SKY NZ CEO Fellet to retire

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › SKY NZ CEO Fellet to retire

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

252 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1983372 26-Mar-2018 12:06

I also had a comment with a little more info that didn't seem to arrive with the post so sorry about that I got the article off stuff early in the morning when I did the quiz.then I hadnt to go do other things so never saw the lack of any clarification.

MyHeritage

Shop MyHeritage and uncover your origins and find new relatives with a simple DNA test. (affiliate link).

jfanning

437 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1983378 26-Mar-2018 12:18

stinger:

That's never going to happen. There is a significant proportion (wild guess about 10%) of the population that will never get unlimited fast Internet. Interesting to see that Foxtel in Australia have decided to move all their HFC customers on to Satellite. You're also not going to get Sky Go features (including watching FTA channels, and delayed playback) on an online only service.

What Sky do need is a product like Foxtel Now, and priced a approximately the same pricing point. Currently, you can get FanPass - which is riddled with bugs - for $99 per month. I can get Fox Sports + premium drama (think SoHo type content) + a handful of other channel for less than half that in Australia. This is definitely the direction Sky need to move to, Foxtel and BSkyB have both done this.

10% isn't significant

Chorus announced this a while back

https://company.chorus.co.nz/chorus-trial-live-4k-broadcasting-service-over-fibre

Also, why would you lose things like Sky Go? other countries with a similar population level to ours provide features like that, say Virgin Media Ireland for example.

networkn

Networkn
30197 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1983383 26-Mar-2018 12:30

hairy1:

networkn:

I'd find it hard to believe that Sky hasn't already considered a huge number of scenarios. Chances are if they didn't undertake the changes you suggested, there is likely a good reason. The board is made up of some very well thought of people but I'd suggest the issues are very complex and

there are factors that most people wouldn't even conceive of shaping their decision making.

They are moving to digital distribution, slower admittedly than most people would have preferred. I think they thought the VF merger would have sped this up and now don't have this option. They are looking at Amazon and other platforms too.

The problem is that every time Sky go near digital it doesn't go well. The world is going digital. My kids don't know what broadcast TV is.

The latest venture which was going to be the product of the Sky Vodafone merger has not exactly changed the world.

People don't want to run coax to all the TV's in their house and buy multiroom. Everyone want an app on all devices that can stream sky channels. Netflix don't care how many devices I am signed in on. That's why everyone wants to be friends with Netflix. Because it is easy and it works.

If Sky get that part going then viewers will return.

Yes, NF does care how many devices. Check your subscription details.

I am not saying that Sky has done an awesome job with it's digital platforms to date. They were too slow to see the need, then didn't commit to it fully. They waited for things to happen (relying on mergers etc which would have given them a platform) rather than making something happen.

I think they are doing the right thing in partnering with an established platform rather than making their own.

My kids don't care how their content is delivered behind the scenes. I didn't know what broadcast tv was as a kid, I knew that my content was available in our 1 device in the house (tv).

In an ideal situation what you mention would be amazing, but NF doesn't need to cater for anyone that doesn't have an internet connection (and has an near unlimited number of customers), Sky has chosen to provide this (for a long time before SVOD was a thing) and understandably (to those who don't only care about themselves) and will continue to for the foreseeable future. This makes their strategy more complicated and the risks higher.

Also, Netflix is a loss-making organization and expect it's prices to jump (some analysts believe by up to 80%) over the next 5 years. They can't make a profit (or even close) charging what they charge.

It's simply not apples with apples. If NF works for you and you don't see the value in Sky, then no-one is forcing you, or anyone to remain a subscriber.

I have both and am happy to pay for both. I'd take my Rugby over transmission before streaming every day of the week. I can't imagine how freaking frustrated I'd be if for some reason my bandwidth mid game was affected and I got buffering and definition changes as a result.

I have a 70Mbps connection and my Netflix would have an issue at least once or twice a week or more even.

