Sky dropping the HD Charge ?

[kingstongold]

So I've heard rumors in various places that the 10pound charge will be dropped by sky at the end of the yr similar to the sky+ charge

Does anyone know if theres any truth in this or if its rubbish?

 

[dunks517]

So I've heard rumors in various places that the 10pound charge will be dropped by sky at the end of the yr similar to the sky+ charge

Does anyone know if theres any truth in this or if its rubbish?

Yes it is true, the charge will be dropped at the same time the usb port is enabled, the HDMI does 5.1 and the multoroom box is released...

 

[6022tivo]

So I've heard rumors in various places that the 10pound charge will be dropped by sky at the end of the yr similar to the sky+ charge

Does anyone know if theres any truth in this or if its rubbish?

rubbish, will not happen.

 

[scodav]

rubbish, will not happen.

so does this mean if you already have hd they will just stop the charge, meant to reply to the the quote above this sorry

 

[snadge]

i very much doubt its true - email SKY direct and ask them? be great if it does - but I wont be surprised if its a "BRAND NEW CUSTOMERS ONLY" thing like they did with the charges on SKY+HD boxes (£49 for current customers - Free to new customers)

 

[steve69]

and how long was it untill they dropped the sky+ sub.
personally i cant see that at all.

 

[lechacal]

Why would they do that? As I remember they only dropped the Sky+ charge at about the same time they launched Sky HD i.e. when they had a new premium product to push. You'll only get Sky HD when it's no longer the latest and greatest.

 

[steve69]

yep that was my point.
dont know how long it will be though when there next new venture will be, there so many rumours round that i will believe it when i see it.

 

[Ataripower]

Next new venture Sky HD 3D??

 

[Starburst]

Why would they do that?

Perhaps when the marketing and bean counters consider HD is more valuable as a retention tool than a direct revenue generator.

I doubt that will be anytime soon unless the current quarter and the xmas period are particularly bad along with a surge in Freesat and the trickle of DTT HD becoming a flood.

 

[Starburst]

Next new venture Sky HD 3D??

They are making a lot of noise but when talking about a single channel and such limited content it's hardly a mass market product which may explain why with UK footy such a integral part it's rumoured to be launching on the business/pub package first.

 

[neilneil]

As much as I would love it to be true. I suspect it's going to take even longer for Sky to drop the HD sub than it took them to drop the Sky+ charge. After all Sky HD actually costs them money to run in extra bandwidth charges. Sky + was basically free to them after they had recouped the R&D costs. So they could afford to give it away.
It will take a serious freeview HD uptake and a lot of customers dropping their package in favour of Freeview for Sky to consider dropping the charge IMO.


-Neil

 

[loz]

More likely to go up than down....

 

[technovorgin]

my father in law says he has paperwork saying hd goes up by 25p and normal sd goes up by £1 in january
i will get it off him and see

 

[Scapegoat]

To me it seemed Sky+ became 'free' with any package when there was significant numbers of comparable PVRs available on the market - it became difficult to justify the 'value' of £120 a year when you could get a similar service for free.

If Sky take the same step with HD, then it may take a while for any significant competition to arrive e.g.

Virgin - charge £5 a month (I think) for HD/V-drive, but only have a handfull of channels (and until recently only had 1!)

Freesat - free, but so little HD content its not a comparable offering.

Freeview - not available.


Perhaps as we appoach a big sporting event (World Cup, Olympics etc) when many people may take the plunge to upgrade to HD and the 'free' HD options have more content - that is when I could see Sky increasing their competitive edge and dropping / reducing the charge.


Also I have speculated, that the first step might be free HD for multiroom subscribers. They would lose income from exisiting multiroom subscribers who have HD, but it might generate more HD subscribers who see it as better value as its 2 services for the price of 1.

 

[simon194]

Also I have speculated, that the first step might be free HD for multiroom subscribers. They would lose income from exisiting multiroom subscribers who have HD, but it might generate more HD subscribers who see it as better value as its 2 services for the price of 1.

My thoughts exactly but maybe it will Sky World subscribers that will be the first to benefit as they did with Sky+.

