Re: OFCOM ready to rule?
 

What does that graph actually describe?

This graph http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ion_income.png shows the total number of subscribers steadily going up.

Does the graph you quoted mean the market size is getting bigger but Sky's share of the total market is getting smaller?

Re: OFCOM ready to rule?
 

I used be a part of the why should sky seller stuff to the competition for cheaper as the made the investment but have come to this conclusion, all manufactures sell at a whole sale price to retailers, Pay TV should be no exception to this. After all Virgin and BT are selling a service that Sky make money form and they too should be able to make some money from it as well.

I think we need to take a look at the US model where content is much more freely available and you chose your cable or satellite company on price rather then what channels they maybe able to carry.

Re: OFCOM ready to rule?
 

I would love to see a price reduction on Sky, I have a multi room with Sky, and it is nearly £80.00 per month, I also have VM especially for the free ESPN channel and phone line etc, and l pay 50.00 and l have two boxes. BUT we did have mutli room on VM at the same price.

IF Sky reduced the price in line with all the others, then there would be good compitition and customers could then choose what is the best service to choose.

Re: OFCOM ready to rule?
 

The price reduction on the other platforms could well plug any finacial lose that Sky might suffer as they could sell more subscriptions and if there is a slight profit for the other operators to make they may get a bit more aggressive about selling Movies and Sports.

Re: OFCOM ready to rule?
 

I was having a look at earlier reports last year. Something has to be done. Who has the b*lls to do it?

Anything that puts even a slight dent in the global media power of the arrogant tool Rupert Murdoch can only be a good thing. Something has to be done.

Re: OFCOM ready to rule?
 

fully agree

Re: OFCOM ready to rule?
 

I'm not holding my breath..As I've said before I'll believe it when it happens. ;)

Re: OFCOM ready to rule?
 

The promising thing is if ofcom are actually taking the line of comply now, appeal later, rather than letting it drag out for years through the courts.

With a verdict at the end of march, and them forcing Sky to comply immediately, the consumer could actually see movement on this before the end of Q2. It just sounds far too good to be true.

Re: OFCOM ready to rule?
 

Sky has a very powerful tool, its like when the football comes up for renewal, Sky has the firepower to knock all the other competition out of the water.

I have said all along, no one has the bottle to take Sky on, and even Ofcom won't beat them, What l would like to see is another broadcastor come in and offer the same service as Sky at a cheaper rate, and see what happens.

I always thought that when Sir Richard came into the business, l thought, here is a man with enough gun power and money to take on Sky, and what has happened nothing. We need someone too take on Sky - BUT who.

Re: OFCOM ready to rule?
 

ESPN have come on to the market in the UK and have the power and also the money to take on SKY (bankrolled by DISNEY) . Also in the movie stakes there are new movies starting up such as EPIXHD as the work with cable companies as if you take bb and tv you can stream on the net and also get the channel on tv where you are able to watch movies the same as VOD but for a monthly subscription !

Re: OFCOM ready to rule?
 

How does this help Sky's customers?

If Sky have to charge VM / BT less than they charge their customers by x%, retail minus, then dropping the prices to their own customers simply means they have to drop the prices to Virgin and BT as well. They aren't going to drop their own customers' prices so that they can charge VM and BT less as well.

---------- Post added at 23:02 ---------- Previous post was at 23:01 ----------

This would not produce any kind of price reduction for Sky customers Arthur. Have another read of it all.

---------- Post added at 23:04 ---------- Previous post was at 23:02 ----------

It's about eye balls on screens and the channels they are watching. There are more channels to watch than before and Sky's content is getting less viewers than before.

Yes Sky continue to gain subscribers however their share of the DTV market continues to drop due to Freeview and Freesat primarily.

---------- Post added at 23:06 ---------- Previous post was at 23:04 ----------

Content is available, just as Sky's content is available, however the price for carriage of the channels is individually negotiated between content provider and broadcaster.

Re: OFCOM ready to rule?
 

I wouldn't hold your breath. If "Dave Camera-on" gets in, he'll give Murdoch what he wants anyway.

Re: OFCOM ready to rule?
 

Ignoring the rest of it I recommend you yourself take a look at America. Local areas don't usually have their own providers who can compete with the big players, no idea where you've gotten that from. Usually the municipal / Ma and Pa cable companies have a more limited subset of channels and aren't competing with the Comcast, Cox, Time Warner and Charters. They tend to have ancient networks descended from old MATV networks from times long passed.

They don't get the content randomly, they negotiate with the content providers just as broadcasters here do. There have been cases recently of operator and content provider having disagreements over carriage charges.

Time Warner Cable have, in the last year and a bit, had disagreements over carriage charges with Viacom and Fox.

http://157.166.226.108/2010/01/01/ne...erry/index.htm
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/106212
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/99971

Cablevision in that same article dropped some channels due to not being able to agree carriage terms with a content supplier.

Hell Time Warner went as far as opening up a campaign website to complain about the TV networks. I have no idea where you have the idea that the US is some kind of free content panacea but you are very, very much mistaken. If we took the US approach it would be for regulators to keep their noses out.

---------- Post added at 23:22 ---------- Previous post was at 23:17 ----------

It would appear that a lot of the support for this is based on Ofcom sticking it to 'the man', ignoring of course that Sky customers will likely end up paying more or service quality for everyone will go down, and that Sky while 39% owned by News Corp is not a News Corp company.

Sky give a good product at a reasonable price (IMHO), Virgin for all their complaints manage to compete with Sky on price and have better gross profit margin. Who's getting stitched up here exactly?

Re: OFCOM ready to rule?
 

According to guardian

The satellite broadcaster is expected to launch an immediate legal attack on any moves to cut its prices but the regulator will use its powers to introduce the measures while the lawyers make their arguments.

So if (and hopefully when) they do that it would mean that the price would have to drop immediately so it would be a brave Cameron to reverse something like that immediately he takes office.

Personally I am not so much interested in the price as having things like the HD channels and the 'other games on the red button' streams. Assuming that is covered by the same rules then we could get them soon and again it would be a brave politician to come in and say "Sorry cable and BT viewers but I am going to take those channels away".

Re: OFCOM ready to rule?
 

Be interesting to see if Ofcom can just push this through. Regardless of what powers Ofcom think they have I believe they can't simply force a change through if BSkyB can obtain an injunction. Worst case BSkyB can tell them to go to hell and Ofcom will have to begin infringement proceedings, Ofcom cannot lower BSkyB's prices for them, they can threaten them with a stick if they don't but it would be a very, very messy battle. IANAL though!

EDIT: Incidentally all this stuff about BSkyB charging VM more for the channels than their own customers pay isn't true, at least for the bundle. For individual packages beyond this a comparison is 'tricky' as I suspect Sky take a hit on SS1 as they know so few customers take it on its' own.

According to The Guardian VM pay 23.40 for the Sports and Movies bundle, Sky charge their customers 25.50. Further, the costs to VM of carriage of these channels specifically over and above the rest of their selection is marginal. Perhaps they are trying to justify their upselling price strategy on TV?

Again the timing of it all seems odd until one notes an election coming up, the Guardian got it spot on. This is Ofcom waving its' willy before it gets chopped off.