Sky Sports News pulled from Freeview

I expect they'll do it when the football season starts, dicks. ¬_¬
 
Billy said:
SSN has never been a 'paid for' channel, and therefore any decision of yours to get Sky/Virgin wasn't based on the news channel, it was based on the fact that you wanted Sky Sports 1, 2 and 3, as well as numerous other channels which come with the package.

Saying that you are happy because we shouldn't get this service for free... why? It's always been free. It's the same as if E4 came and took their channel off Freeview, when that has always been free. You pay your subscription for a host of channels which we don't get, and now you'd like them to take away the one sports channel we do get.

Shameful Kris, poor show.
Click to expand...

1. It is not shameful, why should you get stations for free that I pay for?

2. If it was a 'free' station, It's not anymore lulz.

A few years ago (before freeview) our Sky was cancelled and skysportsnews.com24 or whatever it was called then, was gone with it.

I was under the impression this would still be the case, if not, I hold my hands up on that.

Your point about e4 being the same, It's completely different. E4 started out on ITV Digital as a PPV which was scraped when it colapsed. It only became free to air in 2008.

E4 stays free because of the marketing and advertising potential.

JP Woody said:
Shamefull Kris. Sky Sports News has always been a freeview channel. When are you going to realise that Sky are giving it to you up the rear and charging you for the privilege. 75 quid a month? Outrageous :O No wonder your such a bitter bloke Kris lol :p
Click to expand...

I pay for the highest quality services available, Is it a rip? perhaps but so is petrol and I still buy that every week.

If you don't like the service they provide,Don't pay for it.

It works out at £45 for sky, £10 for HD, £10 for Multi Room, £10 for ESPN.
 
Perhaps a rip?!

Of course it is.

To Pay £75 for the quality of television we get over here, is an outrage - regardless of whether you can see 1000's of pixels in JD's face or Wayne Rooney's legs (in several rooms!) or not.

I would literally rather **** the bed than pay £75 for what Sky offer - though I don't mind my father paying for it - though think ours is nearer 30/40.

+the E4 pointabout advertising potential....SSN has a ridiculous amount of adverts...like they aint raking it in already.

Plus, with the channel being free, and they are moving it onto the paid viewing....does that mean the sky package price will go up?

I can't see too many signing up to Sky and paying out their nose just so they get SkySports News back - so I don't really see the advantages for Sky....

Plus they are talking of adding a SSN HD - why? What a pointless channel.


But on the other hand, I'm glad I can stay out late and still come home to see my favourite shows played one hour later on Sky3 oO)
 
Last edited:
This is ridiculous. Can't afford Virgin or Sky but I need my daily injection of hours of SSN.
 
sky sports news is **** anyway, who wants to see a load of over paid to**ers harrass footballers and sports men and women with stupid questions?

24hr news channels are only there to provoke interest and arguements, SSN is no different.

Plus i don't see why i should pay the best part of £70 a month for SS and not be able to have SSN as part of that inclusive deal.
 
ben_toon said:
sky sports news is **** anyway, who wants to see a load of over paid to**ers harrass footballers and sports men and women with stupid questions?

24hr news channels are only there to provoke interest and arguements, SSN is no different.

Plus i don't see why i should pay the best part of £70 a month for SS and not be able to have SSN as part of that inclusive deal.
Click to expand...

Those overpaid tossers are called footballers...
However Georgie Thompson and co are worth every penny :p
 
05bolasj said:
However ..........

The 24-hour sports news channel will be replaced on Freeview by Sky 3+1 &
"As part of a subscription service, customers can look forward to expanded coverage and the launch of Europe's first HD sports news service." :)
Click to expand...

Am I the only one that doesn't really care about the news being in HD? XD


ben_toon said:
sky sports news is **** anyway, who wants to see a load of over paid to**ers harrass footballers and sports men and women with stupid questions?

24hr news channels are only there to provoke interest and arguements, SSN is no different.

Plus i don't see why i should pay the best part of £70 a month for SS and not be able to have SSN as part of that inclusive deal.
Click to expand...

You pay £70 for Sky Sports? You are getting ripped off mate. :$
 
Redders said:
Perhaps a rip?!

Of course it is.

To Pay £75 for the quality of television we get over here, is an outrage - regardless of whether you can see 1000's of pixels in JD's face or Wayne Rooney's legs (in several rooms!) or not.

I would literally rather **** the bed than pay £75 for what Sky offer - though I don't mind my father paying for it - though think ours is nearer 30/40.

I pay the exact same amount as your folks no doubt, I just pay extra for Multi Room which allows me to get Sky in my room, HD, the quality of HD is amazing, always a great selection of movies to watch. then ESPN which is a fair price at £10 for epl,spl,fa cup and bundasliga.

+the E4 pointabout advertising potential....SSN has a ridiculous amount of adverts...like they aint raking it in already.

Yes but people sit watching E4 all day/night. Think about the products you can advertise while SSN market is limited as

1. you won't sit watching it all day (or shouldn't)
2. the scale of the audience is less than e4. SSN usually advertises injury **** or future sky events.

Plus, with the channel being free, and they are moving it onto the paid viewing....does that mean the sky package price will go up?

doubt it, I can only assume topuptv who run the freeview service have cancelled the contract for SSN or they simply cannot afford to renew it.

I can't see too many signing up to Sky and paying out their nose just so they get SkySports News back - so I don't really see the advantages for Sky....

Plus they are talking of adding a SSN HD - why? What a pointless channel.

Agreed. They fuzz about Sky News HD too :|


But on the other hand, I'm glad I can stay out late and still come home to see my favourite shows played one hour later on Sky3 oO)
Click to expand...
 
No more looking at this fox for you freeviewers :'(

millie-clode-2009-galaxy-british-book-awards-1kZ6s1.jpg


I'll just look more often to make up for it ;)​
 
Kris said:
Sorry guys but I am happy. I don't see why I (and the others like me) should pay £75 a month, just so others can get some of the same services for free.
Click to expand...

Why would you be happy that others can no longer watch this for free? You are gaining nothing from it, it won't directly save anybody money, if anything probably just make Sky more expensive now they will have less viewers and less money coming in from their contract with freeview. Not only that but you do not pay extra for SSN, you pay extra for the Sports channels that show sport.. :S

BSkyB are a twattish company, they always have been. They rip us off as much as possible because they pretty much have a monopoly over anyone who wants to watch sports or movies or anything over than the rubbish free channels, hopefully with Freesat and the growth of Virgin and BT's TV products we won't have to pay BSkyB luducrous amounts of money for **** pundits and infinite adverts!
 
Last edited:
Honestly, I couldn't give a flying **** about it. I (My dad) pays for sky and we don't have freeview so quite frankly...


 
You must log in or register to reply here.

FMBase

Beta

Resources

Top