Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

SKY Sports.

So Sky is making more money out of its customers,splitting sports channels so you pay for each one.So if someone likes a lot of diffirent sports it wil cost a fourtune at £18 for each.I will cancel my Sports when the Cricket is finished.not intersted in other sports.
«1

Comments

  • kodi sorts all of that for me :wink:
  • It's not £18 for each. It's £18 for the first one and then a few bob extra for each you add. The whole pack isn't much more than it used to be (which is, admittedly, a lot). I have so far found sky to be obliging when I ring up and ask for some sort of deal to bring the bill down.
  • I'll the two football channels and Arena for the NFL.
  • Tell them you're cancelling because you can't afford it any more and they'll give you a decent discount.
  • Sorry,I did not know that was how it is priced.i enquired at a SKY centre in Carlisle and was lead to believe it is £18 for each channel.I have always found SKY very helpfull when asking for channels,they will always bring the price down to keep your custom.
  • Now tv day pass is good for the prem games i want to see. I get BT free with virgin also so it's quite reasonable price wise.
  • People subscribe to Netflix and there are no advertisements.
    Just saying.
  • I love the dedicated 402 premier league channel.

    403 is general football I believe.
  • Dave2l said:

    I love the dedicated 402 premier league channel.

    403 is general football I believe.

    No idea why there is a dedicated Premier League channel though.

    All Premier League matches will be shown on Main Event as well. All the Premier League channel has is the same programmes on rotation (highlights, best goals programmes, interviews etc.).
  • Sponsored links:


  • All 10 channels cost £27.50 which is same as before the change. One channel is £18, 2 for £22 and 3 for £26. I keep meaning to phone them to get a better deal...but I'm lazy.
  • Clubs paying Ubermillions for players and TV subscriptions falling through the floor.

    Maths is not my strong point, but..

    Won't matter to the clubs because you can pretty much guarantee the likes of Google, Amazon, facebook etc will all be involved when the next round of bidding takes place.

    Not to mention the premier league makes an absolute fortune from an increase in overseas tv rights.

    Bubble won't be bursting for a while yet.
  • just got rid of sky sports (paid till next month) realising I watch less and less of live football and cricket. just the highlights which I can get on terrestrial tv.

    fortunately I've got BT sport so if I do want a live footy fix I got seria a and European football.
  • This is a rather desperate attempt from the marketing team to deal with a variety of factors that are making life very difficult for the existing broadcasters. Pasting my comment from another thread...

    They've been saving up for ages for next year's bidding war for the 20-23 rights. But with Facebook, Amazon and Google all expanding their sports coverage, I'm not sure it'll be enough - unless they go so high that the others simply don't think the PL is worth it.

    But that's problematic anyway, as viewing has been in decline for some time. Audiences are fractured, and illegal streaming is a major problem, although not for Facebook as their advertising model would mean free football for anyone with a profile.

    And with the next generation using the likes of YouTube, Vine and Netflix to get entertainment fixes, the set top box business model seems antiquated.

    Clubs paying Ubermillions for players and TV subscriptions falling through the floor.

    Maths is not my strong point, but..

    Of the seven packages, Sky have currently have five and BT two. It'll cost them an astonishing amount to maintain that. And they're going to try, so it seems unlikely the bubble is going to burst in the near future (as Chris from Sidcup said, particularly with foreign rights providing much of the income).

    If one of the streaming companies does a Murdoch and commits to using football to get into people's homes, stupid money will still be thrown at the PL. but I can't see it working out well for Rupes and co. who cannot reduce their pricing to a level that suits the generation who are happy to build their own entertainment packages using multiple providers.
  • Thinking of joining this year but the now TV pass probably suits me best.
  • JiMMy 85 said:

    This is a rather desperate attempt from the marketing team to deal with a variety of factors that are making life very difficult for the existing broadcasters. Pasting my comment from another thread...

    They've been saving up for ages for next year's bidding war for the 20-23 rights. But with Facebook, Amazon and Google all expanding their sports coverage, I'm not sure it'll be enough - unless they go so high that the others simply don't think the PL is worth it.

    But that's problematic anyway, as viewing has been in decline for some time. Audiences are fractured, and illegal streaming is a major problem, although not for Facebook as their advertising model would mean free football for anyone with a profile.

    And with the next generation using the likes of YouTube, Vine and Netflix to get entertainment fixes, the set top box business model seems antiquated.

    Clubs paying Ubermillions for players and TV subscriptions falling through the floor.

    Maths is not my strong point, but..

    Of the seven packages, Sky have currently have five and BT two. It'll cost them an astonishing amount to maintain that. And they're going to try, so it seems unlikely the bubble is going to burst in the near future (as Chris from Sidcup said, particularly with foreign rights providing much of the income).

    If one of the streaming companies does a Murdoch and commits to using football to get into people's homes, stupid money will still be thrown at the PL. but I can't see it working out well for Rupes and co. who cannot reduce their pricing to a level that suits the generation who are happy to build their own entertainment packages using multiple providers.
    But someone somewhere is getting screwed to pay for this circus.
    If it's not the TV subscribers then who?
  • Like many I am a BT customer and I have just tinned Sky Sports, will just get NOW TV for passes when I want to watch certain events.
  • I was due to pay for our package £83.50 from October. After speaking to three people at Sky and the threat of a long standing customer leaving (16 years with Sky), they have agreed the same package for an 18 month contract of £54.90 - a saving of over £500 over that period.

