Your figures are simplistic & plain wrong JB. Firstly, you've stated that they have 7m Sports subscribers - Sky doesn't publish how many Sports subscribers they have, all that's known is that they have a total of circa 10m in total. Even if we took that 7m as being correct, you've merely multiplied the TOTAL average revenue earned per customer & decided that they 'earn' that amount to offset their EPL costs. This is total bollocks, as the actual cost of SS is £264 per year & the total revenue spend includes broadband, PPV, telephone, HD, movies, standard channels etc etc etc. In addition you're assuming that every subscriber has SS because of the EPL, ignoring the Ryder cup, F1, Rugby, as well as the CL etc - all of which they also pay handsomely for. You've also ignored the fact that they spend £1.1BN per year marketing their service.
Tobes if you want to talk 'simplistic', you ignored all their income, focusing completely on customers spending £22 p.m. to balance the £760m sky are paying the epl! Now that's the most over simplification on here. At least I've shown how they recoup money which you ignored altogether. I never 'assumed' what customers were buying sports package for either, it simply isn't relevant, whatever they are paying to watch F1, cricket or whatever, their package includes football. Plain fact is 7million people buy sky sports at about £500 p.a. I don't care about what else that covers, broadband whatever doesn't matter, sky still get the subscriptions for a sports package I have never stated it's just about the football, because it isn't. You can't get a sky deal for just football so what you have to pay them to get the football, must be included in the sum and if you're a racing fan you get to watch that as well, great. I'm sure now you've had a think about it and re-read your previous comments on merely balancing £22's with £760m - you have done a bit of research yourself when you see what your simple view overlooked. So I'm expecting you to have gone away and revised your earlier thinking and you will keep coming back with the other things you overlooked in your simple statement : They have a total of 10m subscribers, I've no idea how many of those take the Sports package, but even if they all did @ £22 per month (which they don't) it still wouldn't cover 1/3 of what they're paying the EPL......
I don't have sky now and I don't intend ever to pay them 1p. As an exercise for this debate I just went on their website and to get sky with sports package they want £43 p.m. from me - that's £516 p.a.
Yes & you get far more than just SS with it aaarrrggghh. How do you watch the game then JB? or do you just catch the highlights? I was with Sky for donkeys years & then left them over a fall out over a new HD box. I went to BT for 18 months & it was really good value, with the TV package including SS 1 & 2 only costing about £26 per month for the lot, but I missed the HD & eventually went back to Sky after they gave me 70% off ffs!
Thing is Tobes I know the sub covers far more than the footie but you can't say to them give me a reduction because I only want the football bit - so in effect it doesn't matter what else is included, if you like 'you have to have' all the other stuff to get the footie. If I don't go to the match I rarely watch it on the box [or computer] - I have an lfctv sub and I watch the games as soon as they come on there - usually the next day as they're not allowed to show it live [which is what we're talking about]. I have also done on 3/4 occasions the streaming thing - yes I've seen your comments about that too! We have cable tv and can pay for SS on that but haven't bothered. As I said years ago I may have done - don't know - but I'm more a Liverpool fan these days than general football fan as long as I get to see our games in flesh or retrospectively, I'm happy.
