News Item - Sky may halve the price of Sky+ around August / September 2003
 

Sky may halve the price of Sky+ around August / September 2003:

http://logofreetv.org/render.asp?mod...ews_read&i=123

Source: Interactive TV Today 07/07/2003 - part 3

Jomtien wrote:
Chris p wrote:

Sky may halve the price of Sky+ around August / September 2003:

i would buy at that prce :-)

Even at £5 per month the cost is too high. There is no reason why
anyone should pay any monthly fee at all to use a recorder that they
have purchased outright.

Seems fair enough to me, if the amount of FTV/A channels I can record with
mine are about to be halved :-))

Mark Carver wrote:

Even at £5 per month the cost is too high. There is no reason why
anyone should pay any monthly fee at all to use a recorder that they
have purchased outright.

Seems fair enough to me, if the amount of FTV/A channels I can record with
mine are about to be halved :-))

In theory you should be OK. A Sky+ needs a Sky card to work. If you
pay the Sky+ sub then you will get a Sky card and it should allow
access to the FTA and FTV channels. If the Sky+ sub does ever drop to
£5 then the Sky+ with sub at £250 purchase price + £60 per year would
in fact become the cheapest and most useful way of acquiring an FTV
card. Perhaps I better stop giving Sky ideas.

--
Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these.
The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/4f9c
How to get UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73
Fed up with logos / red buttons? : http://logofreetv.org/
BBC gone? : http://www.astra2d.cjb.net/
----
Only the truth as I see it.
No monies return'd. ;-)

Even at £5 per month the cost is too high. There is no reason why
anyone should pay any monthly fee at all to use a recorder that they
have purchased outright.

Purchased outright? You think that £200 - or even £250, as it is at
the moment - covers the cost of the technology in the box (2 tuners,
don't forget), plus the quad LNB, and installation? And you expect it
to be upgraded and supported, no doubt? What's the atmosphere like on
your planet?

£5 per month would certainly be better, particularly if they want to
increase the number of people that have Sky+. However, there is -
currently - nothing else that can do what it does. There's always a
choice - no one's forcing anyone to buy it. If you don't like it -
don't get it.

Simon Kempster

Simon Kempster wrote:

Even at £5 per month the cost is too high. There is no reason why
anyone should pay any monthly fee at all to use a recorder that they
have purchased outright.

Purchased outright? You think that £200 - or even £250, as it is at
the moment - covers the cost of the technology in the box (2 tuners,
don't forget), plus the quad LNB, and installation? And you expect it
to be upgraded and supported, no doubt? What's the atmosphere like on
your planet?

Yes, purchased outright over the counter with no subs, ifs, buts,
options, contracts, requirements, obligations etc. etc. etc. You see
it. You pay for it. You take it away. End of story.

If Sky and Pace are daft enough to sell an item at less than cost
price without making some contractual requirement in return for the
subsidy then that is up to them. And given that other manufacturers
sell non-Sky PVR satellite receivers for £300 and up I don't see why
there should be any need to pay any more than that for the Sky+.


£5 per month would certainly be better, particularly if they want to
increase the number of people that have Sky+. However, there is -
currently - nothing else that can do what it does.

Of course not. And this is due *solely* to Sky monopolising Videoguard
encryption. There are plenty of other PVRs but Sky prevent you from
using them with Sky channels.


There's always a
choice - no one's forcing anyone to buy it. If you don't like it -
don't get it.

That is hardly a choice.

--
Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these.
The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/4f9c
How to get UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73
Fed up with logos / red buttons? : http://logofreetv.org/
BBC gone? : http://www.astra2d.cjb.net/
----
Only the truth as I see it.
No monies return'd. ;-)

Ed wrote:

The reason is probably that there are soon going to be a whole host of
PVRs, Sky has the advantage that it can record encrypted channels, but
it will then look like it is abusing its monopoly when it is charging
£10 a month and with everyone else it is free.

Indeed. As of July 10 anyone will in theory be able to buy a FTA sat
PVR (of which there are several) and use it to replace a Sky+ for the
BBC and other FTA services. One can hope that the other FTV channels
will also become FTA in the future thus increasing the usefulness of
such a box. The DTT PVRs will surely never require a monthly fee
(quite rightly, of course). The idea of a monthly fee for using a
recorder is a total aberration.

--
Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these.
The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/4f9c
How to get UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73
Fed up with logos / red buttons? : http://logofreetv.org/
BBC gone? : http://www.astra2d.cjb.net/
----
Only the truth as I see it.
No monies return'd. ;-)

"Jomtien" wrote in message
...
Ed wrote:

The reason is probably that there are soon going to be a whole host of
PVRs, Sky has the advantage that it can record encrypted channels, but
it will then look like it is abusing its monopoly when it is charging
£10 a month and with everyone else it is free.

Indeed. As of July 10 anyone will in theory be able to buy a FTA sat
PVR (of which there are several) and use it to replace a Sky+ for the
BBC and other FTA services. One can hope that the other FTV channels
will also become FTA in the future thus increasing the usefulness of
such a box. The DTT PVRs will surely never require a monthly fee
(quite rightly, of course). The idea of a monthly fee for using a
recorder is a total aberration.

Yes but the fee isn't to "use" your recorder. I can use my Tivo without
paying anything. What makes my Tivo useful though is the data it gets that
tells it what I might like, when the next episode of a series is on, what
genre a film is etc. Someone has to provide this and provide the
infrastructure/software to deliver it. At the moment that costs. Look at it
like servicing your car - you don't really need it but it's better with it
and makes it work better.

Stephen (aka steford) said:


"Jomtien" wrote in message
.. .
Ed wrote:

The reason is probably that there are soon going to be a whole host of
PVRs, Sky has the advantage that it can record encrypted channels, but
it will then look like it is abusing its monopoly when it is charging
£10 a month and with everyone else it is free.

Indeed. As of July 10 anyone will in theory be able to buy a FTA sat
PVR (of which there are several) and use it to replace a Sky+ for the
BBC and other FTA services. One can hope that the other FTV channels
will also become FTA in the future thus increasing the usefulness of
such a box. The DTT PVRs will surely never require a monthly fee
(quite rightly, of course). The idea of a monthly fee for using a
recorder is a total aberration.

Yes but the fee isn't to "use" your recorder. I can use my Tivo without
paying anything. What makes my Tivo useful though is the data it gets that
tells it what I might like, when the next episode of a series is on, what
genre a film is etc. Someone has to provide this and provide the
infrastructure/software to deliver it. At the moment that costs. Look at it
like servicing your car - you don't really need it but it's better with it
and makes it work better.

No-one mentioned TIVO. The fee to "use" the recorder is for Sky+
which uses the 'listings' that are freely available to all digibox
users on the EPG anyway.



--
Gareth Kitchener
Bedfordshire, England
http://www.garethkitchener.org.uk

Stephen (aka steford) wrote:

Indeed. As of July 10 anyone will in theory be able to buy a FTA sat
PVR (of which there are several) and use it to replace a Sky+ for the
BBC and other FTA services. One can hope that the other FTV channels
will also become FTA in the future thus increasing the usefulness of
such a box. The DTT PVRs will surely never require a monthly fee
(quite rightly, of course). The idea of a monthly fee for using a
recorder is a total aberration.

Yes but the fee isn't to "use" your recorder. I can use my Tivo without
paying anything. What makes my Tivo useful though is the data it gets that
tells it what I might like, when the next episode of a series is on, what
genre a film is etc. Someone has to provide this and provide the
infrastructure/software to deliver it. At the moment that costs. Look at it
like servicing your car - you don't really need it but it's better with it
and makes it work better.

You seem to have missed the point. The Sky+ £10 fee is indeed to use
the recorder functions. There are no extra EPG features to pay for as
the entire EPG is provided free of charge to all digibox users, with
or without a Sky sub, and the Sky EPG is paid for by the broadcasters
anyway. Whilst the Tivo does indeed provide extra service and data in
return for the monthly fee I personally consider that this fee also is
not only far too high but unacceptable in that it is monthly and
permanent. Tivo do however offer a life-time £199 fee, which I have,
and I consider this to be reasonable if one assumes that the box is
being sold at below cost price, which mine certainly was, and which is
assumed also to be the case for the Sky+.
What is and remains totally unacceptable is any type of permanent
monthly fee for activating the functions of a recorder that one has
already bought. If there is to be such a monthly activation fee then
the box must be lent rather than sold.

--
Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these.
The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/4f9c
How to get UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73
Fed up with logos / red buttons? : http://logofreetv.org/
BBC gone? : http://www.astra2d.cjb.net/
----
Only the truth as I see it.
No monies return'd. ;-)

Gareth Kitchener wrote:
Stephen (aka steford) said:


"Jomtien" wrote in message
...
Ed wrote:

The reason is probably that there are soon going to be a whole
host of PVRs, Sky has the advantage that it can record encrypted
channels, but it will then look like it is abusing its monopoly
when it is charging £10 a month and with everyone else it is free.

Indeed. As of July 10 anyone will in theory be able to buy a FTA sat
PVR (of which there are several) and use it to replace a Sky+ for
the BBC and other FTA services. One can hope that the other FTV
channels will also become FTA in the future thus increasing the
usefulness of such a box. The DTT PVRs will surely never require a
monthly fee (quite rightly, of course). The idea of a monthly fee
for using a recorder is a total aberration.

Yes but the fee isn't to "use" your recorder. I can use my Tivo
without paying anything. What makes my Tivo useful though is the
data it gets that tells it what I might like, when the next episode
of a series is on, what genre a film is etc. Someone has to provide
this and provide the infrastructure/software to deliver it. At the
moment that costs. Look at it like servicing your car - you don't
really need it but it's better with it and makes it work better.

No-one mentioned TIVO. The fee to "use" the recorder is for Sky+
which uses the 'listings' that are freely available to all digibox
users on the EPG anyway.

I assumed, from his tone, the OP had something against ongoing fees for
anything - which from the post below he does. I have never used SKY+ so
can't comment.