Quote:
Originally Posted by ahardie
The take up for this at £7 would be so small I wonder if it is worth all the fuss. If vod is worth £7 to those on a tight budget it just shows how good value xl is. That's £7 for vod, £9 minimum for ESPN lets say£3 for HD as we get a lot of the more popular HD channels. Your already up to the minimum package price for Sky. I'm not arguing this because I think VM are wonderful. I just have no illusions about Sky either. I don't see them offering people who are less well off a package for £6.50, with or without telephone. And given that it seemed to be common knowledge at the time of the Sky 1 dispute that one of the sticking points was that Sky didn't want the channel on the M package I wouldn't rule out them having a hand in this. Unlikely yes, impossible no.
|
Well first I do not know the take up of TVC at £7, what exactly are the numbers? My main gripe is that there is no flexibility, if you want TVC you have to have XL, if you want HD you have to have XL (less the FTA channels, same as Sky with any pack, you don't need to pay the £10) and if you're like me you end up whole genre's of channels you don't watch. You have to pay £5 for V+ if not on XL too, there are no such restrictions on a lower tier Sky subscriber although your OD content will of course be aligned to the sub. XL is great value, but only if you can afford it. One thing we do agree on is Sky's unlikely involvement in this decision, sometimes one might be forgiven for thinking VM are owned by a charitable organisation, not a load of predominantly american financial institutions who we know can be rather greedy. They are no different to Sky.
Also our price comparisons were (sort of) out of date anyway, I got a leaflet today with the post VAT increase tariff so they are closer again to Sky's, who already included the VAT increase.