« TV is stealing from games? | Main | Ms Pac-Man level 6 bracelet »

September 08, 2006


Ian Betteridge

"I wish there were somewhere I could pay, oh I dunno, a few hundred dollars a year to, and in return get a broad range media service - including television, internet, films, music and games - for no further charge."

Isn't that called "Sky TV"? Well, not quite yet - but it's VERY easy to see how they're going to use broadband to deliver all that.


Heh. Naw - I'm talking blanket licenses, not just a subscription. A subscription would work - if the service operator could deliver all the media in my taste range. Which is highly unlikely?


Well, the Amazon/Netflix model has shown that there is no reason not to offer everything, essentially. The benefits of the "long tail," etc. Digital distribution makes this increasingly possible, even if the politics (as seen above) make it less likely. Ah, the paradox.


When Freesat launches Sky TV will lose one of it's primary markets - those people who can't get reception on other multi-channel providers. And what of their reported IP-TV offering? You can bet that it's going to be just as restricted as anything else in the first wave, but as other providers challenge and reinvent the model I still believe that they will be reluctant to shift from whatever brings in the dollars. They'll also likely hassle you with "push" content. Remember that Sky owns the box, and the modem, and their T&C let them do what they want when they want. And you want to trust your IP to them? The data they can mine from what you watch/download/watch again is going to give them a lot to target you with... BT's "total" package is going to be interesting, and (as much as I don't get on with them) Apple are going to make a pretty big announcement on Tuesday - and I wouldn't bet against them dictating the model for the time being.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Recent links