DStv vs Online streaming

Swa said:
Most people don't. Also you'll be surprised how many people will answer that if it wasn't for Netflix or similar they'll cancel or downgrade their fibre for something cheaper. Funny how people now justify overpaying for fibre because they consider Netflix as providing the value. Yeah not a fair comparison as each streaming service only gives you a fraction of the shows so you also need more than one and at the end of the day people choose what makes the most sense for them.
Click to expand...

A fibre line has multiple uses while extras quoted as part of the dstv cost has only a usage for dstv.

It should not be part of the comparison.

The only comparison should be the dstv package cost compared to the streaming package. Of course Monochoice loses badly in that comparison so mybb introduces these "extras" to not upset naspers...
 
stefan9 said:
A fibre line has multiple uses while extras quoted as part of the dstv cost has only a usage for dstv.

It should not be part of the comparison.

The only comparison should be the dstv package cost compared to the streaming package. Of course Monochoice loses badly in that comparison so mybb introduces these "extras" to not upset naspers...
Click to expand...
Nonsense. It's very subjective.
 
bwana said:
:unsure: Netflix is arguably DSTVs biggest threat, judging by the sensationalised article titles, and they weren't blocked.
Click to expand...

No they where not blocked, but there was and still is a hue and cry that they be taxed to death by the Gummitt on DSTV's behalf, for the cheek of coming to play in DSTV's back yard.
 
stefan9 said:
What is subjective about a fibre line having multiple usage while a dstv decoder only has one. That is factual not subjective at all...
Click to expand...
It's subjective that you're assuming the person will have the fibre line regardless. You're doing the same thing you're accusing the article of.
 
Swa said:
It's subjective that you're assuming the person will have the fibre line regardless. You're doing the same thing you're accusing the article of.
Click to expand...

Mine is based on facts that a fibre line has multiple usages so cannot be included in the cost. Their article is based on an assumption with no data provided to prove their assumption.
 
stefan9 said:
Mine is based on facts that a fibre line has multiple usages so cannot be included in the cost. Their article is based on an assumption with no data provided to prove their assumption.
Click to expand...
It's irrelevant. A proper fibre line will cost me R800-R1000. I don't need to spend more than R200/month on internet. I have no use for it. It would be the same as saying a satellite dish can be used for serving food which is technically true.

So Netflix would be the reason I pay R600 more. Guess what Dstv costs me. You're the one making assumptions here.
 
Pointless debate. There's no single solution to the diverse requirements and delivery options out there today. I rejoice in the options. Just keep government out of it.
 
supersunbird said:
You're on the wrong boat, that is a contract issue between MC and the content rights holders. So MC can then for example take CBS to court if CBS breached their contract by giving South African rights to someone else, or MC will take the someone else to court (and moan with CBS) if that someone else is providing the content in South Africa without the permission of CBS to do so.

No government involvement in this one (except ruining running the court system).
Click to expand...

Interesting, thanks.
 
Another half baked comparison, please include all the subscriptions that would be required from steaming services to include la Liga, Premier league, Champions league, all major cricket games,. Tennis, F1, Super 15, European top 14, 6 nations, all golf majors.....
then relook if the comparsion
 
This article feel like a knee jerk reaction to the article that went up on /r/SouthAfrica last week, below is the correct analysis. I cant believe this article prices in internet costs, that's like a slap in the face to the DSTV client base insinuating that they don't have a need for internet connection


726414

Can I link to reddit from mybb? Credit to original poster /u/whattingh/
 
wingnut771 said:
what a dumb article, firstly, dstv charge me R904/month and not R809, also showmax is included with premium afaik so they shouldn't add the cost of that either, or are did they sneak in showmax into my subscription?
Click to expand...

You forgot the exstra R99 ontop of the R904
For HD channels, then you still have new movies that you rent that costs adds up aswell
 
This is not a fair comparison. You cannot compare sports channels with untold number of mostly substandard movies, no matter how many. And this is DSTV’s strength and competitive advantage
 
Sports shouldn't really be as big a deal as some make it out to be. I think most people just watch sport so that they have something in common to talk about with their friends and colleagues. People don't want to feel left out from the conversation.

I'm not anti-sport too as I'd much rather play a game of cricket/soccer/tennis, etc. than watch it on TV. Unless it's a big game like a final. That's the only time I watch sports on TV these days.
 
stefan9 said:
A fibre line has multiple uses while extras quoted as part of the dstv cost has only a usage for dstv.

It should not be part of the comparison.

The only comparison should be the dstv package cost compared to the streaming package. Of course Monochoice loses badly in that comparison so mybb introduces these "extras" to not upset naspers...
Click to expand...
Can streaming packages compete with SuperSport?
 
MyBroadband
Proudly brought to you by Multichoice


How many DSTV 'Articles' has Multichoice lined up for 2020?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X