DS Forums

 
 

sky Mobile is a coming


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-11-2016, 23:21
Faust
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 8,098
BT are really worried SKY could kill their mobile sales. I remember speaking to someone high up in EE that said SKY buying over a network would allow them to ultra competitive as they would run the mobile side at almost a loss but make it up with Broadband/Landline/TV costs. Which would kill sales from EE/BT unless they really react, I expect it to be not as bad seeing it's an MVNO deal, but their sim only existing customer prices should shake things up a little for the other networks.
How's that work when they are offering free BB?
Faust is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 04-11-2016, 23:30
Aye Up
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North West
Posts: 4,884
BT are really worried SKY could kill their mobile sales. I remember speaking to someone high up in EE that said SKY buying over a network would allow them to ultra competitive as they would run the mobile side at almost a loss but make it up with Broadband/Landline/TV costs. Which would kill sales from EE/BT unless they really react, I expect it to be not as bad seeing it's an MVNO deal, but their sim only existing customer prices should shake things up a little for the other networks.
BT has deeper pockets than Sky. Sky is riddled with debt, where as BT isn't, got billions in the bank. BT could out spend Sky and then some, should Sky pose a threat commercially then BT will go toe to toe with them as they have done since they won EPL rights.

Sky/Mobile will not be a threat to BT, they can get equally as competitive, as can Vodafone (who also have deep pockets).
Aye Up is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2016, 23:55
Gigabit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,876
Shame Vodafone never want to actually invest any money in better service. They just spend it on more middle managers.
Gigabit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 00:36
Everything Goes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the future....
Posts: 11,257
BT has deeper pockets than Sky. Sky is riddled with debt, where as BT isn't, got billions in the bank. BT could out spend Sky and then some, should Sky pose a threat commercially then BT will go toe to toe with them as they have done since they won EPL rights.

Sky/Mobile will not be a threat to BT, they can get equally as competitive, as can Vodafone (who also have deep pockets).
BT could spend money on doing proper fibre to the home but they cant be arsed
Everything Goes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 02:33
clewsy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,860
Well it could get interesting as look at the prices Tesco offer. That gives an idea of what an MVNO can offer I guess on o2.
clewsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 04:00
Aye Up
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North West
Posts: 4,884
BT could spend money on doing proper fibre to the home but they cant be arsed
God not that tired old story again
Aye Up is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 07:51
kirstiemcnabb
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 455
Did anyone else get this email from EE

Hi Paul,

Sky is set to launch a new mobile service this winter called Sky Mobile. Existing Sky customers are able to register their interest in the service from Monday 31st October. So far, no details of prices or packages have been released… this is where you come in!

If you are an existing Sky customer, we would like you to keep an eye out for any promotions you receive from Sky about Sky Mobile offers and let us know about it on our new forum:
Yes did
Interesting tactics
kirstiemcnabb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 09:09
frejus19
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 22
O2 isn't worse then EE in Edinburgh.

I tried it out for a month and 4G was a joke. Thought my phone was faulty then the guy in the EE store reluctantly admitted that they were having ongoing technical issues in the city.

I stuck my phone on 3G only, and it worked slowly most of the time except for occasional Android message that the network didn't support mobile data, that I've never seen with a O2 or 3 sim card.
That's disappointing to hear. Edinburgh seems to be poor for 4G in general - mainly in terms of capacity. Bizarrely, Three seems to be the most reliable, even though their 4G is less extensively deployed.
frejus19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 09:16
Gigabit
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,876
BT could spend money on doing proper fibre to the home but they cant be arsed
They're a business, not a charity.
Gigabit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 09:24
jchamier
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: This forum
Posts: 3,389
They're a business, not a charity.
Anyone can order a fibre line from BT; if they have the hundreds of thousands to pay for it. (Worst case).
jchamier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 11:34
clewsy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,860
Sky could run mobile as a loss leader , however I wonder if it will be a success? People tend to be quite loyal on phone networks, especially the higher end users. EE have the network and all the extras to keep the higher end customer happy.

Does any MVNO have WiFi calling yet?

Also I suspect Tesco won't sit back if Sky come on the market, given they have the same network and access to 4g as Sky will have.
clewsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 12:27
stone tape
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 350
I was all for it until I found out it runs on O2, terrible network, I have had a personal mobile on O2 and also a work phone, sometimes the calls would not go through, had signal issues, terrible.

And I'm in London.
stone tape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 14:49
Everything Goes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the future....
Posts: 11,257
God not that tired old story again
They're a business, not a charity.
Yes they would rather spunk it all on Football rights giving over paid and over sexed footballers more money than even world leaders get. All for kicking a ball around a park for 90 minutes a week.

