topic Re: Have we got to pay for hd and uhd in Sky Q

Have we got to pay for hd and uhd

Poppy2107 — Mon, 20 Oct 2025 12:15:37 GMT

Just wondering if I have to pay for sky hd and uhd

Re: Have we got to pay for hd and uhd

PandJ2020 — Mon, 20 Oct 2025 12:19:31 GMT

@Poppy2107 wrote:
Just wondering if I have to pay for sky hd and uhd

No.

But without a UHD sub you won't be able to watch/download UHD material.

Without a HD sub then you won't be able to watch/download certain HD material.

Re: Have we got to pay for hd and uhd

Daniel0210 — Mon, 20 Oct 2025 12:19:44 GMT

@Poppy2107 wrote:

Just wondering if I have to pay for sky hd and uhd

@Poppy2107

No, not if you want to only watch in SD. If you want to watch HD channels you'll need the HD add-on. If you want to watch anything in UHD you'll need the HD and UHD add-ons.

Re: Have we got to pay for hd and uhd

plantpot — Wed, 22 Oct 2025 19:54:01 GMT

I honestly can't believe they're still charging for this.

Their headline prices are attractive but then once you make it usable it's 2-4x the initial cost

Re: Have we got to pay for hd and uhd

TimmyBGood — Wed, 22 Oct 2025 20:30:14 GMT

@plantpot wrote:

I honestly can't believe they're still charging for this.

Glass and Stream don't require a subscription supplement for HD.

If only half of satellite platform users pay for HD that's something like £500,000,000 a year loss in revenue if the charge was dropped, which I suspect Comcast Corporation stockholders might be unhappy about.

@plantpot wrote:

Their headline prices are attractive but then once you make it usable it's 2-4x the initial cost

Yup: that's been a successful marketing strategy for over three decades.

Re: Have we got to pay for hd and uhd

plantpot — Thu, 23 Oct 2025 06:43:53 GMT

Fair point on Stream/Glass and HD. I came here to look into that but the hardware sounds terrible with Stream and I am not interested in Glass.

It's funny you mentioned 3 decades - and since this is the Q forum... Sky's heyday was the late 90s and into the 2000s. I didn't have Sky at home when I was younger, and I remember how awesome it was to go round to a friends house on a Sunday evening to catch the Simpsons (before the C4 days even) or a movie that wouldn't be on 'normal' TV for at least another year.

But with the rise of a vast array of on demand content, substantailly more free to air channels, smart TVs, and so on...getting access to the entertainment we want has never been easier.

I cancelled my Q subscription a while back after taking it out when I moved in to a new property. They wanted to increase my price to over £60 a month for what was just glorified Freeview with Multiroom and HD. This was not inclusive of broadband.

They charge a lot for multi room and yet The Sky Q mini multiroom box was terrible - an inferior product which was laggy and did not support 4k output.

HD is not a premium service.

The discussion with the Sky agent was borderline desperation on their part. Suggesting I remove multiroom and take HD off my package 'if cost is a problem' - folks want decent value for money, not to feel ripped off and locked in while they are free to increase prices every year, especially when the extras are things as ubiquitous as HD.

I can honestly say, cancelling the service and saving the money has had literally zero negative impact on what we enjoy watching.

I really feel Sky have completely failed to adapt to the seismic shift in the way folks consume content and charge way too much for what is just a basic level of service. The nickel and diming is quite something. You can get almost all of the basic package with free to air and a smart TV with on demand apps for £0 per month. Adding one of Netflix/Prime/Disney (or even several) is still way way less. Yet they are even now doing "ad free" as an extra 🤣

I do however think that the current deal on essentials with broadband is pretty solid, but the premium demanded for multiroom makes a good deal turn bad.

I'd love to see a simplification of the bundles but I've no interest in giving them my business with their current model. These forums are littered with customers complaining about poor performance and spurious charges.

