Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | ... | 45
Davy
196 posts

Master Geek


  #1559178 25-May-2016 09:27
Send private message

Yeah, that $50 a month satellite subscription model is on the way out, and Sky is getting itself prepared with Neon and FanPass. It's competitive though, and they really need to push harder for a place in the market. Neon TV is a start but why is it only SD and why is there not more of Sky's content on there?

FanPass has potential, but at $56 a month? They are making the mistake of applying the satellite network model to online delivery. That $56 might reflect the cost of getting sports like rugby and motor racing, but what about people who don't watch rugby or motor racing?

Sky might be better providing tailored products like (say) Rugby FanPass, NRL FanPass, Netball FanPass, Soccer FanPass, Cricket FanPass etc that consumers can imx and match at a moderate cost, because there's a lot of people interested in only one or two of these sports. Rugby is premium and expensive, but by insisting that Sky Sports and FanPass subscribers pay for it regardless.Sky is pricing the less expensive sports away from many prospective customers.

 
 
 

Shop Mighty Ape for electronics, games, computers books and more (affiliate link).
tdgeek
28856 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1559193 25-May-2016 10:02
Send private message

 If TV providers are not liked , then there is little Sky can do as that is a mentality issue for the masses.

 

Why do people like Netflix compared to Sky? $100 vs $13 plain and simple. Why do we hate Sky then when there is a deal we have an ongoing thread on it, so we can all flock to it, and do. Why do we not like ISP's . Cos my internet is playing up, so that is ALWAYDS the ISP's fault. Fickle.

 

I hear your points, but the reality is if Sky had a better priced offering, the hate/like issue goes out the window as I am happy with the lower price. Thats my opinion


trig42
5629 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

  #1559199 25-May-2016 10:15
Send private message

Davy: Yeah, that $50 a month satellite subscription model is on the way out, and Sky is getting itself prepared with Neon and FanPass. It's competitive though, and they really need to push harder for a place in the market. Neon TV is a start but why is it only SD and why is there not more of Sky's content on there?

FanPass has potential, but at $56 a month? They are making the mistake of applying the satellite network model to online delivery. That $56 might reflect the cost of getting sports like rugby and motor racing, but what about people who don't watch rugby or motor racing?

Sky might be better providing tailored products like (say) Rugby FanPass, NRL FanPass, Netball FanPass, Soccer FanPass, Cricket FanPass etc that consumers can imx and match at a moderate cost, because there's a lot of people interested in only one or two of these sports. Rugby is premium and expensive, but by insisting that Sky Sports and FanPass subscribers pay for it regardless.Sky is pricing the less expensive sports away from many prospective customers.

 

I have no problem with the price of FanPass being $56-$60 for the month.

 

I'd like the price of Sky Sport (satellite) to be the same, and the Basic package to be reduced by the same amount the sport package is increased by.

 

I think Sky's policy of having ALL subscribers subsidise Sport has to end.




Fred99
13684 posts

Uber Geek


  #1559200 25-May-2016 10:18
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

 If TV providers are not liked , then there is little Sky can do as that is a mentality issue for the masses.

 

Why do people like Netflix compared to Sky? $100 vs $13 plain and simple. Why do we hate Sky then when there is a deal we have an ongoing thread on it, so we can all flock to it, and do. Why do we not like ISP's . Cos my internet is playing up, so that is ALWAYDS the ISP's fault. Fickle.

 

I hear your points, but the reality is if Sky had a better priced offering, the hate/like issue goes out the window as I am happy with the lower price. Thats my opinion

 

 

You're actually more pessimistic for Sky than I am.  Cutting the price to Netflix level is not the answer to get customers happy and to protect the business - it's suicide.

 

Changing tactics to gain loyalty / improve customer perception is the task they need to address.  How they should achieve that (short of suicidal price-cutting) is what we should be discussing if we want to shift the discussion away from present negativity.


Rikkitic
Awrrr
17570 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #1559215 25-May-2016 10:36
Send private message

I have taken a back seat in the more recent posts here because Dafman and Fred99 have been saying it so much better than I could. I fully agree that the issue with Sky is perception first, cost second. I do believe that some people, maybe many people, see them as grasping, greedy, and disinterested in their customers. Whether this is true or not, it is how people see them. Maybe it is just tall poppy syndrome, but whatever it is, Sky has a problem unless it can change this perception, and they don't do that by starting an on-demand service that costs more than anyone else and only provides lower quality. Regardless of why they started it, or what their future plans for it are, it just reinforces the perception of Sky as miserly and corner-cutting in its services. With all the other things, like Sky Go and the endless promos that irritate even their most loyal fans and the lack of HD everywhere except films and sport, and the extra charge even for that, people have a hard time feeling warm and fuzzy about Sky. Viewers may still think they have no other choice, but it is not a brand they hold in high regard.

