WINKJ Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 So having recently got fibre in my area I had signed up to a contract with BT as my ISP. Part of that package (18 month contract) was free access to the BT sport app. They have recently advised that all customers will be charged £5.99 a month (I think it is) automatically unless you call and cancel or you have a BT TV subscription; which I don't. I just wanted a rant really as I think it's pretty unfair that they can sign you up as a customer based on certain features and then remove them/ start charging for them mid contract. If I wanted to cancel my contract due to this change, I bet they wouldn't let me... Seems a bit one sided!! ARGH always thought BT are sh1te as well.... Wish I could of chosen someone else but only BT were/are available! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudman Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 There is a workaround where you can sign up to BT TV and think that only the admin charge is payable to get one sports channel. I can't use BT TV as I am totally surround by trees and talking a full wood here ! So in theory I could have signed up paid the admin. Never taken the unit out of the box and got a to continue using the app via Apple TV mirror. Reading the small print it would have reset my contract and as I may be off overseas next April decided I didn't want to get locked in so will take the hit. I'm Arsenal so should see all the champions league games and I also watch AFL so guess it had to come at some stage. Still a lot cheaper than SKy Sports who want £31.99 for a months pass for Sports on Now TV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stutopia Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 They suck. I was about to sign up last season, until I found out there was an additional charge on top for HD! In this day and age? It drives me nuts when something I want to watch is only in crap-o-vision. Maybe they could do a deal where it's only a quid to subscribe in black and white! Sky might be a wedge more, but at least they got more than one channel I wanna watch (only Sky Atlantic and a couple of he movie channels mind). With the CL moving entirely next year it looks like you basically just have to suck it up. Obvs it is all for the good of the consumer, I just haven't quite figured out how I'm better off as a consumer than before BT's hand delivered state monopoly allowed it to outbid genuine competition and become a TV station. Hopefully it'll be the next ONdigital. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 I ditched my sub to BT Sport recently too. It was nice to have for free as I watched the occasional thing on it, but £6 a month? I don't think so. I may well miss out on the CL stuff, and I guess they do have to pay for it some way, but for me it's just too much cost. £3 I might have sucked up, but not double that. It's peanuts really, but I don't think I'd get any value out of it, as I can count the number of games I've watched on BT Sport over the last few years on one hand. Sure there's other sports on there which might make it worth it for others, but personally I hope they fall on their arse. It's all well and good saying that it's bad when companies have a monopoly on football, but last year I could watch all the football I wanted for £60 (or whatever my Sky bill is). Now I have to pay an extra £6 for the same stuff. How is that fairer on the customer? Very few people are going to ditch Sky for BT altogether, so really the vast majority lose out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WINKJ Posted July 21, 2015 Author Share Posted July 21, 2015 agree with all the points above, but what is frustrating me even more is that they are not honoring the original agreement whereby I signed up on a basis that I get BT sport for free over my full contract term. Now mid-contract, they are trying to charge for additional features. I just don't see how they can get away with it; but then again they can do what they want. thats it, i'm emailing watchdog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Check your paperwork, I'm willing to bet it contains a clause that lets them alter the free stuff at any time. Alternatively, have you tried calling them? I reckon a good moan at the right person would see you get it for free for the rest of your term Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WINKJ Posted July 21, 2015 Author Share Posted July 21, 2015 Check your paperwork, I'm willing to bet it contains a clause that lets them alter the free stuff at any time. Alternatively, have you tried calling them? I reckon a good moan at the right person would see you get it for free for the rest of your term on my to do list for today - however I have always found BT really difficult to "get a deal" with. i will update with my progress/lack of progress! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZMANALEX Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Urgent: Your BT Sport price is increasing – act now to avoid paying more Hello, We're writing to remind you that your BT Sport Pack will go up to £5 a month from 1 August 2015. To keep your discount, you need to renew your BT broadband contract by 31 July 2015. If you don't renew your contract, you will have to pay an extra out-of-contract charge of £6.75 a month – so your BT Sport Pack will cost you £11.75 a month. To renew, call 0800 917 3650 or click below. Renew your contract If you want to keep watching BT Sport for free, you can downgrade to BT Sport Lite – our basic pack that includes BT Sport 1 only. You'll still need to renew your BT Broadband contract by 31 July 2015 to avoid our £6.75 monthly out-of-contract charge. To downgrade, click here. If you'd like to cancel BT Sport, click here for details. Best wishes, Libby Barr Managing Director, Customer Care Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WINKJ Posted July 21, 2015 Author Share Posted July 21, 2015 I have downgraded to bt sport light... It's a sad day Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimboy2 Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 What is BT sport lite? I signed up to them 2 months ago and haven't even had chance to use the internet yet as we are still doing up the house. Pretty peed off with now having a charge on BT sport. I don't watch football, I only watch the UFC. Think I will just get rid of BT sport all together and go back to watching illegally! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 BT Sport lite is the pikey version that only includes BTS1 which isn't HD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudman Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 so they charge £6.75 if you go out of contract ? Hmmm thats super sucky. Mines up in January so look like they will get the flick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stutopia Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 I had a moan at Sky for keeping my bill the same but loosing the Champions League, the knocked £22 off pcm, nearly enough to cover the subscription to BT Sport. Think I'm £2 pcm down, but UCL is back baby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davetstan Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 Vodafone are just in the process of launching Fibre to the Cab Broadband in the sane exchanges bt offer it. It's unlimited download, you control all the settings from an app on your phone and if you have a Vodafone mobile you get a fiver off every month. The tv offering is also being launched in a month or two also but details in that are still being ironed out. I am moving to that anytime and going to borrow a login from one of my mates to watch the footy on the Bt app. Upto three people at any one time can watch it via the login details. Sorted 😄 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marzman Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 I hate BT. I think it's bang out of order that they've now got all CL football and are holding Sky customers to ransom in order watch it. W@nkers. I'd happily pay over the odds to rip them off rather than paying them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stutopia Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 (edited) I hate BT. I think it's bang out of order that they've now got all CL football and are holding Sky customers to ransom in order watch it. W@nkers. I'd happily pay over the odds to rip them off rather than paying them. Yeah, I know what you mean, if Sky hadn't chopped that lot off my bill I wouldn't have touched them. It stinks that they are in such a strong position becuase they've effectively got a monopoly on the copper gifted to them by the state, yet they drag their feet on nearly everything. If it wasn't for virgin shaking things up a bit in the fibre stakes, they probably wouldn't have gotten round to starting UK fibre roll out yet. Edited August 6, 2015 by SuperStu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baidan Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 I went sport lite and no HD fack'um, I have sky sports too but rarely get to watch it as either at a game or prefer to watch in a pub! Anyone know if I cancel sky sports will I still get the BT sports (albeit in non HD)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I hate BT. I think it's bang out of order that they've now got all CL football and are holding Sky customers to ransom in order watch it. W@nkers. You realise that that's not BT's fault, and that's exactly what Sky did with the PL to terrestrial TV? No-one's holding anyone hostage, it's a free market and you can choose to pay or not. I choose not to. If you have the internet, there's no need to pay BT to watch CL football. It's out there, you just need to know where to google. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stutopia Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I hate BT. I think it's bang out of order that they've now got all CL football and are holding Sky customers to ransom in order watch it. W@nkers. You realise that that's not BT's fault, and that's exactly what Sky did with the PL to terrestrial TV? No-one's holding anyone hostage, it's a free market and you can choose to pay or not. I choose not to. If you have the internet, there's no need to pay BT to watch CL football. It's out there, you just need to know where to google. I'm not a fan of Murdcohm but that's not quite fair on Sky, the football was worth peanuts back then and only just starting to go mainstream off the back of Italia 90. They turned it into this "product" when no one else was that interested. Also they were a genuine market new entrant. BT (as it is now) aren't the same as Sky was then, BT have a stranglehold on infrastructure, which they didn't have to pay to install in the first place, it was paid for by the people. This has put them in an artificially strong position and gives them the clout to win the rights, not becuase they have a vision, or because they are offering something different or innovative, simply becuase they can name their price on line rental for most ot the UK (even if some people notionally pay line rental to other providers, they then pass it on to BT). It's a borderline anti-competitive position that has allowed them to break it up. If you look at OnDigital or Setanta, who had to get into the football the hard way, they've sunk without a trace, becuase they don't have the cash cow BT has and offered a less good product than Sky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I hate BT. I think it's bang out of order that they've now got all CL football and are holding Sky customers to ransom in order watch it. W@nkers. You realise that that's not BT's fault, and that's exactly what Sky did with the PL to terrestrial TV? No-one's holding anyone hostage, it's a free market and you can choose to pay or not. I choose not to. If you have the internet, there's no need to pay BT to watch CL football. It's out there, you just need to know where to google. I'm not a fan of Murdcohm but that's not quite fair on Sky, the football was worth peanuts back then and only just starting to go mainstream off the back of Italia 90. They turned it into this "product" when no one else was that interested. Also they were a genuine market new entrant. BT (as it is now) aren't the same as Sky was then, BT have a stranglehold on infrastructure, which they didn't have to pay to install in the first place, it was paid for by the people. This has put them in an artificially strong position and gives them the clout to win the rights, not becuase they have a vision, or because they are offering something different or innovative, simply becuase they can name their price on line rental for most ot the UK (even if some people notionally pay line rental to other providers, they then pass it on to BT). It's a borderline anti-competitive position that has allowed them to break it up. If you look at OnDigital or Setanta, who had to get into the football the hard way, they've sunk without a trace, becuase they don't have the cash cow BT has and offered a less good product than Sky. That's not fair on BT. Yes, BT owns and operates a huge amount of the UK's network infrastructure, but this is heavily regulated by the government and that's why there is so much competition in the UK ISP space... BT also cannot, by law, use all that network infrastructure to its advantage nor is it allowed to use the profits from that part of the business to compete in different industries, like against SkyTV, for example. All of this regulation is good for all of us consumers because it provides a competitive marketplace and we all benefit from that. All of that infrastructure is owned and operated by BT OpenReach and even I, as a BT Employee, have no greater access to OpenReach than a competitor like Vodafone, Sky, etc. Compare this to Sky, who have an unregulated strangle hold on so much of our TV, from sports to entertainment. Even Virgin struggle against Sky and they're a very established player - remember when Sky pulled Sky1 from Virgin/NTL just because they wanted to charge people even more for Sky Atlantic? Do you think BT could get away with the equivalent of this as an ISP? No chance. Even BT, with all of its money, still couldn't out-bid Sky for PL coverage and so BT spent £900m+ for all of about 20% of the PL coverage. The UK TV market is far from fair or competitive and BT is actually trying to improve things for the UK TV market, but it's not going to happen quickly, or easily, unless somebody forces Sky to play fair. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stutopia Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 BT was privatised in 1984, openreach wasn't formed until 2006. The 20 year monopoly in between is what has established the dominant position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Factually the first sentence is correct, but I fail to see what that has to do with the discussion about TV pricing and rights ownership? BT can't abuse its position with the Internet because of the way its regulated now, and it doesn't have a dominant position with TV because of Sky which is nigh on totally unregulated and the playing field is very uneven. People are happy to pay £50+ / month to Sky for sports and nobody complains. BT comes along with 4k HD, creates a lot of its own content (Clare Balding show, hires lots of commentators, etc etc), and charges peanuts in comparison to Sky, but this isn't seen as good? Sounds like you actually WANT Sky to have a TV monopoly? Competition is a good thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WINKJ Posted August 7, 2015 Author Share Posted August 7, 2015 the only problem I had is that I signed up with BT fibre on the basis of getting the original bt sport deal. then changing the 'deal' mid-contract without reducing the bill pi**ed me off. simples Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Sounds like you actually WANT Sky to have a TV monopoly? Competition is a good thing. In theory I agree, but everything Sky touches when it comes to sports turns to gold. Everything they've paid for they've improved coverage of tenfold, so competition by anyone else actually leaves the punter with an inferior product that they have to pay in addition for. Sky didn't suddenly drop their rates when they were told they couldn't have all the PL games in a season, all that happened was that the end user had to pay MORE to get access to everything they already had last season. That's my issue with this: Last year I had access to all CL games, now I have to pay at least £59.90 extra to watch them, and in poorer quality. In fairness that's because Sky/ITV didn't want to pay as much as BT did which is okay, I'm just still miffed. So yeah, I have two miffs: 1. When the EU tell a successful company that people love* that they can't be too successful, and the end user ends up paying more 2. When anyone other than Sky tries to do sports as well. You can't. You're all sh*t. Sky is just far too good for you, so sod off and leave the rest of us with quality programming. *Yeah, I know people have ethical issues with Sky/Murdoch, but in terms of quality of programming they're a mile apart from the rest when it comes to sport. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stutopia Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Factually the first sentence is correct, but I fail to see what that has to do with the discussion about TV pricing and rights ownership? BT can't abuse its position with the Internet because of the way its regulated now, and it doesn't have a dominant position with TV because of Sky which is nigh on totally unregulated and the playing field is very uneven. People are happy to pay £50+ / month to Sky for sports and nobody complains. BT comes along with 4k HD, creates a lot of its own content (Clare Balding show, hires lots of commentators, etc etc), and charges peanuts in comparison to Sky, but this isn't seen as good? Sounds like you actually WANT Sky to have a TV monopoly? Competition is a good thing. Happy to pay sky £50+ a month because they're not just a one trick pony, you've already mentioned Sky Atlantic content, not to mention Sky Movies. Exactly how am I better off as a consumer now paying more for the same content? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.