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 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | ... | 19
164 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 6


  Reply # 1965891 28-Feb-2018 14:14
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

old3eyes:

 

rugrat:

 

login:

 

Their obvious mistake is not to include all the public access free to air channels (TV1, 2, 3, Prime, Bravo ...) in *BOTH* the Sky Starter and Sky Entertainment packages.

 

Those of us with MySky want to be able to both watch and record programs using their MySky device. The only way to do this under the Starter and Entertainment packages is to have both. So nothing has changed for us. 

 

 

 

 

The way I read it Sky Starter is the new minimum package. Nothing else can be brought until Sky Starter is purchased.

 

So can't buy Entertainment package without Sky Starter.

 

 

If that's the case then it's no go for me. 

 

 

Yes, that makes sense.  In which case nothing has changed for me with the Sky Basic subscription and MySky. There is no incentive for me to remain with Sky, as before.


286 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 15


  Reply # 1965897 28-Feb-2018 14:21
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

vexxxboy:

 

Spyware:

 

vexxxboy:

 

why do people knock Sky for charging for HD yet give Netflix a free pass for doing the same thing. 

 

 

Because Sky's mpeg2 dross is substandard and not even fit for transmission (my opinion).

 

 

The quality is not the point , both charge for HD and Sky is hammered for it. Netflix isn't

 

 

Netflix:

 

Basic Stream in standard definition (SD) on one device at a time. $9.99 Standard Stream in (up to) high-definition (HD) on two devices at a time.

 

$12.99 Premium Stream in (up to) 4K definition on four devices at a time. $15.99  

 

$3 more  for HD and another device $6 more for 4 devices and 4k Meanwhile Sky is $10 just for HD, 90% of the HD channels are premium channels so you're paying twice for said HD...the rest are freeview channels. Also "HD" is a pretty loose term given their bitrate.


418 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 198


  Reply # 1965922 28-Feb-2018 14:55
Send private message quote this post

networkn:

MileHighKiwi: If, like me, you have Sky only to get the Sports package, a $25 discount is pretty good.

Starter = $24.91
Sports = $29.99

Total = $54.90 for "Sports" is how I view it. Works out less than $13 per week. Plus the kids channels are useful for our family so a win win really.

I'm about to come off the Sky deals package and will switch to Vodafone TV. Pretty sure you don't need HD ticket on that.


Well it's unclear if this includes MySkyHDI or HD Ticket, which could easily come to another $20-25 a month. 


 



I'm assuming that I will be able to do this via Vodafone TV and that HD is not extra. It wasn't extra under Vodafones old offering.

36 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 11


  Reply # 1965955 28-Feb-2018 15:20
Send private message quote this post

MileHighKiwi:

I'm assuming that I will be able to do this via Vodafone TV and that HD is not extra. It wasn't extra under Vodafones old offering.

 

 

 

From what I can gather, Vodafone aren't offering the new Sky Starter pack at launch: http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/money/2018/02/vodafone-customers-won-t-get-sky-tv-price-cut.html

 

 


1916 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 125


  Reply # 1965958 28-Feb-2018 15:31
4 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

Hmmm. We dumped Sky a couple of years back because we were paying $50/mth and only watching History Channel and occasionally a couple of others. About 1/3 of the Channels in their new Basic we already get FTA on UHF and the rest are of no interest so why would I pay for that. The only thing that may entice us back is if we were able to exclude Basic and get Entertainment plus Sport. Being unable to do this means there's no difference to what there was before we dumped them and they are losing a possible new cheaper subscription from us if they played ball and were reasonable.


13967 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1761


  Reply # 1965960 28-Feb-2018 15:34
Send private message quote this post

vexxxboy:

 

mattwnz:

 

vexxxboy:

 

why do people knock Sky for charging for HD yet give Netflix a free pass for doing the same thing. 

 

 

 

 

I don't use netflix myself, so didn't know they did that. However lightbox doesn't. Also the price difference to upgrade is't that much with netflix is it? PLus netflix is far cheaper to begin with, so people expect IMO that if you are paying a far higher price, that they could throw that in as standard, if you are going to that expense.

 

 

25% more if you want HD 

 

 

 

 

Percenage wise it doesn't look good, but dollar wise it is a lot less ($3.50 only), and the base price is also a lot less. It is a case where percentages can be used to support a certain point of view. You could also argue that the HD  upgrade price of netflix is only around the 1/3 the price of STV eg $3.50 vs $9.99.


13967 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1761


  Reply # 1965963 28-Feb-2018 15:39
Send private message quote this post

B1GGLZ:

 

Hmmm. We dumped Sky a couple of years back because we were paying $50/mth and only watching History Channel and occasionally a couple of others. About 1/3 of the Channels in their new Basic we already get FTA on UHF and the rest are of no interest so why would I pay for that. The only thing that may entice us back is if we were able to exclude Basic and get Entertainment plus Sport. Being unable to do this means there's no difference to what there was before we dumped them and they are losing a possible new cheaper subscription from us if they played ball and were reasonable.

 

 

 

 

I think it is good for those who really only get sky to watch sport. IMO if you do watch a lot of sport, the price is quite reasonable. Infact I think sky does offer quite good value for money if you use it as your primary source of entertainment and watch a lot of sport. With streaming services, it is very fragmented, and you need multiple services to get similar content. But what I don't like is that they still have adverts on it. A lot of their revenue must come from advertising, so if subscriber numbers drop, so does the amount they can get for advertising, so it becomes a chicken and egg thing. IMO they need a total shakeup, not just fiddling at the corners.


32 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 4


  Reply # 1965975 28-Feb-2018 16:02
3 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

OK, this is a generous move from sky.

Yes the new ~$25 basic package is rather pathetic content wise, but many people who sign up primarily for sport would say they exact same thing about the previous ~$50 basic package.

Almost the entirely of Sky’s business is built around the Sport rights - which are hugely expensive, and in a nation of only 4.7 million people, it unfortunately isn’t feasible for sky to offer it’s content much cheaper than it is now.

Sky Profit margin is only 13%. this means for every $1 dollar it makes from customers/advertisers - it makes a profit of 13c.

Therefore if you turned Sky into a charity making zero profits - the price would only be roughly 13% less than it is now - which I doubt would satisfy the moaners on here who apparently want everything way cheaper than that.

The real villain in the price of everyones Sky subscription is blindingly obvious: the sports entities charging them for broadcasts rights, with the bulk of it being the NZRU. (To be fair to NZRU they are simply making good business decisions in their own interests).

I do feel for those who dont watch sport - becuase even if they don’t subscribe to their sport channels, you are still effectively subsidising the sports viewers. Totally understand these subscribers ditching their subscriptions and turning to alternatives like Netflix/lightbox etc which have plenty of good content.

589 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 103
Inactive user


  Reply # 1965981 28-Feb-2018 16:13
Send private message quote this post

Cheaper for a short time until they catch it up with their yearly price hikes

12273 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2138

Trusted

  Reply # 1965985 28-Feb-2018 16:18
Send private message quote this post

kbkiwi: OK, this is a generous move from sky.

Yes the new ~$25 basic package is rather pathetic content wise, but many people who sign up primarily for sport would say they exact same thing about the previous ~$50 basic package.

Almost the entirely of Sky’s business is built around the Sport rights - which are hugely expensive, and in a nation of only 4.7 million people, it unfortunately isn’t feasible for sky to offer it’s content much cheaper than it is now.

Sky Profit margin is only 13%. this means for every $1 dollar it makes from customers/advertisers - it makes a profit of 13c.

Therefore if you turned Sky into a charity making zero profits - the price would only be roughly 13% less than it is now - which I doubt would satisfy the moaners on here who apparently want everything way cheaper than that.

The real villain in the price of everyones Sky subscription is blindingly obvious: the sports entities charging them for broadcasts rights, with the bulk of it being the NZRU. (To be fair to NZRU they are simply making good business decisions in their own interests).

I do feel for those who dont watch sport - becuase even if they don’t subscribe to their sport channels, you are still effectively subsidising the sports viewers. Totally understand these subscribers ditching their subscriptions and turning to alternatives like Netflix/lightbox etc which have plenty of good content.

 

Fully agree, and this move is for sport, to get back sports subscribers. 


Talk DIrtY to me
4284 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2298

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1966022 28-Feb-2018 17:37
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

Sorry SkyNet, I still wouldn't buy ya service.


13967 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1761


  Reply # 1966038 28-Feb-2018 18:01
Send private message quote this post

kbkiwi: OK, this is a generous move from sky.

