Big drop in Sky subscribers

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › Big drop in Sky subscribers

1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | ... | 45

3923 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1548938 9-May-2016 22:45

With sky doing a major hardware upgrade (replacing all the MPEG2 only decoders with modern ones so they can shut of the duplicate MPEG2/MPEG4 broadcast, freeing up bandwidth), a bit of a dip in (partially lower margin) subscribers is probably not too much of a bad thing.

I suspect they waited untill after the RWC for their change over to reduce the number of new decoders they have to pay for.

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

tdgeek

29587 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1548961 9-May-2016 23:07

Scott3:

With sky doing a major hardware upgrade (replacing all the MPEG2 only decoders with modern ones so they can shut of the duplicate MPEG2/MPEG4 broadcast, freeing up bandwidth), a bit of a dip in (partially lower margin) subscribers is probably not too much of a bad thing.

I suspect they waited untill after the RWC for their change over to reduce the number of new decoders they have to pay for.

I dont buy the RWC argument that Sky state. How many rugger fans decided to get Sky for the RWC, you'd find most already have it as they are rugger fans. How many non rugger fans but like to see the RWC are prepared to pay for a year of Sky to watch RWC? There is an effect, but I am sure its small. Streaming, and cost vs cost is where the straw just broke the camels back. NF or LB plus FTA with my recorder, hey thats not bad. For next to nix. He has it, he tells two, they tell two and so on.

Still early days. Its like doubling sales when sales are stuff all. A day arrives when they are still small overall, but are material. I feel its got to a mini critical mass. Enough of the factors to make it real, and not just what the tech kids have. Its still low in its use, but I see a growing usage month on month. Material enough to be visible.

As regards the upgrade, thats one step to going on demand, the box is now OD capable. Neon was one step to having a SVOD tool. Now that numbers are being affected, they will be planning the expansion, they will have been doing that anyway, as these latest numbers have been known for a while, we just saw them on release day last week.

But what might Sky do?

darylblake

1157 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1548962 9-May-2016 23:28

I think their subs were down from about 880k after the world cup to somewhere around 846k (that was I read on NBR). Personally I think Sky is PAST the cash cow stage, and is heading towards the dog stage.

Give it 12 months And I rekon they will be below 800k. It will probably go up for the olympics then back down again. They need to find a clever way to embrace the internet. And they need an app for things people have like apple tv's xbox' playstations or even the new freeview players. I think chromecasts are pretty cheap and reasonably easy to code for since its in a terrible language called JAVA. They should also be selling a device like chromecast. Im not saying take the satellite option away, because thats still great to have for people who don't have half decent internet speeds.

If you want to watch sport I think you get 2 days for $14.95 and 1 week for $19.95 (online only) and I know for a fact it works with chromecast.

Whats more, its sad you have to pay for pay tv and still put up with more advertising than on the free to air channels. BUT PEOPLE STILL DO IT so they obviously have content that people want to see.

I pay for netflix, watch free tv, and occasionally buy/rent online content. The ONLY thing I miss is Game of Thrones and Sky Sport but hey I guess that's what the pub is for.

Personally don't have a lot of time for TV now days. The kids watch frozen, minions and a bunch of disney movies.

tdgeek

29587 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1548968 9-May-2016 23:54

darylblake:

I think their subs were down from about 880k after the world cup to somewhere around 846k (that was I read on NBR). Personally I think Sky is PAST the cash cow stage, and is heading towards the dog stage.

Give it 12 months And I rekon they will be below 800k. It will probably go up for the olympics then back down again. They need to find a clever way to embrace the internet. And they need an app for things people have like apple tv's xbox' playstations or even the new freeview players. I think chromecasts are pretty cheap and reasonably easy to code for since its in a terrible language called JAVA. They should also be selling a device like chromecast. Im not saying take the satellite option away, because thats still great to have for people who don't have half decent internet speeds.

If you want to watch sport I think you get 2 days for $14.95 and 1 week for $19.95 (online only) and I know for a fact it works with chromecast.

Whats more, its sad you have to pay for pay tv and still put up with more advertising than on the free to air channels. BUT PEOPLE STILL DO IT so they obviously have content that people want to see.

I pay for netflix, watch free tv, and occasionally buy/rent online content. The ONLY thing I miss is Game of Thrones and Sky Sport but hey I guess that's what the pub is for.

Personally don't have a lot of time for TV now days. The kids watch frozen, minions and a bunch of disney movies.

I thought they had 800,000, then I read that they have dropped to 830,000, losing 45000, but they got an extra 25000 from FanPass/Neon. %-wise its a small drop, but like any drop in revenue or hike in costs, thats a far bigger hit to the bottom line.

They aren't a cash cow, I wish that term would cease being used.

They have been in a sound stage for years, they knew SVOD would impact them, but it hasn't, till this year.

They should find a clever way to embrace the internet. Start by going SVOD, they have, Neon. Start by streaming Sport, they have, FanPass. The MySky box is now SVOD capable.Each if these are average at best, but thats not the point. The have the vehicles in place, when needed. They can turn Neon into a Sky Basic SVOD. But a bit better. Turn FanPass into full Sky Sports, with OD sports that have aired live, for a week. There is your MySky Basic with Sports, but the SVOD version.

Dismantle the brick and mortar. Lose those costs. The contractors can pickup and drop off the boxes, and maintain a drop off point. Lots of options I reckon. This time next year, or sooner we will see what changes they will make

ockel

2031 posts

Uber Geek

#1549056 10-May-2016 10:00

insane:

Happy to say I've never had Sky, and even though I pay for Netflix, Hulu Plus, Amazon Prime, Premier League Pass, PSA Squash TV and a DNS service which helps with BBC iPlayer, I'm still paying ~half the cost of a decent Sky sub per month and have no complaints at all.

I struck me that you're paying $45/month for general entertainment and $30/month for 2 sports that you watch. There is bound to be plenty of stuff on Netflix, Hulu and Amazon Prime that you'll never watch. Do you feel that you're being gouged to watch the stuff that you want to see? Or that paying $30/month to watch just two sports seems exorbitant?

BTW, I think that you're getting a bargain with PLP. I think it should have been priced at USD199/season - in line with what other "best in the world" sporting competitions charge for viewers to watch their sports.

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

darylblake

1157 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1549060 10-May-2016 10:08

tdgeek:

darylblake:

I think their subs were down from about 880k after the world cup to somewhere around 846k (that was I read on NBR). Personally I think Sky is PAST the cash cow stage, and is heading towards the dog stage.

Give it 12 months And I rekon they will be below 800k. It will probably go up for the olympics then back down again. They need to find a clever way to embrace the internet. And they need an app for things people have like apple tv's xbox' playstations or even the new freeview players. I think chromecasts are pretty cheap and reasonably easy to code for since its in a terrible language called JAVA. They should also be selling a device like chromecast. Im not saying take the satellite option away, because thats still great to have for people who don't have half decent internet speeds.

If you want to watch sport I think you get 2 days for $14.95 and 1 week for $19.95 (online only) and I know for a fact it works with chromecast.

Whats more, its sad you have to pay for pay tv and still put up with more advertising than on the free to air channels. BUT PEOPLE STILL DO IT so they obviously have content that people want to see.

I pay for netflix, watch free tv, and occasionally buy/rent online content. The ONLY thing I miss is Game of Thrones and Sky Sport but hey I guess that's what the pub is for.

Personally don't have a lot of time for TV now days. The kids watch frozen, minions and a bunch of disney movies.

I thought they had 800,000, then I read that they have dropped to 830,000, losing 45000, but they got an extra 25000 from FanPass/Neon. %-wise its a small drop, but like any drop in revenue or hike in costs, thats a far bigger hit to the bottom line.

They aren't a cash cow, I wish that term would cease being used.

They have been in the sound stage for years, they knew SVOD would impact them, but it hasn't, till this year.

They should find a clever way to embrace the internet. Start by going SVOD, they have, Neon. Start by streaming Sport, they have, FanPass. The MySky box is now SVOD capable.Each if these are average at best, but thats not the point. The have the vehicles in place, when needed. They can turn Neon into a Sky Basic SVOD. But a bit better. Turn FanPass into full Sky Sports, with OD sports that have aired live, for a week. There is your MySky Basic with Sports, but the SVOD version.

Dismantle the brick and mortar. Lose those costs. The contractors can pickup and drop off the boxes, and maintain a drop off point. Lots of options I reckon. This time next year, or sooner we will see what changes they will make

Either way they done a half ass job of those things. I cant watch neon on my Apple TV. Its Dying, and I ain't buying. I still reckon subs are not going to grow anymore. The only thing holding it together is Sports Broadcasting Rights. I have put my investment dollars elsewhere.

tdgeek

29587 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1549065 10-May-2016 10:15

darylblake:

tdgeek:

darylblake:

I think their subs were down from about 880k after the world cup to somewhere around 846k (that was I read on NBR). Personally I think Sky is PAST the cash cow stage, and is heading towards the dog stage.

