Now that my bills have topped the £70 mark, I plan to slash everything down to the bare minimum after Christmas. Unless the give me a cracking deal, everything that can go will go.
so you agree then that it is selective morals when it suits an agenda?
you find it morally unacceptable that a shareholder in sky owned a company that employed someone that listened to peoples voicemails.
but you don't find it morally unacceptable that use a mobile phone that was manufactured and assembled by a company that has been wildly reported as having some pretty major human rights issues.
personally i don't care about either situations, but then i don't claim to have any moral guidance. i'm happy to watch TV from a provider and use a phone from a dodgy supplier.
see, you can't start spouting morals unless you are squeaky clean yourself.
some people are, and they are to be commended, but those who are selective about it when it suits them are on par with those with no morals at all (and i am in that latter bracket).
I said it was a moral issue for me. The discussion here originally was about how expensive Sky is, which obviously I object to, but it's a separate issue to the crimes of the Murdoch empire. Though they both have in common that everything Rupert does, legal or otherwise, is always driven by avarice and power.
Now that my bills have topped the £70 mark, I plan to slash everything down to the bare minimum after Christmas. Unless the give me a cracking deal, everything that can go will go.
They'll probably offer you some sort of temporarily reduced deal. The reason Sky is as successful as it is is because the larger percentage of their customers aren't tech/deal-savvy internet-clued folk like what are on here. They are just pensioners, low-income families and other people who don't have the knowledge to chase Sky up for improved deals. Once the satellite installer has gone and everything is working, they barely give contract periods, bills, price increases etc a second thought, they've got the telly they wanted, and the boat need not be rocked.
They'll probably offer you some sort of temporarily reduced deal. The reason Sky is as successful as it is is because the larger percentage of their customers aren't tech/deal-savvy internet-clued folk like what are on here. They are just pensioners, low-income families and other people who don't have the knowledge to chase Sky up for improved deals. Once the satellite installer has gone and everything is working, they barely give contract periods, bills, price increases etc a second thought, they've got the telly they wanted, and the boat need not be rocked.
That'll do me, as long as it is substantially reduced. There are other options now and I no longer need Sky.
That'll do me, as long as it is substantially reduced. There are other options now and I no longer need Sky.
Just stick to your guns and they'll give you some offer. Though it's against my nature to encourage anyone to stay with Sky, if you're going to do it, make sure it's on your terms and to suit your pockets.
Simple solution to this. Get an old blue Sky card and put it in the slot. Reboot the box and the pvr functions will work on the free channels.
You're welcome
Only true for "Blue" cards that had an active Sky+ sub and were replaced by new "white" cards at the last card swap - all other blue cards will only "regionalise" the box and with a known PIN will allow setting of parental controls.
Absolutely. Sky customers who know how shady the company's practises are but don't care as long as they get what they want fall into their category.
A lot of Sky subscribers are just ignorant or ill educated to the company's corruption, perhaps through no fault of their own, or just because they can't be arsed to learn about what happens in the wider world. I think those people are generally known as Sun readers... :cool:
Just like people who make broad derogatory generalisations are generally known as burks.
Absolutely. Sky customers who know how shady the company's practises are but don't care as long as they get what they want fall into their category.
A lot of Sky subscribers are just ignorant or ill educated to the company's corruption, perhaps through no fault of their own, or just because they can't be arsed to learn about what happens in the wider world. I think those people are generally known as Sun readers... :cool:
Do you delve into the practices of all the companies you deal with and scrutinise their practices from a moral and ethical point of view. Just look at Apple not all sweetness and light if the TV programme about them last week had anything to go on.
Most supermarkets cruelly screwing farmers here and abroad to get the cheapest possible price from them. Clothing companies too having clothes that are sold under well-known labels in well-known stores made in third world counties the workers there getting a pittance.
So go on hammer Sky — a company that is based in Britain and employ thousands of British people AND pay their taxes in this country too.
If people subscribe to Sky without realising what they are subscribing too and then constantly find fault with their services and moan and groan every day about how crap the company is, they are more stupid than I first thought. They have one very easy answer, if you do not like Sky, then do not subscribe to their services it is very, very simple.
The amazing thing is when one reads the people posting here about recording all the films on a free film weekend or getting excited about the sport they can see on a free sport weekend, or the programmes and series they want Sky to put on free on Pick TV, Sky suits them then
Go back to you 5 terrestrial channels and a DVD recorder player it will suit you all better — subscription free and no Sky.
The reason Sky is as successful as it is is because the larger percentage of their customers aren't tech/deal-savvy internet-clued folk like what are on here. They are just pensioners, low-income families and other people who don't have the knowledge to chase Sky up for improved deals.
That statement verges on bigotry ... in fact Sky customers are strongly weighted to ABC1 families with children.
Sky customers value high quality content and are able to afford to pay to access the best range of content.
Some are more interested in playing with their equipment and have less concern for the range of content they can access... each to their own.
Mean and greedy NO just dedicated to running the most successful media company in Europe that spends £4.6 billion last year on content creation, employs 10's of thousands directly and indirectly.
Sky is also run to the highest ethical standards that are more than a match to any UK company.
How many medals would the UK have won in 2012 without Sky's high level of financial sponsorship?
Only true for "Blue" cards that had an active Sky+ sub and were replaced by new "white" cards at the last card swap - all other blue cards will only "regionalise" the box and with a known PIN will allow setting of parental controls.
I've got three boxes in the house with blue cards in, works fine and has done for over two years now just put the FTA channels in the "favourites" bit to avoid having to look through the channels you can't see. Even the Sky+ ipad app works with them.
