Thread: General Underhand devious Sky
View Single Post
Old 21-05-2012, 18:24   #130
muppetman11
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 12,313
muppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny stars
muppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny stars
Re: Underhand devious Sky

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris View Post
While BSB and Sky were both loss-making concerns at the time of the 'merger', BSB was losing twice as much as Sky.
Sky had a 10 year lease on SES transponders to the tune of £50 million , BSB opted to construct and launch it's own satellites (Marcopolo) at a cost of around £200 million also Sky's PAL receivers were also considerably cheaper than BSB's DMAC receivers.
muppetman11 is offline   Reply With Quote