Quote:
Originally Posted by mdwh2
If your TV went wrong and you couldn't get a new one, would you continue to pay for a service you no longer used?
I don't understand why people are labelled as being obsessed about TV just because they don't want to spend money on something they aren't intersted anymore. On the contrary, I'd say it's the people who spend money simply to have "100s of channels", no matter what those channels are, who seem more obsessed about TV.
_Everyone_ here who is spending out money for TV is just as much bothered about TV as each other - maybe someone who didn't pay for TV at all would be able to laugh at us, but then I'd wonder what such a person was doing wasting his time on this forum...
|
Well I have cable primarily because the quality of the broadcast signal is poor in my area, you can't get C4 or 5 very well here. The benefits of dozens of other channels, particularly Film 4 and the like, and VOD is what keeps me with Virgin, the broadband doesn't hurt either
.
If people want out because they are losing Sky's basic channels then Virgin are letting them, so I'm not sure why people are moaning one way or the other to be honest.
If the quoted figure of 100 a day is in the right order of magnitude and it stays like that by the end of this week I would be very worried if I was Sky. The figures are likely to start high and tail off, so in order to meet the 150K minimum to break even they need to average five thousand a day over March. To be pulling much less than 1% of that over the first two weeks is poor to say the least.
This is why Virgin got it right by letting those who really want to get out to do so. It presents a risk, but as things are it gives Sky a reason to get back to the negotiating table.