Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2011) Vol. III. - Page 299

zekeisaszekedoes · 22-11-2011, 17:51

Good points Arthur. "VM have a good TV service but it could be great" is pretty much the opinion of myself and several others who post here frequently.

Chad · 22-11-2011, 18:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

All this argument over Sky and VM, l have said before on this forum that if you want cheap packages, then go to VM, if you want similar cheap packages go to Sky.

What argument?

Digital Fanatic · 22-11-2011, 19:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chad

What argument?

That's what I was thinking too...

muppetman11 · 22-11-2011, 19:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

All this argument over Sky and VM, l have said before on this forum that if you want cheap packages, then go to VM, if you want similar cheap packages go to Sky

Can anyone make any sense of that if I want a cheap package go to VM , but if I want a similar cheap package go to Sky , I'm lost were I should go LOL.

devilincarnate · 22-11-2011, 19:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetman11

I'm lost were I should go LOL.

Please do not tempt us

**Hugh** · 22-11-2011, 19:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Can anyone make any sense of that if I want a cheap package go to VM , but if I want a similar cheap package go to Sky , I'm lost were I should go LOL.

Schoolboy error - you are expecting logic/consistency in a post by Big A.....

Perhaps this pictorial representation may help...

muppetman11 · 22-11-2011, 19:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

All this argument over Sky and VM, l have said before on this forum that if you want cheap packages, then go to VM, if you want similar cheap packages go to Sky.

For what you get for the cost its Sky for me, the channels etc, and Sky are not scared about investing for the customers, that US.

Sadly VM lag behind as they won't invest for the customer, they will for BB as that's what is making them money, but the channel content lags behind drastically.

The HD contents lacks behind Sky, CS on VM lacks on pr with the consumer as most of the time, they don't understand what you are saying.

This might be a criticism on VM, but if you don't pay that extra quid, which VM customers don't want to pay, then you won't get the channels.

VM are in business to make money, but they must know through forums like this what VM think of them. And l am certain that VM read this forum, as l contacted VM one day, and they know this forum very well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

Schoolboy error - you are expecting logic/consistency in a post by Big A.....

LOL

22-11-2011, 20:09

Sky's on demand and download speeds lag behind vs. channels

That's 2-1 on aggregate, VM wins, someone wheel out the pop and nibbles.

greeninferno · 22-11-2011, 20:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

All this argument over Sky and VM, l have said before on this forum that if you want cheap packages, then go to VM, if you want similar cheap packages go to Sky.

For what you get for the cost its Sky for me, the channels etc, and Sky are not scared about investing for the customers, that US.

Sadly VM lag behind as they won't invest for the customer, they will for BB as that's what is making them money, but the channel content lags behind drastically.

The HD contents lacks behind Sky, CS on VM lacks on pr with the consumer as most of the time, they don't understand what you are saying.

This might be a criticism on VM, but if you don't pay that extra quid, which VM customers don't want to pay, then you won't get the channels.

VM are in business to make money, but they must know through forums like this what VM think of them. And l am certain that VM read this forum, as l contacted VM one day, and they know this forum very well.

Tivo is light years ahead of Sky's offering and its not even a year into being developed.

And the broadband is different league for most people not living on top of their BT exchange

denphone · 22-11-2011, 22:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by greeninferno

Tivo is light years ahead of Sky's offering and its not even a year into being developed.

And the broadband is different league for most people not living on top of their BT exchange

**Hugh** · 22-11-2011, 22:35

Different strokes for different folks - what's right for some isn't right for others.

Lew · 22-11-2011, 23:57

What you talkin' 'bout, Willis?

spankysmagicpian · 23-11-2011, 01:44

God help us.....same old..same old.

It's been said before and I'll say it yet again now... it all depends what you want. Nobody is right or wrong if you're with Sky or with VM Arthur. I have just totalled up the top package on Skys site. It's Â£4 less than I am paying now with VM and for that I wouldn't get 50Mb BB (last check on the line gave me 6Mb ADSL), I wouldn't get a second box, I wouldn't get all the TVoD, I wouldn't get the cheap VirginMobile deals and I wouldn't get free repairs.

Now in my eyes, compared to Sky I think I am more than a few quid up despite the lesser number of HD channels with VM. I watch what I watch and that's all I am worried about.

pk1 · 23-11-2011, 10:07

I know what we are discussing here is nothing to do with whats coming soon to Virgin but.

As someone has mentioned before Tivo is only 1 year old. When Sky launched Sky+,people moaned about that because it did not do what THEY thought is should do.Like any new piece of technology it takes time to develop. Tivo already as many reviews have said is better than Sky's box and i agree.

I swapped from Sky to Virgin and yes i would like some of the HD stuff that was on there, but it's my choice i went for a better box,a much better broadband, and happy with my choice, and if it breaks down i don't have to fork out for a repair.

Now can we get back on topic please?

**Hugh** · 23-11-2011, 10:10

As pk1 says, let's get back on topic, please.

This thread is not about the merits of Sky vs VM.