Quote:
Originally Posted by jj20x
This is partly true to but be honest but consider this possibility..
BT offer the sports package to VM at a rate of £16 per subscriber as an add on premium package. VM then asks for a discounted rate to make the package available to all XL customers. BT respond with, sure you can make the channel available to all XL customers but the rate of £16 per subscriber is not negotiable.
|
What BT charge VM is one thing, but I would not have thought they would be dictating to VM how they include BT Sports in VM's package.
VM may well decide to provide BT Sports on the same basis as ESPN and reallocate the remaining costs within the business.
I believe the recent price hike does have something to do with the increased cost of football rights and that they would have anticipated having to pay rather more as a result (even if ESPN had retained these rights). Whilst they may not have known exactly what the content provider would be charging when they set the price increase, they would have had a pretty good idea.
Why else would they have put prices up by this amount?
Unless it's for Sky Atlantic, of course...

---------- Post added at 12:42 ---------- Previous post was at 12:29 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustaBloke
Ahh I get it. Those of us that don't want a TiVo have to pay for those who do. There may be various ways that VM could make it a viable proposition, but that isn't one of them.
|
Fair point, JustaBloke. However, I suspect that VM will drop the additional charge for the TIVO box in due course as the V+ is phased out.
The added facilities on the TIVO box could be used to encourage other subscribers over. Although non TIVO box subscribers with the V and V-HD boxes would be at a disadvantage if an ESPN type deal were not to be forthcoming with BT Sports, and Netflix replaced it, we all need to bear in mind that there is no guarantee anything will replace ESPN or indeed that we will get a price reduction.
I am sure there must be a cost to VM to provide apps such as You Tube, which will be part and parcel of the pricing structure, but all TV subscribers will be contributing to that, not just TIVO users. The Netflix arrangement I have described would follow the same principle.
---------- Post added at 12:45 ---------- Previous post was at 12:42 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat
With any pay TV service, we all pay for things we don't want or watch. That's the nature of a pay TV service.
I don't watch sport, so don't care about ESPN being part of XL and I could theoretically object to the money that VM are paying ESPN. But that would be a short sighted view. ESPN is free as part of the XL package to attract customers and the resulting increased revenue. It is the same with apps and features on Tivo; it is there to attract more people to Tivo and VM. So just as I accept VM paying for a service I don't use in order to attract more customers and more revenue, you need to accept the same thing in regards to increased Tivo functionality.
|
I agree, Passingbat. I don't watch ESPN either yet I've been paying it ever since the deal was done as part of my package. It's just the way it works and in the end, it ensures that everyone has maximum choice at a price they can afford.