Originally Posted by harry_hitch (Post 35642944)

Clearly I could not stay away long.:(

Where have I said Sky are the only one who puts prices up on anything other than sports? I have only ever been talking about sporting bills. I genuinely do not remember posting about other price increases, please do quote me where I have, and I will gladly eat humble pie. If you van not find any, please apologize for calling me ludicrous. Lets try not to digress from my original points though please.

Oddly enough I know all companies put their prices up, I do get bills after-all.

My point about Sky is that they should drop Sky Sports bills due to the lack of content. To be clearer, any sports bills that increase will be down to Sky not lowering their sports prices. The increases in sport prices will not be solely down to BT getting rights Sky to content Sky no longer have.

It is up to Sky Sports to pass on savings to sports customers, not jack up the price of PL rights.

Jeez.

Originally Posted by VirginMediaPhil (Post 35642961)

If Virgin Media enabled an 'HD swap' like Sky do, I reckon they could clean up/organise their line up something like this:


Virgin's current channel numbers have gotten so bad that I've actually gone and made a fantasy channel line-up :p

I really do hope they organise it sooner than later.

Originally Posted by ocav (Post 35642965)

Well channels 1 to 5 will never do a HD swap because of their regionalisation. You forgot BBC Three/Four HD. Also bare in mind when a swap happens the SD version is available on another EPG number.

Originally Posted by JustaBloke (Post 35642942)

You're getting the hang of it, but 'scheduled for 2015' was a schoolboy error. Better to leave it as 'coming soon' so that if pressed on a date, you can keep saying 'soon' or 'not long now' ad nauseam. :D

Originally Posted by Doug P (Post 35643034)

Exclusive opinion. BT Sports will fail eventually... inevitably.

Originally Posted by Doug P (Post 35643034)

Exclusive opinion. BT Sports will fail eventually... inevitably.

Originally Posted by harry_hitch (Post 35642910)

There is a huge difference between stopping Sky Sports ripping people off and trying to lobby the government though. Sky will be hurt by a lack of payment from thousands of people rebelling against the price. If I and thousands of others stop paying taxes, go to Westminister and wave a banner about saying I am not paying any more until we get change, I (we) will be arrested and put in jail. It would take many, many millions to effect the government, and then the army will be bought in. Also we get to vote for a different government every four years.

It's not a pipe dream for me. If people want to pay that's fine, more fool them. They just need to stop blaming other people. it can happen. If a luxury food item was massively over priced few people would pay for it. The shops would then stop selling it or lower the prices. Why accept it for a few football games?

Anyway I am going down the same route as I did yesterday. I give up, everyone is right. The regulators, PL, Sky and BT are all in the wrong. Everyone who pays to keep them making an obscene profit (on sport alone) is a victim and should be treated as one. I am out of this forum for a while. You all have my sympathies for your awful sporting predicaments.

Originally Posted by blue666666 (Post 35643029)

Has any one heard of any rumors or deal that might happen after the netflix roll out is done.

Originally Posted by VirginMediaPhil (Post 35642974)

That was from my perspective - in my region ITV HD shows the same local news as ITV, Granada. BBC Two, Channel 4 and Channel 5 could for sure do an HD swap, they have regional advertising but not regional programming. They already swap on Sky. So really BBC One is the only one that couldn't be HD swapped anywhere because there are no regional HD variants.

I didn't forget BBC Three, Four, News, Parliament, CBBC or CBeebies HD. In my fantasy world the HD channel would replace the SD channel on the EPG but you're right in that it probably technically wouldn't be possible/feasible.

Originally Posted by harry_hitch (Post 35643058)

I am aware of supply and demand too, it is the very basic side of the point I have been making. (if Sky have no demand, they need to act to improve supply, i.e. price cuts) From which you agreed in post #2800.

I find it galling that you have not acknowledged my last post though. In post #2800 you also accused me of saying I thought Sky are the only company who put prices up, and said the statement (I don't I think I made) was "frankly ludicrous".

I have asked you to quote said posts or apologize. I do not appreciate you putting words into my mouth which have absolutely no basis in fact (that I can remember). I will say again I am happy to be proved wrong, if you can not find the posts, I will gladly accept your apology for putting words in mouth, and making up a fictitious point you decided to attribute towards me.

I also fail to understand to why you would wish to post such nonsense.

For someone who has such a high amount of reputation points, I find it quite staggering, and somewhat arrogant to act in this way.

Again, if you post the quotes where I have said only Sky put prices up and no-one else does I will happily apologize, I really do not mind being embarrassed on an internet forum and will happily accept any punishment the mods may deem necessary for my behaviour.

Cheers.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35643053)

I am just annoyed about how the whole system works. Exclusivity deals skew the market and allow monopolistic types to dominate. Such practices should be banned. That way, supply and demand would keep costs lower.

---------- Post added at 16:01 ---------- Previous post was at 15:59 ----------

Yes, new Sky channels are coming.