Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad
Totally agree. It's been a bad week of press with many articles linking to their previous dispute with SKY and their channels being removed in the past. Would certainly put me off signing up not knowing when their next channel dispute is going to happen and if I'm going to lose my favourite channels randomly at some point. Too risky.
|
And you would not be alone Chad, this was my point about the real damage being yet to come.
Many people have expressed the same sentiment and will mention it to friends & family when the subject comes up.
Even if this were all sorted out tomorrow, the product has now been seriously undermined and their brand name has been tainted.
I'm surprised that Richard Branson hasn't complained about this as this could also taint other Virgin branded companies by association; many people still think that it is Richard Branson who owns VM.
---------- Post added at 14:09 ---------- Previous post was at 13:59 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave42
|
I agree with everything he says. VM have boxed themselves in and made a huge tactical mistake by doing this and forcing the issue. There will now be repercussions both now and in the future, whether they back down or give in.
I see the only viable solution being to replace senior staff to start a process of damage limitation, however, John Malone has a reputation for shaking things up and getting his own way.
Maybe VM will eventually have to be sold at a knock form price?
Some have suggested that VM will pull out of TV altogether, which I disagree with. VM makes little from selling TV, the service is mainly there to compete with other triple play operators so that they can make money from BB and telephone line rental.
This is so important to them that VM actually loose £2 a month per customer on the lowest TV pack and this is not taking into account the cost of the STB (now being given away for free without a customer contribution), depreciation, repair costs, customer support etc.