Should sky do this?

Forums › Sky, Neon › Should sky do this?

surfisup1000

3781 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1227

Topic # 201712 31-Aug-2016 07:57

I would like it if Sky had a prepay service, kind of like mobile phone Sims.

eg, I could buy a smartcard from sky, top it up and subscribe for a month if I like. It would be automated and online, so you'd rarely need to contact sky for provisioning/billing.

There are plenty of 3rd party receivers, so you are not tied to sky hardware .

I'd possibly look at getting back into sky if they offered like this.

I suppose they would have looked at this model though, maybe it does not stack up.

Inphinity

2522 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 937

Subscriber

Reply # 1620052 31-Aug-2016 08:24

The hassle of supporting third party hardware is a big consideration. Most people won't be in a position to arrange their own dish, decoder etc, and the support problems associated with it.

Windows 7 x64 // i5-3570K // 16GB DDR3-1600 // GTX660Ti 2GB // Samsung 830 120GB SSD // OCZ Agility4 120GB SSD // Samsung U28D590D @ 3840x2160 & Asus PB278Q @ 2560x1440
Samsung Galaxy S5 SM-G900I w/Spark

eracode

2850 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 796

Subscriber

Reply # 1620053 31-Aug-2016 08:24

It may well cause a large drop in revenue for them. It's a great idea but given that there seems to be a lot of dissatisfaction with they way they currently run things, there could be a sizeable exodus of existing customers moving to your scheme. Their revenue could drop unless the pre-paid costs a lot more per month than current offerings.

Maybe it would pull in current non-customers like you - but that may not be enough to offset any revenue decrease from existing customers.

It would be interesting to know whether there are any providers using this business model elsewhere in the world.

evnafets

123 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 37

Reply # 1620054 31-Aug-2016 08:29

One person supports this post

You mean something like FanPass?

nickb800

2026 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 340

Trusted

Reply # 1620057 31-Aug-2016 08:31

4 people support this post

They pretty much did this with Igloo, although you needed to buy their box.

Igloo is now shutting down, so goes to show how well it worked out for them.

surfisup1000

3781 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1227

Reply # 1620062 31-Aug-2016 08:44

nickb800:

They pretty much did this with Igloo, although you needed to buy their box.

Igloo is now shutting down, so goes to show how well it worked out for them.

Igloo had a small subset of channels.

But i get the reasons why this might not be good for sky.

Be good for me though :)

taneb1

347 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 61

Trustpower

Reply # 1620110 31-Aug-2016 10:47

As others have said - Igloo did this, but with a small number of channels

Would love if something like Fetch TV in Australia launched here -http://www.fetchtv.com.au/

The box itself not only allows free-view, but has On Demand, Netflix, Apps and built in USB for playing your own media.

The pricing is also fairly reasonable $15-20 for entertainment channels/$15 for sports. Pay as you go.

One would wonder if it works via a VPN...

Any comments made are my personal views and does not represent those of my employer

surfisup1000

3781 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1227

Reply # 1620112 31-Aug-2016 10:50

evnafets:

You mean something like FanPass?

Nope, fanpass is online.

old3eyes

7874 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 790

Subscriber

Reply # 1620116 31-Aug-2016 11:05

taneb1:

As others have said - Igloo did this, but with a small number of channels

Would love if something like Fetch TV in Australia launched here -http://www.fetchtv.com.au/

The box itself not only allows free-view, but has On Demand, Netflix, Apps and built in USB for playing your own media.

The pricing is also fairly reasonable $15-20 for entertainment channels/$15 for sports. Pay as you go.

One would wonder if it works via a VPN...

Interesting looking box..

Regards,

Old3eyes

evnafets

123 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 37

Reply # 1620134 31-Aug-2016 11:56

Agreed fanpass is online.

But in many other respects it is what you had in mind

- Pay when you want to use, don't pay when you don't

- All online management, not needing to contact sky for provisioning/billing.

Given that Fanpass exists, I think that makes it even less likely that they would provide the same service for a satellite type setup.

tdgeek

13430 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

Reply # 1620161 31-Aug-2016 12:37

When they perhaps forego satellite and move online, its a real possibility. They may seperate the sports subsidy, perhaps increase sport to $75 from $60 and drop prices elsewhere to get traction. I can see many changes happening, when the competition starts to get more traction, and it isn't really doing that yet.

surfisup1000

3781 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1227

Reply # 1620202 31-Aug-2016 13:29

evnafets:

Given that Fanpass exists, I think that makes it even less likely that they would provide the same service for a satellite type setup.

I tend to think the opposite from you -- given they already have a 'similar' model with fanpass, it wouldn't take much to extend this to another platform -- ie, prepaid service via satellite, as opposed to prepaid service via internet.

Personally I prefer to use a receiver as the best and most reliable way to send high quality tv content to everyone at the same time -- fanpass and skygo often fail during big events. And it suits situations where internet is nonexistent or metered.

This would leverage skys competitive advantage of satellite distribution and allow them to provide content delivery channels unavailable to netflix but with similar billing mechanisms.

Probably this will never happen though the more i think about it, demand would be too weak, only so many caravan owners out there :)

wasabi2k

2091 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 848

Reply # 1620298 31-Aug-2016 15:29

2 people support this post

I guess the question would be why would they bother?

Want SKY content? Pay us $100 a month.

Want some of our content? Tough. Pay us $100 a month.

Want it for one month? Tough. Pay us $100 a month.

Only want sport (on your TV)? Tough. Pay us $100 a month.

This model appears to be working right now. There are a ton of models that would make a lot more sense for consumers, but would not necessarily be as profitable for SKY.

tdgeek

13430 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

Reply # 1620347 31-Aug-2016 17:35

wasabi2k:

I guess the question would be why would they bother?

Want SKY content? Pay us $100 a month.

Want some of our content? Tough. Pay us $100 a month. Subscribe to some, pay less. Basic, and/or Neon. Neon and Fanpass, etc.

Want it for one month? Tough. Pay us $100 a month. It works for Fanpass. Who would want Basic, or Neon, or Soho just for a month?

Only want sport (on your TV)? Tough. Pay us $100 a month. Fan pass is $58. Its on my TV via an ATV4 and other connected devices

This model appears to be working right now. There are a ton of models that would make a lot more sense for consumers, but would not necessarily be as profitable for SKY.

Im sure when they ditch satellite, if they do, then there will be many options, discounts the more you bundle etc. Discounts for x months in a row, etc.