Re: Have we got to pay for hd and uhd

TimmyBGood — Thu, 23 Oct 2025 06:50:04 GMT

@plantpot wrote:

I'd love to see a simplification of the bundles but I've no interest in giving them my business with their current model.

Q isn't going to change now: it will be gone in a few years. Glass/Stream was explicitly supposed to be a much simpler structure without revolving price changes, but that intention didn't actually emerge in reality.

Stream works for most households: by definition they aren't posting to support forums.

Re: Have we got to pay for hd and uhd

Rich+Elliott — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 14:25:14 GMT

Found this article whilst researching my renewal options. As far as I can tell, there is no way to receive UHD on Sky Q without also paying for HD. Unless I've misunderstood, Sky are still requiring customers to pay separately for each tier, rather than the UHD charge including HD, which I find staggering in 2026.

Seriously considering moving to NOW, but need to weigh up the ongoing cost of matching my current 'Signature' package which includes Netflix and Discovery+ thrown in for free, plus UHD (and HD 🙄) and Sky Sports. Losing the ability to record is also a major consideration, but it appears that is on borrowed time regardless.

Re: Have we got to pay for hd and uhd

Chodley — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 14:53:15 GMT

The UHD price is £4 iirc and HD is £10

I guess they could charge £14 for UHD and say HD is included and that would be ok? 😉

Re: Have we got to pay for hd and uhd

TimmyBGood — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 14:58:20 GMT

@Rich+Elliott wrote:

Unless I've misunderstood, Sky are still requiring customers to pay separately for each tier, rather than the UHD charge including HD, which I find staggering in 2026.

Glass & Stream have HD without a subscription supplement: UHD and Atmos is an add-on

Seriously considering moving to NOW, but need to weigh up the ongoing cost of matching my current 'Signature' package which includes Netflix and Discovery+ thrown in for free, plus UHD (and HD 🙄) and Sky Sports.

With the bottom tiers of both HBO Max and Disney+ arriving soon.

Losing the ability to record is also a major consideration, but it appears that is on borrowed time regardless.

Two-year minimum term contracts on Q are still available, although the satellite platform has recently been removed from online sales.

Re: Have we got to pay for hd and uhd

Rich+Elliott — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 15:03:07 GMT

Clearly not. Setting aside the debate of whether charging for HD at all in 2026 is ethical, I do think that, say £5 for HD or £7.50 for UHD (without mandating an additional HD subscription) would be be more palatable.

Re: Have we got to pay for hd and uhd

PandJ2020 — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 15:24:18 GMT

@Rich+Elliott wrote:
Clearly not. Setting aside the debate of whether charging for HD at all in 2026 is ethical, I do think that, say £5 for HD or £7.50 for UHD (without mandating an additional HD subscription) would be be more palatable.

...which is all down to the negotiation. I pay £1 for UHD.

Re: Have we got to pay for hd and uhd

Rich+Elliott — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 15:30:57 GMT

Fair point. Do you also pay the HD fee in addition to that, or did you manage to get it waived?

Re: Have we got to pay for hd and uhd

TimmyBGood — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 16:58:59 GMT

@Rich+Elliott wrote:

Setting aside the debate of whether charging for HD at all in 2026 is ethical

Realistically after having been around since 2006 (HD) and 2016 (UHD) Sky isn't going to make a fundamental change to the pricing structure of its satellite products when those platforms have around four years left at most.

Re: Have we got to pay for hd and uhd

PandJ2020 — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 18:28:46 GMT

@Rich+Elliott wrote:
Fair point. Do you also pay the HD fee in addition to that, or did you manage to get it waived?

Yes, I pay for HD too, also discounted.

Re: Have we got to pay for hd and uhd

Chodley — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 19:13:31 GMT

Lower prices will always be more palatable. Unethical? That's a stretch. It's a product, with a price, we choose whether we want to pay it. I choose not to pay for any sport, as much as I like many of them, because I think it's overpriced.