Subscibing to Sky

  Quickbeam 09:46 04 Aug 2010

On the PCA 3D post there are a lot of absolute NOs, wouldn't give a penny to Sky, not enough to justify the subscription replies.

Are there many like me that might take a pay-as-you-watch subscription if it was on offer?

For myself, the only Sky output that I'd pay to watch is the cricket tests and the 20/20, I don't watch any club football at all, which is over 90% of Sky sports output, which makes it very expensive to watch a few selective hours.

Why are Sky so blind to those viewers (there must be many hundreds of thousands) like me, that won't pay £40 a month for just a few hours viewing.

They could offer either pay-as-you-watch with renewable credit like phone pay-as-you-talk plans, or sport specific plans, in my case cricket only reception. Is this really too much to ask for, or do they think that by standing firm they will eventually force all viewers to accept their terms?

  Quickbeam 09:53 04 Aug 2010

I should also add that obviously I wouldn't expect a free dish and installation. One can't have ones cake... as they say.

  tullie 09:58 04 Aug 2010

I am going to ditch sky tv and just have the channels available free with the sky box,keeping sky broadband and sky talk,and saving £40+ a month.

  Kevscar1 10:06 04 Aug 2010

Where do you get your figures from.
Cheapest sky package with 1 sport channel is £31

  Kevscar1 10:07 04 Aug 2010

with free dish and installation.

click here

  Quickbeam 10:23 04 Aug 2010

It's gone down since I last looked, but that's still too much for someone that doesn't watch more than a couple or three hours a week, and that's with the free to air programming.

How long have they been stuck on about a 5% share of the viewers? They won't move on with their present attitude to selling their output.

  Quickbeam 10:28 04 Aug 2010

And can I be guaranteed that the single sport channel chosen will always broadcast the sport that I watch, or do most subscribers take both to ensure that they get the output they watch at all times?

Their business/sales model is lacking to many would be subscribers.

  ella33 11:18 04 Aug 2010

A pay as you watch package would be is a while since I subscribed to any thing like that, for that reason...the sport wasn't what we hoped for. It is fine for people with broad interests.

Just to digress slightly, the movie channels were not often too brill either but when you don't have Sky there always seem to be films and sport advertised that make you wish you had it!

  WhiteTruckMan 11:27 04 Aug 2010

Why are Sky so blind to those viewers (there must be many hundreds of thousands) like me, that won't pay £40 a month for just a few hours viewing.

Ah, but there are probably many more fanatical fans who would pay, just to watch their 'heroes' pick up their mega fee's on the pitch. The same people who buy the replica kits, pay vast sums for season tickets and travelling to away games etc.


  gaucho. 11:34 04 Aug 2010

After they twice took out an extra £86 out of my bank account in 12 months.

The first time they said it was an account error and took 10 months for them to repay it.

They took it out the following month then repaid it after I told them I was cancelling.

They keep bugging me on the phone to have 3 free months if I will subscribe again but we will not. Freeview does all we want.

  JYPX 13:05 04 Aug 2010

I am well aware that lot's of people, or should I say lot's of guys, are addicted to football on Sky which offers almost round the clock football at all levels. But - I was shocked to discover that subscribers are able to watch league matches from the 70's and 80's - the full match, not highlights - courtesy of Sky. What else am I unaware of - live coverage from the training ground on MUTV?

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Honor 9 Lite review

How Social Media has Propelled Political Graphic Design and Art in the Last Decade

The best kids apps for iPhone & iPad 2018

HomePod d’Apple : date de sortie, prix et fiche technique