To think you don't NEED Sky TV (or similar)?

[Unicat]

This is just another example of how my DH doesn't listen to me, but I need to know if I am being unreasonable.

So, bit of backstory needed. We've been together 4 years, recently married and have DD who is 3.

Up until last week we have lived in his house, that he currently still owns with an ex partner. I hated the house, when they split 11 years ago he let it go to rack and ruin and I've spent the best part of 3 years trying to make it bearable - to no avail.

I laid my chips out on the table whilst we were away on honeymoon and said that I wanted us to move out. We had no deposit saved but it had become unbearable for me. We've recently started to rent a much nicer house that I love and he is in the process of selling the old one.

For that reason, money is not tight (I am recently self employed and earning much more than previously anticipated) but I'm trying to keep an eye on it at least until the house sells.

Prior to moving house we discussed the TV set up. We had Virgin TV, all set up by him, and broadband, but it has transpired that they cannot install it in the new house. We spoke about this and agreed that we don't watch much beyond the freeview channels and I have access to a SKY GO account that can be streamed through our games console anyway, so theoretically already have everything. We agreed that it would be far more economical to just get broadband in the new house and save some money.

Fast forward to today when he's cancelled the Virgin contract and immediately signed up for Sky, despite me going through to what we'd already spoken about.

His argument....in the DAYS that we have been here he has realised that we can't function with just freeview and we HAVE to have some form of cable TV. And because he's given me a rational argument, that's the end of it.

I believe we need LESS screens and have told him he's pretty pathetic if he can't live without Storage Wars or Challenge TV.

It's done anyway, and I've told him if he can't make payment for the TV I refuse to pay it for him (as has been done in the past, albeit a few years ago).

I don't know if I'm being unreasonable because I had an ex years ago who loaded the virgin up with every add on possible then promptly lost his job and I was too naive to refuse to make the shortfall while he spent all day gaming.

Perhaps. But I honestly don't think I'm being unreasonable. Am I??

You can live without Sky TV. If you want to watch the team you support, go to their games, or if you support Manchester United and are not a Mancunian, go down the pub with your prawn sandwiches.
You can live without visiting an over-priced coffee shop each day.
You can live without a car in most large cities.
You can live without a glass of wine each evening, or some horrible swill that is marketed as beer.

Your DP is being unreasonable and has a form of addiction that he is struggling to overcome.

Eh, what Forallthesaints?

Op I think Yabu re sky: he’s an adult and it’s up to him what he wants. Things don’t have to be a need in order for them to be a justified expense.

However you sound really unhappy generally with him

Forallthesaints that's fine if you support a football team, but my 14 year old is going to find it a bit tricky following Scuderia Ferrari around the world next year.

Perhaps I came at this from the wrong angle.

Rest assured, DH can watch whatever he pleases on the tv.

We have sky channels through the Sky Go app. He has bought the sky broadband + tv package, which means we have access to the tv channels twice.

I do not need loads of channels. I don't watch a lot. Wouldn't dream of stopping him from watching what he wants.

I do feel we spend too much time on screens, and that having sky would encourage him to watch MORE tv but I couldn't physically stop him from watching what he wants. I would like him to be more present as a family.

And I really didn't force him to move out.

You don't seem a happy match.

Seems like a massive non-issue tbh
Sounds like your pissed if you paid for your exes cable, and are now projected this on to your current partner.
As long as he’s paying for it, he doesn’t need to justify it to you, surely?

forall a sky package is probably cheaper than a season ticket at a premier League club. My DH has a season ticket but also has a sky sports package as he can't get to away games or champions League games. Plus he likes watching other teams not just his own. What a daft post

We have always had sky, even in times where money has been tight, because DH watches football and supports a premier league team. I forced him to cancel it loads of times. However going to the pub every Saturday to watch the game with a couple of drinks and maybe lunch is MORE expensive than a months worth of sky subscription. A months subscription is less than 1 ticket to watch a game too

I wouldn’t have Sky it looks prohibitive. But I do have Netflix and Amazon.

I did have Now TV but dropped it when they changed and began charging for all films.

With Freeview after you take out the reality, game shows and soaps and repeats there is little else.
I am

@Crimbobimbo

We are, for the most part.

But we can both be pig headed and stubborn.

It is a non issue and perhaps I am projecting and BU.

I can accept that.

I have Sky TV and I love it. But of course it's not a necessity. I'd live without it if I had to but I can afford it so I have it.

Nobody needs Sky. I don't have it and I don't want it.

However, your DH seems to really want it. You are paying to rent a house when you own one at your insistence (why didn't you sell the unsafe house, or make it safe?)

Sky is least if your issues.

*But we can both be pig headed and stubborn.

It is a non issue and perhaps I am projecting and BU*

When neither of you is in a stubborn place; it might be worth a chat about that and finding a way to avoid situations like this. Individually it will pass and feel like nothing but a lot of them will damage your relationship eventually.

We have Sky and Netflix. Both have some great programmes but we find the Sky menus much more user friendly and easier to navigate so the Netflix is rarely watched.

We used to pay £40+ per month to Sky. We now have Now TV which is £7.99 per month. We have prime and Netflix but had those anyway.

We need Sky tv otherwise our viewing would be severely affected as we mainly watch sport , if we didn’t want the sports I wouldn’t bother .

@LynetteScavo

There's many complex reasons.

It is going on the market but we cannot get in touch with his ex to get her permission. The house is also in negative equity and without ploughing £££s into it it's likely to stay that way.

We have been unable to save for a deposit because we have been paying to try and keep the house afloat. It was becoming untenable. When one thing got fixed another broke. It needed new kitchen, bathroom, electrics, you name it. I didn't want to put more money into it anymore and neither did I. We wanted a home we could make ours.

It might not make sense to many, but it makes sense to us.

I agree wrt Freeview - before we signed up with Sky and that's all we had, it was unwatchable as it kept freezing every minute or so (Freezeview, as we 'hilariously' called it). We thought it was just our wobbly old TV aerial, but everywhere I know that has it has the same - even the posh newly-built health centre.

I don't know if the FreeSat signals are more reliable. Sky do their own version of FreeSat, with more channels than standard FreeSat, where you pay £25 or so for a viewing card and have to renew the card once every few years - but undoubtedly will get bombarded with attempts to get you to 'upgrade' to a monthly paid-for package.

However, if those are the main reasons for him wanting Sky, you don't actually need a subscription - you can get Challenge, Challenge+1 and Dave (although, oddly, not Dave Ja vu) on any sky box (cheap from eBay) without any viewing card in it.

We were paying £33.50 a month for the now-obsolete Variety pack and I realised that their new Entertainment pack was pretty much the same, save for the commercial kids' channels (DS only ever watches the BBC and ITV kids' channels) - so I asked to switch and that's £25 (£20 for the first 18 months). It looks like Sky are mainly trying to compete on their technology options and multi-utility markets rather than purely on standard non-premium channels nowadays.

We don't care about sports, films, big blockbuster-type programmes etc and we looked at the channels you get free on a Sky box without a viewing card or subscription at all. They covered about 90-95% of all the telly we watch, but annoyingly, we really didn't want to lose some favourites that make up the other 5-10%, so we grimaced and continued to pay the £25 each month - for now at least.

I have a now TV stick. I can watch Netflix, Now TV, UKTV play, all 4, demand 5. Sky would be wasted in this house.

Sky is pointless these days in the age of Freeview, Netflix etc. Total waste of money

I agree nobody needs Sky, it’s a nice to have but if you can afford it why not.

If you spilt down the costs per day it’s not that bad.

You could even stop cadging it for free off your dad, is he on as much disposable income as you? If you continue to pay for it you could give him access for free on your account

@Ontheboardwalk

Dad is extremely well off.

He would not let us pay for his Sky even if we insisted.

He reasons that he has the slot free, so why don't we use it?

What do people watch on Freeview that isn't a soap, reality TV, a game show, a repeat or something that involves property

If you’ve got SkyQ already then you’ve got everything worth seeing on Sky imo and it is stupid to sign up for another TV package. Is it the sports he wanted? That’s the only thing missing possibly.

P.s. my mum uses my spare slot on Now tv and I’m sharing my prime and Netflix with multiple people quite happily so if the OPs dad is happy to let her use his slot what’s the issue.