Sky blames piracy for lost customers. Sky: it's time to wake up and smell the coffee.

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › Sky blames piracy for lost customers. Sky: it's time to wake up and smell the coffee.

1 | ... | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | ... | 57

28596 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1911619 1-Dec-2017 11:51

browned:

It is only a matter of time before popular sports go direct to customers through their own direct subscriptions and apps.

I buy WRC Plus each January for 29 Euros, I get live stages and ondemand, plus in car footage from multiple cameras, live timing, and results. WRC had 600+ millions viewers this year, if only 10 million of those subscribed to WRC plus then that is a pretty good amount of money going direct to WRC.

There are a few other motorsports I would pay for if they had Android TV apps and direct subscriptions, F1 for one. V8 Supercars, maybe.

Agree. The difficulty is can those subs in NZ match what Sky pays the rights for? Rugger, reportedly thats 40 to 50 million, in a single annual cheque. Maybe its not one cheque but its a single revenue source from Sky. To replace that with apps at a subscription rate is a risk. Take up might be low, or it might be great but 20% less than Sky's lump sum. Or, buying a few subs for a few sports may cost an amount close to Skys annual sub. I recall a few posting in these Sky threads about some sports costing a couple or three hundred per annum. Three or four of those, and thats ouch.

Was WRC 29 Euro per season or per month?

Pluralsight

Learn cloud, mobile, security, data and web technologies with Pluralsight (affiliate link).

browned

636 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1911656 1-Dec-2017 12:23

tdgeek:

browned:

It is only a matter of time before popular sports go direct to customers through their own direct subscriptions and apps.

I buy WRC Plus each January for 29 Euros, I get live stages and ondemand, plus in car footage from multiple cameras, live timing, and results. WRC had 600+ millions viewers this year, if only 10 million of those subscribed to WRC plus then that is a pretty good amount of money going direct to WRC.

There are a few other motorsports I would pay for if they had Android TV apps and direct subscriptions, F1 for one. V8 Supercars, maybe.

Agree. The difficulty is can those subs in NZ match what Sky pays the rights for? Rugger, reportedly thats 40 to 50 million, in a single annual cheque. Maybe its not one cheque but its a single revenue source from Sky. To replace that with apps at a subscription rate is a risk. Take up might be low, or it might be great but 20% less than Sky's lump sum. Or, buying a few subs for a few sports may cost an amount close to Skys annual sub. I recall a few posting in these Sky threads about some sports costing a couple or three hundred per annum. Three or four of those, and thats ouch.

Was WRC 29 Euro per season or per month?

Sorry 39 per season with discount, or 4.99 euro a month.

Well $50 million, divide by say 500,000 subscribers is only $100 or $8.30 a month each (more if the season is only 6 months). Call it $10 a month for ease and there is potential to get that same amount of money. However, this is only the same amount of money and doesn't cover costs. So doing more maths, $20 month gets $100 million, $30 gets $150-180 million. I suspect NZ Rugby can put the figures in place to work this out, eventually it will work for them.

NZ Rugby need to decide if the risk is worth it. I highly doubt it will be profitable to start with but it is going to be.

Home Server: AMD Threadripper 1950X, 64GB, 56TB HDD, Define R6 Case, 10GbE, ESXi 6.7, UNRAID, NextPVR, Emby Server, Plex Server.
Lounge Media Center: NVIDIA Shield TV 16GB: Kodi18 with Titan MOD, Emby.
Kids Media Center: NVIDIA Shield TV 16GB: Kodi18 with Titan MOD, Emby.
Main PC: Ryzen 7 2700, 16GB RAM, RX 570, 2 x 24"

tdgeek

28596 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1911668 1-Dec-2017 12:58

browned:

tdgeek:

browned:

It is only a matter of time before popular sports go direct to customers through their own direct subscriptions and apps.

I buy WRC Plus each January for 29 Euros, I get live stages and ondemand, plus in car footage from multiple cameras, live timing, and results. WRC had 600+ millions viewers this year, if only 10 million of those subscribed to WRC plus then that is a pretty good amount of money going direct to WRC.

There are a few other motorsports I would pay for if they had Android TV apps and direct subscriptions, F1 for one. V8 Supercars, maybe.

Agree. The difficulty is can those subs in NZ match what Sky pays the rights for? Rugger, reportedly thats 40 to 50 million, in a single annual cheque. Maybe its not one cheque but its a single revenue source from Sky. To replace that with apps at a subscription rate is a risk. Take up might be low, or it might be great but 20% less than Sky's lump sum. Or, buying a few subs for a few sports may cost an amount close to Skys annual sub. I recall a few posting in these Sky threads about some sports costing a couple or three hundred per annum. Three or four of those, and thats ouch.

Was WRC 29 Euro per season or per month?

