Sky pricing

Recently relented and gone back to Sky

(Broadband with BT £20.99 including line rental + £8 all calls)

Sky+ Box.  Paying £13 pm for basic package.  Added Sports HD for £18pm last week.  Have BT Sport but not HD.  £6 pm but may get HD when Champions League restarts - maybe another £5

I pay £73 with almost the same twizzle, but i have cinema.

i pay £72 for everything but just the sky hd box not the qbox

3 x multi room.. super fast broadband.. hd sky sports and BT sports.. no movies but everything else with Virgin £90.74

Anyone else want to share prices?

sports pack no films with sky just gone up to £45 thinking of binning it or phoning for a reduction, no q

Basic TV package + Sky Sports =  £29.23

just got a deal with sky for 18 months. paying 55/month for sports and main package. no cinema and no kids channels. we've got netflix, amazon prime and bt( for sport ) so needed to cut somewhere.
goes back to 61/m after 18 months

Just added HD to my BT Sport package.  Free for 3 months, then £6.50.  Rolling 30 day contract.

Wouldn't it be nice if they just posted a simple price list on their website, choose what you want and see the total price immediately, without them trying to rip off every other customer.

Just renewed sky sports with talk talk for another 18 months at £8.50 per month with faster fibre broadband/line rental at £25 a month.

Not as profitable for them.  They need market segmentation.

Some people will pay £100+ a month without thinking about it.

Others, who haggle, will pay say £50.

So they get £100 payers and £50 payers = £150

A price list at £75 and the £100 payers would only pay £75 and the £50 payers wouldn't give them anything. = £75.

you didn't persist with maths at school, did you jack?

Nowt wrong with my maths, Dave.

Nowt wrong with my maths, Dave.

the home of the NBA SKY call it.  Youre lucky to get 2 games a week.  The only reason sky have got it is because BT didnt want it.

no champiuons league. Any half decent fight is PPV.  Crap

eddie hearn is taking the Mick

agree with nba quote its been disappointing they call it sky sports USA now

Jan 10, 2019 -- 2:53PM, Jack Hacksaw wrote:

Not as profitable for them.  They need market segmentation.Some people will pay £100+ a month without thinking about it.Others, who haggle, will pay say £50.So they get £100 payers and £50 payers = £150A price list at £75 and the £100 payers would only pay £75 and the £50 payers wouldn't give them anything. = £75.

It's partly this, most due to the subscription model. If you have the equipment installed etc it doesn't cost them anything to provide the service (TV). Arguable actually that more subscribers/viewers equal additional ad revenue. There is however also a minimal cts. So they would rather get something than nothing. Hence the brinkmanship. It's not so 'flexible' when it comes to the services that have a significant cost to supply, for example broadband.

I used to think that they had very accurate models of individual client behaviour/price sensitivity.  My history of accepting/refusing sport at different price levels would show them what I value it at.

Now I am not so sure.

I think they must just look at the overall business and their turnover and offer products and packages if they think they need to boost revenue.

The advertising element is an interesting one.  A lot of their viewing would be 'live' and so the audience would be captive - compared with ITV.  While the viewing figures would
be less, the advertising is more specific e.g. men/beer/cars/betting so of more value.

Thinking of kicking it into touch when the nfl finishes.

Nebs • January 10, 2019 2:42 PM GMT
Wouldn't it be nice if they just posted a simple price list on their website, choose what you want and see the total price immediately, without them trying to rip off every other customer.

Its simply 'tease and squeeze' economics emulated by every single sector going.
Each time a business model follows suit they create a position where every so often (generally the time following a 'money off period') a customer has to spend time comparing apples and oranges to determine value in as an opaque an enviroment as possible, simply because all profit derives from the lack of information.

That bolt the sky engineer fixes on sky dishes might as well be shackles. They keep all users from being able to look anywhere other than 28.2E.

What I love most though is the fact all these creative business practices evolve out of the auspices of commerce being the reason for being, that the very monster that is appeased in promoting opportunism is the beast that devours all in the end through creative tax avoidence in society in general.(that a genralisation not directed at SKY)

Regarding opacity, I really did think Ofgem got the idea right when they decided to limit the number of tariffs energy companies could offer.

Clearly, it was too good an idea as the idea was very quickly withdrawn!!!!

What could be more of a commodity than say electricity or gas.? They de-commoditise it (if that isn't a word, it should be) to increase profits (to them) and cost (to the consumer).

My view with all of these things (insurance, tv, phone, energy etc) is that it suits me fine that people are happy to overpay. If they didn't, I'd be paying more.

Thats true to an extent cider
but what is actually happening is they are forcing you to work for them by making you work to keep a 'good' price
when you have time that costs nothing then thats ok
but people tend to be time rich/work poor.
when its value to do it you have excess time to personal value, when the alternative happens its cost effective to do nothing.

*thats in a perfect scenario of transparency
regulators attempt to give power to the consumer, except corporations pay for ideology to reduce regulation
go figure

I suppose some people would see it as work. I view it as an enjoyable hobby. Conversing with sky agents probably the least enjoyable part to be fair! I do realise I'm in the minority. I enjoy stoozing for example, which is not for everyone.