Give it 12 months And I rekon they will be below 800k. It will probably go up for the olympics then back down again. They need to find a clever way to embrace the internet. And they need an app for things people have like apple tv's xbox' playstations or even the new freeview players. I think chromecasts are pretty cheap and reasonably easy to code for since its in a terrible language called JAVA. They should also be selling a device like chromecast. Im not saying take the satellite option away, because thats still great to have for people who don't have half decent internet speeds.

If you want to watch sport I think you get 2 days for $14.95 and 1 week for $19.95 (online only) and I know for a fact it works with chromecast.

Whats more, its sad you have to pay for pay tv and still put up with more advertising than on the free to air channels. BUT PEOPLE STILL DO IT so they obviously have content that people want to see.

I pay for netflix, watch free tv, and occasionally buy/rent online content. The ONLY thing I miss is Game of Thrones and Sky Sport but hey I guess that's what the pub is for.

Personally don't have a lot of time for TV now days. The kids watch frozen, minions and a bunch of disney movies.

I thought they had 800,000, then I read that they have dropped to 830,000, losing 45000, but they got an extra 25000 from FanPass/Neon. %-wise its a small drop, but like any drop in revenue or hike in costs, thats a far bigger hit to the bottom line.

They aren't a cash cow, I wish that term would cease being used.

They have been in the sound stage for years, they knew SVOD would impact them, but it hasn't, till this year.

They should find a clever way to embrace the internet. Start by going SVOD, they have, Neon. Start by streaming Sport, they have, FanPass. The MySky box is now SVOD capable.Each if these are average at best, but thats not the point. The have the vehicles in place, when needed. They can turn Neon into a Sky Basic SVOD. But a bit better. Turn FanPass into full Sky Sports, with OD sports that have aired live, for a week. There is your MySky Basic with Sports, but the SVOD version.

Dismantle the brick and mortar. Lose those costs. The contractors can pickup and drop off the boxes, and maintain a drop off point. Lots of options I reckon. This time next year, or sooner we will see what changes they will make

Either way they done a half ass job of those things. I cant watch neon on my Apple TV. Its Dying, and I ain't buying. I still reckon subs are not going to grow anymore. The only thing holding it together is Sports Broadcasting Rights. I have put my investment dollars elsewhere.

You missed my point, now bolded. Forget what Neon is now, and FanPass too. (Sport thats only live is not great, most of the time) Both average, and not up to it, but the issue is getting them in place, for when the day comes to re hash the offerings for the SVOD world. That day is here now. No rush, the world is not going to cave in overnight, but they have everything in place, IMHO

While many are bagging Sky, the thread is about their small drop in numbers, which implies why and where to from here. I feel its exciting to watch this play out

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18581 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1549103 10-May-2016 10:41

I think a point that is being overlooked in this discussion is that Sky has generally done a poor job of providing services up to now. They charge through the nose for their different packages and then dump advertising and those stupid promos on their viewers on top of that. I don't know what the current situation with pay TV is elsewhere in the world, but it used to be that the whole point of pay TV was that you didn't have to sit through the ads. Sky is double dipping here and it isn't particularly user-friendly. On top of that they double charge for their so-called 'premium' channels like Soho and the Arts channel and they tack more extra charges on for things that should be standard by now, like HD and the ability to record. Their technology also tends to be outdated and inadequate, and is the source of constant complaints. The point here being, on the basis of their past performance, why should anyone expect them to do better in the future? Their business philosophy is, and always has been, to cut corners on quality where they can, minimise new investment as much as possible, and maximise profit by charging as much as they can get away with.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

davidcole

6011 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1549109 10-May-2016 10:52

Rikkitic:

I think a point that is being overlooked in this discussion is that Sky has generally done a poor job of providing services up to now. They charge through the nose for their different packages and then dump advertising and those stupid promos on their viewers on top of that. I don't know what the current situation with pay TV is elsewhere in the world, but it used to be that the whole point of pay TV was that you didn't have to sit through the ads. Sky is double dipping here and it isn't particularly user-friendly. On top of that they double charge for their so-called 'premium' channels like Soho and the Arts channel and they tack more extra charges on for things that should be standard by now, like HD and the ability to record. Their technology also tends to be outdated and inadequate, and is the source of constant complaints. The point here being, on the basis of their past performance, why should anyone expect them to do better in the future? Their business philosophy is, and always has been, to cut corners on quality where they can, minimise new investment as much as possible, and maximise profit by charging as much as they can get away with.

Granted. But if people didn't like it so much then they should vote with their feet. And while some are....they still have a pretty sizable customer base.

