Freesat - Finally Competition to Sky?

Epicurus

Well-known Member
I don't know how many of you are thinking the same thing as me, but probably quite a few. I'm really pleased that Freesat and HD Freesat are finally going ahead, and I honestly believe the Murdochs will be cursing behind closed doors right now and considering a response.

Some people have commented that there has not been a lot of publicity yet, but they have been sending out the message in the right places. On populist radio stations like Radio 1 this morning, and in the electronics stores of the masses like Comet, Currys and Argos. Hopefully the constantly crashing launch website is a sign of its impending success.

Like many on here, I too was very excited by the prospect of Sky HD when it first came out, and also like many I was put off by the exorbitant costs involved. More than a year after launch and with only a couple of new channels, Sky HD is still obscenely expensive and it's for that reason alone I have managed to resist temptation. BBC HD has consistently been the best channel Sky HD had to offer, and I for one chose to pay £100 for a DVB-S2 PCI Card to watch it rather than pay Sky!

Finally with Freesat HD we have a real alternative to HD broadcasting that has minmal setup costs and no subscription, launching just in time for Euro 2008 in HD!

It won't be perfect, and it probably won't be as slick as Sky at the start, but I'm intending to buy into it purely to show my support and help drive it forward.
 

earlybath

Novice Member
It certainly seems promising, especially with limited HD from launch, with more to follow.

However, I'm reluctant to fork out now when I know in a few months a Freesat HD PVR will appear on the market (or at least it better do!!).
 

2003bluecat

Active Member
It certainly seems promising, especially with limited HD from launch, with more to follow.

However, I'm reluctant to fork out now when I know in a few months a Freesat HD PVR will appear on the market (or at least it better do!!).
It should do. Take a look here

I just hope they dont hang around too long :smashin:
 

GrantB1980

Novice Member
same amount of people are viewing this forum as there are the Sky forum, says it all really!
I just learned about Freesat today and am very tempted to jump ship. Sky are charging far too much.
 

RobM

Member
Sorry, seems that isn't a pvr. I was getting a little too excited :suicide::oops:
A PVR is due for release around July time as far as I know. My Mrs' was on a Freesat training course a couple of weeks ago and was told they would be following on a month or two after launch :)

Also expect to see a built in Freesat decoder in a plasma in the near future from Panasonic :)
 

CGizzi

Novice Member
Freesat is what weve all been waiting for IMHO, if the next generation of tvs have HD decoders as standard within a few years hopefully HD will become standard. I realise most houses will still have the hit of £80 inst charge for the dish.

People are too quick to moan saying only a handfull of customers, limited HD etc. etc. were looking at the begining of a new format here people given time Im sure it will become standard viewing.

Im pretty sure $ky are pretty nervious about the whole thing, if the launch ( when advertised?) mentions free HD euro cup/olympics F1(?) ect Im sure there will be plenty of people queing to buy it.
 
H

Huntsekker

Guest
Freesat PVR is going to wipe the floor with Sky!! They will be dead within a year!!

They can shove their overpriced packages and crappy customer service right up their :censored:
 

glugwine

Novice Member
All competition is good, but Freesat is the new boy in town and has alot to prove, you all are comparing it to Sky, however with 16 HD channels already, ableit at a cost they are way ahead of the game.

No HD documentary channels, only limted sports compared to Sky's three channels and 3 dedicated movie channels against Freesat's none, plus other channels on Sky HD.
Infact your going to be lucky to get only two channels showing HD for a few hours per day:thumbsdow
Also no PVR at the moment is a bit poor.

Most people will probably stick to Freeview and if they want a 'proper' HD service then Sky is the better choice, I expect ITV to be on Sky with an HD channel within a year, with 500,000 subscribers already, Freesat I doubt will get that number quickly if at all.
 

mrbleu

Novice Member
Sky have been saying that they already offer a freesat service (freesatfromsky), and have done since 2004, so they don't understand why the BBC is spending licence payers money on launching a new service...

Perhaps it has something to do with the many freesatfromsky customers who were hoodwinked into signing up for contracts, or bombarded with sales calls to get them to use premium services...

Sky Threats

And the fact that as a freesatfromsky user you get the full Sky epg and no way of removing all the channels you are never going to use. And the fact that you can't have Sky+ PVR functionality, or HD...

Hint. People don't like you, BSkyB ;)

Yes, Sky will feel a little heat from this new service, and even though I am a longtime Sky customer, I am planning to save myself £30 a month as soon as the freesat pvr launches.
 

2003bluecat

Active Member
Freesat is what weve all been waiting for IMHO, if the next generation of tvs have HD decoders as standard within a few years hopefully HD will become standard. I realise most houses will still have the hit of £80 inst charge for the dish.

People are too quick to moan saying only a handfull of customers, limited HD etc. etc. were looking at the begining of a new format here people given time Im sure it will become standard viewing.

Im pretty sure $ky are pretty nervious about the whole thing, if the launch ( when advertised?) mentions free HD euro cup/olympics F1(?) ect Im sure there will be plenty of people queing to buy it.
Agreed :smashin:

Sky, however with 16 HD channels already, ableit at a cost they are way ahead of the game.
Sky are ahead of the game only because until now there hasn't been any competition. Freesat has the potential to be a good, cheaper alternative which surely can't be bad for the consumer.
 

Bachstrad

Novice Member
I fail to see how Freesat is competition to Sky. Isn't the content going to be the same as Freeview, but with a couple of HD channels thrown in?

Unless 'Freesat' can become 'Paysat', how will it compete? Will there be dedicated HD Sports & Movie channels. I think not, because there's no way of generating the income to purchase the content. Unless I'm missing something.

ATB

Max
 

2003bluecat

Active Member
I fail to see how Freesat is competition to Sky. Isn't the content going to be the same as Freeview, but with a couple of HD channels thrown in?

Unless 'Freesat' can become 'Paysat', how will it compete? Will there be dedicated Sports & Movie channels. I think not, because there's no way of generating the income to purchase the content. Unless I'm missing something.

ATB

Max
I agree it isn't competition at the moment and is unlikely to challenge in the market for those who subscribe to the top Sky HD package (I'm sure it's worth it if you can afford it :cool:). But surely if it can offer a good selection of SD and HD channels, at a cost much lower than Sky, with decent EPG and interactivity features it could compete? Especially at the lower end of Sky's market e.g the non-premium subscribers.

Unless 'Freesat' can become 'Paysat', how will it compete?
Maybe that will be on the cards once freesat has a customer base!?! :D
 

Epicurus

Well-known Member
I'm mainly talking about competition from an HD perspective.

Since HD footage first became available, either through the Xbox, Blu-Ray, HD-DVD, Sky etc I think most of us realised there was no going back, SD just looked so, well, "standard".

Sky deserve their credit for taking the first step forward, but it wasn't as big a risk as some people might think. HD was already shown to be successful and desirable in the American market for example.

What we don't want is the continuing situation of the Sky monopoly. I'm sure I am not alone in my dislike for what is a very unscrupulous company. Sadly the sheer number of sports exclusives means it is difficult for any sports fan to avoid them, a perfect marketing tool!

When Setanta got a share of the Football I quickly signed up to that and no longer pay a Sky subscription. The quality on Setanta is dreadful but I know this is the price I pay if I want to encourage competition.

Supporting the "big boys" leads to a lack of choice, generic high streets and monopolistic price strategies. That's why I and many others will seize on this chance to support an alternative, and if the BBC and ITV see a success then surely we will see an expansion in HD programming.
 

Bachstrad

Novice Member
I agree it isn't competition at the moment and is unlikely to challenge in the market for those who subscribe to the top Sky HD package (I'm sure it's worth it if you can afford it :cool:). But surely if it can offer a good selection of SD and HD channels, at a cost much lower than Sky, with decent EPG and interactivity features it could compete? Especially at the lower end of Sky's market e.g the non-premium subscribers.



Maybe that will be on the cards once freesat has a customer base!?! :D
I think it's worth it :smashin:

Movies, Sports, Multiroom and 17 HD Channels for around £2 a day, that's for what is our main source of entertainment after all. Peanuts IMHO. It costs me way less than the cash I used to spend on cigarettes when I was foolish enough to smoke.

ATB

Max
 

2003bluecat

Active Member
What we don't want is the continuing situation of the Sky monopoly.
I agree. Unfortunately, like you say, they just have far too much power in the sports market.

It costs me way less than the cash I used to spend on cigarettes when I was foolish enough to smoke.
Good point :smashin: I'll have to look into this quitting thing everyone is talking about :rotfl:
 

gavan

Novice Member
I fail to see how Freesat is competition to Sky. Isn't the content going to be the same as Freeview, but with a couple of HD channels thrown in?

Unless 'Freesat' can become 'Paysat', how will it compete? Will there be dedicated HD Sports & Movie channels. I think not, because there's no way of generating the income to purchase the content. Unless I'm missing something.

ATB

Max
It provides a non-Sky-proprietary platform for digital satellite.

Whilst it may not compete for pay TV services to the viewer, it surely offers competition as a distribution service for would-be UK satellite broadcasters with no need to pay Sky anything.

It's really, really bad news for Sky in the longer term. Freeview had already been making dents in sales of their overpriced product. Once people get the message that they can hook a cheap box up to their existing dish and get some HD and lots of SD channels for free, I can see a lot of people deciding to drop their Sky sub.

It won't knock Sky down overnight but will erode at their base in the long term.
 

ronat

Active Member
I totally agree that we should have a viable alternative to Sky.OK,I recognise that an unpaid-for service will never be able to match the Sky package for overall quantity,or indeed quality,but I for one neither need nor want very many of the channels that Sky offer,but would like to have the HD experience. Although Murdoch is one of my pet hates,I always recognise that Sky provides a service to the many hundreds of thousands who don't mind paying for it. However,although it has been compared to the price of a packet of cigarettes,it is still a sizeable lump of cash to a great many people.
Incidentally,although it might seem a naive question,am I right in thinking that the service will be on the same satellite as Sky?
 

kbj242

Novice Member
I know there are those who hold a contrary view to mine, but IMO the launch of Freesat is just as welcome as the capturing of football rights by Setanta.....Sky now have some competition which they've not had for years.

And I don't hate Sky - they've invested their money and brought things on leaps and bounds, but it simply can't be right that only one company provides access (in whatever fashion) to satellite tv, in the same way that Sky having sole claim on live football was "in everyone's best interest" - it wasn't.

I hope Freesat is a success and Sky will come out with some positive response.
 

BrianMc

Novice Member
It's really, really bad news for Sky in the longer term. Freeview had already been making dents in sales of their overpriced product. Once people get the message that they can hook a cheap box up to their existing dish and get some HD and lots of SD channels for free, I can see a lot of people deciding to drop their Sky sub.
I disagree! Once people go as far as getting a satellite dish installed there is just as much likelyhood of them deciding that it wouldn't be that hard to add Sky!

My viewpoint is that, if you can get Broadband from Sky, the saving from that virtually pays for the basic Sky subscription level!
 

2003bluecat

Active Member
My viewpoint is that, if you can get Broadband from Sky, the saving from that virtually pays for the basic Sky subscription level!
This is true. But I'm one of those who cant get broadband from sky, cant get freeview, cant get cable and cant even get channel 5 through terrestrial!!! So at least freesat is good for me :D
 

Bachstrad

Novice Member
It provides a non-Sky-proprietary platform for digital satellite.

Whilst it may not compete for pay TV services to the viewer, it surely offers competition as a distribution service for would-be UK satellite broadcasters with no need to pay Sky anything.

It's really, really bad news for Sky in the longer term. Freeview had already been making dents in sales of their overpriced product. Once people get the message that they can hook a cheap box up to their existing dish and get some HD and lots of SD channels for free, I can see a lot of people deciding to drop their Sky sub.

It won't knock Sky down overnight but will erode at their base in the long term.
I take your point, but surely those people unhappy with the pay TV model have already left Sky to watch Freeview, or have cancelled their subscriptions anyway as part of the 'churn'. If they then install a Freesat STB to their old Sky dish I don't see what that will do to harm Sky.

Conversely, you could argue that someone having bought a Freesat box, it would be easy to then hook up a Sky box having decided that the Freesat content wasn't as good as it was first thought. I'm sure Sky won't be overlooking that in their marketing plan.

ATB

Max
 

BrianMc

Novice Member
Conversely, you could argue that someone having bought a Freesat box, it would be easy to then hook up a Sky box having decided that the Freesat content wasn't as good as it was first thought. I'm sure Sky won't be overlooking that in their marketing plan.
Sky are now being quoted as saying they will up their HD-channels from 16 to 30 by next year.

An undoubted pitch of "You like HD??? See how much more we have!"
 

mrbleu

Novice Member
Incidentally,although it might seem a naive question,am I right in thinking that the service will be on the same satellite as Sky?
Yes and no... There are several satellites located at the 28.2E orbital position, Eurobird 1 owned and operated by Eutelsat, and Astra 2A, 2B, 2C and 2D which owned and operated by Astra.

Sky do not own any satellites, if that was where you were heading with this question ;)
 

Similar threads

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Panasonic HX800 TV + Sony HT-G700 Soundbar reviews, movie and TV show news and reviews

Trending threads

Latest News

Linn upgrades Majik LP12 turntable with new tonearm
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
VPI announces new Prime 21 turntables
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Skyworth launches 8K Q71 TV
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
AVForums Podcast: 23rd September 2020
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
Wharfedale introduces new Diamond 12 Series speakers
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom