Sky Snooze?

Now Virgin is about to take Sky to court about the loss of TV channels and the price Sky is charging Virgin to show its channels, its worth noting that this wasn't a problem until Sir Brnason took over. I've had years of trouble free viewing and high speed broadband with Telewest. Within weeks of Branson taking over I've lost TV channels and had the price put up on Broadband. Nice. The Virgin support desk (when my broadband connection failed for the first time in months and months) redirected me round the same department!

One has to suspect that its Bransons over brash and casual approach ('Can I call you Ian?' instead of the old 'Hello Mr Brandshaw') in both support and mailings that have caused the problems.

Icidientally, Virgin are using the fact that 70% of subscription viewers are with Sky as a reason for the challenge, I suspect the problem is more the amount of cable coverage in the UK rather than Sky being better.

Someone is bound to point out that London is cabled and use that to say that 50% (or whatever it is) of the country is cabled by head of population or something, but having lived in London most people are 'transient' (i.e. moving around the capital rather than living in one place) and the vast majority are in rented accommodation (where the landlords won't let you have cable).

I think the problem is more the new owners rather than Sky changing is policies.