Previously known as psycik

Home Assistant: Gigabyte AMD A8 Brix, Home Assistant with Aeotech ZWave Controller, Raspberry PI, Wemos D1 Mini, Zwave, Shelly Humidity and Temperature sensors
Media:Chromecast v2, ATV4 4k, ATV4, HDHomeRun Dual
Server Host Plex Server 3x3TB, 4x4TB using MergerFS, Samsung 850 evo 512 GB SSD, Proxmox Server with 1xW10, 2xUbuntu 22.04 LTS, Backblaze Backups, usenetprime.com fastmail.com Sharesies Trakt.TV Sharesight

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1549120 10-May-2016 11:06

davidcole:

Granted. But if people didn't like it so much then they should vote with their feet. And while some are....they still have a pretty sizable customer base.

The trend is what is important here, as opposed to absolute numbers.

There are plenty of companies which had plenty of customers but went broke because they failed to adapt .

This is skys problem, adapting to the new world. You have to say, they are trying.

But, I see a time in the future when netflix (or similar overseas company) could buy out rugby viewing rights. Not there yet because netflix is not ready but one day, maybe.

That , would be the kiss of death for sky.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1549124 10-May-2016 11:09

part of the problem with adapting is the product supply for Sky, the content owners are not the best businesses on the planet and the ethics are dubious at best.

tdgeek

29587 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1549136 10-May-2016 11:26

surfisup1000:

davidcole:

Granted. But if people didn't like it so much then they should vote with their feet. And while some are....they still have a pretty sizable customer base.

The trend is what is important here, as opposed to absolute numbers.

There are plenty of companies which had plenty of customers but went broke because they failed to adapt .

This is skys problem, adapting to the new world. You have to say, they are trying.

But, I see a time in the future when netflix (or similar overseas company) could buy out rugby viewing rights. Not there yet because netflix is not ready but one day, maybe.

That , would be the kiss of death for sky.

They havent needed to adapt to SVOD, not till now. Why adapt when your not affected? They are starting to be affected now, so they will adapt.

My guess is they will be the primary sports provider, over SVOD and satellite. The rest of theor offerings will be stopped, trimmed or repackaged as a value addon

Im talking Natgeo etc there. But remember, this isnt panoic that started 4 years ago, its just hit this year, its not doom and gloom by any stretch.

tdgeek

29587 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1549140 10-May-2016 11:32

Rikkitic:

I think a point that is being overlooked in this discussion is that Sky has generally done a poor job of providing services up to now. They charge through the nose for their different packages and then dump advertising and those stupid promos on their viewers on top of that. I don't know what the current situation with pay TV is elsewhere in the world, but it used to be that the whole point of pay TV was that you didn't have to sit through the ads. Sky is double dipping here and it isn't particularly user-friendly. On top of that they double charge for their so-called 'premium' channels like Soho and the Arts channel and they tack more extra charges on for things that should be standard by now, like HD and the ability to record. Their technology also tends to be outdated and inadequate, and is the source of constant complaints. The point here being, on the basis of their past performance, why should anyone expect them to do better in the future? Their business philosophy is, and always has been, to cut corners on quality where they can, minimise new investment as much as possible, and maximise profit by charging as much as they can get away with.

Thats just venting. Everyone knows its reliable as anything. They dont charge through the nose, they get just a fair return on the costs they input for content,

thats common and public knowledge. How can they double charge for Soho, etc? Are they included in Basic so you have to rebuy them? No.

Everyone knows that the MySkyHDi boxes are easy as anything to use.

Their tech doesnt appear outdated to me, and their visual quality is excellent

Record? I believe that may be a capability of the Sky boxes

Ads, yes, HD ticket, yes

Opinions and ha!ing Sky is fine, but stick to the facts, or back them up

tdgeek

29587 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1549141 10-May-2016 11:35

MikeB4:

part of the problem with adapting is the product supply for Sky, the content owners are not the best businesses on the planet and the ethics are dubious at best.

I think they all have that issue, as seen with the Netflx crackdown, that starts at the top, the suppliers. If they have rights, or anyone for that matter, does it matter how they provide (satellite or streaming), probably, if so thats a bit dumb

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1549156 10-May-2016 11:43

I would like to see Sky offer a smorgasbord service where the customer can build their own packages, for example.. Take the Free to air and add say Food, UK TV, The Top Gear Channel (aka BBC Knowledge), History, Living, Sport 1 and 2, Movies 1 and 2, BBC News. etc or variations like this completely at the customers choice with out having to take entire packages as it is now. However I dont want them to use rubbish hardware like Igloo but use their current box.

1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | ... | 45