In reply to a post by NilSatisOptimum:

Hey what about Blockbusters!

It was never the same without Bob Holness.

I know, I was being facetious.

I still reckon that the more we download - the more we should pay.

O2 struggling, Sky BB probably subsidised by their other services.

In reply to a post by broadband66:

I still reckon that the more we download - the more we should pay.

Only if it costs them more money.

In reply to a post by broadband66:

O2 struggling, Sky BB probably subsidised by their other services.

Apparently it's been profitable for a while.

this is the guy who says he wants to pay for what he uses yet what he pays O2 is a loss leader

And your point is?

well you appear to want a pricing model that has noone subsidising anyone else.

Yet I am an O2 mobile customer effectively subsidising your broadband which is sold to you at a loss. I am not moaning about it tho, the telecom companies now cross subidise a lot its common practice now, not just across customers on the same products but also across products as well.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

Yet I am an O2 mobile customer effectively subsidising your broadband which is sold to you at a loss.

How do you know O2 Broadband is sold at a loss?

And I'm not moaning. I just made a point to see if other more knowledgeable posters thought this would be a goer or not. Obviously your O2 mobile costs (and mine) would be cheaper.

Also, I pretty sure my Sky TV costs would be cheaper if it wasn't for their cheap, unlimited BB.