TV cost saving news item

[JPAC]

Quote; "16:36, 19 JAN 2016 BY JAMES ANDREWS
The price of Sky TV has almost doubled since 2008, while Virgin TV costs are up by more than half. But there's less reason to have one than ever before

In December 2008 a basic Sky TV package would set you back £17 a month, while a basic Virgin TV package cost £11 a month.

Now to get the same channels costs you £30 and £18 respectively. That's £156 more a year for Sky and £84 more a year for Virgin. But in the same time wages have risen just 14%, research from Freesat has found.

“The price of TV packages has increased drastically in the last decade and is becoming unaffordable for many families," said Freesat spokesperson Jennifer Elworthy."

http://bit.ly/1Ryi68S

After all these years I still don't understand this dongle thing. OK, buy the dongle but you still have to have an internet connection right? Where's the cost saving?

There is an obvious cost saving in not paying for subscription TV services. What do dongles and internets have to do with it?

[JPAC]

Did you follow the link? Just the content

Did you know with a simple £30 dongle or plug in smart box you can beam content from your laptop to your TV - or even connect straight to the internet - meaning you can get iPlayer, YouTube and more from your phone, laptop or tablet straight to your TV.

How does the TV data get to the laptop to be sent to your TV?

[Stephen]

So you are only paying for the internet then and NOT the TV. So that is where you are saving money.

Simple really

Via an Internet connection - which has precisely nothing to do with the prices Sky and Virgin charge for their TV packs.

Presumably you have an Internet connection and would continue to have one whether or not you subscribe to a TV content provider, Internet being a basic utility much like your phone or electricity.

[MrB]

The article is advertising Freesat and Freeview. The reference to dongles refers to Google Chrome so that you can access catch up services and YouTube etc - there is no detail about streaming other content that is available on the internet.

As noted above, you still need an internet connection if you wanted to use Chrome etc but not for Freeview and Freesat.

We could all save even more money if we did not want any of the premium subscription channels - it is true that prices have risen substantially over recent years though.

If you buy one of the latest generation of set top boxes for Freesat or Freeview (or a "smart" TV), most, or all, of the on-demand and catch-up services are built in. And most of those (iplayer, ITV player, etc) are free to use.

There are of course services that operate by subscription, like Amazon Prime and Netflix, but you can take them or leave them. Even if you take them, it seems to me that they are somewhat cheaper than buying bundles of channels you never watch from Sky, just so you can see one hour of Game of Thrones per week.

I added up once, the true cost of my Sky sub, per programme watched. It was shocking. I cancelled it soon afterwards because it would have been cheaper to buy box sets of everything I wanted than to continue subscribing to Sky.

Then I found if there was less TV in the house, I watched it less, and didn't even bother with any box sets. Result ... More dosh to spend elsewhere.

The cost savings are there for the taking.

[Kushan]

I literally only have the TV because it's part of the mates rates package. Had a second box for a while, wasn't even plugged in.

I don't remember the last time I went "channel surfing", if I want to watch something, I'll stream it from netflix or some other streaming service.

[adduxi]

Yes, I also am becoming disillusioned with TV.
I've often come home and thought "hundreds of channels and nothing to watch"
Once the kids leave home, I am seriously thinking of going to Freeview and starting to read books again

[Taf]

I bought our lad an HD receiver from Tesco.

http://www.tesco.com/direct/manhatta...skuId=320-7521

He loves it, and no fees to pay. Just attach to an aerial and BB and away you go.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by adduxi

Yes, I also am becoming disillusioned with TV.
I've often come home and thought "hundreds of channels and nothing to watch"
Once the kids leave home, I am seriously thinking of going to Freeview and starting to read books again

Agreed up to a point. I'll be ditching Sky Movies soon; and I'll be ditching my BT Infinity & phone line. I've got a VM line, will move to IP telephony when that's up and running and 4G will become my backup.

I'd want to keep the TV XL pack though. Good stuff on the science channels.

But Adduxi implies a wider point. I suspect that many customers will reach a similar conclusion due to the competition brought about by the excellent streaming services. This will affect VM's business model, I'm sure.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Chris

Via an Internet connection - which has precisely nothing to do with the prices Sky and Virgin charge for their TV packs.

It could do, because of the way that the bundle prices work.

Having broadband may make the price of TV cheaper; which reduces any savings made because of any discount.

I've read on here that in some cases it's cheaper to take a VM landline than not having one- even if it never gets plugged in!

[techguyone]

I just pay VM 50p/mth for the freeview channels (obviously I pay for the internet/phone too)

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by techguyone

I just pay VM 50p/mth for the freeview channels (obviously I pay for the internet/phone too)

You aren't getting all the Freeview channels though are you? Spike, Talking Pictures, Moviemix, Movies4men etc. You'd be better saving your 50p.

[techguyone]

Anything I don't get I can just kodi or similar...

I don't mind paying 50p/mth for the ability to record stuff or when kodi goes down etc.