Amosnz

559 posts

Ultimate Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1983387 26-Mar-2018 12:43

This will limit the usefulness of the fellet.io domain name I've thought of registering a few times before.

Speedtest

Dratsab

3929 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1983390 26-Mar-2018 12:47

networkn: Yes, NF does care how many devices. Check your subscription details.

No NF does not care how many devices you have registered - I've got about 11. What it cares about is the amount of devices viewing consecutively.

networkn: I am not saying that Sky has done an awesome job with it's digital platforms to date. They were too slow to see the need, then didn't commit to it fully. They waited for things to happen (relying on mergers etc which would have given them a platform) rather than making something happen. I think they are doing the right thing in partnering with an established platform rather than making their own

In an ideal situation what you mention would be amazing, but NF doesn't need to cater for anyone that doesn't have an internet connection (and has an near unlimited number of customers), Sky has chosen to provide this (for a long time before SVOD was a thing) and understandably (to those who don't only care about themselves) and will continue to for the foreseeable future. This makes their strategy more complicated and the risks higher.

Also, Netflix is a loss-making organization and expect it's prices to jump (some analysts believe by up to 80%) over the next 5 years. They can't make a profit (or even close) charging what they charge.

As has been pointed out numerous other times, it's apples and oranges. NF only competes with a segment of Sky. I'd be interested to see links to back up your claims of NF being a loss making organisation.

https://www.stock-analysis-on.net/NASDAQ/Company/Netflix-Inc/Ratios/Profitability

rugrat

2942 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1983391 26-Mar-2018 12:48

Mean while mega structures was nice to watch in HD on Duke last night.
And the add breaks seem more evenly spread out.

He's still staying on the board, so his Dinosaur thinking will still be there.

quickymart

11171 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1983392 26-Mar-2018 12:48

Personally delivery methods of Sky would not convince me to return - if they had something I wanted to watch I would get it. I guess for me content is king, not the delivery method.

tdgeek

28589 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1983394 26-Mar-2018 12:51

networkn:

Amazes me that people think the CEO stepping down is going to magically going to mean we have any channel available on any device for $20 a month in HD and whilst you watch rugby someone from Sky will massage your feet!

I believe Fellet and the Sky Board are well aware of peoples sentiment, but the reality is likely something pretty different.

Those who keep ignorantly comparing Netflix to Sky (even when it's been shown time and time again as FACT that they aren't the same service) are likely in for big disappointment.

Changes are coming, they were ones the current CEO and Board approved and have been working on for a while now.

I think a new CEO would do well to start being more accessible and improve communication and try and become a little more user-friendly as a company.

I agree. When he/she does that it will be great but when pricing doesnt do what you said above, he/she will be criticised as always

networkn

Networkn
30197 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1983624 26-Mar-2018 16:36

dafman:

networkn:

Screw all those people who live in areas without decent internet? Great.

That's life, get over. I don't see why in this day and age why the vast bulk of Sky subscribers should have to pay extra to subsidise the rural population.

That's a breathtaking display of ignorance right there.

stinger

628 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1983634 26-Mar-2018 16:44

dafman:

That's life, get over. I don't see why in this day and age why the vast bulk of Sky subscribers should have to pay extra to subsidise the rural population.

Once you have one customer on satellite, the transmissions cost will be the same as 1,000,000 customers. If Sky did have an online solution that worked and was comparably priced, the two would co-exist for many decades to come. Both Foxtel (Australia) and BSkyB (UK) have both satellite and online only options available to their customers. Neither are seen as online first, and I don't think Sky intend to be a guinea pig.

DarthKermit

5346 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1983643 26-Mar-2018 17:04

Breaking news!

The captain of the Titanic has been replaced by a younger guy with fresh ideas. Everyone is expecting a more positive outcome. Stay tuned for further detains.

hairy1

3251 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1983704 26-Mar-2018 18:03

networkn:

Yes, NF does care how many devices. Check your subscription details.

