BSkyB Announces 3rd Quarter Results - Page 2

Nugget · 03-05-2007, 18:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick

<snip>Before you come back and throw other weak arguements across about Virgin Media having the same amount of problems with its customers, I know it does, I haven't disputed that but what gets my goat is you and others on here at times painting this wonderful picture of Sky being absolute angels and always being the better service - well the proof is in the pudding, they aren't and nowhere near it.

In fairness Mick, at the moment, Sky do have the better service when it comes to the TV

I can't comment on the Broadband 'cos we don't use it, but the TV is infinitely better...

Downloads · 03-05-2007, 19:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nugget

In fairness Mick, at the moment, Sky do have the better service when it comes to the TV

I can't comment on the Broadband 'cos we don't use it, but the TV is infinitely better...

I don't really agree. Why is it infinitely better?

I would agree the Sky+ box is more responsive.

But, i have used the extra tuner on the V+ Box a LOT lately and i have used VoD a LOT lately too. Sky don't have either. Also i don't pay Ã‚Â£10 a month for the HD Box and all my regular TV is upscaled.

**Mick** · 03-05-2007, 19:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nugget

In fairness Mick, at the moment, Sky do have the better service when it comes to the TV

It's not about the TV service I am disputing here but that's not something I would agree with anyway. At the same time I would say we all prefer our own preferences. But Sky can have such poor customer service. They botched my bothers install and refused to accept responsibility for it, such poor customer service from Sky that is.

But some on here, throw it around and start to spout off that this is better than that, most of the time, what a crock of crap - Sky is not without faults either.

Sky may be jumping for joy at a gain of 51,000 extra customers, but its hardly worth the elation when 290,000 switched off from Sky for good, a 34% loss of viewers from Sky One is nothing to smile about and advertisers are demanding a chunk of their money back. Sky thought they were on to a winner when Sky's basic channels were removed from the Virgin Media TV network and its backfired on them in a huge way.

colin-bennett · 03-05-2007, 19:48

come on guy's.
The figures quoted are for the money market.
The underlying trend (in my humble view) is that BSB's churn has nearly hit record high's. Now considering SKY offering free install,,3 services from as low as ??. (I will not quote as many people who have received mail's from sky will tell me lower figures) I can see the revenue of sky falling considerably. Now this is not taking into affect lost revenues from advertisers etc etc.

Chrysalis · 05-05-2007, 02:43

if the profits include the money lost on the broadband then these are very good figures.

I agree NTLs tv wasnt anywhere near close to sky. NTL could only offer me analogue and it was more expensive then sky digital.

05-05-2007, 06:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

if the profits include the money lost on the broadband then these are very good figures.

I agree NTLs tv wasnt anywhere near close to sky. NTL could only offer me analogue and it was more expensive then sky digital.

who the hell are NTL ?

I did not think you of all people would stoop to that. Show you have the intelligence i credit you with and use there proper name.

Chrysalis · 05-05-2007, 14:18

wasn't means past term, I have never had service with VM.

arcamalpha2004 · 06-05-2007, 09:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul

Sky have gained their custom by the same tactics as always but for a change it seems that some of their long term customers are now getting sick of them and jumping ship. Competition in a market is always a good thing for the end users but only if it's competition on a level playing field.
I'm thinking that with numbers like this Sky will be pushing on with a new aggressive recruitment drive soon to try and shore up the steady flow of customers leaving their services. Without that user base they will struggle to win any arguement about the value of their channels if they cannot show that their own customers are actually seeing any value in their service at the moment.

Also worth noting the figure for customers sky have lost by not offering incentives to stay, unlike vm, basically if people think the grass is greener with vm go there, that seems to be the stance from sky.
What would be the figures for vm if retentions were not working overtime?

**Mick** · 06-05-2007, 10:02

It would be very fitting for your anti-VM agenda wouldn't if all the 290,000 customers lost from Sky, were the ones who left because of Sky ceasing insentives to stay.

Berezovski · 06-05-2007, 10:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill C

who the hell are NTL ?

I press "settings" on my TV and it says NTL: on the top left corner.

Sublime messages by Branson???

I understand that it will take few years for VM engineers to replace it, I hear they were focusing to replace it with "NTL:telewest" but now they have to start all over again, so many more new letters in "Virgin Media" ....

arcamalpha2004 · 06-05-2007, 10:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick

It would be very fitting for your anti-VM agenda wouldn't if all the 290,000 customers lost from Sky, were the ones who left because of Sky ceasing insentives to stay.

Did I mention a figure mick? no I did not.
just that nothing was mentioned about sky's new policy, it is not me being anti vm as you put it....<mod edit: Chris W> Discussion of reps removed
Just think your response says more about you than your claims about me.
Have a nice day

TheBlueRaja · 06-05-2007, 11:05

I love the bods on here jumping on the lost customers, they could have been lost for any number of reasons and they are that much of a concern to the people who invest in Sky that the share price shot up.

Virgin / NTL probably lost a hell of a lot more customers than that recently after they shafted their own customers and lost the Sky channels and naturally according to these same people its all Sky's fault.

The facts are they are 51,000 customers better off, profits were up 9% and revenues were above expectations which led to a massive increase in share price.

Yet the only people whining are the Virgin customers who were hoping to see Sky rot after Virgin lost the channels you "never really watched anyway".

Life's harsh ain't it fellas.

arcamalpha2004 · 06-05-2007, 11:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBlueRaja

I love the bods on here jumping on the lost customers, they could have been lost for any number of reasons and they are that much of a concern to the people who invest in Sky that the share price shot up.

Virgin / NTL probably lost a hell of a lot more customers than that recently after they shafted their own customers and lost the Sky channels and naturally according to these same people its all Sky's fault.

The facts are they are 51,000 customers better off, profits were up 9% and revenues were above expectations which led to a massive increase in share price.

Yet the only people whining are the Virgin customers who were hoping to see Sky rot after Virgin lost the channels you "never really watched anyway".

Life's harsh ain't it fellas.

The story was in the sunday mail last week.
They said that although sky had lost customers since the spat with vm the figures quoted should be put into context of the fact that customers are not getting retention deals unlike vm, so imo the figures are up in the air for both providers, note I said " Both "

**Mick** · 06-05-2007, 19:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBlueRaja

I love the bods on here jumping on the lost customers

Very highly hypocritical comment from you but I didn't expect anything else really.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBlueRaja

Virgin / NTL probably lost a hell of a lot more customers than that recently after they shafted their own customers and lost the Sky channels and naturally according to these same people its all Sky's fault.

They haven't lost as many as that at all and they didn't shaft their customers over the loss of the basic channels, remember it was your greedy satellite supplier who wanted more money (whilst wanting to pay less for VM's own channels such as Living, Bravo etc etc). VM wanted to settle the dispute with arbitration, Sky being Sky refused and now it has backfired on them.

With Sky's absolutely dire broadband service I wonder what next Qtr's churn rate will be.

**Matt D** · 06-05-2007, 20:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick

With Sky's absolutely dire broadband service

Mine's fine

Only problems have been ones I'd have had with any ADSL service, 'cos of a long line & crappy extensions.

I have heard that the customer service & tech support can leave a lot to be desired, though. But then, I found that with ntl too.