Foxtel leaves Sky HD in the dust

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › Foxtel leaves Sky HD in the dust

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#68407 21-Sep-2010 13:10

http://www.screenscribe.tv/channels/foxtel-leaves-sky-in-hd-dust/

"While Sky subscribers continue to fork over $100-plus a month for a handful of HD channels, across the Tasman sister satcaster Foxtel soon will be offering 24 HD channels and a 25th dedicated to 3D."

Regards,

Old3eyes

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

73 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#382669 21-Sep-2010 13:37

It wouldn't be hard to leave in the dust anything Sky NZ does.

NZCoderGuy

513 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Kiwi Dev Studios

#382671 21-Sep-2010 13:40

Isn't the only reason they are pushing it is competition? Foxtel vs Austar etc.

In New Zealand the only competitor is FreeView HD and its not much to compare with.

So there is no motivation for SkyTV to do this.

--
Stephen
twitter/ NZCoderGuy / KiwiDevStudios

magu

Professional yak shaver
1599 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

BitSignal

Lifetime subscriber

#382672 21-Sep-2010 13:40

newznz: It wouldn't be hard to leave in the dust anything Sky NZ does.

You can say that again. Charging extra for the decoder to watch HD content AND extra for the content itself is outright robbery.

"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads." - Doc Emmet Brown

jjnz1

1358 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#382673 21-Sep-2010 13:41

old3eyes: http://www.screenscribe.tv/channels/foxtel-leaves-sky-in-hd-dust/

"While Sky subscribers continue to fork over $100-plus a month for a handful of HD channels, across the Tasman sister satcaster Foxtel soon will be offering 24 HD channels and a 25th dedicated to 3D."

Foxtel has 1.6 million subscribers while Sky NZ only has 800k. I imagine the profit numbers would be a lot easier with 1.6M subscribers.

If we all paid double our monthly installment then we might get 25HD channels.

So who's in?

newznz

73 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#382675 21-Sep-2010 13:44

NZCoderGuy: Isn't the only reason they are pushing it is competition? Foxtel vs Austar etc.

In New Zealand the only competitor is FreeView HD and its not much to compare with.

So there is no motivation for SkyTV to do this.

Foxtel & Austar aren't in competition as they are available in different areas...they offer much of the same contents.

langers1972

1039 posts

Uber Geek

#382677 21-Sep-2010 13:51

jjnz1:Foxtel has 1.6 million subscribers while Sky NZ only has 800k. I imagine the profit numbers would be a lot easier with 1.6M subscribers.

If we all paid double our monthly installment then we might get 25HD channels.

So who's in?

Yes but what percentage of the population is 1.6m in Oz compared to 800K here? Sky have us by the short and curlies in so far as we have no alternatives and so they can continue to charge whatever they like and have very little incentive to churn anything back into content/service upgrades.

I would be willing to bet that profits here per subscriber are actually higher than Oz.

magu

Professional yak shaver
1599 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

BitSignal

Lifetime subscriber

#382678 21-Sep-2010 13:54

Exactly. Just look at Vodafone NZ, the most profitable arm of Vodafone Group, according to the wisdom of the internet.

"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads." - Doc Emmet Brown

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

JonnyCam

643 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#382681 21-Sep-2010 13:55

Charging extra for the decoder to watch HD content AND extra for the content itself is outright robbery.

Isn't that the model the world over?
Charge for the DVR, and charge an HD access fee (or build it into the package price)

magu

Professional yak shaver
1599 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

BitSignal

Lifetime subscriber

#382682 21-Sep-2010 13:58

Not that I'm aware. I mean, the content is there anyway. Why charge extra for it?

"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads." - Doc Emmet Brown

jjnz1

1358 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#382683 21-Sep-2010 14:01

magu: Not that I'm aware. I mean, the content is there anyway. Why charge extra for it?

For the extra infrastructure?

jjnz1

1358 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#382684 21-Sep-2010 14:01

Its basically the same as Telecoms VDSL charge model.

magu

Professional yak shaver
1599 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

BitSignal

Lifetime subscriber

#382686 21-Sep-2010 14:06

jjnz1:
magu: Not that I'm aware. I mean, the content is there anyway. Why charge extra for it?

For the extra infrastructure?

I must be crazy, then, for I was thinking that $6.4 million/month (800k customers at avg $80/month) would have taken care of that already.

I know infra is costly, but you can't convince me that HD content is soo much more expensive now that pretty much everything in the US (main content source) is in HD or better.

"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads." - Doc Emmet Brown

jjnz1

1358 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#382691 21-Sep-2010 14:17

magu:
jjnz1:
magu: Not that I'm aware. I mean, the content is there anyway. Why charge extra for it?

For the extra infrastructure?

I must be crazy, then, for I was thinking that $6.4 million/month (800k customers at avg $80/month) would have taken care of that already.

I know infra is costly, but you can't convince me that HD content is soo much more expensive now that pretty much everything in the US (main content source) is in HD or better.

From a business point of view which in this case is irrespective of competition, you charge for what ever your customers are willing to pay for. Unfortunately for NZ because of the lack of competition, it comes down to pure supply and demand.

It would be nice to get more HD content, but would that get them 30% more subscribers?
(Apparently it costs on average 30% more for the HD component compared to SD http://broadcastengineering.com/infrastructure/broadcasting_cost_hd/)

I think we wont be seeing that much more HD content arriving until the market changes ie, more competition, lower content costs, aged HD content being played etc.

Its a shame but money talks.

magu

Professional yak shaver
1599 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

BitSignal

Lifetime subscriber

#382693 21-Sep-2010 14:18

FTTH can't come soon enough.

"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads." - Doc Emmet Brown

Linuxluver

5828 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#382694 21-Sep-2010 14:19

old3eyes: http://www.screenscribe.tv/channels/foxtel-leaves-sky-in-hd-dust/

"While Sky subscribers continue to fork over $100-plus a month for a handful of HD channels, across the Tasman sister satcaster Foxtel soon will be offering 24 HD channels and a 25th dedicated to 3D."

If Foxtel has anything to do with Rupert Murdoch I wouldn't knowingly give them a penny. Same goes for Sky.

_____________________________________________________________________

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

1 | 2 | 3 | 4