Sorry 39 per season with discount, or 4.99 euro a month.

Well $50 million, divide by say 500,000 subscribers is only $100 or $8.30 a month each (more if the season is only 6 months). Call it $10 a month for ease and there is potential to get that same amount of money. However, this is only the same amount of money and doesn't cover costs. So doing more maths, $20 month gets $100 million, $30 gets $150-180 million. I suspect NZ Rugby can put the figures in place to work this out, eventually it will work for them.

NZ Rugby need to decide if the risk is worth it. I highly doubt it will be profitable to start with but it is going to be.

There is no way that 500,000 would subscribe. Rugby is our national sport but what % of people follow it? Many dont like rugby or sport. Many cant be ar$ed or know how to watch it via an app, directly on TV is far better.

But we also like F1, MotoGP, Grand Slam Tennis, NRL, do we have an app for each of these and how much are they? Why were some sports here at $200 to $300 on an annual pass? If I am having to spend 4 x $200 I may as well spend $1200 and have all sports and other channels, etc. Sometimes a package works better, less cost per sport, but not ideal for those that watch one or two sports

Oblivian

6944 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1911676 1-Dec-2017 13:17

Sitting down?

For example American channel NBC paid around $7.65 billion to for the next three olympic games cycles till 2032. Thats around $1.275 billion for each of the next 6 olympic games.

Sky NZL

New Zealand & Pacific region countries

Sky NZ signed a massive olympic deal to cover broadcasting rights in New zealand as well as pacific region countries in a deal worth $10.5m each Olympic cycle till 2024.

tdgeek

28596 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1911683 1-Dec-2017 13:29

Oblivian:

Sitting down?

For example American channel NBC paid around $7.65 billion to for the next three olympic games cycles till 2032. Thats around $1.275 billion for each of the next 6 olympic games.

Sky NZL New Zealand & Pacific region countries Sky NZ signed a massive olympic deal to cover broadcasting rights in New zealand as well as pacific region countries in a deal worth $10.5m each Olympic cycle till 2024.

Not sure of your point?

US$200 per event to NZ$10 per event

US population 300 million vs 5, makes sense. Actually per capita we pay twice as much

Oblivian

6944 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1911700 1-Dec-2017 14:11

tdgeek:

Oblivian:

Sitting down?

For example American channel NBC paid around $7.65 billion to for the next three olympic games cycles till 2032. Thats around $1.275 billion for each of the next 6 olympic games.

Sky NZL New Zealand & Pacific region countries Sky NZ signed a massive olympic deal to cover broadcasting rights in New zealand as well as pacific region countries in a deal worth $10.5m each Olympic cycle till 2024.

Not sure of your point?

US$200 per event to NZ$10 per event

US population 300 million vs 5, makes sense. Actually per capita we pay twice as much

Not a point being made. Just putting some factual figures forward. Anyone can come up with a best-case subscriber figure/'should cost' value over overseas streaming pricing but it's not a yearly cost thing but spread out so hard to actually get right.

The up front costs Sky need to re-coup in doing so in securing this single example dropping them 10.5m a cycle in the red. So 4 more to go ~42m (possibly in US$ which would nearly double that). + NZRFU securing. And making 160m profit theres quite likely a bigger chunk from advertising than subs which we don't know to offset

tdgeek

28596 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1911712 1-Dec-2017 14:51

Oblivian:

tdgeek:

Oblivian:

Sitting down?

For example American channel NBC paid around $7.65 billion to for the next three olympic games cycles till 2032. Thats around $1.275 billion for each of the next 6 olympic games.

Sky NZL New Zealand & Pacific region countries Sky NZ signed a massive olympic deal to cover broadcasting rights in New zealand as well as pacific region countries in a deal worth $10.5m each Olympic cycle till 2024.

Not sure of your point?

US$200 per event to NZ$10 per event

US population 300 million vs 5, makes sense. Actually per capita we pay twice as much

Not a point being made. Just putting some factual figures forward. Anyone can come up with a best-case subscriber figure/'should cost' value over overseas streaming pricing but it's not a yearly cost thing but spread out so hard to actually get right.

The up front costs Sky need to re-coup in doing so in securing this single example dropping them 10.5m a cycle in the red. So 4 more to go ~42m (possibly in US$ which would nearly double that). + NZRFU securing. And making 160m profit theres quite likely a bigger chunk from advertising than subs which we don't know to offset

Sky doesnt recoup these costs. Olympics, RWC, they pay the costs and wear it. They will pickup some temporary subscribers, but thats peanuts, as is advertising

Its a cost of running the business, in that to be the go to service for sport they have to have the sport, and as there is no surcharge for subscribers, there is very little recovery of the costs. It does however keep them as the premium service for sport, and that is the glue that holds them together.

JimmyH

2820 posts

Uber Geek

#1911766 1-Dec-2017 18:15

tdgeek:

Agree. The difficulty is can those subs in NZ match what Sky pays the rights for? Rugger, reportedly thats 40 to 50 million, in a single annual cheque. Maybe its not one cheque but its a single revenue source from Sky. To replace that with apps at a subscription rate is a risk. Take up might be low, or it might be great but 20% less than Sky's lump sum.

That's true. However, they face a risk either way. The reality is that while other revenue channels may not be able to match what Sky currently pays, neither may Sky itself for much longer. If they keep bleeding revenue and subscribers at the current rate their profitability and cashflow will plunge steeply over the next 2-3 years. With falling revenue they will have to take a knife to costs, including what they can afford to pay for sports rights, with an ever-smaller base to spread those costs across.

While it may get a temporary lift if new entrants spark a bidding war for some of the flagship sports rights in the near future, NZ Rugby would be wise to ensure it has plans for coping with a substantial drop in broadcasting-rights income over the medium term.

tdgeek

28596 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1911806 1-Dec-2017 20:05

JimmyH:

tdgeek:

Agree. The difficulty is can those subs in NZ match what Sky pays the rights for? Rugger, reportedly thats 40 to 50 million, in a single annual cheque. Maybe its not one cheque but its a single revenue source from Sky. To replace that with apps at a subscription rate is a risk. Take up might be low, or it might be great but 20% less than Sky's lump sum.

That's true. However, they face a risk either way. The reality is that while other revenue channels may not be able to match what Sky currently pays, neither may Sky itself for much longer. If they keep bleeding revenue and subscribers at the current rate their profitability and cashflow will plunge steeply over the next 2-3 years. With falling revenue they will have to take a knife to costs, including what they can afford to pay for sports rights, with an ever-smaller base to spread those costs across.

While it may get a temporary lift if new entrants spark a bidding war for some of the flagship sports rights in the near future, NZ Rugby would be wise to ensure it has plans for coping with a substantial drop in broadcasting-rights income over the medium term.

Fully agree. Im sure most think I am a Sky fanboy. Im not. I am a realist. I can easily see Sky going Basic at $15, Neon at $15, sport at what ever it costs. That could be huge as no Basic subsidy. I can also see Sky going sports only. A crunch is coming, but its not a Sky issue, its more a sports right owner issue.

Id hate to have to get a pay app (pay no issue) for F1, MotoGP, Tennis etc etc etc and have to manage all that manually, at would possibly be within a bulls roar of Sky Basic + Sport. The days of what device, and what HDMI channel may go to what app....

Geektastic

17690 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1914893 7-Dec-2017 23:12

Just as a general comment, I have to say that I find it quite astonishing the amount of money these firms will pay for sports.

I foresee a future of AD2000-style Fatties, eating FlabOn and watching sport on multiple screens as the entire world - other than the players - has become too fat to play themsleves!

I’m not tribal enough to understand the fascination: ultimately it seems largely meaningless to me personally which group of sweaty men carried a ball over a line or kicked it into a net the most, or who drove a car fastest but of course I also accept that I am in somewhat of a minority there - but it really does make it hard to understand just why people pay so much money to stick these things on the telly.

I think Sky might be heading out of the door at our place in the New Year to be honest especially if you can stream Freeview. We get no decent TV reception here (which is why we ended up with Sky originally).

PhantomNVD

2619 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1915020 8-Dec-2017 09:01

A Freeview satellite decoder is around $80, and uses the dish sky put on your roof anyway. Ditch them now and use a single month’s sub to buy the decoder instead?

Benoire

2630 posts

Uber Geek

#1915028 8-Dec-2017 09:08

Just remember that Freeview via Sat is not in HD so the picture quality is quite poor.

bmt

574 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1915424 8-Dec-2017 20:04

Much like most of Sky's channels, even after paying for the privilege of viewing a 10 year old picture quality standard:)

Let's be honest, if NZ Rugby goes it alone they are going to charge an absolute fortune. Rugby. All Blacks. Expensive New Zealand. Perfect storm.

shk292

2692 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1915473 8-Dec-2017 22:07

bmt:

Much like most of Sky's channels, even after paying for the privilege of viewing a 10 year old picture quality standard:)

Let's be honest, if NZ Rugby goes it alone they are going to charge an absolute fortune. Rugby. All Blacks. Expensive New Zealand. Perfect storm.

You can only charge what people are willing to pay. Through the Sky model, non-rugby-watchers have effectively been subidising rugby fans. That will stop when Sky fails

cws82us

785 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1916316 11-Dec-2017 01:04

I think what will kill sky if the competition like Amazon out bids sky in the nz rugby

1 | ... | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | ... | 57