|
|
SKY+
Sorry if this asks the obvious, but if i already have standard Sky and i
wish to upgrade to Sky+ it is going to cost me £99 plus a extra £10 a month extra whatever package i am on. Now i do not mind the £99, but another tenner, if that is right what a rip off. TIA |
SKY+
Syberian wrote:
Sorry if this asks the obvious, but if i already have standard Sky and i wish to upgrade to Sky+ it is going to cost me £99 plus a extra £10 a month extra whatever package i am on. Now i do not mind the £99, but another tenner, if that is right what a rip off. The extra £10 is only payable if your package does not include premium channels. ie if you don't get films or sport. -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) |
SKY+
"Syberian" wrote in message
... Sorry if this asks the obvious, but if i already have standard Sky and i wish to upgrade to Sky+ it is going to cost me £99 plus a extra £10 a month extra whatever package i am on. Now i do not mind the £99, but another tenner, if that is right what a rip off. TIA a 'rip off' is when you have no choice. You have a choice. -- Tumbleweed email replies not necessary but to contact use; tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com |
SKY+
Syberian wrote:
Sorry if this asks the obvious, but if i already have standard Sky and i wish to upgrade to Sky+ it is going to cost me £99 plus a extra £10 a month extra whatever package i am on. Now i do not mind the £99, but another tenner, if that is right what a rip off. TIA If you order Sky+ you can opt for multiroom to have sky in another room. This will cost you £10 extra. If you don't have multiroom you will also pay £10 unless you have premium channels. So its actually worth the £10 extra to get multiroom and sky+ in the same deal. |
SKY+
Tumbleweed wrote:
Now i do not mind the £99, but another tenner, if that is right what a rip off. a 'rip off' is when you have no choice. You have a choice. No, a rip-off is asking significantly more than a product/service is worth. It has nothing whatsoever to do with choice, nor does anyone actually have to buy the product or service for it to be a rip-off. For example: designer jeans are a rip-off. They are no better quality than the average £10 Tesco pair and probably come from the same Chinese or Moroccan sweatshop anyway. -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) |
SKY+
Beck wrote:
If you order Sky+ you can opt for multiroom to have sky in another room. This will cost you £10 extra. If you don't have multiroom you will also pay £10 unless you have premium channels. So its actually worth the £10 extra to get multiroom and sky+ in the same deal. No, because the £10 multiroom payment is on top of the £10 Sky+ payment. -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) |
SKY+
"Jomtien" wrote in message ... Tumbleweed wrote: Now i do not mind the £99, but another tenner, if that is right what a rip off. a 'rip off' is when you have no choice. You have a choice. No, a rip-off is asking significantly more than a product/service is worth. It has nothing whatsoever to do with choice, nor does anyone actually have to buy the product or service for it to be a rip-off. For example: designer jeans are a rip-off. They are no better quality than the average £10 Tesco pair and probably come from the same Chinese or Moroccan sweatshop anyway. But if you have choice, how can it be a rip-off? You don't have to buy it. Sound more like jealousy. I can't afford it - must be a rip off... Loz |
SKY+
"loz" wrote in message ... "Jomtien" wrote in message ... Tumbleweed wrote: Now i do not mind the £99, but another tenner, if that is right what a rip off. a 'rip off' is when you have no choice. You have a choice. No, a rip-off is asking significantly more than a product/service is worth. It has nothing whatsoever to do with choice, nor does anyone actually have to buy the product or service for it to be a rip-off. For example: designer jeans are a rip-off. They are no better quality than the average £10 Tesco pair and probably come from the same Chinese or Moroccan sweatshop anyway. But if you have choice, how can it be a rip-off? You don't have to buy it. Sound more like jealousy. I can't afford it - must be a rip off... Loz agreed, to me a rip off is when you have no choice. You are only 'ripped off' if you have to pay, usually because of the circumstances, such as buying popcorn at the cinema, food at an airport, etc. Designer jeans arent a 'rip off, because you arent forced to buy them, since you have a choice,say Gucci jeans or Tesco's, Guccis arent a rip off, they are just expensive or costly or overpriced depending on your POV. -- Tumbleweed email replies not necessary but to contact use; tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com |
SKY+
"Tumbleweed" wrote in message ... "loz" wrote in message ... "Jomtien" wrote in message ... Tumbleweed wrote: Now i do not mind the £99, but another tenner, if that is right what a rip off. a 'rip off' is when you have no choice. You have a choice. No, a rip-off is asking significantly more than a product/service is worth. It has nothing whatsoever to do with choice, nor does anyone actually have to buy the product or service for it to be a rip-off. For example: designer jeans are a rip-off. They are no better quality than the average £10 Tesco pair and probably come from the same Chinese or Moroccan sweatshop anyway. But if you have choice, how can it be a rip-off? You don't have to buy it. Sound more like jealousy. I can't afford it - must be a rip off... Loz agreed, to me a rip off is when you have no choice. You are only 'ripped off' if you have to pay, usually because of the circumstances, such as buying popcorn at the cinema, food at an airport, etc. Designer jeans arent a 'rip off, because you arent forced to buy them, since you have a choice,say Gucci jeans or Tesco's, Guccis arent a rip off, they are just expensive or costly or overpriced depending on your POV. .....plus they have a label that says 'Gucci' which to some people (probably most of the ones buying them ) is worth every penny of the extra cost. Hence, no rip off. I once visited a factory in Mauritius that made those La Coste Polo Shirts. You could buy them without the croc logo for about £2, or with it stuck on, for a tenner or so. Were people who bought them for a tenner of their own free will being 'ripped off'? I dont think so, they thought it was worth it for the little croc and the status they felt it gave them. -- Tumbleweed email replies not necessary but to contact use; tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com |
SKY+
Tumbleweed wrote:
You are only 'ripped off' if you have to pay, usually because of the circumstances, such as buying popcorn at the cinema, food at an airport, etc. You don't "have" to do those either. You don't "have" to get out of bed in the morning. Life is nothing but choices but this has no bearing on whether things are rip-offs or not. -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) |
SKY+
loz wrote:
a 'rip off' is when you have no choice. You have a choice. No, a rip-off is asking significantly more than a product/service is worth. It has nothing whatsoever to do with choice, nor does anyone actually have to buy the product or service for it to be a rip-off. For example: designer jeans are a rip-off. They are no better quality than the average £10 Tesco pair and probably come from the same Chinese or Moroccan sweatshop anyway. But if you have choice, how can it be a rip-off? See above. -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) |
SKY+
"Jomtien" wrote in message
... Tumbleweed wrote: You are only 'ripped off' if you have to pay, usually because of the circumstances, such as buying popcorn at the cinema, food at an airport, etc. You don't "have" to do those either. You don't "have" to get out of bed in the morning. Life is nothing but choices but this has no bearing on whether things are rip-offs or not. If the person paying for the service (or whatever else they're buying) considers it to be worth it then it isn't a rip off. I certainly wouldn't pay for anything I consider to be a rip off but I will pay more for some things than others are prepared to pay because *I* think it's worth it. You may consider it a rip off but that doesn't mean everyone else does. Is 1st class air travel (or executive class or whatever it's called) worth the money ? Not to me so I think it's a rip off but many think it is worth it. Earlier in this thread you said designer jeans were a rip off as they were no better than a £10 pair from Tesco. However, by your reasoning, the Tesco jeans must be a rip off because you can buy elsewhere for less than a third of the price. Different people see things in different ways and you can't apply your views to everyone else. A company has a choice, sell a lot of things for a small cost, a few things for a big cost, or pitch the price in the middle. Whatever price something costs some people will pay regardless, some won't pay because the can't afford it and others won't pay because although they can afford it they think it's a rip off. |
SKY+
"Paul" wrote in message ... "Jomtien" wrote in message ... Tumbleweed wrote: You are only 'ripped off' if you have to pay, usually because of the circumstances, such as buying popcorn at the cinema, food at an airport, etc. You don't "have" to do those either. You don't "have" to get out of bed in the morning. Life is nothing but choices but this has no bearing on whether things are rip-offs or not. If the person paying for the service (or whatever else they're buying) considers it to be worth it then it isn't a rip off. I certainly wouldn't pay for anything I consider to be a rip off but I will pay more for some things than others are prepared to pay because *I* think it's worth it. You may consider it a rip off but that doesn't mean everyone else does. Is 1st class air travel (or executive class or whatever it's called) worth the money ? Not to me so I think it's a rip off but many think it is worth it. Earlier in this thread you said designer jeans were a rip off as they were no better than a £10 pair from Tesco. However, by your reasoning, the Tesco jeans must be a rip off because you can buy elsewhere for less than a third of the price. Different people see things in different ways and you can't apply your views to everyone else. A company has a choice, sell a lot of things for a small cost, a few things for a big cost, or pitch the price in the middle. Whatever price something costs some people will pay regardless, some won't