Quote:
Originally Posted by gj4009
That part is about Skys challenge against ofcoms misinterpretation of power, nothing to do with the headline matter that i pointed out which is Sky won there appeal against having the charge less. End of the day ofcom have something against Sky and are on a mission but lets not forget this is the same ofcom that wasted hundreds of thousands of pounds pursuing late night phone in channels if a little bit of pubic hair was flashed or baby oil was rubbed in an overly suggestive manner. Ofcom are not worth a light my friend, they are well and truly chumming up to VM and are upset that they lost.
Just incase there is any further doubt.
http://corporate.sky.com/media/press..._pay_tv_appeal |
Yes BUT
"However, the tribunal did not find in BSkyB's favour on each of the grounds that it contested.
BSkyB was unable to convince the tribunal that Ofcom misinterpreted its powers when it ordered the pay-TV company to reduce its wholesale prices for the two sports channels."
So if Sky lose the part where it suggests OFCOM had no right to force it to lower the price of Sky Sports then they still have to lower the price, no?
This ruleing doesn't mean that SKY can begin to ask for ridiculous prices for its premium channels again!
As far as I can make out what we have now after the ruling is the same as what we had beore it.
Sky must offer it's premium chanels at a decent price.