We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Sat 16 August - 7 FREE Sky sports channels.
EIGHTOF8
Posts: 1,835 Forumite
Not sure if this applies to everyone who has Sky, but here's the link with all the info - http://www.sky.com/tv/show/skysportsopenday
Not been in here for years. Life got hectic!
0
Comments
-
They must be getting pretty desperate. Since they lost all that premiership football i bet the numbers paying for sky sports have plummeted.0
-
What Premiership Football have they "lost" recently ?Since they lost all that premiership football i bet the numbers paying for sky sports have plummeted.
Sky Sports subscribers were actually able to view more Premiereship games than ever before last season. BT provide only a similar number games to those formerly provided by Sky (for an extra subscription) through PremPlus.
Sky have certainly lost Champions League games to BT, but that doesn't actually take effect until NEXT season..
Sky have offered this "free" Sports taster to all Sky subscribers in the past.
Their subscriber numbers are also not in any decline. Wishful thinking on your part, I think.:p0 -
They must be getting pretty desperate. Since they lost all that premiership football i bet the numbers paying for sky sports have plummeted.
A lot of sky sports customers leave for the summer months and even sky wont know how badly the new competition has affected them until the new season gets under way.
Numbers of sports channels (and numbers of games on offer) are meaningless to me. I just need to watch a couple of games of footy at the week-end and maybe one game during the week. The vast majority of sports coverage just passes me by. I am usually elsewhere watching the documentaries or something.
I stopped my sky sports subscription a month or so ago. For me it was a "no-brainer". I get BT broadband and hence BT Sports at no cost. So I save £20 a month and still get my weekly fix of footie.
I dont know that sky are "desperate" but they have sure locked horns in a desperate battle with their fellow giants BT. Sky have made a considerable investment in the new sports season as they have constantly been telling me on the sky sports channel I watched an hour ago. They have to take on BT and have started doing so with their free broadband offers.
Competition is supposed to be good for the customer. We should be glad there is more choice in the sports market-place.0 -
The problem is that it's not proper competition, for that to be the case both suppliers would have to be offering similar packages of Sport. Instead, Sky still have two-thirds of the Premiership games and BT have some different (choice) games.Competition is supposed to be good for the customer. We should be glad there is more choice in the sports market-place.
In other words, it's not possible to have access to all televised games unless the customer subscribes to both broadcasters.
That's not "competition", it's just extra expense..0 -
Moneyineptitude wrote: »That's not "competition", it's just extra expense..
Completely agree with this. Since the EU, in their wisdom, decided to prevent any one broadcaster having sole live rights to the Premier League, it has just led to consumers paying more. How is that in any way beneficial to us?
Makes me laugh that they said:
Obviously someone, somewhere, thinks that paying more money to watch the same amount of games makes it better value...... :mad:the Commission wants viewers and football fans to enjoy more choice and better value
Unless of course, they were so stupidly out of touch with reality, that they thought a company would pay hundreds of millions and then broadcast for free!
0 -
Since the EU, in their wisdom, decided to prevent any one broadcaster having sole live rights to the Premier League, it has just led to consumers paying more. How is that in any way beneficial to us?
No. The EU stopped interfering in UK EPL coverage years ago. Its the Premier League that now chooses to split the packages.Obviously someone, somewhere, thinks that paying more money to watch the same amount of games makes it better value...... :mad:
Again no. There are now more games available than ever before. So this situation is going to continue. Plus no one knows the EPL package split/number come the next auction (in Dec).0 -
No. The EU stopped interfering in UK EPL coverage years ago.
Most probably because they achieved what they set out to do. They no longer need to have an input if the PL is towing the line so to speak.Again no. There are now more games available than ever before.
The jury may be out on your first point regarding outside interference, but this point is just wrong.
The current deal is made up of 6 packages of 23 games each, which is 138 games. In the 2005/2006 season (the only season I could find reliable information on) Sky had the whole set, which was.... 138 games. So it's been 138 games for at least 10 years.0 -
Back then, of course, it STILL cost two subscriptions in order to view all the available games! The lion's share was shown on Sky Sports, but there was also an "extra package" of games which Sky called "PremPlus" which was available on a separate pay-per-view or monthly subscription.The current deal is made up of 6 packages of 23 games each, which is 138 games. In the 2005/2006 season (the only season I could find reliable information on) Sky had the whole set, which was.... 138 games. So it's been 138 games for at least 10 years.
The big difference now is that subscribers to BT broadband get the BT Sport channel free. I wonder if that will remain the case in the 2015-2016 season when BT start showing the Champion's League?0 -
Me too.Numbers of sports channels (and numbers of games on offer) are meaningless to me.
I used to enjoy Test and other cricket on the BBC. They had serious authoritive commentary. Since the ECB sold coverage to the minority Sky, I have been deprived of serious cricket. (I don't count IPL on ITV4). I did try the Now TV sports pass at £10 (or in Sky money £9.99) and was surprised by the lack of commentary with just the occasional few words. Very poor quality.
Now there seems to be a compromise. Sky are introducing a weekly Now TV sports pass for £11 (£10.99 in Sky currency).
http://www.theguardian.com/media/media-blog/2014/aug/10/sky-sports-weekly-pass-bskyb-budget
BTW watching the Now TV stream and listening to the BBC Test Match Special doesn't work as BBC is live and streamed Sky is about a minute late.
0 -
Yours is the first criticism of Sky's cricket commentary team for being too quiet I've seen. Most complain that the commentators have too much to say…;)was surprised by the lack of commentary with just the occasional few words. Very poor quality.
Generally speaking, Sky's coverage is the same or superior to the old BBC broadcasts. I think your opinion is being coloured by you now having to pay to view.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454K Spending & Discounts
- 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.3K Life & Family
- 258.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards