Yup, that is the issue. I'll spend a couple hours studying Sky TV as a possible investment, totally seeing a lot of value *in theory*, then I'll unwind by watching anything I want, from anywhere I want, for free.
It is really hard to see any long term competitive advantage that a company like Sky now has in the delivery of either movies or pre-recorded television programs.
About all that is keeping the lights on is live programs, especially sport. But as a result, TV channels globally are bidding insane amounts of money for anything of this nature, even in an environment of ever declining ratings. Witness the deals done by World Wrestling Entertainment last year to provide a product that is getting worse and less popular by the month, as reflected in the rapidly falling ratings. So why did Fox and USA pay so much? Live content.
It's easy to see a scenario where the TV and movies that Sky provides are available more cheaply or free elsewhere, while the live stuff, especially sport, becomes so expensive they're delivering it for almost no profit.
SKT stands out as dirt cheap in a world of expensive shares, but I still think it is more likely a value trap than a bargain.