Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


573 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 3

Trusted

Topic # 14777 19-Jul-2007 23:11
Send private message

Hi guys (and girls),

Just doing a little market research, and would be keen to know the reason you've still got Sky (or any other pay TV provider such as TCL).

Is there a specific channel that you can't do without, but could do without the rest? A specific type of show that you can't see on any other channels? Or something else entirely?

Thanks all, look forward to seeing the responsesCool

View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
 1 | 2
939 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 16

Trusted

  Reply # 78892 20-Jul-2007 00:28
Send private message

Someone else in the house couldn't do without Food TV or The Living channel, I suppose the cartoon channels too.

What I'd like to see is Cartoon Network:Boomerang and Comedy Central, there are some great shows on those stations - just not here :-(

The main reason we still have TelstraClear TV is because we aren't restricted by viewing time anymore - when something is on, we record it and watch it when we're free.




munchkin | Troll | Author | Artist | Citizen | Friend | Misanthrope

Join us in the Geekzone IRC channel!

 


All information contained in posts made by me shall be treated as PotatoZoo's own personal opinion unless otherwise specified.

 


Infrastructure Geek
4057 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 195

Trusted
Microsoft NZ
Subscriber

  Reply # 78895 20-Jul-2007 00:47
Send private message

How about reasons for not keeping them :)

I was paying somewhere around $75 per month for SKY.  I mainly liked movies and the rugby, only rarely did i watch discovery, news or other 'start-up' channels.  Unfortunately the movies I wanted to see were always on at the wrong time for me so i didnt end up watching as many movies as i thought i would.  When SKY bought out the rugby channel I thought great! I'll subscribe to that, get widescreen rugby, and drop the other sports channels..  unfortunately I had to buy all the sports channels to get rugby.  So I dropped the sports channels, movies too and the rest were no use to me so I dropped them too.  With the money I saved in dropping SKY I found I had enough for both a fatso subscription and a season ticket to Eden Park... win :-)  If the games at Eden Park aren't enough rugby for me then I can either take a pub trip, head to a friends place or catch the delayed coverage on prime.  This year the rugby world cup is live on tv3 so really not finding a need to have the rugby channel anymore.

If SKY had previously offered the option of pay per view widescreen rugby I may well have kept my sky box on the cheaper $20 or $30 per month free to air channel package (for the good picture/signal) and watched the occaisional rugby game or movie.    Freeview has sorted our the good signal bit now so i'm very unlikely to consider that option anymore.





Technical Evangelist
Microsoft NZ
about.me/nzregs
Twitter: @nzregs


255 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Reply # 78896 20-Jul-2007 06:17
Send private message

I have SKY Startup + Sports
I have the Sports add-on mainly just for rugby and cricket. (Golf, soccer and baseball, pfffft! Yell)

I'd like to see the NHL regular season and finals back on SKY / ESPN(?) Has it got something to do with international broadcasting rights, that it is no longer shown?

More NBA coverage please. Sure, SKY picks up the International ESPN schedule, but what about the ABC coverage? I've been tempted to subscribe to online NBA TV services, just to see extra games. I'm a bit annoyed that the recent 2007 WNBA All-Star Weekend didn't even get a delayed broadcast here in NZ! Again, it was probably due to the fact it was on the ABC network, and not ESPN.

I'd also like to see Cartoon Network: Boomerang added to SKY Startup. Laughing










573 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 3

Trusted

Reply # 78898 20-Jul-2007 06:28
Send private message

Heh - I pay around $120 a month for Sky. 3 decoders, allowing for two people to watch different channels at once and another one recording in the background. I had this setup before MySky came out, and really couldn't be arsed changing.

Thanks for the replies so far everyone, keep em comin! :P

112 posts

Master Geek


  Reply # 78903 20-Jul-2007 07:04
Send private message

We have TelstraClear Sports & Movies  and have split the signal so we can watch a program in the bedroom as well.  Watch mainly sport - mainly rugby & league games- and probably two or three movies a week.  Nothing like getting kids into bed and watching a movie so the brain does not have to engage too much!!!

237 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 8


  Reply # 78909 20-Jul-2007 07:55
Send private message

$120 per month! To watch TV!  Willnz, you need to get out more hehehe!  Tongue out

(just havin you on, but serial - no way would I spend $1440 per year on tv).

420 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 2


  Reply # 78911 20-Jul-2007 08:22
Send private message

Sky Live Rugby and Cricket are the main events in this household.  So, if they were no longer available, Sky would be a past memory here - they are just no longer good value for money. The MySky was also a compelling reason, but even that has become less compelling now I have my own PVR.

Another reason for using Sky was the good picture quality for TV1, 2 and 3 but Freeview can fix that.
 
Frankly as soon as the rest of the household looses interest in live sports - pay TV is out of the door.

