Thread: New Online Angling TV Channel.

our very own Marigold is a star performer in some program......ohhhh he is copyright to me....i thank you

I know they got to pay for it somehow, but not sure I want to pay to watch.
Still looks good though and its a plus for fishing everywhere
I may be tempted if the content suits me and is value for money.
I am a tight sod

Originally Posted by Neilio

I know they got to pay for it somehow, but not sure I want to pay to watch.

So how exactly do they pay for it!!!
Given that kind of attitude, why would anyone bother starting a venture like this?

I was told by a bank manager last week that if my pictures were good, they would be ripped off the website they are going on rather than having to pay for them.
Two thoughts spring to mind:
Why would I bother posting them now?
What would happen if I walked into their bank and just took a wad of money?



So what line of work are you in Neilio? Whatever it is, I want some for free.

Who is behind the site?

Its Gareth Purnell thats doing it Simon.

The company are called World Channel Network and Gareth is the face that anglers will know. As far as I'm aware at this moment in time, they will show 30 minute programmes for a £30 six-monthly subscription.
I think Kevin Green from Improve Your Coarse Fishing will have a weekly show, but not sure of other regulars.
The figures are not finalised yet, nor is the part that V2V Angling Productions may play in it. We hope to bid for some custom filming and there is a possibility of some edited 'greatest hits' programmes of our earlier DVDs.

Steve,
It seems there is a reason behind your strong opinion about this subject.

Originally Posted by stevelockett

We hope to bid for some custom filming and there is a possibility of some edited 'greatest hits' programmes of our earlier DVDs.

As for picking out one line of my post is a bit below the belt !
You forgot to quote my other lines which I feel need explaining to you.
My second line 'Still looks good though and its a plus for fishing everywhere' means I like the look of the content, and is good for the Angling world in general.
My third line 'I may be tempted if the content suits me and is value for money' means that if I like what I see and is of interest to me then I would consider paying.
My forth line 'I am a tight sod ' is an attempt at self sarcasm and I am sorry it went over your head, I will try to be a little clearer next time.
Please do not try to make me out as having a bad attitude as all my previous post lean the other way.
I too could easily pick out some words from your post

Originally Posted by stevelockett

So, Given that kind of attitude Why would I bother posting them now?

Just to make you appear silly but why would I want to do that, your not are you?
As for what I do for a living might not be of any help to you, but I can give you some advise for free. If you dont want your pictures ripped off the net why dont you put a watermark through the picture. See simple clear free advise, how nice am I.
Tell you what Steve if you P.M. me your address I will send you a copy of photoshop so you can be better prepared for the bank manager next time and wont be turned down.
I will even let you have it for free too, arent I a nice chap.

Thanks for that Neilio.

Just seems that everyone wants something for nothing. That still begs the question: how do anglers expect a business to survive that has to give away their product, or have it stolen?

In your reply (which really is more than I deserve for my rant, or perhaps exactly what I deserve), you mention you would let me have a copy of Photoshop. It is so easy to do, isn't it? But it is illegal and exactly the kind of unthinking action that forces smaller businesses than Adobe to consider if it is worth staying in business.
We have already had to battle tooth and nail to stop two 'customers' selling shoddy copies of our DVds on a variety of websites. That is the background to my little explosion.

I did notice the other comments you posted but with my journalists head on, selectively quoted to highlight the fact that many are not prepared to pay for access to services.

I'm sure you are a nice chap, and trust you will accept my apologies for the outburst?

As for watermarks, they can be lifted by those who are skilled enough in the art of the rip off, but it is something I'm planning. Shame it has to be on a shot, though.
The bank manager story was by way of explaining the difference between what is considered as a product for sale and what should be available for free. It would be interesting to see what worth they attach to 'their' money compared to other products like a photographer's photos.