Cryptic post regarding Sky from "James" ;-)

[bubblegun]

Deliberately cheaper than Virgin's comparable XL TV package?

[Chad]

Originally Posted by bubblegun

Deliberately cheaper than Virgin's comparable XL TV package?

XL on virgin includes ESPN. If you add ESPN to SKY's new package it takes the price up to something silly like £44.00!

[bubblegun]

Originally Posted by Chad

XL on virgin includes ESPN. If you add ESPN to SKY's new package it takes the price up to something silly like £44.00!

And that point will be worth what when ESPN withdraws from the UK sports market in May or June as is widely rumoured?

[Chad]

Originally Posted by bubblegun

And that point will be worth what when ESPN withdraws from the UK sports market in May or June as is widely rumoured?

It all depends what happens if and when ESPN depart. Virgin could reduce the price of the XL package or might try to replace ESPN with BT Sports.

Also got to remember that XL customers don't need a seperate broadband connection to access on demand or catch up content via their TiVo box. This is another cost you'd need to add in to SKY's package to enjoy a similar experience to Virgins XL package.

So currently that'll be £31.50 for Entertainment Extra +, £13.00 for ESPN and then £7.50 for SKY's Unlimited broadband. That's £52.00 in total. You might get more HD channels than Virgin through the new SKY package but in terms of overall service and value for money, Virgin's XL package blows SKY's new offering out of the water.

I'm a SKY customer but know a great deal when I see one. Even if you don't take ESPN, Virgin is still cheaper when it comes to like for like.

[muppetman11]

All pretty irrelevant Chad as each individual customers needs differ , to suggest VM is cheapest for everyone is quite frankly ludicrous.

[Chad]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

All pretty irrelevant Chad as each individual customers needs differ , to suggest VM is cheapest for everyone is quite frankly ludicrous.

I'm not suggesting Virgin is cheapest for everyone.

My post was directed at the point raised by Bubblegun who posted:

"Deliberately cheaper than Virgin's comparable XL TV package?"

I was just highlighting that for SKY to provide a service comparable to XL, you'll have to shell out more than Virgin charge for the XL package. On a like for like basis, Virgin is cheaper. That of course might not be the case accross all the other comparable packages SKY and Virgin provide. SKY's comparable version of Virgins VIP package actually works out cheaper by £1 each month.

[muppetman11]

Ah right I get you , like I say every individual differs my family choose VM purely because the best their BT line can manage is around 2mb compared to their rock solid 60mb on VM , at our house we choose Sky purely for our Sports in HD , Sky Atlantic and a wider base range of HD however many have no interest in any of these just look how many still use old non PVR STB's on both services.

[Chad]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Ah right I get you , like I say every individual differs my family choose VM purely because the best their BT line can manage is around 2mb compared to their rock solid 60mb on VM , at our house we choose Sky purely for our Sports in HD , Sky Atlantic and a wider base range of HD however many have no interest in any of these just look how many still use old non PVR STB's on both services.

Agreed

I went with SKY partly because I got a great deal but also because of their wide range of HD, SKY 3D and SKY Atlantic. Also if you want the latest TV channels from launch you really need to have SKY. Virgin have upped their game in the past 2 months however SKY will always have their nose in front. I gave Virgin the chance to match my expectations in terms of HD channels and price but they couldn't.

SKY Atlantic wasn't a must for me, it was always something my wife wanted. It doesn't take you long to get drawn into the channels programming. The Following and Vegas have joined Ripper Street and The Walking Dead as my must watch programmes. Via on demand I've started to watch Boardwalk Empire and Game of Thrones from the start in HD. I'm recording Blue Bloods season 2 and 3. I'm just waiting for season 1 to either be repeated or made available on demand. Just watched The British back to back. Not as good as some BBC documentaries but still enjoyable.

It really would be difficult to now go without SKY Atlantic.

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by Chad

Agreed

I went with SKY partly because I got a great deal but also because of their wide range of HD, SKY 3D and SKY Atlantic. Also if you want the latest TV channels from launch you really need to have SKY. Virgin have upped their game in the past 2 months however SKY will always have their nose in front. I gave Virgin the chance to match my expectations in terms of HD channels and price but they couldn't.

SKY Atlantic wasn't a must for me, it was always something my wife wanted. It doesn't take you long to get drawn into the channels programming. The Following and Vegas have joined Ripper Street and The Walking Dead as my must watch programmes. Via on demand I've started to watch Boardwalk Empire and Game of Thrones from the start in HD. I'm recording Blue Bloods season 2 and 3. I'm just waiting for season 1 to either be repeated or made available on demand. Just watched The British back to back. Not as good as some BBC documentaries but still enjoyable.

It really would be difficult to now go without SKY Atlantic.

That's what I've been saying for ages , exclusive content is as much about retaining customers as it is attracting new ones , all the media are reporting that 'House of Cards has been a massive success for Netflix and a high percentage of interviewed people said they valued their subs more , Netflix have vowed to bring more Orignal programming to the service and declared it a success , this is the route I believe Sky are trying to go with Atlantic a mixture of original programming and premium US content from HBO , Showtime etc.