Any official numbers yet

[smelly-finger]

After a long time with cable tel/ntl we're changing to sky simply because the channel that was most watched (stargate, lost, battlestar etc) has been removed from the VM service. Initially I thought the adverts that sky was running were just scaremongering and we would see a last min deal. So now we're going to change.

I spent a good portion of today trying to get through to CS but to no avail shall try again tomorrow.

Anyhow i was wondering if there are any figures out as to how many customers called today to cancel thier service. I know several people who weren't aware that this was going on and only realised when sky 1 vanished from thier STB. I believe that the vote on this site only shows those people like me who use the net more and therefore aren't too bothered about the lose of sky 1 but I have to consider the rest of the family.

I don't want to turn this into a "your sad for leaving since it was a **** channel" thread i'd just be interested in seeing roughly how many "churned" today.

[Stuart]

Well, I doubt you'll get Official figures in any forum. Pretty sure that Virgin will want them kept secret.

to the forum though.

[michael]

i cant understand why vrm (virgin ridiculous media) have done this. they have shot themselves in the foot. did they really think that nobody would notice?or did they think that nobody would say anything?as is the norm nowadays, anything that happens that directly affects us we just take it on the chin and carry on.where have the days gone where if we didnt agree with something we did something about it? it seems that we always let them get away with it, be it the government or private corporations. not everybody has so much money in their bank accounts that they are prepared to pay whatever it costs, some people are struggling to make ends meet, for various reasons.my first bill from vrm (virgin ridiculous media) has increased by £4.50 without any reason given, not even a letter letting me know. some people may not be able to afford that, but obviously they dont care. sent them numerous emails trying to find out why, but all i get is it will take 24-48 hours to get back to me. i even got a letter from them telling me it may take up to 10 days to reply to me.shame on you, i always admired mr branson but now i am very dissapointed, not that he wold give a hoot. oh well, time to shop around i suppose.

[AndyCambs]

Originally Posted by michael

i cant understand why vrm (virgin ridiculous media) have done this. they have shot themselves in the foot. did they really think that nobody would notice?or did they think that nobody would say anything?as is the norm nowadays, anything that happens that directly affects us we just take it on the chin and carry on.where have the days gone where if we didnt agree with something we did something about it? it seems that we always let them get away with it, be it the government or private corporations. not everybody has so much money in their bank accounts that they are prepared to pay whatever it costs, some people are struggling to make ends meet, for various reasons.my first bill from vrm (virgin ridiculous media) has increased by £4.50 without any reason given, not even a letter letting me know. some people may not be able to afford that, but obviously they dont care. sent them numerous emails trying to find out why, but all i get is it will take 24-48 hours to get back to me. i even got a letter from them telling me it may take up to 10 days to reply to me.shame on you, i always admired mr branson but now i am very dissapointed, not that he wold give a hoot. oh well, time to shop around i suppose.

Let's try and put it in simple terms for you:

You buy a tin of Heinz beans from Sainsburys every week - but this week Sainsburys double the cost. You can either pay double, or find something else to eat. But you know if you pay double for the tin of beans, then you're going to have to pay double next week and so on. So you decide that you might try spaghetti instead - and find that you like it.

In this scenario - Sky artificially inflated the price of the channels, and dictated to Virgin Media that they should no longer be available on the medium television package. For all the "offers" that Sky made, the minimum price was such that it would never have been acceptable for a channel where the viewing figures have decreased over the past few years.

I can't say I really watched Sky One - it was a channel I used to hop over. I'd sometimes watch Sky Travel when I was really bored. BBC News is better presented and has won the RTE award for best news broadcasting.

Oh yes, you mention shopping around - well if you do go with Sky, then good luck - remember their broadband is upto 8MB, and very dependant on your phone line and how far you live from the exchange - I'd be lucky to get 1MB in this area. Also - just think, Sky have a large deficit to plug - around £60m is the estimate from loss of Virgin Media subscriptions and advertising - they're going to need the extra money from somewhere, and the only place left are the Sky subscribers. They've wasted quite a bit of money recently purely to annoy Virgin Media - the 17.9% stake in ITV (Murdoch doesn't invest in companies he can't control), and the £1m spent on the breakfast show on Virgin Radio immediately prior to the VM launch. You're looking for childish behaviour and someone to blame - then look squarely at Sky and the Murdoch family.

[crowlord]

Originally Posted by AndyCambs

Let's try and put it in simple terms for you:

You buy a tin of Heinz beans from Sainsburys every week - but this week Sainsburys double the cost. You can either pay double, or find something else to eat. But you know if you pay double for the tin of beans, then you're going to have to pay double next week and so on. So you decide that you might try spaghetti instead - and find that you like it.

In this scenario - Sky artificially inflated the price of the channels, and dictated to Virgin Media that they should no longer be available on the medium television package. For all the "offers" that Sky made, the minimum price was such that it would never have been acceptable for a channel where the viewing figures have decreased over the past few years.

I can't say I really watched Sky One - it was a channel I used to hop over. I'd sometimes watch Sky Travel when I was really bored. BBC News is better presented and has won the RTE award for best news broadcasting.

Oh yes, you mention shopping around - well if you do go with Sky, then good luck - remember their broadband is upto 8MB, and very dependant on your phone line and how far you live from the exchange - I'd be lucky to get 1MB in this area. Also - just think, Sky have a large deficit to plug - around £60m is the estimate from loss of Virgin Media subscriptions and advertising - they're going to need the extra money from somewhere, and the only place left are the Sky subscribers. They've wasted quite a bit of money recently purely to annoy Virgin Media - the 17.9% stake in ITV (Murdoch doesn't invest in companies he can't control), and the £1m spent on the breakfast show on Virgin Radio immediately prior to the VM launch. You're looking for childish behaviour and someone to blame - then look squarely at Sky and the Murdoch family.

