Sky increasing their prices by $2.18 per month

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › Sky increasing their prices by $2.18 per month

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

43 posts

Geek

#620089 5-May-2012 13:10

For those who wish to complain, you can email the CEO (John Fellet) at jfellet at skytv.co.nz or the person who wrote the letter - Billing Services Manager (Veni Morisa) vmorisa@skytv.co.nz. I have sent them both a nice email telling them where they can shove their price increase and referred them to this thread.

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#620100 5-May-2012 13:43

DarkKnight08: For those who wish to complain, you can email the CEO (John Fellet) at jfellet at skytv.co.nz or the person who wrote the letter - Billing Services Manager (Veni Morisa) vmorisa@skytv.co.nz. I have sent them both a nice email telling them where they can shove their price increase and referred them to this thread.

Its going up by $2.18 per month jeez...

How about just cancelling? Instead of stressing yourself out over it.

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#620136 5-May-2012 15:29

BraaiGuy:
DarkKnight08: For those who wish to complain, you can email the CEO (John Fellet) at jfellet at skytv.co.nz or the person who wrote the letter - Billing Services Manager (Veni Morisa) vmorisa@skytv.co.nz. I have sent them both a nice email telling them where they can shove their price increase and referred them to this thread.

Its going up by $2.18 per month jeez...

How about just cancelling? Instead of stressing yourself out over it.

All you people making this point are, well, missing the point. As customers, we are entitled to be unhappy with a change to our service no matter how small, and are also entitled to make our opinion on said changes known. To claim that we should "stop complaining" and that "we have choices" is to claim we have no right to an opinion on a service which we are paying for - something which I most vehemently refuse.

Have you not heard the saying "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"?

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#620150 5-May-2012 16:06

Kyanar:
Have you not heard the saying "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"?

Whatever ...

Just because you have a right to have an opinion it does not give you the right to ...

DarkKnight08: I have sent them both a nice email telling them where they can shove their price increase and referred them to this thread.

With an attitude like that I'm sure Sky will be thrilled to loose this customer.

And PS: I'm not a Sky subscriber either. I cancelled a few months ago. Got tired of the high prices and lack of content

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#620179 5-May-2012 17:40

BraaiGuy:
Kyanar:
Have you not heard the saying "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"?

Whatever ...

Just because you have a right to have an opinion it does not give you the right to ...

DarkKnight08: I have sent them both a nice email telling them where they can shove their price increase and referred them to this thread.

With an attitude like that I'm sure Sky will be thrilled to loose this customer.

And PS: I'm not a Sky subscriber either. I cancelled a few months ago. Got tired of the high prices and lack of content

He has the same right to an opinion as you are stating YOUR opinion here

richms

28168 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#620185 5-May-2012 17:48

When my half price year was ending I was going to give sky the oppertunity to keep my by seeing if they would do a deal on the mysky, it really is handy to get all the local programs that are never well seeded on the torrents or only capped in sub SD quality. There was enough value (barely) in having 4 more music channels and a discovery channel to catch ultra-low-res versions of shows that were not desirable enough to torrent, and perhaps some of the stuff on CI etc.

But this price increase with these BS reasons that are totally wrong (as in, more sports crap should be an increase in the SPORTS sub, as should the unwanted olympics channels etc) they are really taking the .... as far as I am concerned.

Richard rich.ms

clevedon

1059 posts

Uber Geek

#620196 5-May-2012 18:01

Spyware: Their infrastructure is old and obsolete though. A satellite mostly full of DVB-S mpeg2 streams which can't be converted to DVB-S2 (50% increase in bitrate) H.264 without replacing all those 1998 technology analog interface decoders. Instead of spending money on migrating to new decoders they go DVB-T2 and 11 channels stuffed on to a single 35 Mbps mux, low bitrate delight again. I can't follow their logic at all when a bouquet of premium HD channels could have been a showcase for DVB-T2 H.264.

Yawn - again.

Moan, is that all you ever do on any Sky topic?

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.

DarkKnight08

43 posts

Geek

#620210 5-May-2012 18:26

BraaiGuy:

With an attitude like that I'm sure Sky will be thrilled to loose this customer.

There is a difference between stating your opinion and being abusive. I was not abusive. I did not abuse either of the two people I emailed. I did not make my issue (about increasing the sky subscription prices) into a personal attack against the two Sky people. I expressed my opinion based on why I believe the price increase was unjustified. They even go one step further by justifying the general increase (Sky Basic Subscription) with specific/qualified viewership benefits (Sky Sport Subscriptions, HD Subscription Subscribers, iSky users who need to have multi-room enabled to view the content). It does not make sense. As a Sky subscriber for 10 long years I will not accept this.

I think it is disgusting to increase the monthly price (even if it was 50c per month I would still be angry) on the back of getting people to join up because of the RWC. I feel sorry for those people who joined up just to see the RWC get roped into the mandatory contractual period, then have their subscription prices increase for something they probably do not need or want. In this world/economy fighting for what you believe in, or voicing your opinion is more pivotal than it has ever been. Driving past some AFFCO workers who were locked out by an arrogant AFFCO after the workers tried to raise some health and safety issues hits home that you need to fight for what you believe in and not stay quiet and passively accept something that is clearly wrong, whether its for $2.18 per month or 10 cents per month.

jtbthatsme

937 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#620237 5-May-2012 19:16

Well although Sky are more than welcome to increase their prices I see no real reason as to why they need to as like others have pointed out the added channels are nearly all subscription addon channels.

