Charnham, you are just so unrealistic and so child-like in what you say that i cannt take you even remotely serious! Thank god you are not the DG of the BBC or anywhere in broadcasting for that matter as your idea of a broadcaster is something quite odd!!!
to be quite honest ive never tried to be DG of the BBC, and I wasnt aware that today was the day I made my pitch to be DG.
I would hardly say my posts are child like, somtimes idealistic, but normally my tone when thinking those comments though is tongue in check.
I never said I would axe sports, I said I would run ing poorly. Also there is a differnce between my idealistics posts, and what I would seriously do if I was DG.
From the very person who trivialised a tribute show of a kids tv show because it had a channel logo on the screen!!!! And you say you are not child-like?...
From the very person who trivialised a tribute show of a kids tv show because it had a channel logo on the screen!!!! And you say you are not child-like?...
I didnt like the DOG, and felt it was inapporaite for the tone fo the show.
I hadnt reaslied people had been keeping lists of my posts to apparntly throw back in my face later.
Thats called making a point in general to support when i said that your posts are child-like and preposterous in what you say!
The comment that you would destroy BBC Sport is the next one... You are not for real!
Thats called making a point in general to support when i said that your posts are child-like and preposterous in what you say!
The comment that you would destroy BBC Sport is the next one... You are not for real!
shocking I dont have a list of peoples posts in my head, I have a list of peoples usernames, and for some of them I remeber there views on keys subjects.
Anyways I think ive had enough of these thinny vield attacks on my good self, this forum is not for pesonal insults, lets move on to something else.
There are people here who are navie in my opnions than myself.
I'm sorry if it comes across to you as an attack because thats not what i am doing at all and i will apologise to you if you feel that way, i am mealy saying that i think you post alot of what you say childishly.. Thats my opinion and i having seen many of your threads in the time i was a lurker of this site, im not the only one. Good day!
Yes i did de-lurk and i am saying what i feel on subjects that are being discussed. I will also say if i think someone is making a mockery of the forum and making a mockery of the subject matter with pointless comments because of a disdain towards a broadcaster and the sporting department or a logo... Have a think maybe.. As i said, good day to you!!
I'm overjoyed with Sky. Rupert and James are just fantastic!!:D:D
.
Yes, how true. Without them millions wouldn't have a clue about how to access internet pirates and how to download sopcast/veetle software. I thank you, Mr M.
Yes, how true. Without them millions wouldn't have a clue about how to access internet pirates and how to download sopcast/veetle software. I thank you, Mr M.
Sky is the best TV company in the world and i love you Rupert and James!!;);)
Ian,
The IBA may have thought that five satellite channels were enough, but that was a restriction they imposted and would very likely have changed.
The BBC tried to launch a satellite service long before, but the government told them they could only do so if they paid for their own satellites!:eek:
And I certainly remember other bidders for the satellite licence, not just BSB being the only applicants.
BSB Bid for 4 licences but as the IBA couldnt get another 2 providers to bid they were given the other 2 free. and yes the IBA did restrict the system to the point that the cost of the Dmac satellites that only supported 5 channels and the second one required to back up the service meant BSB were crippled from the start. they also had pay per view system where as skys were free to air.
Yes, how true. Without them millions wouldn't have a clue about how to access internet pirates and how to download sopcast/veetle software. I thank you, Mr M.
Of course Sky Player is soon becoming Sky Go. He's done so much for us Sky subscribers. I wish i knew Rupert and James personally, becacause they sound marvelous people.:D:D
Ian.
Of course Sky Player is soon becoming Sky Go. He's done so much for us Sky subscribers. I wish i knew Rupert and James personally, becacause they sound marvelous people.:D:D
Ian.
They do. They made Sky accessible to the public (Skygo) you do not need to subscribe to Sky to get Skygo. Isn't that fantastic news?! Making Sky more accessible to the public. Their phrase "believe in better" couldn't be more true. If only, they could read this. They done so much for this country. Rupert Murdoch- the sweetheart of the world.
They do. They made Sky accessible to the public (Skygo) you do not need to subscribe to Sky to get Skygo. Isn't that fantastic news?! Making Sky more accessible to the public. Their phrase "believe in better" couldn't be more true. If only, they could read this. They done so much for this country. Rupert Murdoch- the sweetheart of the world.
I wonder what the future is for BSkyB. Living in a post-DSO area and knowing a couple of installers, I'm aware of how their work has dried up.
In this area, the people who want BSkyB's digital television service, already have it. The people who want Freeview, Freesat or cable already have the service of their choice.
There's little or no scope for growth. Yes, there might still be small numbers of new or returning customers signing up in this area, but for every one, there's probably another leaving.
The strategy will need to change. Existing customers will have to be the priority, and they will all have their own tipping point, where they're not prepared to pay any extra for their existing services and/or any new services.
It will be all about looking after the existing customers, and making sure they are not pushed too far.
I wonder what the future is for BSkyB. Living in a post-DSO area and knowing a couple of installers, I'm aware of how their work has dried up.
In this area, the people who want BSkyB's digital television service, already have it. The people who want Freeview, Freesat or cable already have the service of their choice.
There's little or no scope for growth. Yes, there might still be small numbers of new or returning customers signing up in this area, but for every one, there's probably another leaving.
The strategy will need to change. Existing customers will have to be the priority, and they will all have their own tipping point, where they're not prepared to pay any extra for their existing services and/or any new services.
It will be all about looking after the existing customers, and making sure they are not pushed too far.
In a way that is a plus for Sky. They have always used their ongoing income to subsidise installations and free boxes. Now that they have reached a plateau and new installs are slowing down they will be saving money and can grow by upselling existing customers with HD, 3D, more channels etc at no extra cost and keep all that money for themselves.
