SKT Sky Network Television Limited.

[Stumpynuts]

So in the future Sky its competitors or even the sports themselves could create an IPv6 broadcast video stream allowing clients to acess the stream. They would need to establish authentication as part of the process but the distribution of the video stream itself would be a minor technical problem.

Does this mean authenticated users will be prevented from being able to find a way to share their live streams with others should they wish to do so?

Joseph Parker's next fight scheduled for September later this year...

Titanic / Iceberg collision course I'm afraid...

[Bobdn]

Stumpy, why are you so worried about all this. Sky is a "dead/dying" model to quote you. Just relax and let rhe old Sky beast check out gracefully. When do you think this will happen by the way - before or after the next big fight?

[Stumpynuts]

Stumpy, why are you so worried about all this. Sky is a "dead/dying" model to quote you. Just relax and let rhe old Sky beast check out gracefully. When do you think this will happen by the way - before or after the next big fight?

I'm not worried at all from an investment point of view as I don't invest in SKT. I'm curious more so for the sake of those that embrace online streaming what future plans a global telco like VF might take to try and offer freedom of choice for internet users in NZ (Or take away freedom)

[LAC]

Anyone thats pays for the content can show the content....thats a fair playing field. If Netflix pay for it then sure enough people should buy their service but stealing the content and showing it isnt a fair playing field. Sky may now have better ways of blocking "certain" sites through VF.
I am all for that

[winner69]

Apparently there was a decent profit downgrade hidden away in the presentation material

[bull....]

I don't see the synergies as being as big as they say, and sky tv product is still going to face revenue decline even in bundled packages

[Zaphod]

Anyone thats pays for the content can show the content....thats a fair playing field. If Netflix pay for it then sure enough people should buy their service but stealing the content and showing it isnt a fair playing field. Sky may now have better ways of blocking "certain" sites through VF.
I am all for that

You're right - if a particular service has the content you want to watch, then by all means subscribe to it whether that be Netflix, Lightbox, Sky etc.

It's unfair for comparisons to be made between Sky and "free" services where content is effectively stolen. Redefining "illegal" or "stealing" is not the right way to legitimise the process, regardless of whether we agree with the existing business model of the content producers/distributors.

[Zaphod]

I don't see the synergies as being as big as they say, and sky tv product is still going to face revenue decline even in bundled packages

Yes - IMO in the very near future they will need to address pricing issues and separation of the content bundles if they want to survive.

[RGR367]

Worth not having to do with their very expensive subscription when you can watch all International sports (rugby, boxing, football, etc.)if you're willing to search the internet. I'm watching Joshua's title defense against Breazeale right now (about to start).


disc: never been a shareholder

[Marilyn Munroe]

Posters have not completely understood my recent post.

Broadcast streaming over the internet destroys the power of the agregators. Sports bodies could sell access to the video stream of their event directly to the public bypassing Sky. It is not beyond the bounds of technology for an event promoter to sell customers a one time one person key to decrypt the video stream of their event.

Want to watch an All Blacks test? Pay the Rugby Union not Sky.

Boop boop de do
Marilyn