SKT Sky Network Television Limited.

[value_investor]

Unimpressed with Fellet's announcement, he doesn't seem to get it. He still believes the set box is the main consumer piece and that the on demand way we have gone is just a segment. If not now, then soon it will be the whole piece of the consumer play and not the box top.

There's nothing in this announcement that gets me to believe that Sky have changed their model to be in unison with what is actually happening. The new pricing is a band-aid on a much larger problem. That being that the "box first" model of pay tv operation is not what will propel them in 2018.

And yes I do love to hate this stock.

[minimoke]

Fellet really is not with it at all. Heard him on the radio this afternoon talking about Skys premium for HD content. He reckons its worth a premium due to the low take up of HD tV's. Sky will probably look at the pricing when HD is more mainstream and there are many more 4K sets out there. Does he not realise that virtually every TV in NZ is HD capable. That is 1080p. Sure their will be a few old CRT's connected to a set top box. From there everything else will be 720p (HD ready) or 1080p (HD) and a growing body of 4K (UltraHD).

Virtually every TV in NZ is ready for HD broadcast - the sad thing is there is still so little free to air HD content.

Dont tell him cos he probably doesnt realise it. But many TV's have such good upscalers that many people would find it hard to tell teh different between a standard definition broadcat upscaled to HD and an actual HD broadcast. (Though maybe he does - which is why he is selling HD to teh unwary in teh same way they are sewelling freeview free channels in their starter pack.

[Baa_Baa]

Unimpressed with Fellet's announcement, he doesn't seem to get it. He still believes the set box is the main consumer piece and that the on demand way we have gone is just a segment. If not now, then soon it will be the whole piece of the consumer play and not the box top.

There's nothing in this announcement that gets me to believe that Sky have changed their model to be in unison with what is actually happening. The new pricing is a band-aid on a much larger problem. That being that the "box first" model of pay tv operation is not what will propel them in 2018.

And yes I do love to hate this stock.

Insightful thanks. They, SKY, have a lot of sunk cost in the satellite and set-top-box model, so it's reasonable that they sweat that asset to its demise, especially given the latency in their customer base.

That said, I agree that they have completely missed the point and hopefully for shareholders not the opportunity, to diversify into digital content distribution. This is where SKY seem to have missed the point.

How could it possibly be that with such strong content sources and captive audience in selected 'channels' that they fail to see the opportunity to diversify the distribution to the 'online' audience.

Especially with a platform that works, like FanPass, which is configurable to any content and distribution in any form and price point. The future of SKY is the Fanpass platform, delivering content online, anytime, anywhere at any price point. It just needs to be hooked up to the source content and sliced into consumable chunks that customers can buy when they the want it.

It beggars belief that SKY would put their future at risk by prioritising sweating legacy assets versus embracing digital consumption models, especially while they have a stranglehold on certain types of content.

For shareholders, if the latest announcements don't equate to at least a lower trajectory to oblivion, they will probably see that oblivion is the ultimate conclusion either way.

jmho
BAA

[bull....]

tracking down $2 on the monthlies bollinger is a possibility

[axe]

Lucky they got a "young" "tech savvy" director on the board. they surely have the guidance and leadership to realise how disrupted their current model is.

Insightful thanks. They, SKY, have a lot of sunk cost in the satellite and set-top-box model, so it's reasonable that they sweat that asset to its demise, especially given the latency in their customer base.

That said, I agree that they have completely missed the point and hopefully for shareholders not the opportunity, to diversify into digital content distribution. This is where SKY seem to have missed the point.

How could it possibly be that with such strong content sources and captive audience in selected 'channels' that they fail to see the opportunity to diversify the distribution to the 'online' audience.

Especially with a platform that works, like FanPass, which is configurable to any content and distribution in any form and price point. The future of SKY is the Fanpass platform, delivering content online, anytime, anywhere at any price point. It just needs to be hooked up to the source content and sliced into consumable chunks that customers can buy when they the want it.

It beggars belief that SKY would put their future at risk by prioritising sweating legacy assets versus embracing digital consumption models, especially while they have a stranglehold on certain types of content.

For shareholders, if the latest announcements don't equate to at least a lower trajectory to oblivion, they will probably see that oblivion is the ultimate conclusion either way.

jmho
BAA

[IAK]

Lucky they got a "young" "tech savvy" director on the board. they surely have the guidance and leadership to realise how disrupted their current model is.

IMO most companies should have "young" "tech savvy" director on the board.

[Entrep]

I actually like the new starter channel. Shame that HD and MYSKY is another $25 on top of that. $10 for HD is particularly offensive.

[minimoke]

I actually like the new starter channel. .

What is there to like about it? It is essentially Freeview (Emphasis on free) for $25. If subscribers dont know this then they are vulnerable. How do shareholders feel about ripping off vulnerable people?

[Benny1]

I actually like the new starter channel. Shame that HD and MYSKY is another $25 on top of that. $10 for HD is particularly offensive.

Paying $10 for HD is a complete rip off.
If this company wants to be seen as offering a premium product HD should be a given... not a money sucking extra....
Time for a new direction and that starts at the top with new directors and CEO...

Disc: Do not hold and never will this lot running it!

[errornz]

Anyone else see Sky as the NZ version of Blockbuster? Its only a matter of time before another company creates a better/cheaper IPTV model and wins the sport broadcasting contract.