pay because the can't afford it and others won't pay because although they can afford it they think it's a rip off. To me, a rip off occurs if there is limited choice, and if because of that, you are charged more than you would be in an open market. Such as popcorn in a cinema or food at an airport or beer at a concert. If I have choice, I dont class it as a rip off if something is very expensive even if cheaper elsewhere, since its up to me to a much larger extent, to choose. So I can buy jeans at 100 different places, from £10-£100, and none of those is a rip off, because there is no ability to take advantage of me needing/wanting jeans, whereas there is at an airport if I am hungry. -- Tumbleweed email replies not necessary but to contact use; tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com |
SKY+
"Jomtien" wrote in message ... loz wrote: a 'rip off' is when you have no choice. You have a choice. No, a rip-off is asking significantly more than a product/service is worth. It has nothing whatsoever to do with choice, nor does anyone actually have to buy the product or service for it to be a rip-off. For example: designer jeans are a rip-off. They are no better quality than the average £10 Tesco pair and probably come from the same Chinese or Moroccan sweatshop anyway. But if you have choice, how can it be a rip-off? See above. -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) Thank you all, i think i was asking for confirmation of the initial cost of Sky+, plus any subsequent cost. Not a definition of the term "rip off" Anyway thanx to all who gave helpful responses. |
SKY+
Paul wrote:
If the person paying for the service (or whatever else they're buying) considers it to be worth it then it isn't a rip off. So an old granny who pays some yob £500 to shove a few roof tiles back into place hasn't been ripped-off? -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) |
SKY+
"Jomtien" wrote in message
... Paul wrote: If the person paying for the service (or whatever else they're buying) considers it to be worth it then it isn't a rip off. So an old granny who pays some yob £500 to shove a few roof tiles back into place hasn't been ripped-off? To *me* that would have been a rip off price but then I wouldn't have paid and I don't know anyone who would and that includes my mother who is an "old granny". With your example the majority of people would consider the price to be a rip off but then I really don't care how much someone else pays for something. OK, so what I probably should have said is that if *I* want to buy something and *I* consider the price to be worth it then it's not a rip off to *me*. Is that better ? Still happy with your £10 Tesco jeans ? You're paying far too much and, in my view, being ripped off. |
SKY+
Paul wrote:
So an old granny who pays some yob £500 to shove a few roof tiles back into place hasn't been ripped-off? To *me* that would have been a rip off price but then I wouldn't have paid and I don't know anyone who would and that includes my mother who is an "old granny". With your example the majority of people would consider the price to be a rip off but then I really don't care how much someone else pays for something. You are splitting hairs. A rip-off is a rip-off, plain and simple. OK, so what I probably should have said is that if *I* want to buy something and *I* consider the price to be worth it then it's not a rip off to *me*. Is that better ? No, because your perceived notion of whether it is a rip-off is neither here nor there, as I explained. Still happy with your £10 Tesco jeans ? You're paying far too much and, in my view, being ripped off. My jeans cost 5 Euros from my local supermarket. -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) |
SKY+
"Jomtien" wrote in message ... Paul wrote: So an old granny who pays some yob £500 to shove a few roof tiles back into place hasn't been ripped-off? To *me* that would have been a rip off price but then I wouldn't have paid and I don't know anyone who would and that includes my mother who is an "old granny". With your example the majority of people would consider the price to be a rip off but then I really don't care how much someone else pays for something. You are splitting hairs. A rip-off is a rip-off, plain and simple. Its obvious that each persons defnition of 'rip off' varies, and there's nothing simple about it at all. Some of my friends paid £100+ to see the Rolling Stones earlier this week. They could have listened to a CD for £15 (bought from HMV) or the same CD for £10(from CD Wow) or the same CD from £8 (101CD ) or for free (downloaded). Which of those is a rip off? In many cases it depends on your POV, in others it doesnt (such as you granny example), thats because in that case most people have the same POV, but in others (Concert tickets, jeans, food at the cinema, etc etc) it varies considerably. You may consider I've been ripped off with my £100 Gucci jeans from Harrods, I may consider you are a chav in your £5 tesco jeans and wasted your money. OK, so what I probably should have said is that if *I* want to buy something and *I* consider the price to be worth it then it's not a rip off to *me*. Is that better ? No, because your perceived notion of whether it is a rip-off is neither here nor there, as I explained. Still happy with your £10 Tesco jeans ? You're paying far too much and, in my view, being ripped off. My jeans cost 5 Euros from my local supermarket. But they dont have a Gucci label on them, so for some they are a waste of money. -- Tumbleweed email replies not necessary but to contact use; tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com |
