Fan Pass - I'll Pass On That

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › Fan Pass - I'll Pass On That

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ... | 25

3928 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1776513 5-May-2017 19:12

Bobdn:

dafman:

vexxxboy:

... and you can all say i hope sky goes under but if it does you can kiss any live sport goodbye in NZ , Sky is the only company that can afford bidding for the popular sports for the money that the sports want and we are talking big money, in fact it wouldnt matter because Professional Rugby would cease to exist in NZ without Sky's money..

With due respect, rubbish. Rugby will always be with us, with or without Sky.

The NZ sports environment will adapt to whatever the post-Sky environment turns out to be.

To be honest, I'm flabbergasted with Sky's announcement today - they've exceeded all expectations by proving themselves an even greater anachronistic-money-grubbing-consumer-hating monopoly than even I previously gave them credit for!

Adapt or die. I'm predicting die (and soon, please).

Why would you wish that on a NZ company? It employs a lot of people (who pay taxes) and it also pays taxes to the NZ Government. It has made a huge contribution to Sport in NZ. Do you remember how sport used to be covered? Better to have Sky here than not.

I'd wish it on Sky because they are a anachronistic-money-grubbing-consumer-hating monopoly (honest opinion). Another sport provider will replace them, will also pay tax as well as employ a lot of people.

richms

28198 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1776515 5-May-2017 19:16

This is just sky being dicks over being told no by the com com. Hope it comes back to hurt them even more.

Richard rich.ms

darylblake

1162 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1776522 5-May-2017 19:19

WHAT

They have to be off their chop. There is no way in hell, I am going to buy a fanpass now.

They are just gonna drive more people into the web to get streaming content.

This is the demise of Sky. What an absolute joke this has turned out to be.

tripp

3848 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1776525 5-May-2017 19:21

Media rights is not an easy thing. It's not like going to the supermarket and picking what you want and don't want. It's more like if you want these apples you also have to buy all these bananas and oranges but you can only eat the apples on Tuesday and the oranges and bananas on Wednesday. If you want to eat the apples on Wednesday then you have to pay more money to do that.

So even when sky has the rights to show something on paid TV they also needs to buy the rights to stream the content over IP or via on demand etc.

So this increases the cost to deliver the same game/sports by Satellite and IP.

It would be great if you could pay 1 fee to broadcast on any platform. It just does not work like that currently and there is nothing sky or any other provider can do about it.

Lets also remember that anyone is free to bid for the rights, you don't really see other telco's and companies doing that and when they have they have found out it's not as easy or profitable as they think and tend to not bid again.

Jaxson

8044 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1776538 5-May-2017 19:35

littleheaven:

They've basically switched to forcing people into long-term subscriptions, so you may as well be with Sky (which I suspect is their intention).

Yep, you can see it now.

"Well we tried online streaming and it just wasn't popular."

BarTender

3606 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1776541 5-May-2017 19:36

I wonder if the costs associated with streaming via Akamai just didn't stack up for them as Akamai was taking too much of the pie. Hence why pushing customers back to Satellite means they keep all the profit since it's just a case of sending a tech to install the STB and in most situations the house already has the dish.

mattwnz

20169 posts

Uber Geek

#1776546 5-May-2017 19:52

BarTender: I wonder if the costs associated with streaming via Akamai just didn't stack up for them as Akamai was taking too much of the pie. Hence why pushing customers back to Satellite means they keep all the profit since it's just a case of sending a tech to install the STB and in most situations the house already has the dish.

That is a good point. People think that things over the internet are free, but it actually costs a lot. But on the flipside, people buying fanpass are providing all the equipment to view it at their cost. Whereas normal over the air transmission has hardware and associate maintenance/ install / troubleshooting costs. Not to mention the problems with reception and rain-fade etc.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1776548 5-May-2017 19:55

Amosnz:

Amosnz:

Wow, its gone from overpriced to ridiculously overpriced. Talk about trying to lock people into their conventional system.

I'm referring to how Sky seem to intentionally cripple every online platform they develop so they can turn around and say "the set top box over satellite is the best system".

SkyGo - limited quality (never HD), login issues at peak times.

Neon - no sports

Fan Pass - Cost.

When they end a press release with "if you don't like these changes you can still get our preferred platform" you know that's where they are pushing people.

Anyone else thing the next PR from FanPass will be 'due to the low number of subscribers the service will be permanently shut down from xx date'.

You need to see the reality. Sport costs. If Sky said, we are separating sports so that each individual sport user pays what it costs, and F1 is $13 per month, Golf is $9 per month, Super 14 is $12or month, AB's are $12 per month , America's Cup is $24 per month and so on, thats user pays and fair. Sky bundle all this so many users subsidise other users, so the end payment is semi reasonable. Ive seen many on these type of threads outlining what they ended up paying on individual streams = costly.

Before you blame Sky, look at each sport and tally them up. Sky is just a provider, not THE provider

compost

295 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1776549 5-May-2017 19:55

Sky can't keep squeezing such a small market, they're starting to look like Louis XVI vs an overtaxed peasant mob manning the guillotines. To stay viable they have to either reduce the cost of rugby rights or spread the cost across a lot more subscribers.

Netflix reduced their content costs by commissioning and owning more content, so maybe Sky should merge with the NZRB instead of Vodafone. Or they could buy the French competition, sign up all the All Blacks and sell rights to a global audience instead of a measly 4.5 mil.

Actually I just googled that Top 14 TV rights are currently $160m per season so buying the whole shooting match would be well into ten figures - ouch.

A time-poor geek is hardly a geek at all

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1776550 5-May-2017 19:57

myopinion:

What we need is a Netflix for sports.

We do. Sky. But a major sports item costs a lot more than 250 old movies

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1776553 5-May-2017 19:58

trig42:

I quite often bought a day passes for a Rugby Game or a ODI/20-20.

Never bought a month pass before, but as mentioned earlier, had planned to for the Lions and the AC.

I guess now I'll be renewing my DNS4ME sub and looking for an overseas AC provider and RugbyPass. Will be cheaper than the $56 I was happy to pay Sky (I'd be OK at $66. $99 is a rort - why aren't they increasing the price of the Sport component on their 'preferred' platform??)

The sport content should be $60, not 26 odd, Ive always asked for that.

Bobdn

222 posts

Master Geek

#1776554 5-May-2017 19:58

dafman:

Bobdn:

dafman:

vexxxboy:

... and you can all say i hope sky goes under but if it does you can kiss any live sport goodbye in NZ , Sky is the only company that can afford bidding for the popular sports for the money that the sports want and we are talking big money, in fact it wouldnt matter because Professional Rugby would cease to exist in NZ without Sky's money..

With due respect, rubbish. Rugby will always be with us, with or without Sky.

The NZ sports environment will adapt to whatever the post-Sky environment turns out to be.

To be honest, I'm flabbergasted with Sky's announcement today - they've exceeded all expectations by proving themselves an even greater anachronistic-money-grubbing-consumer-hating monopoly than even I previously gave them credit for!

Adapt or die. I'm predicting die (and soon, please).

Why would you wish that on a NZ company? It employs a lot of people (who pay taxes) and it also pays taxes to the NZ Government. It has made a huge contribution to Sport in NZ. Do you remember how sport used to be covered? Better to have Sky here than not.

I'd wish it on Sky because they are a anachronistic-money-grubbing-consumer-hating monopoly (honest opinion). Another sport provider will replace them, will also pay tax as well as employ a lot of people.

You have some strong feelings there. Is it possible you actually loved Sky at one point but you wanted more from it than it could give? Sports rights are extremely expensive as has been pointed out. Sometimes it's best for people to just move on.

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1776556 5-May-2017 20:03

mattwnz: This just shows how badly competition is needed in the sports content field. I wonder if this has anything to do with the VF merger, and the plans they may offer with it?

If someone can get all their entertainment and sports needs for 100 dollars a month, and shared across a family, that probably isn't that bad. But many people only have time to watch the occasional thing.

I agree. What I feel is that sports providers, like IVESCO, etc, etc, etc want too much. Sky doesnt own sports, it plays them, after PAYING rort fees to the sports providers. These providers could stream for a not cheap price. The user then finds they may far too much for their 6 sports scores the fan damily. But Sky subsidises multiple sports across multiple users, so it comes out half ok. Sky is just a wholesaler.

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1776561 5-May-2017 20:06

dclegg:

Talkiet:

I love how everyone is just assuming that the new pricing is unreasonably high. I highly doubt any of us here have any basis in fact for that opinion.

Cheers - N

Not so much an assumption from me, but more about perspective. To me it IS unreasonably high. I have no idea whether it is unreasonably high in the context of what it costs Sky to deliver the service. And nor do I really care.

Prior to Fan Pass, I used to watch my All Blacks games delayed on Prime. Then Fan Pass came along, and I was happy to occasionally throw money at Sky to watch games live.

But with these price increases I'll go back to my old viewing model.

You should care. Or do you not support user pays unless it suits you? If Sky decided to wind itself up, many wood cry our you horrid b'stards. Then whine when they pay $13-49 per sport x 6 sports, when subscribing per sport.

If they were rorting they would be buying farms to store their cash, but they arent!

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1776565 5-May-2017 20:07

asjohnstone:

Talkiet:

I love how everyone is just assuming that the new pricing is unreasonably high. I highly doubt any of us here have any basis in fact for that opinion.

Cheers - N

In a capitalist society, price is a mechanism which is used to regulate supply and demand.

The fact that people think the price is unreasonably high and it deters them purchasing it, means that it is unreasonably high and the product being sold isn't worth the price being asked.

Customer perception is fact.

Sporting bodies will end up selling for less

Exactly. The sporting bodies are at fault.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ... | 25