Sky announced performance numbers and drops HD Ticket Fee

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › Sky announced performance numbers and drops HD Ticket Fee

1 | ... | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23

978 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2210084 3-Apr-2019 12:30

Actually I never said ALL is opinion I said some. The trend in this thread is some people are so defensive of their own opinion that someone cannot have their own without being jumped all over. An above post hits the nail on the head by Hammerer (no pun intended) that more objective opinions are need rather than some that come across as trying to defend the honour of their chosen service.

There is a lot of dribble ITT but some good points made nonetheless as well.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18663 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2210101 3-Apr-2019 13:41

I am happy to have a serious, dispassionate discussion about different modes of content delivery that does not descend into personal abuse. However, I am not in a position to compare current offerings or technology of Sky because I am no longer a subscriber and don't know how they have changed from the time I was. I am also not able to comment on high end stuff like 4K streaming because my RBI broadband is not up to that. For regular SD and HD content, streaming works better for me than Sky did at the time I had Sky. That is the reason I left it. The content I stream is also far cheaper than Sky was, but in spite of what some keep saying, that is not a primary consideration for me. I don't mind paying whatever something costs, if the something is what I want in the way I want it. When I said I could get 10,000x more content from 6x$15 sources (or whatever it was I did say), I was being a leetle sarcastic. I was just trying to make the point that I could probably subscribe to Hulu, Amazon Prime, Lightbox, Netflix, Curiosity Stream and a handful of others for the same total price I had been paying to Sky. Any added convenience from zapping channels on the Sky remote does not make up for the huge difference in available content.

What I have found with IPTV channels in particular, such as those from Apsattv, is that they are as easy to zap through as any Sky (or other) remote. With Kodi Favourites shortcuts and some clever add-ons, many other sources are not much more difficult. The Sky remote still wins out for ease of use, but not by much for my use.

That is all I will say for the moment. If the emotion is taken out of the discussion, Sky wins on some things, loses on others. No surprises there. The balance depends a lot on individual needs and wishes of the consumer.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18663 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2210149 3-Apr-2019 14:17

ockel:

Rikkitic:

I actually don’t understand what your second paragraph is about, so I will skip over that.

This. Totally this.

I invite anyone else to make sense of the following:

Thank you for telling me to get a life [Should I be crying personal attack?]. Perhaps I should take some time to attack those services to which I formerly subscribed? I used to subscribe to a home food delivery service (I terminated it a few years ago and havent missed it at all, thanks for asking). I found that I had more choice and I made significant savings if I did it myself. Until now I havent found the need to continuously remind people, especially existing subscribers, of my opinion on the service that they choose. Clearly they need constant re-education as they are unable to reach any conclusion of the values and merits of their subscription on their own. I shall indeed take a leaf out of your book, so thanks for the advice.

Does this mean I am not entitled to express an opinion about my Sky experience because I no longer subscribe? Does that make sense?

Anyway, I have had enough of this and I'm sure others have as well. I am happy to participate in the kind of discussion @hammerer proposes but that is all. Enough of the personal jabs. I have as much right to be here as anyone else.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

networkn

Networkn
32354 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210172 3-Apr-2019 15:03

Rikkitic:

ockel:

Rikkitic:

I actually don’t understand what your second paragraph is about, so I will skip over that.

This. Totally this.

I invite anyone else to make sense of the following:

Thank you for telling me to get a life [Should I be crying personal attack?]. Perhaps I should take some time to attack those services to which I formerly subscribed? I used to subscribe to a home food delivery service (I terminated it a few years ago and havent missed it at all, thanks for asking). I found that I had more choice and I made significant savings if I did it myself. Until now I havent found the need to continuously remind people, especially existing subscribers, of my opinion on the service that they choose. Clearly they need constant re-education as they are unable to reach any conclusion of the values and merits of their subscription on their own. I shall indeed take a leaf out of your book, so thanks for the advice.

Does this mean I am not entitled to express an opinion about my Sky experience because I no longer subscribe? Does that make sense?

Anyway, I have had enough of this and I'm sure others have as well. I am happy to participate in the kind of discussion @hammerer proposes but that is all. Enough of the personal jabs. I have as much right to be here as anyone else.

I didn't really have any trouble following the quoted section myself. It seemed a reply in kind to the tone of the message you posted he was responding to.

