Why do people suggest cancelling Sky...

MS_Dolphin

Unsure - Sitting on the fence

Its good to have an old fashioned fun debate - but with a serious point.

When someone posts a new SOA and Sky is listed, its right that people point out the opportunity to save money by cancelling it. From here it is down to the individual as to which advice is taken or not.

My view (for what it's worth) is that from a pure financial standpoint, if you are in serious debt then Sky should go without a doubt. HOWEVER, we are not robots but living breathing entities that have emotions and it is our emotions not logic that guide most of what we do.

I'm a typical example of how this works. I'm not in a good financial position right now and I live the rollercoaster ride that goes with this. I've had Sky and cancelled it twice. Last month, at a time when things got really desperate, Sky offered me a half price 6 month deal to come back. Emotions took over my practical side that knows every pound counts and with some twisted logic concluded that an extra £18 per month over the next 6 months will not make a difference in the grand scheme of things. Back to this month and the practical side is kicking in again and I wished I'd not done it.

There is no right or wrong answer but individual choice. As others have said before, where do we draw the line? My son's Christmas presents are not technically necessary and that money could be well spent elsewhere.... My line is pretty closely drawn but for the next 5 months at least, I'll still have Sky.

OrkneyStar

Unsure - Sitting on the fence

I think for any DMP to succeed there does need to a be a little room in there, so if Sky is someones one and only luxury and (and this is a big and) they can still make sensible repayments to their debts (ie pay off in a reasonable time) then a basic package would be ok imho. This said, if they are trying to go to the max with all their outgoings then I would suggest loosing the Sky, and especially if it would knock a chunk of the amount of debt/interest repayments they have to make! Noone has to take any of the advice on here, but people generally gives advice which has helped them (be they DFW or otherwise on a tight budget). We cannot afford Sky unless we forego something else and so therefore we don't have it, simple as.
ETA we don't really need it tbh anyway, there is plenty on freeview for us, but then I am not that big on films and stuff anyway!

Ames

I think that they key word in the question is 'serious'. If you're at the point when you can't afford food, are facing repossession or eviction, have bailiffs knocking for unpaid council tax, utilities being cut off then sky is clearly a waste of money.

If your debts are managable, and having sky is part of a reasonable entertainment budget, then fine.

If you're on a DMP that will take, say, 10 years to clear, then maybe having sky, even though it will push back the DFD a bit, is probably a sanity saver.

MS_Dolphin

Unsure - Sitting on the fence

MrsTine wrote: »

I think it's merely the fact that I disagree with their view on the lawfullness vs moral point of view of CCAs etc that they object to But yes if any post contravenes the MSE board rules then regardless of who posted it it should be reported to Abuse

Speaking personally, it's not the fact that I disagree with your views about CCA's that makes me object. Long may the dissenting voice and contrary perspective continue, its the way change is made.

I did though object to your posts, particularly the opening one because of the strength of which your underlaying views came across. There was a real sense of disdain, disgust and even contempt behind the words suggesting that all who are in debt or challenge a CCA etc are unclean criminals on a level somewhat lower than the child catcher.

Now if I've misread those views then you have my sincere apologies, but that is how it reads, if not I'd ask you to take a look at those views with fresh eyes. Consider that maybe the vast majority of those in debt and challenging agreements are in a postion of hardship, largely through a change of circumstances, sometimes of their own doing, sometimes not, but hardly ever fraudulently or criminally.

Walk a mile.... before taking such a hard line. If you still retain the same views, fair enough, but at least consider the other perspective before being so harsh, take every individual case on its merits rather than applying sweeping generalisations at the very mention of challenging a CCA.

Incidentally, some of the best, most helpful and sincere advice offered on this site is given by those who are themselves in the most serious debt.

never-in-doubt

No - Not a chance

MS_Dolphin wrote: »

Post Above.

Words well spoken Ms D...... :T :T :T

JES_F1

I've not cancelled Sky - and consider it part of my 'entertainment'.

When I started on my DMP, it was one of the many things I reviewed but decided to keep - though I did check I wasn't paying for any unnecessary channels.

Prior to my lightbulb moment, I was spending huge amounts of money on totally unnecessary things rather than using credit simply to survive so fortunately, I'm able to pay a substantial chunk of money to my DMP each month.

I do go out for a meal once or twice a month with friends - we check out the best deals or pick somewhere cheap. One friend is a great cook so she'll pop round with a dish that we pop in the oven to heat up and then find something trashy on TV to have a laugh at! I otherwise don't go out very much.

If I gave up Sky, I'd want to spend more than what it costs me on alternative entertainment.

Sky probably is a luxury but one I'm not yet prepared to give up even though my lightbulb moment was definitely real. I'm someone that used to think nothing of spending £40-£50 a month on takeaway coffees and £80-£100 a month on lunch! :eek: I rarely buy coffees now and mostly take in my own lunch.