Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu
if you had to pay £1.50 for example, for the basic package, that is the price of ONE meal, or a pint or THREE cigarettes,
|
fags are'nt 50p each yet (it's around £5.65 a packet of 20 at the moment until the nanny state raises the tax on them again)
please correct your statement to ....
"if you had to pay £1.50 for example, for the basic package, that is the price of ONE meal, or a pint or FIVE cigarettes"
it's very difficult for folk to take your views to be of any value if you can't get the fundamentals right
I do agree with others that those basic Sky channels were essentially low brow channels and not worth the inflated Sky charge (and certainly not an extra £1 or so on customer bills).
BUT where I am VERY VERY annoyed is that I pay extra for this so called 'Sky Sports Collection' package which does'nt include Sky Sports News that's even available on bloody Freeview.
Sorry but the VM/Setanta attempt at a dedicated Sports New Channel is no where near the standard set by SSN.
And no I'm not going to install a Freeview box just for SSN.
I hold both Sky and Virgin at fault for this. Sky for being
[inappropriate language removed] and not playing fair and include SSN within the Sports package AND VM for being far too quick to place the blame on Sky on removing their basic channels - they should have contested SSN seperately on the basis of the Sport Package subscriptions.
Sky One - the Simpson's repeat channel and dumbed down US tripe (Lost? c'mon grow up people)