Sky blames piracy for lost customers. Sky: it's time to wake up and smell the coffee.

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › Sky blames piracy for lost customers. Sky: it's time to wake up and smell the coffee.

1 | ... | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | ... | 57

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1857443 3-Sep-2017 08:27

I think the point is, its been shown that Sky isn't overcharging. For some it has value, for others it doesnt. Many numbers have been quoted to show they are not overcharging and the oft quoted get with the times , its 2017 doesnt actually matter. If Sky went with 2017 technology, i.e. SVOD only, that doesnt drop the price $50, it drops it about $8, maybe a bit more. The point is, the anti Sky brigade are just that, for no sound reason, they just hate Sky. I have Sky, I dont love it, I wish it was a lower cost, but it isn't, it has value, so I have it. As he said, its been said before. If numbers showed they were overcharging then Id be on the anti brigade as well, but they arent.

Sky Hate = no sound reasons

Sky Dont Hate = sound reasons

Dratsab

3946 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1857453 3-Sep-2017 08:50

tdgeek: If Sky went with 2017 technology, i.e. SVOD only, that doesnt drop the price $50, it drops it about $8, maybe

If they went SVOD only they'd cut pretty much every rural customer out of the market. That would be one of the big issues for someone like Amazon. They'd have to also do satellite.

The other would be broadcasting all the provincial rugby across the SANZAAR region as this will undoubtedly be part of the deal.

But, they're a shrewd company - they wouldn't be as big as they are if they weren't. They may try and compete for the rights, they may not, only time will tell. Interesting times.

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1857455 3-Sep-2017 08:58

Dratsab:
tdgeek: If Sky went with 2017 technology, i.e. SVOD only, that doesnt drop the price $50, it drops it about $8, maybe

If they went SVOD only they'd cut pretty much every rural customer out of the market. That would be one of the big issues for someone like Amazon. They'd have to also do satellite.

The other would be broadcasting all the provincial rugby across the SANZAAR region as this will undoubtedly be part of the deal.

But, they're a shrewd company - they wouldn't be as big as they are if they weren't. They may try and compete for the rights, they may not, only time will tell. Interesting times.

I fully agree. My comment was based on the many times mentioned, get with the times. Getting with the times isn't a solution, and as you say it will affect others. Ideally a new Optus deal would vasty reduce transmission costs, but even then its not much per week, so sticking with satellite is the best idea. nd other price shifts as has been mentioned many times, but at the end of the day, sport costs, its a premium live product.

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1857459 3-Sep-2017 09:03

dejadeadnz:

networkn:

This thread should be closed now, everything that should be said has already been said.

I really wish people who aren't mods or the forum owner would stop trying to regulate what other users post. And this is coming from someone who finds the anti-Sky brigade more than a bit boring. You don't want any more of this thread? How about you leave and stop telling everyone what should happen?

Its not uncommon for threads to be closed as they are going nowhere, its all been said, and the same people are merely repeating the same stuff. IMO @networkn comment was pretty reasonable. If you feel there is more to be said that can add value, you can raise it. Many threads stay open indefinitely, and some are just re runs of the same comments.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1857504 3-Sep-2017 10:17

The issue is that if the mods and owner of the site feel the thread needs to be closed, they can make their own judgement. Yet networkn has been hectoring on and on for this thread to be closed and yet there are still interesting discussions going. Honestly, live and let live - if he's not interested he should avoid the thread, rather than trying to speak for everybody.

Benoire

2798 posts

Uber Geek

#1857508 3-Sep-2017 10:28

Dratsab does make an interesting assesment in that Rugby distribution is not all about the all blacks but the provincial and local types currently distributed via the Rugby Channel and on the normal sports channels. I can't see Amazon wanting that, nor NZRFU here as internet streaming is not very good for a lot of people, otherwise the grass roots side gets left behind... With Sky's sport side broadcasting and provincial rugby distribution I wonder if that will play in to Sky's hand in future bids?

kingdragonfly

11196 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1857509 3-Sep-2017 10:30

While I can agree that the thread has gone on far longer than I would have expected, I disagree that it's a "tall poppy syndrome "

From Wiki: "The tall poppy syndrome describes aspects of a culture where people of high status are resented, attacked, cut down or criticised because they have been classified as better than their peers."

I guess Sky was better than its peers, because it had no peers. It was a monopoly.

Sky's attitude still is "like it or lump it," and a misguided vision by the CEO that pirates, not competition, is the reason for lost customers.

Sky abused its monopoly by being lawsuit happy, even on such trivialities as lobbying for copyrights on TV listings (a law unique in the world), threatening media box distributors, and threatening small fan clubs for displaying local rugby games.

That fact that so many are ready to move from Sky to even bigger corporations, such as Netflix, Hulu, Amazon proves my point that it's not "tall poppy syndrome "

Sky may be better than its peers, in sports only, but the real pirates of the customers are cheap and convenient streaming.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

bmt

574 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1857525 3-Sep-2017 11:15

Sky is still making profits. It might be decreasing but making more money than you spend is still a profit.

They are a big organisation, they will do exactly what they think they need to do and think they can get away with to keep those profits high. Cutting prices, offering stuff for cheaper, stopping charging for HD content when even 4K has been around for 3+ years - why would they? People may hate Sky and begrudgingly subscribe to watch rugby, but at the end of the day Sky is still getting that money.

Providing all the content is great, and obviously people are happy to pay. But the way Fellett runs the company does not lend to people liking them. Public opinion is largely negative towards Sky and I'd say it is entirely justified. You don't have to be a Geekzoner to see that under it's current structure, Sky looks to be on its last legs and they are trying to wring out as much money as they can before they're stuffed.

old3eyes

9120 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1857536 3-Sep-2017 11:59

Just got an email today from Amazon saying that I will get with my Amazon Prime account free NFL Thursday Night Football so it looks like they are actively pursuing popular sport..

Regards,

Old3eyes

GV27

5897 posts

Uber Geek

#1857625 3-Sep-2017 15:30

I just want a Sky app that lets me use my PS4 as a PVR so I can watch F1 from the middle of the night the next day. I want a plan that will let me do that.

I don't want to have to pay multiple subs to multiple services to watch each individual sport I follow now because that will become far more expensive than Sky very very quickly. If Sky can stick around and adapt, it will be far more preferable to having to pay for everything unbundled.

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1857658 3-Sep-2017 16:58

Let me get this right....

If Amazon win rugby rights (lets say they do for the sake of it), they would pay Sky outside broadcast unit to film it and broadcast each game?

Benoire

2798 posts

Uber Geek

#1857668 3-Sep-2017 17:23

Most likely unless NZRFU setup their own broadcasting system in place in order to be like the English Premier League.

I would still be concerned that a 'giant' coming in for the rights might mean less money or visibility of the feeder systems.

We know that the EPL is priced around $20 per month with Bein, I can't imagine that Rugby would be much different really... Imagine a world where you pay for sports seperately...

$20 for F1, $20 for BeIN, $20 for NZ Rugby, $20 for supercars etc.... Would soon add up!

JimmyH

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#1857674 3-Sep-2017 17:39

Most of this discussion has been from a customer's perspective, which is fine.

What I do find interesting is the thunderous silence from Sky to it's shareholders. Many New Zealanders hold shares in Sky - either directly, or indirectly through managed funds like Kiwisaver. The industry is in disruptive turmoil wouldwide. In New Zealand Sky is slowly bleeding customers, seeing ongoing material falls in its profit, and facing potentially existential threats from changing technology and potential new entrants like Amazon.

If I was a shareholder, particularly a large institutional one with a material holding, I would be looking for company to outline what it saw as the future of its business and how it planned to respond to the rapidly changing landscape. Yet they don't seem to be saying much at all.

Shareholders have a legitimate interest in a company's governance and strategy, especially where its long-term survival may be threatened. But they aren't being given information. Which, if I had any of my money tied up in the company, would concern me greatly.

dafman

3927 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1857687 3-Sep-2017 18:22

tdgeek:

I think the point is, its been shown that Sky isn't overcharging.

With due respect, arguing that Sky isn't overcharging because of the underlying high cost of its outdated technology is not a valid argument. Move over Sky, let smarter, newer tech, lower cost companies to come in and provide improved value to the consumer.

SheriffNZ

671 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1857690 3-Sep-2017 18:34

dafman:
tdgeek:

I think the point is, its been shown that Sky isn't overcharging.

With due respect, arguing that Sky isn't overcharging because of the underlying high cost of its outdated technology is not a valid argument. Move over Sky, let smarter, newer tech, lower cost companies to come in and provide improved value to the consumer.

I think it's been established in this thread that the method of delivery is not the "issue" with Sky's pricing, its the cost of the sports rights.

1 | ... | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | ... | 57