Sure they'd like more customers but profitability wise they are going to do very well over the next few years, which is why Rupert is so keen to own the whole company and use Sky's profit to offset losses elsewhere in News Corp.
In a way that is a plus for Sky. They have always used their ongoing income to subsidise installations and free boxes. Now that they have reached a plateau and new installs are slowing down they will be saving money and can grow by upselling existing customers with HD, 3D, more channels etc at no extra cost and keep all that money for themselves.
Sure they'd like more customers but profitability wise they are going to do very well over the next few years, which is why Rupert is so keen to own the whole company and use Sky's profit to offset losses elsewhere in News Corp.
I hope that Rupert does get to own the whole company! HE'S SUCH A MARVELOUS MAN!!:):)
Ian.
I hope that Rupert does get to own the whole company! HE'S SUCH A MARVELOUS MAN!!:):)
Ian.
I think he deserves it, since it was a huge gamble at the time and came very close to dragging his whole company into bankruptcy. He took a risk, it paid off. He deserves the reward.
There's little or no scope for growth. Yes, there might still be small numbers of new or returning customers signing up in this area, but for every one, there's probably another leaving.
The strategy will need to change.
Well the numbers do not yet suggest any significant slowdown in customer growth. And revenue growth this year is actually accelerating due to growth in HD, broadband and phone.
Sky TV customer numbers:
30 June 2006 - 8,176,000
30 June 2007 - 8,582,000
30 June 2008 - 8,980,000
30 June 2009 - 9,442,000
30 June 2010 - 9,860,000
31 March 2011 - 10,147,000
So customer growth has been very consistent around 400,000 per year. And there is no sign of any significant slowdown this year (287,000 in first 9 months).
Going forward, there also remains very substantial room for growth in HD, broadband and phone. See slide 5:
Comments
I would hardly say my posts are child like, somtimes idealistic, but normally my tone when thinking those comments though is tongue in check.
I never said I would axe sports, I said I would run ing poorly. Also there is a differnce between my idealistics posts, and what I would seriously do if I was DG.
I hadnt reaslied people had been keeping lists of my posts to apparntly throw back in my face later.
The comment that you would destroy BBC Sport is the next one... You are not for real!
Anyways I think ive had enough of these thinny vield attacks on my good self, this forum is not for pesonal insults, lets move on to something else.
There are people here who are navie in my opnions than myself.
I think its best we leave it here.
I thought that too
Ian.
Yes, how true. Without them millions wouldn't have a clue about how to access internet pirates and how to download sopcast/veetle software. I thank you, Mr M.
Ian,
BSB Bid for 4 licences but as the IBA couldnt get another 2 providers to bid they were given the other 2 free. and yes the IBA did restrict the system to the point that the cost of the Dmac satellites that only supported 5 channels and the second one required to back up the service meant BSB were crippled from the start. they also had pay per view system where as skys were free to air.
Amen to that!
This. Mr Murdoch is a beautiful man. haha
Thank you for sky player. He is a star.
Of course Sky Player is soon becoming Sky Go. He's done so much for us Sky subscribers. I wish i knew Rupert and James personally, becacause they sound marvelous people.:D:D
Ian.
On another positive note:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-13709062
Sky is investing more than ch4 on British content. A sight for sore eyes for some on here.
Ian
It's now 6 weeks since I handed Virgin their equipment back (after cancelling) and lost the channels they provided from Sky.
I'm not missing anything, Sky always carried a hell of a lot of advertising, considering it's a subscription service.
I'm sure the better material will trickle down on to freeview eventually. If not there are always DVDs.
In this area, the people who want BSkyB's digital television service, already have it. The people who want Freeview, Freesat or cable already have the service of their choice.
There's little or no scope for growth. Yes, there might still be small numbers of new or returning customers signing up in this area, but for every one, there's probably another leaving.
The strategy will need to change. Existing customers will have to be the priority, and they will all have their own tipping point, where they're not prepared to pay any extra for their existing services and/or any new services.
It will be all about looking after the existing customers, and making sure they are not pushed too far.
In a way that is a plus for Sky. They have always used their ongoing income to subsidise installations and free boxes. Now that they have reached a plateau and new installs are slowing down they will be saving money and can grow by upselling existing customers with HD, 3D, more channels etc at no extra cost and keep all that money for themselves.
Sure they'd like more customers but profitability wise they are going to do very well over the next few years, which is why Rupert is so keen to own the whole company and use Sky's profit to offset losses elsewhere in News Corp.
Ian.
I think he deserves it, since it was a huge gamble at the time and came very close to dragging his whole company into bankruptcy. He took a risk, it paid off. He deserves the reward.
But I still don't want him to have a monopoly.
Well the numbers do not yet suggest any significant slowdown in customer growth. And revenue growth this year is actually accelerating due to growth in HD, broadband and phone.
Sky TV customer numbers:
30 June 2006 - 8,176,000
30 June 2007 - 8,582,000
30 June 2008 - 8,980,000
30 June 2009 - 9,442,000
30 June 2010 - 9,860,000
31 March 2011 - 10,147,000
So customer growth has been very consistent around 400,000 per year. And there is no sign of any significant slowdown this year (287,000 in first 9 months).
Going forward, there also remains very substantial room for growth in HD, broadband and phone. See slide 5:
http://corporate.sky.com/documents/pdf/latest_results/Q3_1011_Presentation
The latest results show revenue growth of 14% and operating profit growth of 24% compared to last year. That sounds like pretty strong growth to me.