Landlady to challenge unfair Sky Sports' subscription charges.

idd this is the issue with this

The rights to games are sold else were around europe and we wont get 3pm kicks off to entice people to the grounds.

She has got the games from a different satellite provider showing games not shown in the UK so I dont see the issue so much.

Sky aren't really losing out here because they dont have the games live anyway!
 
Fairly or unfairly this should be equated to other types of goods.
It is good business sense to source goods from any supplier regardless of location if it can be gotten for a better price.
Surely the landlord/lady should have only paid the vat/import duty on the invoices hitting her from the greek company?
 
We should also remember its not just sky who do this and would complain. For instance if BBC have the exclusive rights for say wimbledon matches , they would equally kick up a stink if sky started showing the live matches that they werent. Or indeed any channel with anything that they have "exclusive" rights on.
 
The thing is though, if you are selling a service and someone else regardless of location, can undercut you, then you are either charging too much or you have lost the sale. I say tough luck to sky.
 
That's as maybe but an exclusive contract is an exclusive contract so you can understand why any company who holds exclusive rights to anything would complain about such a thing. If I could get another boat to be a ferry across the harbour near where I live for cheaper than the existing one I would, but they can't because the company doing it currently has exclusive rights for that service, you could understand why they might complain if someone rigged up a boat and started doing it
 
I would prefer the competition, but I can also understand why someone with exclusive rights would not be happy about infringement on those exclusive rights. I'd like to be able to choose a different ferry service but I cannot due to exclusivity, I'd like to be able to pick a different water supplier in my area but I cannot due to exclusivity and so on with many services that I have to deal with.

I'd like the competition and I may disagree with the concept of exclusive rights but I also fully agree that someone should have the right to defend their rights, if the legal standpoint is that someone has an exclusivity agreement then I think its only right that they are able to defend that agreement no matter how much I might disagree with the concept behind the agreement. If the whole concept of exclusive rights to something (anything at all in life, mail, schools, hospitals, streets, pathways, ferries, services, whatever) is scrapped then ok, but in the meanwhile, while there are legalities like that in existence then I believe they should be followed, then again, as I've said before on these forums, I'm a rule follower kind of person :)
 
Last edited:
R5Rich said:
idd this is the issue with this

The rights to games are sold else were around europe and we wont get 3pm kicks off to entice people to the grounds.

She has got the games from a different satellite provider showing games not shown in the UK so I dont see the issue so much.

Sky aren't really losing out here because they dont have the games live anyway!
Click to expand...

Yes but the greek satelite channel doesn't just show the Saturday 3pm kickoffs, they show all the other live matches that Sky and ESPN show as well. It's not just about the 3pm kickoffs.
 
That is very true but when you pay quite a lot of money for sky sports over the football season, which lets be honest is 99% of the reason people buy sky sports (they know this and force the entertainment package as well) I expect more games.

The other weekend all 3pm ko's not a single game on TV, pretty disgusting really.

Sky have a monopoly in this Country hence why they were forced to sell it on cheaper to virgin/bt. Still to much control if you ask me.
 
Skys rates for pubs are based on rateable value not a flat rate. Bigger pubs pay more money.
You see the little pint glass in the bottom right of your screen in the pub? thats to show the pub has paid "public rates" Sky can and do send inspectors around to catch you out if you have your own private feed on in public.

My most of my family run pubs (mum, dad, brother and 2 cousins) and while they all bitch on about Sky costs they all agree that if you dont have it you take less money. how much less depends on whos playing that week and the local intrest, for example you not going to get 200 people through the door to watch west ham vs bolton if your running a pub in newcastle unless its important to the local team, or you have the west ham supporters from the local uni round.
Season long they all agree Sky makes them a profit overall so they buy it.

My brother runs a pub in area whos local team have made big deal about "norwegian TV" stealing their gate recipts but he has refussed to break the law by getting it, and it has cost him customers when they are playing.

I wonder how this varies nationwide?
Rich areas people have sky at home so watch footy at home?
Poor areas people go to the pub?
ESPN/Setanta games used to always be busy for my folks because even people with sky would hate spending the extra.
 
House said:
Rich areas people have sky at home so watch footy at home?
Poor areas people go to the pub?
Click to expand...
quite the contrary, in some of the poorest areas around here the sky guy in the supermarket struggles to sell any because everyone has it already. It's the priority for a lot of low income families.
 
All of my local pubs have axed their Sky subscription this year, besides the Rugby Club.

Bad times.


Sure everyone has sky at home, but I wouldn't want to invite 30 or 40 blokes into my house to watch it with me :p
 
THFC said:
It is tricky as we can go elsewhere in europe and buy goods cheaper. She is not a pirate, and has paid for a subscription but through a non Uk country but at a far cheaper rate.

Okay Sky makes up it's own rulse and pricing policies - she may have breached these but under EU Law has she done anything wrong.
Click to expand...

this tbh....

I don't see where the problem is - if you chose to purchase content from a foreign satellite provider then surely that is your choice. She's not obtaining sky content illegally - she's purchasing content from another provider.

If I chose to buy a car from Germany and a UK company happened to own the rights to distribute those cars within the UK I don't see why they would be able to sue me simply because I went to an overseas suppler to purchase a car.

I don't see why one provider should have a monopoly tbh... if the Greek provider has breached some sort of premiership rules by selling subscriptions outside of a particular area then it is surely a civil matter/breach of contract between the Greek company and the premiership. I don't see how the woman is at fault for simply purchasing services from a company within the EU.
 
dowie said:
if the Greek provider has breached some sort of premiership rules by selling subscriptions outside of a particular area then it is surely a civil matter/breach of contract between the Greek company and the premiership. I don't see how the woman is at fault for simply purchasing services from a company within the EU.
Click to expand...

Now that part I agree with, she shouldnt be at fault here, it should be the Greek company for selling her it in the first place, they presumably must have been aware that Sky have exclusive rights so its them who should not have sold her the package to start with.

If Yorkshire Water came down to Hampshire and started offering Southern Water customers water then it shouldnt be the customer at fault for taking it up, the blame should lie with Yorkshire Water for selling water where they arent supposed to.
 
I hadn't realised this thread was still going.

It should have been, I'll try to find something later on if anybody doesn't beat me to it. It appears Five Live discussed it on a programme that was put on iPlayer, but that was a week ago.
 
I get NovaSport despite being in the UK, far far cheaper than Sky and half the time it's even the same commentators as Sky if you choose the right audio feed.

Fair play to the landlady, I hope she wins, but I'm guessing Sky are gonna have some rather good lawyers... :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom