Traditional Subscription TV... On it's death bed?

chrcoluk said:
its overpriced compared to competitors.
Click to expand...
Interestingly, though, it's the only one where there seem to be deep discounts available all the time. I took up a 6 month deal for about £27, with £5 Quidco cashback, and was going to cancel yesterday before that ran out, but NowTV offered 3 months at £3.20/month (IIRC) so I kept it. I guess they're hoping I'll forget and just move onto £8.99 (! that is a lot !) per month.
 
chrcoluk said:
On game of thrones illegal rips of the show were better quality than what was aired on NowTV.
Click to expand...

LOL

Sky are trying to protect their outdated business model. When I first saw SkyQ, my immediate thought was last throw of the dice.

Once they have rinsed SkyQ, they will offer a decent ipTV offering with the Sky brand.

I do not see what their long term plan is for NowTV. Seems badly managed to me or under invested. NowTV is simply not good enough to be the main hub of your family viewing. I think that is by design though, make of that what you will.

Even IF 1080p happens, what about 4K?
 
chrcoluk said:
Its clearly regressing.

Looking at sky e.g.

The production quality of their content is going down which indicates cost cutting.
The subscription fees are rising rapidly year on year, this is to compensate for drop in subscribers.
This increase is especially apparent on the base packages which is likely to compensate for where most of the loss of subs is felt in the premium packages.

As the prices go up it moves further and further away from the average person been able to afford it.

Sky's entire model is about exclusivity as well, as they not willing to compete in other metrics, look at how they refused to allow f1tv to be a thing in the uk, and wont share movies with netflix etc.

However I also think scheduled tv in general is on its way out as well. The future is on demand content for scripted content. Live would be for news events and sport.

Sky world used to cost £15 maybe a decade or so ago, now if I were to ring up sky for the full package I would be paying the best part of a £100, that inflation is insanity, and the cost is ridiculous.

Also I see Am not the only one thats noticed that sky deliberately cripple their online content, the EPL highlights on their website is like what youtube used to be like in the 2000s, now tv has been a joke as well and thats a paid for service, yet when I watched highlights of the leics spurs game on lcfc website, it was proper hd with decent bitrate.
Click to expand...
You couldn’t be more wrong.

Sky have consistently won awards for their production in sports broadcasting, news broadcasting and their own content too. Chernobyl, a joint HBO & Sky production was raved about by critics and viewers and has just won Emmy’s.
Sure the prices rise every year, but so do everyone else’s. And they’re limited to, a 10% rise every year as well.
A one or two pound increase isn’t massive on £22pm but when Netflix puts a pound or two on their package it’s a far higher percentage increase?
Sky have had an INCREASE in subscribers every quarter for nigh on five years now. Your statement they’re losing customers is false.
Sky have a massive on demand presence on both their satellite service and via Now TV. They’re on this. Many older people don’t watch or use on demand either so Sky has to cater to both parties, which they do.

To compare Sky World at £15 a decade or more ago with two Sports channels, two movie channels and a dozen other channels compared to the current offerings isn’t a fair or valid comparison. The content available now is far far wider and broad than before with more movies, more live content and more sports covered.

Why on earth would you offer content that you expect people to pay for, for free, elsewhere? You want to protect your content and hope that if people want to watch it they'll pay you for the privilege. If you offer it for free, they won’t pay? The same goes for the F1. They paid Bernie and the FIA a pretty penny for exclusive coverage. Why on earth would they want to allow F1 TV in the UK when they paid for exclusivity?

Now TVhas a bit of a problem in that If they get too close to the content and quality and usability of the main satellite service, their main and most profitable business, they could lose customers from one to the other.

You seem to forget that a business has a primary concern of making a profit rather than being the cheapest or feeling charitable.
 
Sky are still increasing subscriber numbers so it would be a pretty stupid move to make NowTV much better and much cheaper and lose their subscriber customer base.
 
I dont know what to say if you think 10% is a reasonable rate to increase prices annually.

I would have been more impressed if you acknowledged nowtv needs improving (and said it will be), and also acknowledged the pricing issues, but instead there is denial.

Netflix price increase was a bigger % but its not an annual occurrence. However if they change this to become like sky, believe me I will criticise them.
 
Last edited:
chrcoluk said:
I dont know what to say if you think 10% is a reasonable rate to increase prices annually.

I would have been more impressed if you acknowledged nowtv needs improving (and said it will be), and also acknowledged the pricing issues, but instead there is denial.

Netflix price increase was a bigger % but its not an annual occurrence. However if they change this to become like sky, believe me I will criticise them.
Click to expand...
I don't use Now TV but yes I've heard the complaints here and elsewhere. They are steadily improving it but need to be careful as I've mentioned above.

10% isn't a huge amount if its £2 or £3 here and there really. No one is forced to have Sky. Its a luxury.
 
For me it's dead I haven't had a TV license for 5 years now, purely watch catch up (excluding iPlayer), Netflix, Prime and the occasional 4K blu ray.
 
Sports is another reason I ditched Sky. In one of their fee increases, I seem to remember them citing that a main reason for the increase was due to the football licensing ... " why the F should I pay for that? " was my thought considering I dont watch it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom