SKY launches FAN PASS 2.0 with new content, pricing plans and improved technology

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › SKY launches FAN PASS 2.0 with new content, pricing plans and improved technology

1 | ... | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57

9120 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1722971 20-Feb-2017 11:26

trig42:

I don't think it is too expensive. Of course, I'd love it to be cheaper. I think the Fan Pass prices (for a month) are probably about what it is worth.

I think Sky Sport is too cheap. IMO, Sky should reduce the price of Basic, and increase the price of the sport package (say $25/month for basic, $50/month to add sport). At the moment, basic users are subsidising sport users. That is why I cancelled Sky, and now just get a day/week pass a couple of times a year when I'm not watching at a friends/at the pub.

I think if they increased sport to $50 / there would be a lot of yelling and screaming..

Regards,

Old3eyes

Jaxson

8043 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1722975 20-Feb-2017 11:43

old3eyes:

I think if they increased sport to $50 / there would be a lot of yelling and screaming..

I think Sport is the only reason to have Sky now, (geographical location limiting access to the internet for example aside), given the increase in options like Netflix here now.

It's almost commerce commission type investigable to force people to have to have a base package first, before they can add on an upgrade package.

Of course if you just had to pay for straight sports access, then that might be a shock to some.

trig42

5814 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1722978 20-Feb-2017 11:49

old3eyes:

trig42:

I don't think it is too expensive. Of course, I'd love it to be cheaper. I think the Fan Pass prices (for a month) are probably about what it is worth.

I think Sky Sport is too cheap. IMO, Sky should reduce the price of Basic, and increase the price of the sport package (say $25/month for basic, $50/month to add sport). At the moment, basic users are subsidising sport users. That is why I cancelled Sky, and now just get a day/week pass a couple of times a year when I'm not watching at a friends/at the pub.

I think if they increased sport to $50 / there would be a lot of yelling and screaming..

But if they decreased the cost of Basic, so your total spend was the same?

What would happen I'd think is that a lot of people who have Sport, but only watch a few things a year (I was one of those) would cancel Sport, and revenue would decrease.

I now spend about $100 a year with Sky (Rugby on FanPass), previously it was $100 a month.

More and more people are doing this. If they made the sports cost in the Sky Satellite packages the same price as on FanPass, they may find more people getting monthly FanPasses (including people that do not subscribe to Sky at all). They would also get more people on just Basic as well (I might be tempted to go back to Sky if Basic was $20-25 a month, plus $15 for MySky as the MySky is the best PVR available IMO).

martyyn

1971 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1723002 20-Feb-2017 13:20

trig42:

I now spend about $100 a year with Sky (Rugby on FanPass), previously it was $100 a month.

That's great if you just want to watch 5 weeks of rugby a year. What if you want to watch 9 months of the English football ?

I just don't understand your argument in saying it's cheap given you watch so little.

bbunnys

321 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1723008 20-Feb-2017 13:41

I just wish Fanpass would let you purchase a package for one off sport.

I only want to watch V8's and Formula 1. But not willing to pay Sky $100 a month for all the other stuff.

Ideally I pay the daily rate for Fanpass when either of those events were on. But they always on pop up channels so no point.

trig42

5814 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1723020 20-Feb-2017 14:32

martyyn:

trig42:

I now spend about $100 a year with Sky (Rugby on FanPass), previously it was $100 a month.

That's great if you just want to watch 5 weeks of rugby a year. What if you want to watch 9 months of the English football ?

I just don't understand your argument in saying it's cheap given you watch so little.

It is cheap for me.

I don't want to watch all that football. However, even if I did, it would be cheaper paying $52.99 a month for FanPass than $75 a month for the cheapest Sky subscription that included Sport. I think FanPass is OK value, just that some people think that Sky Sports is only worth what Sky charge for it as part of a Satellite Subscription package. It isn't, it is worth a lot more (I'd say Sky are charging what it is worth to Monthly FanPass subs). My issue is that Sky Basic customers (even those that, shock-horror, don't have Sports) are all subsidising Sky Sports subscribers (except those that use FanPass).

martyyn

1971 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1723028 20-Feb-2017 14:51

trig42: It is cheap for me.

Because you watch 5 games a rugby a year !

trig42: I don't want to watch all that football. However, even if I did, it would be cheaper paying $52.99 a month for FanPass than $75 a month for the cheapest Sky subscription that included Sport. I think FanPass is OK value, just that some people think that Sky Sports is only worth what Sky charge for it as part of a Satellite Subscription package. It isn't, it is worth a lot more (I'd say Sky are charging what it is worth to Monthly FanPass subs). My issue is that Sky Basic customers (even those that, shock-horror, don't have Sports) are all subsidising Sky Sports subscribers (except those that use FanPass).

Incorrect.

Fanpass (correct me if I'm wrong) gives you access to Sky Sport 1-4 only. The football is on Bein Sports (and their own popup channels) and ESPN (UCL and FA Cup I think) with the A League being on Sky. FanPass is also live only isn't it ? There is no option to record games played in the middle of the night and no option for on demand either. It's also highly dependant on your broadband speeds.

Besides, it takes five minutes of searching to find out how to be on the same rate I am which is $60 for Basic, MySky, Sports, Bein and HD ticket. Cancelling and getting the same rate after an initial 12 months is also incredibly easy. So whilst you are paying $52.99 for four channels, I'm paying $60 for all of them, have them in HD, are able to record, etc.

Fanpass is simply a streaming version of television in the 80's, you get what you are given and that just doesn't cut it anymore.

I think your opinion would be vastly different if you wanted to watch more than 5 games a year.

Sharesies

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

Jaxson

8043 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1723031 20-Feb-2017 14:54

trig42:

it would be cheaper paying $52.99 a month for FanPass than $75 a month for the cheapest Sky subscription that included Sport.

If you have to add $20 a month to your broadband to bring you up to an data unlimited plan, then you're kinda back where you started, and you only get 720p out of fanpass, which is only marginally higher res than 576i SD.

There was originally an option for F1 and League and Rugby season passes.

Assume these don't exist anymore?

trig42

5814 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1723033 20-Feb-2017 14:59

martyyn:

trig42: It is cheap for me.

Because you watch 5 games a rugby a year !

trig42: I don't want to watch all that football. However, even if I did, it would be cheaper paying $52.99 a month for FanPass than $75 a month for the cheapest Sky subscription that included Sport. I think FanPass is OK value, just that some people think that Sky Sports is only worth what Sky charge for it as part of a Satellite Subscription package. It isn't, it is worth a lot more (I'd say Sky are charging what it is worth to Monthly FanPass subs). My issue is that Sky Basic customers (even those that, shock-horror, don't have Sports) are all subsidising Sky Sports subscribers (except those that use FanPass).

Incorrect.

Fanpass (correct me if I'm wrong) gives you access to Sky Sport 1-4 only. The football is on Bein Sports (and their own popup channels) and ESPN (UCL and FA Cup I think) with the A League being on Sky. FanPass is also live only isn't it ? There is no option to record games played in the middle of the night and no option for on demand either. It's also highly dependant on your broadband speeds.

Besides, it takes five minutes of searching to find out how to be on the same rate I am which is $60 for Basic, MySky, Sports, Bein and HD ticket. Cancelling and getting the same rate after an initial 12 months is also incredibly easy. So whilst you are paying $52.99 for four channels, I'm paying $60 for all of them, have them in HD, are able to record, etc.

Fanpass is simply a streaming version of television in the 80's, you get what you are given and that just doesn't cut it anymore.

I think your opinion would be vastly different if you wanted to watch more than 5 games a year.

Agreed. If I did watch more than 5 games (actually, more like 7 if you're being pedantic @$14.99 per 24 hours), I would still have Sky. I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying that Sky Sports as part of the Sat package is too cheap, and FanPass, as an option FOR THOSE THAT DON'T HAVE SKY is a good option and not too badly priced. I do not see why you think otherwise - you obviously have Sky and are happy with the price you are paying (and by the way, I'd say the vast majority of people aren't on the same package as you, and there are standown periods to re-subscribe, which again most people won't do). Why would YOU care what FanPass is worth (as you say, it doesn't even have BEIN. I wasn't aware that Football wasn't on one of the 4 main Sports channels - shoot me). I think FanPass is OK value. Be nice if it were cheaper, but I'm happy to pay the prices they charge. If I needed recording, and BEIN etc., I'd be a Sky Subscriber still. Fanpass is HD by the way. At least as far as I can tell.

trig42

5814 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1723057 20-Feb-2017 15:05

Jaxson:

trig42:

it would be cheaper paying $52.99 a month for FanPass than $75 a month for the cheapest Sky subscription that included Sport.

If you have to add $20 a month to your broadband to bring you up to an data unlimited plan, then you're kinda back where you started, and you only get 720p out of fanpass, which is only marginally higher res than 576i SD.

There was originally an option for F1 and League and Rugby season passes.

Assume these don't exist anymore?

Is there a cheaper, data limited UFB plan that the $79 I already pay Bigpipe? But yes, agreed, if I were on a data limited DSL plan, FanPass would likely not be for me. 720p is still HD. I don't watch enough sport regularly to warrant paying a monthly fee for it, but I enjoy the convenience of being able to subscribe as and when needed. I will probably subscribe for a month when the America's Cup starts - depending on how it goes.

There are a lot of ways Sky could improve FanPass - sports packages for one. OnDemand playback of events would be another easy one I'd think. I guess the more people that use it, the more they (may) roll out features.

martyyn

1971 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1723072 20-Feb-2017 15:13

trig42:

Agreed. If I did watch more than 5 games (actually, more like 7 if you're being pedantic @$14.99 per 24 hours), I would still have Sky. I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying that Sky Sports as part of the Sat package is too cheap, and FanPass, as an option FOR THOSE THAT DON'T HAVE SKY is a good option and not too badly priced. I do not see why you think otherwise - you obviously have SKy and are happy with the price you are paying (and by the way, I'd say the vast majority of people aren't on the same package as you, and there are standown perios to re-subscribe, which again most people wont do). Why would YOU care what FanPass is worth (as you say, it doesn't even have BEIN. I wasn't aware that Football wasn't on one of the 4 main Sorts channels - shoot me). I think FanPass is OK value. Be nice if it were cheaper, but I'm happy to pay the prices they charge. If I needed recording, and BEIN etc., I'd be a Sky Subscriber still. Fanpass is HD by the way. At least as far as I can tell.

As long as you are forced to buy Basic to get a 'premium' channel then I don't think breaking the cost down has any relevance at all. If you want Sport you have to pay $60/$75, whatever.

I haven't had Sky for years. I wasn't happy paying $110 a month for just football and so I left. I only came back (kicking and screaming mind you) because there is no other way to get the football we are interested in. In the last 12 months my wife and kids have also wanted to watch the big All Blacks games and the Silver Ferns tests. At $20 a week it very quickly added up. Pretty soon you're looking at $55 a month and why would you pay $55 a month for streaming tv when you can have all the benefits of MySky, HD, etc and all the channels for $60 ?

Are you aware of how short the stand down period is ? For those 30 days you could buy Fanpass and still pay no more than $60 a month forever ;)

You ask me why I care what FanPass is worth. So I ask, why do you care at all if you are only interested in 5/7 games a year ?

bj99

169 posts

Master Geek

#1723074 20-Feb-2017 15:16

trig42:

There are a lot of ways Sky could improve FanPass - sports packages for one. OnDemand playback of events would be another easy one I'd think. I guess the more people that use it, the more they (may) roll out features.

I would definitely use it more if On Demand playback was available on ATV4.

SeymourScagnetti

58 posts

Master Geek

#1725189 23-Feb-2017 14:24

Hi Bj99 + @trig42,

24 hour playback of all content on SKY SPORTS 1-4 is available on the Fan Pass website. We've been investigating for a while how to extend this to other platforms but it has not proved possible as yet - this is not through a lack of desire to do it but more of a shared roadmap decision with our development partner.

Regards

Alex

Monza

299 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1725415 23-Feb-2017 21:45

Any particular reason the cricket highlights from yesterday still not on the highlights page? Have Aus vs Sri Lanka from yesterday but no NZ...

SeymourScagnetti

58 posts

Master Geek

#1725425 23-Feb-2017 22:09

Hi,

I'm not sure but will check with the publishing team and let you know.

Cheers
Alec

1 | ... | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57