# Sky Q



## Frank (31 Jan 2016)

[broken link removed] 

Might be worth waiting to see what this is


----------



## Leo (1 Feb 2016)

It's a nice leap forward in terms of features and functionality. The WiBand LNB can feed 12 tuners from two cables from the dish, so can plug in to existing Sky+ setups without running extra cables. The multi-room and tablet options are great too, the ability to watch recorded content outside the home and offline is nice, as is the ability to pause a show in the living room and pick up from that point in another room or on tablet.

Price wise, at the lower end, it's more expensive for relatively little extra, but the price rises quickly and sharply if you want support for more than a single tablet and multi-room.


----------



## Cervelo (1 Feb 2016)

I have a sky+ package with a 1tb box costing 35pm, the only thing that annoys me at the moment is I can only record 2 channels at one time.
This new system answers that problem but there is no way I would pay the prices quoted.


----------



## MrEarl (2 Feb 2016)

Sky provide a good service, but they are really losing the run of themselves with their prices... a quick search online tells me that they made a profit of almost £2 BILLION sterling last year and yet, they want to find ways to charge their customers even more money.


----------



## Cervelo (2 Feb 2016)

MrEarl said:


> Sky provide a good service, but they are really losing the run of themselves with their prices... a quick search online tells me that they made a profit of almost £2 BILLION sterling last year and yet, they want to find ways to charge their customers even more money.



But didn't they spend 5/6 billion on the premiership rights early last year, so that cost is spread over all customers


----------



## MrEarl (3 Feb 2016)

Cervelo said:


> But didn't they spend 5/6 billion on the premiership rights early last year, so that cost is spread over all customers



Hello,

I am sorry I do not know the exact amount they paid for the rights to broadcast football, but had they not paid such a significant amount, then a lower bid would have secured the rights.  Would this have resulted in viewers of a rival service being able to watch football at a cheaper price, I suspect it would.  Would a lower bid have simply been turned down and the English FA not sold the rights, I seriously doubt it. Ultimately, too much money is being spent on the likes of football, by tv companies. However, they will continue to spend it, as long as they can subsequently extract it back (along with a generous profit margin) from the likes of you and I.

Also, lets not forget that Sky's previous profits were declared after absorbing a not insignificant amount in respect of the previous deal for football broadcasting rights 

As long as we continue to put fuel on the fire, it will continue to burn brightly.  Sky TV might be a very good service, but not at any price and not while they make such massive profits !


----------



## Leo (4 Feb 2016)

Sky have been pretty open about the pricing for Sky Q being expensive. They have said that for now, it is being aimed at the early adopter market who aren't as price sensitive. They've done their market research, that has guided these prices. While I'd love some of the features, I won't be going for it myself though, while I love a good gadget, it's just too expensive for me.


----------



## demoivre (4 Feb 2016)

MrEarl said:


> Sky provide a good service



Less Rugby coverage at a higher price is not good service in my book.


----------

