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.
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | ... | 25
3806 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 807


  Reply # 1776925 6-May-2017 18:21
Send private message

mattwnz: I wonder if neon will also change?

 

Maybe they'll get rid of it and replace it with something decent laughing


896 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 272

Trusted

  Reply # 1776931 6-May-2017 18:32
5 people support this post
Send private message

Most people I have spoken to are over it.

The consumer doesn't care about what it costs sky . They care about the price they pay.

All the nonsense with broadcasting rights etc is sky's problem. Sky just tell the consumer it's is gonna cost "this much". The consumer either decides to pay it or not.

But what is happening now is loads of numbers are dropping off and the rest of the subs have to carry it. So they actually have a model that is falling apart.

This Parker fight tonight is an absolute joke.

They won't get their act together. And it will fall apart in a few years unless Vodafone can save it.





2642 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 651


  Reply # 1776938 6-May-2017 19:29
One person supports this post
Send private message

darylblake: Most people I have spoken to are over it.

The consumer doesn't care about what it costs sky . They care about the price they pay.

All the nonsense with broadcasting rights etc is sky's problem. Sky just tell the consumer it's is gonna cost "this much". The consumer either decides to pay it or not.

But what is happening now is loads of numbers are dropping off and the rest of the subs have to carry it. So they actually have a model that is falling apart.

This Parker fight tonight is an absolute joke.

They won't get their act together. And it will fall apart in a few years unless Vodafone can save it.

 

 

 

Woe, Sky gets the blame for everything, if the Parker fight is a joke then that is down to Duco who control everything to do with it.





Common sense is not as common as you think.


352 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 97


  Reply # 1776965 6-May-2017 20:40
Send private message

mattwnz: They would have to accept the next highest price, otherwise they get nothing at all. Although I suspect and overseas provider could pick up the rights and then distribute to nz online. If there was no provider, then the government could always write legislation that allowed NZers to watch culturally significant sports. I don't think there is any risk of nzers not being able to watch it, at a price.

 

It happened a few years ago, when no one secured the rights to show Black Caps vs South Africa cricket. IIRC, in the end Cricket NZ offered live streams for free online for most (but not all) of the matches.

 

 

 

Back to Fan Pass though, Sky should talk to Foxtel about how to do it economically. Foxtel Play offers lots of channels. You can get Sport + one other package (e.g. docos, kids, entertainment) for A$39/month, and play it on nearly every device. Only drawback from a technical view point is no chromecast support from mobile devices.

 

This definitely stinks of trying to cash in on the Lions tour. I'm pretty sure once the tour has finished, they'll return prices back to what they are now.

 

 


3806 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 807


  Reply # 1776968 6-May-2017 20:49
Send private message

Or they may just leave them where they are, as they may (seem to) be more profitable?


12804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2294

Trusted

  Reply # 1777029 7-May-2017 08:27
Send private message

Azzura:

 

I can't help but feel, this change has been pressed into motion due to the up coming Lions visit (seems rather conveniently timed...but not quite exactly when the event happens). I also suspect... there will be some "special" kind of extra fee on top of the new $100 monthly fee to watch the Lions vs ABs. Along the lines of ---for $25 you can watch Lions vs ABs live!

 

 

 

I dropped my Sky STB box off a few months ago. I was happily thinking of using the daily option (perhaps weekly) to watch Lions vs ABs (perhaps many viewers planned the same?)....i'm not so sure now.

 

 

 

Should be interesting to see how it all plays out....

 

 

I can recall them ever adding an extra fee for content. Their model is to supply as many good contents as they can, then recover that from subscriptions, and make a margin. Which from one of the many anti Sky threads was about $15 per month per subscriber. Not much wiggle room there.  RWC arrived, they will have lost a bomb there, as they wore the cost, and would have not got anywhere near the temporary new subscribers to cover that. Other years there will be less big events, so they got a gain there if they rights budget was under budget.

 

If there is a tour, or a couple of big events, maybe Grand Slam tennis, $25 a week isn't too bad.


12804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2294

Trusted

  Reply # 1777030 7-May-2017 08:29
Send private message

surfisup1000:

 

Sky with a maximum possible audience of 4 million people is having to compete against netflix, with a target audience in the billions. 

 

They are squeezed on the revenue side by netflix, and on the expenditure side by Sonny Bill Williams and his rich pals. 

 

The only surprise is that sky shares are not falling more heavily. Huge uncertainty in the entire long term viability of sky. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sky vs Netflix is a bad comparison. There is very very little overlap. You wont get NF for sport, you wont get Sky for movies. But I feel people latch onto $13 a month now being the norm.


12804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2294

Trusted

  Reply # 1777031 7-May-2017 08:33
Send private message

Pumpedd:

 

tdgeek:

 

vexxxboy:

 

I dont know why people are saying Sky is dead , they have a turnover of close to a billion a year and profits of nearly $150 million a year, they will be around for a few years yet .

 

 

Sure will. They will assess all manner of costs, reduce what they can, and if people want to watch live sport and record it, they will have to pay what Sky has to pay. They are caught in the middle as sport these days is a very very expensive exercise. Salaries are huge, travel is huge, so TV broadcasters have to pay big, Our population means we are in a very bad economy of scale. 

 

 

 

 

So they should merge with the Aussie Foxtel....at least fellett should go...well past his use by date.

 

 

Interesting idea, makes a lot of sense. But Fellet, he can't control the low NZ population, nor the sky high fees some sports demand. That Sky has always been very sticky says they are doing things right, within the constraints of a teeny population.

 

While many see Sky as over priced and rorting, the opposite also applies. Many want a price that suits them, irregardless of everything else


12804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2294

Trusted

  Reply # 1777033 7-May-2017 08:44
Send private message

petes117:

 

tdgeek:

 

The reality price is what it costs. Should Sky be rorting, their profits would be way higher than the market average ROI, thats not the case. Their return is no more than satisfactory. So to reduce the price as many feel its too high, they lose revenue, or they could drop services and reduce desire. Right now, they pay costs, and they charge prices, those two factors are in sync. As subscribers drop, they can reduce prices in some areas, such as brick and mortar. Staff via automation. They cant afford to drop key sports. It may well be that they become a sports only service, which makes sense. That would drop rights payments almost in half, as while they offer many channels of all sorts of stuff, the sports rights costs are 60% of all rights costs. 

 

 

I don't buy that argument. If Sky refused to pay for the sports rights, what local provider would pick up the slack? Probably none unless the sports providers dropped their price, either way resulting in a loss in revenue for both parties.

 

So Sky paying whatever it takes to get the sports rights locks those rights up with them for local distribution through only their platforms. That's why we don't have access to overseas services like rugby pass, and Sky can just pass on the cost to the customer because there's no other choice.

 

If segmenting the sports market is what it takes (i.e. higher overall cost to customers if you want to watch everything, or buy just the ones you want), I'm all for that because at least then there is a choice.

 

Ultimately, it's decided by what the customer is willing to pay. Vote with your wallets

 

 

Sky has stopped buying rights, or been outbid. EPL, Golf, Black Caps to name ones off the top of my head. If Sky bought rights, it has to make them exclusive, as would be the case for anyone else. Given the internet there is no barrier to competition, as there is no need for massive infrastructure, call centres, dishes. The ability to setup a Netflix for Sport is extremely easy compared to what Sky has had to do with satellite.

 

Passes are a good option, but the risk is how many people are needed to make one pass worthwhile? If I needed four passes that cost me $20 each, and I still miss out on other sports or niche channels, its easy to justify the whole package. Now, if our population was 25 million, that would be a great deal easier

 

It is vote with your wallet. Sky cant drop prices, so thats no issue (unless they dropped services) They make $15 per month per subscriber, thats all. Drop prices a piddly $20 a month and they are running at a loss. Sky could say to the major sports providers, we will pay 20% less. They will say no. We are too small, they know we have no wiggle room so we will have to pay. We dont have the population to spread the load. 


12804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2294

Trusted

  Reply # 1777035 7-May-2017 08:50
Send private message

mattwnz: They would have to accept the next highest price, otherwise they get nothing at all. Although I suspect and overseas provider could pick up the rights and then distribute to nz online. If there was no provider, then the government could always write legislation that allowed NZers to watch culturally significant sports. I don't think there is any risk of nzers not being able to watch it, at a price.

People are already voting with their wallets. I do wonder why they setup fanpass in the first place as it always had the risk of canabalising their satellite service, and whether it had anything to do with the VF merge, and getting that through the competition watchdog. Now that looks to have failed. I wonder if neon will also change?

 

But nothing at all isn't correct. The sports providers would lose the revenue for NZ rights, which globally, is bugger all. 

 

Why cant and don't them or anyone else distribute to NZ online? Because paying the big money (in NZ terms) and seeing a population of 5 million, less kids = say 2.5 million, less non sports people, less the sports people that arent into that sport, leaves a small potential number, and of these, many or some wont or cant pay, or be bothered with an internet thingy to get it on TV. Thats why we see a Sky sports sub of $100 per month, yet we see Joseph Parker fighting a nobody at $50 for one hour. (And , no thats not the same as Sky and Duco split whatever it is, but its along those lines)


12804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2294

Trusted

  Reply # 1777038 7-May-2017 08:54
Send private message

darylblake: Most people I have spoken to are over it.