Glad you two are happy to defend the lazy useless monopoly.
Everything Goes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 14:55
moox
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,640
They're a business, not a charity.
That doesn't mean they're making the right long term decisions, though. Spending billions on FTTC was all well and good in the short term - it's just a shame that most of the equipment is obsolete from the day it goes in, because BT chose to go with a technology that is several years old (and a network architecture from the 90s)

BT will realise that FTTH is the future. I mean, they did - in the 80s - and it looks like they'll have to rediscover it. Other legacy telcos are already there and are crowing on about how much cheaper it is to run a fibre network vs copper - not to mention how it enables increased revenues (you can sell those ultra expensive leased lines without having to lift a finger to provide them - just change the boxes at the ends of the pre-existing fibre)
moox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2016, 16:22
clewsy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,860
But the majority of the public are perfectly happy with their speed - current fibre pleases the customer on the whole, so that will suit BT.

Why fit FTTP when people are happy with the current super fast offering?
clewsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2016, 10:21
WelshBluebird
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 720
But the majority of the public are perfectly happy with their speed - current fibre pleases the customer on the whole, so that will suit BT.

Why fit FTTP when people are happy with the current super fast offering?
At the moment, yeah you are right.
But the majority of the public were perfectly happy with 2Mbps ADSL just a few years ago.
So it is fairly sensible to think that in a few more years, the number of people unhappy with FTTC speeds will increase.

Short term, yeah FTTC is fine. But if you are looking long term (more than just a few years), then doing FTTH from the start would have been more cost effective.
WelshBluebird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2016, 12:59
Aye Up
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North West
Posts: 4,884
Glad you two are happy to defend the lazy useless monopoly.
Where you or someone else whinges about BT & fibre..........

That doesn't mean they're making the right long term decisions, though. Spending billions on FTTC was all well and good in the short term - it's just a shame that most of the equipment is obsolete from the day it goes in, because BT chose to go with a technology that is several years old (and a network architecture from the 90s)

BT will realise that FTTH is the future. I mean, they did - in the 80s - and it looks like they'll have to rediscover it. Other legacy telcos are already there and are crowing on about how much cheaper it is to run a fibre network vs copper - not to mention how it enables increased revenues (you can sell those ultra expensive leased lines without having to lift a finger to provide them - just change the boxes at the ends of the pre-existing fibre)
This fella inevitably follows. This thread is about Sky and their mobile offering, keep on topic if you don't mind
Aye Up is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 12:22
samuel79
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 87
It would not be a shock if 02 sold them giffgaff its a ready made network for them and iirc 02 want out
samuel79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2016, 13:34
Mystic Eddy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,884
It would not be a shock if 02 sold them giffgaff its a ready made network for them and iirc 02 want out
Telefonica (the parent company of O2) want to divest the entirety of O2 UK to help pay down company debt. This will either be via a sale or an IPO. I'd imagine a sale of giffgaff would take place after one of the two options for the parent company have been exercised.
Mystic Eddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2016, 21:20
The Lord Lucan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 4,966
That's disappointing to hear. Edinburgh seems to be poor for 4G in general - mainly in terms of capacity. Bizarrely, Three seems to be the most reliable, even though their 4G is less extensively deployed.
Totally have to disagree.. consistently getting fast speeds and coverage bar say inside Ocean Terminal is great. O2 has issues at peak, Three the same.

Regularly get these speeds in the city centre nowadays.
http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/i/1790783339
The Lord Lucan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2016, 10:20
noise747
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 22,797
Yes they would rather spunk it all on Football rights giving over paid and over sexed footballers more money than even world leaders get. All for kicking a ball around a park for 90 minutes a week.

Glad you two are happy to defend the lazy useless monopoly.
Agree with you there, but this is the problem with privatising the main network, BT had the network for pittance, sure they may have spent a lot of money on so called modernising it, but still not enough.

Saying all of that, would we be better of if the network stayed in government hands? But even in private hands there have a been a load of tax money spent on the network over the last few years which BT will benefit from.
noise747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2016, 10:22
noise747
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 22,797
But the majority of the public are perfectly happy with their speed - current fibre pleases the customer on the whole, so that will suit BT.

Why fit FTTP when people are happy with the current super fast offering?
I do agree with you to be honest, there are still a lot of places that Fibre do not cover, some that even ADSL do not cover, these places need to be sorted first.

Even some people who do have FTTC, have a pretty naff speed for the price they are paying.
noise747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2016, 15:52
Faust
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 8,098
BT could spend money on doing proper fibre to the home but they cant be arsed
They have already started with FTTP, problem is the average consumer will never pay those prices. No need to really as many families don't even bother with FTTC and are still content with their ADSL.
Faust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2016, 16:11
jonmorris
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: a land filled with trolls
Posts: 12,014
I can live with ADSL to a degree, but it is a pain if I need to upload video to YouTube (when I switch to 4G).

But I'm considering buying an Ultra HD TV and for streaming, I have to get a faster connection. I don't fancy buying physical media to play, so I'm stuffed as using 4G would be far too expensive.
jonmorris is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2016, 17:57
clewsy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,860
Yes it's the upload that is the killer on ADSL.

If you had an ADSL router for downloads, but it also had the facility to switch to a 4g sim for uploads, many people would just stick with ADSL.

There are not that many residential users who are brothered about the potential max speed that they can get from FTTC, let alone FTTP.
clewsy is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 13:13.