Govt may subsidise Igloo set top boxes

Forums › Sky and IGLOO › Govt may subsidise Igloo set top boxes

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

1128 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 557789 14-Dec-2011 10:42
jonherries: They opened a bag of hurt choosing "disability" as the yard stick. What is a disability, and how do you measure it...? Jon WINZ manage to define it for the sickness/invalids benefit, so Id imagine the same if not a similar definition would be used for this

crackrdbycracku

864 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 557796 14-Dec-2011 10:57
Does anybody have any thoughts on how this will affect Igloo sales? The launch is in June and it is targeted at a [cough] 'price sensitive' market sector. Is it silly to think a few of these people will sit on their hands in expectation of a cheap/free STB that can 'get Sky too'? Be interesting to see what effect all this might have on Igloo uptake. Didn't anybody tell you I was a hacker?

nickb800

1128 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 557814 14-Dec-2011 11:29
Sky will have economies of scale in purchasing these devices (i'd imagine they will be ordering a greater quantity of the igloo box than even the most popular freeview decoder) and an existing network of installers (which is important for switching over the disabled). Devil is in the detail here, but in terms of switching over disabled people to freeview, a partnership with sky will likely be the cheapest option. If the govt decides to start subsidizing igloo boxes and installation for all people, or lower incomes, then that's another can of worms

sbiddle

16706 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Subscriber

Reply # 557841 14-Dec-2011 12:34
It's also worth noting that Igloo is clearly not going to be a Freeview approved product that has MHEG5 support. There has already been talk in the news of MediaWorks not providing their EPG, and the only way they could do this would be to not grant commercial rights to the EPG - if the product was a Freeview approved MHEG5 capable unit the EPG would be a feature that MediaWorks couldn't (and wouldn't be allowed) to block. *Need help configuring your Linksys ATA or IP Phones for New Zealand? Check my blog post

ZollyMonsta

1994 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Reply # 557858 14-Dec-2011 13:04
If the government wants to keep it 'transparent' they would provide a voucher to a certain value for a box and leave it up to the recipient to decide which unit to get. Subsidising one company's product is anti-competitive and not transparent.

mattwnz

4244 posts

Uber Geek

Reply # 557860 14-Dec-2011 13:05
oxnsox: NonprayingMantis: +1 on the views already here. Why subsidise a pay TV box when you can subsidise a Freeview box. +1 sheesh, seems like Sky have the government wrapped around their little finger. ...or Sky has TVNZ to do the Government wrapping for it? That just doesn't make. Normal freeview boxes are a lot cheaper anyway. igloo are possibly making a large margin on those boxes as it is. Don't the governemt own freeview anyway, so why would they subsidise a direct competitor to freeview, which will only hurt freeview. Not unless they are not wanting to keep freeview in the longterm, except all new tvs have freeview built it. Something very strange going on. They would be better to put NZ taxpayer money towards keeping tvnz7, which is the best channel in NZ and NZs only inclusive public broadcast channel. I am not against a voucher, but it should be able to be used only on freeview, or on a tuner of your choice, eg tivo which in my opinion is better value as it has a pvr. The other thing is that igloo doesn't cover the whole country, so the subsidy will not cover people who can not pick up the UHF reception. This is why it really needs to be a voucher for any freeview box, including satellite.

mattwnz

4244 posts

Uber Geek

Reply # 557861 14-Dec-2011 13:12
sbiddle: It's also worth noting that Igloo is clearly not going to be a Freeview approved product that has MHEG5 support. There has already been talk in the news of MediaWorks not providing their EPG, and the only way they could do this would be to not grant commercial rights to the EPG - if the product was a Freeview approved MHEG5 capable unit the EPG would be a feature that MediaWorks couldn't (and wouldn't be allowed) to block. In a way I hope media works do block the epg on it, until sky provide primes to tivo.

