Sky's two fingered salute to Ofcom
 

Zero Tolerance wrote:

Without an EPG entry few if any of the 9million Sky box users would
ever see these channels.

Well if the Sky EPG number is such poor value for money, perhaps those
channels could spend the money on marketing their satellite frequency
and polarisation details instead?

You are being deliberately obtuse, like the Sky EPG.

Virtually no one knows that channels can be added manually, and even
fewer will care to do so.

--
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's two fingered salute to Ofcom
 

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 08:34:53 +0200, Jomtien wrote:

Virtually no one knows that channels can be added manually, and even
fewer will care to do so.

So you admit that there is a commercial value in having an EPG number?

OK, so then given that the last time I checked, Sky was not a
registered charity, can you explain why Sky should not make a charge
for that valuable service?

And again I restate - if the charge was unreasonable, then many more
channels would advertise their frequency some other way.
--

Sky's two fingered salute to Ofcom
 

Zero Tolerance wrote:

Virtually no one knows that channels can be added manually, and even
fewer will care to do so.

So you admit that there is a commercial value in having an EPG number?

Only because Sky have made is deliberately difficult to tune and use
non-EPG channels.


OK, so then given that the last time I checked, Sky was not a
registered charity, can you explain why Sky should not make a charge
for that valuable service?

"A" charge, maybe. But not such as absurdly high one.

One bloke with a modest PC could run the entire EPG. And you're
telling me that makes it worth £70,000 per channel per year? Rubbish.


And again I restate - if the charge was unreasonable, then many more
channels would advertise their frequency some other way.

No, for the reasons I gave.

--
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's two fingered salute to Ofcom
 

Dave wrote:

: The Sky EPG prices are excessive,

Says you!

And many broadcasters.

Show me anybody who likes paying for any service and doesn't think it
ought to be cheaper.

The difference here is that this is a monopoly, with prices fixed by
the only supplier.

--
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's two fingered salute to Ofcom
 

"Jomtien" wrote in message
...
Zero Tolerance wrote:

Virtually no one knows that channels can be added manually, and even
fewer will care to do so.

So you admit that there is a commercial value in having an EPG number?

Only because Sky have made is deliberately difficult to tune and use
non-EPG channels.


OK, so then given that the last time I checked, Sky was not a
registered charity, can you explain why Sky should not make a charge
for that valuable service?

"A" charge, maybe. But not such as absurdly high one.

One bloke with a modest PC could run the entire EPG. And you're
telling me that makes it worth £70,000 per channel per year? Rubbish.

But you can`t make this arguement, it isn`t what something costs to run/make
that determines the value, it is what it is worth that sets the value.
Enough people seem to agree that it`s worth that level of cost, otherwise
they`d find an alternative.

Sky's two fingered salute to Ofcom
 

Simon Finnigan wrote:

One bloke with a modest PC could run the entire EPG. And you're
telling me that makes it worth £70,000 per channel per year? Rubbish.

But you can`t make this arguement, it isn`t what something costs to run/make
that determines the value, it is what it is worth that sets the value.

Not necessarily.

This is why we have a Monopolies Commission and an OFT.

--
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's two fingered salute to Ofcom
 

"Jomtien" wrote in message
...
Simon Finnigan wrote:

One bloke with a modest PC could run the entire EPG. And you're
telling me that makes it worth £70,000 per channel per year? Rubbish.

But you can`t make this arguement, it isn`t what something costs to
run/make
that determines the value, it is what it is worth that sets the value.

Not necessarily.

This is why we have a Monopolies Commission and an OFT.

And have they got involved and forced Sky to reduce their fees?

Sky's two fingered salute to Ofcom
 

"Simon Finnigan" wrote in message
...
"Jomtien" wrote in message
...
Zero Tolerance wrote:

Virtually no one knows that channels can be added manually, and even
fewer will care to do so.

So you admit that there is a commercial value in having an EPG number?

Only because Sky have made is deliberately difficult to tune and use
non-EPG channels.


OK, so then given that the last time I checked, Sky was not a
registered charity, can you explain why Sky should not make a charge
for that valuable service?

"A" charge, maybe. But not such as absurdly high one.

One bloke with a modest PC could run the entire EPG. And you're
telling me that makes it worth £70,000 per channel per year? Rubbish.

But you can`t make this arguement, it isn`t what something costs to
run/make
that determines the value, it is what it is worth that sets the value.
Enough people seem to agree that it`s worth that level of cost, otherwise
they`d find an alternative.

Cost is the amount is costs the producer to provide the goods or service.

Price is the amount the producer\wholesaler\retailer asks for the goods
or service.

Consumers will then determine whether that price represents good value
or not, by buying or not buying the product or service.

If theres a big difference between the manufacturing cost and the selling
price and a large demand, then other producers will enter the market and
offer the same goods at a lower price.

However, if the producer has or has purchased exclusive licencing rights
to some intellectual property, information, etc then they too will be part
of the production costs as well. And they can charge whatever the market
will bear. However having exclusive licencing rights doesn't usually
constitute
a restrictive monoply as prohibited by the legeislation, as otherwise no
authors, musicians etc would be able to claim the protection of copyright.


michael adams

....

Sky's two fingered salute to Ofcom
 

"Jomtien" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:

: The Sky EPG prices are excessive,

Says you!

And many broadcasters.

Show me anybody who likes paying for any service and doesn't think it
ought to be cheaper.

The difference here is that this is a monopoly, with prices fixed by
the only supplier.


How come lots of people are voting with their wallets and dropping SKy and
moving to Freeview? SUrely if Sky was a monopoly, they wouldnt be ableto do
that?

Or do you mean, Sky has a monopoly on Skys' programmes, just like Ford has a
monopoly of Ford cars. If you dont like Sky TV there are plenty of TV
alternatives.

--
Tumbleweed

email replies not necessary but to contact use;
tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com

Sky's two fingered salute to Ofcom
 

Simon Finnigan wrote:

But you can`t make this arguement, it isn`t what something costs to
run/make
that determines the value, it is what it is worth that sets the value.

Not necessarily.

This is why we have a Monopolies Commission and an OFT.

And have they got involved and forced Sky to reduce their fees?

Ofcom did in fact make a half-arsed effort to do this. After much
twittering about "'market forces" (and how can you have market forces
without competition?) they ended up capping them.

The MMC and the OFT are currently looking at Sky.

The main problem here is that all UK government bodies are terrified
of Murdoch and will do nothing to upset him. The procedures and
organisations are in place to effectively and correctly regulate this
industry, but nothing ever happens.

--
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. ;-)