Yes it is.Franchise FC wrote:Isn't that what 'Still watch the channels ...' means ?Sanguine wrote:The channels don't get removed.6ft Kerplunk wrote: Some people may still be watching endless repeats of the last couple of decades of the Sky Sports archive just to get their sporting fix.
As anyone who's ever run a subscription business will attest - about half of your revenue comes from people who no longer use you service (and in most of those cases are even aware they still pay for it)6ft Kerplunk wrote:Soz for skim reading stuff, didn't notice they you can still watch bit. So yeah why haven't they just paused everyone's subscription.
I don't think anyone was suggesting that pausing subscriptions was the best decision from a pure bottom line perspective. I think we are in 'right thing to do' territory though.Green wrote:As anyone who's ever run a subscription business will attest - about half of your revenue comes from people who no longer use you service (and in most of those cases are even aware they still pay for it)6ft Kerplunk wrote:Soz for skim reading stuff, didn't notice they you can still watch bit. So yeah why haven't they just paused everyone's subscription.
To put another way, it's pretty obvious why sky haven't paused all subs isn't it?
Sure, but Sky?Sanguine wrote:I don't think anyone was suggesting that pausing subscriptions was the best decision from a pure bottom line perspective. I think we are in 'right thing to do' territory though.Green wrote:As anyone who's ever run a subscription business will attest - about half of your revenue comes from people who no longer use you service (and in most of those cases are even aware they still pay for it)6ft Kerplunk wrote:Soz for skim reading stuff, didn't notice they you can still watch bit. So yeah why haven't they just paused everyone's subscription.
To put another way, it's pretty obvious why sky haven't paused all subs isn't it?
Users browsing this forum: Semrush [Bot] and 17 guests