On 19/10/2007, Christopher Woods <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thinking about Sky's power over us, my housemate told me that if you want > to get Freesat (or their £75 one-off offer which gives you six months of > knowledge mixes and then after that, just freesat) then you're quite > entitled to do so, no problems. But, if you want to get a Sky+ box, you HAVE > to pay £10 a month for the timeshifting functionality regardless of whether > you're on one of their packages or whether you're just a Freesat customer, > and you then get tied into a 12 month contract just for the £10pm charge. > Apparently it's a legal thing... But why? If they've dropped (read: > absorbed, I suppose) the £10pcm cost for the timeshifting and outwardly > don't charge anybody for it, why can't they offer it free (and charge more > for the box)? >
http://www.ukfree.tv/fullstory.php?storyid=1107051248 I wrote... BSkyB subscribers will no longer have to pay to retain the personal video recorder facilities from 1 July 2007. If you have stopped subscribing and wish your Sky+ box to be restored to full function you simply have to subscribe to the lowest level Sky package. Alternatively, ex-subscribers will now be allowed to use the device with the Freesat channels, but this will retain the £10 charge. In effect you can now pay £15 per month for "2 mixes" and have Sky+ (was £25) or pay £10 per month for just the Freesat channels. > Just thought I'd ask seeming that there's more than a few people on here > who have some decent Sky knowledge :) > -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv
