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 | ... | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | ... | 57

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1878118 5-Oct-2017 20:36

ockel:

tdgeek:

evilengineer:

Personally I'm not interested in paying for sport.

Or $50 per month for a basic package full of crap that I'm not going to watch (eg. lifestyle and home reno rubbish etc.)

But movies on the other hand.....

With the lack of new release movies on Netflix/Lightbox, the death of Fatso (which I liked) and the increasing rarity of the old school video shop it seems to be that there's an opening in the market for a decent SVOD version of Sky Movies.

I'd be willing to pay $30-40 a month for that.

They could tier the service: $15 for three streams a month, $30 for six and $50 for unlimited etc.

They could even have an additional three month delay on the Satellite version to differentiate the services and still beat Netflix.

How about it Sky? Show some imagination.

Your not into sport, thats ok

You think Basic is crap? Many disagree.

Sky has movies, but its $27 odd I believe, plus you need Basic. Now, if you feel Sky has an option here, you are saying that Netflix isn't great? iTunes is out there, I dont feel Sky has an interest in movies, its an add-on, but they dont have 4000 movies to show, nor are $14, so its WAY too expensive.

Seriously???!!! Look, I totally get the whole aversion to PPV thing. If you're not going to pay $10-18 to watch a 2 hour flick at the cinema then chances are that you dont want to pay $7-8 to watch that 2hr movie on Apple's iTunes or Google Play.

What you want is the recent release movies not at $20/mth but at the old-movie-catalogue price of $14/mth. Surely you get that, right?!

I was being sarcy. As everyone thinks everything is too expensive for Sky.

Netflix should outbid all of Sky Sports, and add $15 per month to the Netflix price, then many will still say, $7-95 is fairer. Can't win, reality doesn't exist.

vexxxboy

4243 posts

Uber Geek

#1878362 6-Oct-2017 10:30

also with Netflix , if you are doing a proper cost analysis, you have to add in what it costs you for your internet access per month.

Common sense is not as common as you think.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1878363 6-Oct-2017 10:34

vexxxboy:

also with Netflix , if you are doing a proper cost analysis, you have to add in what it costs you for your internet access per month.

In this day and age, thats no different to saying you need to factor in your electricity costs.

Just like electricity, everybody has internet and will be paying for it anyway.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1878365 6-Oct-2017 10:40

Internet must must be factored in Sky works without it Netfix doesn't. And no everybody does not have the internet .

Benoire

2798 posts

Uber Geek

#1878368 6-Oct-2017 10:43

I would suggest its only a factor for those that went unlimited data for Netflix etc. Those that have it (like me) for other uses shouldn't count, as I would have unlimited anyway irrelevant to Sky and Netflix positions.

JimmyH

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#1878372 6-Oct-2017 10:52

I suspect that, without any new information, the arguments have been pretty much done to death now.

I note, however, that Sky has its AGM on the 19th of October. Luckily, I'm not a shareholder (either directly or indirectly). But I will have a passing interest in whether the Company manages to unveil any new products or strategies to arrest the subscriber bleed.

However, I suspect those who have held the shares for a few years, and have watched their value fall steadily from a high of just under $7 in July 2014 to about $2.86 (about a 60% decline in the value of their investment) now will have more than passing interest. Suffering a 60% decline is pretty catastrophic when viewed against a market that has risen by 74% (NZX50 from 4582 to 7974) over the same time period.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1878407 6-Oct-2017 11:51

JimmyH:
I suspect that, without any new information, the arguments have been pretty much done to death now.

I note, however, that Sky has its AGM on the 19th of October. Luckily, I'm not a shareholder (either directly or indirectly). But I will have a passing interest in whether the Company manages to unveil any new products or strategies to arrest the subscriber bleed.

However, I suspect those who have held the shares for a few years, and have watched their value fall steadily from a high of just under $7 in July 2014 to about $2.86 (about a 60% decline in the value of their investment) now will have more than passing interest. Suffering a 60% decline is pretty catastrophic when viewed against a market that has risen by 74% (NZX50 from 4582 to 7974) over the same time period.

What I read they said the other day is adding value. Have also a full OD means to watch, which I assume can allow reducing the STB fee and also allowing what will effectively be free multi room. If they added some niceties like that, it's something. Won't help churn much but it will a little. I'd guess they may restructure the plans but they still need to maintain ARPU. They may one day have no option but to go OD only which would leave some rural with no TV. Although that's not Dkys fault it was happily a convenient option

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.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1878782 7-Oct-2017 08:20

If Sky wants to make inroads into their churn rate they need to the following (in my opinion)
1. Stop the endless cycle of repeats.
2. Improve the broadcast quality of their basic package
3. Give the customer greater flexibility in package and programming choices.
4. Listen to their customers

elpenguino

3419 posts

Uber Geek

#1878860 7-Oct-2017 09:57

tdgeek:
JimmyH:

I suspect that, without any new information, the arguments have been pretty much done to death now.

