Sky announced performance numbers and drops HD Ticket Fee

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

1 | ... | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23

ockel

2031 posts

Uber Geek

#2214290 10-Apr-2019 11:03

rugrat:
ockel:

I think you mean to contrast Neon at 66c per day with Netflix at 63c per day.
Content and delivery on a like for like basis.

You'll get 1 long black per month saving.

Neon doesn’t compare to Netflix presentation wise, No UHD, Lack of devices including Apple TV, No Dolby Digital.

Content wise I’d rate Neon stronger in movies, and I’m not sure who’d be winning on TV series.
It’s the no DD that is the deal breaker for me on Neon.

If people spend more on coffee then Entertainment maybe they value coffee more.

True but if you don't want docos, news, etc why would you choose Sky over Neon or Netflix?

If you only seek movies and TV series on an on-demand basis then you'd rationally choose between Neon and Netflix. If characteristics like DD and UHD are important then you'd tend towards the latter. It's not going to tip you towards a Sky package, is it?

Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

tdgeek

29537 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2214303 10-Apr-2019 11:14

https://thespinoff.co.nz/media/09-04-2019/sky-tv-has-a-wild-new-strategy-stop-doing-things-its-customers-hate/

Its hard to know where sport will go, but putting sport aside as people like me will still have to sub to Sky anyway, it looks like it will be getting all innovative in a decent fashion before long. Prices? hard to say. Streaming and featureset, very much so. I predict it may get a bit cheaper, a lot more featured, and more and deeper content.

rugrat

3087 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2214313 10-Apr-2019 11:35

ockel:
rugrat:
ockel:

I think you mean to contrast Neon at 66c per day with Netflix at 63c per day.
Content and delivery on a like for like basis.

You'll get 1 long black per month saving.

Neon doesn’t compare to Netflix presentation wise, No UHD, Lack of devices including Apple TV, No Dolby Digital.

Content wise I’d rate Neon stronger in movies, and I’m not sure who’d be winning on TV series.
It’s the no DD that is the deal breaker for me on Neon.

If people spend more on coffee then Entertainment maybe they value coffee more.

True but if you don't want docos, news, etc why would you choose Sky over Neon or Netflix?

If you only seek movies and TV series on an on-demand basis then you'd rationally choose between Neon and Netflix. If characteristics like DD and UHD are important then you'd tend towards the latter. It's not going to tip you towards a Sky package, is it?

There was no mention of Docs and News in what I was replying to.
I was replying to the comment saying Neon is the product to compare Netflix to in similarity of products and just pointing out where Neon is lacking.

Yes if DD etc are of no big deal to someone then it’s only based on content they want to see.

Our Planet has just been released on Netflix and on an OLED TV it looks stunning with HDR.

networkn

Networkn
32116 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2214314 10-Apr-2019 11:35

The conversation is taking the usual twist.

I think what it comes down to, is not what PLATFORM is better, because Sky is very different to Netflix, but rather what CONTENT you want. If Dafman has a decent internet connection and the content he wants is on a platform for $20 a month, great. That doesn't make Sky BAD, it makes Sky not suitable for his needs. There are PLENTY of people for which Sky provides good value and essential services.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2214323 10-Apr-2019 12:08

networkn:

The conversation is taking the usual twist.

I think what it comes down to, is not what PLATFORM is better, because Sky is very different to Netflix, but rather what CONTENT you want. If Dafman has a decent internet connection and the content he wants is on a platform for $20 a month, great. That doesn't make Sky BAD, it makes Sky not suitable for his needs. There are PLENTY of people for which Sky provides good value and essential services.

Yep, I have tried the alternatives and returned to using Sky

networkn

Networkn
32116 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2214324 10-Apr-2019 12:12

It's about what's right for YOU as a consumer, not about whether a particular service is good or bad. If every time the word Netflix was mentioned I got on my high horse and derailed the thread with nonsense about Netflix people would get pretty fed up, but for some reason, people feel that the word Sky enttitles them to rail on about how Netflix is better for *them* as if it invalidates others reasons to use Sky.

dafman

3898 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2214370 10-Apr-2019 13:51

tdgeek:

Related

https://thespinoff.co.nz/media/09-04-2019/sky-tv-has-a-wild-new-strategy-stop-doing-things-its-customers-hate/

Yikes, that article's even more damning than what's been discussed here. Yet more Sky-hating, why can't people be a little more positive about our beloved entertainment brand?

On a positive, though, well done Stewart for having a crack at doing the things Sky should have been doing decades ago. Is it too late? Time will tell.

tdgeek

29537 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2214372 10-Apr-2019 13:59

dafman:

tdgeek:

Related

https://thespinoff.co.nz/media/09-04-2019/sky-tv-has-a-wild-new-strategy-stop-doing-things-its-customers-hate/

Yikes, that article's even more damning than what's been discussed here. Yet more Sky-hating, why can't people be a little more positive about our beloved entertainment brand?

On a positive, though, well done Stewart for having a crack at doing the things Sky should have been doing decades ago. Is it too late? Time will tell.

Not too late. The metrics of subscriber numbers, profit per subscriber make it almost impossible to survive, but if he does what is required to make Sky desirable, then those numbers don't matter as once you get subscriber numbers up, it looks after itself

I didnt read the article as that damning. As for the below quote, they need to get accurate, Sky does heaps of and panel shows for sport

Sky’s failure to invest consistently in any wider sports content such as documentary story-telling (think ESPN’s outstanding 30 for 30 series), intelligent magazine and panel shows (think the informative and entertaining Fox Sports shows featuring former stars like Matt Johns) and sports news reporting and coverage (think FoxSports.com.au etc) has left hardcore sports fans further frustrated.

tdgeek

29537 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2214375 10-Apr-2019 14:04

Plus this

The sporadic nature of rights that were purchased added further irritation. One year EPL would be there, the next it wasn’t. Then the same for Formula 1.

Maybe the writer is a new grad. Yes they lose EPL, does that mean Sky is not allowed to buy and lose any content? It happens. They had F1 forever, then lost it this year, does that become "Then the same for F1" as if its a regular thing? Seems the writer prefers a monopoly, thats odd given that's been a misplaced but common comment from baggers

However I filtered out that poor reporting and focussed on Bennett's management style, which is clear the decks and HE will go from here

quickymart

13620 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#2214679 10-Apr-2019 21:43

tdgeek:

..focussed on Bennett's management style, which is clear the decks and HE will go from here

Who?

tdgeek

29537 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2214752 11-Apr-2019 07:14

quickymart:

tdgeek:

..focussed on Bennett's management style, which is clear the decks and HE will go from here

Who?

Bennett, oops from there not here

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18520 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2217008 14-Apr-2019 16:56

Hard to know where to put this, but it will interest some who have posted here and I think it encapsulates the issues well.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

tdgeek

29537 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2217159 15-Apr-2019 07:42

Rikkitic:

Hard to know where to put this, but it will interest some who have posted here and I think it encapsulates the issues well.

It does

This is interesting A study by Ovum analyst Tony Gunnarsson cited at the recent NAB trade show noted that the majority of consumers will subscribe to only 2.25 streaming services, leaving many players out in the cold.

We are looking at 6 or 7 services, 2.25 are used on average per consumer. Yes, some players will be out in the cold, or will they. If the 2.25 is relatively evenly spread, then all of them will be out in the cold. If 2.25 is about 1/3 of the SVOD mainstream services, then 2.25 is like the size of the market suddenly reducing by 67% . The other factor is if the 7 services have a nice spread of very cool content, then the average consumer is foregoing 2/3 of what they would like to watch.

In short, the growth of streaming will be a fail for providers and for consumers

trig42

5787 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#2217194 15-Apr-2019 08:31

Yep, I think 2 or 3 is the max.

I'm currently subscribed to Prime Video and Netflix.

Now that The Grand Tour is finished, I'll probably drop Prime. I may take up Neon Today, to watch some Dragons etc., but it's lack of an AppleTV App is disappointing and makes me consider finding that content elsewhere.

I really don't want to be paying for more than 2 or 3. I will have to get Spark Sport for the RWC. I may consider Fan Pass now that Sky have dropped their prices (if they added On Demand to it, it'd be a great product IMO).

1 | ... | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23