OFCOM ready to rule?

zantarous · 17-01-2010, 08:56

According to the Telegraph OFCOM could possibly rule this week that Sky must drop its whole sale prices of Movies and Sports, there is no mention in the article of HD content.

And it would seem that BT and Virgin are already drawing up plans to slash the price they offer Sky Sports at.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...price-war.html

As one would expect Sky have already stated they they will raise a legal challenge if forced to lower wholesale prices.

I have kept this out of the coming soon thread as we would just end up derailing that thread.

Sirius · 17-01-2010, 09:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by zantarous

According to the Telegraph OFCOM could possibly rule this week that Sky must drop its whole sale prices of Movies and Sports, there is no mention in the article of HD content.

And it would seem that BT and Virgin are already drawing up plans to slash the price they offer Sky Sports at.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...price-war.html

As one would expect Sky have already stated they they will raise a legal challenge if forced to lower wholesale prices.

I have kept this out of the coming soon thread as we would just end up derailing that thread.

This is the best news i have heard all month.

Toto · 17-01-2010, 09:20

If this is announced in March as the article suggests, it will not likely mean prices will start to fall. Sky have said they intend to challenge this legally, and they are adept in doing that.

They still have their 17% stake in ITV, despite being told to reduce it to at least 7% over a year ago.....this is as a direct legal challenge to that ruling.

Dukefever · 17-01-2010, 09:28

We are still along way off from a solution but this is although positive only what we expected. I for one would be happy to continue the full price providing I got all of package, HD and red button feature of all sky channels.

Duke

Toto · 17-01-2010, 09:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dukefever

We are still along way off from a solution but this is although positive only what we expected. I for one would be happy to continue the full price providing I got all of package, HD and red button feature of all sky channels.

Duke

I think a lot of people would agree with you on that.

17-01-2010, 09:41

it seems a little unfair to me to force sky to drop it's prices ,they have put in all the investment over the last 15-20 yrs ,if it wasn't for sky then football and sports coverage in the uk would still be stuck like it was in the 70's and early 80's .Jeremy Darrach has good right to be upset .

Dukefever · 17-01-2010, 09:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

it seems a little unfair to me to force sky to drop it's prices ,they have put in all the investment over the last 15-20 yrs ,if it wasn't for sky then football and sports coverage in the uk would still be stuck like it was in the 70's and early 80's .Jeremy Darrach has good right to be upset .

I agree with you. It is unfair.

On the football matter though, if we were still in the 70s & 80s we would see a different class of football and none of these Â£80m pound deals / Â£100,000 a week wages.

Duke

17-01-2010, 10:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dukefever

I agree with you. It is unfair.

On the football matter though, if we were still in the 70s & 80s we would see a different class of football and none of these Â£80m pound deals / Â£100,000 a week wages.

Duke

you mean footballers would actually play for the love of the game?

Dukefever · 17-01-2010, 10:08

Wouldn't that be a show of loyalty?

17-01-2010, 10:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dukefever

Wouldn't that be a show of loyalty?

hold on a minute ,that would involve ethics and commitment from footballers and as you well know that's just wrong

17-01-2010, 10:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

it seems a little unfair to me to force sky to drop it's prices ,they have put in all the investment over the last 15-20 yrs ,if it wasn't for sky then football and sports coverage in the uk would still be stuck like it was in the 70's and early 80's .Jeremy Darrach has good right to be upset .

Look at it another way as a taxpayer i over the years paid a lot of money towards huge investments in BT(when state owned),that massive investment made by taxpayers not private companies, is being used by sky to deliver their BB and phone service is that fair or should sky if they are bleating on about investment ought to have laid their own lines?

As a consumer i am not worried about virgin sky or bt i want a good deal,and the monopoly sky now hold through their integrated platform is not the best way to achieve this, i think everyone one has a right to be upset not just Jeremy Darroch,comsumers have the most reason to be upset in my view.

Toto · 17-01-2010, 10:38

It's not just football though is it, its Cricket, Rugby and other good sports.

TheDon · 17-01-2010, 10:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

it seems a little unfair to me to force sky to drop it's prices ,they have put in all the investment over the last 15-20 yrs ,if it wasn't for sky then football and sports coverage in the uk would still be stuck like it was in the 70's and early 80's .Jeremy Darrach has good right to be upset .

It's not unfair to expect them to charge a fair market price for the services, and to offer equivalent services to those that they themselves offer.

Them being able to charge anything they want limits consumer choice, and is bad not just for non-sky customers but also their own. Competition drives down prices, and competition can only thrive in an environment where all providers have access to the premium content at competitive pricing.

That no one other than Sky can offer their channels in HD, or with the red button is an obvious case of abusing a dominant market position by non-price discrimination, and it doesn't matter how much they invested on those services, they should still be offered to other carriers of the channels on a rate that allows them to offer them to their customers at a competitive price.

17-01-2010, 10:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDon

It's not unfair to expect them to charge a fair market price for the services, and to offer equivalent services to those that they themselves offer.

Them being able to charge anything they want limits consumer choice, and is bad not just for non-sky customers but also their own. Competition drives down prices, and competition can only thrive in an environment where all providers have access to the premium content at competitive pricing.

That no one other than Sky can offer their channels in HD, or with the red button is an obvious case of abusing a dominant market position by non-price discrimination, and it doesn't matter how much they invested on those services, they should still be offered to other carriers of the channels on a rate that allows them to offer them to their customers at a competitive price.

I would agree with the above in full,the dominent position sky now hold is bad for all including their own customers perversly.

Digital Fanatic · 17-01-2010, 10:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

it seems a little unfair to me to force sky to drop it's prices ,they have put in all the investment over the last 15-20 yrs ,if it wasn't for sky then football and sports coverage in the uk would still be stuck like it was in the 70's and early 80's .Jeremy Darrach has good right to be upset .

Sky were more than happy to take advantage of BT's network to get in to the broadband market... they are not victims by any means!