The newspapers are today reporting that SKY wants to remove it's 3 channels on Freeview (Sky News, Sky Sports News and Sky 3) and replace them with 4 new Pay-Per-View channels.
http://news.independent.co.uk/business/news/article2368894.ece
I've no problem with their football pay-per-view.. and might use it to catch occasional game without being a full-on subscriber to a full SKY package........ but isn't it a bit cold of them and against the principles of why Freeview was set up, for them to want to remove all their Freeview channels... including SKY News which I sometimes watch (I switch between BBC News 24 and SKY News for different perspectives on news items).
Isn't it a bit unfair if a broadcaster like SKY can promote the Freeview venture at the start, then decide they'd prefer to snap away the free-to-air digital channels they offered on Freeview to replace them all with pay-per-view offerings ?
2007-03-18 10:47:45 · 12 answers · asked by Narky 5 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Television
All successful business conglomerates are ruthless, they wouldn't be a success otherwise!
2007-03-18 10:51:29 · answer #1 · answered by ? 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
They are totally money driven.
I bought a subscription to Sky Sports for Christmas, and a special "Golden Ticket" for my hubby (£75 total ) and his boys one year. I spoke to the guy on the phone at length, about how to get the best sports package, and this was it, we talked about the premier games what would be shown on this golden card/ticket membership and he said the Man U v Portsmouth game ,would be on it.( Hubby supports Portsmouth, 1 of his boys supports Man U.)
One week before the game, after Christmas, Sky started advertising this game as Pay for view only.
I phoned them , and they had nothing decent to say for themselves, It was a Christmas present for crying out loud!!!
We had many other rip-offs from them, paying £65 for replacing "faulty" equipment when it was just their Viewing card needed replacing.(free)
Bad or lost reception.
Hours waiting on the customer service line.
We say stuff them, they're never getting another penny out of us.
About the Christmas present thing: they obviously do a calculation, and work out how much extra money they can get, and that's the end of it.
They have no morals, they're just a money making machine.
M : {
2007-03-18 11:02:29 · answer #2 · answered by mesmerized 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I had NTL in the previous this is now Virgin, they have a tendency to have very undesirable shopper help although in terms of fee are greater much less costly than SKY. Sky Plus continues to be the main suitable of the puzzling disk packing packing containers accessible additionally, yet in terms of programming I even have observed that Virgin are commencing as much as seize up out of nowhere.. Their Virgin a million channel seems to be pulling in distinctive the recent shows and getting them solely. additionally, setanta activities is getting premiership and ecu soccer additionally. So in terms of programming fee, the two are leveling out although i might nonetheless recommend SKY for greater effective shopper help and because they're nonetheless forward. additionally, while you're no longer likely to swap BB and get in touch with then their stand on my own televison expenditures are nicely balanced nonetheless while Virgin is greater concerning the excellent kit.
2016-10-19 00:35:03 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It comes down to people like me and you, I have seen may shops close in the local area just because they can not compete with Tesco and the same happens here sky kill there competition then do what the hell they like
2007-03-18 11:04:27 · answer #4 · answered by Markieg 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
virginmedia are having loads of probs with sky and looks like there's gonna be a court battle bout sky upping their prices to get rid of the competition
2007-03-18 10:51:37 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Rupert Murdoch is totally ruthless
2007-03-18 10:51:45 · answer #6 · answered by Just for Laughs 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Sky tv is ruthless but more than that there bullies,all they
want is to monopolise British tv.
2007-03-18 11:13:28 · answer #7 · answered by Edd e 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
all the people that run big corporations are ruthless its fashionable look at the daft programmes like the apprentice.
2007-03-18 10:54:45 · answer #8 · answered by oobedoo 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
They are in the huff and we are all getting the backlash, its like Virgin said "They've picked up their ball and gone home", The Meanies.
2007-03-19 02:32:56 · answer #9 · answered by Roxy. 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No. Business sense. It's their shows, they create them. If they don't want to give them to Virgin Media, then they don't have to. VM should be happy they had the opportunity to get them in the first place.
2007-03-18 11:05:04 · answer #10 · answered by Ihsahn_ 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