Sky OnDemand, new set top box

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › Sky OnDemand, new set top box

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 10

6756 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1391317 21-Sep-2015 14:38

I wonder if the new box will still have scart. We take our silver digital box to the beach when we go and there is only our old Panasonic CRT TV over there. Otherwise it will mean either buying a new TV for the beach or taking the mysky instead. I recognise no analogue out is a first world problem , but a problem nevertheless.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

ockel

2031 posts

Uber Geek

#1391321 21-Sep-2015 14:45

Jaxson:
ockel:

So you're unhappy at the cross-subsidy between Basic and Sport? Or the premium for HD?

Both, but do different degrees.

It's a have to make you pay for the base package and then charge extra for sport, IF sport is the only thing you're after.
I get it, that's Sky's little pot of gold and they're obviously going to structure their offering to milk that content for all it's got.
However, the base plus addons is the model that's annoying long time sky supporters nowadays.
I've been very surprised at the interest even older, more 'loyal', customers have shown in wanting to investigate alternatives, with the likes of Netflix etc generating some alternatives in the traditionally monopolistic market.

The HD thing is annoying, but if you could pay for that without having to upgrade to another box then that would be better.

No I understand - and its a debate I've had with people for years. If you only want sport what would be the true cost of sport?
And realistically Sky had a Return on Equity of 12% last year which is not high for that sort of business. But we'll leave the pot of gold question aside.

Lets break down Basic and see what might be a theoretical subsidy going on.
Assuming that the only boxes bought last year were MySky boxes and that they have a 3 year life. Each box costs roughly $400 (from the number of boxes bought and the capital expenditure on those boxes). With a 15% IRR I think thats about $16-17/mth for the box rental.

Basic has roughly 38 channels - pasthru and inhouse. If you assume the average price per channel per sub per month is 50c (and thats sufficient to cover content+subscriber management and any linking for pass thru channels) then thats $19/mth for the actual cost of basic. Obviously the assumption can be varied.

So a Basic subscriber could be paying $13/mth too much into the cross-subsidy box.

Would you be happy to pay $60/mth for SD sport only? (Being box+sport+the cross subsidy).

Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1391324 21-Sep-2015 14:45

Jaxson:
ockel:

So you're unhappy at the cross-subsidy between Basic and Sport? Or the premium for HD?

Both, but do different degrees.

It's a have to make you pay for the base package and then charge extra for sport, IF sport is the only thing you're after.
I get it, that's Sky's little pot of gold and they're obviously going to structure their offering to milk that content for all it's got.
However, the base plus addons is the model that's annoying long time sky supporters nowadays.
I've been very surprised at the interest even older, more 'loyal', customers have shown in wanting to investigate alternatives, with the likes of Netflix etc generating some alternatives in the traditionally monopolistic market.

The HD thing is annoying, but if you could pay for that without having to upgrade to another box then that would be better.

Sky has a Bricks and Mortar business model. I allow the dish and STB as part of that bricks and mortar. Its expensive. Content is expensive, the sport especially.
Its a captive customerbase. Churn varies little, I gather a small uptake due to RWC, small downtake due to RWC. Its a one box solution that has a wide variety of content, and its got great sports coverage. easy to use. Thats why its stable.

But it will need to adapt, and I'd say it will evolve to the online solution over time, thereby having an online and STB based service. Right now though they need to bring in the revenue, the average of about $80 per connection.

(And I am in the process of cancelling Sky. )

Spyware

3762 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1391348 21-Sep-2015 15:10

Dingbatt: I wonder if the new box will still have scart. We take our silver digital box to the beach when we go and there is only our old Panasonic CRT TV over there. Otherwise it will mean either buying a new TV for the beach or taking the mysky instead. I recognise no analogue out is a first world problem , but a problem nevertheless.

All modern Pace boxes have SCART either as an option, alternate being RCA, or they provide SCART via a mini DIN interface. My guess is that Sky would choose SCART given any option.

