concluding that Sky just isn't value for money.

boristhespieboristhespie Posts: 24
Forum Member
Had Sky a few years. I got it primarily for the broadband unlimited and european calls. At the time you had to have the tv.

Now however, Sky just seems o be devoid of any value. I never watch it. The channels offer little that ain't available on freeview as far as I can see. I pay for Eurosport mainly for cycling, but even this is taken up with hours of womens tennis and superbikes. I like tennis but I also like variety.

I really, beyond those who want premiere league, cannot see the point of Sky.

I may stay with them if I were to get a substantial reduction in price, but this threatening to leave crap in order to get a better deal really bores me. Why do they require this to offer some solice for their poor show?

I know Sky has it's supporters but, With the competion from other tv streaming and films from the likes of Netflix, Sky needs to really start proving they are relevant to the average joe or I believe they will die a slow death as a company.

Just some thoughts before I make that phonecall.
«1345

Comments

  • big_hard_ladbig_hard_lad Posts: 4,077
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    If you don't find value in the product...don't buy it?

    Personally, I find my Sky package excellent value for the content I get and enjoy.
  • boristhespieboristhespie Posts: 24
    Forum Member
    Great as I said they have their supporters. Yes I am about to cancel the tv. Glad I no longer need it.
  • Tom123Tom123 Posts: 1,326
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Now however, Sky just seems o be devoid of any value. I never watch it. The channels offer little that ain't available on freeview as far as I can see.

    Really depends on what you're interested in. A lot of the stuff I'm interested in is NOT on Freeview channels.
    I really, beyond those who want premiere league, cannot see the point of Sky.

    I do though
    I may stay with them if I were to get a substantial reduction in price, but this threatening to leave crap in order to get a better deal really bores me. Why do they require this to offer some solice for their poor show?

    If it's not good value in your personal opinion and for your personal preferences you should just cancel. End of... It's what I would do and considering you can't see anything of interest to you I fail to see whether you would want to continue paying at all - even a reduced rate.
    With the competion from other tv streaming and films from the likes of Netflix, Sky needs to really start proving they are relevant to the average joe or I believe they will die a slow dearh as a company.

    Hmmm....with 10 million subscribers I have a feeling they're quite relevant to the average joe.
    Testing Netflix and although it is not bad, it's still not there yet and is missing too much at the moment. Whether that will change remains to be seen
  • BKMBKM Posts: 6,912
    Forum Member
    Had Sky a few years. I got it primarily for the broadband unlimited and european calls. At the time you had to have the tv.

    Now however, Sky just seems o be devoid of any value. I never watch it. The channels offer little that ain't available on freeview as far as I can see. I pay for Eurosport mainly for cycling, but even this is taken up with hours of womens tennis and superbikes. I like tennis but I also like variety.

    I really, beyond those who want premiere league, cannot see the point of Sky.
    I am never quite sure of the point of postings like these!

    I do not have Premier League BUT Sky is still value to me. If it was not I would cancel!!
  • big_hard_ladbig_hard_lad Posts: 4,077
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    BKM wrote: »
    I am never quite sure of the point of postings like these!

    I do not have Premier League BUT Sky is still value to me. If it was not I would cancel!!

    I don't see the point either. I don't find value in a lot of things that others do...so I don't buy them.
  • noise747noise747 Posts: 30,692
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I got rid of sky about 5 years back, it got to be that, but then I only had it for 12 months. After six months I had enough of the repeats and did not really want to keep it for another six, but had no choice.

    i did not have Sky+, jst a normal box and sky did not do broadband then. I remember phoning them up to cancel and they offering me a Sky+ box, what is the point in having a box to record repeats.


    i was going to go back with sky, i only wanted their discovery channels, but then they changed it to the system they got now, Sky entertainment and Sky entertainment+ so I gave up on that idea.

    i also don't think Sky is good value, but millions of people seems to think it is.
  • joshua_welbyjoshua_welby Posts: 9,017
    Forum Member
    Sky is value for money for me as most of the programmes I watch are not on Freeview like new episodes of Nikita and The Simpsons and the Golden Globes

    Added to that all of their HD channels for an extra tenner a month, I cannot really complain
  • boristhespieboristhespie Posts: 24
    Forum Member
    Would have liked to see the Globes but they were on a movie channel and voila, there it is for me. I pay for tv but even something like this is put onto some other channel that requires further cost.

    The point of a post like this on a Discussion forum, is to start a discussion. That is all. It is an opinion. You may agree. You may disagree. But still interesting to read others thoughts. Only channel I would miss would be Eurosport at grand tour and classics time of year. That's why I have been hesistant.

    But basic entertainment mix really has nowt that can't be seen on freeview. Yeah a couple of programmes aren't available but that's a helluva cost for a couple of programmes. I switch on in the morning and am confronted with nowt but shopping channels. Nice.
  • Tom123Tom123 Posts: 1,326
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Only channel I would miss would be Eurosport at grand tour and classics time of year. That's why I have been hesistant.