I think by all means share an opinion of your experience if it's still relevant today. As a Sky subscriber, my experience hasn't changed much in the past 5 years or so, but I am happy with that (and your primary complaints about Ads, lower resolution etc are still present). I don't consider the technology "old" because I'd prefer reliable over flashy, and I don't miss much in terms of functionality from Sky that I get from Netflix, Kayo, Spark Sports, Lightbox or Amazon Prime Video all of which I either currently subscribe to or have within the last 90 days. The fact Sky is delivered over satellite doesn't bother me one iota, and I bet those who are rural or have lower end internet connections are truly grateful. Spark Sports will end up cutting a LOT of people out of the RWC, which I think is a disgrace. Sky over IP would only benefit me if they can make it more portable, as reliable and still allow for the same quality of viewing.

Sky isn't eqivilent to Netflix per se. They are only competing in the loosest of terms. If Sky has what you want, great, if not, then get Netflix or whatever else. I like both. I find watching Sport vastly superior on Sky to anything else I have seen EXCEPT for the portability of Kayo, but the downside is navigation insteam which is horrible in every SVOD product I have used. Sky is broken into curated channels, which suits how I like to find media (Food TV for example), but there are plenty of people who are ok without that, those people should/will find Netflix or competing services works for them.

Where I generally get annoyed is where people make factually misleading comments about Sky (or in fact other services) as a reason for hating on said provider.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18663 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2210182 3-Apr-2019 15:29

I get the point he is trying to make but he is being ridiculous. This is a Sky thread. It is perfectly reasonable to speak of past Sky experience here. It has nothing to do with food delivery or any other nonsense. I agree with the rest of your reply.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

dafman

3928 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2210186 3-Apr-2019 15:35

networkn:

Sky isn't eqivilent to Netflix per se. They are only competing in the loosest of terms.

Sport is the exception. In other areas (eg. movies, docos, TV series) they are competing head on, aren't they?

networkn

Networkn
32354 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210193 3-Apr-2019 15:54

dafman:

networkn:

Sky isn't eqivilent to Netflix per se. They are only competing in the loosest of terms.

Sport is the exception. In other areas (eg. movies, docos, TV series) they are competing head on, aren't they?

No, they aren't. Only in terms of being content providers in the loosest sense.

How they curate it is completely different, how they deliver is completely different etc. We have covered this.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

networkn

Networkn
32354 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210195 3-Apr-2019 16:08

Rikkitic:

I get the point he is trying to make but he is being ridiculous. This is a Sky thread. It is perfectly reasonable to speak of past Sky experience here. It has nothing to do with food delivery or any other nonsense. I agree with the rest of your reply.

He was drawing comparative examples to make a point. I felt they were valid. YMMV.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18663 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2210197 3-Apr-2019 16:16

If you follow the 'logic' of his example he is saying I have no business discussing Sky here because I am no longer a subscriber. I disagree with that.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

networkn

Networkn
32354 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210206 3-Apr-2019 16:30

Rikkitic:

If you follow the 'logic' of his example he is saying I have no business discussing Sky here because I am no longer a subscriber. I disagree with that.

That's not the only point he was making.

Your experience isn't completely current but some of your concerns are still valid. I think he was wondering why every time a Sky thread comes up, you and a few others here, as non subscribers feel the need to jump in and stick the boot in to Sky, often with invalid arguments of varying degrees, as in, what you get out of doing that ? If you aren't a subcriber, and you don't intend to be one again, talking about your 2+ year old experience doesn't really seem relevant. Ranting about Ads, or low resolution, why?

I see that he is making a point that you talk about how much better your experience is than it used to be with Sky, but there are quite a few issues raised by you over time in implementing and running your solution. It's not as "seamless" as I think you indicate and almost certainly would be more time consuming. People value their time differently and some people enjoy tinkering. Nothing wrong with that, but most people lack the time or expertise for it.

You are free to participate in any thread in any way you see fit, but it's also fair that others get to do the same and that may include calling someone out for making invalid comparisons, or making inaccurate statements if they are present.

Dial111

978 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2210208 3-Apr-2019 16:38

But they are competing.

A quote from https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2019/02/20/452986/not-much-joy-in-fellets-sky-tv-swansong#

“Sky has been hard hit by competition from streaming services like Netflix and Spark's Netflix equivalent Lightbox, over the last few years.

Fellet said the company's had to keep its prices down to try to hold onto subscribers.”

If your losing subscribers directly to Netflix or Lightbox or whatever that makes them competition does it not?

ockel

2031 posts

Uber Geek

#2210212 3-Apr-2019 16:44

Dial111: But they are competing.

A quote from https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2019/02/20/452986/not-much-joy-in-fellets-sky-tv-swansong#

“Sky has been hard hit by competition from streaming services like Netflix and Spark's Netflix equivalent Lightbox, over the last few years.

Fellet said the company's had to keep its prices down to try to hold onto subscribers.”

If your losing subscribers directly to Netflix or Lightbox or whatever that makes them competition does it not?

Half of Sky subscribers also have Netflix - in some cases its a bundle from the telco. About 10% are former Netflix subscribers. In many market studies around the world the streaming and paytv/cable providers are seen as much complementary as they are competitive - people want access to the content they seek.

Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"

dafman

3928 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2210215 3-Apr-2019 16:53

networkn:

dafman:

networkn:

Sky isn't eqivilent to Netflix per se. They are only competing in the loosest of terms.

Sport is the exception. In other areas (eg. movies, docos, TV series) they are competing head on, aren't they?

No, they aren't. Only in terms of being content providers in the loosest sense.

How they curate it is completely different, how they deliver is completely different etc. We have covered this.

I'm not sure we have covered this.

From a end-user perspective - Sky and Netflix are providing media content that, with the exception of sport, is the same end product for the user (movies, TV, docos served up on a screen). If two companies are providing the similar media content then they are competing. Do I watch a movie tonight on Netflix or do I watch a movie on Sky - bingo, head-on competition right there!

Similar comparison. Uber and Wellington Combined taxis are very much competitors, aren't they? Yet, like Sky v Netflix, how they deliver their services is completely different. This difference in how they deliver services doesn't mean they are now competing in the loosest sense, they are very much head to head competitors. One is simply using new technology to deliver, the other old technology (hmmn ... just like NF v Sky).

Following the introduction of Netflix, Sky disconnections skyrocketed (pun intended) because many Sky subscribers switched to Netflix. We all know people that say they ditched Sky after subscribing to Netflix, don't we? They switched because NF competes directly with Sky.

Sport is the only exception, and the only thing keeping Sky on air.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18663 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2210216 3-Apr-2019 16:57

networkn:

That's not the only point he was making.

If he had said something like you just said, we would have had a whole different discussion. And if you look back through my comments on this thread, they have not all been anti-Sky by any means. People just seem to assume I am anti-Sky because of some past criticisms I have made. At some point I made a simple comment, with no sarcastic undertones or sneers, that I could get a lot more content per dollar from streaming than from Sky. This is true. It is a fact. It is not a value judgement. But then I got jumped on and accused of whining and inconsistency, amongst other things. From there things continued downhill.

I would still like to have the kind of discussion @hammerer suggested. I think objective comparisons can be useful if good ways of making measurements can be found. This can take some of the heat out of disagreements and even be useful for others trying to decide on one or the other.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

networkn

Networkn
32354 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210229 3-Apr-2019 17:39

dafman:

I'm not sure we have covered this.

From a end-user perspective - Sky and Netflix are providing media content that, with the exception of sport, is the same end product for the user (movies, TV, docos served up on a screen). If two companies are providing the similar media content then they are competing. Do I watch a movie tonight on Netflix or do I watch a movie on Sky - bingo, head-on competition right there!

Similar comparison. Uber and Wellington Combined taxis are very much competitors, aren't they? Yet, like Sky v Netflix, how they deliver their services is completely different. This difference in how they deliver services doesn't mean they are now competing in the loosest sense, they are very much head to head competitors. One is simply using new technology to deliver, the other old technology (hmmn ... just like NF v Sky).

Following the introduction of Netflix, Sky disconnections skyrocketed (pun intended) because many Sky subscribers switched to Netflix. We all know people that say they ditched Sky after subscribing to Netflix, don't we? They switched because NF competes directly with Sky.

Sport is the only exception, and the only thing keeping Sky on air.

You are missing my point, not sure if it's deliberate.

They are competing in terms of being content providers, but they don't contain (all) the same content. Nor is it delivered the same way. If you like the content on Netflix and it meets all your wants/needs *and* you can meet the pre-requsitites (decent internet) then have at it, but for a LOT of people, for a variety of reasons, Sky meets their needs or suits their viewing preference, and no, Sport isn't the only thing people want Sky for. Tell me how I get a Food TV, History Channel, Living Channel experience from Netflix please?

I might be rare, but the reason I first subscribed to Sky is for Food TV. I like being able to sit down and just blob on the couch and watch a variety of food shows without having to pick a specific one. The variety of food shows can't be matched by any single other provider, same with the other channels I mentioned above, nor SOHO, Jones, BBC blah blah. This is what I mean by curated content. If this isn't how you consume content, then perhaps another service suits you better, but criticizing Sky for providing this way is pointless.

I watch Netflix for a specific show(s) and yes, I could probably watch Netflix 24/7 till my dying day, such is the vastness of the content.

I am sure if I went looking I'd find these numbers, but what portion of Sky Subscribers don't have Sport? I know a few.

1 | ... | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23