Sky+ to be free on any package from 1 July

On 14 May, 19:48, Ed wrote:
Header says it all really. No charge for Sky+ sub with even the two
mix basic pack - currently £15 a month - from 1 July.

Hmmmm,

I wonder what Virgin will do to counter this ? Sky are starting to
look like a viable deal ...

I unsubscribed from Sky but kept the recording facility. If this is indeed
the case, I may well re-subscribe to a £15/month package

"Jethro" wrote in message
ups.com...
On 14 May, 19:48, Ed wrote:
Header says it all really. No charge for Sky+ sub with even the two
mix basic pack - currently £15 a month - from 1 July.

Hmmmm,

I wonder what Virgin will do to counter this ? Sky are starting to
look like a viable deal ...

In uk.media.tv.sky Jethro wrote:
: Hmmmm,

: I wonder what Virgin will do to counter this ? Sky are starting to
: look like a viable deal ...

Probably generate even better retention deals! Sky have reportedly stopped
most "half-price for 6 months" type deals (and taken the hit of losing
people who had got used to these!) due to the success of Sky Broadband.
In contrast Virgin have been reported as giving people the price they had
to to make them stay put!

If people can have Broadband, PVR (Sky+), and TV from £15/month (OK plus
installation fees) it does looks very good!

"Andrew Gill" wrote in message
...
If it is true, then I hope I can get a free upgrade to sky+ (been a
customer since the 80's), otherwise I will still with my standard sky
box


LOL. If its free, why would they then give you a free box? the time to get a
subsidised box is, I would think, now, not when its free (if this oft
recurring rumour turns out to be true)

--
Tumbleweed

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

"Jethro" wrote in message
ups.com...
On 14 May, 19:48, Ed wrote:
Header says it all really. No charge for Sky+ sub with even the two
mix basic pack - currently £15 a month - from 1 July.

Hmmmm,

I wonder what Virgin will do to counter this ? Sky are starting to
look like a viable deal ...

This coincides with the launch of BT Vision...

"Jethro" wrote in message
ups.com...
On 14 May, 19:48, Ed wrote:
Header says it all really. No charge for Sky+ sub with even the two
mix basic pack - currently £15 a month - from 1 July.

Hmmmm,

I wonder what Virgin will do to counter this ? Sky are starting to
look like a viable deal ...

The same as Sky did of course....

When the time comes for Sky wanting to renegotiate the price for carrying
their channels, VM will just say "We've managed without yours on our
platform, lets see what happens when you have explain to customers why we've
removed ours"

Healthy for competition I say, Different systems,different channels rather
than a monopoly of one ie', SKY.

In uk.media.tv.sky The Wizard wrote:

: When the time comes for Sky wanting to renegotiate the price for carrying
: their channels, VM will just say "We've managed without yours on our
: platform, lets see what happens when you have explain to customers why we've
: removed ours"

It's lucky that you don't run VM then!!! Your "bright idea" would cause those
channels to fold - as they just CANNOT survive without the advertising that
the 8-10 million potential Sky viewers bring!

: Healthy for competition I say, Different systems,different channels rather
: than a monopoly of one ie', SKY.

No!! - what viewers ACTUALLY want is all channels on ALL (pay) systems. No-one
is going to buy a second system just to get one or two fringe channels.

In article , Brian McIlwrath
writes
In uk.media.tv.sky The Wizard wrote:

: When the time comes for Sky wanting to renegotiate the price for carrying
: their channels, VM will just say "We've managed without yours on our
: platform, lets see what happens when you have explain to customers why we've
: removed ours"

It's lucky that you don't run VM then!!! Your "bright idea" would cause those
channels to fold - as they just CANNOT survive without the advertising that
the 8-10 million potential Sky viewers bring!

: Healthy for competition I say, Different systems,different channels rather
: than a monopoly of one ie', SKY.

No!! - what viewers ACTUALLY want is all channels on ALL (pay) systems. No-one
is going to buy a second system just to get one or two fringe channels.



Exactly! This is precisely what the EU were trying to achieve when they
stopped one company getting all the rights to Premiership football. Now
if you want to watch all the matches, it's going to cost more, well done
the EU.

The only way for it to have been better for the customer is to allow
more than one channel to show all the games.
--
Sean Black

"Sean Black" wrote in message
...
In article , Brian McIlwrath
writes
In uk.media.tv.sky The Wizard wrote:

: When the time comes for Sky wanting to renegotiate the price for
carrying
: their channels, VM will just say "We've managed without yours on our
: platform, lets see what happens when you have explain to customers why
we've
: removed ours"

It's lucky that you don't run VM then!!! Your "bright idea" would cause
those
channels to fold - as they just CANNOT survive without the advertising
that
the 8-10 million potential Sky viewers bring!

: Healthy for competition I say, Different systems,different channels
rather
: than a monopoly of one ie', SKY.

No!! - what viewers ACTUALLY want is all channels on ALL (pay) systems.
No-one
is going to buy a second system just to get one or two fringe channels.



Exactly! This is precisely what the EU were trying to achieve when they
stopped one company getting all the rights to Premiership football. Now if
you want to watch all the matches, it's going to cost more, well done the
EU.

The only way for it to have been better for the customer is to allow more
than one channel to show all the games.
--
Sean Black

More competition in sport broadcasting only means more competition to buy
the broadcast rights and drive prices up!

"Brian McIlwrath" wrote in message
...
In uk.media.tv.sky The Wizard wrote:

: When the time comes for Sky wanting to renegotiate the price for
carrying
: their channels, VM will just say "We've managed without yours on our
: platform, lets see what happens when you have explain to customers why
we've
: removed ours"

It's lucky that you don't run VM then!!! Your "bright idea" would cause
those
channels to fold - as they just CANNOT survive without the advertising
that
the 8-10 million potential Sky viewers bring!

: Healthy for competition I say, Different systems,different channels
rather
: than a monopoly of one ie', SKY.

No!! - what viewers ACTUALLY want is all channels on ALL (pay) systems.
No-one
is going to buy a second system just to get one or two fringe channels.


Those who are lucky can chose between cable or sat. The trouble is the
powers that be didn't consider that for many there is no choice in terms of
delivery technology. The method of delivery shouldn't be dependent upon
which channel supplier you chose, it should be controlled purely by
installation problems. You should be able to buy Sky channels via cable and
VM by Sat.