 

[loz]

my father in law says he has paperwork saying hd goes up by 25p and normal sd goes up by £1 in january
i will get it off him and see

That is because of the VAT rate returning to 17.5%

 

[Broadz]

To me it seemed Sky+ became 'free' with any package when there was significant numbers of comparable PVRs available on the market - it became difficult to justify the 'value' of £120 a year when you could get a similar service for free.

Sky+ is a service which doesn't give you any extra channels - you are only entitled to pause, record, rewind, and series link the free channels and channels that you already subscribe to.

The HD Pack gives you fifteen channels which are not available anywhere else - maybe a handful are available via Virgin - plus, if you subscribe to Sky Sports and/or Sky Movies, up to another dozen high definition channels which aren't available anywhere else.

Sky don't give the Variety Mix away for free. Sky don't give the News Mix away for free. Sky don't give Sky Sports away for free. So why would they give one of their other packs away for free? Surely giving the HD Pack away for free would just persuade people to stop subscribing to the Variety Mix ("Hey, if I get Sky One HD for free anyway, why bother subscribing to the mix which gets me Sky One SD?"). Which would mean that Sky would not only lose money by not charging for the HD Pack, but might also encourage people to drop their subscriptions to the SD Mixes as well. Double whammy! And not in Sky's shareholders minds in terms of making profit.

The only thing that Sky+ and the HD Pack ever had in common was the initial cost - £10 per month for each. That's it. Nothing else about the two is the same. One is subscription to a set of channels - one allows you to pause and record what you were already paying to watch.

They are two totally different services, and if the HD Pack had originally cost anything other than a tenner a month people wouldn't be trying to claim that because one eventually became free the other one must as well. If the HD Pack had cost (say) £16 per month, putting it on a par with Sky's two premium mixes, people wouldn't be claiming that it should soon become free - because nobody is claiming that Sky Movies or Sky Sports should soon become free.

Anyone who thinks they'll drop the charge fairly soon (or indeed ever) really needs to stop comparing it with Sky+ and start comparing it with every other subscription package that Sky sell on a monthly basis - none of which are ever likely to be free. And when Sky are pretty much giving away the HD boxes at the moment, on the understanding that anybody who gets a free or massively discounted HD box must subscribe to the HD Pack for at least twelve months, they are even more unlikely to suddenly stop charging for the HD Pack.

 

[lechacal]

But apart from that...

 

[Pecker]

They'll have to drop it eventually, of course. You know, when HD becomes the standard, and is thus SD.

Please remember, we're in a recession. The stories of people 'phoning up and saying they're cancelling, only to be offered all sorts of freebies, and legion.

A good mate in Ireland posted this the other day:

was chatting to my pal on the way up to the boxing saturday, and was telling him that sky was costing me a lot, and how i'd like skyhd but dont want to pay an even bigger monthly subscription...and every time i ring sky to take something like the movies off it, it only makes a tenner difference..
so, he said i should ring them and say i want to cancel...that i'm not interested in removing channels, just want to cancel the lot.

so..i did...they asked why, i said it was costing too much...they asked if i would like hd..i said yes..but its besides the point as its costing too much now anyway...

anyhoo...long story short...i ended up getting 15 euros a month off my subscription...and a free skyhd box + channels....just like my buddy said would happen.

it'll be here friday.

happy days.

Sky are a commercial operation, who've largely won the battle over cable over the years by being in front of everyone else, with digital, with surround sound, with widescreen, with HD.

Why would they offer HD for free? To stay ahead of the game.

I'm not saying it's going to happen, but I think the view that "They're making £10 a month from us now so why drop it?" is a little limited.

Steve W

 

[Ray_Woodward]

my father in law says he has paperwork saying hd goes up by 25p and normal sd goes up by £1 in january
i will get it off him and see

That is VAT rate related I think you'll find.

This "rumour" crops up occasionally.

There are *NO* plans to drop the HD subscription - and are not likely to be any such plans for quite some time yet (HD currently accounts for just over 1 million subs out of over 9 million total, IE HD is still the minority).

 

[Scapegoat]

The only thing that Sky+ and the HD Pack ever had in common was the initial cost - £10 per month for each. That's it. Nothing else about the two is the same. One is subscription to a set of channels - one allows you to pause and record what you were already paying to watch.

They are two totally different services, and if the HD Pack had originally cost anything other than a tenner a month people wouldn't be trying to claim that because one eventually became free the other one must as well. If the HD Pack had cost (say) £16 per month, putting it on a par with Sky's two premium mixes, people wouldn't be claiming that it should soon become free - because nobody is claiming that Sky Movies or Sky Sports should soon become free.

HD does not give me any additional content, just content in a higher resolution. So I am not sure I can agree with the comparison to giving Sports / Movies etc away free as well.

I can think of a few occassions where an improvement in broadcast media quality has occurred that could provide a comparison.

Widescreen - when channels were first introduced (and there were specific w/s versions of the movie channels at the start) there was no seperate subscription charge for those that decided to buy state of the art w/screen sets.

NICAM / DD - when channels became available with NICAM and later DD sound, again there was no increase in subscription.

These developments must have required R&D expenditure, new equipment, changes/improvements to studios etc etc. However these costs were 'hidden' in the overall cost of TV (subs / licence fee) and initially the majority paid for the benefit of the minority of early adopters, but eventaully they now benefit an ever increasing % of the population.

Colour - when colout TV started, the licence fee did (does?) differentiate and charge more for the same content in a better quality. So in this instance, the decision was that people would pay extra for the new better service. Eventually, everyone paid the extra money and it became the standard cost for your TV.

Sky made the decision to differentiate this time. Whether they decide to remove the differentiation in the future and use it as a retention/attraction mechanism (as they did with Sky+ albeit not a broadcast quality system - though it was the first recording system that allowed playback of recorded material at broadcast quality IIRC) OR keep it and use it as a way of inflating the cost of TV going forward (as the BBC did) only time will tell.

 

[Scapegoat]

They'll have to drop it eventually, of course. You know, when HD becomes the standard, and is thus SD.

Perhaps not.

As I mention in another post, when Colour was introuced the licence fee was higher than B&W. Eventually everyone bought a Colour licence and paid the new hihger amount.

 

[Pecker]

That is VAT rate related I think you'll find.

This "rumour" crops up occasionally.

There are *NO* plans to drop the HD subscription - and are not likely to be any such plans for quite some time yet (HD currently accounts for just over 1 million subs out of over 9 million total, IE HD is still the minority).

Logically, Sky will drop the £10 when (a) they don't need it to fund the transition to HD anymore, and (b) when new converts to HD hit a wall, and they think they won't get anyone else on board without dropping the charge.

Steve W

 

[Broadz]

HD does not give me any additional content, just content in a higher resolution. So I am not sure I can agree with the comparison to giving Sports / Movies etc away free as well.

Maybe not - for you. But for many people the HD Pack gives them lots of additional content that they don't get anywhere else - in SD or HD. None of the high definition Knowledge Mix channels show the same programmes as the SD equivalent but in high definition. They each show their own programme content which is not the same as is being shown in parallel in standard definition.

And if you don't subscribe to the Knowledge Mix anyway - you will still get these HD channels as part of the HD Pack. If you don't subscribe to the Variety Mix but do subscribe to the HD Pack you'll get Sky One HD, FX HD, Rush HD without having Sky One SD, FX and Rush etc etc etc. If you don't subscribe to News and Events you won't get Eurosport SD - but if you subscribe to the HD Pack you will get Eurosport HD. If you don't subscribe to the Style and Culture Mix you won't get Sky Arts 1 and 2 in standard def - but if you subscribe to the HD Pack you will get them in high definition.

The HD Pack channels are completely discrete channels - whether you subscribe to the SD equivalents when one is a simulcast of the other or not is up to you - but in many cases the channels are showing different content to what ther SD version is showing (if there is an exact SD equivalent) so you can't just say "I'm already getting that in SD, so it's just a better picture of what I'm already paying for."