back to article Sky: We're no longer calling ourselves British. Yep. And Broadcasting can do one, too

BSkyB has ditched the words British and Broadcasting from its name, after the media and telecoms company completed its takeover of Sky Italia and Sky Deutschland yesterday. From now on, it will simply be known as Sky, but shareholders will be asked to approve the name switch at the firm's AGM on 21 November. Its company stock …

Anonymous Coward

Another set of takeovers making sky an international company rather than a national one, and taking the headcount up to 31,000?

I feel sorry for the folks who are going to find themselves redundant in a few years once the books have been sorted. I see it dropping down to 25,000 or thereabouts

5
0
Silver badge

Beat me to it. Was going to say

"he merger obviously also means more staff on Sky's books with the headcount now reaching 31,000 across 30 main sites" not for long.

5
0
Anonymous Coward

I think that outcome is pretty much clear from the following:

The opportunity ahead is substantial and we believe the new Sky will be good for customers, content creators and shareholders alike.

Notice who is missing?

8
0
Ogi

> Notice who is missing?

The people who pay for the service? What, you thought they were the customers? The customers are the advertising agencies. I believe the term for those who stump up the money are "consumers", a word I despise personally.

Man as I age, I get more and more cynical...

10
3

I thought the "who is missing" is the staff ?

5
0
Anonymous Coward

> I believe the term for those who stump up the money are "consumers", a word I despise personally.

Having briefly been a Sky customer, I think the term is "victims".

11
2
Silver badge

I believe the term for those who stump up the money are "consumers"

I think the word you are looking for is "product". The only industry where the product pays its own money to be sold to customers (advertisers)

4
0

How did you manage to escape?

I had to argue with a lovely little lady on the phone for *ages* before she would accept that I wasn't after an upgrade, downgrade, sidegrade or any other sort of grade but really, truly, honestly did want to stop having their offerings. She seemed to think this was an impossibly irrational decision on my part. She almost convinced me.

Almost. But I've been trained on Mormons and JW's, mere salesmen are never going to defeat me.

0
0
Silver badge

Once upon a time ...

There was a squaerial and a company named British Satellite Broadcasting. Satellite became Sky when they merged so both identities were preserved as BSB but no longer. Oh well RIP.

18
0

Re: Once upon a time ...

Indeed. Frankly I'm surprised they kept up the "BSkyB" charade for as long as they did.

I expected them to revert back to just Sky years ago, in much the same way as Autocar magazine "merged" with The Motor to form "Autocar & Motor" before the "& Motor" got continually smaller in font until it disappeared altogether and the magazine became known as just "Autocar" again.

7
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Once upon a time ...

BSB was a failed attempt at providing competition to Turdoch. With him buying out the venture it was a totally pointless exercise.

Cable TV was the next attempt and that's failed too since the cable companies have to show Sky channels to get any decent sports and TV content.

6
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Once upon a time ...

"Frankly I'm surprised they kept up the "BSkyB" charade for as long as they did."

Yes- although it was presented as a "merger" at the time, it was clear which identity and vision won out, and I've learned that in retrospect that it was always intended as a takeover, with Murdoch's chums in the final days of Thatcher's government permitting and effectively colluding in the charade.

7
1

Re: Once upon a time ...

ISTR that legally BSB took over Sky because Sky wasn't allowed to buy BSB because BSB had the license to broadcast in the UK.

1
0

Re: Once upon a time ...

One of the basic rules of company mergers is that when a series of mergers occur and the company name is constructed by combining the names of the parties that merged, then *eventually* the company name will revert to that of the company that was dominant in all this. Hence "Total Elf Fina" reverting to "Total", "Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, Discover" (the comma in that one was a work of genius) reverting to "Morgan Stanley", "Maersk Sealand" merging with "P&O Nedlloyd" to form "Maersk", and "British Sky Broadcasting" merging with various other companies to form "Sky".

1
0

Re: Once upon a time ...

It's a very rare (possibly nonexistent) "merger" that isn't really one company taking over another.

0
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Silver badge

So does this mean

That I will be getting a lower price....nah thought not.

3
0
gv

Re: So does this mean

Paying £60+ a month for a service that I would value at £20-25 tops. All to keep those footballers in Bentleys...

11
3

Re: So does this mean

Ah, but they invest SO much in their 'high quality' product.

It's not all about the football.

Just think about all of the ...er.. homegrown quality drama they make.

*tumbleweed*

No?

7
3
Silver badge

Re: So does this mean

The way I see it is they offer what they do at the price they want to ask and you can take it or leave it, which seems to be what everyone else offers as well. I don't particularly like Murdoch but Sky doesn't seems any worse than other companies and their TV offering is better than many.

A subscription-free Sky box without a viewing card is very good value for money so you don't have to pay if you don't want to. I find that just as good as what anyone else offers for the price and Murdoch doesn't get a penny.

4
4
Pirate

Re: So does this mean

Seriously you think approx £240 a year is good value for entertainment? I wouldnt pay that unless it danced around a pole on my birthday.

7
2
Unhappy

@ukgnome - Re: So does this mean

> That I will be getting a lower price..

Not while they can sell you a "package" which contains all the channels *apart* from the "Premium" ones which make them the most money and which you have to pay through the nose for because they've spent huge amounts making sure that they have a monopoly on new films and sports and...

0
1

Re: So does this mean

Seriously you think approx £240 a year is good value for entertainment? I wouldnt pay that unless it danced around a pole on my birthday.

£240 is peanuts; if you include the cost of the internet connection and XBox Live, you barely have change for 2 XBox One games. For a whole year.

If you have no TV, or computer, or console, or internet connection, then you could use £240 to buy around 20-30 books, aka 2-3 a month on average. I could just about squeeze by on that (I can finish a standard paperback in around 1-2 weeks).

You could do pretty well on £240 if you only play RPGs; that would get you a good few dice, plus stationary supplies (pads, pens, folders, gaming mat etc.) and have enough left over for a few models and official game system handbooks / modules.

I do all of the above, so I potentially spend £2400 or more a year on "entertainment" when you include internets, TV subscription, PC games, console games, books, and pen&paper RPGs. That's ignoring incidentals like beer, snacks, and travel expenses (when gaming at a mates house instead of mine).

I wouldn't spend £240 on a pole dance though. That's a waste of money ;)

5
2
Silver badge

240 quid to watch adverts?

Do one,

4
1

Re: So does this mean

"£240 is peanuts; if you include the cost of the internet connection and XBox Live, you barely have change for 2 XBox One games. For a whole year."

It's peanuts if you find yourself immersed in Sky's content and are prepared to overlook the copious amount of advertising which goes with your paid subscription.

Personally I'm happy with freesat although I augment it with a netflix sub.

4
1
Silver badge

Re: So does this mean

"Just think about all of the ...er.. homegrown quality drama they make."

Was it not Sky who paid to make the Terry Pratchett Discworld stuff?

Ah,yes, here it is.

I'm not really defending Sky, and certainly not Murdoch, but bare in mind roses grow in shit ;-)

3
0

Re: So does this mean

The words subscription free does suggest not paying anything ^^

0
0
Silver badge

Re: So does this mean

" then you could use £240 to buy around 20-30 books, aka 2-3 a month on average. I could just about squeeze by on that (I can finish a standard paperback in around 1-2 weeks)."

[cough] Public library [cough]

(it's one of the things you get from your council tax. if you're choosy £240 would pay for reserving 400 books, or get about 40 on interlibrary loan, )

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Does this mean

I no longer need a Squarial?

I really don't care. Anything owned by Murdoch is almost as Evil as Microsoft, and neither get a single cent of my money.

9
6
Silver badge

Re: Does this mean

IIRC Murdoch owns somewhere around 7% of Sky, it's hardly "owned by" him. These days most things seem to be largely owned by pension funds. Retirement is coming...

1
0

Re: Does this mean

So, you dont use Windows, MS office or anything MS created legally then....

1
3
Silver badge
Gimp

Re: Does this mean

"So, you dont use Windows, MS office or anything MS created legally then...."

or At All.

3
1

Re: Does this mean

I don't care how much he or his evil offspring own, and no, I have gotten rid of Microsoft in the home. I still have to suffer it at work.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Do we really need more Internationalism?

0
2
Silver badge

"Do we really need more Internationalism?"

No, you don't. But this increases Murdoch's reach and makes him more money, and poor old Rupert needs the money more than the bill payers do. Sadly for Sky's other shareholders I wouldn't consider doing business with them whilst the shrivelled old c**t is a major beneficiary. Or his revolting offspring.

6
2
Silver badge

Maybe this will finally encourage "Sky" to sell subscriptions across Europe?

(OK, it's a slim hope...)

0
0
Thumb Down

It used to be that...

... England Rugby internationals - in fact, most decent games of sport, thinking about it - were broadcast on either the Beeb or ITV. Not any more. It appears that even national team games are ones you have to pay through the ring, if you want to see them live.

It's bloody disgusting.

And Murdoch and his ilk are to blame. Oh, and the politicians we voted in, who allowed it to happen.

It's still bloody disgusting.

3
1
Silver badge

Re: It used to be that...

And Murdoch and his ilk are to blame. Oh, and the politicians we voted in, who allowed it to happen.

It's still bloody disgusting.

Don't forget all those vulgar, disgusting customers who paid for it as well. If they had refused to cough up the pay channels would never have been successful.

10
0

Re: It used to be that...

Didn't the ECC and IRB sell cricket and rugby rights to Sky to help develop the game and international players?

I know it means those that want to watch the game have to pay, but doesn't the counter argument also apply? Why should those with no interest in these games pay for them out of the TV licence fee?

As for Sky - can you create a Sports product without football as an option so that those who watch rugby and cricket don't have to pay a fortune for something that we never watch? I know - they won't kill the cash cow...

2
0

Re: It used to be that...

You can watch 'Pick' if you like, or get Sky1 through a cable package.

Though both largely consists of unending adverts for Ladbrokes, and, you guessed it, Sky Sports packages.

0
0

I'm waiting for BBC to follow suit

Wouldn't it be great if they were just called "C"?

"The Corporation". Cool.

2
2
Bronze badge

Re: I'm waiting for BBC to follow suit

would they collect the bins too?

10
0
MJI
Silver badge

Never used the Bs

Dropped the better technical system. Not a merger but a close down of a good system for a worse system..

Never used them, never will.

3
1

In memoriam

A rare sighting of a BSB Squarial in the wild (on the Clapton Cinematograph Theatre).

1
0

Re: In memoriam

It might not a BSB dish because some wireless ethernet / broadband antennae look like that.

0
0

Re: In memoriam

Given how long that particular building has been disused, it's very unllikely to be anything other than a squarial, but if I can get a bit closer (there's finally hoarding up, and the possibility of building work) I shall see if I can spot any more marks on it.

0
0
Silver badge
Happy

Re: In memoriam

There is still my squarial and one of the parabular equivalents up where I used to live (my parents house!)

Revealing no more than if I'd posted a link to my website, and you did a whois on my domain...

0
0
Slx
Silver badge

Seems like a reasonable move as BSkyB comes from the "merger" between the original Sky and BSB which in reality seems to have been a complete take over by Sky.

Nobody actually calls Sky BSkyB other than business journalists anyway.

Sky UK

Sky Ireland (recently split off from being just a marketing division of Sky UK's operations and now has a significant office in Dublin to support Irish customers for TV and broadband).

There are localised versions of a lot of Sky's content with Irish adverts running on them, but other than that they're pretty much identical to the UK versions.

Sky Deutschland

Sky Italia

There are several other Sky televisions that have nothing to do with them though like Sky in NZ had a minority shareholding by News Corp, no longer the case.

Sky in Japan, Sky México and Brazil are nothing to do with News Corp either.

0
0
Pirate

Pirate TV

Until the merger with BSB, Sky were broadcasting to the UK without a licence, effectively making them a pirate TV operation. But Uncle Rupert was such a generous supporter of the government, so it was ok for him to unfairly compete with the legitimate operator.

7
3
Silver badge

Re: Pirate TV

broadcasting to the UK without a licence,

What licence do you think he would have needed???

0
0

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018