Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu
When VM decided to have this aggro with Skys basic package, and it got pulled off, and they stated that they would continue to discuss the fee etc, l said at the time, if it was Virgin Atlantic, the problem would be sorted out within days, as the thought of losing so much money over flights,, prompted Sir Richard to do something, and bingo today after a threat of TWO strikes planned, the aircrews accepted a new deal, isn't strange that VM, which has the VIRGIN brandname, therefore to me runs VM or a shareholder, this Sky problem has been going for a months, would it be nice, if Sir Richard said come on we will sit and discuss with Sky the deal, oh l forgot how much does a subscriber pay a month £20.00, compared to £250.00 on one flight. see how much he would lose.  |
With all due respect, none can be entirely sure why VM dropped the channels, beyond the fact that VM/Sky did not agree a price.
Sky wanted more money, while paying less for the then Flextech channels (living, uktv etc). This much (IIRC) was admitted by both sides. Virgin claim they would have had a heavy loss on each customer if forced to pay those prices. Sky obviously claim that the extra content would help vm.
Now, the real crux of the matter, and why it's not valid to compare Virgin Media with Virgin Atlantic is simple. Sky provide services to VM. It is therefore relatively easy (and legal) for Sky to make things difficult for VM. BA (AFAIK) do not provide services to Virgin Atlantic, so, therefore, had to resort to legally dubious methods to affect them.