SKY+
Tumbleweed wrote:
You may consider I've been ripped off with my £100 Gucci jeans from Harrods, I may consider you are a chav in your £5 tesco jeans and wasted your money. Me being a chav has nothing to do with designer jeans being a rip-off. As I explained, the definition of rip-off is very simple: it is being charged substantially more than a product or service is worth. Perceived notions are neither here nor there. -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) |
SKY+
"Jomtien" wrote in message ... Tumbleweed wrote: You may consider I've been ripped off with my £100 Gucci jeans from Harrods, I may consider you are a chav in your £5 tesco jeans and wasted your money. Me being a chav has nothing to do with designer jeans being a rip-off. As I explained, the definition of rip-off is very simple: it is being charged substantially more than a product or service is worth. Perceived notions are neither here nor there. what something is worth is very much a perceived notion. -- Tumbleweed email replies not necessary but to contact use; tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com |
SKY+
"Tumbleweed" wrote in message
... "Jomtien" wrote in message ... Tumbleweed wrote: You may consider I've been ripped off with my £100 Gucci jeans from Harrods, I may consider you are a chav in your £5 tesco jeans and wasted your money. Me being a chav has nothing to do with designer jeans being a rip-off. As I explained, the definition of rip-off is very simple: it is being charged substantially more than a product or service is worth. Perceived notions are neither here nor there. what something is worth is very much a perceived notion. I agree with you 100%. Asking those at work with me today and they also agree. However, Jomtien doesn't and so we are wrong and he is right ! Jomtien, who defines what a product or service is worth ? As I said before, if I consider something is being offered at a fair price then it is not a rip off to me. Only I can decide if something is worth the asking price. According to wikipedia a rip off is in the eye of the beholder. |
SKY+
On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 08:26:42 +0100, "Tumbleweed"
wrote: what something is worth is very much a perceived notion. And some people have difficulty in distinguishing similar things. For some, there is no difference between a £500 pair of Luis Vutton jeans, and a £5 pair from Tesco. They are absolutely the exact same thing, and therefore the LV item must be a rip-off. However, the people who buy LV jeans will probably tell you that they buy them for a reason - yes, for the name, but also because they're most likely to be better made, better stitched, with better fabric, etc. Now, OK, no question that the 'designer' labels do make a substantially higher profit as well, and in the cases where these labels act to prevent retailers from discounting their products, then arguably yes, that is a rip-off. But the point is that just because something is cheaper doens't necessarily mean it's exactly the same. Sometimes it is worth paying more for something that's better made. -- |
SKY+
"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message ... On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 08:26:42 +0100, "Tumbleweed" wrote: what something is worth is very much a perceived notion. And some people have difficulty in distinguishing similar things. For some, there is no difference between a £500 pair of Luis Vutton jeans, and a £5 pair from Tesco. They are absolutely the exact same thing, and therefore the LV item must be a rip-off. However, the people who buy LV jeans will probably tell you that they buy them for a reason - yes, for the name, but also because they're most likely to be better made, better stitched, with better fabric, etc. They arent exactly the same though. They have a 'cachet' or status about them **to the buyers** that makes them worth that to the buyer.Even though Jomtien wouldnt be seen dead in them and doesnt value that status at all. Someone else does. As I said, value is mostly about perception, not fact. Thats why one year houses are worth X, the next X+20% and the next X-20%. Now, OK, no question that the 'designer' labels do make a substantially higher profit as well, and in the cases where these labels act to prevent retailers from discounting their products, then arguably yes, that is a rip-off. But the point is that just because something is cheaper doens't necessarily mean it's exactly the same. Sometimes it is worth paying more for something that's better made. Sometimes people think its worth paying for the badge and only that. They perceive the logo to be worth it. Those who pay £100 for gucci jeans no doubt perceive the logo as being worth about £90. I suppose you could argue they are buying jeans for £10 and a logo for £90. -- Tumbleweed email replies not necessary but to contact use; tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com |