The consumer doesn't care about what it costs sky . They care about the price they pay.

All the nonsense with broadcasting rights etc is sky's problem. Sky just tell the consumer it's is gonna cost "this much". The consumer either decides to pay it or not.

But what is happening now is loads of numbers are dropping off and the rest of the subs have to carry it. So they actually have a model that is falling apart.

This Parker fight tonight is an absolute joke.

They won't get their act together. And it will fall apart in a few years unless Vodafone can save it.

 

Your right, its Skys problem. But Sky cannot solve it, no one can. The only way to solve it is to drop prices, and there is no room. Or drop services, then the subsequent price drop still isn't seen as value. Sport costs too much for our population to achieve a lower price.

 

They may one day, drop satellite, and be Sky Sports Online only. Remove all that dish and brick and mortar and staff cost, and the other 40% of non sports rights costs, thats the only solution I see.  


2106 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 525


  Reply # 1777043 7-May-2017 09:15
Send private message

Why are they able to let overseas people watch our teams play Rugby (rugby pass.com) so much cheaper then we are? $119 USD for 1 year at the moment.

 

 

 

If they did a Fan Pass that was just rugby and no other sports would it be cheaper?


355 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 33


  Reply # 1777049 7-May-2017 09:48
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

Sky has stopped buying rights, or been outbid. EPL, Golf, Black Caps to name ones off the top of my head. If Sky bought rights, it has to make them exclusive, as would be the case for anyone else. Given the internet there is no barrier to competition, as there is no need for massive infrastructure, call centres, dishes. The ability to setup a Netflix for Sport is extremely easy compared to what Sky has had to do with satellite.

 

 

Why does it have to be exclusive rights?

 

 

Passes are a good option, but the risk is how many people are needed to make one pass worthwhile? If I needed four passes that cost me $20 each, and I still miss out on other sports or niche channels, its easy to justify the whole package. Now, if our population was 25 million, that would be a great deal easier

 

 

Yes agreed it's easy to justify the whole package if you want to watch everything. But that's our only option right now, there's no other choice. If passes are available worldwide from any provider, then it's not just the 5 million or so kiwis as potential customers.

 

 

It is vote with your wallet. Sky cant drop prices, so thats no issue (unless they dropped services) They make $15 per month per subscriber, thats all. Drop prices a piddly $20 a month and they are running at a loss. Sky could say to the major sports providers, we will pay 20% less. They will say no. We are too small, they know we have no wiggle room so we will have to pay. We dont have the population to spread the load. 

 

 

Exactly, follow this hypothetical to its conclusion...Sky says to the sports providers, we will pay 20% less. They will say no. So they will sell the rights to someone else, or to multiple other parties. We the customers will get more choice. And Sky either pays less for non-exclusive rights and retains the customers who want everything and niche sports/channels, they may lose some customers at first yes, but they have other features to entice customers other than sport.

 

However it's a risk they have no incentive to take, hence the exclusive rights and high prices. Pains me to say it but a little government intervention here might be appropriate to "unbundle the lines" so to speak, and enforce non-exclusive rights.


Glurp
7822 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3640

Subscriber

  Reply # 1777051 7-May-2017 09:55
4 people support this post
Send private message

Our small population is often used as an excuse to justify the rorting by Sky and others, not just for sport. But our population isn't small at all. With Australia and the Pacific Islands (our natural family members, just as America has states), it is probably around 30 million. We do not have a 'small' population. We are victims of artificial geographical boundaries which make no sense in the age of the Internet and exist purely to line the pockets of content producers so they can keep reselling the same thing in different localities. Fix that and sport (along with everything else) will suddenly become financially viable here, not to mention much, much cheaper. No market there for NZ sport? The islands would love it and even in Australia there would be many fans.

 

   





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


12804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2294

Trusted

  Reply # 1777061 7-May-2017 10:06
Send private message

petes117:

 

tdgeek:

 

Sky has stopped buying rights, or been outbid. EPL, Golf, Black Caps to name ones off the top of my head. If Sky bought rights, it has to make them exclusive, as would be the case for anyone else. Given the internet there is no barrier to competition, as there is no need for massive infrastructure, call centres, dishes. The ability to setup a Netflix for Sport is extremely easy compared to what Sky has had to do with satellite.

