tone and without
shouting at him. It would be useful to know if they give some other reason
that we haven't already thought of. Perhaps we'd be able to point out any
lies/flaws in their response and help George form a suitable rebuttal for
a second phonecall to Sky. Who knows. I think Peter's on the money though.

....Thank you, Mike, for your positive reply - especially since it came
twice!! (-:

I've noticed before in this and other forums that, when someone like me
makes an observation or comment which is, possibly in retrospect a bit
naive, there is always someone who will shout them down. A bit like CJ
Mooi on Eggheads when he is scathing of someone not knowing the answer
to an "obvious" question.

It does inhibit some from posting and being involved in discussions.

Yes. The "proper" course of action is to phone Sky, but I thought (and
still do) think that the value of a newsgroup is the sharing of
experience and self-help.

Scenario: User 1 recognises something that might be better and so
contacts Sky Helpdesk. Helpdesk provides an explanation. User 1 is
satisfied. Meanwhile, User 2 notices the same thing and contacts Sky
Helpdesk....

Having had time to consider my initial thoughts on the subject (ie no
ITV1 HD on EPG in Scotland), I have, with the input of those of you who
are more interested in helping than putting down we simple folk, come to
the following conclusions:

My £10 HD sub is, of course to allow me to have access to HD versions of
those SD channels to which my basic Sky sub entitles me. I don't have
film or sports channels, so no HD versions of those (apart from Sky
Sports 3 and Eurosport). That seems OK, I knew that before taking out
the HD sub.

The issue of ITV1 HD is, I think, different. OK, as has been posted,
BBC and ITV pay for inclusion of other regions (BBC) and ITV London for
the reasons previously given by Brian McD. I assume that ITV1 HD is
supra-regional - one channel for all (English) regions? If this is so,
then there is no reason I can see (apart from media politics) why it
should not be available to all ITV regions.

The fact that I can get it through "other channels" and some ITV1
programmes are flagged as "simulcast on ITV1 HD)" in my Scottish edition
of Radio Times (other listings magazines are available) makes the whole
issue of unavailability in Scotland a farce.

If it is there, and available, ISTM that it would be in Sky/ITV's best
interest to maximise HD accessibility to encourage uptake. After the
football and tennis are over, the short term demand for HD could dwindle...

I believe that this discussion has probably now run its course. If I do
contact Sky and/or ITV and discover something different to what has
already been posted I may re-post. Or I may just keep it to myself and
let you all find it out for yourselves!

--
George from Cartland