IWantItNow Report post Posted January 27, 2011 Pre-tax profits at the broadcaster rose to £467m in the last six months of 2010, with revenues up 15% to £3.2bnBSkyB said increased demand for high definition (HD) television services - up by 68% on a year ago - had boosted results. And more customers were also opting to buy broadband internet access and phone services from the firm, as well as television, adding to "a half year of outstanding performance", said chief executive Jeremy Darroch. He told the BBC it was "very encouraging" that the company's customer numbers had risen above 10 million. But he added that being "more broadly based", offering communication services as well as pay television developments such as 3D and on-demand viewing would be key to future growth. "It's not just about adding more households, though we will do that," he told the BBC. "It's about increasing the penetration of products in our customer base." BBC Link How the hell do you unplug these people? A friend of mine pays over £70 a month to watch shite in HD. I don't get it. Is this why people are not a*sed about having bankers and politicians hands in their pockets? Who gives a toss as long as you can watch a bloke kick a ball into a net as if you were there watching it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OzzMosiz Report post Posted January 27, 2011 BBC Link How the hell do you unplug these people? A friend of mine pays over £70 a month to watch shite in HD. I don't get it. Is this why people are not a*sed about having bankers and politicians hands in their pockets? Who gives a toss as long as you can watch a bloke kick a ball into a net as if you were there watching it? I don't buy into this HD stuff, DVDs at 2.99 will do me fine. £70 a month is madness for TV Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
papag Report post Posted January 27, 2011 Its a social thing working at a block of 6 identical flats in Leeds yesterday (all social tenants) you know the ones that got undetectably got pregnant and have a nice new flat given to them to help their predicament everyone had a sky dish installed, an adjacent block of 6 identical flats only had 1 dish installed these were owned by private owners. Every picture tells a story Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
interestrateripoff Report post Posted January 27, 2011 As incomes get squeezed it will be interesting to see how long Sky can retain subscribers. HD has been a great coup as I bet many have taken the multiroom option which I think is another £10 on top of the £10 for Sky HD. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IWantItNow Report post Posted January 27, 2011 As incomes get squeezed it will be interesting to see how long Sky can retain subscribers. HD has been a great coup as I bet many have taken the multiroom option which I think is another £10 on top of the £10 for Sky HD. It's 3D next, so maybe they will retain them for a good while yet. Surely 3D HD and all that jazz will push it over the £100 PCM barrier. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dorkins Report post Posted January 27, 2011 TV is cheap entertainment for people who can't afford real life. Assume you have a family of 5, each watching 4 hours a day. That's 20 hours a day, or 600 hours a month for £70. Works out to just over 11p an hour. Meanwhile beer in pubs is £2.80 a pint, five return bus fares to town is upward of a tenner (or pay similar for parking), cinema is £5-£10 a head, tickets to see the football around £15-£20 a head, swimming at the leisure centre £3-£4 a head etc. For families taking home £1000-£1500 a month who have seen the basic cost of living rise so much, these things have become expensive luxuries. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cinzano Bianco Report post Posted January 27, 2011 As incomes get squeezed it will be interesting to see how long Sky can retain subscribers. From an entertainment point of view, it will be the last thing to go IMO. £70 seems a lot to me, but to be fair, that is barely a night out London for 1 person... plus, what's the use of a 50" plasma, if you don't have HD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
leicestersq Report post Posted January 27, 2011 Does anyone know if you can keep your sky TV if you go bankrupt? I know that what you do is make a statement of affairs about your outgoings, and the official receiver prunes it down if you think you are spending too much in one area. But do they let you have an amount for Sky TV? Does the government connive with Sky such that it is a necessity that you can have in preference to repaying your creditors? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pete.hpc Report post Posted January 27, 2011 Does anyone know if you can keep your sky TV if you go bankrupt? I know that what you do is make a statement of affairs about your outgoings, and the official receiver prunes it down if you think you are spending too much in one area. But do they let you have an amount for Sky TV? Does the government connive with Sky such that it is a necessity that you can have in preference to repaying your creditors? You can include TV and entertainment costs in your statement of affairs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shermanator Report post Posted January 27, 2011 TV is cheap entertainment for people who can't afford real life. Assume you have a family of 5, each watching 4 hours a day. That's 20 hours a day, or 600 hours a month for £70. Works out to just over 11p an hour. Meanwhile beer in pubs is £2.80 a pint, five return bus fares to town is upward of a tenner (or pay similar for parking), cinema is £5-£10 a head, tickets to see the football around £15-£20 a head, swimming at the leisure centre £3-£4 a head etc. For families taking home £1000-£1500 a month who have seen the basic cost of living rise so much, these things have become expensive luxuries. All good points. Sky are definitely a winner as their core demographic can no longer go out so their home becomes a mini entertainment centre with a bar (courtesy of ultra cheap supermarket booze). With this trend growing, goodness knows why thousands of new restaurants are opening - can see them going the same way as pubs. Freeview satifies my needs even as a sports fan but when I move to France may invest in Eurosport. By the way, in Germany Deutsche Sky only have 2.2m subscribers with a population of 20m more - losing money hand over fist apparantly. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IWantItNow Report post Posted January 27, 2011 TV is cheap entertainment for people who can't afford real life. Assume you have a family of 5, each watching 4 hours a day. That's 20 hours a day, or 600 hours a month for £70. Works out to just over 11p an hour. Meanwhile beer in pubs is £2.80 a pint, five return bus fares to town is upward of a tenner (or pay similar for parking), cinema is £5-£10 a head, tickets to see the football around £15-£20 a head, swimming at the leisure centre £3-£4 a head etc. For families taking home £1000-£1500 a month who have seen the basic cost of living rise so much, these things have become expensive luxuries. I understand all those points. The problem I have is that the people subjected to 20 hours a week of Murdoch are being brainwashed by all the marketing, advertising, both subliminal and obvious. This is not helped by VIs and other parasites using this to transfer wealth from the monkeys to the masters. Where will it end? On a side note, I was round at my mothers the other day and my sister, who is well and truly plugged into the matrix, was crowing about how good TV was that night, the shows consisted of Snog, Marry, Avoid and I'm hotter than my daughter. I just sat there jaw open as the enjoyed the absolute tripe that was on. Unfortunately she's beyond help. How many more are? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Democorruptcy Report post Posted January 27, 2011 My £20 Sky subscription recently increased to £20.50 due to VAT. Prices rounded to the nearest 25p £20 was £17.02 + £2.98 VAT and now it should be £17.02 + £3.40 = £20.42 I hope some people are paying less then the VAT rise? I suppose it will be somebody on a tracker mortgage who is getting my 8p every month. The &*^%ers have the interest on my savings so I might as well subsidise their TV as well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xux42 Report post Posted January 27, 2011 I understand all those points. The problem I have is that the people subjected to 20 hours a week of Murdoch are being brainwashed by all the marketing, advertising, both subliminal and obvious. This is not helped by VIs and other parasites using this to transfer wealth from the monkeys to the masters. Where will it end? On a side note, I was round at my mothers the other day and my sister, who is well and truly plugged into the matrix, was crowing about how good TV was that night, the shows consisted of Snog, Marry, Avoid and I'm hotter than my daughter. I just sat there jaw open as the enjoyed the absolute tripe that was on. Unfortunately she's beyond help. How many more are? Millions. Agree with all you say. Apparently product placement is on the way for British TV now because the advertisers can't stop us skipping the ads using time slip. :angry: Its not a lot of money in absolute terms though, £70 a month for TV. Me and the mrs are spending more than that on Sat. at Cheltenham Race Course. Its a lot if you haven't got it though if that makes sense. Eventually Sky will be willing to haggle, but its Freeview and cheap DVD/Bluray all the way in the xux house for now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tim123 Report post Posted January 27, 2011 Does anyone know if you can keep your sky TV if you go bankrupt? You get allowed to keep "enough to live on". It seeems likely that that calculation includes an amount for "entertainment" and "vices". If you want to spend that money on Sky instead of a week's holiday at the seaside or 7300 ciggies, that is entirely up to you. tim Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winkie Report post Posted January 27, 2011 I don't know if anyone can cast their mind back 30 or so years, all we had was bbc 1 bbc2 & itv...no mobiles, playstation, xbox sky etc........kids lived then they went to each others houses or down the park they socialised with others, played sport, went swimming, went to cubs, brownies, guides, boys brigade, youth club built a network of friends, they entertained themselves...... ....today they are put them in front of the TV from the age of around 12 months onwards....and they call that progress. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Democorruptcy Report post Posted January 27, 2011 I don't know if anyone can cast their mind back 30 or so years, all we had was bbc 1 bbc2 & itv...no mobiles, playstation, xbox sky etc........kids lived then they went to each others houses or down the park they socialised with others, played sport, went swimming, went to cubs, brownies, guides, boys brigade, youth club built a network of friends, they entertained themselves...... ....today they are put them in front of the TV from the age of around 12 months onwards....and they call that progress. They have to have more in-house entertainment because the streets aren't safe. Keeping up with the Jones for kids will be comparing gadgets in their panic rooms next. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
history repeats Report post Posted January 27, 2011 Before you start knocking sky you need to take a very close look at the BBC. The coverage by the bbc over the past few days has been pathetic. Sky today released subscriber figures of 10million. The bbc knows that the license fee days are numbered. In a attempt to undermine sky they have been covering the sexism row as if it was major news. It was headline news at 8am this morning instead of being a small snippet, they should have been giving in depth coverage to the Egyption revolution that is potentially taking place. The BBC is biased no longer impartial and its fighting for its life. It will loose that fight sooner rather than later and I will rue that day. The BBC is still needed but it needs to be put back into its place. There is a battle going on for the control of the airwaves its Murdock vs the BBC. It's not a public battle but you can see it being played out. Murdock is attempting to take full control of BSKYB and has offered to sell sky news to facilitate that deal. The bbc have had the license fee frozen for two years. The bbc have been told to cut back the bbc website that was costing 200million a year to run.... YES your reading that correct 200 million for a website. They are cuting costs by 34 million. Why do you think the BBC have dragged this phone hacking thing out again? Why do you think sky were so quick to sack andy grey? Why do you think the news of the world assistant editor was sacked yesterday? Why do you think a previous editor of the news of the world resigned as camerons press secretary. Vince cable was getting involved last month saying "he had declared war" on murdock. Battle lines are being drawn, as the bbc attempts to drag murdock, SKY, The News of the Worlds name through the mud in a desperate attempt to show its squeeky clean impartiality. The bbc are not squeeky clean they are parasitic crooks who must be cut down to size. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
douggggy Report post Posted January 27, 2011 instead of paying £200+ quid (fitted) for a new tv ariel, I bought for £50.00 in Aldi, on special clearance, a freesat HD box and dish fitted it myself, works perfect and unlike Sky, you can completely remove all the rubbish chanels you don`t want all for the price of one months sky hd subscription Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Democorruptcy Report post Posted January 27, 2011 Sky today released subscriber figures of 10million. 10,000,000 x 8p = £800,000 a month Somebody tell me their bill is less than the appropriate VAT rise? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SarahBell Report post Posted January 27, 2011 TV is cheap entertainment for people who can't afford real life. Assume you have a family of 5, each watching 4 hours a day. That's 20 hours a day, or 600 hours a month for £70. Works out to just over 11p an hour. Freeview it's FREE Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sour Mash Report post Posted January 27, 2011 Its not a lot of money in absolute terms though, £70 a month for TV. Me and the mrs are spending more than that on Sat. at Cheltenham Race Course. On the other hand, spending a small amount of money on a decent internet connection (and maybe Usenet sub) will see you provided with endless amounts of TV, films and music. Combine that with the 'free' (you have to pay for a license in any case) channels on Freeview for casual watching and you're sorted - Sky is a colossal waste of money unless you are a football fanatic. Even then you can see any matches that your team is playing in at the local pub and pay for the beer with the cash you saved by not having a home sub. I can't believe that this crowd are still in business in a recessionary environment, let alone increasing profits. Shows just how chav-ified Britain has become. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
history repeats Report post Posted January 27, 2011 I agree with pretty much all you say but the Sky chap on the BBC news at lunchtime 12:40ish when asked outright if Sky news would go wouldnt comment, his words something along the lines of "I cant comment on the regulation process". That suggests to me you that you might be a Sky employee or be someone in the know at the very least. Correct? One other point, bearing in mind the Foreign Office fund the world service to push the UK agenda and values, is it a co-incidence the World Service is losing its funding just as the middle east as a whole region is under going a major transition. Tunisia, Egypt and now spreading to other countries like the Yemen? How long for the likes of Saudi Arabia or even Iran? Most western countries have a vested interest in the implementation of democracy in these countries which in turn renders the world service in its current implementation surplus to requirement. I don't work for sky, i just don't like the way they operate with the threat of jail if you don't pay the tv license. I have noticed that the BBC bash sky at ever opportunity. Also they pinched my photo and stuck it on the 6 oclock news. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/11/bbc_flickr_image/ Since stealing my work, I have kept a very close eye on the BBC. I don't disagree with the world service but its the how it's funded that upsets me. I want the option to opt out. Like events in the middle east, change will come eventually. The writing is on the wall. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dinker Report post Posted January 27, 2011 I don't buy into this HD stuff, DVDs at 2.99 will do me fine. £70 a month is madness for TV Average Revenue Per Customer is £541 p.a. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SarahBell Report post Posted January 27, 2011 Average Revenue Per Customer is £541 p.a. I think this sort of figure shows that there's quite a bit of leeway before people are on the breadline... Although some people believe not having a full sky package is the same as starving to death. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winkie Report post Posted January 27, 2011 I think this sort of figure shows that there's quite a bit of leeway before people are on the breadline... Although some people believe not having a full sky package is the same as starving to death. I have freeview...am I missing anything?......most of the stuff is repeats, reality, house, cooking or rabbit this or that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
