Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35644148)

You seem very convinced about Sky winning out, Doug, which I understand, because they have previously bullied their way into the areas they want to dominate.

However, I really do think they have met their match this time. And I don't believe that Sky and the markets are unperturbed about recent developments with BT as you suggest.

I hope that Sky raise their game now and start focusing more on their customers, giving them more of what they want. A lot of people actually detest Sky for various reasons, but it would be good if they could plot out a new direction and put their past practices behind them. This might well change attitudes in the medium term.

Sky need to revise their business plan as a matter of urgency if they don't already have an imaginative pathway in place to keep moving forward. Sky have beaten the odds before, and I do hope that they will do so again, but in a nice way this time.

Sky have done a lot for British television and I for one appreciate that. If they can drive forward a more customer friendly company that can behave in a more appropriate way with their competitors, that can only be a good thing in helping people to change their minds about the company.

Originally Posted by colin25 (Post 35644149)

You say bullied, in that case, is BT the bully?

If someone wishes to spend their money, for them to do that, and for customers to pay, or not.

Too much emotive language concerning these businesses, which is what they are

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35644153)

In terms of out-bidding Sky? No, I don't regard that as bullying behaviour at all, that's just competition.

Originally Posted by Top banana (Post 35644154)

Looks like deep pockets will be needed for next premiership rights


http://www.theguardian.com/business/...s-bskyb-shares

Originally Posted by vincerooney (Post 35644158)

Which will mean higher prices for us all. How the introduction of a second broadcaster in football can be a good thing is the ultimate question. Wasnt it OFCOM who forced sky to only be able to bid for some and not all of the rights for competition purposes??

Brilliant. So now our bills continue to increase as both attempt to destroy each other. Well done *sarcastic clap* at least then it was all with sky it was just one provider to pay

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35644159)

Yes, but ultimately this may lead to cheaper prices. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. For example, what if BT and Sky got together next time to make a lower joint bid for the rights? Anything can happen....

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35644171)

But there is no way that BT and Sky will get together OB to make a lower bid for the rights as this is war and the financial prize is huge for both of them and there is more chance of man landing on Mars then of the getting together scenario happening.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35644175)

But it would be better for both of them, Den. Whilst Sky don't like these developments, faced with being blown out of the water by BT, they may go for the sensible option. This would also be appreciated by BT, who can pay less for their sports rights, thus reducing their costs. There are lots of things they could do to keep their broadband figures up, they won't be playing the same cards forever.

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35644194)

Oh dear this is starting to sound like a singalong at thy local pub with Colin as the drunken landlord.;):D

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35644148)

You seem very convinced about Sky winning out, Doug, which I understand, because they have previously bullied their way into the areas they want to dominate.

However, I really do think they have met their match this time. And I don't believe that Sky and the markets are unperturbed about recent developments with BT as you suggest.

I hope that Sky raise their game now and start focusing more on their customers, giving them more of what they want. A lot of people actually detest Sky for various reasons, but it would be good if they could plot out a new direction and put their past unwanted practices behind them. This might well change attitudes in the medium term.

Sky need to revise their business plan as a matter of urgency if they don't already have an imaginative pathway in place to keep moving forward. Sky have beaten the odds before, and I do hope that they will do so again, but in a nice way this time.

Sky have done a lot for British television and I for one appreciate that. If they can drive forward a more customer friendly company that can behave in a more appropriate way with their competitors, that can only be a good thing in helping people to change their minds about the company.

Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 35644143)

prices will only ever go up and up :(:(:(:(:(

Originally Posted by muppetman11 (Post 35644317)

Supposedly one on the way in the new year for BB , wonder how much tv subs will rise.

Originally Posted by Chad (Post 35644351)

Quick question.

When BT bought the ESPN channels, and took over the existing carriage deals, why did BT not change the name of ESPN to BT Sports 3? Was it a stipulation by ESPN that the name had to remain?