SKY+
Paul wrote:
what something is worth is very much a perceived notion. I agree with you 100%. Asking those at work with me today and they also agree. However, Jomtien doesn't and so we are wrong and he is right ! Well, there you go. Jomtien, who defines what a product or service is worth ? The market. If five places sell a discombobulator for £10 and one sells it for £50 then the one is a rip-off. It matters not whether people are prepared to pay it, or whether they think they are being ripped-off or not. A rip-off is anything being sold for substantially more than its normal price or for which the price bears little or no relation to the cost of providing the item or service. Given that the Sky+ recording function (aka "service") has NO production costs at all above those of the EPG which is provided free to all digibox users, this £10 fee is clearly a rip-off. As I said before, if I consider something is being offered at a fair price then it is not a rip off to me. Only I can decide if something is worth the asking price. This is neither here nor there. If I buy a perfectly good vacuum cleaner for half of its normal price and then decide for whatever reason that I have been ripped-off, does that make it likely that a court will find in my favour and order a refund? Of course not. Opinion and perceived worth is meaningless. According to wikipedia a rip off is in the eye of the beholder. Wikipedia is riddled with errors. -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) |
SKY+
Zero Tolerance wrote:
But the point is that just because something is cheaper doens't necessarily mean it's exactly the same. Sometimes it is worth paying more for something that's better made. Something that really is better made is worth more than something that less well made. To sell a cheap and nasty item for the price of a good one is clearly a rip-off too. However, having a designer label on is absolutely no indication of the quality of the item. I could stick a designer label on a £3 pair of Tesco jeans (indeed if you look in your local market you will probably find many such) but that won't make the jeans worth more than £3 even if I charge £50 and even if you pay it. The label on a thing is not a guarantee of quality and so to be charged for the label and not the quality is clearly a rip-off. -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) |
SKY+
Tumbleweed wrote:
They perceive the logo to be worth it. Those who pay £100 for gucci jeans no doubt perceive the logo as being worth about £90. I suppose you could argue they are buying jeans for £10 and a logo for £90. And no matter how you look at it, this is a rip-off. -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) |
SKY+
On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 09:54:05 +0200, Jomtien wrote:
Something that really is better made is worth more than something that less well made. Exactly. The label on a thing is not a guarantee of quality and so to be charged for the label and not the quality is clearly a rip-off. Certainly, if the label alone is all that you are being charged for. However, sometimes if you pay more, then along with the label you do get a better quality of fabric, deeper dyeing, etc., and all the things that make "a better pair of jeans". If that matters to you then there is sometimes value in spending more than the minimum possible. As a wearer of jeans, this is something only you can judge for yourself as to whether (a) there IS any difference in quality, and (b) whether it is important enough to you so as to be worth the extra. -- |
SKY+
"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 09:54:05 +0200, Jomtien wrote: Something that really is better made is worth more than something that less well made. Exactly. The label on a thing is not a guarantee of quality and so to be charged for the label and not the quality is clearly a rip-off. Certainly, if the label alone is all that you are being charged for. However, sometimes if you pay more, then along with the label you do get a better quality of fabric, deeper dyeing, etc., and all the things that make "a better pair of jeans". If that matters to you then there is sometimes value in spending more than the minimum possible. As a wearer of jeans, this is something only you can judge for yourself as to whether (a) there IS any difference in quality, and (b) whether it is important enough to you so as to be worth the extra. ....and (c) whether the logo is worth it for the sense of superiority it gives you. -- Tumbleweed email replies not necessary but to contact use; tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com |
SKY+
Tumbleweed wrote:
...and (c) whether the logo is worth it for the sense of superiority it gives you. This is the rip-off part, regardless of whether the pea-brained morons who buy such nonsense think they are getting value for money. -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) |
SKY+
Zero Tolerance wrote:
The label on a thing is not a guarantee of quality and so to be charged for the label and not the quality is clearly a rip-off. Certainly, if the label alone is all that you are being charged for. However, sometimes if you pay more, then along with the label you do get a better quality of fabric, deeper dyeing, etc., and all the things that make "a better pair of jeans". If that matters to you then there is sometimes value in spending more than the minimum possible. As a wearer of jeans, this is something only you can judge for yourself as to whether (a) there IS any difference in quality, and (b) whether it is important enough to you so as to be worth the extra. If you look at my initial comment about this you will see that I specifically mentioned that the designer jeans probably came out of the same sweatshop and were of no better quality. *If* the quality is better then they are worth more. However I doubt that the quality of any pair of jeans could ever be 15 times better than that of the £3 Tesco pair. -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) |
SKY+
"Jomtien" wrote in message ... Zero Tolerance wrote: The label on a thing is not a guarantee of quality and so to be charged for the label and not the quality is clearly a rip-off. Certainly, if the label alone is all that you are being charged for. However, sometimes if you pay more, then along with the label you do get a better quality of fabric, deeper dyeing, etc., and all the things that make "a better pair of jeans". If that matters to you then there is sometimes value in spending more than the minimum possible. As a wearer of jeans, this is something only you can judge for yourself as to whether (a) there IS any difference in quality, and (b) whether it is important enough to you so as to be worth the extra. If you look at my initial comment about this you will see that I specifically mentioned that the designer jeans probably came out of the same sweatshop and were of no better quality. *If* the quality is better then they are worth more. However I doubt that the quality of any pair of jeans could ever be 15 times better than that of the £3 Tesco pair. Blimey they are getting cheaper by the minute, next time you post they will be paying you to take them away! -- Tumbleweed email replies not necessary but to contact use; tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com |
SKY+
On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 08:25:04 +0200, Jomtien wrote:
If you look at my initial comment about this you will see that I specifically mentioned that the designer jeans probably came out of the same sweatshop and were of no better quality. Yes, I saw you say that, and yet I did not agree that this hypothesis was always true. *If* the quality is better then they are worth more. Then we agree. However I doubt that the quality of any pair of jeans could ever be 15 times better than that of the £3 Tesco pair. Mm, law of diminishing returns and the £30,000 hi-fi speakers, of course. -- |
SKY+
"Jomtien" wrote in message
... Paul wrote: what something is worth is very much a perceived notion. I agree with you 100%. Asking those at work with me today and they also agree. However, Jomtien doesn't and so we are wrong and he is right ! Well, there you go. A rip-off is anything being sold for substantially more than its normal price or for which the price bears little or no relation to the cost of providing the item or service. Given that the Sky+ recording function (aka "service") has NO production costs at all above those of the EPG which is provided free to all digibox users, this £10 fee is clearly a rip-off. So the value of something isn't defined by the market then ? If the market allows me sell a product at a certain price then can it be a rip off ? Surely if it was a rip off there wouldn't be a marktet as nobody would pay ? The cost of providing the recording service on Sky+ is not zero. There were, and still are, development costs involved. I'm not saying it cost them £10/month/user to development but it certainly wasn't free. There are many products which are sold at a far higher price than they cost to make purely to recoup development costs. In many cases the cost of a product is driven by supply and demand and what people in that market are prepared to pay and has nothing to do with how much it costs to provide or make. Anyway, there are far more important things to worry about than this. |
SKY+
"Paul" wrote in message ... "Jomtien" wrote in message ... Paul wrote: what something is worth is very much a perceived notion. I agree with you 100%. Asking those at work with me today and they also agree. However, Jomtien doesn't and so we are wrong and he is right ! Well, there you go. A rip-off is anything being sold for substantially more than its normal price or for which the price bears little or no relation to the cost of providing the item or service. Given that the Sky+ recording function (aka "service") has NO production costs at all above those of the EPG which is provided free to all digibox users, this £10 fee is clearly a rip-off. So the value of something isn't defined by the market then ? If the market allows me sell a product at a certain price then can it be a rip off ? Surely if it was a rip off there wouldn't be a marktet as nobody would pay ? The cost of providing the recording service on Sky+ is not zero. There were, and still are, development costs involved. I'm not saying it cost them £10/month/user to development but it certainly wasn't free. There are many products which are sold at a far higher price than they cost to make purely to recoup development costs. In many cases the cost of a product is driven by supply and demand and what people in that market are prepared to pay and has nothing to do with how much it costs to provide or make. Jomtien seemingly believes* that the price of something should always be a certain percentage above its cost to manufacture (I'm not even sure he'd include development and sales and marketing costs,since price to manufacture is the only cost he ever mentions). Thats no doubt why he thinks Sky+ should be free, because the box has been sold for a price and therefore the service should be free since it doesnt cost anything to make it record (accrding to him, though as you point out, it does cost something). As you say, there are costs involved in keeping it going, but also Sky are free to make the price of the box and the price of the service (recording) meet whatever objective they want, That could be boxes at £1,000 each and free recording, or free boxes and £10/week recording fee or everything free to encourage people to stay with Sky, or £1M a box and £10,000/week recording fee. The point being as you say that the price is arbitrary and controlled much more by supply and demand ,and not generally related to cost of manufacture. Another POV might be that the people being ripped off are the ones in China making the jeans. -- Tumbleweed *judging from previous messages email replies not necessary but to contact use; tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com |
SKY+
"Tumbleweed" wrote in message ... "Paul" wrote in message ... "Jomtien" wrote in message ... Paul wrote: what something is worth is very much a perceived notion. I agree with you 100%. Asking those at work with me today and they also agree. However, Jomtien doesn't and so we are wrong and he is right ! Well, there you go. A rip-off is anything being sold for substantially more than its normal price or for which the price bears little or no relation to the cost of providing the item or service. Given that the Sky+ recording function (aka "service") has NO production costs at all above those of the EPG which is provided free to all digibox users, this £10 fee is clearly a rip-off. So the value of something isn't defined by the market then ? If the market allows me sell a product at a certain price then can it be a rip off ? Surely if it was a rip off there wouldn't be a marktet as nobody would pay ? The cost of providing the recording service on Sky+ is not zero. There were, and still are, development costs involved. I'm not saying it cost them £10/month/user to development but it certainly wasn't free. There are many products which are sold at a far higher price than they cost to make purely to recoup development costs. In many cases the cost of a product is driven by supply and demand and what people in that market are prepared to pay and has nothing to do with how much it costs to provide or make. Jomtien seemingly believes* that the price of something should always be a certain percentage above its cost to manufacture (I'm not even sure he'd include development and sales and marketing costs,since price to manufacture is the only cost he ever mentions). Thats no doubt why he thinks Sky+ should be free, because the box has been sold for a price and therefore the service should be free since it doesnt cost anything to make it record (accrding to him, though as you point out, it does cost something). As you say, there are costs involved in keeping it going, but also Sky are free to make the price of the box and the price of the service (recording) meet whatever objective they want, That could be boxes at £1,000 each and free recording, or free boxes and £10/week recording fee or everything free to encourage people to stay with Sky, or £1M a box and £10,000/week recording fee. The point being as you say that the price is arbitrary and controlled much more by supply and demand ,and not generally related to cost of manufacture. Another POV might be that the people being ripped off are the ones in China making the jeans. p.s just saw this. Its not you is it Jomtien? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/5292860.stm :-) -- Tumbleweed email replies not necessary but to contact use; tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com |
SKY+
Tumbleweed wrote:
Jomtien seemingly believes* that the price of something should always be a certain percentage above its cost to manufacture (I'm not even sure he'd include development and sales and marketing costs,since price to manufacture is the only cost he ever mentions). Not a certain percentage; just a percentage. The other costs are merely parts of the whole. Thats no doubt why he thinks Sky+ should be free, because the box has been sold for a price and therefore the service should be free since it doesnt cost anything to make it record (accrding to him, though as you point out, it does cost something). No, it costs nothing. Therefore there is no reason why one should pay for it. Anyone who thinks that it costs Sky something to let the Sky+ record is an idiot. The functionality is contained in the box. Just like any VCR, DVDR, Freeview hard drive recorder, Ipod etc. etc. As you say, there are costs involved in keeping it going, These are the