Is There A Sky Subscribers Lobby Group ?

garrettod

Hi

I'm starting to get really pi$$ed off with Sky & wondered if anyone knew of a Sky Subscribers Lobby Group / Action Group ?

Several things are really starting to get to me about Sky TV, who are now abusing what is little more than a monoply situatio when it comes to the likes of Sports events etc.

- Regular Subscription Increases. I think we have seen an increase just about every year, normally effective from September each year. Granted, this year my increase is only €1.50 per month, but I'm already paying them $61 per month !

- Further near rip off costs when you want a second Sky TV box in your house, so as to permit the family the chance to watch a different channel etc

- The lack of Ch4, Ch5 & ITV from the channel line up. Also, the lack of the various BBC channels from the EPG (only bbc1 & 2 seem to be available). I think you can get all of these, or nearly all of them without paying more than the standard charge on NTL etc

- Setanta Sports going on NTL for "free" but Sky subscribers likely to have to pay for the same service

- Subscibers such as myself, who have been with Sky over 10 years and paying them plenty of dosh without a peep getting nothing back, such as a free months viewing now and again etc while the promotions for new subscribers continue endlessly.


:mad:

denissilver

look up the start of the satillite thread to learn how to tune in all the extra bbc channels

ShaneOC

I have a vague recollection of a group set up to lobby Sky but I have not heard anything from or about them in ages.

I agree that they could improve some aspects of their service specifically

- Listing all of the BBC channels on the EPG (other channels is good but no use to Sky+ users)

- Sort out the ITV/Channel 4 issue. We all know about rights problems for UTV but what about Channel 4?

- Not specifically Sky's fault but they could (and should) develop the technology to allow E4 to be interactive and switch to the correct adverts to enable E4 to be interactive here.

BrianD

Setanta Sports going on NTL for "free" but Sky subscribers likely to have to pay for the same service

Why should you not have to pay for it?

BTW this topic does bring up the problems that may occur with a delivery platform that is not regulated in this country.

Originally posted by BrianD
BTW this topic does bring up the problems that may occur with a delivery platform that is not regulated in this country.

Well in fairness now Brian when comparing the regulation authorities in the UK with those in ROI, the latter are sadly lacking...

Whats this the term for Comreg is over in Ireland offline or on the Broadband forum??
Ah yes
Comwreck

I'd hate to think what Sky would get away with even more if they just had an Irish regulator to deal with.
Irish regulation is not the mana from heaven it's made out to be.

Gadgie

Originally posted by BrianD
Why should you not have to pay for it?

I think what the original poster meant was that Setanta will be available as part of the basic NTL package, wheras Sky subscribers will have to pay extra for it.

BTW this topic does bring up the problems that may occur with a delivery platform that is not regulated in this country.

FYI Comreg would be responsible for regulating Sky in this country.

Mossy Monk

Originally posted by Glenn
I think what the original poster meant was that Setanta will be available as part of the basic NTL package, wheras Sky subscribers will have to pay extra for it.

to be fair no one knows how it will turn out on Sky yet

mike2084

Wouldn't an ESB Customer Lobby Group be better than a Sky one at the moment, considering there going to hold the country to ransom again? Speaking of that, could we claim refunds from Sky for the time during the impending blackouts that we won't be able to use our subscriptions :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Michael Walsh
Speaking of that, could we claim refunds from Sky for the time during the impending blackouts that we won't be able to use our subscriptions :rolleyes:

LoL I've a generator so I guess I won't be joining the class action

BrianD

I know Sky subscribers will have to pay for Setanta but the poster was implying that they should have it for free on Sky just because NTL have it.

In regards to regulation, I know the ComReg would in theory be responsible for Sky if it agreed to be regulated here. It is a problem that so many many Irish TV households are now signed up to Sky and there are no legal controls. Sky can up the price if they like, drop channels etc and there is no mechanism for the customers interests to be represented.

garrettod

Hi BrianD

Sorry if my original post was not entirely clear. I used the term "free" in the hope people would have known what I meant .... Setanta Sports Channel is to be part of the basic NTL package, following several recent reports in the papers etc.

However, it appears Sky TV are seeking to charge a further sub in order to view the same channel. I don't see why they can't pay Setanta something from their existing income, rather than try to get even more money out of us >?

DMC

The thing to point out is that NTL or Chorus are not competition to Setanta. They are gamekeepers. They operate their transmission system, and don't have channels to compete with Setanta.

Whereas Sky are both gamekeepers and poachers; they have the keys and the crowbars. They provide their own sports channels and a transmission method. So that's why Setanta could always have gotten a better deal with NTL, all the while BSkyB have their own extremely successful sports channels, and they wont be rushing to get Setanta on board.

But Setanta would be foolish to not go on Sky. They have a relationship at the moment with the 2 PPV channels, so I would expect something to appear on Sky, albeit not the same as whats on NTL.

BrianD

I don't see why they can't pay Setanta something from their existing income, rather than try to get even more money out of us >?

I think that is the problem!

Tony

I think the real problem is lack of competition, too few players in the market who do not have access to the same channels.

Originally posted by BrianD


Sky can up the price if they like, drop channels etc and there is no mechanism for the customers interests to be represented.

garrettod

Hi

Agree entirely, as such ... we need some sort of lobby / action group, kinda like a trade union for staff, or like a Government appointed agency to ensure the people are not entirely screwed over

To be Frank

Sky digital is a service provided by BSkyB.
They spent millions, nay billions setting it up with satelites,ground stations, software and as good as free digi boxes.

People have some cheek in the light of that demanding that they shouldn't charge what they like for it.
They will charge what the market will bear and like all things if one can't afford it then one won't have it.
Thats the fact of the matter when no one else is prepared to take the gamble that Sky did to enter this market.

The reason they have a near monopoly is quite simply nobody touches them on quality of service,availability and choice of channels.

Nobody else has bothered to spend to enter the market and consequently kudus to those at Sky for reaping the reward of having entered it themselves at a great initial cost.

Round Cable

Originally posted by Earthman
They spent millions, nay billions setting it up with satelites,ground stations, software and as good as free digi boxes.

I thought it was Eircom that provides the money (subsidy) for the box not sky.

mickeyboymel

Originally posted by Round Cable
I thought it was Eircom that provides the money (subsidy) for the box not sky.

What??? You are joking,right?

Round Cable

Originally posted by mickeyboymel
What??? You are joking,right?

No

But I'm not sure they do anymore, but they did in the early days of Sky Digital. Eircom's reasoning: People who would get/have Sky would keep their phone services with Eircom, while those with NTL would avail of cheaper calls and so eroding their business.

The price in the Republic was not subsidised, as BiB had no plans to launch a service there. This meant the Irish had to pay more, over £300 (Sterling). Worse, when Sky launched their free box offer in the UK, to compete with OnDigital, it did not alter their Irish prices, as it had no Digital competitors in the Republic. The monthly fees were about 10% lower than the UK, but this did not compensate for the huge startup costs. And to cap it all, the service did not include the BBC channels, plus Channels 4 and 5, which UK viewers received.

Fair enough, Irish viewers were not paying the UK licence fee, but given that these channels had been available via other suppliers for years it seemed rather odd.

So whilst it was very common by the year 2000 for Sky minidishes to be seen across the UK, it was a rare sight in the Republic of Ireland. People generally received multichannel TV by cable, or by MMDS, a microwave-based system, relying on local transmitters and wire-mesh receivers. Some used analogue satellite, but again, as this did not supply the UK "terrestrials" (apart from Channel 5), it was not particularly popular.

In the Spring of 2000, the "free" box offer was finally launched. Still having no interactive services in the pipeline, the interactive subsidy was not used. Instead, the Irish former state-owned phone company, Eircom, provided subsidy. This is presumably because defectors to cable companies would get their phone service too. Getting Sky would make them more likely to stick with Eircom for their phone.

mickeyboymel

Aha I see, never heard of that before,but I am sure that no longer applies as the box will callback from any phone provider not just Eircom.I suppose this was before the days of Eircom's wholesale selling to other providers.

Tom Dunne

Originally posted by Earthman
To be Frank
...
The reason they have a near monopoly is quite simply nobody touches them on quality of service,availability and choice of channels.

Nobody else has bothered to spend to enter the market and consequently kudus to those at Sky for reaping the reward of having entered it themselves at a great initial cost.

