Sky is not worth having anymore

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › Sky is not worth having anymore

theboxseat

15 posts

Geek

#60766 2-May-2010 23:14

Putting it very simplisticly, any chance of conducting a poll to determine who agrees with this statement?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 10

4064 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Snowflake

#325900 3-May-2010 00:09

i came to that conclusion a few years back. i only really cared for rugby on sky sport, and hardly ever watched movies because there were never scheduled for time i wanted. the rest of the channels barely got a look.

my 'alternative' was to go with freeview (as soon as it hit dvb-s), a fatso subscription (which wasnt sky owned at the time) and a season pass for eden park rugby in the ASB stand.

Recalculating my savings, based on today's costs:

[EDIT: html table removed cause it looked A55 in the post]

NB: If SKY had offered just the sports package (with no base package) and including the rugby channel I would consider it.

Sales Engineer
Snowflake
www.snowflake.com

about.me/nzregs
Twitter: @nzregs

NordVPN

Protect your online activity with NordVPN (affiliate link).

Regs

4064 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Snowflake

#325901 3-May-2010 00:10

huh. that table looked perfect when i hit the 'preview' button.....

sky value (or lack thereof)

Sales Engineer
Snowflake
www.snowflake.com

about.me/nzregs
Twitter: @nzregs

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#325911 3-May-2010 06:42

I guess the answer to that question is entirely a personal one.

Sky currently have 785 000 customers. There are 1.6 million households in NZ. That by itself would seem to suggest that a lot of people disagree with you.

MikeB4

18131 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#325912 3-May-2010 07:25

We had Ski HDi until week or two ago. I suspected we were not getting value for money so a did a simple Excel tick sheet for daily TV usage to plot Free to air viewing versus Pay to view usage. It turned out that we were viewing something like 85% free to air. The pay to view we were watching was 99% non HD that History or Discovery.

We figured that it was $100+ per month we can easily put into something else and cancelled sky and purchased the new reduced price Tivo.

clevedon

1059 posts

Uber Geek

#325914 3-May-2010 07:41

Had it for around 14 years and we wouldn't be without Sky, even if it was double the price - Live Rugby in HD is essential fare with this Rugby watching and playing family.

vinnieg

2260 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#325923 3-May-2010 08:32

I think Sport is the main thing that makes people keep Sky, my parents have it, but whenever we aren't watching sport, we are watching FTA TV....they also use MySky for their HD recorder as they only have a dvd based recorder with no HDD

I however, don't have Sky, I just stream TV through the net, think it's a waste of time, but that's only my opinion, 785k people would disagree :)

I have moved across the ditch. Now residing in Melbourne as a VOIP/Video Technical Trainer/Engineer.

Kiwipixter

246 posts

Master Geek

#325924 3-May-2010 08:44

i have had Sky sport package for over 4 years and Myskyhdi recently thru Voda's free offer. Sport is the main reason for me, they have a monopoly on this content. Would gladly jump ship if theres an alternative, Tivo and Freeview is not it.

patatrat

261 posts

Ultimate Geek

#325932 3-May-2010 09:10

I'll throw in an opinion from someone who has never had sky.

My work takes me to hotels across the country on a semi regular basis (monthly or less). This is the only time I get to watch sky, and even though I only watch it once a month (or less than that) I always get the impression that there is nothing new on - I've seen it all before.

To a guy that doesn't look too closely to the programing guide, it seems they have 4 or 5 movies a month (which I would have seen else where), and old TV shows I either have no desire to watch or have already seen.

I don't regularly watch sport, (the sport I do watch I'll go to a bar or the actual venue). The only thing I could get into would be discovery, but even this seems to be a bunch or re-runs most of the time.

For me, Sky is not worth the $800 - $1000 a year price. If there are shows I really want to watch, its 10 bucks to rent the DVD of a season (something I've done for West Wing, the Wire, firefly etc). So at home, its terrestrial freeview for me.

MySky is probably the biggest selling point for most people these days. But with the cost of freeview PVRs coming down (I've recently just picked one up for 400), we might see more people ditching sky for this.

semigeek

1604 posts

Uber Geek

#325945 3-May-2010 10:00

Agree. Sky is not worth having. In the end we were watching more FTA TV than anything else, and also we were getting sick of the repeats on Sky, so ditched the subscription. Now days we just watch a bit of Freeview and Blu-rays or DVD's.

walt12

324 posts

Ultimate Geek

#325957 3-May-2010 10:37

I have Sky basic Sports package. I would ditch the subscription if there was a way of getting EPL football and F1 on a FTA channel. Rugby I would watch the delayed games on Prime. The choice for me is to watch everything delayed and download content, I have considered going that way, I guess the ease of Sky has prevented me but its not a done-deal and if Sky's pricing continues to ratchet higher there will be a tipping point for me ...

kiwitrc

4123 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#325959 3-May-2010 10:41

Have it for the NRL, but watch a lot of History and Discovery, but if NRL went then so would I.

Linuxluver

5824 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#325965 3-May-2010 11:23

theboxseat: Putting it very simplisticly, any chance of conducting a poll to determine who agrees with this statement?

I used to have it via TelstraClear / Saturn cable and it was cheap bundled with phone and Internet...but we barely watched TV as it was all crap anyway, so we downgraded to the cheapest possible package within the bundle. We don't give a rat's arse about rugby.

We shifted away from the TC cable coverage and looked at $50/month for basic Sky....and $600/year seems like a lot for TV we never watch anyway because reality shows and other crud are of little interest.

We bought a terrestrial Freeview box for $249. That's mostly crap, too, but TVNZ 6 and 7 often have worthwhile / interesting content (the sort of stuff TV One should have)...and there is zero ongoing cost.

TVNZ OnDemand covers the remainder...or we download content off the Net that has been previously broadcast FTA in NZ or elsewhere. I used to get family overseas to send video tapes....this is just more convenient. We don't download movies or music. We pay for them, but we don't pay for FTA TV.

But Sky?

Never had it in its own right as - IMHO - it was never worth the money at any time....particularly as we don't watch sport. We'd rather be playing than watching. It's more fun. Cheaper, too.

I grew up in Canada where cable TV was $20 / month...and that price you can sustain it as a contingency item through (formerly) long cold winters. NZ doesn't have long cold winters (North Island, anyway)...so there really is no excuse for not getting out side and doing something...or staying inside and doing something useful....like cooking, writing, reading, programming or sewing. Investing in our own knowledge and skills and enabling our own creativity.

TV - Sky included - destroys all that by wasting your time. You end up paying to be less than you could be. Feels too much like smoking. I don't do that either.

I'm sure LOADS of people see value in it. I don't.

_____________________________________________________________________

I've been on Geekzone over 16 years..... Time flies....

heavenlywild

4557 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#325967 3-May-2010 11:39

Sky is becoming a monopoly just like Telecom. Without real competition, they can do as they please. And I believe even if they jack up their prices by 50%, the majority would stay on.

I think perhaps some are willing to buy less food and warm clothes just to keep Sky - even those living in poverty / state houses have Sky! Now that's a little worrying.

Anyway, bring on some more competition!

Handsomedan

5966 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#325975 3-May-2010 11:55

I have it mainly for the Football (round ball variety) and the kids programming.

My eldest (5) loves the cartoon network now and the youngest (3) loves Playhouse Disney.

Majority of what we watch is FTA and to be honest I am really starting to think about the validity of having Sky at all, when Saturday mornings and some afternoons, CN content is on FTA - a la Ben 10 etc and TVNZ6 is much like the Plahouse offering anyway.

We have lots of DVD's plenty of stuff on our harddrive thanks to my wife recording things during the day and if it weren't for the total lack of ability to see football in any form on Free To Air telly, I definitely wouldn't have the service.

In saying that, Freeview is of little interest also - coudn'y justify purchasing a set top box for the sake of seeing TVNZ6

Handsome Dan Has Spoken.
Handsome Dan needs to stop adding three dots to every sentence...

Handsome Dan does not currently have a side hustle as the mascot for Yale

*Gladly accepting donations...

heavenlywild

4557 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#325977 3-May-2010 11:58

It's time to go out and socialise with others!:) Go to a mate's place with food and I am sure you will be very welcomed to watch the latest sports matches.

When I had Sky prior to coming over to Aussie temporarily, I found myself not watching any of it. Perhaps just one Warriors game per week.

There is always something else to do I suppose:)

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 10