Yes the new ~$25 basic package is rather pathetic content wise, but many people who sign up primarily for sport would say they exact same thing about the previous ~$50 basic package.

Almost the entirely of Sky’s business is built around the Sport rights - which are hugely expensive, and in a nation of only 4.7 million people, it unfortunately isn’t feasible for sky to offer it’s content much cheaper than it is now.

Sky Profit margin is only 13%. this means for every $1 dollar it makes from customers/advertisers - it makes a profit of 13c.

Therefore if you turned Sky into a charity making zero profits - the price would only be roughly 13% less than it is now - which I doubt would satisfy the moaners on here who apparently want everything way cheaper than that.

The real villain in the price of everyones Sky subscription is blindingly obvious: the sports entities charging them for broadcasts rights, with the bulk of it being the NZRU. (To be fair to NZRU they are simply making good business decisions in their own interests).

I do feel for those who dont watch sport - becuase even if they don’t subscribe to their sport channels, you are still effectively subsidising the sports viewers. Totally understand these subscribers ditching their subscriptions and turning to alternatives like Netflix/lightbox etc which have plenty of good content.

 

 

 

I think it needs to work out a way of cutting costs. High paid staff I am sure doesn't help, especially if they aren't really adapting the business model, and are largely running in autopilot. But then you have high hardware costs, installers, tech staff, transmission costs etc, which laregely don't apply for streaming services.  For the last decade it has been pretty much the same old formula, apart from testing the market with online services. I think the problem is that things needed to change years ago. But changes likely would have come at the cost of lower divideds for shareholders, at least short term, as they reinvested in a new model. Instead they seem to have just coasted along with the old model, which at some stage would become irrelevant, but the writing has been on the wall for years. I guess some businesses do have a use by date. eg Kodak, the horse & cart etc.


532 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 40


  Reply # 1966039 28-Feb-2018 18:02
Send private message quote this post

This is a win for us, the basic package is good for what we watch and the kids channels.
Add in sports and the (pseudo)HD and mysky, and sport and for $80 I’m happy.

2630 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 271


  Reply # 1966042 28-Feb-2018 18:07
Send private message quote this post

So some more geek-ish analysis (in responce to Paul Brislen perhaps?)

 

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12003757 

 

Pretty much what we all surmised in the 'other' sky thread of epicness and many pages re needing the infrastructure to compete since it's grasp hold of OSB probably won't be let go.

 

 

 

 

 

 


61 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 8


  Reply # 1966044 28-Feb-2018 18:08
Send private message quote this post

Well thats typical ZB news item Sky isn't interested in its existing customers, just new ones. No suprises there then.


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | ... | 19
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 »

N4L helping TAKA Trust bridge the digital divide for Lower Hutt students
Posted 18-Jun-2018 13:08


Winners Announced for 2018 CIO Awards
Posted 18-Jun-2018 13:03


Logitech Rally sets new standard for USB-connected video conference cameras
Posted 18-Jun-2018 09:27


Russell Stanners steps down as Vodafone NZ CEO
Posted 12-Jun-2018 09:13


Intergen recognised as 2018 Microsoft Country Partner of the Year for New Zealand
Posted 12-Jun-2018 08:00


Finalists Announced For Microsoft NZ Partner Awards
Posted 6-Jun-2018 15:12


Vocus Group and Vodafone announce joint venture to accelerate fibre innovation
Posted 5-Jun-2018 10:52


Kogan.com to launch Kogan Mobile in New Zealand
Posted 4-Jun-2018 14:34


Enable doubles fibre broadband speeds for its most popular wholesale service in Christchurch
Posted 2-Jun-2018 20:07


All or Nothing: New Zealand All Blacks arrives on Amazon Prime Video
Posted 2-Jun-2018 16:21


Innovation Grant, High Tech Awards and new USA office for Kiwi tech company SwipedOn
Posted 1-Jun-2018 20:54


Commerce Commission warns Apple for misleading consumers about their rights
Posted 30-May-2018 13:15


IBM leads Call for Code to use cloud, data, AI, blockchain for natural disaster relief
Posted 25-May-2018 14:12


New FUJIFILM X-T100 aims to do better job than smartphones
Posted 24-May-2018 20:17


Stuff takes 100% ownership of Stuff Fibre
Posted 24-May-2018 19:41



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.