[TV] Sky Sports £54 price rise

[El Presidente]

Received the letter from Sky this morning, and it's time to ditch Sky methinks.

Letter was classic marketing disingenuous slipperiness.

The rise was shown as £4.50 a month (yet whenever the Murdoch press quote the TV licence fee it's shown as £149 a year to make it appear more expensive), and there's no reference to the actual total cost, which is now £62 a month, or £744 a year.

This comes on top of a larger rise last year.

For that you don't even get HD.

No doubt Sky will claim that they have to recoup the cost of the new football deal, but no one forced them to pay such a sum to the PL, and similarly no one is forcing me to subscribe, so it's goodnight from me, and goodbye to them.

 

[deletebeepbeepbeep]

Holy moly!!

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

glad I've given in to the wife and got rid of it....especially as they've actually been losing a fair bit of action to BT sport lately

 

[Sweeney Todd]

With that lot, when it comes to price rises, the Sky is the limit.

 

[Steve in Japan]

Steep. Better to nip to the pub as and when a match takes your fancy IMO.

 

[Geestar]

Get rid...Sky is awful!

 

[Cian]

Gradual reduction for me - movies went ages ago, sports the last time we were relegated as the number of games fell; then moved to cable for the normal channels and last month I dropped them also. Now get 17 'free' channels on cable the bulk of which are actually free (Sky 1, Sky Living, MTV, Discovery, Comedy Central, Setanta are the only ones that aren't) and have Freesat.

Murdoch doesn't get a penny, the cost of Sky Sports easily covers trips to the pub for Albion games and I find I've no less TV to watch really - there's still feck all on.

 

[glasfryn]

Received the letter from Sky this morning, and it's time to ditch Sky methinks.

Letter was classic marketing disingenuous slipperiness.

The rise was shown as £4.50 a month (yet whenever the Murdoch press quote the TV licence fee it's shown as £149 a year to make it appear more expensive), and there's no reference to the actual total cost, which is now £62 a month, or £744 a year.

This comes on top of a larger rise last year.

For that you don't even get HD.

No doubt Sky will claim that they have to recoup the cost of the new football deal, but no one forced them to pay such a sum to the PL, and similarly no one is forcing me to subscribe, so it's goodnight from me, and goodbye to them.

I got an email with a 10month discount of 15% if I sign up for another year with the £4.50 price rise, suppose I am banking on the Albion making it to the premier and if they don't we and it is we watch most of the games at the weekend
plus if you have the whole package the cheaper it is
you just do not watch the crap films

EDIT
we get HD as well for that +telephone +to mobiles+ internet
+ speaking to someone here and not India
we tried all the others and you get what you pay for

 

[TWOCHOICEStom]

Received the letter from Sky this morning, and it's time to ditch Sky methinks.

Letter was classic marketing disingenuous slipperiness.

The rise was shown as £4.50 a month (yet whenever the Murdoch press quote the TV licence fee it's shown as £149 a year to make it appear more expensive), and there's no reference to the actual total cost, which is now £62 a month, or £744 a year.

This comes on top of a larger rise last year.

For that you don't even get HD.

No doubt Sky will claim that they have to recoup the cost of the new football deal, but no one forced them to pay such a sum to the PL, and similarly no one is forcing me to subscribe, so it's goodnight from me, and goodbye to them.

Charging an extra cost for HD movies and sports is the biggest con Sky gets away with IMO. Whilst the rest of the tech world has moved onto 4K content, Sky is still claiming that delivering 1080p is some kind of premium service. Joke.

Why not make the raise a tad easier to swallow by "upgrading" everyone to this wonderful, futuristic HD technology?

 

[Easy 10]

Binned sports and movies once I got Kodi. Wish I'd done it yonks ago.

 

[GOM]

Get rid...Sky is awful!

I like Sky and don't find it awful at all.

 

[GOM]

Charging an extra cost for HD movies and sports is the biggest con Sky gets away with IMO. Whilst the rest of the tech world has moved onto 4K content, Sky is still claiming that delivering 1080p is some kind of premium service. Joke.

Why not make the raise a tad easier to swallow by "upgrading" everyone to this wonderful, futuristic HD technology?

Charging an extra cost for HD movies and sports is the biggest con Virgin gets away with IMO. Whilst the rest of the tech world has moved onto 4K content, Virgin is still claiming that delivering 1080p is some kind of premium service. Joke.

 

[theboybilly]

Received the letter from Sky this morning, and it's time to ditch Sky methinks.

Letter was classic marketing disingenuous slipperiness.

The rise was shown as £4.50 a month (yet whenever the Murdoch press quote the TV licence fee it's shown as £149 a year to make it appear more expensive), and there's no reference to the actual total cost, which is now £62 a month, or £744 a year.

This comes on top of a larger rise last year.

For that you don't even get HD.

No doubt Sky will claim that they have to recoup the cost of the new football deal, but no one forced them to pay such a sum to the PL, and similarly no one is forcing me to subscribe, so it's goodnight from me, and goodbye to them.

I've just halved my outgoings by switching to BT Infinity. In truth I rarely watch Sky Sports and will only miss Gillette Soccer Saturday as and when Albion matches allow. I've invested in a fully-loaded Amazon Fire stick with Kodi (from eBay) on it so will see how that goes. I might need some help there though.

 

[BUTTERBALL]

Received the letter from Sky this morning, and it's time to ditch Sky methinks.

Letter was classic marketing disingenuous slipperiness.

The rise was shown as £4.50 a month (yet whenever the Murdoch press quote the TV licence fee it's shown as £149 a year to make it appear more expensive), and there's no reference to the actual total cost, which is now £62 a month, or £744 a year.

This comes on top of a larger rise last year.

For that you don't even get HD.

No doubt Sky will claim that they have to recoup the cost of the new football deal, but no one forced them to pay such a sum to the PL, and similarly no one is forcing me to subscribe, so it's goodnight from me, and goodbye to them.

Couldn't agree more. Got a similar email from them and will be doing the same, it's the final straw. I don't watch it anywhere near enough to justify the cost and will hardly watch at all in the summer. There are plenty of other options out there and they will lose my phone and (slow) broadband into the bargain.

 

[Notters]

Just say no, and that you're leaving, you'll soon get a 50-75% reduction.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

Charging an extra cost for HD movies and sports is the biggest con Sky gets away with IMO. Whilst the rest of the tech world has moved onto 4K content, Sky is still claiming that delivering 1080p is some kind of premium service. Joke.

Why not make the raise a tad easier to swallow by "upgrading" everyone to this wonderful, futuristic HD technology?

Sky don't even provide 1080p do they? They broadcast at 1080i and the box can be set to downscale to 720p.

The new Sky Q boxes are 4k ready, but they aren't launching the service until later in the year.

 

[NODC]

This really annoys me as I've only just renewed for a further 12 month (was going to cancel but they gave me a 50% discount for 12 months) and then within a few months they hike the price, wish it was locked in for the 12 month that I had agreed

 

[tinx]

I've just cancelled as well. Fed up with the price. I'm going to get the BT TV total entertainment package. Currently £13 a month and that includes BT sport etc and most of the standard channels. For sky sports and movies Kodi it is.

Oh and it also includes BT Sport in Ultra HD as well.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

Just say no, and that you're leaving, you'll soon get a 50-75% reduction.

Sky cave in quicker than George Osborne after a budget. My partner got them to half their intial quote for tv phone and internet after the latest attempted price hike.

 

[ofco8]

Received the letter from Sky this morning, and it's time to ditch Sky methinks.

Letter was classic marketing disingenuous slipperiness.

The rise was shown as £4.50 a month (yet whenever the Murdoch press quote the TV licence fee it's shown as £149 a year to make it appear more expensive), and there's no reference to the actual total cost, which is now £62 a month, or £744 a year.

This comes on top of a larger rise last year.

For that you don't even get HD.

No doubt Sky will claim that they have to recoup the cost of the new football deal, but no one forced them to pay such a sum to the PL, and similarly no one is forcing me to subscribe, so it's goodnight from me, and goodbye to them.

This is a bit like the Mobile Phone companies. Says in paper today that customers leave the phone shops signing a contract that is far more than they thought they were being sold.
The mobile operators mix up the new phone with the usage rates and most people are unaware what the breakdown of costs is. Thus surprised when they get their bills.