![]() |
Re: ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news
Quote:
Sky's entertainment content has been fragmented since Disney + started thereby increasing prices for those fans of Fox content. The costs of Sky Entertainment (or Now TV entertainment pack) on its own have always been cheaper than Sky Entertainment & Disney Plus. With the advent of HBO Plus in the future, costs for existing content are only likely to increase. There won't be consolidation between Comcast, Warner Brothers Discovery, Walt Disney, Amazon and Apple even if there is consolidation amongst other providers. |
Re: ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news
Quote:
|
Re: ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news
Quote:
The type of user who goes from one streamer to another every month isn’t having a representative experience of a Sky/Virgin pay-tv subscriber before this revolution. They are also undesirable for the streamer in any case. Imagine the losses if everyone did that. |
Re: ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news
I do it all the time. One in, one out every few months. The only problem I get is Sky Atlantic on Now - any new HBO series are only available in a blink-or-you'll-miss-it short window.
|
Re: ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news
Quote:
|
Re: ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news
Quote:
|
Re: ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news
Quote:
|
Re: ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news
Quote:
|
Re: ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news
Quote:
I do the same as well |
Re: ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news
Quote:
This isn’t new in the pay-tv market. ITV Digital with Football League rights, Setanta with EPL rights. Sky (and BT) have naturally focussed on what gets bread and butter, year round subscriptions. Something that none of the minority interest content elsewhere provides (and with the best will in the world to international football, it doesn’t either). |
Re: ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news
Quote:
It is obvious that the more good quality content that is available, the more it will cost. But that's not the same as saying the streamers are more expensive, particularly if you have the choice of what you subscribe to. The same principle applies to the channels. You wouldn't count the cost of a Sky subscription with the premium channels included if you were not interested in watching sport or films. ---------- Post added at 10:46 ---------- Previous post was at 10:41 ---------- Quote:
I think the Sky channels represent poor value for money in terms of their content. |
Re: ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news
Let me get this straight - to get the depth and breadth of content that used to be available routinely in packages from incumbent pay-tv providers customers will have to wait months and years until they decide to move on to whatever streamer now holds the content for it to be cheaper?
And this is a better solution? Priceless. |
Re: ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news
Quote:
As streaming becomes ever more established, you will find an increasing number of AVOD services as well. |
Re: ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news
Quote:
You do indeed "only pay for the content you watch" however with the lost economies of scale that incumbent providers had costs rise for the end users. Or they have sub-optimal experiences like you suggest above with less choice on a given day. Instead having to meticulously plan which streaming services to have on a given month being the narrow set of circumstances where costs are actually saves. Quote:
|
Re: ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news
I see the FT is reporting that Access Industries is likely to inject another £140m into loss-making DAZN just a few months after the streamer's last bailout.
I'm struggling to see who's winning in this brave new world apart from the sports bodies perhaps. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 19:49. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum