• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Broadcasting
BT Sports Channel
<<
<
49 of 281
>>
>
mlt11
23-04-2013
Originally Posted by BigFoot87:
“BT preparing for battle in the pubs:
http://recombu.com/digital/news/bt-s...nt_M11455.html”

Per that article:

"BT Sport and Sky Sports will share live coverage of Aviva Premiership Rugby for the 2013-14 season with BT having exclusive coverage of all 69 live games for the 2014-15 season and the following three seasons."

No they won't. BT Sport has all of the Aviva exclusively live from 2013/14 - ie all 69 TV games.

They are getting mixed up with the Heineken Cup / "new European competition" rights dispute / whatever you want to call it.

Hopeless.
Igloo_Man
23-04-2013
It's amazing how poor some of the reporting surrounding BT's entry into the sports broadcasting market has been. Shockingly poor at times.
samburrows
24-04-2013
Originally Posted by Igloo_Man:
“It's amazing how poor some of the reporting surrounding BT's entry into the sports broadcasting market has been. Shockingly poor at times.”

Agreed. Some of it is poor research, some of it is lack of understanding and some of it is just plain speculation (to be kind) which is held up as fact. Katherine Rushton of the Telegraph please step forward.
1andrew1
24-04-2013
Originally Posted by samburrows:
“Agreed. Some of it is poor research, some of it is lack of understanding and some of it is just plain speculation (to be kind) which is held up as fact. Katherine Rushton of the Telegraph please step forward.”

The Recombu article which I confess I didn't read at first doesn't need an industry expert to see it makes no sense! The beer mats clearly say "Exclusively live Aviva Premiership Rugby matches next season" whilst the article says "BT Sport and Sky Sports will share live coverage.."
1andrew1
24-04-2013
The Guardian's Media Twitter feed is reporting an Investec analyst's report which says that BT Sport's content won't impact BSkyB mid-term but in the short term will result in BSkyB spending more on marketing and retention and gaining less revenue from pubs and clubs. Hence margins will be reduced.
Investec has reduced BSkyB's rating from buy to hold.
Dr2Pat
24-04-2013
Does anyone have any idea how much a month BT sport will cost if you are a sky subsciber?
I got an e-mail from sky today saying that my espn subscription will end on 31 july, so I assume the start date for BT is 1st August?
Sad_BB_Addict
24-04-2013
Virgin deal with Sky puts BT under pressure
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013...eal-sky-sports
BigFoot87
24-04-2013
Quote:
“Virgin announced Wednesday that it had struck a deal to rent its fibre 'backhaul' to the satellite group, helping carry internet traffic across its core network, although not as far as customers' homes, for which Sky still relies on BT.”

Hmmm. After the Sky Basics nonsense, VM and Sky have been working together nicely of late. Sky buying VMTV. VM getting Sky HD, Red button and VOD content in return. Sky content showing up on VM's TV Anywhere service and now this back-haul deal which benefits Sky broadband while VM renew their Sky Sports deal.

Maybe they both see BT with EPL Football as a serious threat and are working together to fight that threat? VM are Sky's biggest wholesale customer after all.

Just speculating. Lazily.
VisionMan1
24-04-2013
Originally Posted by BigFoot87:
“Hmmm. After the Sky Basics nonsense, VM and Sky have been working together nicely of late. Sky buying VMTV. VM getting Sky HD, Red button and VOD content in return. Sky content showing up on VM's TV Anywhere service and now this back-haul deal which benefits Sky broadband while VM renew their Sky Sports deal.

Maybe they both see BT with EPL Football as a serious threat and are working together to fight that threat? VM are Sky's biggest wholesale customer after all.

Just speculating. Lazily. ”

Indeed BigFoot87, this Sky/BT spat is almost mirroring the previous Sky/VM one.

Does anyone know when the decision on BT's appeal to appeal the CAT decision is expected to happen, which carries the 'must offer' stipulation?
1andrew1
24-04-2013
Originally Posted by VisionMan1:
“Indeed BigFoot87, this Sky/BT spat is almost mirroring the previous Sky/VM one.

Does anyone know when the decision on BT's appeal to appeal the CAT decision is expected to happen, which carries the 'must offer' stipulation?”

I think the consensus is - before the new EPL season starts but no definite dates known yet.
mlt11
24-04-2013
Originally Posted by 1andrew1:
“I think the consensus is - before the new EPL season starts but no definite dates known yet.”

Agreed.

But if BT gets permission then the actual appeal itself (plus the wait for the Court's verdict) will likely be 9 to 12 months.

So as long as BT gets permission to appeal it's going to have SS1 and SS2 for the next football season - even if it then actually loses the appeal itself.
1andrew1
24-04-2013
No proper place for this so just mentioning it here - BT is tendering for an operator to provide BT mobile services. Analysts suggest that it could offer in-home 4G services with mobile roaming when not in range of hotspots.
Source (registration needed) http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6f81a472-a...#axzz2RPn3Yd00
muppetman11
24-04-2013
This is an interesting article and related in a way to the thread , apologies if already posted.

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/5...c-network.html
VisionMan1
24-04-2013
Originally Posted by muppetman11:
“This is an interesting article and related in a way to the thread , apologies if already posted.

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/5...c-network.html”

That article is... interesting. Though I'd love to know where Andrew Ferguson got his info from, as he neither quotes a source or a link.
1andrew1
24-04-2013
Originally Posted by VisionMan1:
“That article is... interesting. Though I'd love to know where Andrew Ferguson got his info from, as he neither quotes a source or a link.”

He links to the BT Wholesale website in the first paragraph so I think directly from them.
VisionMan1
24-04-2013
Originally Posted by 1andrew1:
“He links to the BT Wholesale website in the first paragraph so I think directly from them.”

Thanks for that, 1andrew1. I didn't realise that was a link.

This is bad news for Sky. Not for the Sports, but for the broadband market. Which is what this battle is really all about anyway.
gs1
25-04-2013
I agree, VisionMan1.

Whilst the headline of the Guardian article said "Virgin Media secures deal with Sky Sports for next season" the less attractive but pertinent point was "Sky secures deal to rent Virgin's fibre backhaul".

Also relevant, is BT Wholesale's statement that:

Quote:
“Research shows that bundling TV with your broadband and telephony package can halve churn rates. And it's clear that a significant percentage of the broadband market is unwinnable without a TV offer.”

That's the rationale behind BT Retail improving its tv offer- to a consumer, telephony and broadband are more mundane products. You have to excite them with some added content (at the right price point!), especially if you wish them to go to the trouble of switching their broadband from a competitor.

For BT Retail, Sky Sports is not the content to achieve that, because they don't have control over its supply or crucially, a sustainable price at which they can provide it. The best way to do that is not be reliant on the content of one of your largest competitors, and own some high quality content yourself, so you can guarantee its supply. Hence, BT Sport!

BT Vision/Youview is a very simple "Plug & Play" addition to a fibre connection, irrespective of whether you subscribe to Sky TV!

The key battleground is the broadband market, and the greatest risk to Sky's tv business, in my view, is not BT Sport, but that consumers come to expect their tv to be delivered via fibre, rather than through the "aggravation" of running cables from satellite dishes; which would make Sky more dependent on its immediate competitors for the wholesale supply of the delivery method.
1andrew1
25-04-2013
Originally Posted by gs1:
“ BT Vision/Youview is a very simple "Plug & Play" addition to a fibre connection, irrespective of whether you subscribe to Sky TV!”

At the moment it's a very confusing proposition regarding sports and extra channels. From anecdotal evidence; it's not measured; but there's now a high proportion of satellite houses that don't have working aerials which YouView requires. A Freesat switch would therefore be far easier for Sky households to make than a YouView one.
blueisthecolour
25-04-2013
Originally Posted by gs1:
“I agree, VisionMan1.

Whilst the headline of the Guardian article said "Virgin Media secures deal with Sky Sports for next season" the less attractive but pertinent point was "Sky secures deal to rent Virgin's fibre backhaul".

Also relevant, is BT Wholesale's statement that:


That's the rationale behind BT Retail improving its tv offer- to a consumer, telephony and broadband are more mundane products. You have to excite them with some added content (at the right price point!), especially if you wish them to go to the trouble of switching their broadband from a competitor.

For BT Retail, Sky Sports is not the content to achieve that, because they don't have control over its supply or crucially, a sustainable price at which they can provide it. The best way to do that is not be reliant on the content of one of your largest competitors, and own some high quality content yourself, so you can guarantee its supply. Hence, BT Sport!

BT Vision/Youview is a very simple "Plug & Play" addition to a fibre connection, irrespective of whether you subscribe to Sky TV!

The key battleground is the broadband market, and the greatest risk to Sky's tv business, in my view, is not BT Sport, but that consumers come to expect their tv to be delivered via fibre, rather than through the "aggravation" of running cables from satellite dishes; which would make Sky more dependent on its immediate competitors for the wholesale supply of the delivery method.”

