There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
26 Apr 10
21:12
Joined:
Date Joined:
27 Oct 05
seriously?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 90
|
By:
i wont it but refuse to pay that much for it , rip off!
|
|
By:
wot no Lampus??
|
|
By:
Yes.
|
|
By:
Paid it for March an April as i enjoy their coverage of the big nh festivals. Rang up to cancel to day and found out i have to give 30 days notice so im stuck with it for another Month :(
|
|
By:
Terrific value. Far better than the £22 I have to fork out for at the races.
|
|
By:
Muqbil
You really are a** of grade 1 status. |
|
By:
T0sser
|
|
By:
I agree with Muqbil - RUK is terrific value.
|
|
By:
What's bothering you, telepathic? Come on get it off your chest lad.
|
|
By:
FACT. RP reported that RUK has more than 40K subscribers even more than when they 1st launched in 2,004.
FACT. If that is true RUK not affected by globall financial downturn FACT. RUK costs about the same as a barely decent bottle of win ;) |
|
By:
You come up with the same old sh*t every time the subject is raised your mantra ad na
|
|
By:
I must sound like a right old bore......
Enjoy your evening :) |
|
By:
Great Shyte you wouldnt know a FACT if it kicked you up the ar*E
|
|
By:
why are people so aggressive on this site ??
fuc*king madmen! |
|
By:
** off hearts you **ing tit!
|
|
By:
I do, and its VFM (cheaper than buying a daily paper).
|
|
By:
Muqbil - thanks for the opportunity to agree with you - "right old bore" - accurate statement eventually.
|
|
By:
ruk do a good job of covering racing well of that there is no doubt but they need to be aligned to something else like they where with setanta otherwise the only people who will watch it are the very insular people who belong to the racing world.most people unless they need it have better things to do with their money in the current economic climate,where are their future viewers going to come from if they exclude anyone new from even seeing racing.
|
|
By:
The Optician 26 Apr 21:46
**** off hearts you ******* tit! i'll get my coat! |
|
By:
scarecrow = sense
|
|
By:
I couldnt ever pay them money after how they treated their customers who supported them right from day 1 of the original launch.
|
|
By:
Hearts 1874 ill even get your coat for you .
|
|
By:
you know i was joking hearts.
scarecrow makes sense. setanta used to be about £10-£15 and included ruk as well, which was value and people who wouldnt necessarily bet on racing may have watched. now, at £20 with none of the other sports thrown in, only hardcore racing fans will pay for it. |
|
By:
they should team up with espn ?? i did have ruk when it was setanta , was really good coverage! but £20 just for one channel is steep!
|
|
By:
that would make a lot of sense hearts if it could be made to happen but i would not hold your breath.
|
|
By:
If RUK was free to view. Would the benefits and advertising to racing outweigh the lost subs money?
|
|
By:
more people would bet in the shops, go home to watch the racing
more levy |
|
By:
Scarecrow is spot on. All very well for the people who are full time now , but nobody goes from zero knowledge/interest to being full time overnight.
If i'd never seen Racing on TV i doubt i'd ever have had a bet on it , and there was a hell of a lot more on BBC/C4 at the time i became interested . I certainly wouldn't have paid £20 a month on the off chence i might develop a liking for it, and no one will today, so who is going to be following it in 30 years time if things carry on like this? |
|
By:
Get it from Nov-April for Cheltenham build up and Aintree,then stop it till following November,costs 10 per month then over a year!!
At least they dont make us have a yearly contract!! |
|
By:
Can't see what all the fuss is about? £5 a week is peanuts compared to what most of you stake/lay a day.
Anyway, we've had this thread about a hundred times now, move on...... |
|
By:
In answer to the question, I'm seriously paying £20 a month for racing uk.
Is there a way around it ? |
|
By:
if you cant afford 20 a month give up betting and just post on this forum all day and have the very occasional 2 pound bet
|
|
By:
66p a day is too expensive :0
|
|
By:
The point being missed is that £20 per month for one channel to the person who has a passing interest is ludicrous.
Like cycling? well tune into the cycling channel for £20 per month. Doesnt happen, cycling is covered very well on Eurosport Like Football? Tune into the football channel for £20 per month. Of course not, Football part of Sky Sports. Even Espn have it bundled with other stuff. So the questions are Should racing have a stand alone channel which it charges £20 per month? or Should racing be part of a bundled package?( as earlier pointed out by scarecrow) Was RUK watched more whilst under Setanta's umbrella? Personally, racing should be behind the red button. Several screens with each meeting covered. Parade ring on another screen. Live market on another and so on. |
|
By:
I agree with Muqbil ,Ruk is great value for twenty notes a month.
Racings channel for Racing. . |
|
By:
One can say lots of things about RUK but compared to other pay tv it certainly can't be called good value! Do they still have minute long plugs for bookies every 5 mins?
|
|
By:
Yes, unfortunately
|
|
By:
those adds keep the price down
ruk - the racing peoples channel - as lampus would say. |
|
By:
I thought they were going to stop them when they bought subs in? If it was 1 racing channel that showed all the racing (on red button for clashes) that gave insights into racing - showed/made documentaries, stable tours etc regularly and had no adverts then £20 would just about be worth it but as it is the odd time i watch it now it still looks cheap (no matter how good some think the analysis is).
|