20-05-2012, 18:10
|
#123
|
cf.mega poster
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: North-West Kent
Services: VIP
Posts: 2,887
|
Re: Underhand devious Sky
Quote:
Originally Posted by boragthung
Can't believe how big this thread's got! It's sort of evolved from my original moan though.
My opinion on licence fees and subscriptions - I have no problem with paying so I can have advert free quality (well some of it) telly. The licence fee provides a large number of services compared to what is provided by the likes of $ky at a more substantial cost.
Seeing as how the likes of $ky must make a fortune from advertising why should they be allowed to charge a subscription on top of that? This is the reason they have so much money to outbid and control content. Now I know the answer to that would be providing boxes and cards and encryption just like cable. Personally I think there should be no subs for anything if they raise income from adverts (else with subs - no adverts).
I think all media output should just be put out there FTA - if you want it buy the hardware you want. As it is everything is 'closed shop' with allowing only provided hardware and having viewing cards, subscriptions, etc. But my personal revolutionary new world is never going to happen.
The likes of ITV rely purely on income from adverts and although they have considered (or are considering) it, do not gain subscription income on top of that. Not that I watch much of ITV anyway as I think it is full of brainless tat in the main, with only the odd quality programme (Like Scott and Bailey). No subs to watch Ch4 or 5 either although I think these do get a small cut of licence fee to provide public services (and maybe ITV or rather ITN do as well?).
|
As far as I can work out, subs are a revenue stream for ITV, who have the majority of their hd variants behind Sky's pay wall.
---------- Post added at 18:10 ---------- Previous post was at 18:06 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superblade7
I just thought I would add my points to this pretty interesting thread:
Sky have dominance because they took a big risk in the early days and bought the rights to the Premier League and first run movies on tv. This has paid off over the years as the popularity of having the choice to watch these on tv has grown and grown.
At the same time the cable industry was split into different companies all doing their own thing. If VM had been around in the late 80's / early 90's as the company they are today then things may have been different as they may have gone head to head for certain content. Unfortunately they weren't and that is where we are today.
The other advantage Sky have is it's availability as it is available in many more homes than cable and is therefore always going to pull a larger market share and in turn far greater revenue. They then use this revenue to invest in their programming, content and ever improving products and services.
The Sky quality also shows through, for example, the Champions League final last night, I chose to watch it on Sky Sports rather than ITV as I personally believe Sky present their football content far superior to any other channel.
Don't get me wrong, I would love to see Sky Atlantic, ITV2/3/4 HD, etc on VM but at the end of the day, it's a business and it has to have a USP to make people choose Sky over it's rivals.
VM currently have superfast broadband and all their advertising is focused on that as that's VM's USP.
I am very happy with my VM services and whilst I would love some extra TV content, to me Sky Atlantic only has had one or two shows that would have been interested in so wouldn't make me switch unless I got a far greater deal which would save me money for similar services.
On the point of the licence fee, I believe the BBC produce some great content, have great services and therefore provide a top class service considering.
My final point to end my post would be that whatever you believe, healthy competition is good for us, the consumer. It is great to have choice, whether you are happy with the FTA range available on Freeview / Freesat or if you want the pay TV content on Sky / VM / BT. It also keeps the prices reasonable as it it were only one big pay TV company, they would probably hike their prices up and you would have to like it or lump it.
Whatever your views, each individual has the right to choose what services are right for them both in terms of what they can afford and what they wish to watch.
Also, wouldnt it be boring if they were exactly the same as forums like this wouldn't be littered with all these interesting posts about pro's and con's and showing that everyone has their own views and where people have problems, others are always willing to help.
Great topic borag!
|
This thread, in a nutshell. Good post. Repped.
|
|
|