Cheers Mike


154 posts

Master Geek


  Reply # 78915 20-Jul-2007 08:45
Send private message

I've got the Sky basic package only, and have been tempted to drop it many times. Originally, we had Sky so we could get a good recption of 1,2,3 but Freeview is looking more enticing, especially as it has a way better picture quality with less compression than the Sky feeds. We've also dropped the movie channels (the ones played are too far behind releases) and have dropped the Sports channels (wanted more motor racing but they seem to fill up the schedule with more golf and fishing shows).

Oddly, Ch 9 FoodTV is quite watchable, my wife and I find ourselves watching a fair bit of that. The kids like the cartoons, etc stuff, and I was a follower of Discovery/Nat Geo/History/Doco channels. But lately there seems to be a huge number of re-runs on them.

While it's easier to get off torrents copies of shows to play thru my media centre - I've got series 5 of Mythbusters in better quality and no ads ahead of what Sky is transmitting now, and Future Weapons series - sometimes it's just better to be able to switch on the tv and watch what's on.

If Sky raise their prices again then it's going for good, because while it's handy, it's not that essential.
 Too many ads, with too many re-runs, on what is expected to be a premier tv service, because you're paying for the privilege ? No thanks, I think Sky is missing it's target.

140 posts

Master Geek

Trusted

Reply # 78924 20-Jul-2007 09:19
Send private message

I'm reviewing my position at the moment. I started off with the Full Monty package. Then they started adding channels, but my Full Monty is now around half Monty and my fees have doubled. I have te full sports package, which doesn't include The Rugby Channel! Is there a common thread here.

Basically I am into sport and want all the sports channels. I'm getting disillusioned with movies and the rest. I'd like the arts, but don't want to add another $8 to my bill.

I have an HP Entertainment Centre at home and may start playing with downloads and transmitting them to the TV, one of those things I hadn't got around to.

If Sky don't start adding value, I may start exploring Internet downloads, then of course there is the issue of speed and price through Xtra. This is an exciting and interesting space and I think that Sky is about to understand what the music companies are learning. As to TVNZ big thumbs down from me for their digital service with the new channel. Its bad enough having Friends on the 3rd go round, but watching loads of Selwyn Toogood in its in the bag doesn't do it for me.




Luigi
Helping companies with location based problem solving, blogs and social media
SolomoConsulting

Find me on LinkedIn
Blog http://luigicappel.wordpress.com
Check out my songwriting

91 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 3


  Reply # 78940 20-Jul-2007 10:16
Send private message

See my post on another thread:
http://www.geekzone.co.nz/forums.asp?ForumId=44&TopicId=14770&page_no=2#78937



573 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 3

Trusted

  Reply # 78946 20-Jul-2007 10:45
Send private message

Mattnzl: $120 per month! To watch TV! Willnz, you need to get out more hehehe! Tongue out

(just havin you on, but serial - no way would I spend $1440 per year on tv).


Yes, I do need to get out more :P. I also spend about $200 a month on internet (fixed and mobile - I do about 150-200GB at home usually), $250 a month on mobile calls (choose 600), and another $100 or so on landline line rental / tolls.

And I wonder why I have no money left, sigh Yell

76 posts

Master Geek


  Reply # 78947 20-Jul-2007 10:46
Send private message

Playhouse Disney!Smile
News channels, Nat Geo & Docos, food TV & movie channels
FTA channels of course
No sports, we dont watch enough to warrant its extra cost
Delayed coverage is good enough.

Some movies can be OK to watch but we've seen them all before.
movies & TV3 are looking good in widescreen -hurry up TVNZ! 

It's good to be able to flick through lots of channels & pickup on a new TV show or doco
you might not otherwise know of.

1677 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7

Trusted

  Reply # 78970 20-Jul-2007 12:25
Send private message

Two words - live sport

Other than that I occasionally watch a few other things.  But at the end of the day, i could just as easily do without them.   I watch too much sport not to have Sky.

As for sports coverage, each to their own. I'd be quite happy if Sky/ESPN dropped the NBA completely.  I'm more peeved they no longer cover the NHL.

255 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Reply # 78977 20-Jul-2007 13:12
Send private message

allstarnz: As for sports coverage, each to their own. I'd be quite happy if Sky/ESPN dropped the NBA completely.  I'm more peeved they no longer cover the NHL.


I'm lucky if ESPN show two live NBA/WNBA games per week.
Which probably equates to 1/8 of all games broadcast in the USA during a regular season.

I do agree with you on the NHL - I'd like to see it back too.







217 posts

Master Geek


  Reply # 79301 23-Jul-2007 16:33
Send private message

As Regs says, how about a reason for not keeping it.

I pay $64 a month. All we ever watch is Nick, Disney, Discovery & Nat Geo. We have Sky sports and thats only for F1 and WRC (when Sky don't screw up). We can't get any sort of terrestrial reception, so Skys the only option. When you break it down to how much you actually view per month, it soons adds up.

But at least I'm not spending $120. WOW.

 1 | 2
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.