Telecom New Zealand and Sky sign agreement

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › Telecom New Zealand and Sky sign agreement

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

1971 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#476309 31-May-2011 17:33

They tried to break Sky's monoply in England over the football and there was only one loser.

It ended up costing you more to watch your team because you were paying three different companies to view the share of the games they each had.

I only have Sky for one reason and one reason only and thats the football. Now the Champions League final is over Ill be cancelling as soon as I can find the time to make the phone call !

Being a Telecom customer though, Im all ears to see what they can provide as some sort of package :)

fostercrif

30 posts

Geek

#476329 31-May-2011 18:36

It will be interesting to see if this will allow Telecom to offer a discount such as the $15.00 a month vodafone give their broadband subscribers with miSky. The discount is the reason I moved to vf from telecom.

old3eyes

9120 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#476363 31-May-2011 19:56

jeffreyh: Ah ok,

Then Vodafone for example should be left alone since they didn't get their network given to them is that correct? and no I don't work for them. I think that the argument is really around competition or lack thereof and not whether it was paid for (I'm fairly sure that Telecom probably paid something for the original infrastructure)

Actually Vodafone got their network from Bell South..

Regards,

Old3eyes

Beccara

1469 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#476366 31-May-2011 20:07

jeffreyh: Ah ok,

Then Vodafone for example should be left alone since they didn't get their network given to them is that correct? and no I don't work for them. I think that the argument is really around competition or lack thereof and not whether it was paid for (I'm fairly sure that Telecom probably paid something for the original infrastructure)

Telecom paid pennys on the dollar for what it got($4.2ish billion irrc) and the whole mobile network is moot since it's apples an oranges. Don't wanna pay SKY? Watch FTA, Dont wanna pay for a mobile..... Well there is no state funded mobile network that's free is there

Why do we feel the need to regulate everything? Telecommunications I get but pay TV? Sky have done nothing but invest and build up, They are a monopoly because NZ is too tiny to support 2 SAT based pay tv networks. Sky have invested alot into NZ and have built it from the ground up and I would expect anyone who wants to compete to have to do the same.

Most problems are the result of previous solutions...

All comment's I make are my own personal opinion and do not in any way, shape or form reflect the views of current or former employers unless specifically stated

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#476409 31-May-2011 21:04

Beccara +1

stormcloud

22 posts

Geek

#476427 31-May-2011 21:26

Now that Sky and Telecom are the best of friends again, will Sky provide Tivo with EPG info for Prime TV? No reason for them to withhold it any more.

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#476436 31-May-2011 21:49

Not sure if that is relevant. Sky owns Sky.Telecom does not own Tivo, Hybrid TV does, so the Prime issue is between Sky and Hybrid not with Telecom.

But being friends again, one would expect that iSky can be unmetered, and hopefully there may be some Sky via broadband offerings. As in a more full coverage then iSky which is quite narrow.

GoodSync

GoodSync. Easily back up and sync your files with GoodSync. Simple and secure file backup and synchronisation software will ensure that your files are never lost (affiliate link).

scorpiworld

192 posts

Master Geek

#476440 31-May-2011 21:55

Regulation for Sky... I am split 50/50 and going round in circles where I stand. My thoughts below on that topic and the original post about the TNZ agreement.

As a shareholder of TNZ and SKY I know how devastating government interference can be for the future perceived benefit of consumers. If as a customer I can get cheaper pay TV then there is some merit in regulation, but at what cost to quality and fragmentation?

I am wary of regulating content, if separate pay TV operators offer me ‘exclusive’ content like F1 on Sky, EPL on another retailer, and another with the latest movies (i.e. Box office) there is a risk after they add their operating costs and profit margins, I end up paying more than what I do today with 1 single operator. (Plus all the setboxes! [Pre UFB / LAN connected TV Apps])

If sky wholesaled (by regulation) all channels and retailers were allowed to cherry pick the popular channels (Something like TNZ Fixed, Mobile and Broadband), that is a win for customers and retail providers, but a massive disincentive to Sky who do all the hard work negotiating contacts with overseas content owners and paying expensive distribution costs, (anyone like to guess how much it costs to pull TB’s of HD content down pipes from the US?).

This would allow other retailers to drive prices down (Win for customers) but I think Sky would stop signing up content when the margins are so thin it is uneconomical to buy and on sell. Much like Telecom and its latest broadband initiatives. Look up getting VDSL to market and the new FTTCabinet issues. Maybe other retailers can negotiate direct with content suppliers, maybe even at lower prices, but goes back to my earlier concern with fragmentation and exclusivity.

