NZ Cricket to Spark Sport

Forums › Online streaming services › NZ Cricket to Spark Sport

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 16

694 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 303

ID Verified

#2335049 10-Oct-2019 14:41

empacher48:

tdgeek:

empacher48:

This is great. I know a mad cricket fan who can’t use Spark sport because their home internet isn’t up to scratch, however the only way they get TV is via satellite. They don’t have Netflix, Lightbox or any streaming service, but rely on sky to be able to watch anything decent on TV. There is no cellphone reception at this place and they managed to ADSL at 256kb/s about 3 years ago.

I guess if Sky does collapse, there is going to be a proportion of NZers who are going to be left behind when it comes to entertainment.

True, same as if Sky had all sport, not everyone can afford it, 900,000 dont have it

But for those that don’t have it, it is their choice not to have it. They have the choice whether or not to pay for it.

These people I’m talking about have no choice anymore. They can’t whistle up the hundreds of thousands of dollars to run a fibre line to their place, nor will they ever have rural broadband anywhere close to where they need it.

So what will their options be when Sky goes?

That is an unfortunate side effect of moving forward with new tech. Wonder if they will do a sky commercial channel deal?

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2335050 10-Oct-2019 14:50

empacher48:

tdgeek:

empacher48:

This is great. I know a mad cricket fan who can’t use Spark sport because their home internet isn’t up to scratch, however the only way they get TV is via satellite. They don’t have Netflix, Lightbox or any streaming service, but rely on sky to be able to watch anything decent on TV. There is no cellphone reception at this place and they managed to ADSL at 256kb/s about 3 years ago.

I guess if Sky does collapse, there is going to be a proportion of NZers who are going to be left behind when it comes to entertainment.

True, same as if Sky had all sport, not everyone can afford it, 900,000 dont have it

But for those that don’t have it, it is their choice not to have it. They have the choice whether or not to pay for it.

These people I’m talking about have no choice anymore. They can’t whistle up the hundreds of thousands of dollars to run a fibre line to their place, nor will they ever have rural broadband anywhere close to where they need it.

So what will their options be when Sky goes?

Choice is the wrong argument. Why do 900,000 not have Sky? It costs to much. Sky literally covers ALL of NZ geographically but it covers only 40% economically. Some of those chose not to as it lacks value for cost. Many cannot afford it, so its no choice for them as well. In Skys heyday they had 50%. Its a luxury for some and no choice for others

SheriffNZ

677 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 322

#2335051 10-Oct-2019 14:54

Does anyone know when the rugby rights get renewed? Without those, Sky is dead in the water. Holding rights to Blackcaps games being played in the middle of the night (as well as all the other rights they hold) won't be enough to sustain it imho.

empacher48

376 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 283

#2335053 10-Oct-2019 14:56

tdgeek:
Choice is the wrong argument. Why do 900,000 not have Sky? It costs to much. Sky literally covers ALL of NZ geographically but it covers only 40% economically. Some of those chose not to as it lacks value for cost. Many cannot afford it, so its no choice for them as well. In Skys heyday they had 50%. Its a luxury for some and no choice for others

Fair enough, choice maybe wrong. How about infrastructure?

Everyone in NZ can get TV through satellite, just point the dish to the right place in space and you get it as long as you have the dish and receiver. It’s why the government required Freeview to be available via both UHF and satellite.

If streaming is where the world is going, then the infrastructure should ensure that the same number of people have access to it as traditional broadcast medium. Then people can choose if they want access to it. By not having the infrastructure there is no choice.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2335056 10-Oct-2019 15:02

empacher48:
tdgeek:

Choice is the wrong argument. Why do 900,000 not have Sky? It costs to much. Sky literally covers ALL of NZ geographically but it covers only 40% economically. Some of those chose not to as it lacks value for cost. Many cannot afford it, so its no choice for them as well. In Skys heyday they had 50%. Its a luxury for some and no choice for others

Fair enough, choice maybe wrong. How about infrastructure?

Everyone in NZ can get TV through satellite, just point the dish to the right place in space and you get it as long as you have the dish and receiver. It’s why the government required Freeview to be available via both UHF and satellite.

If streaming is where the world is going, then the infrastructure should ensure that the same number of people have access to it as traditional broadcast medium. Then people can choose if they want access to it. By not having the infrastructure there is no choice.

I agree. There is no choice both ways. More can get coverage with Sky, 100%, but 60% dont/cant. However you cut it, Sky means 60% do not have the service. I assume maybe 80% + have access to ADSL2+, and Fibre, on Unlimited plans.

Both are not ideal, one is less ideal than the other

SheriffNZ

677 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 322

#2335057 10-Oct-2019 15:02

empacher48:
tdgeek:

Choice is the wrong argument. Why do 900,000 not have Sky? It costs to much. Sky literally covers ALL of NZ geographically but it covers only 40% economically. Some of those chose not to as it lacks value for cost. Many cannot afford it, so its no choice for them as well. In Skys heyday they had 50%. Its a luxury for some and no choice for others

Fair enough, choice maybe wrong. How about infrastructure?

Everyone in NZ can get TV through satellite, just point the dish to the right place in space and you get it as long as you have the dish and receiver. It’s why the government required Freeview to be available via both UHF and satellite.

If streaming is where the world is going, then the infrastructure should ensure that the same number of people have access to it as traditional broadcast medium. Then people can choose if they want access to it. By not having the infrastructure there is no choice.

Why? and who is going to pay for it?

My comment on the why would be for whatever societal goodness that flows from that infrastructure but I don't think that people have a right to watch the Blackcaps (or the RWC) just because. Society should pay for the societal goodness and the balance of the costs should be built into the price (whether the people who require extra infrastructure pay for it as an extra is a different question).

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

sen8or

1897 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1402

#2335071 10-Oct-2019 15:19

Is satellite broadband still a thing? I remember in the early days of broadband, our work had some sort of radio thing set up to receive our internet. Speed was pretty good at the time, it may or may not be better now?

My boss has 4g broadband through Spark as fibre hasn't yet been installed to his area. Downside is no unlimited internet with 4g, but that is not so much a limitation of the technology, more a limitation by the provider. Has this replaced satelite option?

dfnt

1553 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1036

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2335077 10-Oct-2019 15:29

stuff comments are gold as usual

bagheera

544 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 189

#2335099 10-Oct-2019 16:16

sen8or:

Is satellite broadband still a thing? I remember in the early days of broadband, our work had some sort of radio thing set up to receive our internet. Speed was pretty good at the time, it may or may not be better now?

My boss has 4g broadband through Spark as fibre hasn't yet been installed to his area. Downside is no unlimited internet with 4g, but that is not so much a limitation of the technology, more a limitation by the provider. Has this replaced satelite option?

yep, there is and for $200 for unlimited data, that really moots the raaaaa I can not get unlimited internet out in the whoop whoops https://getgravity.nz/rural-broadband-plans/

SheriffNZ

677 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 322

#2335103 10-Oct-2019 16:19

bagheera:

sen8or:

Is satellite broadband still a thing? I remember in the early days of broadband, our work had some sort of radio thing set up to receive our internet. Speed was pretty good at the time, it may or may not be better now?

My boss has 4g broadband through Spark as fibre hasn't yet been installed to his area. Downside is no unlimited internet with 4g, but that is not so much a limitation of the technology, more a limitation by the provider. Has this replaced satelite option?

yep, there is and for $200 for unlimited data, that really moots the raaaaa I can not get unlimited internet out in the whoop whoops https://getgravity.nz/rural-broadband-plans/

Perhaps the option for Spark is to provide unlimited downloads for spark sport data for those on it's metered plans.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2159

#2335108 10-Oct-2019 16:30

empacher48:
If streaming is where the world is going, then the infrastructure should ensure that the same number of people have access to it as traditional broadcast medium. Then people can choose if they want access to it. By not having the infrastructure there is no choice.

I think it is important to have 100% coverage.

It is possible for satellite freeview to broadcast an encrypted channel, and authenticated settop boxes can decrypt specific channels. People in remote areas could pay to have sporting events decrypted. Could even be a practical use for "Realme".

Also, Spark must offer an installation service. Too many customers rely on dodgy old standard wifi, or out of range wifi.

The gold standard install for TV over fibre (DSL similar) would be ONT -> Cat6/5e -> ISP router -> cat6/5e -> TV/certified smart media device

Geekzone

Want to support Geekzone and browse the site without the ads? Subscribe to Geekzone now (monthly, annual and lifetime options).

rugrat

3142 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 944

Lifetime subscriber

#2335119 10-Oct-2019 16:38

tripp:
tdgeek:

Hammerer:

I'd like to know what the actual basis for the decision was.

From the way NZ Cricket chair talked, it sounded like the board went with Spark because they considered it the better platform. I didn't hear them mention that they would be getting more money than the Sky offer. I didn't hear any concern for those who will find it most difficult to shift to or add on Spark Sport.

I think that NZC will lose a lot of their long-term viewers - I know some beneficiaries/superannuitants that won't be able to make the shift to Spark because of the additional cost. NZC might see more "customers" but there will be a lot of cricket fans aggrieved because of the new hurdles.

Sky with Sport is about $95. Spark Sport is $20. The additional cost is Sky, not streaming

Disclosure, I have both and like both

Not correct, sky with sports is "sky starter" @ $26 + "sky sports" @ $32, total of $58

Then add the recording cost on, multi room if not always watching on same TV (only watching sports on one TV at time) Sky starts to cost an arm and leg.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2335121 10-Oct-2019 16:40

dfnt:

stuff comments are gold as usual

I think they dug out the Sky bagging posts and updated the company name.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2335124 10-Oct-2019 16:50

Given the TVNZ is a partner, and they do TV, it must have been suggested for TVNZ to setup a PayTV service. Applicable to those who are not in a VDSL/FIbre area. A need for validation means its too late to be next week, but is there a way to deliver an encrypted service to a TV? Without too much hassle, so that TVNZ can pass it through a box to the TV?

SheriffNZ

677 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 322

#2335127 10-Oct-2019 16:54

tdgeek:

Given the TVNZ is a partner, and they do TV, it must have been suggested for TVNZ to setup a PayTV service. Applicable to those who are not in a VDSL/FIbre area. A need for validation means its too late to be next week, but is there a way to deliver an encrypted service to a TV? Without too much hassle, so that TVNZ can pass it through a box to the TV?

I have a funny feeling I've read somewhere that they've thought about. Not sure on how to deliver it though. Can freeview do it? I don't have any experience with freeview. (or subcontract it back to sky....)

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 16