- This topic has 108 replies, 44 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
And RUK going alone at £20 per month
If RUK go for £20 a month they will soon be following Setanta.
- Total Posts 17716
So I’m supposed to go from paying £13 per month for Setanta Sports 1, Setanta Sports 2, Setanta Golf, Setanta Sports News, RUK and LFC TV, to £20 per month for just RUK?
No chance.
Their press release confirms its £20per month. Ridculous in the current climate
I doubt i will bother frankly
RUK for £20 per month – no way will I pay that unless I can do it from Nov to March only but they may put a 12 month min contract on it as mentioned by mulls.
I’m off to cancel my d/debit now.
Those moaning about the £20 subs would do well to remember that was exactly the amount when RUK began which, together with their style of presentation, met with a generally positive response
Might it not be the case that the current £13 per month for RUK and all the Setanta bumf was actually as financially unsound a setup as the rest of their doomed business
Frankly if an extra £7 per month means RUK can continue as a standalone business no longer shackled to a dodgy ‘big business’ then I’m all for it.
Time will tell if this little fish is predated by a new big fish but in the meantime let’s just enjoy swimming with them in their own little royal blue sea
All that said I do have some sympathy with the idea of a seasonal subs as I watch little over the summer months, particularly now Rasen has only hurdle races
Those moaning about the £20 subs would do well to remember that was exactly the amount when RUK began
That is indeed true Drone, however that was in a totally different economic environment.
If I also remember correctly, as well as the full £20 subscription they also offered a weekend only subscription at a lesser rate.
I am happy to be proved wrong but in the current economic climate they will lose viewers. I know my father-in-law will be cancelling as he used to watch the football as well and saw it as a complete package.
£20 is very steep, to say the least; plus, as I am interested only in the jumps, if I do subscribe it will only be if there is no minimum 12 month contact, and I can subscribe Nov- April.
But even then, I’m very unlikely to subscribe- the stuff about £600 of free admissions is all fine and dandy, if you take up every offer. Can’t think many people do.
I used to subscribe to the weekends only, and if they reintroduced this, I may be interested.
Well we get RUK in with Setanta in the Virgin Premium with phone and unlimited Internet so i will be annoyed if RUK gets taken off for the amount we pay in the first place.
I did like Setanta for the Premiership coverage which was great in the winter after Saturday racing at Haydock, i could get home and watch a decent game aswell as the odd Monday night match.
One thing which has pissed me off though is why didnt BBC and ITV do a joint bid for the Premiership packages for sale as they could rotate one game a week and viewing figures would have been much higher than Sky.
One thing which has pissed me off though is why didnt BBC and ITV do a joint bid for the Premiership packages for sale as they could rotate one game a week and viewing figures would have been much higher than Sky.
How would it be paid for – use of the licence fee could not really be justified for the BBC and ITV advertising revenues are so bad they can barely support their current programming levels and I am sure the increased advertisning revenue during the live games would not be sufficient.
Also would either be happy showing live games Saturday teatime or Monday evening (clash with Eastenders / Corrie)?
A good idea in theory but not sure if economically viable.
I think we have become so used to the quality of the presenters and pundits on RUK that we have now started to take them for granted.
Of course we all want to have the pictures for as little as possible, but I think RUK is an excellent specialist sports channel and all things considered is still massive value at £20 a month.
Just imagine if we didn’t have any coverage at all from the RUK tracks? £20 a month to get them back would be the best value you would get all year.
- Total Posts 17716
Frankly if an extra £7 per month means RUK can continue as a standalone business no longer shackled to a dodgy ‘big business’ then I’m all for it.
But they’re not ‘standalone’ Drone, as they demonstrated loud and clear when they had racing videos removed from Youtube at the behest of the Racing Post.
I’ve cancelled my Setanta subscription, and won’t be taking out an RUK one. Ironically, I’ll pay the RP 20p to watch the few races I’d be interested in.Sorry if this has been asked before but could someone explain why ATR who put out considerably more hours is basically a ‘free’ channel as part of a package whereas we are expected to pay an additional £20 for Racing UK?
As regards the quality of presenters and guests I would like to see Lydia and Steve on ATR but I wouldn’t be the slightest bit bothered about the rest.
I think the problem with setting the charge is that racing is seen as a rich man’s sport. That may be the case for many involved but not necessarily the audience. I suspect many pensioners who probably enjoy the sport would not be able to afford £20/month.
Why is £20/month good value? What other single channel charges that amount?
The arrogance of Racing UK to charge £20 in a recession beggars belief.
It is Ok for rich trainers/owners etc but for the ordinary chap in the street it is I find frankly incredible.
I for one will not be subscribing and I hope their arrogance costs them deary with people voting by not stumping up.
When they fold, which I think they will at that price, we may get it for free with ATR, who I beleive are better anyway.
Paul…the BBC shoved £200m at that farce called formula one didnt they? Tossers… I think Neils point is very valid. Advertising reveues would be stronger for football too. Formula one would only attract ads for denim jackets and acne cream…
I agree with TDk that the quality is top class on RUK, but these things are notoriously price sensetive and judging by the responses here they could easily lose a lot of viewers. I also thought that the idea behind the setanta link up was to maximise coverage for a sport which is competing with so many others for the betting pound, rather than have it ghettoised and continuing to suffer from reduced coverage on terrestial
Neil…will be interesting to see how Virgin handle this. The overall all inclusive package is alittle more than skys but benefited from the "free" setanta. They may have to reduce the price a bit.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.