Things that annoy me about sky

At 05:34:58 on 13/08/2006, Tumbleweed delighted uk.media.tv.sky by
announcing:


"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
... On Sat, 12 Aug 2006
21:52:25 GMT, "[email protected]" wrote:

Why are there so many advertisments (when we are paying a
subscription)

Because if there were no advertisements at all, your subscription
would be substantially higher and you'd be moaning about that too.


8% IIRC. I'd take that.

What's the 8%? The proportion of Sky's revenue that comes from
adverts? If so, it would probably be more than an 8% increase without
the adverts since either the programmes would be longer (and so cost
more) or there would be more of them to buy (and so cost more).

loz wrote:
"[email protected]" wrote in message
k...
Hi all,
Why are there so many advertisments (when we are paying a
subscription)and is it me or do they increase the volume when the adverts
come on, and why are the adverts on every channel at the same time.
Why do all the programs start on the hour or half hour, why don`t they
stagger the start times,
also the movie channels on sky seem to be showing older movies since box
office began .
Why are there so many repeats on
Why am I still subscribing ?
Oh yeah, I signed a contract for 12 months

People who subscribe to Sky, then moan about the subscription...

Loz


Have you never moaned about something you've purchased or a politician
you've voted for?

Mike

"Alex" wrote in message
...
At 05:34:58 on 13/08/2006, Tumbleweed delighted uk.media.tv.sky by
announcing:


"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
... On Sat, 12 Aug 2006
21:52:25 GMT, "[email protected]" wrote:

Why are there so many advertisments (when we are paying a
subscription)

Because if there were no advertisements at all, your subscription
would be substantially higher and you'd be moaning about that too.


8% IIRC. I'd take that.

What's the 8%? The proportion of Sky's revenue that comes from
adverts? If so, it would probably be more than an 8% increase without
the adverts since either the programmes would be longer (and so cost
more) or there would be more of them to buy (and so cost more).

A potters wheel, for 15 min before the start of each hour, would be enough.

--
Tumbleweed

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

"Paul Heslop" wrote in message
...
Brian Wescombe wrote:

"Paul Heslop" wrote in message
...
"[email protected]" wrote:

Hi all,
Why are there so many advertisments (when we are paying a
subscription)

because they're money grabbing *******s

and
is it me or do they increase the volume when the adverts come on, and
why
are the adverts on every channel at the same time.

Yes, it does seem louder and apparently they spent a lot of time
trying to sync the things so it would be hard to dodge them. worse
still were the ones that came on almost as soon as the credits had
finished at the start.

Why do all the programs start on the hour or half hour, why don`t they
stagger the start times,

advertising?

also the movie channels on sky seem to be showing older movies since
box
office began .

there are some moldies doing the round, or course they're 'classics'

Why are there so many repeats on

because they would have no new programing except american series and
gambling things

Why am I still subscribing ?

because, like me, you're crazy

Oh yeah, I signed a contract for 12 months

only 4 months to go )

I am reluctant to give it up as I've been with others and been less
happy. It's a shame that money and trickery, the stupid red dots and
DOG crap etc come before customers happiness.

That's why Sky continue to do it, they know people wil keep paying
whatever
they do. Money talks - the only way to make Sky listen would be for
thousands of people to unsubscribe (all on the same day for better
effect!)
I cancelled earlier this year and don't regret it one bit.

I'm not into cutting my nose off to spite my own face. There's much I
hate but I would go spare with the basic five channels. I don't watch
much telly but hardly any of it is on the five.

I've got way more than five channels and don't pay for any of them

"Alex" wrote in message
...
Because if there were no advertisements at all, your subscription
would be substantially higher and you'd be moaning about that too.
8% IIRC. I'd take that.

What's the 8%? The proportion of Sky's revenue that comes from
adverts? If so, it would probably be more than an 8% increase without
the adverts since either the programmes would be longer (and so cost
more) or there would be more of them to buy (and so cost more).

You must be joking.
Sky's programming budget must be all of 45p an hour
:-)

Loz

[email protected] wrote:
[...]
Why do all the programs start on the hour or half hour, why don`t they
stagger the start times,


Not that Sky have any control over it anyway (Sky just being the delivery
mechanism for most of the channels rather than running the channel itself),
but I'm personally very glad the start times aren't staggered. It would make
recording things much more difficult if they all overlapped in different
ways. Having everything start and end on the half-hour is perfect IMO, it
maximises the amount you can record.

--

(O)enone

On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 13:34:58 +0100, "Tumbleweed"
wrote:

"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
Because if there were no advertisements at all, your subscription
would be substantially higher and you'd be moaning about that too.

8% IIRC. I'd take that.

8% might cover the Sky-branded channels, but what about all the rest?
Exactly how many 8%s would you be happy paying?

--

"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 11:53:24 +0100, "Tumbleweed"
wrote:

whats that? sounds (no pun intended) interesting, annoys me as well the
way
they ramp up the vol on ads even if they use some technical trick to prove
they dont really.

They don't ramp up the volume and don't use a technical trick to prove
that they don't. The ADVERTISERS use a technical trick to make their
adverts SOUND louder when the volume ISN'T turned up.

Didn't channel 5 recently (within the last year) get fined for this?

On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 17:34:41 +0100, "Beck" [email protected] wrote:

Didn't channel 5 recently (within the last year) get fined for this?

Yes. So did Bravo, if I recall correctly. I think the issue there was
that C5's programmes were really extra quiet so the noise difference
was all the more of an issue.
--

"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 17:34:41 +0100, "Beck" [email protected] wrote:

Didn't channel 5 recently (within the last year) get fined for this?

Yes. So did Bravo, if I recall correctly. I think the issue there was
that C5's programmes were really extra quiet so the noise difference
was all the more of an issue.

Yep was searching for news items on them and it seems ITV got a slapped
wrist aswell. They really ought to sort themselves out. I know they say
that its down to the advertisers but they do have the facility to bring down
the sound during adverts.