 

 

Why does it have to be exclusive rights?

 

 

Passes are a good option, but the risk is how many people are needed to make one pass worthwhile? If I needed four passes that cost me $20 each, and I still miss out on other sports or niche channels, its easy to justify the whole package. Now, if our population was 25 million, that would be a great deal easier

 

 

Yes agreed it's easy to justify the whole package if you want to watch everything. But that's our only option right now, there's no other choice. If passes are available worldwide from any provider, then it's not just the 5 million or so kiwis as potential customers.

 

 

It is vote with your wallet. Sky cant drop prices, so thats no issue (unless they dropped services) They make $15 per month per subscriber, thats all. Drop prices a piddly $20 a month and they are running at a loss. Sky could say to the major sports providers, we will pay 20% less. They will say no. We are too small, they know we have no wiggle room so we will have to pay. We dont have the population to spread the load. 

 

 

Exactly, follow this hypothetical to its conclusion...Sky says to the sports providers, we will pay 20% less. They will say no. So they will sell the rights to someone else, or to multiple other parties. We the customers will get more choice. And Sky either pays less for non-exclusive rights and retains the customers who want everything and niche sports/channels, they may lose some customers at first yes, but they have other features to entice customers other than sport.

 

However it's a risk they have no incentive to take, hence the exclusive rights and high prices. Pains me to say it but a little government intervention here might be appropriate to "unbundle the lines" so to speak, and enforce non-exclusive rights.

 

 

If anyone bought Rugby rights for NZ and it wasn't exclusive, then it loses value. If Netflix released the latest and greatest TV series, yet it also was on TV1, TV2, TV3, Sky, Lightbox, Hulu, its valueless, as the rights payments offer no benefit.

 

Sky cant see worldwide passes, not unless it buys worldwide rights, and that would be HUGE to put it mildly. Sky operates in NZ. There are not 5 million customers here. Remove, kids, remove non sport people, remove sports people but not that sport, remove those who cannot or will not pay. Not that many left

 

If Sky paid 20% less, for non exclusive, and others also bought the rights, they will all lose and the incentive to buy Sky drops, the incentive to buy the other competitor drops as surely it still wont be cheap, plus these that have Sky for other reasons wont buy. he low low population means that I pay a little subsidy so you can watch rugby, you pay a little subsidy so I can watch F1. Factor in that hey great I do enjoy casually watching other sports, kids channels, niche channels, recording, convenience, and it becomes a bit easier to accept the bill.

 

 

 

Yes, the bill is not cheap. But unless Sky is rorting, it costs what it costs, and I doubt that passes can help for such a small country.

 

Lets say Foxtel or Sky UK (unrelated company) expanded their sports to NZ via streaming. They still have to pay the same rights fees, as the greedy sports providers don't want a drop in revenue. They need then to setup CDN with NZ telcos; or fund their own servers here, staff that, repair that, etc. There is no getting away from

 

1. Sports providers want their cash

 

2. Too few in NZ to spread the cost effectively.

 

These two problems are Skys problems, and if someone else took over Sky, or competed, its then their problem. 


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | ... | 25
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Intel introduces new NUC kits and NUC mini PCs
Posted 16-Aug-2018 11:03


The Warehouse leaps into the AI future with Google
Posted 15-Aug-2018 17:56


Targus set sights on enterprise and consumer growth in New Zealand
Posted 13-Aug-2018 13:47


Huawei to distribute nova 3i in New Zealand
Posted 9-Aug-2018 16:23


Home robot Vector to be available in New Zealand stores
Posted 9-Aug-2018 14:47


Panasonic announces new 2018 OLED TV line up
Posted 7-Aug-2018 16:38


Kordia completes first live 4K TV broadcast
Posted 1-Aug-2018 13:00


Schools get safer and smarter internet with Managed Network Upgrade
Posted 30-Jul-2018 20:01


DNC wants a safer .nz in the coming year
Posted 26-Jul-2018 16:08


Auldhouse becomes an AWS Authorised Training Delivery Partner in New Zealand
Posted 26-Jul-2018 15:55


Rakuten Kobo launches Kobo Clara HD entry level reader
Posted 26-Jul-2018 15:44


Kiwi team reaches semi-finals at the Microsoft Imagine Cup
Posted 26-Jul-2018 15:38


KidsCan App to Help Kiwi Children in Need
Posted 26-Jul-2018 15:32


FUJIFILM announces new high-performance lenses
Posted 24-Jul-2018 14:57


New FUJIFILM XF10 introduces square mode for Instagram sharing
Posted 24-Jul-2018 14:44



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.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.