Do you regulate pricing? Well I see that falling back to the margin argument, price it too low and Sky wont do it, other retailers may pick it up but doesn’t that ultimately limit customer choice if they cant afford multiple subscriptions? Once the government sorts out prices for necessities, electricity and milk, then I think luxuries like Pay TV could be next.

Regarding the Telecom arrangement I guess they will on sell the same standard package and add-ons (Sports, Movies etc) that Sky offers today, without any manipulation to content and channel mixtures at the same prices, less a dollar or something like the old arrangement. Maybe TNZ / Sky will surprise us all and offer something unique and the regulation discussion will quite down.

robbyp

1199 posts

Uber Geek

#476445 31-May-2011 22:00

Beccara: Don't wanna pay SKY? Watch FTA, Dont wanna pay for a mobile..... Well there is no state funded mobile network that's free is there

Thats not a fair comparison, as you are comparing apples with oranges. It is all about the content, and FTA TV doesn't have the content that is on Sky. If you want to watch the All blacks rugby live on tv, you have no option but to subscribe to sky, which is largely foreign owned. Australia are a lot more protective of their national sports.

There is mobile competition, not only 2-3 networks, but multiple resellers to, and with the drop in prices, it shows that regulation does bring down pricing. Sky tv is more expensive than ever, but phone calls and internet have never been cheaper. Why is this?

robbyp

1199 posts

Uber Geek

#476451 31-May-2011 22:02

tdgeek: Not sure if that is relevant. Sky owns Sky.Telecom does not own Tivo, Hybrid TV does, so the Prime issue is between Sky and Hybrid not with Telecom.

But being friends again, one would expect that iSky can be unmetered, and hopefully there may be some Sky via broadband offerings. As in a more full coverage then iSky which is quite narrow.

Doesn't TVNZ own a slice of tivo, yet they provide sky tv exclusive content and channels that aren't available on FTA or on tivo.

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#476457 31-May-2011 22:12

You cannot regulate Sky, on what basis? Monopoly? Sky has a technical monopoly, but it is not in a position of control of the market. Others are free to join and compete with Sky. Others being similarly large operators globally.

As there is no infrastructure to build, there is freedom and ease to compete here.

If Sky had a true monopoly, that made it impossible for others to join and compete, you may then have a case for regulation. Unless Sky have bought all satellite rights and bandwidth to stop others entering, there is no case.

If say, FTA took the F1, RWC, etc from Sky, then who will pay for that? Will we get a subscription for TVNZ? Or 4 minutes of RWC then 4 minutes of ads as happens in some high interest content?

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#476461 31-May-2011 22:19

Out of interest, how much Govt funding do free to air radio networks and free to air TV networks get?

compost

295 posts

Ultimate Geek

#476469 31-May-2011 22:38

martyyn: They tried to break Sky's monoply in England over the football and there was only one loser.

It ended up costing you more to watch your team because you were paying three different companies to view the share of the games they each had.

I only have Sky for one reason and one reason only and thats the football. Now the Champions League final is over Ill be cancelling as soon as I can find the time to make the phone call !

Being a Telecom customer though, Im all ears to see what they can provide as some sort of package :)

The Sky UK example is often thrown out there as a reason for not regulating monopolies, but their approach was poorly thought out. I bet these rules were drawn up hastily as a populist response to public outcry. I guess at least they didn't end up using taxes to put live free to air football on multiple channels at the same time...

If we want a workable way of influencing pricing for the benefit of consumers then we should track down the people who came up with Pharmac and ask for their considered help instead of just winging it. For starters, how about making content rights non-exclusive by law?

As to the argument raised by a previous poster that somehow it's fine for Sky to corner content rights because they're privately owned - do you also think that rape is ok if the attacker's good looking? This country seems to have a hard core of individualist ideologues who gawp with swooning adulation at free market predators as if they were movie stars.

A time-poor geek is hardly a geek at all

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#476475 31-May-2011 23:01

---As to the argument raised by a previous poster that somehow it's fine for Sky to corner content rights because they're privately owned ---

??? Please do not quote previous posters comments and then alter the wording to suit your ends. And then analogising that to a rape? At the risk of myself being spoken to by the moderator, your comments are pathetic and immature and not acceptable.

---If we want a workable way of influencing pricing for the benefit of consumers---

You may wish to approach the National Party to ask that the "private companies" be taken over by the Govt in order to provide the cheap prices you require for all the expensive content that you want.

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#476477 31-May-2011 23:02

I just noticed your username is Compost...

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6