General : Sky Sports pricing dispute: appeal ruling looms

[devilincarnate]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Come on people I have asked you all to stick to the topic.This will be the last time of asking.

Ok Maggy will stop to the topic

[Telly_]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

Except, there is nothing stopping Sky investing in their own fibre network to give customers 100Mbit broadband.

However sports rights are a single shot thing. It's impossible for Sky's rivals to offer the same service at the same time as Sky - so they have to buy Sky's channels.

Their is nothing stopping VM investing in Sports/Movie rights like BT. When the rights come up for Auction its an open market. You cant ignore the auction then cry when you didn't get anything. VM invested in TiVo exclusivley, why not EPL?

The same arguments are wearing thinner and thinner.

[andy_m]

Originally Posted by Telly_

Well when in areas consumers can get Sky and VM the difference in TV channels is minimal, VM get ALL Skys sports channels just not ALL HD.

But in the same areas Sky customers maybe limited to 3Mb BB where as Virginmedia customers may be getting 100Mb, How is that fair?

Virgin should be forced to open the network that passes more than 50% of UK households.

Maybe they should, but not by the competition regulator, because it simply isn't stopping Sky competing.

The judgment today appears to suggest that not having full access to Sky channels isn't stopping Virgin competing either.

[devilincarnate]

I have had enough of this so will not be back
.

Originally Posted by Telly_

Their is nothing stopping VM investing in Sports/Movie rights like BT. When the rights come up for Auction its an open market. You cant ignore the auction then cry when you didn't get anything. VM invested in TiVo exclusivley, why not EPL?

The same arguments are wearing thinner and thinner.

I would have thought that VM just don't have the money to invest in purchasing the rights to show the sports direct at auction when up against the might of Murdochs deeper pockets due to having a larger share of the media market by dint of being first onto the scene..
They simply get outbid so maybe they just can't be bothered and so seek other products to sell to existing and future customers which they can cover cost ways..

[Telly_]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

I would have thought that VM just don't have the money to invest in purchasing the rights to show the sports direct at auction when up against the might of Murdochs deeper pockets due to having a larger share of the media market by dint of being first onto the scene..
They simply get outbid so maybe they just can't be bothered and so seek other products to sell to existing and future customers which they can cover cost ways..

I'm sure you're intelligent enough to understand Murdoch does not own Sky, and Sky are right now as we speak buying back £500 million in shares mostly from Murdoch.

So soon he won't be a factor,

Originally Posted by Telly_

I'm sure you're intelligent enough to understand Murdoch does not own Sky, and Sky are right now as we speak buying back £500 million in shares mostly from Murdoch.

So soon he won't be a factor,

No his organisation part owned it..and he had a huge influence over it.However that wasn't the point I was making.

[Telly_]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

No his organisation part owned it..and he had a huge influence over it.However that wasn't the point I was making.

Yeah but lets not look into some of the owners of VM debt hey,

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Telly_

Yeah but lets not look into some of the owners of VM debt hey,

News Corp own 39% of BSkyB

Virgin's largest single investor owns 14%

[Telly_]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

News Corp own 39% of BSkyB

Virgin's largest single investor owns 14%

Panick stations panick stations,

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Telly_

I'm sure you're intelligent enough to understand Murdoch does not own Sky, and Sky are right now as we speak buying back £500 million in shares mostly from Murdoch.

So soon he won't be a factor,

But i am sure the poo associated with some of the Murdoch papers and what they did will continue to be thrown at Sky for a long time yet. Just buying back the shares that he owns will not stop that.

Originally Posted by andy_m

Somewhat surprised that the take up of Sky Sports is so low across the Virgin customer base. Somewhere between 10 and 12%. That can't just be because of price-the difference really isn't that great. I find it slightly surprising that ofcom think Sky's negotiations with several other companies have failed because of the other companies and not the common denominator-common sense tells you thats unlikely-but perhaps the reason why companies like Virgin haven't engaged fully, if that really is the case, is that there's no real incentive for them to do so because there really isn't the clamour for these channels that some would have you believe.

Would think myself that sky sports uptake on VM will be even lower in future now the sky sports collection is £25.75! they have lost me for a start.

£4 a month dearer then sky i think and more expensive certainly then smallworld cable sell sky sports for.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by richard1960

Would think myself that sky sports uptake on VM will be even lower in future now the sky sports collection is £25.75! they have lost me for a start.

£4 a month dearer then sky i think and more expensive certainly then smallworld cable sell sky sports for.

For £25.75 a month come October one would hope we get the missing Sky Sports HD channels which we currently have not got.

Originally Posted by denphone

For £25.75 a month come October one would hope we get the missing Sky Sports HD channels which we currently have not got.

Would not think so den sky are not going to let VM have them unless ordered to do so,they use those as a unique selling point over VM.

[LexDiamond]

The problem is that it is easy to blame Sky and say they won't let VM have a channel. But the evidence actually suggests VM don't always want to do business.

Its convenient to say VM is the victim but it isn't really.