sdav:tdgeek:Are you saying Sky don't see the potential in Fan Pass being a subscription model (but then they offer a recurring payment)?. I was comparing a potential Fan Pass customer to an existing non-sport Sky subscriber regardless of how delivered. For what it's worth, I'm neither - but more likely to jump on Fan Pass than Sky Basic + Sport.sdav:tdgeek:So really, non-sports subscribers should be getting upset at sports fans for keeping their content artificially high :-)sdav: I'm only assuming regular (non sports fans) subsidise the sports channels.
Yep, its like anything you buy in bulk, its cheaper.
No. If subscribers pay for Basic, sport is the standard price. If non subscriber wants sport you pay more. Put it down to Sport + non subscriber premium. Its pay as you go and not a monthly sub. Like most things if you buy one its more costly per unit than buying bulk. Basic and Sport is about $70 every month, or you just pay $56 for some months. Sky gets funds, you get a saving, win-win
Why is the price different because one person doesn't have Sky at all? Is it because Basic across all subscribers subsidises the sport or because it is more expensive to deliver on demand content to a smaller cliental or a bit of both?
The average person watches 1 hour of Sky sport per week (only Sky Sport 1-4 details are given by Nielsen) or the average Sky household watches 2.7 hours of sport per week.
If you apportion the cost of HD across movies and sport channels on a watched proportion basis and the cost of the box across movies, sport and all-other Sky channels in a watched proportion basis then the total cost of "sport only" with no subsidy from Basic it works out about $38/month ($28+$7+$3 respectively). The cost per viewing hour of sport on this measure is ~$3.20 per viewer.
[Incidentally the cost per viewing hour of movies is ~$5 and the remaining channels (ie all othe Sky channels) is $0.62.]
Trusted
