Sky announced performance numbers and drops HD Ticket Fee

Forums › Sky, Neon › Sky announced performance numbers and drops HD Ticket Fee

1 | ... | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17

15358 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2984
Inactive user

Reply # 2192440 6-Mar-2019 17:26

MikeB4:

tdgeek:

MikeB4:

I feel teh much anticipated Amazon move to NZ was more wishful thinking and any possible move here is dead in the water. The NZ market place would be just a rounding error on the Amazon trading accounts.

You mean on the Amazon Prime accounts? Not a rounding error there I am sure you will find. Why is Netflix here? Same reasoning applies.

We are talking Amazon Pay TV not Amazon

Netflix and Prime are here piggy backing off the Australian market with a virtual pressence that is a huge step away from a physical pressence.

Yes that's right. Sky could do that to, just air stuff, thats an option. A buyer may do just that, take it over, strip the assets and satellite and just air stuff like the others. Thats ok too. You will know about Ron Brierley, strip it, and in this case turn it into a Netflix type business. There is no need then for a physical presence, and the takeover at a decreasing share price makes that a nice money recovery option, and the low prices as its just a virtual business with an app means a lower price, that helps build subscribers.

tdgeek

15358 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2984
Inactive user

Reply # 2192442 6-Mar-2019 17:40

MikeB4:

Sky needs more than $30pm per subscriber to provide Sport. At venue production is hugely expensive.

In the past when I was defending the gauntlet, the transmission costs were 100M. It was noted that this includes whatever they then called truck roll and production. You assume most of it is Optus costs.

Then 100M, is $125 per year, or $10 per month for ALL of that. Production, truck rolls, Optus. Which is why I made the point that there isn't a lot that can be gained even if they moved to SVOD and dumped Optus entirely. Profit per subscriber then was about $15 per month. At $10 per month for transmission, 1/10 of that more or less is production, its not much

Sport, used to be about 60% of rights costs which from memory was 350M. Thats $210M or 18M per month per subscriber. Sport is sport. Its premium and people pay for that. The true price of sport is near $60 per month, its subsidised by Basics which should be $20

What has the cost that Sky pays for sport got to do with this current topic re low share price? They cant dump sport

PolicyGuy

279 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 152

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2192443 6-Mar-2019 17:40

One person supports this post

Why not Channel Nine Network who own Stuff (formerly Fairfax NZ)?
Potential synergies from merging the newsroom operations of Sky into Stuff.co.nz, and it would create a real trans-Tasman news, sport & entertainment behemoth.

They would still have the problem of the unwanted print division, of course, but this wouldn't get any worse from that merger

Just a thought 😉

tdgeek

15358 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2984
Inactive user

Reply # 2192444 6-Mar-2019 17:41

MikeB4:

The production and delivery of 4K content springs to mind.

Netflix does that and it doesn't live here. I'd also suggest its an expense, a daily running cost than capital expenditure.

tdgeek

15358 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2984
Inactive user

Reply # 2192446 6-Mar-2019 17:48

PolicyGuy:

Why not Channel Nine Network who own Stuff (formerly Fairfax NZ)?
Potential synergies from merging the newsroom operations of Sky into Stuff.co.nz, and it would create a real trans-Tasman news, sport & entertainment behemoth.

They would still have the problem of the unwanted print division, of course, but this wouldn't get any worse from that merger

Just a thought 😉

Thats a good thought. The newsroom stuff is minor, white noise, but it could make a merge like that into a TV1, Mediaworks venture possibly? That would make Sky TV more rounded as a TV channel, as well as an entertainment and SPORT hub?

Add to this a LOT of centralisation

Yes, thats a good point. It would still allow an asset strip mentality ti happen and thats a good thing, as at the end if the day, the costs per subscriber have to drop, then the prices can become palatable to more people. Whatever anyone thinks of Sky, the ONLY issue is price, that has to reduce to allow subscribers to grow

sub

316 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 31

Reply # 2192461 6-Mar-2019 18:17

2 people support this post

tdgeek:

If Sky became a $20 for Basics and $30 for Sport, a puck you can buy, here is the app, THEN it could actually take off perhaps. But they need rot remove or reduce anything that is an unnecessary cost, or dividend.

You shouldn't have to buy their puck - nearly everyone is already using a device they're using for Netflix and other service, or have it built into their TV. They should just provide and app, that can be used with the existing popular platforms (iOS/Android devices and direct TV support for LG and Samsung TVs, maybe other platforms too). No one wants another device.

tdgeek

15358 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2984
Inactive user

Reply # 2192469 6-Mar-2019 18:34

sub:
tdgeek:

If Sky became a $20 for Basics and $30 for Sport, a puck you can buy, here is the app, THEN it could actually take off perhaps. But they need rot remove or reduce anything that is an unnecessary cost, or dividend.

You shouldn't have to buy their puck - nearly everyone is already using a device they're using for Netflix and other service, or have it built into their TV. They should just provide and app, that can be used with the existing popular platforms (iOS/Android devices and direct TV support for LG and Samsung TVs, maybe other platforms too). No one wants another device.

That’s correct and that’s what they said. A puck and a full app. Many need a puck that just works

MikeB4

13846 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6610

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 2192470 6-Mar-2019 18:35

One person supports this post

sub:

tdgeek:

If Sky became a $20 for Basics and $30 for Sport, a puck you can buy, here is the app, THEN it could actually take off perhaps. But they need rot remove or reduce anything that is an unnecessary cost, or dividend.

You shouldn't have to buy their puck - nearly everyone is already using a device they're using for Netflix and other service, or have it built into their TV. They should just provide and app, that can be used with the existing popular platforms (iOS/Android devices and direct TV support for LG and Samsung TVs, maybe other platforms too). No one wants another device.