I'm with Frank, er, Earthman on this one. I was one of those poor unfortunates that had to tolerate the misery that was Chorus. I won't go off on my usual Chorus bashing rant, but the day Sky became available, I jumped immediately.

Chorus and from what I hear, NTL, appear to be lazy and incompetent. If they actually gave a damn, they would have responded to the threat from Sky by instilling a little bit of care into their customer support staff, they would have ensured their digital signal could actually be seen, in short, they would have competed.

garrettod, could I suggest you sign up with Chorus for a while. Believe me, it will really make you appreciate Sky.

freetoair

As another former Chorus customer I think Sky are fantastic, but I feel this price hike is just one price hike too many for me. Maybe the market can bare it but I can't !!
I'm cancelling my subscription from today. I agree with the first poster, I'm sure if enough people did the same as me then their customer relations department would altert the sales department that the market has been pushed too far.


But one great thing about Sky over Chorus, after cancelling I'll still have all the FTA channels plus the FTV channels on my UK FTV card...and I can re-subscribe anytime I like for as short a period as I like so the kids can have Sky again for Christmas!!

Capt'n Midnight

I want the following EPG options in services - that you can turn or off as needed

a) Hide channels I can't recieve
b) reassign the BOX OFFICE button to toggle between the last two channels
c) have "other channels" assigned to 000-0999 in the channel line up (or even 00-09 )
d) display frequency / polarization / FEC when you look at the signal strength (handy for setting up second box)
e) auto search for new channels not on the EPG.

None of this will ever happen - because it means you could skip past the Marketing of subscription channels

garrettod

Originally posted by Earthman
To be Frank

Sky digital is a service provided by BSkyB.
They spent millions, nay billions setting it up with satelites,ground stations, software and as good as free digi boxes.

People have some cheek in the light of that demanding that they shouldn't charge what they like for it.
They will charge what the market will bear and like all things if one can't afford it then one won't have it.
Thats the fact of the matter when no one else is prepared to take the gamble that Sky did to enter this market.

The reason they have a near monopoly is quite simply nobody touches them on quality of service,availability and choice of channels.

Nobody else has bothered to spend to enter the market and consequently kudus to those at Sky for reaping the reward of having entered it themselves at a great initial cost.

Hi Earthman

Some very good points made, in the above post.

However, there is a difference between those that take risks, getting a reward & those who abuse a monoply position getting away with murder

I feel Sky go too far with Irish residents

Capt'n Midnight

Originally posted by Earthman
To be Frank

Sky digital is a service provided by BSkyB.
They spent millions, nay billions setting it up with satelites,ground stations, software and as good as free digi boxes.
...................
The reason they have a near monopoly is quite simply nobody touches them on quality of service,availability and choice of channels.

Nobody else has bothered to spend to enter the market and consequently kudus to those at Sky for reaping the reward of having entered it themselves at a great initial cost.

What about BSB ? - they didn't exploit the same loopholes as and had tougher standards to adhere to...

SKY is a lock in system - you can watch anything you want as long as it is on sky - don't forget they don't own the ASTRA satellites - they did not develop most of the infrastructure behind it. re the EPG - nice one - reminds me of DOS 5 - "DOS ain't done, till Lotus won't run..."

Originally posted by garrettod
However, there is a difference between those that take risks, getting a reward & those who abuse a monoply position getting away with murder

I feel Sky go too far with Irish residents

Yeah, they are a monopoly of sorts in that theres nothing comes near what they do.
But as regards exploitation,It doesn't pan out that way or else they wouldn't be winning customers from chorus every day.

But then I 'spose chorus ain't what you call competition...
If you want a better example of a rip off to be honest its them not sky.

Tony

apparently irish law prevented sky from subsidising their own product so I think that was the reason Eircom were brought on board.

Xcom2

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

a)Hide channels I can't recieve
b) reassign the BOX OFFICE button to toggle between the last two channels
e) auto search for new channels not on the EPG.

These three would be very handy!

G

Richard

Round Cable wrote:

No

But I'm not sure they do anymore, but they did in the early days of Sky Digital. Eircom's reasoning: People who would get/have Sky would keep their phone services with Eircom, while those with NTL would avail of cheaper calls and so eroding their business.

Quote:

The price in the Republic was not subsidised, as BiB had no plans to launch a service there. This meant the Irish had to pay more....

That looks familiar!

Dear Round Cable,

Next time you repost part of an article of mine, please credit me! You didn't say where you'd taken the text from, or who'd written it.

For the record, although I wrote it, it appears on Mike McGonagle's excellent website 'The TV Room'. See http://thetvroom.com/tvrplus/s-tv-features-uk-tv-ireland.shtml for the whole thing. It is now a bit out of date.

Cheers,

Richard

garrettod

Hi Everyone,

Are we losing focus here a little I've wondered & the answer I have come up with is Yes, we have.

As I see it, Sky TV have a monoply situation & as such, should be regulated. How can any one single entity control the majority of sporting events & new movie events & be permitted a free hand ?

Were this an issue where one party controllled such things as the supply of oil, milk etc there is now way we would permit the controlling party a free hand. However, because Sky provides a "non-esential" service, they get away with everything except murder imho.

Taking a simple example in support of the above comments, consider this please:

* Sky TV have successfully managed to increase their subscriptions without any opposition every September for the last several years. This is while the company returned good profits, which might contribute / cover their initial investment

* Sky TV have dropped various services they had previously offered under different (Sky) packages, without dropping their monthly rentals. A recent example is the reduction in Movie Channels from 10 to 9 (excluding the oldies on Sky Cinema or whatever it's called this week )

People have previously posted to this forum, suggesting I consider subscribbing to the likes of Chorus for example. However, the simple point behind my principal arguement is that I do not have this choice. Competition brings stability of pricing coupled with competing services, assuming price fixing does not exist - with Sky as the only Satellite service worth mentioning in the Irish market, coupled with either NTL or Chorus .... there is no competition & in the absence of such, there should be a regulator.

BTW, as a long time Sky subscriber who has paid them thousands, over the years & without a problem I ask, why do the potential new subscribers get offers such as free Sky Sports for 6 months, while existing subscribers get nothing for their loyalty ? ... I fear the answer is simple, they don't have to give me anything, they just have to increase the direct debit every month !

BrianD

Excellent post Garrettod. Sky have a monopoly in the DSAT delivery platform and are fast becoming the key player in digital TV delivery. One wonders how long it will take Sky Digital to become the No. 1 delivery system in Ireland. The Sky subscriber magazine now has a greater circulation than that favourite Irish institution, the RTE Guide.

At the same time, Sky has refused to be regulated in this country. Though recent reports suggest that NTL have slipped out of ComReg's stable as well. I haven't researched this so perhaps somebody who has can confirm it. Sky Digital is also located outside of the state and it's portfolio of channel don't have to comply with many of the broadcasting rules and regs we have here e.g the new childrens advertising codes.

The platform offers excellent opportunities for a small channel who wants to get on-air and reach an Irish and U.K. audience. At the same time, the price of EPG and encryption are making it more and more difficult for these channels to do so.

If you check out the Sky corporate reports, you can see that their business approach is very similar to that of a mobile phone company. They have become fixated with average revenue per user. They have targets set on both subscriber revenue and interactive revenues. This is the driving force behind all decisions - the ARPU and not the viewing choice offered. The keen offers are there to get the new people onboard and loyalty counts for nothing (just like our friends in the mobile phone co's!). They have factored in a certain amount of 'churn' but they have probably calculated that dropping the odd channel won't lose too many subscribers once you continue to get good reception and the key channels (many terrestrial ones) you'll stay with them.

Really we need to see more competition in digital TV delivery in this country. The CATV and MMDS co's are financially strapped and they'll never adequately serve our dispersed populations and they have to install and upgrade expensive infrastructure. Until they can offer a substantially better overall package, Sky will have the edge. Personally. I would prefer a single cable with TV, phone and BB coming into the house (then again thats putting all your eggs in the one basket).

The government have dithered on a freeview type system and now that they are making some movement on the issue the Eurocrats have intervened with "issues". This dithering by the Government will cost Irish TV broadcasting dearly in the future and will ultimately affect consumer choice and competition in the digital tv delivery market.

I wonder would Sky Digital actually listen to a User Group or would it be a nice PR exercise?