costs of EPG provision and these are met (many times over) by the broadcasters who pay for an EPG slot. There are NO ongoing costs to Sky to let the Sky+ record. but also Sky are free to make the price of the box and the price of the service (recording) meet whatever objective they want, That could be boxes at £1,000 each and free recording, or free boxes and £10/week recording fee or everything free to encourage people to stay with Sky, or £1M a box and £10,000/week recording fee. The point being as you say that the price is arbitrary and controlled much more by supply and demand ,and not generally related to cost of manufacture. Sky should not be free to restrict the manufacture of competing devices thus artificially affecting the price of the service. Supply and demand is precisely what is *not* deciding the fee charged for Sky+ use. -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) |
SKY+
Tumbleweed wrote:
p.s just saw this. Its not you is it Jomtien? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/5292860.stm Hardly. I never buy branded products if I can avoid them by getting the same thing in a plain packet. And I would certainly never buy brand-name clothes, trainers, sunglasses, shopping bags etc. The chap writing the article is a self-confessed brandname junkie and to me that makes him a total pillock. -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) |
SKY+
Paul wrote:
A rip-off is anything being sold for substantially more than its normal price or for which the price bears little or no relation to the cost of providing the item or service. Given that the Sky+ recording function (aka "service") has NO production costs at all above those of the EPG which is provided free to all digibox users, this £10 fee is clearly a rip-off. So the value of something isn't defined by the market then ? If the market allows me sell a product at a certain price then can it be a rip off ? Surely if it was a rip off there wouldn't be a marktet as nobody would pay ? The market does decide, when the market is open. In the case of the Sky+ it is a firmly closed monopoly. Hence the bizarre pricing that works, unsurprisingly, to the total detriment of the user. The cost of providing the recording service on Sky+ is not zero. Yes it is. There were, and still are, development costs involved. That is not the cost of providing the service. It is the cost of providing the box. The cost of providing the box should be met from the profit made from selling the box, just as it is with other consumer electronic devices that perform a similar function. Once purchased the expense for the user ends. I'm not saying it cost them £10/month/user to development but it certainly wasn't free. There are many products which are sold at a far higher price than they cost to make purely to recoup development costs. The router I am using gets free firmware updates, even though I pay no fee for this. Windows gets regular free updates. Freeview boxes get free firmware updates. My DVD player gets free firmware updates. The subscription-free FreesatfromSky digibox gets free firmware updates. None of these products require a subscription to function or to be updated and the Freeview and Sky EPGs are both provided free of charge to all users, with or without pay subscriptions. The same free Sky EPG drives the Sky+ recording function. The end user does not directly pay for ongoing development costs. -- Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these. The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5 UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73 BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/ ---- Only the truth as I see it. No monies return'd. ;-) |
SKY+
"Jomtien" wrote in message
... Tumbleweed wrote: p.s just saw this. Its not you is it Jomtien? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/5292860.stm Hardly. I never buy branded products if I can avoid them by getting the same thing in a plain packet. And I would certainly never buy brand-name clothes, trainers, sunglasses, shopping bags etc. The chap writing the article is a self-confessed brandname junkie and to me that makes him a total pillock. You are entitled to your view just like everyone else is entitled to theirs. It is only a view though, it might be right for you and wrong for others. If someone is happy to buy branded goods then that's fine, lots of people try to kill themselves by taking drugs or smoking - it's entirely up to them. |
SKY+
"Jomtien" wrote in message
... Tumbleweed wrote: Sky should not be free to restrict the manufacture of competing devices thus artificially affecting the price of the service. Supply and demand is precisely what is *not* deciding the fee charged for Sky+ use. Years ago Sky took a risk by starting a satellite TV service. Anyone could have done it but with the exception of BSB or whatever they were called nobody could be bothered. Don't blame Sky for spotting an opportunity and exploiting it to the full. If you want to blame anyone blame the laws which allow them to do it. Now the kids are ready to go back to school it's time to go on holiday. That is one area that is definitely a rip off. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:19 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com