In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:

Unlike the incomplete, unclear, guess-what-you are-paying bills tabled in this thread .

I'll break it down more for you.

Scenario: user has Sky Broadband and Sky TV

Billing method 1:

Sky Broadband Unlimited: £15
Discount for having Sky Talk: £5
Discount for having Sky TV: £2.50

Cost to user: £15 - £2.50 = £12.50

Billing method 2:

Sky Broadband Unlimited: £7.50
Supplement for not having Sky Talk: £5
Supplement for not having Sky TV: £2.50

Cost to user: £7.50 + £5 = £12.50

I'm aware of that and did mention it elsewhere in this thread.

It does seem to be ex Be* members that are more affected by the lack of communication though rather than O2,

In reply to a post by pcoventry76:

I did for a year. I had 6 months free and 12 months at £7.50 with line rental

Presumably you took up one of their offers to move early rather than being auto-migrated?

Based on evidence I've seen, BE customers were the last to be migrated

It could be the case that all BE and O2 customers on static IP's were the last to be migrated

It does seem that the closer it got to the Be / O2 service being closed, the sloppier Sky became with the migration process

The best course of action for me is voting with my feet

I also had a discount with BE, so am definitely paying more with Sky

Finding out I would not be paying £7.50pm did therefore come as a it of a shock

At this point though, I'm beyond caring

In reply to a post by nredwood:

It could be the case that all BE and O2 customers on static IP's were the last to be migrated

It does seem that the closer it got to the Be / O2 service being closed, the sloppier Sky became with the migration process

I've worked in some company acquisition projects, and at some point there is a deadline for stopping using the selling companies infrastructure - OR - to start paying (a lot!) for service. Sky may have decided to not pay Telefonica anymore, and force migrate everyone. There was at least one poster who posted they were cut off and sent a Vodafone dongle.

No Need! I understand your maths (I didn't at 1st).

My objection is that it is selective. On the 1st bill, e.g., there is no clue to take Lines 1 & 3 and ignore Line 2.

It's all in the recipient's mind but that isn't a bill as we know it. What if he is forgetful?

In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:

My objection is that it is selective. On the 1st bill, e.g., there is no clue to take Lines 1 & 3 and ignore Line 2.

In my "billing method" examples I was displaying all the possible options/permutations available on Sky, it wasn't a suggestion for exactly how the bill should look.

In actuality (and how it should be done), only the applicable discounts or supplements will be shown on the bill. E.g. under billing method 1, if the user takes Broadband and TV, then the Sky Talk discount will not be present on the bill at all. Equally, the same scenario under billing method 2 would result in the TV supplement being omitted entirely from the bill.

The main thrust of the argument on Watchdog appears to be that supplements for not taking multiple services are unfair. My argument is that they are no more unfair than discounts for taking multiple services, which no-one seems to have an issue with.

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

In my 'billing method' examples I was displaying all the possible options/permutations available on Sky, it wasn't a suggestion for exactly how the bill should look.

Well, you made that crystal clear, didn't you?

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

The main thrust of the argument on Watchdog appears to be that supplements for not taking multiple services are unfair

Well they are when there is no cancelling Welcome discount as there was with IanBB.

The WD article was all too brief and did not compare the user's Sky bills with what they were paying O2 nor put it into context that that custs would not be paying any more than with O2 by judicious application of a Welcome discount for 1 year. I thought I glimpsed just a £1 Welcome discount in 1 bill.

Edited by XRaySpeX (Sat 17-May-14 01:35:45)

In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:

Well, you made that crystal clear, didn't you?

Clearly not! But at least we are on the same page now.

In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:

Well they are when there is no cancelling Welcome discount as there was with IanBB.

I've seen no evidence that people who were auto-migrated are paying more than their previous standard pricing on O2/BE. Perhaps Sky could have made it clearer that they were matching the standard O2/BE prices as quoted on the website, and did not (in all cases) match retention discounts, which were generally about 9 or 10 months in when the migrations actually occurred. Some O2 customers were 10 months into 12 months free for instance, it would not exactly be reasonable to expect Sky to turn that into 12 months free on Sky, IMO.

In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:

The WD article was all too brief and did not compare the user's Sky bills with what they were paying O2. I thought I glimpsed just a £1 Welcome discount in 1 bill.

I quote the time-stamp here: http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/sky/t/4329238-watch...

Watchdog made no mention of the Welcome discount, or that customers are paying more than they were on O2/BE. So as I say the gripe highlighted on the program seems to be the word "supplement", which I believe is a non-issue for the reasons I've already given.

In reply to a post by tommy45:

So, we have Fred ex BE customer, who is SMPF bb only with sky following migration, why are sky issuing invoices that itemise products and services that those customers at least don't subscribe for , or even want to pay for,

They have always have done it for their Talk and broadband products for as long as I can remember.

Edited by simon194 (Sat 17-May-14 07:29:01)