"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Max Demian wrote:
What about all the hundreds of thousands of films there are?

There's room for about a dozen film channels without all the repeats the
Sky ones have.

The transmitting company have to pay for the rights to show a film. And
better ones won't come cheap. After all, they're in competition with the
rental market.

I know. I was arguing against Alan's contention that there isn't enough
material to broadcast. Anyway, there must be loads of old films that are
cheap to show.

On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 12:18:39 +0100, "Max Demian"
wrote:

| "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
| ...
| In article ,
| Max Demian wrote:
| What about all the hundreds of thousands of films there are?
|
| There's room for about a dozen film channels without all the repeats the
| Sky ones have.
|
| The transmitting company have to pay for the rights to show a film. And
| better ones won't come cheap. After all, they're in competition with the
| rental market.
|
| I know. I was arguing against Alan's contention that there isn't enough
| material to broadcast. Anyway, there must be loads of old films that are
| cheap to show.

There are lots of Bollywood cheap films available. Would you watch them?

--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk In Case of Emergency
Store the word "ICE" in your mobile phone address book, and
against it enter the number of the person you would want to be
contacted "In Case of Emergency". http://tinyurl.com/79lz9

In article ,
Max Demian wrote:
The transmitting company have to pay for the rights to show a film.
And better ones won't come cheap. After all, they're in competition
with the rental market.

I know. I was arguing against Alan's contention that there isn't enough
material to broadcast. Anyway, there must be loads of old films that are
cheap to show.

But would many want to watch them? Just because they are a film doesn't
make them automatically good.

--
*Geeks shall inherit the earth *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

John Porcella wrote:


I think that it is pretty much inevitable.

Personally I wouldn't bet on it considering the potential for making
money by selling off the space.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Max Demian wrote:
The transmitting company have to pay for the rights to show a film.
And better ones won't come cheap. After all, they're in competition
with the rental market.

I know. I was arguing against Alan's contention that there isn't enough
material to broadcast. Anyway, there must be loads of old films that are
cheap to show.

But would many want to watch them? Just because they are a film doesn't
make them automatically good.

What an odd statement! If we had dozens of channels of films no-one would
expect a lot of people to watch them all. They would inevitably be minority
interest channels, as the same audience would be split between many.

--
Max Demian

"Dave Fawthrop" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 12:18:39 +0100, "Max Demian"
wrote:

| "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
| ...
| In article ,
| Max Demian wrote:
| What about all the hundreds of thousands of films there are?
|
| There's room for about a dozen film channels without all the repeats
the
| Sky ones have.
|
| The transmitting company have to pay for the rights to show a film.
And
| better ones won't come cheap. After all, they're in competition with
the
| rental market.
|
| I know. I was arguing against Alan's contention that there isn't enough
| material to broadcast. Anyway, there must be loads of old films that are
| cheap to show.

There are lots of Bollywood cheap films available. Would you watch them?

If they were worth watching. But why pick on Mollywood? There are plenty of
old US/UK/European films that are worth airing but are very rarely shown on
analogue TV, if at all.

--
Max Demian

"Chris Howells" wrote in message
...
John Porcella wrote:


I think that it is pretty much inevitable.

Personally I wouldn't bet on it considering the potential for making
money by selling off the space.

Er, yes, but the space could be sold off to TV broadcasters!


--
MESSAGE ENDS.
John Porcella

If they were worth watching. But why pick on Mollywood? There are plenty
of
old US/UK/European films that are worth airing but are very rarely shown
on
analogue TV, if at all.

They are probably shown on existing digital film services.


--
MESSAGE ENDS.
John Porcella

I know. I was arguing against Alan's contention that there isn't enough
material to broadcast. Anyway, there must be loads of old films that are
cheap to show.

Yes, of course there are! The rights are held for these by the existing
broadcasters, no doubt!


--
MESSAGE ENDS.
John Porcella