 

 





Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

 


 


tdgeek
28856 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1559218 25-May-2016 10:46
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

I have taken a back seat in the more recent posts here because Dafman and Fred99 have been saying it so much better than I could. I fully agree that the issue with Sky is perception first, cost second. I do believe that some people, maybe many people, see them as grasping, greedy, and disinterested in their customers. Whether this is true or not, it is how people see them. Maybe it is just tall poppy syndrome, but whatever it is, Sky has a problem unless it can change this perception, and they don't do that by starting an on-demand service that costs more than anyone else and only provides lower quality. Regardless of why they started it, or what their future plans for it are, it just reinforces the perception of Sky as miserly and corner-cutting in its services. With all the other things, like Sky Go and the endless promos that irritate even their most loyal fans and the lack of HD everywhere except films and sport, and the extra charge even for that, people have a hard time feeling warm and fuzzy about Sky. Viewers may still think they have no other choice, but it is not a brand they hold in high regard.

 

 

 

 

Yes it has a low perception, as does the TV industry. If Neon is complete, then thats a poor effort, but is it? SWhats a good perception company? Reliable service, no wait times to speak of, no pressure when you call them. Sky has that. Its only about price and the same old thing, people want everything for nix. That wont chnage and Sky cannot improve its custoner service, wait times or reliability, as the vast majority want price first, and a long way first. Fickle


tdgeek
28856 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1559221 25-May-2016 10:49
Send private message

Fred99:

 

tdgeek:

 

 If TV providers are not liked , then there is little Sky can do as that is a mentality issue for the masses.

 

Why do people like Netflix compared to Sky? $100 vs $13 plain and simple. Why do we hate Sky then when there is a deal we have an ongoing thread on it, so we can all flock to it, and do. Why do we not like ISP's . Cos my internet is playing up, so that is ALWAYDS the ISP's fault. Fickle.

 

I hear your points, but the reality is if Sky had a better priced offering, the hate/like issue goes out the window as I am happy with the lower price. Thats my opinion

 

 

You're actually more pessimistic for Sky than I am.  Cutting the price to Netflix level is not the answer to get customers happy and to protect the business - it's suicide.

 

Changing tactics to gain loyalty / improve customer perception is the task they need to address.  How they should achieve that (short of suicidal price-cutting) is what we should be discussing if we want to shift the discussion away from present negativity.

 

 

I didnt say to cut it I said thats how the users see it. They could improve the reliability, wait times etc but those are already very good. It also hasnt affected them in the past, tall poppy syndrome, whine about them but use them




Fred99
13684 posts

Uber Geek


  #1559227 25-May-2016 10:52
Send private message

Here's some positive suggestions.

 

Sky's greatest strength is sport.  Added strengths are coverage (nobody else can get pay TV into every NZ home).  Another is that very loosely, they're "too big to fail" - not true of course, but in general business wouldn't want it, sporting organisations wouldn't want it, government wouldn't want it even if just for the basic reason that if it did fail, then most likely the market would be taken over by an offshore company vs a significant large NZ listed company.

 

A threat from the netflix model is that as those global providers grow, then they're going to gain clout with content providers.  Sky is in a lonely place in global terms - a tiny isolated company serving a tiny isolated market.  If (I should say "as") that happens, and regardless of past relationships and arrangements, Sky could lose access to content as global streaming providers seek global distribution rights.  That will hurt.

 

Opportunity from that would be to work with those global content providers - not against.  Share content/distribution by some cross-licensing payment deal, and get in now before it's too late.  Use the strength (existing coverage) to negotiate.  Netflix etc then get to gain revenue via sky subscribers to a market they can't reach (yet...), Sky "disincetivises" churn because they've got access to more content.  Better still, Netflix or Google etc actually already have the infrastructure to deliver live pay per view TV to a market Sky doesn't have (non subscribers) and would do a much better job of it I expect.  Seems like a win-win to me, with an extra win for the consumer as well.  Perhaps Netflix etc would react to such a proposal with a single digit salute - or have done so already - I don't know.


tdgeek
28856 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1559249 25-May-2016 11:19
Send private message

Fred99:

 

Here's some positive suggestions.

 

Sky's greatest strength is sport.  Added strengths are coverage (nobody else can get pay TV into every NZ home).  Another is that very loosely, they're "too big to fail" - not true of course, but in general business wouldn't want it, sporting organisations wouldn't want it, government wouldn't want it even if just for the basic reason that if it did fail, then most likely the market would be taken over by an offshore company vs a significant large NZ listed company.

 

A threat from the netflix model is that as those global providers grow, then they're going to gain clout with content providers.  Sky is in a lonely place in global terms - a tiny isolated company serving a tiny isolated market.  If (I should say "as") that happens, and regardless of past relationships and arrangements, Sky could lose access to content as global streaming providers seek global distribution rights.  That will hurt.

 

Opportunity from that would be to work with those global content providers - not against.  Share content/distribution by some cross-licensing payment deal, and get in now before it's too late.  Use the strength (existing coverage) to negotiate.  Netflix etc then get to gain revenue via sky subscribers to a market they can't reach (yet...), Sky "disincetivises" churn because they've got access to more content.  Better still, Netflix or Google etc actually already have the infrastructure to deliver live pay per view TV to a market Sky doesn't have (non subscribers) and would do a much better job of it I expect.  Seems like a win-win to me, with an extra win for the consumer as well.  Perhaps Netflix etc would react to such a proposal with a single digit salute - or have done so already - I don't know.

 

 

Good points. But Neon has two modern and popular TV series, I wouldn't have thought that acquiring new content is difficult, as Lightbox also has some new stuff? 

 

As you say sport is their gold. Netflixs gold in many many movies and series. LB has some new stuff as does Neon. Exclusives. But I dint see Sky combating with NF for example. Sky has movies but thats just a small channel. NF has heaps, LB has less but newer etc, they arent really Skys market. Skys market is sport, with Basic has a general, large genre bit of everything. But Sky does now compete on price even though they arent directly competing with the other SVOD providers. Hence my suggestion to lose the sports subsidy and let Basic go down to the "standard" price that many percieve is now the new norm. Maybe package Neon with Basic as an extra option.  But Im still not sure Sky will have a difficult time buying new content, they did with Neon (GOT and Walking Dead) But again, Sky, NF, LB are aimed at different users. Basic may be a better fit for a family, NF for movie buffs and Tv series bingers. Overlap for sure, but I feel the markets do differ, but in any case Skys gold is sports, NF is lots of movies/TV, LB is some good TV.

 

Im not really sure how Sky and NF could cross share, but yeah, for the reasons I stated that they are not competing one on one, maybe thats a sound option.

 

One thing Sky has to teach the public is that sport is NOT a $26 service.   


Fred99
13684 posts

Uber Geek


  #1559264 25-May-2016 11:45
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

 

 

One thing Sky has to teach the public is that sport is NOT a $26 service.   

 

 

 

 

Well yes, and/or maybe sport should be taught that subscription/pay TV has been a goose laying golden eggs, but that goose may not be immortal.

 

There are other threats to Sky not related to disruptive technology - economic cycles and sport.  The cost is high enough so that subscribers will dump it if household cashflow gets screwed, thinking particularly about the perceived wealth effect of our crazy housing market, and the incredible pain that our highly leveraged home owners are going to feel when interest rates head North. The past decade or so might in future be seen to be the "golden era" for NZ rugby - never to be repeated.  (a crude Americanism here - "only winners go home and get to %^$% the prom queen")

 

Perhaps I'm a natural pessimist rather than the realist I'd like to think I am -  but how things are now might be as good as it ever gets.


debeeriz
5 posts

Wannabe Geek


  #1559325 25-May-2016 12:21
Send private message

Why did I leave  sky, Reason because up until recently I believed all the blurb about  geoblocking  being illegal. Then a guy at work showed us how to get legally  all the sport, tv shows and movies that sky shows  for the cost of a vpn/geoblocking service. and it does not cost another $25 a month for every screen i want to show it on


tdgeek
28856 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1559331 25-May-2016 12:33
Send private message

debeeriz:

 

Why did I leave  sky, Reason because up until recently I believed all the blurb about  geoblocking  being illegal. Then a guy at work showed us how to get legally  all the sport, tv shows and movies that sky shows  for the cost of a vpn/geoblocking service. and it does not cost another $25 a month for every screen i want to show it on

 

 

All free, plus the VPN cost?


debeeriz
5 posts

Wannabe Geek


  #1559357 25-May-2016 13:21
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

debeeriz:

 

Why did I leave  sky, Reason because up until recently I believed all the blurb about  geoblocking  being illegal. Then a guy at work showed us how to get legally  all the sport, tv shows and movies that sky shows  for the cost of a vpn/geoblocking service. and it does not cost another $25 a month for every screen i want to show it on

 

 

All free, plus the VPN cost?

 

 

One off refundable (if you dont lose) deposit into a bookmakers account, you dont have to bet,) and tv on demand in different countries, some require a postcode or zip code to register. so I just google hotels in the area to find the codes and I set my vpn to that country and because I use linux theres also the, I would not go there with windows  sites . cough cough


Fred99
13684 posts

Uber Geek


  #1559510 25-May-2016 18:01
Send private message

debeeriz:

 

Why did I leave  sky, Reason because up until recently I believed all the blurb about  geoblocking  being illegal. Then a guy at work showed us how to get legally  all the sport, tv shows and movies that sky shows  for the cost of a vpn/geoblocking service. and it does not cost another $25 a month for every screen i want to show it on

 

 

 

 

I don't believe that is morally ok.