You also missed that the tins are more tomato sauce then beans nowadays andy, good simile though. I find it all rather supect that Sky pulled out their advertising campaign the very day after the channels were dropped.

I doubt we will see any numbers too, I'm sure the proof will be in the performance of both platforms and the end of year figures.

[basa]

You can add one more

[mentalis]

You may not see any official figures from VM but I imagine you may see some figures from Sky, especially if they are in Sky's favour.

[Downloads]

Originally Posted by mentalis

You may not see any official figures from VM but I imagine you may see some figures from Sky, especially if they are in Sky's favour.

All figures will be in Sky's favour, but unless it's in the hundreds of thousands they have failed. I'd be really interested to know too if anyone has any inside info!

[MovedGoalPosts]

The only figures from VM the public are likely to see are those issued quarterly, as reports to shareholders, which show how many customers overall have been won / lost. I doubt that there would ever be an accurate breakdown of the reasons for leaving publicly released, that would most definitely be kept as company confidential, just as Sky could probably not be certaina as to the specific reason a customer was won.

[smelly-finger]

I was just curious since i found it difficult to get through to CS I figured they must of been swamped with people wanting to do the same thing.

Example (VERY ROUGH NUMBERS)

100 CS advisors working 10 hours with say an average of 10 mins per call thats 6 disconnects per hour per advisor. Thats 600 per hour and 6000 for the day.

We pay
£22.50 for phone
£18.00 for BB
£25.50 for TV (sky sports)

A total of £66.50 before phone calls (or the wife using the interactive service to enter the channel 5 comps)

If everybody that left was on the same package thats a whopping £399,000.00 per month !!! thats £4,788,000 per year !!!

I know these numbers aren't correct but can Virgin really afford anything in this region even half the amount is a lot.

[mertle]

Originally Posted by AndyCambs

Let's try and put it in simple terms for you:

You buy a tin of Heinz beans from Sainsburys every week - but this week Sainsburys double the cost. You can either pay double, or find something else to eat. But you know if you pay double for the tin of beans, then you're going to have to pay double next week and so on. So you decide that you might try spaghetti instead - and find that you like it.

In this scenario - Sky artificially inflated the price of the channels, and dictated to Virgin Media that they should no longer be available on the medium television package. For all the "offers" that Sky made, the minimum price was such that it would never have been acceptable for a channel where the viewing figures have decreased over the past few years.

I can't say I really watched Sky One - it was a channel I used to hop over. I'd sometimes watch Sky Travel when I was really bored. BBC News is better presented and has won the RTE award for best news broadcasting.

Oh yes, you mention shopping around - well if you do go with Sky, then good luck - remember their broadband is upto 8MB, and very dependant on your phone line and how far you live from the exchange - I'd be lucky to get 1MB in this area. Also - just think, Sky have a large deficit to plug - around £60m is the estimate from loss of Virgin Media subscriptions and advertising - they're going to need the extra money from somewhere, and the only place left are the Sky subscribers. They've wasted quite a bit of money recently purely to annoy Virgin Media - the 17.9% stake in ITV (Murdoch doesn't invest in companies he can't control), and the £1m spent on the breakfast show on Virgin Radio immediately prior to the VM launch. You're looking for childish behaviour and someone to blame - then look squarely at Sky and the Murdoch family.

Well said. But how much is down to the feverent rubbish Sky dishing out in news and media. I think there is huge worry that virgin media getting accussed as Sky media campaign is running the show. Virgin media are really going to have to raise there game make sure that everybody is aware of the situation, the facts and maybe people will stop blaming them.

I for one fully support virgin media stance on this. But slightly miffed why they are so quiet considering the heat sky doing. In the end it wont be a matter who is right or wrong in this war. It will be who can manipulate there defence better. I am afriad sky winning the media hands down.

[sav112]

I'd just go to another shop that i know i can get my beans for the same price.

[awibble]

Originally Posted by smelly-finger

Example (VERY ROUGH NUMBERS)

100 CS advisors working 10 hours with say an average of 10 mins per call thats 6 disconnects per hour per advisor. Thats 600 per hour and 6000 for the day.

We pay
£22.50 for phone
£18.00 for BB
£25.50 for TV (sky sports)

A total of £66.50 before phone calls (or the wife using the interactive service to enter the channel 5 comps)

If everybody that left was on the same package thats a whopping £399,000.00 per month !!! thats £4,788,000 per year !!!

Then you need to tak into account, that not all of them are disconnects as some they will convince to stay and give a discount.... but still 4.7m is less than the 60m that Sky is going to loose

[frost@UK]

Originally Posted by Rob

The only figures from VM the public are likely to see are those issued quarterly, as reports to shareholders, which show how many customers overall have been won / lost.

VM have just released their figures for the last quarter of 2006, apparently they lost 37,000 customers.
Link
Will be intersesting to see how many leave due to Sky going.

Originally Posted by sav112

I'd just go to another shop that i know i can get my beans for the same price.

The problem with that is, under a monopoly status - there is no competition - you cannot get those brand of beans anywhere else. This is the current situation with Sky - they are setting out their stall so they can eventually create a monopoly.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, less or no competition at all, is bad news for the consumer.