Personally, I don't think too many customers care about what cables they have at the back of their tv sets or where their tv packages come from. However I do agree that broadband appears to be a problem for Sky. As far as i'm aware, their standard offering to customers is something like 6-7 mbps and I honestly don't think that's sustainable moving forward. I have 60 mbps from VM (well about 50 in practice) and would give up my entire tv service rather than drop down to anything less.
1andrew1
25-04-2013
Originally Posted by blueisthecolour:
“Personally, I don't think too many customers care about what cables they have at the back of their tv sets or where their tv packages come from. However I do agree that broadband appears to be a problem for Sky. As far as i'm aware, their standard offering to customers is something like 6-7 mbps and I honestly don't think that's sustainable moving forward. I have 60 mbps from VM (well about 50 in practice) and would give up my entire tv service rather than drop down to anything less.”

I think for Sky, when you price up their packages with fibre broadband, they do start to look expensive. I wouldn't rule them out investing in this area though.
1andrew1
25-04-2013
Meanwhile Sky is emailing its ESPN customers with the link below advising they can cancel the service and advising it ceases at the end of July. Probably the first time that Sky has allowed cancellation of a service without having to phone them?

https://skyid.sky.com/signin/helpcen...emove.sky.com/espn

Sky is also making phone cancellation easy:
Quote:
“Sky Help Forum Well that was easy. Called up to cancel ESPN and they actually had an automated option to do so. 90 seconds later it was all sorted. Well done sky!”

http://helpforum.sky.com/t5/Sky-Prog...PN/td-p/203225

I wonder what VM and TopUp Tv are advising their customers?
gs1
25-04-2013
Originally Posted by 1andrew1:
“At the moment it's a very confusing proposition regarding sports and extra channels. From anecdotal evidence; it's not measured; but there's now a high proportion of satellite houses that don't have working aerials which YouView requires. A Freesat switch would therefore be far easier for Sky households to make than a YouView one.”

Going forward, they need to and I believe will focus on one box- Youview- but, I agree that having a legacy box that is currently offering a different proposition to the future box, does create some confusion.

I take your second point as well, and if indeed, some consumers are ridding themselves of working aerials, that sounds like a reason to me, for BT to start offering something worthy of reversing or slowing this trend.

Each of the rooms that have a tv in my home are served primarily by a Sky box, but still have easy access to a working aerial point, which I regard as a "backup".

Originally Posted by blueisthecolour:
“Personally, I don't think too many customers care about what cables they have at the back of their tv sets or where their tv packages come from.”

That's clearly true, by virtue of the sheer number of households that Sky have connected to a satellite dish; but most of them haven't seen the full extent of fibre yet and the ease by which it can deliver high quality content.

I plugged in a BT Youview box a few weeks ago- it was the easiest experience (I accept that it helped that I had a working aerial) I could have imagined, to extend the viewing options in my house.

It's not a substitute, according to my needs/wishes, for Sky TV, but it is a worthy addition that justifies my reasons for switching telephone and Fibre from Sky to BT.

So, whilst Sky had 100% of my business, BT have now taken a 45% share of it.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1:
“I think for Sky, when you price up their packages with fibre broadband, they do start to look expensive.”

At the top end, BT's up to 76Mb fibre ("Unlimited BT Infinity 2") is available at £26 per month, as opposed to Sky Fibre Pro at £30 per month.

That was a factor in me switching from Sky Fibre to BT Fibre, but I accept that some peoples' lines won't support the highest available speeds and they may not feel that their usage would benefit the higher prices.
1andrew1
25-04-2013
Originally Posted by gs1:
“ I take your second point as well, and if indeed, some consumers are ridding themselves of working aerials, that sounds like a reason to me, for BT to start offering something worthy of reversing or slowing this trend.”

Perhaps BT could offer the Freeview suite through IPTV in situations like this, as per the old Tiscali TV service. I don't think it's a case of consumers necessarily removing working aerials, it's more a case of them ceasing to work through weather damage, though obviously some people will remove unused cables when decorating and builders when repointing chimneys etc.
1andrew1
25-04-2013
Meanwhile, BT Sport's logo designers Red Bee Media have won another commission from the company, to provide playout, channel and media management services.

http://www.iptv-news.com/2013/04/red...-playout-deal/
BKM
25-04-2013
Originally Posted by gs1:
“At the top end, BT's up to 76Mb fibre ("Unlimited BT Infinity 2") is available at £26 per month, as opposed to Sky Fibre Pro at £30 per month.

That was a factor in me switching from Sky Fibre to BT Fibre, but I accept that some peoples' lines won't support the highest available speeds and they may not feel that their usage would benefit the higher prices.”

As my line (and according to BT's speed tester!) won't support >34Mb I would gain nothing by the faster BT options.

For these sorts of limitations - and that fact that not everyone wants or needs faster broadband - I forsee that IPTV will remain an addition to broadcast (inc satellite) TV for quite some time!
<<
<
49 of 281
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map