Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart
They can raise £2.2 billion for the football rights because they know that enough people will pay the subscription to see the premiere league clubs. Premiere League fans will not be able to see the matches sky has the rights to anywhere (legally) unless Sky gets at least some money for them watching it. This means Sky can pretty much charge what it wants.
The same cannot be said of mobile phones. The market is saturated. A saturated market means that prices have to be kept low. This is why Orange and TMobile merged in the first place. It was not viable to keep both.
Now, you could argue that the ISP market was saturated when Sky tookover Easynet. It was. However, Easynet cost about £210 million. Even all these years later, and with Sky's upgrades to the Easynet network, I'd be surprised if they've spent more than £1 billion on Sky Broadband.
I think that even if they had the will, they would have trouble raising several billion for a takeover of a mobile phone network.
|
I completely disagree, as I said in the other thread Sky has 10Million customers taking at least1 service and more tripple pay customers taking 3 serives than VM do.
Their is no reason not believea lot of the 10 million customers wouldn't move to Sky. If they can tempt customers from 100Mb BB to 8Mb ADSL lines then I'm sure they can win customers with an equal or better product than the customer already has.
If you were a Sky shareholder would you be happy to put money in to get a Sky mobile network? Or would you want Sky left behind having to rent or piggy back on a virtual network?
If it can raise some from share holders and some from banks it will be easy.
---------- Post added at 16:50 ---------- Previous post was at 16:40 ----------
ALSO**
If you type boots owner to buy everything everywhere into google(which lots will be doing as the day goes on and news spreads) cableforum.co.uk is googles top pick...Good for the site eh.