The Footie Thread

[PJ87]

Yes, it's about TV. But it can't be discussed in isolation WITHOUT ticket prices being part of the discussion for comparative purposes. Regardless of whether they are too high as it stands.

I'm not for or against the idea of per team subscription here. And I don't think that Sky necessarily provide terrible vfm in the football area (although it should be better after the loss of 15% of their package proposition), but a model for all fans would be skewed by how it equates to the cost to "see live". Should Aresnal fans pay more per month for the same televised product? Should Ipswich fans pay less (just picked Ipswich as a smaller team, no idea of their ST costs).

The broadcast complexities also need to be factored in. How many transponders would be required, how much additional bandwidth? How many additional broadcast licenses? Who pays for that? I think I know the answer.

The thing is the games are available to watch now is the point. You don't need anymore equipment because they all being broadcast outside the UK with pundits from the UK appearing on them over the internet

Just need to unlock the UK boxes to watch

 

[GreiginFife]

Sky own now TV , they are one and the same company

No, they don't and they aren't. They are a separate legal entity.

Comcast own both if you want to go to that level.

 

[GreiginFife]

The thing is the games are available to watch now is the point. You don't need anymore equipment because they all being broadcast outside the UK with pundits from the UK appearing on them over the internet

Just need to unlock the UK boxes to watch

The thing is, "boxes" don't just get unlocked.

 

[PJ87]

No, they don't and they aren't. They are a separate legal entity.

Comcast own both if you want to go to that level.

It's operated by sky Europe in Europe so it's the same thing. The money goes to sky

The thing is, "boxes" don't just get unlocked.

What do you mean? What I'm saying is they wouldn't need to set up cameras, etc or feeds .. they would just need to make it available to the UK boxes.

It's available everywhere else just needs to be enabled in the UK. No extra transponders etc

 

[Pin-seeker]

Forest 7/1 at City tonight,worth a punt?
Wolves & Brentford also look big prices away to Everton & Villa.

 

[GreiginFife]

It's operated by sky Europe in Europe so it's the same thing. The money goes to sky



What do you mean? What I'm saying is they wouldn't need to set up cameras, etc or feeds .. they would just need to make it available to the UK boxes.

It's available everywhere else just needs to be enabled in the UK. No extra transponders etc

Again, no it doesn't. Sky group operate the platform. But NowTV is the company that makes or loses money for Comcast. My best mate works for Now having left Sky to go there.

Your second point, did I mention cameras or equipment? No. I didn't. Explain how it's made available to "boxes" without considering a) transponders, b) bandwidth and c) broadcast license changes?

 

[Fade and Die]

The EFL have other ways to watch their club outside sky

And before sky etc there was very little of any of the games on telly




And what’s a fair price and who decides that

For £900 a year you get all the live sport there is that’s broadcast within the UK

Football is one of those sports

You get every rugby game going including

European , games from abroad -leagues all over the world

Cricket - you get every single major tournament

Golf - the same

The list is endless

And all for £900 a year


Yes people do have a choice on if they want to take it or not - but what clubs etc are doing is removing concessions for kids etc - prices increasing way beyond inflation because they know someone will spend it


So you had one day maybe two days of sport with Granstand that only showed a home test , very little other cricket

You had the 5 nations for a couple of weeks - no other tests outside that , even the Lions was limited broadcast

There was no sport Monday to Friday

There is no comparison to what you can now watch sport wise vastly improved

You are absolutely on a wind up if you are dismissing £900 a year as good value.
Well played Phil, you have hooked plenty with that one.

 

[AmandaJR]

Forest 7/1 at City tonight,worth a punt?
Wolves & Brentford also look big prices away to Everton & Villa.

I might watch from behind the settee as David is a Forest fan. Until this season it's been an easy watch (for me)!!

The rot's got to stop sometime though

 

[PJ87]

Again, no it doesn't. Sky group operate the platform. But NowTV is the company that makes or loses money for Comcast. My best mate works for Now having left Sky to go there.

Your second point, did I mention cameras or equipment? No. I didn't. Explain how it's made available to "boxes" without considering a) transponders, b) bandwidth and c) broadcast license changes?