I note, however, that Sky has its AGM on the 19th of October. Luckily, I'm not a shareholder (either directly or indirectly). But I will have a passing interest in whether the Company manages to unveil any new products or strategies to arrest the subscriber bleed.

However, I suspect those who have held the shares for a few years, and have watched their value fall steadily from a high of just under $7 in July 2014 to about $2.86 (about a 60% decline in the value of their investment) now will have more than passing interest. Suffering a 60% decline is pretty catastrophic when viewed against a market that has risen by 74% (NZX50 from 4582 to 7974) over the same time period.

They may one day have no option but to go OD only which would leave some rural with no TV.

Rural dwellers can get freeview satellite.

Sky is not a community service so such a concern should not figure in their reckoning.

Thanks for the figures outlining the share drop. Time for a new CEO?

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1878884 7-Oct-2017 11:05

MikeB4: If Sky wants to make inroads into their churn rate they need to the following (in my opinion)
1. Stop the endless cycle of repeats.
2. Improve the broadcast quality of their basic package
3. Give the customer greater flexibility in package and programming choices.
4. Listen to their customers

They are attending to some changes, added value. Which would be good for many, especially a free type of multiform as they are going to make Sky full OD by the looks of it, as an added value. No doubt other things too. But the issue most customers have is price. Should they remove the sport subsidy, then Basic would be much cheaper. But of you watch sport its tough, its way it costs. Whatever they do, I doubt very much that prices would change if you have sport. I envisage Basic being a Netflix price. Sport being $100 less Basic. Maybe some price savings for multi services. Neon gets better. Again, cheaper if multi services.

Apsattv

2388 posts

Uber Geek

#1879026 7-Oct-2017 14:58

Changes will happen quick once the old decoders are gone and they can have a channel cleanout. I still think they could easily drop at least 2 transponders or more. They can drop about 25 sd channels in the conversion to MPG4

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1879030 7-Oct-2017 15:02

tdgeek:

MikeB4: If Sky wants to make inroads into their churn rate they need to the following (in my opinion)
1. Stop the endless cycle of repeats.
2. Improve the broadcast quality of their basic package
3. Give the customer greater flexibility in package and programming choices.
4. Listen to their customers

They are attending to some changes, added value. Which would be good for many, especially a free type of multiform as they are going to make Sky full OD by the looks of it, as an added value. No doubt other things too. But the issue most customers have is price. Should they remove the sport subsidy, then Basic would be much cheaper. But of you watch sport its tough, its way it costs. Whatever they do, I doubt very much that prices would change if you have sport. I envisage Basic being a Netflix price. Sport being $100 less Basic. Maybe some price savings for multi services. Neon gets better. Again, cheaper if multi services.

While they can get Freeview sat service they can't get HD service..

Regards,

Old3eyes

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1879163 7-Oct-2017 18:08

old3eyes:

tdgeek:

MikeB4: If Sky wants to make inroads into their churn rate they need to the following (in my opinion)
1. Stop the endless cycle of repeats.
2. Improve the broadcast quality of their basic package
3. Give the customer greater flexibility in package and programming choices.
4. Listen to their customers

They are attending to some changes, added value. Which would be good for many, especially a free type of multiform as they are going to make Sky full OD by the looks of it, as an added value. No doubt other things too. But the issue most customers have is price. Should they remove the sport subsidy, then Basic would be much cheaper. But of you watch sport its tough, its way it costs. Whatever they do, I doubt very much that prices would change if you have sport. I envisage Basic being a Netflix price. Sport being $100 less Basic. Maybe some price savings for multi services. Neon gets better. Again, cheaper if multi services.

While they can get Freeview sat service they can't get HD service..

But if you only have Sky as there is no other TV option, rurally, does HD matter? It was about getting any TV. Its not Sky's role to provide FTA to rural, but happily, that was an option for them. Sky is 1080i, what is Freeview via satellite? 576p? Google doesnt tell me much. In any case its about getting TV and not getting any TV. What I did read was that Sky has the bandwidth leaving not enough for Freeview, so if Sky drops satellite, then its there. If Sky can get a sweet deal with Optus in a year or two, they may be able to offer both, but I dont know enough about satellite to know if they can lose say 50% customers and drop 50% of the leases, maybe not?

RunningMan

8953 posts

Uber Geek

#1879168 7-Oct-2017 18:25

tdgeek:[snip] what is Freeview via satellite? 576p?

576i

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1879251 8-Oct-2017 07:43

I read the other day that Peters wants FTA sport. This was across many sports not just rugby tests. Tennis was mentioned, we have bugger all in that sport, maybe its the three Grand Slams that are on Sky? And racing which is only on Sky Basic. Interesting as this was supposedly a non negotiable.

Sky said if there was no competition for sport, especially rugby, the sport will suffer due to less funding. I guess they would say that, but OTOH surly NZF would propose that the Govt funds the same rights costs that Sky pays?

1 | ... | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | ... | 57