Sky response to 20Mbps service from Virgin Media

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/3...gin-media.html

The news of a 20Mbps cable broadband service at £37 a month being available
in May 2007 has brought a swift response from Sky who offer their own
broadband services.

"Virgin Media is pushing up broadband prices at a time when dramatic
savings are available from other providers. Sky customers can enjoy download
speeds of up to 16Mb per second for just £10 per month - less than a third
of the price of Virgin Media's fastest service. No wonder that in the last
three months of 2006, Sky added almost twice as many broadband customers as
Virgin Media"

Comment from Sky spokesperson

cokeman wrote:
> http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/3...gin-media.html
>
> The news of a 20Mbps cable broadband service at £37 a month being available
> in May 2007 has brought a swift response from Sky who offer their own
> broadband services.
>
> "Virgin Media is pushing up broadband prices at a time when dramatic
> savings are available from other providers. Sky customers can enjoy download
> speeds of up to 16Mb per second for just £10 per month - less than a third
> of the price of Virgin Media's fastest service. No wonder that in the last
> three months of 2006, Sky added almost twice as many broadband customers as
> Virgin Media"
>
> Comment from Sky spokesperson

So .... is 16 Mb available to me from Sky for the all inclusive cost of
$10 per month, no extra charges (like line rental) and as a permanent
(i.e. not introductory offer) price?

Or are Sky being economical?

I also notice that a certain content provider with a pretty significant
market share has pulled all of it's content from it's biggest uk
competitor in the content delivery market. Perhaps OfCom should be
investigating that too.

Denis McMahon

Denis McMahon wrote:
> cokeman wrote:
>> http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/3...gin-media.html
>>
>> The news of a 20Mbps cable broadband service at £37 a month being
>> available in May 2007 has brought a swift response from Sky who
>> offer their own broadband services.
>>
>> "Virgin Media is pushing up broadband prices at a time when
>> dramatic savings are available from other providers. Sky customers
>> can enjoy download speeds of up to 16Mb per second for just £10 per
>> month - less than a third of the price of Virgin Media's fastest
>> service. No wonder that in the last three months of 2006, Sky added
>> almost twice as many broadband customers as Virgin Media"
>>
>> Comment from Sky spokesperson
>
> So .... is 16 Mb available to me from Sky for the all inclusive cost
> of $10 per month, no extra charges (like line rental) and as a
> permanent (i.e. not introductory offer) price?
>
> Or are Sky being economical?
>
> I also notice that a certain content provider with a pretty
> significant market share has pulled all of it's content from it's
> biggest uk competitor in the content delivery market. Perhaps OfCom
> should be investigating that too.
>

Why? Sky wanted X amount to supply Virgin , Virgin didn't want to pay so
they didn't purchase it. It's the law of the market place & not restrictive
practises.

So again I ask why should OFCOM get involved?

rumour has it that sky wanted to charge £0.03/day per customer, virgin give
no figures, but say sky doubled its charge, maybe neither, or maybe even
both of these are true.
i would happily pay 3p/day for the channels myself though.
seems a show of strength by both parties, but i guess branson is going to
lose (again) shame really beacuse murdoch could do with a bit of a beating
now and again as far too much british media is controlled by him imho.

"kraftee" <kraftee@b&e-cottee.me.uk> wrote in message
news:etk4lc$cgh$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Denis McMahon wrote:
>> cokeman wrote:
>>> http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/3...gin-media.html
>>>
>>> The news of a 20Mbps cable broadband service at £37 a month being
>>> available in May 2007 has brought a swift response from Sky who
>>> offer their own broadband services.
>>>
>>> "Virgin Media is pushing up broadband prices at a time when
>>> dramatic savings are available from other providers. Sky customers
>>> can enjoy download speeds of up to 16Mb per second for just £10 per
>>> month - less than a third of the price of Virgin Media's fastest
>>> service. No wonder that in the last three months of 2006, Sky added
>>> almost twice as many broadband customers as Virgin Media"
>>>
>>> Comment from Sky spokesperson
>>
>> So .... is 16 Mb available to me from Sky for the all inclusive cost
>> of $10 per month, no extra charges (like line rental) and as a
>> permanent (i.e. not introductory offer) price?
>>
>> Or are Sky being economical?
>>
>> I also notice that a certain content provider with a pretty
>> significant market share has pulled all of it's content from it's
>> biggest uk competitor in the content delivery market. Perhaps OfCom
>> should be investigating that too.
>>
>
> Why? Sky wanted X amount to supply Virgin , Virgin didn't want to pay so
> they didn't purchase it. It's the law of the market place & not
> restrictive practises.
>
> So again I ask why should OFCOM get involved?
>

"tony h" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:etke5q$qr1$(E-Mail Removed)...
> rumour has it that sky wanted to charge £0.03/day per customer, virgin
> give no figures, but say sky doubled its charge, maybe neither, or maybe
> even both of these are true.
> i would happily pay 3p/day for the channels myself though.
> seems a show of strength by both parties, but i guess branson is going to
> lose (again) shame really beacuse murdoch could do with a bit of a beating
> now and again as far too much british media is controlled by him imho.

OFCOM should get involved if Virgin bid for the programs and put them on
cable.
That would be restrictive as only some people can get cable, not all anyone
can get Sky if they really want to.