Sky Q Multiscreen

takman

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

I think live Soccer is the biggest attraction.

The "cable cutting" phenomenon sweeping the States has not yet begun in earnest here, but the same inertia is prevalent here with Banking and Utilities-people don't want the hassle of changing providers.

(By the way, NOW TV is from Sky;) )

Yes i do know that NOW TV is part of Sky which does show they know streaming is the business to be in. Although i don't know anyone who has it even though they boxes with a few months subscription seem to be very cheap.

brewerdave

takman wrote: »

Which again begs the question why do so many people pay for Sky?

1. Can't record on NOW TV or BT Sports app.

2. Limited sport available on terrestrial TV


I won't pay anything like full price for my Sky package - every year I make a decision on the max. I'm willing to pay, cancel and wait for the offers - last 5 years I've had good discounts of between 55 % and 65 % (allowing for cash credits) -currently paying £33pm which will go up to £72.50 pm (I don't think so:rotfl:)

takman

brewerdave wrote: »

1. Can't record on NOW TV or BT Sports app.

2. Limited sport available on terrestrial TV


I won't pay anything like full price for my Sky package - every year I make a decision on the max. I'm willing to pay, cancel and wait for the offers - last 5 years I've had good discounts of between 55 % and 65 % (allowing for cash credits) -currently paying £33pm which will go up to £72.50 pm (I don't think so:rotfl:)

I'm not sure why you would want to record on NOW TV which is a streaming service and all programs are available on demand.

I don't really watch sports so i don't know much about what each service offers content wise but there must be something cheaper that offers live sports and streaming of previous content?. If not then that seems to be a big gap in the market.

mije1983

iniltous wrote: »

BT a company that had the resources and technical know how to be a competitor to Sky were barred from being a broadcast company for decades

Ironic you mention BT as an example given the monopoly they had on telecoms at the time. It could be argued that having a behemoth like BT at the forefront of satellite TV would have just extended the monopoly into TV as well.

iniltous wrote: »

Most company's with the market dominance that Sky enjoy , ( even if you could argue that they won that market share by fair means) wouldn't be allowed to keep that position, and would be required to divest, imagine only one bank, or one newspaper, or one supermarket,

But, just like there is nothing stopping anyone opening a bank, newspaper or supermarket, there is nothing stopping anyone challenging Sky. They just choose not to. Looking back, it could be seen that opening a bank to challenge the 'big four' is just as daunting as taking on Sky. That didn't stop people/businesses doing it.

And that's my point that seems to be getting missed. It CAN be done, but others CHOOSE not to. Presumably because they decide the cost isn't worth it.

It's like people who complain they don't have choice with their FTTP connection and blame BT. It's not BT's fault that other mainstream providers choose not to offer FTTP when they could if they wanted.

iniltous wrote: »

but as I said ,presumably pay TV isn't considered to be anything more than a luxury item

And that is exactly how it should be considered. I'd like an expensive car (pay TV) but it's a luxury item, so I'll just keep my 'normal' car (FTA channels).

takman wrote: »

there must be something cheaper that offers live sports and streaming of previous content?. If not then that seems to be a big gap in the market.

Not really for sports. And I'd say that is down to cost. BT Sport for example, started off free and has slowly crept up to about £10 a month now with BT BB although the app can be had cheaper.

Setanta and ESPN both tried with sports but quickly gave up. Top Up TV never got going, and the less said about OnDigitial/ITV Digital the better!

[Deleted User]

takman wrote: »

Yes i do know that NOW TV is part of Sky which does show they know streaming is the business to be in.

As I said, internet downloads of shows are already available via the Sky decoder. The material is downloaded rather than streamed, but that actually improves the service.

I very much doubt they see NOW TV as the future of their service though, it's just an additional competitor with Netflix and Amazon