As BskyB celebrates a surge in pre-tax profits to June 2012 of 17 per cent to £1.19 billion, I’ve been trying to work out why Sky TV seems to be stunting the growth of its own 3D subscriptions. Apparently Sky enjoys around 250,000 3D subscribers (as at June 2012) from a total subscriber base of 10.6m, so that’s just 2.36 per cent of its entire audience.
One clue is the that, too my immense frustration I recently decided to upgrade to 3D only to discover that I can’t add 3D to my package unless I switch to the complete Sky World bundle, which includes Sky Sports 1 and 2.
Ironically I’ve been re-enthused to add 3D due to the Olympics, but outside of that I just don’t watch sport, so I can’t help feeling slightly ripped off at having to spend another £5 per month (or £60 a year) on a service I’ll almost never watch. That said, I guess I would probably pay a £5 premium per month for 3D alone, which is currently free if you have the whole kit and caboodle, Sky World Package.
While researching the problem, I found that there were many other complaints online in various forums, which seem to be totally unheard:
KWALTER commented on SkyUser.co.uk “Call us strange if you like, but we have absolutely no interest in sport, however we would like to see the odd 3D movie. Question is - has anyone managed to get Sky to supply them with 3D without subscribing to any of the sports channels? (we have everything else)” and many other complained on Sky’s own Forum. In the end, with various offers from Sky TV, I decided to take the plunge and upgrade, albeit begrudgingly.
It’s sad that so many of us are buying 3D capable TVs yet unless we resort to Blu-ray 3D titles, we can’t easily make use of the technology. Clearly there are serious costs of implementation to consider when providing 3D, however, Virgin Media seems to be much more forward thinking about this, making its packages far simpler and more accessible.
Are you having a similar problem? Did you find a better solution? Let us know in the comments below.