Quote:
Originally Posted by Tod
Maybe it's customer loyalty to the brand because they have had no problems and are happy with what they have got - why is it assumed people always want the "cheap" option - untrue.
|
Well to use the same example, why would someone pay 30% more for their gas? I've been doing it, but I've finally got around to changing to an alternative supplier.
When it comes to brand loyalty, you might be right if you were talking about a product, such as baked beans or crisps, but generally not in terms of service providers. This is especially true when it comes to a service that could be perceived to be identical, such as energy providers or multichannel TV. (Note the use of the word perceived).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tod
Sky has done more damage than good. We used to get cricket, rugby and football on terrestrial television - even the national teams you have to pay to see now, not to mention the splitting up of world darts because of Sky.
|
You fail to mention the sports bodies that accepted the offers from the broadcasters. You also fail to mention Setanta, the Irish broadcaster, who now have the rights to some major golf tournaments.
Whilst I agree with the concept that there should be mainstream sport on the mainstream channels, this simply was never going to be practical in the multichannel world. I don't agree that this has done damage, if there were no subscription sports channels you TV license fee would be a hell of a lot more than it currently is, and as a someone who doesn't really watch much sport, I object to funding it via my license fee to the degree you're talking about.
The other positive effect of Sky Sports is that you can now watch more sport than you could ever hope for in the good old days you're on about; Minority sports are now catered for more than ever, lower-league football teams find their matches on TV and of course you can always go to the pub to watch it all for free. So there is a positive effect from Sky's entry into that market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tod
How is Skys platform "a long way ahead of the game?" - I don't see it as being any better than cable.
|
Have you used to two systems? I had ntl digital fairly early after it was released, then we moved and I dumped them (back to the more hassle than it was worth argument from above, to do it before moving house) and got a Sky+ box. It's all personal I guess, but the accuracy, efficiency, style, speed and usability IMHO are streets ahead of ntl.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tod
If you have a HD TV, and Sky is the only provider of HD content, then you will pay more to get it. OK there would be a limit, but Sky would charge a lot closer to that limit with no competition.
|
But your beloved cable company pretty much set the agenda for HD pricing in this country - Telewest were the first to market, Sky had no HD offering when TV Drive was launched. So why did Telewest charge what they did? Becuase the research they did (and presumably Sky did too) told them that this was the price that most interested customers would be prepared to pay. There is no conspiracy theory of the evil Mr Murdoch sitting in a darkened room telling his mignons to financially cripple every HDTV owner - that's a crazy theory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tod
Our government are scared of News International, they can and have swayed elections, and this is something we should all be worried about. Their purchasing of ITV was well below the belt.
|
There's no doubt that News Internation is a powerful media outlet, not just here, but around the world. We also have some of the most strict media regulation in this country, which is controlled by the government - so why is Murdoch not allowed to buy a terrestrial mainstream channel, if what you say is true?
And for the record, Murdoch has NOT bourght ITV, he has bought a minority stake in ITV - which ntl itself tried to buy by offering a well below market price for. Why would they want to do that do you think?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tod
I wish Branson luck with what is going to be his hardest challenge yet, because you can bet your life News International will not be reporting him as such the hero as they have before now. You can bet they will have some scam story to demolish the poor guy is he starts to succeed.
|
I wish Branson luck too, although I'm not sure how hands-on he's likely to be. I think this country deserves a decent cable TV offering, I think they're about ten years too late, which makes his job much harder, but I also think the potential of cable has never been realised completely, due to a sucession of inferior senior management at ntl and Telewest.
Maybe now is the start of something good.... but me as the synical one in the corner suggests that a clever rebrand and figurehead is not going to change the years of rot that much. We'll see.