![]() |
Re: Cryptic post regarding Sky from "James" ;-)
Deliberately cheaper than Virgin's comparable XL TV package?
|
Re: Cryptic post regarding Sky from "James" ;-)
Quote:
|
Re: Cryptic post regarding Sky from "James" ;-)
Quote:
And that point will be worth what when ESPN withdraws from the UK sports market in May or June as is widely rumoured? |
Re: Cryptic post regarding Sky from "James" ;-)
Quote:
Also got to remember that XL customers don't need a seperate broadband connection to access on demand or catch up content via their TiVo box. This is another cost you'd need to add in to SKY's package to enjoy a similar experience to Virgins XL package. So currently that'll be £31.50 for Entertainment Extra +, £13.00 for ESPN and then £7.50 for SKY's Unlimited broadband. That's £52.00 in total. You might get more HD channels than Virgin through the new SKY package but in terms of overall service and value for money, Virgin's XL package blows SKY's new offering out of the water. I'm a SKY customer but know a great deal when I see one. Even if you don't take ESPN, Virgin is still cheaper when it comes to like for like. |
Re: Cryptic post regarding Sky from "James" ;-)
All pretty irrelevant Chad as each individual customers needs differ , to suggest VM is cheapest for everyone is quite frankly ludicrous.
|
Re: Cryptic post regarding Sky from "James" ;-)
Quote:
My post was directed at the point raised by Bubblegun who posted: "Deliberately cheaper than Virgin's comparable XL TV package?" I was just highlighting that for SKY to provide a service comparable to XL, you'll have to shell out more than Virgin charge for the XL package. On a like for like basis, Virgin is cheaper. That of course might not be the case accross all the other comparable packages SKY and Virgin provide. SKY's comparable version of Virgins VIP package actually works out cheaper by £1 each month. |
Re: Cryptic post regarding Sky from "James" ;-)
Ah right I get you , like I say every individual differs my family choose VM purely because the best their BT line can manage is around 2mb compared to their rock solid 60mb on VM , at our house we choose Sky purely for our Sports in HD , Sky Atlantic and a wider base range of HD however many have no interest in any of these just look how many still use old non PVR STB's on both services.
|
Re: Cryptic post regarding Sky from "James" ;-)
Quote:
I went with SKY partly because I got a great deal but also because of their wide range of HD, SKY 3D and SKY Atlantic. Also if you want the latest TV channels from launch you really need to have SKY. Virgin have upped their game in the past 2 months however SKY will always have their nose in front. I gave Virgin the chance to match my expectations in terms of HD channels and price but they couldn't. SKY Atlantic wasn't a must for me, it was always something my wife wanted. It doesn't take you long to get drawn into the channels programming. The Following and Vegas have joined Ripper Street and The Walking Dead as my must watch programmes. Via on demand I've started to watch Boardwalk Empire and Game of Thrones from the start in HD. I'm recording Blue Bloods season 2 and 3. I'm just waiting for season 1 to either be repeated or made available on demand. Just watched The British back to back. Not as good as some BBC documentaries but still enjoyable. It really would be difficult to now go without SKY Atlantic. |
Re: Cryptic post regarding Sky from "James" ;-)
Quote:
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:27. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum