ASA Adjudication on British Sky Broadcasting Ltd

Ad

A national press ad for Sky was headlined "Free Sky+ box When you join Sky TV, plus get free broadband and calls". Text underneath stated "1. Free Sky+ box Join Sky TV before 23 July 2009 and you can get a free Sky+ box ... 2. Pick your Sky TV Pack from just £16.50 a month. We've split our Sky TV channels into 6 Entertainment Packs ... Your first pack is just £16.50 a month and you can add others for just £1 extra a month each ... 3. Choose to add Sky Sports from just £11 a month extra ... 4. Plus free broadband and calls". Footnoted text at the bottom of the ad stated "Channel/programmes and prices subject to change".

Issue

The complainant challenged whether the ad was misleading, because he understood that the subscription cost was due to rise less than two months after the ad appeared.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

British Sky Broadcasting Ltd (Sky) explained that information about the increased subscription, which was due to come into effect on 1 September 2009, had been omitted from the ad, which appeared on 8 July, in error. Sky said they had trained their marketing team and re-issued their legal guidance as soon as they had been informed of the mistake. They provided a correct version of the ad, which stated "Choose your first Pack currently for just £16.50 a month and add others for just £1 extra a month each" and included the price change information in footnoted text.

Sky said prospective customers were informed about the cost of their Sky TV package, including any forthcoming price changes, whether they enquired online or by telephone. They said they also wrote to new customers, once they had subscribed, to confirm the current price of their package and the cost after any future price rises. Sky confirmed that existing customers were notified of the price changes on 26 June 2009, and that from that date the price a new customer would pay following the price change was included in their marketing, with the exception of this case. Sky explained that any customer joining Sky before the 1 September would have been protected from the price increase for the first 60 days of their subscription.

Sky pointed out that although the price of most Sky TV packages increased after 1 September, other Sky TV packages decreased in cost and some remained unchanged. They said the ad specifically promoted an upgrade to Sky Sports and that, following the changes implemented on 1 September, a customer who subscribed to a Sky package that included Sky Sports 1 or 2 would pay the same or less than the pre-1 September price, depending on the number of other entertainment packs they decided to take up.

Assessment

Upheld

The ASA noted that new Sky customers who subscribed to a TV package before 1 September would be protected from the price increase for 60 days. We understood, however, that customers who saw the ad and joined before 23 July, when the free Sky+ box offer expired, could see their subscription rise in October, just one month after the price increase for existing customers, depending on how soon they were set up. We noted Sky's argument that the ad promoted an upgrade to Sky Sports, and that customers who took up a package that included Sky Sports 1 or 2 would not see an increase in their subscription price. We also noted, however, that the main promotion in the ad was the free Sky+ box, and that the upgrade to Sky Sports was an added option. We considered that some customers might not sign up for Sky Sports and, given that the prices of most packages would increase, those customers were likely to pay extra for their TV package once the price increase came into effect. We therefore considered that the price rise was a significant condition that was likely to affect customers' decision to take up the offer.

We noted that the ad had been produced in error and we welcomed the steps Sky had taken to ensure the error would not be repeated. We also noted that the correct version of the ad included footnoted text that explained the forthcoming price increases. However, for the reasons given above, we considered that the increase in cost of the TV package was important pricing information that should have been communicated more clearly to customers, either in the body copy of the ad or through footnoted text linked to the price claim by an asterisk. Because it was not we concluded that the ad was misleading.  

The ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 and 7.1 (Truthfulness).

Action

The ad must not appear again in its current form.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)