While HD
expansion is continuing
somewhat in locales
not named America, Europe is having a tough time grabbing hold of high-definition programming. Nary a month after Sat.1 HD and ProSieben HD were
shut down in Germany until 2010 due to lack of interest, a new report has surfaced with quite a few startling facts. First off, just 5-percent of Europe's HDTV owners were found to actually watch some sort of HD programming. The article goes on to assert that Europe's TV providers should "concentrate their resources initially on building pay television rather than advertising-based business models in order to reach the critical mass of HD content and receivers necessary to make HDTV a self-sustaining business." Still, there seems to be hope for the market yet, as these same analysts also suggested that nearly 20-percent of all European homes would be watching HD channels by 2012 -- better get a move on, though.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Truth Teller @ Mar 5th 2008 4:02PM
It's simple really, they're too greedy and they want too big a premium for HD TV services and (here's the real killer) too many people don't see it as being worth it.
That's what is putting people off.
(and some of the PS3/BD devotees here are determined to 'think' I'm just expressing 'hate' when I say Blu-ray is growing feebly and will continue to grow feebly.......well suck it up boys, if 'HD on your HD TV all the time' can't pull in the punters what chance an expensive, unfinished spec player and an occasional expensive movie disc?)
Much as I do enjoy my HD TV and my HD TV service and my HD DVDs and my high def rips I can really understand why some are completely underwhelmed by it all - as well as thinking we're mad to pay what we do for it.
I know some think that's heresy but that's the truth of the matter that some just can't bear to face up to.
locke6854 @ Mar 5th 2008 4:12PM
welcome back
DrXym @ Mar 5th 2008 4:40PM
Wow you can't even respond to a non Blu Ray story without your hate spilling over.
Truth Teller @ Mar 5th 2008 4:47PM
@ DrXym
LMAO
You are funny.
Mr. E @ Mar 5th 2008 5:51PM
I'm an American, and so not necessarily qualified to comment directly on this. However, I wonder if part of the problem is a lack of available programming? Here I can put up an antenna and see virtually all primetime programming in glorious 1080i or 720p, for free. If I subscribe to cable or satellite, my choices go up to as many as 50 HD channels (most broadcasting a combination of HD and SD programs).
I'm sure HD would have had a tough sell here as well, if the only way to receive it were through expensive premium pay channels, or PPV.
It's been my experience that once people experience HD, they want it. So if slow European HD adoption is a case of lack of programming, Blu-ray might actually act as a launching pad for HD in Europe. If someone could go out and get a player and movies and jump into HD as easily as they've been doing with DVD, I'd say that could be movement in a positive direction.
Sam Winter @ Mar 6th 2008 4:16AM
1) you are a moron.
2) How the hell did you manage to spew I-defended-HD-DVD-relentlessly-but-they-lost-so-now-I'm-a-bitter-geek format war nonsense on a completely unrelated article?
3) Since you live in America, you have no idea in hell what the European HD market looks like
Truth Teller @ Mar 7th 2008 6:34AM
@ Sam Winter
1) No Sam, you are a moron (see below) and a blind one at that, obviously incapable of either readin properly and/or in the habit of leaping to idiotic and unfounded conclusions.
2) The comments about a poor Blu-ray start are relevant to the entire slow start for high def in general which this article is about.
Obviously you can't bear to have it pointed out but that doesn't make it any less true and nor does it make a preference for HD DVD any less valid
(like a hell of a lot of movie enthusiasts I prefer it and would have much referred to see it win out and not the game console format).
3) Since I am British and I am not and never have been an American living in America I think I have a fair idea of how things are here.
You ludicrous moron.
:P
locke6854 @ Mar 7th 2008 10:35AM
I've realized something... if you read truth's posts with an american accent in your head, it sounds like an asshole.
But if you keep a british accent in your head, say, like the game reviewer from Zero Punctuation, then he just sounds like a cynical 'ol chap' at the pub.
Devron @ Mar 5th 2008 4:12PM
A few things I think we in the tech community don't take into account...we're all hardcore HD nuts... we can spot the difference between SD and HD in like 5 seconds of footage. The general populous can look at a DVD or even an SD signal playing in 16x9 and swear that it's HD.
The other problem is the way that the channels are arranged. I've set up people's HDTVs in a few homes and in several different cable providers, the channels are usually in the 100's. (In NYC, Time Warner HD channels start at 100.) The cable providers have generally done a poor job of informing users about their HD options.
XDragon @ Mar 5th 2008 4:17PM
I have an HD TV and I had HD cable service with Rogers. Issues:
very few chanels in HD
HD chanels were freezing
Volume on HD chanels were radically different than other chanels
Much more expensive monthly fee
Delayed 20 seconds compared to the same non HD chanel
I got rid of it as it simply wasn't worth it; maybe when it improves I'll try again.
genaldar @ Mar 5th 2008 8:42PM
That sucks. I had some issues of my own going HD (funny - sad story actually). But once it was up and running it was great.
Bob Sintas @ Mar 5th 2008 4:31PM
This is probably due to Europe having PAL, which may be good enough for people there. If it isn't that, is it due to people not aware of HD programming?
DrXym @ Mar 5th 2008 4:38PM
This isn't surprising. Can't speak for the rest of the Europe, but Sky is basically raping UK viewers who want an HD service. The box is 250 and 10 per month on top of the normal sub. I imagine many people will wait for either the price to drop or for HD DVB-T transmissions and the BBC to force Sky's hand before adopting HD.
ryan10ad @ Mar 5th 2008 5:04PM
Can't agree with you more, and if you're on Sky is BBC HD or Channel 4 HD unless you want to shell out for their Sky Sports and Sky Movies Packs. Cable is even worse.
LordZargon @ Mar 5th 2008 7:14PM
Wow. Virgin offer it for 75 (150 for existing customers) and NO added monthly fee - and its got more features than Sky+. Still, only cabled areas get it!
That said, of course only 5% of EU customers watch High Def - in the UK there are what... 4 HD channels that I can think of? And only two providers offer it on a national scale.
Need more content!
The Fuzz 53 @ Mar 5th 2008 4:42PM
What's the matter? Do they not have enough left after paying their insane taxes to support their socialist governments?
Truth Teller @ Mar 5th 2008 4:50PM
You might want to try looking up the real definition of 'socialist'.
There is not a single one of the Gov's in EU Europe where the state is responsible for more than 50% of the total economic activity, they are all well under that.
genaldar @ Mar 5th 2008 4:58PM
Yeah, we spend all of our taxes on occupying other countries and rebuilding their infastructure while ours crumbles. Like any sane country would.
Of course the fact that if you combine our taxes, plus what we spend on healthcare its usually a higher percentage then what Europeans spend on taxes (which covers both) the numbers aren't so different. But they get better schools, elder care, child care and roads, while we get stealth bombers.
Rob Bye @ Mar 5th 2008 5:11PM
This really isnt surprising. I live in the UK and we always get technology later than you do in America. So HD TV's are really only just catching on and people have only started to buy them on mass recently. I know this as i work in a sony centre. Also there are still a large amount of people who hardley even know what HD is and are just content with the standard freeview digital channels. Also as said above is that to get HD, the only way is via SKY which will cost $500 and then to get all the HD channels about $80 a month. And there are only about 15 HD channels actually available at this time. SO basically until the companies reduce the cost and increase the amount of channels, noone will really buy into it. And this is in the UK which is probably one of the most technologically advanced places in Europe!
Pete @ Mar 5th 2008 6:44PM
Agreed,
But I think there is another reason. We in the UK had a much better starting point than the American's. PAL looks infinitely better than NTSC, which I once saw referred to as Never The Same Colour (note the spelling ;) )
While HD is a huge jump over both systems, PAL is easier to live with than NTSC.
What we really need (in the UK anyway) is for the 'big 5' to launch HD simulcasts, now. Then get rid of that 10 charge from Sky.
If it was mentioned enough "also on HD" like the BBC are advertising the iPlayer at the moment, then it'd take off quick enough.
JohnHD @ Mar 5th 2008 6:09PM
I live in Germany (where Pro 7 / SAT 1 HD was cancelled a short while ago). The problem here seems to be that Cable Providers (3 big ones, some minor ones) won't really advertise HD and / or open up their nets to it. DVB-C overall quality in SD is very bad to put it mildly and a lot of people still receive analogue cable. Apart from that, receiver prices are horribly high
( > 230) and currently there are only 2 models ( / brands) available. Situation seems slightly more felxible via DVB-S (more boxes, cheaper prices) but there's only 1 additional channel with german Audio. Interestingly, though, DVB-S is the preferred choice for the future. All the HD-plans of public TV stations (2 most important programs will start broadcasting when the Beijing Olympics kick off) are expected to hit DVB-S way sooner than DVB-C. maybe this explains the situation a bit. Lack of offer, high prices, not enough channels, DVB-S vs. DVB-C.
genaldar @ Mar 5th 2008 8:41PM
I'm just shocked that we get anything (other than video game systems) ahead of Europe. You're cell networks are so much better than ours. And so are your handsets (we did get the iPhone first, but that makes sense).
I gotta say though, 4 HD channels, that sucks. When I first got hd through directv (over a year ago now) we had probably about a dozen (including locals) and I thought the pickings were slim.
Chris @ Mar 6th 2008 12:29PM
In Germany it isnt about the Cable Providers. Its all about money talks. It`s curious, but the war between blu-ray and HD-DVD is one reason for the major breakdown. HD-DVD/blu-ray had a better standing over HD television programming, but if you let become it a war you lose customer, not just for your own business more for the whole thing. It isn`t a part of the story here, but why did Warner go to blu-ray, instead of HD-DVD? Easy, cause they lose customer and money.
The situation in germany is more difficult than in the USA. In the USA you have the problem with all the locals, in Germany every major channel is nationwide. The next Problem is that the two major Channels in Germany saying no to any support. Now they starting with HD periods for realtime simulation.
You need to check this out:
2008 - you have two big sport events European Soccer Cup (really big in Europe) and the Olympics. The two channels will broadcast both events with so much hours per day, but nothing in HD, just PAL widescreen. The official start will be 2010 from Vancouver, Winter Olympics.
Richard @ Mar 6th 2008 12:58PM
Well duh! here in Holland there isn't any provider that broadcasts more than 4 channels in HD even though we're one of the most technically advanced countrys in the world with about 75% people having broadband internet and more than 50% having widescreen tvs. The four channels are Discovery, national geographic, the history channel and some culture/sports channel, for 4 euros (thats 6 bucks for four not-so-exciting (lame) channels!)
I mean COME ON WE NEEDZ TEH LEETZ TOO YOU KNOW