jonherries

676 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 557869 14-Dec-2011 13:27
nickb800: jonherries: They opened a bag of hurt choosing "disability" as the yard stick. What is a disability, and how do you measure it...? Jon WINZ manage to define it for the sickness/invalids benefit, so Id imagine the same if not a similar definition would be used for this They generally use note sick note from your doctor. I can see it now: Doctor: "So, why have you come to see me today?" Patient: "I want you to tell skytv that I am disabled so I can get a $50 discount on my igloo box" Doctor: "ok, here is a note" Receptionist: "that will be $50 for the consultation today"

Ragnor

6891 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 557934 14-Dec-2011 15:25
nickb800: jonherries: They opened a bag of hurt choosing "disability" as the yard stick. What is a disability, and how do you measure it...? Jon WINZ manage to define it for the sickness/invalids benefit, so Id imagine the same if not a similar definition would be used for this They are doing a pretty bang up jon on that, refer to: Invalid Benefit Growth Sickness Benefit Growth

oxnsox

1500 posts

Uber Geek

Reply # 557946 14-Dec-2011 15:43
nickb800: jonherries: They opened a bag of hurt choosing "disability" as the yard stick. What is a disability, and how do you measure it...? WINZ manage to define it for the sickness/invalids benefit, so Id imagine the same if not a similar definition would be used for this "I'm sick of Freeview Doc" ''Then you'll be needing to take one of these then" ....ka-ching... "have an Igloo voucher, try it for a few days and if that doesn't perk you up your case-officer can put you on the in-valid-igloo-benefit"

paulmilbank

475 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 558001 14-Dec-2011 18:05
I may well be wrong here and picking up on bad second hand information, so please correct me if i'm wrong, but it is my understanding that winz already subsidise sky on the benefit as a claimable expense for those with "disabilities" (however this is defined) who need it. In theory it is for those who cant get out of the house easily. If this is the case, moving them onto a cheaper box makes a lot of sense. Providing them with a box for $25 a month or free and they pay for the sky programs if they want to makes financial sense instead of $45 a month for basic sky.

crichton

89 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 558006 14-Dec-2011 18:17
60,000 boxes being considered. That seems like a large number of house-bound people with disabilities.

jonherries

676 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 558159 15-Dec-2011 09:33
Given that 20% of nzers identify having a long term impairment, that is a pretty low number. Few thoughts about this without going (hopefully too far) OT. Ragnor - Growth in invalid benefit numbers, and sickness benefit numbers that you list would be more relevant if they didn't come from a lobbyist website. The data is published regularly and so credibility could additionally be established by publishing a methodology and source. Also using raw numbers and not considering population growth, the ageing of the population and the large number of refugee migratns entering new zealand would probably add some more relevance to the debate. As it stands, I still think they will find it difficult to give the boxes to the right people.

jonherries

676 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 558170 15-Dec-2011 09:44
paulmilbank: I may well be wrong here and picking up on bad second hand information, so please correct me if i'm wrong, but it is my understanding that winz already subsidise sky on the benefit as a claimable expense for those with "disabilities" (however this is defined) who need it. In theory it is for those who cant get out of the house easily. If this is the case, moving them onto a cheaper box makes a lot of sense. Providing them with a box for $25 a month or free and they pay for the sky programs if they want to makes financial sense instead of $45 a month for basic sky. I believe that sky is specifically excluded from the resthome subsidy, so find it hard to believe that WINZ would fund it for others. Eldernet have some interesting comments on what is excluded from residential care subsidies, but they also have an agenda. Jon

oxnsox

1500 posts

Uber Geek

Reply # 558181 15-Dec-2011 09:53
paulmilbank: I may well be wrong here and picking up on bad second hand information, so please correct me if i'm wrong, but it is my understanding that winz already subsidise sky on the benefit as a claimable expense for those with "disabilities" (however this is defined) who need it. In theory it is for those who cant get out of the house easily. If this is the case, moving them onto a cheaper box makes a lot of sense. Providing them with a box for $25 a month or free and they pay for the sky programs if they want to makes financial sense instead of $45 a month for basic sky. If this is correct, I find it shocking that Sky should be subsidised for any beneficiaries. And yes I acknowledge that some folk maybe confined to home, however free to air TV still provides that choice as an option. I'm open to be convinced otherwise providing its not a 'content' based argument, because everyones 'content' choices are justifiable individual and different.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4