NEWS: Sky to increase HD content - and cut prices?
Clare Newsome Thu, Jun 5 2008, 7:46PM
Fresh from unveiling a forthcoming new look for the Sky HD programme guide (EPG) - reported here last week - Sky today revealed to us that additional HD channels will shortly be announced, and that ITV HD is firmly on its agenda.
"The EPG relaunch is just the first phase of a really good push on HD," a Sky spokesperson confirmed. "There's a lot of changes coming".
And, as we'll come to shortly, that 'push' could possibly include price-cuts, and will certainly involve a technical update to streamline HD content.
But first the ITV HD situation. As we reported here, the new channel launches exclusively on Freesat this Saturday. However, Sky has confirmed it's in discussions about ITV HD being available via Sky HD service, and that it's "very hopeful" of a positive outcome to those talks.
Part of those negotiations surround how Sky HD would host ITV HD as a standalone channel - not the 'via the red button' option that will first be available to Freesat HD users. Regional variations in ITV's programming and advertising are an issue here, it seems.
Despite Sky's optimism, ITV HD is unlikely to be one of the new HD channels it unveils in around four weeks time. We'll bring you news of those announcements as soon as they're made.
We'll also update you on any Sky HD pricing changes. When we suggested possible price cuts - to the box or the £10/month HD fee - Sky didn't rule either out as part of its 2008 plans.
Definitely in the plans, meanwhile, is a move to a different, more efficient CODEC for Sky's HD content, meaning users will be able to fit more high-definition programmes onto their box, without - Sky claims - a loss of quality. Again, we'll bring you a date for this technical tweak as soon as possible.
As well as watching this space for news updates, look out for more pictures of the new Sky HD EPG - and our initial feedback on its usability, based on some hands-on experience - next week.
- Clare Newsome's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
I think and hope it is too late for Sky HD. I for one believe that Sky have been holding us to ransom over their HD content. Now there is a potential freee option in the form of Freesat Sky have to do something but i for one will be riding myself of their claws at the earliest oppertunity. When fuel stations were ripping us off there were protest and blockades, seem we are ignorant to Sky profiteering and their disregard for custmoer service. Am i the only one that has spent a fortune in calls in an attempt to resolve a hard ware issue when they should, on the third or fourth instant of a fault, changed my equipment. Not a sky fan i am affraid.
Waiting for a Sky HD box not made by Thomson, too much bad press.
peds - there's a bit of a difference between sky hd and fuel.
I reckon Sky would do well to take a leaf out of Virgin Media's book and rent the HD boxes out, rather than insist customers fork out £200 for the box up front.
That is the one thing precluding me from switching to Sky for their HD content (Virgin is limited to BBC HD plus VOD stuff in HD), particularly sports and movies. They are pricing way too many people out of the market.
I wouldn't mind paying £10 extra a month for the additional HD content, even though it is slightly expensive. The main issue I have is the cost of the box, and payment for installation.
There are more than a few cases on the Web of people having to pay an installation fee for an engineer to come round and literally switch boxes. No change of aerials, no change of cables, nothing.
I refuse to pay £50 or £60 for this, but Sky have customers over a barrel as if this isn't done by one of their engineers they refuse to support you should you have problems with HD later on.
Clayts - Virgin now sell their boxes (only £75), but they do continue to service them as part of the subscription as opposed to Sky's insulting after-sales policy. I'm considering switching to Sky simply because of the increased available content, although as I understand from 'an insider' the majority of non-movie material is upscaled SD, not HD native resolution. What's holding me back is the V-box's extra tuner that enables me to record two channels and watch another simultaneously. Does anybody know if Sky have plans to add an extra tuner into their next genration boxes?
If you have Sky+ get a HD box off of say EBAY and fit it your self and save the £60 install (rip-off) charge. The extra £10 a month may be a lot of dosh but the differnce with say LOST in HD compared to SD is quite staggering.
You could do that, but you don't qualify for any sort of support if you get a problem. Sky will just disown the problem
What gets me about sky is they offer all the best deals to new customers even though existing customers have spent a fortune on sky +,sky hd ,sky broadband,sky talk , sky make me sick and i hope that freesat is successfull and all sky customers give sky the two fingers and tell em to shuv it.I feel better now !
We could do with 2 or 3 times the HD content and get rid of those filler rubbish channels.
Sky has always been a rip off anyway, Just because they offer more content than any other television service provider doesn't necessarily make them any better, and the rubbish they put on is unreal.
If you could program your own channel positions I would get a HD box, I hate the random order of the HD channels and other channels for that matter.
Also they need to drop the £60 installation charge for existing customers who already have everything they need installed or a self install option that is cover by warranty for the products.
To ask someone who is a sky subscriber for £250 for the box £10 a month for A handful of channels (no sport or movies unless you already subscribe to them) and £60 for a bloke to plug it in after wile you take a day is a bit much to ask for.
I think £200 for the box, Free HD subscription if you subscribe to movies or sports or both and a self install option (£30 install if you want them to plug it in) to me this is reasonable considering HD is that widespread at the moment.
Sky are running scared of freesat as you can see from virtually every billboard in the land promoting Sky+ which must be costing them a fortune. They know that when the first Freesat pvr's with series link and the ability to record hd become available that people will be cancelling their sky subscription in their droves and they are looking to tie people in for a 12 month contract.
This is interesting, just today I saw in my local Curry's an offer from Sky to receive Sky+, Sky TV, with free boradband calls, from £16.00 per month.
They still want to charge for the box though, a one off cost of £99.00 they have produced a booklet which then details a range of options, all of which cost yet more money.
I have always said that I would not subscrbe to SKY as 'A' I don't like Rupert Murdoch' and 'B' because our Government have failed the viewing public in allowing him to high-jack all the best sport, etc.,to their eternal shame.
Most ordinary folk can't afford £42.00 per month, anyway, but, who has the time to watch all these channels? even though I am retired, I just don't have that time, and freeview has become a joke, how many times do you have to repeat a film or series before the public realise they are taking the mickey?