    See, I wouldn't be paying just for that. Wouldn't be good value for me.
    But basic entertainment mix really has nowt that can't be seen on freeview.

    Hmmm....about half of my viewing is pay channels and none of the content I watch there is available on Freeview
    I switch on in the morning and am confronted with nowt but shopping channels. Nice.

    Hmmm...actually when I switch on in the morning I never watch the shopping channels.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 2,784
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Once again we ALL have the choice whether or not to subscribe to SKY. If u think it's NOT value for £ then don't have it. I remember when SKY showed "The Pacific" for the first time and it was shown on Movies Premier and lots of people complained about it and rightly so. That to me was just money grabbing and a kick in the teeth for those without the movie packs but SKY told subscribers that's where they thought it should be shown. If we didn't have the movie packs then there's no way I would have had them put on just to watch that.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 2,784
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Would have liked to see the Globes but they were on a movie channel and voila, there it is for me. I pay for tv but even something like this is put onto some other channel that requires further cost.

    The point of a post like this on a Discussion forum, is to start a discussion. That is all. It is an opinion. You may agree. You may disagree. But still interesting to read others thoughts. Only channel I would miss would be Eurosport at grand tour and classics time of year. That's why I have been hesistant.

    But basic entertainment mix really has nowt that can't be seen on freeview. Yeah a couple of programmes aren't available but that's a helluva cost for a couple of programmes. I switch on in the morning and am confronted with nowt but shopping channels. Nice.

    Again it all depends on the type of progs that interest u. When money became tight, the wife and I discussed having SKY turned off but we would have missed the progs that weren't shown on Freeview so decided against it. Yeah we may cut back on our packs but we wouldn't ditch it altogether. There's too many decent progs we'd miss.

    I do find it difficult to understand how, with all the £ SKY invest in new content that there's basically nothing that interests u on their platform but each to their own I guess.
  • swillsswills Posts: 4,004
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Once again we ALL have the choice whether or not to subscribe to SKY. If u think it's NOT value for £ then don't have it. I remember when SKY showed "The Pacific" for the first time and it was shown on Movies Premier and lots of people complained about it and rightly so. That to me was just money grabbing and a kick in the teeth for those without the movie packs but SKY told subscribers that's where they thought it should be shown. If we didn't have the movie packs then there's no way I would have had them put on just to watch that.

    Was that not because the Studios (HBO?) would only allow transmission on a 'Premium' channel at that time ?
  • methodyguymethodyguy Posts: 6,044
    Forum Member
    I am looking forward to all the American shows starting on Sky this week. :cool:
  • methodyguymethodyguy Posts: 6,044
    Forum Member
    swills wrote: »
    Was that not because the Studios (HBO?) would only allow transmission on a 'Premium' channel at that time ?

    Yes HBO wanted The Pacific shown on a Premium channel without DOGS and adverts.
  • mrsgrumpy49mrsgrumpy49 Posts: 10,061
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I have Freesat from Sky so it's perfect 'value for money' for me! I can live without the subscription channels and my only reason for going satellite is the poor aerial signal here.
    The only other contender is BBC Freesat and the only reason imo for going with the latter is subscription free recording etc - which I'm not interested in. Plus as Sky Freesat has a slightly better range of channels, I see no reason to change. :D
  • Phil_ShippPhil_Shipp Posts: 33
    Forum Member
    i have all the channels on Sky and i think Sky is great value for money espically for sports and movies

    i pay £80 per month for all,just 1 watch of a premier league match shows how good value it is the cost considering going to a live match would cost you £60+ and again movies £6-8 to go and watch a film in the cinema
    makes me laugh when people say sky overcharge when you break things down into small pieces you see how cheap sky really is

    sky1 also has new programmes including new comedy and is the only channel who is heavily investing in new comedy and other types of programmes and finally a channel moving away from cheap reality rubbish and investing millions in things people would rather see

    sky atlantic always has new programmes starting,id rather watch sky's line of channel than the rubbish ITV continue to churn out

    and also getting the "on demand" feature for free is excellent,
    now i sound like a tv commercial, lol but its true if you think sky is expensive don't buy it,but most people would agree that with the wide range of channels and features we get sky is very good value
  • joshua_welbyjoshua_welby Posts: 9,017
    Forum Member
    Phil_Shipp wrote: »
    i have all the channels on Sky and i think Sky is great value for money espically for sports and movies

    i pay £80 per month for all,just 1 watch of a premier league match shows how good value it is the cost considering going to a live match would cost you £60+ and again movies £6-8 to go and watch a film in the cinema
    makes me laugh when people say sky overcharge when you break things down into small pieces you see how cheap sky really is

    sky1 also has new programmes including new comedy and is the only channel who is heavily investing in new comedy and other types of programmes and finally a channel moving away from cheap reality rubbish and investing millions in things people would rather see

    sky atlantic always has new programmes starting,id rather watch sky's line of channel than the rubbish ITV continue to churn out

    and also getting the "on demand" feature for free is excellent,
    now i sound like a tv commercial, lol but its true if you think sky is expensive don't buy it,but most people would agree that with the wide range of channels and features we get sky is very good value

    Yes, I have the FULL Sky package - the lot including all the Sports and Movie channels and most of the Asian channels
    with over 300 channels it is very good value for money indeed
  • noise747noise747 Posts: 30,692
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Yes, I have the FULL Sky package - the lot including all the Sports and Movie channels and most of the Asian channels
    with over 300 channels it is very good value for money indeed

    But how many of those channels will you ever watch?

    i don't see the point in paying for all these channels and watching a few.