 

Geoblocking of most "entertainment" content for sure - go for it. There's no legitimate reason for differential pricing.

 

Sport events - no - there's a legitimate reason for geoblocking / differential pricing, I wouldn't pay 0.05c to watch Uzbekistan play Kurdistan in their game of whatever it might be, and I wouldn't expect that people over there would want to watch a Bledisloe cup match.  OTOH if they could access NZ live stream to watch their local game, and we could use their livestream to watch our rugby, then you've destroyed professional sports main source of revenue. I'm saying this from the position of not being a sport fanatic and not even caring much if it all vanished from screens, but plenty of people do care, and sabotaging them isn't fair.


tdgeek
28856 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1559562 25-May-2016 19:20
Send private message

Fred99:

 

debeeriz:

 

Why did I leave  sky, Reason because up until recently I believed all the blurb about  geoblocking  being illegal. Then a guy at work showed us how to get legally  all the sport, tv shows and movies that sky shows  for the cost of a vpn/geoblocking service. and it does not cost another $25 a month for every screen i want to show it on

 

 

 

 

I don't believe that is morally ok.

 

Geoblocking of most "entertainment" content for sure - go for it. There's no legitimate reason for differential pricing.

 

Sport events - no - there's a legitimate reason for geoblocking / differential pricing, I wouldn't pay 0.05c to watch Uzbekistan play Kurdistan in their game of whatever it might be, and I wouldn't expect that people over there would want to watch a Bledisloe cup match.  OTOH if they could access NZ live stream to watch their local game, and we could use their livestream to watch our rugby, then you've destroyed professional sports main source of revenue. I'm saying this from the position of not being a sport fanatic and not even caring much if it all vanished from screens, but plenty of people do care, and sabotaging them isn't fair.

 

 

?  But you said "Geoblocking of most "entertainment" content for sure - go for it. There's no legitimate reason for differential pricing."

 

But its ok for sport? Sport is entertainment, and while I don't know enough about Movie and TV rights payments (being excessive or not) some sports are rorting.

 

Sky was going to cancel IVESCO (V8 Supercars) a few years back as what they wanted was uber excessive. Rikkitic and I have battled over cost plus margin vs what the market will bear, but in my example of IVESCO they have tried to screw everyone for the last piece of blood from that stone. That is what the market will bear and then some. Many of these issues we debate do come back to the rights owners, not the Sky or Netflix or Lightbox. What I do admire is Wimbledon. They are FTA, as Wimbledon want the spectacle to as many viewers as possible,they arent chasing the last dime like many top sports are.  


1 | ... | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | ... | 45
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic





News and reviews »

HP Unveils Broadest Consumer Portfolio of AI-Enhanced Laptops
Posted 3-Mar-2024 18:09


Samsung Tab S9 FE Review
Posted 3-Mar-2024 18:00


Norton Genie Review
Posted 3-Mar-2024 17:57


Synology Introduces BeeStation
Posted 23-Feb-2024 14:14


New One UI 6.1 Update Brings Galaxy AI to More Galaxy Devices
Posted 23-Feb-2024 10:50


Amazon Echo Hub Available in New Zealand
Posted 23-Feb-2024 10:40


InternetNZ Releases Internet Insights 2023
Posted 20-Feb-2024 10:31


Seagate Adds 24TB IronWolf Pro Hard Drives for Multi-user Commercial and Enterprise RAID Storage Solutions
Posted 19-Feb-2024 16:54


Seagate Skyhawk AI 24TB Elevates Edge Security Capacity and Performance
Posted 9-Feb-2024 17:18


GoPro Releases Quik Desktop App for macOS and Introduces Premium+ Subscription Tier
Posted 9-Feb-2024 17:14


Ring Introduces New Ring Battery Video Doorbell Pro
Posted 9-Feb-2024 16:51


Galaxy AI Transforms the new Galaxy S24 Series
Posted 18-Jan-2024 07:00


D-Link launches AI-Powered Aquila Pro M30 Wi-Fi 6 Mesh Systems
Posted 17-Jan-2024 20:02


Newest LG 4K Lifestyle Projector Doubles as Art Objet
Posted 9-Jan-2024 15:50


More LG Smart TV Owners Set To Enjoy the Latest webOS Upgrade
Posted 9-Jan-2024 15:45









Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.







GoodSync is the easiest file sync and backup for Windows and Mac