It's hard to say who's winning the streaming wars, but customers are losing

Re:It's hard to say who's winning the streaming wars, but cu... by jen20 on Friday November 19, 2021 @03:52PM (#29282304)

This is only true in letter (rather than spirit) because subscription television in the UK was delivered by satellite (“Sky”) rather than cable - a fully loaded sports and movies package would easily dwarf $170/mo, and still required a separate phone line from BT in addition.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:It's hard to say who's winning the streaming wars, but cu... by switch007 on Friday November 19, 2021 @04:16PM (#29282615)

I've never met anyone paying >£100/mo for Sky. Is/was that a thing?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:It's hard to say who's winning the streaming wars, but cu... by michaelt on Friday November 19, 2021 @06:30PM (#29283966)

Sky don't show their prices on their website, but according to [1] the "Sky Complete bundle" costs £111/month. And Virgin Media have a £99/month bundle [2] (although admittedly it includes broadband and mobile phone)

[1] https://www.offersnewcustomers.co.uk/sky-tv/complete-bundle/ [2] https://www.virginmedia.com/broadband/packages

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:It's hard to say who's winning the streaming wars, but cu... by jen20 on Friday November 19, 2021 @08:53PM (#29284909)

It is - and it’s not so long ago that it was $2 to £1, so the requisite amount for a $170 cable bill in the heyday of US cable would have been ~£85.

[ Parent | on HN ]