|
|
|
I guess we can just be grateful that Football world cup will be live on iPlayer/ITV, and America's Cup will be free to air - that's my family sorted for major sporting events
how do you watch ITV/iplayer?
stinger:
I'm not sure what's Sky's deal is with this $16 deal. Surely the bandwidth used for viewing on a mobile device is the same as streaming via Chromecast. One is $16 per month, and the other is $56 per month.
You are thinking like a techie not an accountant. Its nothing to do with cost of delivery, its about protecting their "premium" customer base income. If a person who currently pays for standard connection (but really only wants sports from sky) can pay $16 and get it to work on my TV then they can finally dump that set top box (and the resulting income per customer drops). This is the attitude of every failing business that stubbornly refuses to change with the times. I remember the early days of the internet industry seeing the same thing. ISP's that tried to keep charging over priced data plans while pretending they were providing "business grade" service all fizzled, those that went hard and listened to the customers won in the end. Ultimately the companies that provide what the customer wants (think Netflix/Amazon) at the price point the customer is happy with prosper and grow (all be it with a scary business plan for the accountants). Those that are locked to the accountants business plan like Sky die with a whimper not a bang.
Batman:
how do you watch ITV/iplayer?
Via the apps on my Samsung smart TV, using a DNS geo-unblocker service.
noroad:
stinger:
I'm not sure what's Sky's deal is with this $16 deal. Surely the bandwidth used for viewing on a mobile device is the same as streaming via Chromecast. One is $16 per month, and the other is $56 per month.
You are thinking like a techie not an accountant. Its nothing to do with cost of delivery, its about protecting their "premium" customer base income. If a person who currently pays for standard connection (but really only wants sports from sky) can pay $16 and get it to work on my TV then they can finally dump that set top box (and the resulting income per customer drops). This is the attitude of every failing business that stubbornly refuses to change with the times. I remember the early days of the internet industry seeing the same thing. ISP's that tried to keep charging over priced data plans while pretending they were providing "business grade" service all fizzled, those that went hard and listened to the customers won in the end. Ultimately the companies that provide what the customer wants (think Netflix/Amazon) at the price point the customer is happy with prosper and grow (all be it with a scary business plan for the accountants). Those that are locked to the accountants business plan like Sky die with a whimper not a bang.
If you made Fanpass $16 and full featured, then your post is also correct. Sky will shut down. Any business is there to make a return on investment. It slike the ones that want Sky everything for $20
SeymourScagnetti:
If you are able to install the App on your Android device and open it - FAN PASS mobile should work fine. If you register for a Fan Pass account try playing one of the free highlights on the app - this will tell you whether or not it will work.
Yep, that worked. Free highlights play fine.
Yeah I've been looking into that lately, checking out what others pay overseas.
F1 TV Pro Streaming Access is $100 NZD per year.
Rugby Pass Streaming Access is $230 NZD per year, but is on a special at the moment with a code for 25% off.
ESPN+ (which hopefully has the content we want any, but might not) is only $7.50 NZD per month / $90 per year.
All require a DNS redirect service (to fool these sites into thinking we're in a suitable country for the service).
Cost is $43 per year.
So depending on what you're after, things might not be too expensive, or they might be very expensive.
Also there are monthly options, which given some sports are seasonal may work out cheaper too.
The likes of ESPN+ offering all blacks and super 23 rugby (or whatever number we're up to now) is really cheap.
Doesn't have F1 or the Rugby League though, and in the fine print it might not have northern hemisphere internationals etc.
Also doesn't include internet connection in the first place, which would be factored in if you were getting it just to be able to stream.
There are options, not fully geo unlocked legit options, but the idea of a streaming service is not new now.
(That's 3x 3 letter words, all starting with n...)
This comes to mind as to what may happen ..
SheriffNZ: I’ve got Sky for the sports at the moment. My current dilemma is whether to drop down to Sparks Fanpass deal where I would be losing out on HD, as well as the ability to time shift given I’m putting the kids to bed quite often between 7:30 and 9:30.
I think we’ve done to death the whole value proposition of Sky and their current cost structure. If they could change their cost structure then other things come into the table.
True, make Sky $20, with sport, HD, movies and so on?
Apsattv:
This comes to mind as to what may happen ..
I dont see that as relevant. All Sky did was offer a super cheap sport option. No its not a Ferrari option, but neither is the $16. Now, many seem to want full Sky on a massive TV, in great hi res for $16????
If you want to fudge a mobile service onto a big TV for $16, fine, but dont whine about why its not the same.
Apsattv:
This comes to mind as to what may happen ..
Except in Skys case they've made it clear upfront that 6inch screen size is the limitation, from article
“Some footy fans were locked into a Telstra subscription before the screen size restriction took effect,” Mr Sims said.
and also once they did the change they did not make it clear before sign up, even showing full size screen shot pictures on larger screens.
As long as people can do test to see if works on their device, don't see a problem with it - from previous posts sounds like there is.
tdgeek:
SheriffNZ: I’ve got Sky for the sports at the moment. My current dilemma is whether to drop down to Sparks Fanpass deal where I would be losing out on HD, as well as the ability to time shift given I’m putting the kids to bed quite often between 7:30 and 9:30.
I think we’ve done to death the whole value proposition of Sky and their current cost structure. If they could change their cost structure then other things come into the table.
True, make Sky $20, with sport, HD, movies and so on?
I'd pay $20 a month for sports only online/streaming at full HD. Would happily pay the "special" telemarketer price too. If they priced it at that everybody will have sky.
Batman:
tdgeek:
SheriffNZ: I’ve got Sky for the sports at the moment. My current dilemma is whether to drop down to Sparks Fanpass deal where I would be losing out on HD, as well as the ability to time shift given I’m putting the kids to bed quite often between 7:30 and 9:30.
I think we’ve done to death the whole value proposition of Sky and their current cost structure. If they could change their cost structure then other things come into the table.
True, make Sky $20, with sport, HD, movies and so on?
I'd pay $20 a month for sports only online/streaming at full HD. Would happily pay the "special" telemarketer price too. If they priced it at that everybody will have sky.
And then Sky will shut down
|
|
|