« Topics
1234...8910
Inspector Sands10,624 posts since 25 Aug 2004

Time for the competition commission to come in and break the company up as they did with BAA. Its too big and not in the interests of the UK population.

Is it though?

It's a big company but it's not the dominant force that it once was. It's got real competition for sports rights now and the new on demand services are chipping away at its other traditional USPs of films and American content.

That's not to mention the other traditional TV platforms which are providing multi-channel offerings, again once Sky's dominant offering.
1
London Lite gave kudos
62305818,804 posts since 19 Aug 2005
STV Central Reporting Scotland


Murdoch started 21st Century Fox, later he also started Sky..


He didn't 'start Sky' either.
He brought the Sky channel, which was a low budget general entertainment cable channel in Swindon.


NO NO NO NO, lets get a fact straight, before this gets out of hand:

SKY channel which started in April 1982 as "Satellite Television" for cable operators all over Europe, On 27 June 1983, the shareholders of Satellite Television agreed a £5 million offer to give News International 65% of the company

In Jan 1984 the service expanded to the UK, and was rebranded.
Is the next post dreaded?
Colorband (previously AgainWTheNorth) 210 posts since 30 May 2015
UTV BBC World


Murdoch started 21st Century Fox, later he also started Sky..


He didn't 'start Sky' either.
He brought the Sky channel, which was a low budget general entertainment cable channel in Swindon.


NO NO NO NO, lets get a fact straight, before this gets out of hand:

SKY channel which started in April 1982 as "Satellite Television" for cable operators all over Europe, On 27 June 1983, the shareholders of Satellite Television agreed a £5 million offer to give News International 65% of the company

In Jan 1984 the service expanded to the UK, and was rebranded.


Ok, so he didn't start Sky. He rebranded it to Sky, but the channel existed before it was rebranded.
Then again, I'm an American - what do I know?
picard421 posts since 2 Jun 2016
Ed Miliband has tweeted about it.





2
bkman1990 and Austin Tatious gave kudos
rdd2,580 posts since 21 Jun 2001
He didn't start 20th Century Fox either, as it was formed (from the merger of Fox Film and 20th Century) when he was only a child. Can't even lay claim to News Corporation - it grew out of News Ltd, which Murdoch inherited from his father.

I guess this has been an inevitability - News Corporation would probably have taken over Sky a while back if it hadn't been for some spectacularly bad timing in terms of the Leveson inquiry. They've often been guilty of treating it as if it were a subsidiary and I imagine for some shareholders it has just been a matter of waiting for the right price (after all, a plc is always for sale at the right price). By all accounts the mooted price represents a good deal for shareholders.
Luke2,652 posts since 6 Oct 2003
If Sky News splits off, can it still use the Sky name?

It could be licensed by them. That's what happens with a lot of Virgin brands, both incarnations of Virgin Radio for example

why would it split off? the difference with this bid compared to 2010 is that Murdoch has split his two companies into 21st Century Fox (TV and film business) and News Corp (publishing), meaning those plurality and editorial concerns that people had with the same company owning The Sun/The Times and Sky News no longer exist.
all_night186 posts since 2 Apr 2016
Anglia (West) Look East (West sub-opt)
This forum doing what it does best with over the top speculations from pretty much nothing. Laughing

I suspect there will be pressure and for that to increase over the coming weeks for regulatory bodies to try and stop the takeover. Sky News is subject to Ofcom rules and regulations so I don't see how Fox coming in buying the whole company would impact its output other than the negative connotations people already associate with it.