how crap are sky tv?
Author
Discussion

insanojackson

Original Poster:

5,998 posts

265 months

Tuesday 8th September 2009
quotequote all
Well about 4-5 months ago i cancelled my sky subscription as i didnt think i was watching it enough to justify £40 a month. Anyway today i gets a letter saying they will give me a free sky+ box and £50 marks and sparks vouchers if i renew.

As this didnt really reduce the payments i thought i would email them asking them what deals they could offer other than the one in the letter seeing as they must want my business back. So i mail them via there website and get an email off some numpty telling me he cannot help and that i need to ring the sales team, i reply that if my business is important to sky then they should ring me and i ask him to pass my message on to them. Same numpty then replies again telling me that he is unable to pass on my message and that i need to ring the sales team!!!

Do these useless flip not have internal email? phones? post? are staff not capable of speaking to each other?? if my custom isnt worth them giving me a call then they can feck off!

okgo

41,304 posts

219 months

Tuesday 8th September 2009
quotequote all
Sales team in Bangalore.

Customer service in Mumbai.

Probably.

insanojackson

Original Poster:

5,998 posts

265 months

Tuesday 8th September 2009
quotequote all
okgo said:
Sales team in Bangalore.

Customer service in Mumbai.

Probably.
probably, but if they can mail me in england, they can mail each other. I actually think the sales team is based somewhere in scotland.

Republik

4,525 posts

211 months

Tuesday 8th September 2009
quotequote all
...but still better than Virgin Media.

insanojackson

Original Poster:

5,998 posts

265 months

Tuesday 8th September 2009
quotequote all
Republik said:
...but still better than Virgin Media.
not an option for me, no cable where i live!

toasty

8,170 posts

241 months

Tuesday 8th September 2009
quotequote all
Sales and Customer Service are in Scotland.


becksW

14,690 posts

232 months

Wednesday 9th September 2009
quotequote all
Have had a nightmare of a time with Sky. Hubby wanted more HD choices so took up a trial 30 day offer after a cold caller came round. However we quickly realised that V+ still had much more to offer than Sky and the HD wasn't that good any way. So we cancelled the trial.

Cue many weeks of charges amounting to £180 be billed to us. 2 hrs on the phone by my hubby got no where even though they agreed a mistake had been made, they couldn't correct it. Eventually a couple of days later spoke to someone who made sense and has started to sort it. Still not quite right yet though.

We now have broadband, phone and V+ for £36 per month and new HD channels arriving (The sky sales person told us Virgin would not be increasing their HD channels for another 6 years!!)

Snoop Bagg

1,879 posts

215 months

Tuesday 15th September 2009
quotequote all
Seriously Sky are 100% better than Virgin Media IMO and experience!

jimpritchard

4,215 posts

212 months

Tuesday 15th September 2009
quotequote all
to be honest, I have alwsays found Sky to be fine... Talk Talk on the other hand......

Moonhawk

10,730 posts

240 months

Tuesday 15th September 2009
quotequote all
I cancelled my subscription last year as the amount of adverts on channels like Sky-one were just getting crazy. Considering how much the subscriptions are - you'd expect there to be fewer ads on skys own channels - but no.

aclivity

4,072 posts

209 months

Tuesday 15th September 2009
quotequote all
Snoop Bagg said:
Seriously Sky are 100% better than Virgin Media IMO and experience!
Unless you want really fast broadband.
And video on demand.
And free ESPN.
And not to give money to the dirty digger
And don't want a wok on the side of your house.
And want to watch TV in the summer when the big tree is in the way of the satellite signal.
And want to watch TV during a thunderstorm or heavy rain.

2 sides to every story, 5 million customers it's only to be expected that some have a problem. The 4.95 million who never have a problem with their service don't make good stories though, do they.

dave_s13

13,968 posts

290 months

Tuesday 15th September 2009
quotequote all
insanojackson said:
,,,,,,,if my custom isnt worth them giving me a call then they can feck off!
To be honest they won't give a flying fvck about one persons account. There are millions of us all handing over our hard earned for a short length of old rope, one lost here and there is nothing to them.

cazzer

8,883 posts

269 months

Wednesday 16th September 2009
quotequote all
aclivity said:
Snoop Bagg said:
Seriously Sky are 100% better than Virgin Media IMO and experience!
Unless you want really fast broadband.
And video on demand.
And free ESPN.
And not to give money to the dirty digger
And don't want a wok on the side of your house.
And want to watch TV in the summer when the big tree is in the way of the satellite signal.
And want to watch TV during a thunderstorm or heavy rain.

2 sides to every story, 5 million customers it's only to be expected that some have a problem. The 4.95 million who never have a problem with their service don't make good stories though, do they.
Would be nice if the cable TV companies had lived up to their original operating briefs of cabling the country, rather than just the highly populated areas.

aclivity

4,072 posts

209 months

Wednesday 16th September 2009
quotequote all
cazzer said:
Would be nice if the cable TV companies had lived up to their original operating briefs of cabling the country, rather than just the highly populated areas.
£6 billion of debt tends to slow things down a bit.

cazzer

8,883 posts

269 months

Wednesday 16th September 2009
quotequote all
aclivity said:
cazzer said:
Would be nice if the cable TV companies had lived up to their original operating briefs of cabling the country, rather than just the highly populated areas.
£6 billion of debt tends to slow things down a bit.
Tough, they shouldn't have signed up to deliver it then should they?

aclivity

4,072 posts

209 months

Wednesday 16th September 2009
quotequote all
cazzer said:
aclivity said:
cazzer said:
Would be nice if the cable TV companies had lived up to their original operating briefs of cabling the country, rather than just the highly populated areas.
£6 billion of debt tends to slow things down a bit.
Tough, they shouldn't have signed up to deliver it then should they?
They didn't. The franchises were defined by the government, only those that were financially viable were purchased. Then the councils jumped on the bandwagon and charged a fortune for wayleave - more of that cost was burned in buying permission than it was in buying kit.

As for "signed up for it", only BT has a universal service provision requirement, as they were granted a hugely valuable infrastructure (paid for by the taxpayer) when they were privatised. Cable companies (other than Kingston Cable) do not have that requirement.

cazzer

8,883 posts

269 months

Wednesday 16th September 2009
quotequote all
aclivity said:
cazzer said:
aclivity said:
cazzer said:
Would be nice if the cable TV companies had lived up to their original operating briefs of cabling the country, rather than just the highly populated areas.
£6 billion of debt tends to slow things down a bit.
Tough, they shouldn't have signed up to deliver it then should they?
They didn't. The franchises were defined by the government, only those that were financially viable were purchased. Then the councils jumped on the bandwagon and charged a fortune for wayleave - more of that cost was burned in buying permission than it was in buying kit.

As for "signed up for it", only BT has a universal service provision requirement, as they were granted a hugely valuable infrastructure (paid for by the taxpayer) when they were privatised. Cable companies (other than Kingston Cable) do not have that requirement.
Fair enough..just pisses me off that no one seems to be expanding the cable network at all.

aclivity

4,072 posts

209 months

Wednesday 16th September 2009
quotequote all
cazzer said:
Fair enough..just pisses me off that no one seems to be expanding the cable network at all.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/05/13/vigin_media_expansion/


randlemarcus

13,644 posts

252 months

Wednesday 16th September 2009
quotequote all
aclivity said:
Cable companies (other than Kingston Cable) do not have that requirement.
Ha! Would that Kingston were capable of finding their arse with both hands... No cable provision, flaky old copper infrastructure, and a monopoly charging model (only alternative to the frankly pathetic 8mb/£40pm is to get Torch or BT to pay fibre from a POP at hideous cost)

cazzer

8,883 posts

269 months

Wednesday 16th September 2009
quotequote all
The article said:
The strategy is termed "infill" because it seeks to add high density pockets of premises close to, or geographically inside, existing coverage areas.

In the long term, Virgin Media's spokesman said there were also embryonic plans to expand to areas further from the existing network. ®
Guess I wont be holding my breath then