3 ms·
$60 to watch at home was unreasonable - definitely the law was broken, but this is what happens when they charge unreasonable amounts, it was almost a form of c
by airbreather 10y ago
$60 to watch at home was unreasonable - definitely the law was broken, but this is what happens when they charge unreasonable amounts, it was almost a form of civil disobedience.
I would say that a lot of people who watched it on the streaming were not going to pay anyway, so the loss was probably minimal in reality.
If you really wanted to watch and did not have the Foxtel or the money you could have gone to the pub, or a mates, anyway.
- technion 10y ago$60 is only the price if you have an existing Foxtel contract, which is an increasingly poor proposition these days. My parents pay $120 per month for their Foxtel subscription and honestly there's better viewing on Netflix.
- airbreather 10y agoTotally agree, but some people get it for the sport. I just go to the pub or local bowling club if there is something I want to see.