    The fact that we probably haven't had a subscription that low for a decade says it all so far as the position Sky find themselves in. The loss of Champions League, some cricket and golf coverage too plus the threat of streaming is a big threat.

    Whether £54.90 proves too much still only time will tell.
  • edited August 3
    People still pay to watch Sky channels???? This is so 2005 :smile:
  • Sponsored links:


  • A few months ago I realised most of the sky sports I watch, I do so sat in my local.
    So I've switched to the lowest basic sky package (£5.75 with discount) to keep the box an recording facility. Get bt with my broadband package and have got now tv box for spur of the moment sky purchases.
  • edited August 3

    JiMMy 85 said:

    This is a rather desperate attempt from the marketing team to deal with a variety of factors that are making life very difficult for the existing broadcasters. Pasting my comment from another thread...

    They've been saving up for ages for next year's bidding war for the 20-23 rights. But with Facebook, Amazon and Google all expanding their sports coverage, I'm not sure it'll be enough - unless they go so high that the others simply don't think the PL is worth it.

    But that's problematic anyway, as viewing has been in decline for some time. Audiences are fractured, and illegal streaming is a major problem, although not for Facebook as their advertising model would mean free football for anyone with a profile.

    And with the next generation using the likes of YouTube, Vine and Netflix to get entertainment fixes, the set top box business model seems antiquated.

    Clubs paying Ubermillions for players and TV subscriptions falling through the floor.

    Maths is not my strong point, but..

    Of the seven packages, Sky have currently have five and BT two. It'll cost them an astonishing amount to maintain that. And they're going to try, so it seems unlikely the bubble is going to burst in the near future (as Chris from Sidcup said, particularly with foreign rights providing much of the income).

    If one of the streaming companies does a Murdoch and commits to using football to get into people's homes, stupid money will still be thrown at the PL. but I can't see it working out well for Rupes and co. who cannot reduce their pricing to a level that suits the generation who are happy to build their own entertainment packages using multiple providers.
    But someone somewhere is getting screwed to pay for this circus.
    If it's not the TV subscribers then who?
    Oh we are undoubtedly getting screwed.

    Depends which way you want to look at it. The current status quo means we are getting screwed financially (the Competition Commission's insistence on not allowing one broadcaster to have all packages inevitably means we would have to spend more to get all games).

    As it is, one company is charging way too much, BT is charging very little (given that broadband is an essential now, their deal is very decent), and if FB go with an advertising model instead of subscription, then we become the product - FB are selling us to advertisers and using football to turn us into that product.
  • Kodi is my platform of choice.
    Ignorance is no defence I realise, but I am a bit unsure which law I am breaking.
  • seth plum said:

    Kodi is my platform of choice.
    Ignorance is no defence I realise, but I am a bit unsure which law I am breaking.

    The one they came up with earlier this year! They got a caught to agree to a 'blocking order' - more here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/07/27/premier-league-lands-game-changing-court-order-war-illegal-streaming/

    (I realise you may be embracing ignorance on this one).
  • It seems to be a business culture. Only act when you are losing customers/supporters, screw all your loyal customers for all you can while offering inducements to getting new bodies on board. Then when they start voting with their feet, scratch your heads for a while and then decide to change something.
    http://www.ladbible.com/now/uk-interesting-sky-is-launching-a-loyalty-system-to-reward-longest-serving-customers-20170803
  • Digital and Cable television is dying. Sky need to cut all services that aren't sports in order to survive long term.

    The public aren't willing to pay over-the-odds anymore for a service that they can get for much much cheaper over the internet.
  • It's not £18 for each. It's £18 for the first one and then a few bob extra for each you add. The whole pack isn't much more than it used to be (which is, admittedly, a lot). I have so far found sky to be obliging when I ring up and ask for some sort of deal to bring the bill down.

    me too except I get mine thru Virgin .. incidentally, someone last week was successfully prosecuted for supplying set top boxes with Kodi and 'some other downloaded software' included .. can't recall the exact details, but it might well have been the first successful prosecution of its kind
  • I would pay a subscription fee to just watch football without all the stuff you have to buy on sky/virgin.
  • I was due to pay for our package £83.50 from October. After speaking to three people at Sky and the threat of a long standing customer leaving (16 years with Sky), they have agreed the same package for an 18 month contract of £54.90 - a saving of over £500 over that period.

    The fact that we probably haven't had a subscription that low for a decade says it all so far as the position Sky find themselves in. The loss of Champions League, some cricket and golf coverage too plus the threat of streaming is a big threat.

    Whether £54.90 proves too much still only time will tell.

    For £54.90 you could buy a Kodi box and save yourself another £933.33 over the next 18 months. And you'd have access to loads of TV shows and movies.

    I kept Sky for about two and a half years and paid half price (less than £35 a month) but even that in excess of £1,000. Money that sky will never get from me again.
  • At the moment I get the F1 channel for free as part of the £10 a month I pay to include HD.

    Do they really think that anyone is going to pay £18 a month for F1, that works out at £10 per GP. If they try to charge me that I will have to catch the scraps provided by terrestrial TV
Sign In or Register to comment.