Sorry I thought you meant to be able to broadcast it. I was just saying it's already being broadcast it just needs to be opened up to streaming in the UK

The main point is the premier league want to beat the IPTVs. They won't do so without all games being available which you yourself have said you would be in favour of.

It needs to happen otherwise they are fighting a losing battle

If you make it legal, and reasonable priced people never go illegal because it's too much of a faff.

I'll give a real life example, I have IPTV. I could bin off netflix, Disney, prime and itv X as on there everything is available. I don't. Because for reasonable monthly cost I have Available to me majority of what I want to watch. Litterally the only show I have watched via it is superman and Lois season 4 because iPlayer had 1-3 then 4 is out now in USA so I finished it off yesterday. (Great show btw) But I don't cancel my subscriptions. I think they provide great value.

If sky offered every single game that I wanted to watch for a reasonable price (let's say £100 a month) I'd jump on it.

I'd much rather do it via regular media than not. But the options are crap. I had BT sport but canceled my BT broadband (had a years sport contract) they said no problem you can keep it.. non-issue. But soon as I left they said no sorry our mistake you can't have it as you no longer have BT TV (it was a deal apparently) so £30 a month if you want it back. Even though I still now have 3 months left on what I've paid for.

So iptv it is .. no way am I paying the same company twice

 

[Arthur Wedge]

You are absolutely on a wind up if you are dismissing £900 a year as good value.
Well played Phil, you have hooked plenty with that one.

Yes £900 for all the sport broadcast in the UK I believe is good value

And I suspect that you can get deals for it to be lower - my current subscription for Sky Sports and TNT is £50 a month

 

[GreiginFife]

Sorry I thought you meant to be able to broadcast it. I was just saying it's already being broadcast it just needs to be opened up to streaming in the UK

The main point is the premier league want to beat the IPTVs. They won't do so without all games being available which you yourself have said you would be in favour of.

It needs to happen otherwise they are fighting a losing battle

If you make it legal, and reasonable priced people never go illegal because it's too much of a faff.

I'll give a real life example, I have IPTV. I could bin off netflix, Disney, prime and itv X as on there everything is available. I don't. Because for reasonable monthly cost I have Available to me majority of what I want to watch. Litterally the only show I have watched via it is superman and Lois season 4 because iPlayer had 1-3 then 4 is out now in USA so I finished it off yesterday. (Great show btw) But I don't cancel my subscriptions. I think they provide great value.

If sky offered every single game that I wanted to watch for a reasonable price (let's say £100 a month) I'd jump on it.

I'd much rather do it via regular media than not. But the options are crap. I had BT sport but canceled my BT broadband (had a years sport contract) they said no problem you can keep it.. non-issue. But soon as I left they said no sorry our mistake you can't have it as you no longer have BT TV (it was a deal apparently) so £30 a month if you want it back. Even though I still now have 3 months left on what I've paid for.

So iptv it is .. no way am I paying the same company twice

I get your point but the fundamental flaw is that Sky simply don’t own the rights to these broadcast games, don’t have the infrastructure set up currently to deal with 38 new streams concurrently being broadcast to receivers and licensing probably doesn’t cover those additional games.

Think, £1.6bn for what they currently have the rights to. Now multiply that in your head to what the rest would cost and how that would flow down to the end user.

For the record I said I wasn’t for or against every match being broadcast.
I also don’t know if all games being in pubs would be a good idea either, the police might have issue with it for a start, civil unrest would be rife IMO.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Sorry I thought you meant to be able to broadcast it. I was just saying it's already being broadcast it just needs to be opened up to streaming in the UK

The main point is the premier league want to beat the IPTVs. They won't do so without all games being available which you yourself have said you would be in favour of.

It needs to happen otherwise they are fighting a losing battle

If you make it legal, and reasonable priced people never go illegal because it's too much of a faff.

I'll give a real life example, I have IPTV. I could bin off netflix, Disney, prime and itv X as on there everything is available. I don't. Because for reasonable monthly cost I have Available to me majority of what I want to watch. Litterally the only show I have watched via it is superman and Lois season 4 because iPlayer had 1-3 then 4 is out now in USA so I finished it off yesterday. (Great show btw) But I don't cancel my subscriptions. I think they provide great value.