Spark Max Fibre using Mikrotik CCR1009-8G-1S-1S+, CRS125-24G-1S, Unifi UAP, U6-Pro, UAP-AC-M-Pro, Apple TV 4K (2022), Apple TV 4K (2017), iPad Air 1st gen, iPad Air 4th gen, iPhone 13, SkyNZ3151 (the white box). If it doesn't move then it's data cabled.

clevedon

1059 posts

Uber Geek

#1391362 21-Sep-2015 15:25

I'm going to put our MySky+ on their hold package after the RWC. It's only $18.70 per month (paying $110.00 a month now and really only watch the sport channels anyway), I still get to keep the STB, have all the free channels and access to Sky Box Office and Sky Arena and can put any Sky package back on at anytime - probably when the Super 15 and Rugby Championship rolls around again.

Jaxson

8042 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1391364 21-Sep-2015 15:29

tdgeek:
Its a captive customerbase. Churn varies little,

I hear you, and agree it's been that way for years.

However, as mentioned earlier, several people I know that have had Sky for years now, (like a very very long time years), have started asking what else is out there.
Whether they jump or not is a different question, but I personally have been surprised at the interest/awakening that Sky does cost quite a bit.

The fibre into the homes push has provided the opportunity I expect.

Fanpass is a welcome indication of thinking outside the box.
Neon seems to have crashed an burned, and sky Go is a nicety that's just a little value add offering to appear to move with the times.

Potentially these new boxes will allow the HD ticket to be purchased without the MySky $15 monthly charge to enable hdmi HD output?

I openly acknowledge that the sports alone cost would be more than just the add on package price presently, but at least it would be honest and up front.
It's akin to free education and school donation charges as it currently sits.
One can blame the bricks and mortar structure, but in the future, with content able to be nicely shipped via broadband/fibre links, there's less need for that.

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1391452 21-Sep-2015 17:04

Jaxson:
tdgeek:
Its a captive customerbase. Churn varies little,

I hear you, and agree it's been that way for years.

However, as mentioned earlier, several people I know that have had Sky for years now, (like a very very long time years), have started asking what else is out there.
Whether they jump or not is a different question, but I personally have been surprised at the interest/awakening that Sky does cost quite a bit.

The fibre into the homes push has provided the opportunity I expect.

Fanpass is a welcome indication of thinking outside the box.
Neon seems to have crashed an burned, and sky Go is a nicety that's just a little value add offering to appear to move with the times.

Potentially these new boxes will allow the HD ticket to be purchased without the MySky $15 monthly charge to enable hdmi HD output?

I openly acknowledge that the sports alone cost would be more than just the add on package price presently, but at least it would be honest and up front.
It's akin to free education and school donation charges as it currently sits.
One can blame the bricks and mortar structure, but in the future, with content able to be nicely shipped via broadband/fibre links, there's less need for that.

I agree fully. Its been a great wide ranging service, and its martket share shows that. I feel the need to change is slow as its got lots of stickability, but
it will have to change. Maybe when change starts to occur it will be an ever increasing drip

Tradepub

Free professional, reference and technical white papers (affiliate link).

JimmyH

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#1392961 23-Sep-2015 18:46

Are the specs on the new boxes published yet.

I'm quite interested in whether they have non-macrovisioned analog outputs, live the one I have now.

While HDMI is good for connecting the box to the TV, I rely on the analog outputs for the hardware I use (Hauppauge Broadway) to stream the Sky feed to the PC in the study, and my tablet over WiFi when I want TV in the kitchen. I would be greatly irritated to lose that, although I know I can work around it with the right hardware.

hairy1

3332 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1393009 23-Sep-2015 19:33

I thought the Hauppauges's ignored macro vision which is why they are so popular. I could be wrong though.

My views (except when I am looking out their windows) are not those of my employer.

JimmyH

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#1393128 23-Sep-2015 22:07

You are thinking of the Hauppauge capture boxes.

The Broadway is a network streaming product - whole different thing.

I can cope with Macrovision if necessary, I have a suppressor box lying around somewhere from when I digitised my video tapes years ago. However, no analog outputs at all would be somewhat inconvenient (but not impossible) to work around.