BT Sport free for 'BT' customers

[#1]

its been mentioned that bt sport has weak content,and the success of channels that have gone head to head with sky inst good in the past. i wonder if these would work with a relevant card as it appears to be on freeview.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/TOP-UP-TV-T215-FREEVIEW-DIGITAL-RECEIVER-SET-TOP-BOX-SEALED-/200937792843?...

[#2]

I disagree with this.  Top-up tv - sky sports/ESPN had a few more failings than BT.  A)  It was only available via a top-TV box or a Sky box,  B)  There are already loads of BT broadband customers out there, C)  BT have a lot more ways to get the content to viewers than the previous had.

[#3]

Quote from: RichardB

Looks like as SKY subscription is NOT required.    See http://bt.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/43272/~/how-to-get-bt-sport-with-bt I already have a 28.2 dish installed with a quad LNB (for satellite radio) so all I need is used SKY box off ebay and a Freesat form SKY card http://www.sky.com/shop/freesat/home/ Then pay PN £5.99 per month..

but you have to pay Sky £10 a month to be able to record.. which makes it a no go for me..
I hope plusnet eventually offers BT Sport (not saying for free) via freeview .. (especially since BT sport is supposed to offer Top 14 Rugby next season  :P.. curretnly have no way to watch that at all)

[#4]

BT Sport NOT free for BT customers.
If BT Sport is free for BT customers, then tax is free for tax payers.  There simply is no such thing as a free lunch, and if people were to stop and think about it, they would realise that BT is very expensive compared to other providers.  And BT Sport doesn't make it cheaper, on the contrary.  Here are some sobering numbers:
BT has spent over £1bn (£1,000,000,000) on BT Sport.  A BT insider I spoke to said it will go up.  BT has paid £246M for the 38 Premier League matches it will show in the current round.
BT has 10M customers.  That means that BT Sport has so far cost each customer £100, which happens to be the ballpark figure non-customers have to pay to watch.  In other words, the cost for BT customers is simply hidden in the bill, and if BT had not cranked up BT Sport, they could have lowered their bills by £100 in the coming year for each customer.  More so if running costs are factored in.
Only 1M of BT's 10M customers have subscribed to BT Sport.  Hence, each BT Sport viewer costs BT £1000.  They will themselves pay £100 in the coming year (as per above), the remaining £900 is paid by BT's non-viewing customers.
BT has announced price rises of 6-8% between now and the next quarter.
All of this information is readily available using a little Googling; much of it can be found in this article:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/household-bills/10338836/BT-to-hit-m...
My broadband contract with BT is up on Nov 1st, and I took the opportunity to move both telephone and broadband to Plusnet, and I'm saving a packet.  I have nothing against BT as such, but I have no desire to be fleeced in the name of some "free" football television that somebody else is watching.
  -- G

[#5]

Nice maths, but it's clearly flawed.
BT have sold BT Sport to other networks like Virgin Media and UPC in Ireland. Also, people can and do subscribe through Sky.
BT Sport will also receive revenue for TV adverts etc.

[#6]

First, hi Andy, I have no reason to have anything against you, do I?  I mean, you're not a bank, an insurance company, a utility company, BSkyB, GCHQ, BT, NSA, the government ... right?  🙂  Good.  I'm sure we'd enjoy a couple of pints in the pub, so please understand my reply in the best possible way.
Having said that, I have to take my gloves off.  I feel strongly about these things, so bear with me:

Quote from: AndyH

Nice maths, but it's clearly flawed.

Numbers, please.  Please provide numbers showing how my numbers are substantially flawed.  As far as opinion goes, I'll say: All commercial broadcasters (Sky, BT, whomever) and all other Xopoly-like operators are looking for nothing else but opportunities to rope in customers.  Do not for an instance believe that they will do anything else than screw their customers for every single penny they've got.  Recent energy price increases speak for themselves.

Quote from: AndyH

BT have sold BT Sport to other networks like Virgin Media and UPC in Ireland. Also, people can and do subscribe through Sky.

Again, numbers please.  And again, do not for an instance believe that BT will do anything else than screw their customers for every single penny they've got.  If they receive revenue from other sources, that means only one thing: more revenue.  They're not going to reduce prices, are they?  They have already announced price increases, as I mentioned in my original post.

Quote from: AndyH

BT Sport will also receive revenue for TV adverts etc.

Numbers?  In lieu of numbers, show me a published policy saying BT will reduce (or just maintain) prices whenever possible.  I haven't seen any, and I'm certain I never will.
The fact that BT has already spent well over £1bn (yes, £1,000,000,000) plus running costs is well documented.  You're not disputing that.  Then:
I'd love to see BT recouping £1bn++ from advertising revenue and pass the profit on to their customers.  Yes, really.  If that were to happen I'd retreat to a Himalayan monastery in order to ponder my evil dispositions vis-a-vis hardcore utility companies.  But I don't think that's going to happen.  What will happen is that BT recoups some, or maybe even all, of the initial investments, and keep the customer-provided £1bn++ as ... a contribution? ... towards ... ? ... bonuses?
Do not for a second believe the thinking is any other way.  Two jobs back, my boss's boss got seven years in US prison for insider trading.  He was on a $100M annual salary plus stock options, undisclosed bonus, and countless benefits (as if that makes a difference).  And that wasn't enough, he engaged in insider trading to sell stock (from options) at artificially inflated prices.  $100M++ per year was not enough.  He ended up being among the elite sporting what was then described as the latest executive fashion: Armani suit and handcuffs.  And the company went Chapter 11, laid off most of their staff, and withered.  Been there, read the book, seen the movie, got the T-shirt, and played the game.  I have no faith in any of these jerks.
I'd genuinely love to be proved wrong -- that, if nothing else, one, just one, Xopoly type company would be different, but I don't think it will ever happen.
There's more information in this article appropriately entitled "BT ready to spend again ... ":
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/10/10/uk-bt-sport-idUKBRE9990K020131010
Pints are on me.-)
Best,
  -- G

[#7]

Quote from: Greg60

[...]

It's in bad taste to reply to one's own posts, but please forgive me.  I just now went to catch the latest TV news before clocking off, and on came an advertisement for BT Sport.  It very simply said:

    Free for BT Broadband customers.
    £12 per month for Sky subscribers.

It went on to hint at the mystical significance of people kicking a ball around a lawn, but never mind that.
To me, the message from BT means that (there being 12 months in the year) unless BT is £12 * 12 = £144 cheaper per year, people need to see their doctors about the obvious dysfunction of their rectal nerves.
"BT ready to spend again ..." really boils down to a question about whose money they're spending.
Pints and a good malt on me.-)
Best,
  -- G

[#8]

Greg, i suspect Andy isn't disputing that BT customers are paying towards the cost of the "free" service, just the amounts that you have calculated. A lot of the figures you ask for are probably commercially sensitive and so we will never know exactly how much they are.
What i think Andy is saying is that there are other incomes for BT such as the advertising and selling the channels to other providers and possibly other streams that will have some kind of dent in the £1b before they start spreading the rest of the cost between their customers.
Phil

[#9]

We know there are over 2 million BT Sport subscribers, most of which are BT customers already.
BT won't be making a profit from BT Sport for a number of years because of the cost of entry into the pay-TV sport's market. But they will have done their calculations and you would hope that their forecasts were accurately done.

[#10]

Hi both,
and thanks for your notes.  By all means, numbers like these can never be particularly accurate, and news out today confirms that BT Sport has 2M BT Customers signed up.  But that really only means that BT Sport is being subsidised by 80% of BT's Customers, rather than 90%.  Not a major change, and either way BT Sport still isn't free for anybody.
It would be interesting to know how much advertising revenue really is generated; personally I think it's quite limited.  Remember Film 4 being subscription-only, then experimented with free weekends, and then went free to air?  In that case increased advertising revenue more than paid for the loss of subscriptions.  If advertising revenue was significant for premium sports there would have been similar developments a long time ago, but the whole caboodle remains behind costly subscriptions.
Anyway, happy to be with Plusnet, it gives me great peace of mind, even though the company is owned by BT.-)
  -- G

[#11]

And with PN's price increases you (and me and the rest of us who don't want it) are STILL paying for 'free' BT sport.

[#12]

PN didn't pay BT a dividend this or last year. So we haven't paid them for anything...

[#13]

It had to happen:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/champions-league/10438140/BT-to-charge-for-Ch...

Quote

Football supporters face having to pay more than ever to watch Britain’s top clubs on television after BT confirmed it would charge viewers for its Champions League coverage.

So is this the final score?
BT: 2
Sky/ITV: 0
Fans: Royally screwed
  - G