I am not saying that Sky has done an awesome job with it's digital platforms to date. They were too slow to see the need, then didn't commit to it fully. They waited for things to happen (relying on mergers etc which would have given them a platform) rather than making something happen.

I think they are doing the right thing in partnering with an established platform rather than making their own.

My kids don't care how their content is delivered behind the scenes. I didn't know what broadcast tv was as a kid, I knew that my content was available in our 1 device in the house (tv).

In an ideal situation what you mention would be amazing, but NF doesn't need to cater for anyone that doesn't have an internet connection (and has an near unlimited number of customers), Sky has chosen to provide this (for a long time before SVOD was a thing) and understandably (to those who don't only care about themselves) and will continue to for the foreseeable future. This makes their strategy more complicated and the risks higher.

Also, Netflix is a loss-making organization and expect it's prices to jump (some analysts believe by up to 80%) over the next 5 years. They can't make a profit (or even close) charging what they charge.

It's simply not apples with apples. If NF works for you and you don't see the value in Sky, then no-one is forcing you, or anyone to remain a subscriber.

I have both and am happy to pay for both. I'd take my Rugby over transmission before streaming every day of the week. I can't imagine how freaking frustrated I'd be if for some reason my bandwidth mid game was affected and I got buffering and definition changes as a result.

I have a 70Mbps connection and my Netflix would have an issue at least once or twice a week or more even.

I'm wasn't talking about the Netflix service. I was talking about the platform. Sky needs a digital platform. I gather that transmission works for you but to be honest you are not the future. The digital natives are. The baby boomers are keeping the Sky boat going but they are going to become a limited commodity in the future.

My views (except when I am looking out their windows) are not those of my employer.

networkn

Networkn
30197 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1983709 26-Mar-2018 18:13

hairy1:

I'm wasn't talking about the Netflix service. I was talking about the platform. Sky needs a digital platform. I gather that transmission works for you but to be honest you are not the future. The digital natives are. The baby boomers are keeping the Sky boat going but they are going to become a limited commodity in the future.

Transmission works for pretty much everybody, that's the point. Internet Platforms only work for those with internet capable of decent speeds.

Sky has a digital platform (or one coming in the next 12 months) and a digital transformation plan I believe. I think its timeframes are different to your expectation.

By the time I get Fibre, I expect Sky will have a digital platform and I may consider that. I am not married to broadcast, I am saying it's required for a while yet due to the relatively low population density we have here. I don't see Sky abandoning it anytime soon. It would be a massive disservice to the rest of the people with poor internet.

stinger

628 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1983739 26-Mar-2018 19:14

networkn:
By the time I get Fibre, I expect Sky will have a digital platform and I may consider that. I am not married to broadcast, I am saying it's required for a while yet due to the relatively low population density we have here. I don't see Sky abandoning it anytime soon. It would be a massive disservice to the rest of the people with poor internet.

Chorus are looking at TV over fibre (using a spare port on the way to ONT), and Sky is interested https://www.computerworld.co.nz/article/635323/chorus-trial-tv-broadcast-over-fibre/

richms

26388 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#1983746 26-Mar-2018 19:25

Sky is a hassle to get. Have to book a time for someone to come out and plug in a box to a dish that may already be there. Charge you for the privilege. Apps just login to the smart tv and youtube and netflix are all working. No tech visit, do it yourself, own the gear yourself so no contract etc.

Want to cancel for a while - can do that no dramas. Whereas sky you are probably in a contract for the man with a van bringing you an annoying box that you never actually own, so the best they can do is move you to decoder rental only. So you're paying to have a box in your house that you dont need or want, and cant give back without taking it to them, and if you want it again you have to again take half a day off for the man with a van and ladder to come out and plug it in for you.

No thanks. Apps and owning the hardware is where I want to be. Turn it on, turn it off, login to anything and watch. A box hooked up to one TV in one room in the house, and possibly taken thru to a few others but only showing the same thing is about as appealing as a party-line landline phone is in an era when everyone else is selling you mobile phones and messaging apps.

Richard rich.ms

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6