SKT Sky Network Television Limited.

[blackcap]

Called to cancel, they offered me pretty much half price for what I currently had, from $94 to $49 per month. Might just stick it out till after the cricket season.....

Worth a call anyway.

[bull....]

story on nbr pretty much about this

https://newsroom.cisco.com/press-rel...icleId=1878785

[flyer]

Interesting they need to do something and do something fast before they lose more subscribers.
I am contemplating ringing up to cancel to see if they will offer me half price

[blackcap]

Interesting they need to do something and do something fast before they lose more subscribers.
I am contemplating ringing up to cancel to see if they will offer me half price

Give it a go... I did just that 2 or 3 days ago. From $94 a month I now pay $49 a month.

[Nasi Goreng]

Just looking at todays result in the Herald. SKY have lost 27897 subscribers in the last 12 months. It sounds like a lot but they currently have 824782 subscribers so they have only lost 3.3% of their customer base in the last year. 3.3% meh, no sweat?

Everything else being equal, their current operating expenses of $600M per year and average customer spend of $945.84 per year, they would need to lose 190000 subscribers to break even so at the current rate of churn, so they have another 6.8 years to find a solution... hmmm maybe shareholders should begin to sweat with a PE of 9.36.

If I was a shareholder, I would be uneasy about holding SKT with a declining customer base and potentially rising costs. If we get into a situation where there are bidding wars for future content, this is going to drive up operating expenses and if the speed of customer churn increases, the break even number might approach faster than some have foreseen.

If we fast forward 12 months, and assume operating costs are the same, and churn drops by 5% (41k customers), this would reduce revenues by $39M and provide a profit buffer of 151000 customers before break even is achieved. We are not quite into the area of sweat just yet but you would have to be nervous as a Sky director or investor against what is now a relatively thin margin for profit.

[value_investor]

Just looking at todays result in the Herald. SKY have lost 27897 subscribers in the last 12 months. It sounds like a lot but they currently have 824782 subscribers so they have only lost 3.3% of their customer base in the last year. 3.3% meh, no sweat?

Everything else being equal, their current operating expenses of $600M per year and average customer spend of $945.84 per year, they would need to lose 190000 subscribers to break even so at the current rate of churn, so they have another 6.8 years to find a solution... hmmm maybe shareholders should begin to sweat with a PE of 9.36.

If I was a shareholder, I would be uneasy about holding SKT with a declining customer base and potentially rising costs. If we get into a situation where there are bidding wars for future content, this is going to drive up operating expenses and if the speed of customer churn increases, the break even number might approach faster than some have foreseen.

If we fast forward 12 months, and assume operating costs are the same, and churn drops by 5% (41k customers), this would reduce revenues by $39M and provide a profit buffer of 151000 customers before break even is achieved. We are not quite into the area of sweat just yet but you would have to be nervous as a Sky director or investor against what is now a relatively thin margin for profit.

Past the numbers, I'd be more uneasy at the fact that they stated numbers are down yet have offered no implementation of a strategy or path out of it. Frankly it looks like a presentation that says, "look at all the good programming we have. The downturn is just a phase"

[Baa_Baa]

03-03-2017

Eventually if they don't fix the content distribution (increasing eyeballs, wallets and revenue for the whole value chain), the content sources will seek other distributors. SKT are seriously exposed to content distribution disruption as well, as content sources can mount their own online content distribution easily at relatively low costs, cutting out the intermediary (Sky).

NZ Rugby flexes its muscle with AllBlacksTV.com https://www.nbr.co.nz/article/nz-rug...vcom-ck-209053

Here: http://allblackstv.com

Kaboom, SKY.

[Zaphod]

Brilliant move. Now if I just add up all the services I need to subscribe to in order to watch the content I want......

[value_investor]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/ind...r-the-internet

Yikes! This is a really outdated way of thinking. I think this is convenient for management to say in order to make it look like they are doing something but not really. It would be much harder to change their business model and actually try and turn things around..

[minimoke]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/ind...r-the-internet

Yikes! This is a really outdated way of thinking. I think this is convenient for management to say in order to make it look like they are doing something but not really. It would be much harder to change their business model and actually try and turn things around..

An appalling move. Fancy trying to block sites that allow me to download legitimate torrent files! What a waste of shareholders funds.

About time that got with the times and found ways of distributing product in a format and price point consumers would enjoy.

This company needs to pull its head out of the sand and get with the new century. Time for that Chair of the Board to go - he will be the one responsible for the further destruction of shareholder wealth.