I agree to a point. However an App wont work a large chunk of their customer base. Sky will also fall into the useless grip of Smart TV makers, who are terrible at providing or updating Apps.

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

Using empathy takes no energy and can gain so much. Try it.

dafman

2630 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1250

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 2192471 6-Mar-2019 18:36

I love reading Sky threads. The writing is on the wall is unmistakable, but all power to the optimists. Personally, I reckon whoever is shuffling the deck chairs must be at risk of suffering tennis elbow by now.

mattwnz

14666 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1969

Reply # 2192474 6-Mar-2019 18:41

tdgeek:

I think Matt was suggesting that with extra competition, that Voda could retry this. Sky doesn't hold all the sport anymore, that may continue, so sport was the big issue before, its less so now

Yeah, I think conditions have now changed. Things do change rapidly in this market. The alternative is that they could end up going out of business or not being able to pay rights for certain things, and NZers could miss out on content such as sports events of importance. I can't remember exactly what the issue was but I recall, it was something about bundling of services, and maybe requiring using a certain ISP to get access, or the potential for that problem to occur?. Even now many people seem to think that you can only get lightbox, if you are with Spark as your ISP. An energy company these days isn't much different from an ISP, as several are also ISPs anyway. As is a newspaper / media company. It seems being an ISP is now just another bow to the string of some businesses.

sub

316 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 31

Reply # 2192475 6-Mar-2019 18:42

tdgeek:

If Sky became a $20 for Basics and $30 for Sport, a puck you can buy, here is the app, THEN it could actually take off perhaps. But they need rot remove or reduce anything that is an unnecessary cost, or dividend.

It'd depend what you mean for "Basics". They'd need that to be the equivalent of the current Starter+Entertainment. There just isn't enough value in the current "Starter" package to justify it's use to someone unless they want sport.

tdgeek

15358 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2984
Inactive user

Reply # 2192476 6-Mar-2019 18:45

dafman:
I love reading Sky threads. The writing is on the wall is unmistakable, but all power to the optimists. Personally, I reckon whoever is shuffling the deck chairs must be at risk of suffering tennis elbow by now.

Yep, sort of!

Whatever happens and if sky shuts down we will still pay more fir the hat they had

Back of envelope calculation
They are tracking 100M profit maximum. ARPU is 80 per month
So the profit is the last 100,000 customers. Then it’s break even

Whoever buys their sport will have to charge for it:

tdgeek

15358 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2984
Inactive user

Reply # 2192479 6-Mar-2019 18:50

sub:

tdgeek:

If Sky became a $20 for Basics and $30 for Sport, a puck you can buy, here is the app, THEN it could actually take off perhaps. But they need rot remove or reduce anything that is an unnecessary cost, or dividend.

It'd depend what you mean for "Basics". They'd need that to be the equivalent of the current Starter+Entertainment. There just isn't enough value in the current "Starter" package to justify it's use to someone unless they want sport.

Both need to be $20 combined, one Basic $20, Sport $60

tdgeek

15358 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2984
Inactive user

Reply # 2192487 6-Mar-2019 19:03

dafman:

I love reading Sky threads. The writing is on the wall is unmistakable, but all power to the optimists. Personally, I reckon whoever is shuffling the deck chairs must be at risk of suffering tennis elbow by now.

Back on a keyboard now

What I mean is forget Basic, you can get that stuff off the others, Netflix etc. Its only about Sport. If you aren't into sport who cares about Sky? Its a non issue. If Sky decide to fold, when they lose 100,000 customers and are in the red, then the sport rights they have they get rid of. Whoever buys it will charge for it. You can't see Spark buying it all for example and including it all in the $19-99 package they announced. We are talking a couple of hundred million from memory, minimum. Right now you can get Fanpass for $60, that's fair. (Well it was) But when and if Sky go under it won't be yay Sky is gone I get more now for free. Id be interested to see what everyone's ARPU is here. The monthly cost of SVOD and Fanpass.

Sport people who watch a few sports will probably have Spark Sport and Fanpass thats $80 (Yes some who get lucky and all their stuff is on one, but most wont be that lucky) If you pay $30 for Fanpass that will go when Sky goes. Either these sports are gone, or Spark picks some up, TV1 or Mediaworks may pick some up and have their own sport apps, nice and cheap. But you wont be watching all the sport you can for nix. Sky or no Sky the bill will be similar, or more, and as some of us now find, sport already will cost more.

So, no, its not a deck chair issue, its just we pay different people, thats all, and almost definitely more as fragmentation continues to show us

tdgeek

15358 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2984
Inactive user

Reply # 2192490 6-Mar-2019 19:09

mattwnz:

tdgeek:

I think Matt was suggesting that with extra competition, that Voda could retry this. Sky doesn't hold all the sport anymore, that may continue, so sport was the big issue before, its less so now

Yeah, I think conditions have now changed. Things do change rapidly in this market. The alternative is that they could end up going out of business or not being able to pay rights for certain things, and NZers could miss out on content such as sports events of importance. I can't remember exactly what the issue was but I recall, it was something about bundling of services, and maybe requiring using a certain ISP to get access, or the potential for that problem to occur?. Even now many people seem to think that you can only get lightbox, if you are with Spark as your ISP. An energy company these days isn't much different from an ISP, as several are also ISPs anyway. As is a newspaper / media company. It seems being an ISP is now just another bow to the string of some businesses.

I recall the ComCom issue was too much control over sport by a large telco who can use that as lever. End of the day if Sky loses 100k customers thats it. And as they are losing content not gaining it, its less appealing. They may see how Spark goes. Maybe by Sky Sport only, via app or a puck, thats it, that would make the most sense and discard everything else, trim it right back. be a Netflix of sport and no more

1 | ... | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17