denismartindale
Guru
   
Offline

I got Sky, Freesat and Freeview! Now I'm skint!
Posts: 5595
Waltham TV region, Midlands
|
As the cost of Freeview receivers reduce, even to about £10, it's obviously going to be more economic to settle for Freeview, especially as some shows are on Sky then appear on Freeview a few years later. Some free channels like Dave and Dave ja vu also help.
It's just that some of us prefer to pay for what we can get so as to record more shows and films. Some of us then cancel after a Sky's 12-month subscription, keeping the Sky box or the Sky+ box or even the Sky+ HD box.
Freeview isn't as reliable as Sky for reception, Winter and Summer, so I'd recommend Sky to help with the shows you like to watch, that Freeview can't guarantee.
Freeview isn't based on a Freeview receiver costing nothing. The rooftop aerial installation and a signal booster may be required.
If the installation were to be done by the BBC Helpscheme then the aerial and the box would be well worth getting done. I chose Freesat, upgraded to twin cable from the outside Sky-type QUAD LNB dish, thus allowing me to switch to Sky and Sky Multiroom recording. Or maybe a Freesat Recorder as some prefer since they don't pay Sky's £10 a month charge just for free channel recordings stored on their own Sky+ or Sky+ HD box.
I have the Netgem IPlayers as well as the Fetch TV Smartboxes ie the 7000 version and the 8160 and the 8000 version. I record and export copies to the Freecom USB external hard drive. It's faster than a VCR or realtime playbacks for Sky copying to a VCR or DVD Recorders hard drive or just to a DVD disc.
I don't do these things based on the standard costs, but on the overall costs of my home budget eg massive savings on the shopping channels and haggling for Sky or VM discounts. Others get the cashback deals online, thus it's possible that a £60 a month contract gets down to £30 a month instead, plus the equipment is yours if from Sky or on-loan yet no repair costs if from VM.
All I think you're trying to say is that it's silly to pay Sky high prices for more services from Sky yet it's these services that millions have paid for because they want to see their favourite shows, just like sports fans and movie buffs would.
If these millions didn't become subscribers then Sky would probably be forced to offer less and less for the same charges. Likewise, without VM as competition who knows what Sky would charge?
We don't all have HD TVs either, so some may have got the HD channels package just to qualify for getting the Sky+ HD box.
You've got 3D TV, which hopefully pleases you and is considered well worth the money paid, ie a long-term financial investment.
Consider the Sky+ HD box again. I got that by getting the HD pack and paid £10 a month extra for a year. I enjoyed the HD channels I was subscribing to, as well as Sky Movies HD channels, but I soon cancelled Sky Movies to reduce the costs per month. In the process, Sky checked my installation, about 7 years old, then granted me a free installation of a brand new Sky dish with a new QUAD LNB unit.
All I paid was £10 a month for a year, not £120 up front. The old Sky dish and QUAD LNB unit could have been sold on, if I chose to do so.
So there are variations to consider, especially for me over the last 10 years, for Freeview, Sky, VM as well as Freesat. Even the preference of DVD discs, rather than video cassettes and buying the discs in bulk to save on costs.
Others would stay with Freeview and a VCR and video cassettes, but that covers just ONE room and may require extra cables or scart signal senders to get the same picture into another room for a TV there. Upgrades are cheap for Freeview, so enjoy what you can.
Otherwise, try USB TV and Radio dongles or UK Freeview dongles or Freeview TVs, and good luck with Winter conditions, because these have destroyed hundreds of hours of my TV shows and recordings.
|