    Still, each to their own and we are being told that people don't have money and are struggling to live.
  • Tom123Tom123 Posts: 1,326
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    noise747 wrote: »
    But how many of those channels will you ever watch?

    I always find that the silliest of arguments. You might as well say 'why have a telly at all?'
  • big_hard_ladbig_hard_lad Posts: 4,077
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Tom123 wrote: »
    I always find that the silliest of arguments. You might as well say 'why have a telly at all?'

    Yup! My mum always used to say, "you can only watch 1 channel at once". You can only drive one car at once too, doesn't mean I don't want a garage full so I can have my choice, though.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,835
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The Sky package is full of things which, taken on their own, you wouldn't necessarily pay for, but taken together as a collective "package" I think you get quite a lot.

    For me personally, the current James Bond movie channel is great, I also watch Sky Atlantic, use Sky Go on my tablet, have Sky Sports and Movies, looking forward to the start of the winter sports on Eurosport, using OnDemand, kids channels (for when you need to keep the kids quite for half an hour).

    Taken together, the package gives me quite a lot but as I said I probably wouldn't subscribe especially to get just one of those.

    Also, everyone has a different view of what is value for money, which to a large degree I would say is based on income levels and your tv watching time availability.
  • peter05peter05 Posts: 3,569
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Had Sky a few years. I got it primarily for the broadband unlimited and european calls. At the time you had to have the tv.

    Now however, Sky just seems o be devoid of any value. I never watch it. The channels offer little that ain't available on freeview as far as I can see. I pay for Eurosport mainly for cycling, but even this is taken up with hours of womens tennis and superbikes. I like tennis but I also like variety.

    I really, beyond those who want premiere league, cannot see the point of Sky.

    I may stay with them if I were to get a substantial reduction in price, but this threatening to leave crap in order to get a better deal really bores me. Why do they require this to offer some solice for their poor show?

    I know Sky has it's supporters but, With the competion from other tv streaming and films from the likes of Netflix, Sky needs to really start proving they are relevant to the average joe or I believe they will die a slow death as a company.

    Just some thoughts before I make that phonecall.


    I think you are like many thousands of other people with sky, who are starting to think for the money they pay SKY it is just NOT WORTH THE MONEY, and there is plenty to see on FREEVIEW and FREESAT and with FREESAT + it is better to save the £800 or so do away with sky, as you can still watch films on Netflix or any one of the new Broardband services coming on line now:)
  • derek500derek500 Posts: 24,887
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    peter05 wrote: »
    I think you are like many thousands of other people with sky, who are starting to think for the money they pay SKY it is just NOT WORTH THE MONEY, and there is plenty to see on FREEVIEW and FREESAT and with FREESAT + it is better to save the £800 or so do away with sky, as you can still watch films on Netflix or any one of the new Broardband services coming on line now:)

    ..and there's many thousands of people who are deciding that Freeview/Freesat don't offer the choice of TV that they want and are signing up to Sky/Virgin.

    Also, a full Sky package is not £800.
  • RadiomikeRadiomike Posts: 7,926
    Forum Member
    peter05 wrote: »
    I think you are like many thousands of other people with sky, who are starting to think for the money they pay SKY it is just NOT WORTH THE MONEY, and there is plenty to see on FREEVIEW and FREESAT and with FREESAT + it is better to save the £800 or so do away with sky, as you can still watch films on Netflix or any one of the new Broardband services coming on line now:)

    ...and yet Sky's subscriber numbers continue to increase. :D

    As ever there are those for whom Sky does not represent value for money, or for whom the expense is one they cannot justify or afford, and in those cases freesat and Freeview are available.

    By the same token there are MILLIONS of people who do think Sky is worth the money they pay and many thousands of others who decide to join Sky on a regular basis because they think that the cost is something they can justify and are willing to pay to get a better service than your beloved freesat and Freeview can offer.
  • CaxtonCaxton Posts: 28,881
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I always find posts similar to what the OP made to be a form of a cry for help. They appear to do or thinking of doing something they are not 100% sure of and need some sort of support from other other posters here.
    It looks a desperate attempt to find all the reasons why they do not want a service any more and I find it difficult to see why one person wanting to stop subscribing to a service, any service for that matter, should really be of general in interest to others any more than it would be to start a thread in the general discussion section about the fact I had decided to cancel my subscription to Woodworkers and Carp Fishing Monthly.

    I am sure there are many people here who could equally start a thread telling everyone all the reasons in detail why they subscribe to Sky and try and justify why they do so, but then would they need to tell everyone if they are happy with the service
Sign In or Register to comment.