Following articles in the Morning Advertiser relating to the outrageous increase in Sky subscription rates, I would like to make you aware of what I believe is an unreported and hidden increase.
During my initial 12-month contract Sky allowed licensees to suspend their subscription for the summer months and restart the service at the start of the football season.
However, from this summer onwards Sky will only allow you to terminate your contract in full. You must then sign a new contract for a minimum of 12 months. This alone represents an increase of around one-third per annum in addition to the increase of my monthly payment from £400 per month to £550.
Keith Furlong
Licensee
Pied Bull Inn
Shepshed
Leicestershire
Sky's fixed contract is an unaffordable option
I note with interest that Sky claims the aver
age spend per customer is £15.50 while watching live sport in a pub.
Aside from the obvious question of where does it get these unrealistic figures, one has to ask, has this figure risen by 29% since last year? If not, how does Sky justify applying such a hefty increase?
Coupled to the new condition that customers like me, who suspend Sky over the summer months, are now being forced into signing 12-month contracts, makes it an unaffordable option for most premises.
Mark Goodman
The Jovial Monk
Durham
We must stand together to fight Sky's monopoly
I have always been disgusted at my Sky subscription charges as it is in a monopoly position.
My monthly subscription has gone up from £387 per month to £511 per month and Premiership Plus from £1,300 to £1,700 outrageous! I telephoned Sky to try to see if there was any cheaper package I could take out or have Premiership Plus only no chance. Apparently the new charge per month for my Sky package was the minimum at £511.
But to add insult to injury the woman from Sky then continued to ask: 'Are you running your business properly? People like you (us publicans) don't know how expensive it is to provide Sky channels. She asked if I was advertising properly or adequately but I replied that I do promote Sky & Premiership games but I didn't want to add to costs with expensive advertising.
She also said I should do special promotions, such as buy one get one free (drinks) and food deals. I said: 'So I need to reduce my takings on food and drinks sales as well. She then concluded that I was, obviously, 'not running my business properly.
I was really livid, we myself and my partner run a great family community pub, we do great food and lead a very eventful business. It has been in my family since 1889 and I am the fifth generation.
I will not be renewing my Sky subscription in September, unfortunately! I don't really want to lose it, I just feel that I am being ripped off. Maybe if more pubs took a stand together, and didn't renew, Sky might have to 'listen and reduce its charges (by at least 50%!)
Linda Smith, FBII
Licensee
The Old House at Home
Portsmouth
Hampshire
Sky's pricing bands for fees need reassessing
Because of rates revaluation Sky automatic
ally feels empowered to raise prices. The logic behind its pricing system is, I assume, the higher the rateable value, the bigger the business, and, therefore, the bigger the business, the more it should pay for the benefit of Sky broadcasts.
However, my local authority has reduced the amount payable per rateable pound to arrive at its required charge. Although the rateable value increased by 27.5%, the council's actual bill rose by only 15%. And with the Small Business Rate Relief, introduced this year, I actually received a reduction of 45.9%.
The Sky subscription for my pub has risen 20% it is still the same small couple-and-two-part- timers pub that it was before rates revaluation.
The Government and local authority realise this and have deemed that it qualifies for small business relief. So, far from my pub being a bigger business liable to pay higher rates, it is seen as being in need of support against the giants of the high street.
However, unlike the Government, Sky doesn't care. Its policies play into the hands of the big boys. This Sky rate benefits from what it calls 'transitional relief. So, goodness knows what it will charge next year. I think their pricing bands need reassessment.
John Bruce
Licensee
The Mitre
Buckingham
Even Coulson can get it wrong over licensing
Peter Coulson in his article 'Council-power worries (Morning Advertiser, 14 July) 'reveals that the licensing department of Westminster Council shares an office with the police licensing officers.
They don't. The city council's licensing department is located in Westminster City Hall in Victoria. The police licensing officers to whom he refers are located in Marylebone.
Unfortunately, Mr Coulson is guilty of the very sin he accuses Westminster of that is confusing the position of the licensing authority with that of the 'responsible authorities who are entitled to make representations on licence applications.
The officers who are located close to the police licensing officers are the city council's environmental health consultation team. The problem Mr Coulson thinks he has identified, that is, the licensing authority seeking to generate objections to applications it 'doesn't like, does not arise.
Perhaps the real lesson from his article is that the new legislation is difficult to understand, even for very experienced licensing lawyers.
Councillor Audrey Lewis
Cabinet Member for Licensing Westminster City Council
Westminster
London SW1