Blue cards may/may not be available from a well-known online auction site
EDIT: just thought I'd add - all three boxes are the DRX890 500mb ones - two of which were bought for £10 each from cash converters! I have done a forced update on all three to the latest R010 13p software and it still works like a charm.
There is simply no better way into multiroom freesat.
That statement verges on bigotry ... in fact Sky customers are strongly weighted to ABC1 families with children
"I have worked with many ABC1 people and they are not a good example of the
majority of people who watch sky"
Sky customers value high quality content and are able to afford to pay to access the best range of content.
"not all Sky customers have and endless pot of money most have to give something up just to keep Sky and their children happy"
Some are more interested in playing with their equipment and have less concern for the range of content they can access... each to their own.
"should not Sky make all of their content easily available for all customers no matter what their skill level is"
Mean and greedy NO just dedicated to running the most successful media company in Europe that spends £4.6 billion last year on content creation, employs 10's of thousands directly and indirectly.
"who for not the customers just the share holders, and the people they employ at CS are not helpful and in my opinion when I have rung they have been rude. and if you read some of the comments on here (indirectly) out side contractors leave a lot to be
desired"
Sky is also run to the highest ethical standards that are more than a match to any UK company.
"not when my father 86yo rang to a to ask why he could no get Sky Sport5 and was told to go on line, the only line he has is a washing line , two weeks later after phone calls at my expense we finally got it sorted out"
How many medals would the UK have won in 2012 without Sky's high level of financial sponsorship?
"so without Sky UK would have won nothing :D rubbish if that was the case with the amount of money put in to football England should have won the World Cup every time"
"so without Sky UK would have won nothing :D rubbish if that was the case with the amount of money put in to football England should have won the World Cup every time"
Firstly, Football is a professional sport, and players can make a very very good living from it, whereas Athletics is an amateur sport, and most of the participants rely on funding to help them train without having to get another job, and only the very best of the best can get by with sponsorship etc.
Secondly, money paid for the Premier League rights go to the Premier League, not the English FA for funding the national tram, which in turn is paid to clubs, who use it for wages, to pay players from wherever they please, not just British players.
Comments
I said it was a moral issue for me. The discussion here originally was about how expensive Sky is, which obviously I object to, but it's a separate issue to the crimes of the Murdoch empire. Though they both have in common that everything Rupert does, legal or otherwise, is always driven by avarice and power.
Hence the rip-off subscription charges
They'll probably offer you some sort of temporarily reduced deal. The reason Sky is as successful as it is is because the larger percentage of their customers aren't tech/deal-savvy internet-clued folk like what are on here. They are just pensioners, low-income families and other people who don't have the knowledge to chase Sky up for improved deals. Once the satellite installer has gone and everything is working, they barely give contract periods, bills, price increases etc a second thought, they've got the telly they wanted, and the boat need not be rocked.
That'll do me, as long as it is substantially reduced. There are other options now and I no longer need Sky.
Just stick to your guns and they'll give you some offer. Though it's against my nature to encourage anyone to stay with Sky, if you're going to do it, make sure it's on your terms and to suit your pockets.
You're welcome
Only true for "Blue" cards that had an active Sky+ sub and were replaced by new "white" cards at the last card swap - all other blue cards will only "regionalise" the box and with a known PIN will allow setting of parental controls.
Just like people who make broad derogatory generalisations are generally known as burks.
Do you delve into the practices of all the companies you deal with and scrutinise their practices from a moral and ethical point of view. Just look at Apple not all sweetness and light if the TV programme about them last week had anything to go on.
Most supermarkets cruelly screwing farmers here and abroad to get the cheapest possible price from them. Clothing companies too having clothes that are sold under well-known labels in well-known stores made in third world counties the workers there getting a pittance.
So go on hammer Sky — a company that is based in Britain and employ thousands of British people AND pay their taxes in this country too.
If people subscribe to Sky without realising what they are subscribing too and then constantly find fault with their services and moan and groan every day about how crap the company is, they are more stupid than I first thought. They have one very easy answer, if you do not like Sky, then do not subscribe to their services it is very, very simple.
The amazing thing is when one reads the people posting here about recording all the films on a free film weekend or getting excited about the sport they can see on a free sport weekend, or the programmes and series they want Sky to put on free on Pick TV, Sky suits them then
Go back to you 5 terrestrial channels and a DVD recorder player it will suit you all better — subscription free and no Sky.
That statement verges on bigotry ... in fact Sky customers are strongly weighted to ABC1 families with children.
Sky customers value high quality content and are able to afford to pay to access the best range of content.
Some are more interested in playing with their equipment and have less concern for the range of content they can access... each to their own.
Mean and greedy NO just dedicated to running the most successful media company in Europe that spends £4.6 billion last year on content creation, employs 10's of thousands directly and indirectly.
Sky is also run to the highest ethical standards that are more than a match to any UK company.
How many medals would the UK have won in 2012 without Sky's high level of financial sponsorship?
I've got three boxes in the house with blue cards in, works fine and has done for over two years now
Blue cards may/may not be available from a well-known online auction site
EDIT: just thought I'd add - all three boxes are the DRX890 500mb ones - two of which were bought for £10 each from cash converters! I have done a forced update on all three to the latest R010 13p software and it still works like a charm.
There is simply no better way into multiroom freesat.
"so without Sky UK would have won nothing
Firstly, Football is a professional sport, and players can make a very very good living from it, whereas Athletics is an amateur sport, and most of the participants rely on funding to help them train without having to get another job, and only the very best of the best can get by with sponsorship etc.
Secondly, money paid for the Premier League rights go to the Premier League, not the English FA for funding the national tram, which in turn is paid to clubs, who use it for wages, to pay players from wherever they please, not just British players.