So.... Who should buy the 39% of BSB?
Object Z
Posts: 1,871
Forum Member
✭✭✭
Assuming that it becomes available, who would you like to own or who do you think will end up with the News Internationals 39%.
(BTW Closing Sky is not an option).
(BTW Closing Sky is not an option).
0
Comments
With a full public enquiry into media and technology group ownership to follow in the name of competition...
Phazer
I think we know that the OP actually means BSkyB
You know what I mean, I was being lazy.
BSB = `British Sky Broadcasting`, or `Sky` for short
I like `donated`, but I would have to disagree with shares only going to non Sky customers/TVL holders. Maybe the shares should be distributed to existing Sky customers. :rolleyes:
BTW. Don't care about Cricket, so never a selling point to me
I think I could find a few quid to buy some shares.
Now that would be quite funny
It doesn't matter anyway, because Sky will still have their assets, profits, dominance, and will still be able to hoover up sports rights and other bits and bobs.
i hope your takeing the bloody mic
News Corp's share is worth £4.63bn, which equates to about £185 donated to each of 25 million Licence Fee holders!
That is about 270 shares at the current price.
Ofcom have a right to impose such a sanction. Heck they can revoke their broadcast licences if they feel that is a reasonable sanction also.
So if Ofcom did that what you going to say? That Ofcom are "Anti-Sky" because they are picking on them? Get a grip :rolleyes:
Ofcom won't revoke their broadcasting license. It just won't happen.
If News Corp are made to give up the shares (doesn't bother me one bit if they do), then the idea of them going to TVL payers is absurd. Sky's a business, not some kind of charity.
Murdoch will get off the hook for this episode. He has all the dirt he needs for the collapse of Parliament and the Establishment. The Left should stop wetting themselves and finish their Vimto. There will be future battles ahead and we can hardly wait to hear your wisdom.
No, not if News Corp sees sense and gives up its share should Ofcom declare that it is not a fit and proper body to hold a broadcast licence as long as 39% is owned by News Corp.
would have the beneficial outcome of giving the customer a greater influence over the running of the company -
why does this philosophy not apply to my suggestion?
BSkyB would remain a company, the balance of ownership would change.
You cant be serious?
Stock Market for me as well
This is TV. TV isn't some kind of 'right' in the same way gas is. People don't HAVE to have Sky like they HAVE to have gas.
Sky is something that people choose to have, so it's not important for shares to be spread around society for influence from varying sections of it.
The only TV that all sections of society should have influence on is that paid for by the TVL.
Exactly, nobody needs Sky like in the same way people need gas or healthcare
Then you are living in a fantasy world and btw there have been highlights of test cricket on fta