It is true that competition would be a good way to make Sky realize that their customer base is to be valued not milked but there is no competition but good news on the horizon folks soon there will be some competition in the form of.....

IGLOO oh wait thats right that Sky again lol

Congratulations to our government though since they're are backing this monopoly situation and making the already ridiculous TV situation in New Zealand even worse. Shame they couldn't have the foresight to realise the best option to help would be a Freeview based investment as a free set top box is a lot better than supporting a pay model that many in NZ feel they have no choice in getting due to lack of content on FTA TV already. If they partnered with Freeview then maybe they could get some better content too.

It's attitudes like the Igloo initiative with the government that help drive TV piracy in NZ.

clevedon

1059 posts

Uber Geek

#620249 5-May-2012 19:40

DarkKnight08: As a Sky subscriber for 10 long years I will not accept this.

I take it then you have cancelled you Sky subscription immediately then Caped Crusader?

BTW - what is a long year other than it being a leap year?

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#620250 5-May-2012 19:47

clevedon:
DarkKnight08: As a Sky subscriber for 10 long years I will not accept this.

I take it then you have cancelled you Sky subscription immediately then Caped Crusader?

BTW - what is a long year other than it being a leap year?

He has the right to disagree with Sky's actions as are we all.

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#620260 5-May-2012 20:20

Dynamike: This would have been a more honest letter to send:

"Dear Stock Unit

We increase the cost of our subscriptions every June. This year will be NO exception.

We are working hard to decrease the value you get from our services.

We have reduced the number of channels available to our basic customers. This includes Triangle Stratos. This trend will continue with the removal of TVNZ 7 at the end of June.

As programming is purchased in US Dollars, the cost to us of purchasing programs has reduced. We have decided to pass these benefits on to our shareholders rather than to our customers.

We have increased the advertising content on most channels. We intend to continue adding more advertising content over the next twelve months.

Our iSky service continues to hold the Internet rights to our programming. This ensures competition from rival companies will not occur using the new UFB platform.

We have finally added closed captions. We should have done this since day one, but we really don't care about deaf people.

Sky Television
Propaganda Department"

This made me laugh out loud at a cafe :) Thanks. So true as well.

JimmyH

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#620302 6-May-2012 00:13

jtbthatsme: [...] Shame they couldn't have the foresight to realise the best option to help would be a Freeview based investment as a free set top box is a lot better than supporting a pay model that many in NZ feel they have no choice in getting due to lack of content on FTA TV already. If they partnered with Freeview then maybe they could get some better content too.

Not sure what you mean by this?

Presumably Igloo's investors (Sky & TVNZ) are investing a capital sum in the Igloo project because they expect it to make an ongoing profit that justifies the investment up front. Are you saying that investing the money in a new FV channel would be a better business model and, if so, I doubt it - it would depend on whether there was enough new advertising revenue to cover the extra costs. However, if you feel you can pull it off then I suggest mailing your CV and business plan to TVNZ or TV3 post haste! Or are you saying use the capital sum to support operating losses on a new channel that is never expected to turn a profit? If so, that's not an "investment", it's a financial rat-hole. No sane shareholder would do that.

I'm close to ditching Sky myself and aren't a fanboi by any stretch of the imagination. However, the reality is that TV channels aren't an essential like food or housing, and I don't think that the solution is for the Government to fund TV. Personally, I don't want to see health spending cut or my taxes raised so that I can get TV channels that a few politicians or their appointees think that I ought to want.

Given the choice, I would rather have my income left in my pocket so I can decide what sort of entertainment (Sky, Telstra, buying a DVD, renting a DVD, going to the movies, going to see a play, buying a console game, buying a book...... ) suits me best.

jtbthatsme

937 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#620309 6-May-2012 00:56

What I am saying that government should not be funding an initiative that encourages growth for a company who already has no competition.

TVNZ is funded by the Government and the Igloo idea is also going to include more taxpayer money to make it free for some people (under certain criteria) or at least for the set top box.

If i wanted my wages to be spent on lining Sky TV's pockets I would have Sky TV so yeah like you I would rather that money going to Education or Health initiatives not a something that will be partially funded by the taxpayer which will continue to line Sky's pockets or if they feel the need to put tax payer money into something to do with TV then it should be Freeview as there is no ongoing cost once you have the Set Top Box or a TV with Freeview built in. It was the Govt's decision to bring in digital tv and they did so promoting Freeview yet now we have a turnaround and they want to help fund a corporate entity that is pretty much to blame for the current state of FTA tv.

As lets be honest if the Govt had prevented or attempted to bring in / encourage some competition we wouldn't all be faced with the one (legal) choice we have now as who really wants to watch what's on Realitvnz.

I look forward to when Sky's contract with HBO ends so Quickflix will be able to start putting some shows on there for us to watch since HBO have a 10% stake in Quickflix.

bbunnys

321 posts

Ultimate Geek

#620327 6-May-2012 08:53

Have to say this increase is enough for me to now cancel my sky sport and HD ticket. Really only got it for the F1 season and to be honest have found there coverage pretty crap so far.

Expecially now that the ISP im with has increased my data cap by 4x last month and its cost me nothing extra. Id rather just download an HD torrent of the races which has better coverage, than pay sky for poor coverage.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6