Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetman11
I fully expect VM to tweak its packages making them even better ,
Looking purely at the cheapest entry package to XL with a PVR (TIVO) costs £60.99 , compared to £54.00 for Entertainment Extra + (from Sept 13 prices) with Sky of course if your address can only receive poor ADSL speeds requiring you to take Sky fibre this then this makes VM cheaper by around £5.50.
Both companies have introductory offers for new customers however I still believe VM will make XL even more attractive or alter its pricing to make it more attractive to those wanting XL TV via the cheapest method.
|
I've always thought VM could do with offering their top 'collections' (Premiere & VIP) with a single STB option. I do think they represent good value as they stand but I, and no doubt many other VM customers, only require a single STB.
For example, VIP is £113.99 per month, take off the additional V HD box and the price goes up to £130.24 when surely they should offer it for £107.49 (£6.50 less due to removing the additional STB). Sky packages are all built around a single STB with additional ones available if required (albeit at extra cost).
Just wonder if it would benefit VM to do this as Sky's top package (without getting into the comparing apples and pears argument) is around £93 so VM's is about £20 more. Surely a single STB VIP collection with a lower headline cost would benefit VM and reduce the price gap but still allow those who want additional STBs to add them at the regular cost of £6.50+.
Anyway, back on topic with the loss of ESPN in the XL pack and the current negotiations with Sky, does anyone think we may see the end of the Sky Premium HD charge? My logic behind this is that Sky Sports on Sky will be £22 a month from Sep plus about an extra £5 for HD making it £27ish per month. If Sky Sports on VM does go up by over £3 then it is going to touching £30 a month without HD. So if the Premium HD was dropped, it would still be about £3 a month more than on Sky and wasn't the Premium HD charge originally introduced so VM couldn't appear to offer Sky Sports in HD for less than Sky (back when their HD charge was around £10 per month)?
Obviously it's only a thought but some people (me included) enjoy watching sport in HD but will think twice about it now if it's going to be £37ish a month for the privilege. Surely with the launch of BT Sport, Sky will be keen to get as many Sky Sports subscribers as possible even if that means getting them through VM? Alternatively, they could give us all the Sky Sports channels in HD but even then £37ish is still a bit steep.
Interesting times ahead me thinks especially as Sky will be wanting to fight off BT and surely LG must have something up their sleeves as part of the aquisition of VM?