As ever, both parties are presenting their version of events, and personally, I don’t believe a word from either of them. Virgin claim Sky wanted to double the price of their channels, while Sky claim the increase would have been 3p per customer and what’s more they were going to throw in some extra channels. Virgin are also a wee bit miffed about the price Sky are paying for Virgin’s channels. Sky apparently decided to pay less, and Virgin apparently went along with this, presumably imagining that Sky would play nicely when it came to their channels.
And so it goes on, with claim and counter-claim. All quite pathetic really. I hope they get a really nasty judge.
Wouldn’t it be nice if they could lock up Richard Branson and Rupert Murdoch?
 Note that these two claims are not mutually exclusive
 OK, technically, Sky is run by Rupert’s son James, but let’s not spoil a nice fantasy, OK?