Plusnet TV How much would you pay?

[#1]

With so many companies offering this service I wonder if any will be profitable.

[#2]

There are a couple of free trials on my Roku. Netflix and Nowtv ( Sky). Nowtv shoots up to £15 after 3 months but that's typical Sky.

[#3]

thing is... if you look at freeview and freesat channel list they are different
you get channles for free on view but you have to pay for those channles on sat n vis vrs
so that means if you don't wanna pay u need 2 boxes ...

[#4]

Of the two Freesat does have more channels but, like several others here, I have both.
We watch using Freesat HD and record using Freeview SD. Freesat cost us next to nothing as part of over 75 switchover help scheme 

[#5]

I have freesat via sky as I told them where to stick it due to taking triple the money from my bank and refusing to refund when I asked why they told me it would cover me 3 months in advanced.....I did get money back via my bank
anyways back to the point
I don't get dave watch and afew others on freeview

[#6]

Not a service I'm champing at the bit for. 
I did take part in a trial offering a few years back and saw limited Merit in using the service.    Most of what I want is on Freeview / Freesat and I've got that covered - life's too short to bother about the 'bits' that are left in such a volatile developing market.
Judging by the responses so far it is unlikely to be a huge revenue earner?
Maurice 

[#7]

Again - not something I'd be interested in.
Main point is that I don't fully see the point of it.  With Sky I can watch stuff via Iplayer (or equivalent) - a lot of newer TVs are Internet enabled & have Iplayer (or equivalent) built in.  Why should I pay extra to get something similar?
I'd rather PN focused on doing what they do best - which is provide a quality product for a reasonable price - rather than joining in with the mass-market "gimmick based" ISPs such as EE or TT.

[#8]

I doubt if I'd be interested. We have Sky's basic package (with Plus) on one TV and Freesat from Sky on others and it's pretty unlikely that we'd get anything like that number of channels for anything like the same cost anywhere else.

[#9]

you know something alot of you are sat here ... we wouldt have it because we have youview or freesat ect ..... we dont think plusnet should do it
what about the people who dont have £130-£260 upfront to go splash about ?
like i said before i got sky and free-view but i reckon PN have customers who dont have £130 to £260 to splash out
hows about some of you guys give those people a thought instead of saying PN shouldnt do it because we dont have use for it?
thats basically like saying TV companies should stop making TV because i have one...

[#10]

The original question was how much would I pay for such a service and my honest answer is nothing as I wouldn't want it.
As to whether Plusnet should provide such a service, that is a different question entirely.

[#11]

im not picking at you start... i would pay depending on what they offer if we can get a service similar to sky id rather give my money to PN than sky anyday....
but i have seen people say it would be a waste for Pn blah blah... just thought i would point out about people who dont have money dropping out of their pockets

[#12]

Everyone will now have digital tv, if they want tv, so it's not a question of people who have it being rich. My complete Freesat install cost me £16 because I'm poor
The response to your poll wouldn't give Plusnet much motivation to offer a service.  No doubt they'll review their position at regular intervals.
People on this forum aren't noted for their love of Sky 

[#13]

Quote from: warbleeder

you know something alot of you are sat here ... we wouldt have it because we have youview or freesat ect ..... we dont think plusnet should do it what about the people who dont have £130-£260 upfront to go splash about ? like i said before i got sky and free-view but i reckon PN have customers who dont have £130 to £260 to splash out hows about some of you guys give those people a thought instead of saying PN shouldnt do it because we dont have use for it? thats basically like saying TV companies should stop making TV because i have one...

Where has that figure come from?  It seems I can sign up to Sky+ for £21.50 per month without paying any up-front costs.  That enables me to

• watch live tv


• record shows to watch later


• download stuff of the IPlayer etc to watc

Now if PN were to provide a service similar to this; I don't think I'd risk watching live tv or recording stuff to a h/d due to the limitations of the ADSL service.
Where we live; the houses were built with no external TV aerials - originally the "terrestrial" service was in fact provided by the cable companies - this signal was turned off quite a few years ago - meaning that the cheapest option would be cable.  In our case; the previous owners of the house had satellite installed; so that became a reasonably cheap "up-front" option for us as opposed to forking out however much it would cost to get an aerial installed on the roof & the associated cabling placed into the right locations.
As a result; we cannot pick up any Freeview channels whatsoever via that method.
I suppose it might be possible to watch live TV using one of the Fibre packages...

[#14]

now they have unlimited it would work no problem...

[#15]

Not convinced about that:
What if I want to watch the news live whilst SWMBO watches Neighbours live?
Given that we have an approx 2mb connection; I can see that not working particularly well and a fair amount of buffering coming into play.