« Topics
12
Neil Jones4,055 posts since 23 Dec 2001
Central (West) Midlands Today
Are Sky prevented from just offering their own entertainment channels as an entry point, or at the very least making them available to sports or movies subscribers without needing a general entertainment pack.


I shouldn't have called them packs, they haven't been packs for ages. They're bundles. The packs was the old way of Sky TV.

Sports and Cinema have always been classed on Sky as the premium/add-on channels even back in the days when they had the pick-and-mix choices of six packages on offer. Wiki suggests Sky Sports did use to be available standalone back in the analogue days, but was discounted if you took it with movies. I suspect it became "on top" with Sky Digital.

There is probably nothing to stop Sky selling Sky Sports on its own if they really wanted to. But why would they when a requirement for at least the basic package guarantees at least £20 a month extra on top of the Sky Sports asking price?

And anyway they're throwing deals out again left right and centre - half price to the Cinema channels and free fibre internet as long as you have a Sky Sports subscription are the two current ones.
rdd2,828 posts since 21 Jun 2001
The reason it was different with analogue was that Sky Sports and Movies (both of which were free to air in their earliest days) became pay channels before the basic package, Sky Multichannels came along on 1st September 1993. Up until then, and even up until the launch of Sky Digital, Sky primarily described itself as a broadcaster and not a platform.
Michael3,988 posts since 5 Sep 2005
There is also the big problem of commercial premises' costs. Some pubs are having to choose between Sky or BT, or both, or in some cases, neither plus dodgy satellite or streaming boxes.
Hatton Cross2,590 posts since 4 Jan 2003
Central (West) Midlands Today
'If' being the optimum word.
Guess the thinking in UEFA is £1 billion from BT Sport (a slight increase on what they are currently paying) and somewhere around another £500 mill from a secondary rights holder/junior partner who will get highlights and one live game per week.
Another Hatton Cross Comment
Parts of this post have been edited but does not affect the outcome. Portions Recorded. All Rights Reserved. (c) MMXVIII
rdd2,828 posts since 21 Jun 2001
There is also the big problem of commercial premises' costs. Some pubs are having to choose between Sky or BT, or both, or in some cases, neither plus dodgy satellite or streaming boxes.


Seems a big difference between Ireland and the U.K. In Ireland Sky Sports is regarded as de rigour by most publicans, and the only pubs you won't find it in are specialised craft beer places, some hotel bars that wouldn't do a lot of business, and Wetherspoons. Most places would take Eir/BT Sport too, though not as universal as Sky.

Only a small number would go for foreign satellite and I've only ever see one place do streaming. I remember walking around a west London suburb many years ago looking for a particular match on Sky and being amazed at the number of pubs that didn't have it.
p_c_u_k1,847 posts since 27 Mar 2004
[quote="rdd" pid="1020751"]
Only a small number would go for foreign satellite and I've only ever see one place do streaming. I remember walking around a west London suburb many years ago looking for a particular match on Sky and being amazed at the number of pubs that didn't have it.


Similar experience in London for me - always a strange thing when you come from elsewhere in the UK.