If sky offered every single game that I wanted to watch for a reasonable price (let's say £100 a month) I'd jump on it.

I'd much rather do it via regular media than not. But the options are crap. I had BT sport but canceled my BT broadband (had a years sport contract) they said no problem you can keep it.. non-issue. But soon as I left they said no sorry our mistake you can't have it as you no longer have BT TV (it was a deal apparently) so £30 a month if you want it back. Even though I still now have 3 months left on what I've paid for.

So iptv it is .. no way am I paying the same company twice

the only reason why IPTV is cheap is because it’s illegal- if it was legal and every game was broadcast in the UK then the price rockets through the roof , media rights from abroad pay a fortune to buy the right to broadcast them

Greg asked the question - would you be ok paying less if it meant less money went to the clubs , which of course would have a knock on effect. With people being able to just broadcast their own teams which teams do you think will get more money from subscribers.

 

[GreiginFife]

the only reason why IPTV is cheap is because it’s illegal- if it was legal and every game was broadcast in the UK then the price rockets through the roof , media rights from abroad pay a fortune to buy the right to broadcast them

Greg asked the question - would you be ok paying less if it meant less money went to the clubs , which of course would have a knock on effect. With people being able to just broadcast their own teams which teams do you think will get more money from subscribers.

My point was more how balanced the model would be given disparity in cost to “watch live”. Clubs would absolutely block any move that jeopardised ST sales. So Arsenal would charge more than West Ham for example. If all that money flows to the clubs then the Arsenals just get richer and you end up like La Liga.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

My point was more how balanced the model would be given disparity in cost to “watch live”. Clubs would absolutely block any move that jeopardised ST sales. So Arsenal would charge more than West Ham for example. If all that money flows to the clubs then the Arsenals just get richer and you end up like La Liga.

Sorry the Greg was the other Greg

But the La Liga issue was something I highlighted when it was first mentioned when the Saturday black out removal was talked about - that financial model is the last thing the league needs

 

[GreiginFife]

Sorry the Greg was the other Greg

But the La Liga issue was something I highlighted when it was first mentioned when the Saturday black out removal was talked about - that financial model is the last thing the league needs

My bad

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Newcastle United vs Liverpool: Premier League preview, team news, stats & head-to-head - BBC Sport

Follow live text commentary, score updates and match stats from Newcastle United vs Liverpool in the Premier League

www.bbc.co.uk

Random Irritation

Why on earth have they got the line ups in alphabetical order

 

[PJ87]

My point was more how balanced the model would be given disparity in cost to “watch live”. Clubs would absolutely block any move that jeopardised ST sales. So Arsenal would charge more than West Ham for example. If all that money flows to the clubs then the Arsenals just get richer and you end up like La Liga.

I think it could easily set up the model to follow the idea that it is now, all the money is pulled into a out and paid out to the teams equally

It's only what happens now but with more options for the fans involved

 

[nickjdavis]

Newcastle United vs Liverpool: Premier League preview, team news, stats & head-to-head - BBC Sport

Follow live text commentary, score updates and match stats from Newcastle United vs Liverpool in the Premier League

www.bbc.co.uk

Random Irritation

Why on earth have they got the line ups in alphabetical order

Maybe it might help Newcastle if the formation was based on alphabetical order?

Not looking forward to watching the carnage that is surely going to unfold over the next 90 minutes.

 

[GreiginFife]

I think it could easily set up the model to follow the idea that it is now, all the money is pulled into a out and paid out to the teams equally

It's only what happens now but with more options for the fans involved

Are you suggesting that all clubs fans pay the same and the money is distributed evenly or that fans pay relative to ST prices and then the money is distributed evenly?

I can see massive issues with either option tbh.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Maybe it might help Newcastle if the formation was based on alphabetical order?

Not looking forward to watching the carnage that is surely going to unfold over the next 90 minutes.

Not sure - can see a draw here , Newcastle midweek away , tough game