How much would you pay for a Spurs 'TV season ticket'?

[Maxtremist]

I agree completely, I said in this thread as soon as this topic came up, Netflix showed the model to make it so convenient to stream television that it completely eliminates people desire to search for a free option. The prem has seemingly completely ignored that and I think they'll lose money from a lot of people who will now find other means to watch the game.

With that said, I think what's important to note is Sky and BT get the big games, if they're making PPV games which wouldn't normally be available to the public then I think that's a good model as long as season ticket holders get a free code to stream the game considering they already paid to view the thing. Then they should make those games imo no more than a fiver. I think that's the price point to say, yeah that's worth it and I think people would probably be less likely to illegally watch the game because as you said 15 quid will send people onto google.

In terms of it sending people to google... it's not gonna be an increase on people though? People who watch streams already are gonna keep on watching streams.
Now, whilst not many of them seemingly, but now that the games will be made available in stable HD legal way via PPV you're gonna get some who streamed moving to PPV.
I don't see there now being a large group who didn't originally watch streams in the first place, now going to streams. You'll get a slight increase as you don't have fans in the stadium atm so that group are gonna try and find alternatives, but will they all go to streaming or will they go PPV? We don't know and I think we might be underestimating how many people will go the PPV route.

For as greedy as the Premier League is and as high a charge as this may be (and with every chance for it to backfire) let's not pretend they didn't have meetings about this with people and, whatever research they did, they as a successful business figured £15 was a good price for a reason. I think it's a flawed reason but I don't do business.

 

[vegassd]

Now, whilst not many of them seemingly, but now that the games will be made available in stable HD legal way via PPV you're gonna get some who streamed moving to PPV.

Totally agree, and in the right circumstances I'll be one of them. I think a lot of people would be happy to pay the money to take away the hassle of setting up the right streaming system. But it's horses for courses, and it's not like illegal streams are going to suddenly stop broadcasting!

For as greedy as the Premier League is and as high a charge as this may be (and with every chance for it to backfire) let's not pretend they didn't have meetings about this with people and, whatever research they did, they as a successful business figured £15 was a good price for a reason. I think it's a flawed reason but I don't do business.

Totally agree with this as well. I thought the price for Mulan on Disney+ was a rip off at £20 (on top of the subs) but my girlfriend, her sister and a couple of their mates didn't so we all got together to watch it. For four girls watching that film and it's £5/head which is far more reasonable. And if that's a family watching at home it's still way cheaper than a cinema trip with kids.

I think £15 might end up being a bit high, but if people have a couple of mates round the price per person goes down, and even for one person on their own it's still probably cheaper than what you might spend in a pub.

My guess would be that they have pitched it at £15 as a sort of upper limit. Much easier to bring that price down in future should the demand not be there, but starting at £5 and trying to increase the price would be received far worse. But like you say, I'm sure they've done their research.

 

[wrd]

In terms of it sending people to google... it's not gonna be an increase on people though? People who watch streams already are gonna keep on watching streams.
Now, whilst not many of them seemingly, but now that the games will be made available in stable HD legal way via PPV you're gonna get some who streamed moving to PPV.
I don't see there now being a large group who didn't originally watch streams in the first place, now going to streams. You'll get a slight increase as you don't have fans in the stadium atm so that group are gonna try and find alternatives, but will they all go to streaming or will they go PPV? We don't know and I think we might be underestimating how many people will go the PPV route.

For as greedy as the Premier League is and as high a charge as this may be (and with every chance for it to backfire) let's not pretend they didn't have meetings about this with people and, whatever research they did, they as a successful business figured £15 was a good price for a reason. I think it's a flawed reason but I don't do business.

There will be those who didn't have access in the past to Sky/BT who used to stream now having the means to afford it or having access through family members going straight back to their old ways imo.

 

[Maxtremist]

There will be those who didn't have access in the past to Sky/BT who used to stream now having the means to afford it or having access through family members going straight back to their old ways imo.

Apologies, little confused by this, so you're saying people who didn't have Sky or BT will now stream? Why weren't they before?

 

[wrd]

Apologies, little confused by this, so you're saying people who didn't have Sky or BT will now stream? Why weren't they before?

No I'm saying they're people who previously streamed in their teens or early 20's probably now have the means to buy Sky / BT and chose to go that route because of the ease of it. A lot of them will probably rather find a stream for a one off game than spend 15 quid.

 

[Maxtremist]

No I'm saying they're people who previously streamed in their teens or early 20's probably now have the means to buy Sky / BT and chose to go that route because of the ease of it. A lot of them will probably rather find a stream for a one off game than spend 15 quid.

Ah, so I'm guessing then you're viewing it then as a fan of, say, Fulham. They don't have many of their games shown on Sky or BT in the first place so rather than them chose to go to Sky/BT now, they'll just stream everything?

I kinda get that... but still seems in the vast minority to me and also a kinda weird position. Cause if they weren't gonna have many of their teams matches on Sky/BT in the first place then why would they have been considering it if that's what they wanted to get it for?
If they wanted to get it to watch football matches in general, the big football matches are still going to Sky and BT anyway so they still get that.

I agree that for our (or any teams) non televised games, given the choice between Streaming or PPV, there's a lot that will chose streaming. But there'll be people that fork out the £15 for the guaranteed stability and legality of PPV. I just don't see how that affects the Sky/BT games that already happened. People already could stream them and do? This PPV stuff doesn't really affect that.

 

[Maxtremist]

Totally agree, and in the right circumstances I'll be one of them. I think a lot of people would be happy to pay the money to take away the hassle of setting up the right streaming system. But it's horses for courses, and it's not like illegal streams are going to suddenly stop broadcasting!


Totally agree with this as well. I thought the price for Mulan on Disney+ was a rip off at £20 (on top of the subs) but my girlfriend, her sister and a couple of their mates didn't so we all got together to watch it. For four girls watching that film and it's £5/head which is far more reasonable. And if that's a family watching at home it's still way cheaper than a cinema trip with kids.

I think £15 might end up being a bit high, but if people have a couple of mates round the price per person goes down, and even for one person on their own it's still probably cheaper than what you might spend in a pub.

My guess would be that they have pitched it at £15 as a sort of upper limit. Much easier to bring that price down in future should the demand not be there, but starting at £5 and trying to increase the price would be received far worse. But like you say, I'm sure they've done their research.

Your Mulan example was one I was thinking of and is a large reason why I'm so into this PPV/VOD stuff at the moment. Film is a big part of my life so seeing what's happening there in that industry is fascinating cause it's clearly not as simple as taking a film from the cinema and putting it on a streaming or VOD platform, and the money and price point changes.

As much as my head says, if you make it £5 then people will be more likely to buy it etc... that's still kinda anecdotal. We don't know how many people actually would buy it. Cause making it very simple maths if you do make it £5, in terms of what the Premier League have planned and researched, they'd need 3 times as many people to watch that game to make the same money. So if you say to people that Tottenham VS. Brighton is £5 to watch on PPV, would three times as many people watch it compared to making that game £15?

 

[wrd]

Ah, so I'm guessing then you're viewing it then as a fan of, say, Fulham. They don't have many of their games shown on Sky or BT in the first place so rather than them chose to go to Sky/BT now, they'll just stream everything?

I kinda get that... but still seems in the vast minority to me and also a kinda weird position. Cause if they weren't gonna have many of their teams matches on Sky/BT in the first place then why would they have been considering it if that's what they wanted to get it for?
If they wanted to get it to watch football matches in general, the big football matches are still going to Sky and BT anyway so they still get that.

I agree that for our (or any teams) non televised games, given the choice between Streaming or PPV, there's a lot that will chose streaming. But there'll be people that fork out the £15 for the guaranteed stability and legality of PPV. I just don't see how that affects the Sky/BT games that already happened. People already could stream them and do? This PPV stuff doesn't really affect that.

No I'm not saying it like how you're putting it at all so I'll put it in an example that I know from the conversations I've had with people they're a lot of people in this boat.

They're Spurs and Man United fans who were previous streamers but because their circumstances have changed now currently have BT and Sky subscriptions and watch all the games available legally which are available on Sky / BT and for the past 6 months that has been every single game.

Now the prem is offering them the chance to watch games vs Brighton and Newcastle for the price of 15 pound and isn't available to them on Sky or BT so rather than pay the 15 quid, they'll go back to their old methods.

 

[Maxtremist]

No I'm not saying it like how you're putting it at all so I'll put it in an example that I know from the conversations I've had with people they're a lot of people in this boat.

They're Spurs and Man United fans who were previous streamers but because their circumstances have changed now currently have BT and Sky subscriptions and watch all the games available legally which are available on Sky / BT and for the past 6 months that has been every single game.

Now the prem is offering them the chance to watch games vs Brighton and Newcastle for the price of 15 pound and isn't available to them on Sky or BT so rather than pay the 15 quid, they'll go back to their old methods.

Ah, well yeah that I get. But that surely only covers the PPV games which are games that wouldn't have been shown any other season. So outside of these last 6 months, that Tottenham VS. Brighton game wouldn't have been shown on TV so if they'd wanted to watch it they'd have had to stream? It's only been the past 6 months where that game has been made available (3 of those months without any football on TV).

So it's not really increasing/sending any extra people to streaming. It's people just going back to it after 3 months of football off of it?

 

[wrd]

Ah, well yeah that I get. But that surely only covers the PPV games which are games that wouldn't have been shown any other season. So outside of these last 6 months, that Tottenham VS. Brighton game wouldn't have been shown on TV so if they'd wanted to watch it they'd have had to stream? It's only been the past 6 months where that game has been made available (3 of those months without any football on TV).

So it's not really increasing/sending any extra people to streaming. It's people just going back to it after 3 months of football off of it?

Yeah if you look at it from how football used to be you're right. I guess the question is as you raised with another poster is whether there's a price point which gets people to prefer paying for it rather than streaming or whether the value of 1 person for 15 quid is better than trying to get 3x for a 5er for example as you said. I think people will fall into 3 category's, those who will pay for it, those who think it costs too much and won't pay at all and those who will stream it.

I personally think there will be a lot in those latter 2 categories and if they made it cheaper they'd end up getting more viewers. It's just a question of whether they'll make more money I guess.

 

[vegassd]

So if you say to people that Tottenham VS. Brighton is £5 to watch on PPV, would three times as many people watch it compared to making that game £15?

Exactly. I would imagine they don't see the PPV stuff as super price sensitive because it's a live event, as opposed to the VOD nature of Netflix and Prime. For some fans the question won't just be "can I afford £15" it will be "can I get 2 hours to myself on a Saturday afternoon".

I often baulk at prices on Prime for new movies when they are charging £12 or whatever just for a rental, but it actually makes (some) sense. Not only does that price cover my whole household but it also includes the premium of watching at the time of release to VOD. If I want to rent a movie from last year it isn't going to have that same premium attached.

In terms of the OP and the idea of buying a VOD season ticket rather than one off games, I would imagine if anything like that comes along it would be at a somewhat discounted rate - maybe games costing £7-10 instead of £15 but you've gotta take the plunge. If that sort of thing was offered I wonder how many Sky Sports/BT subscribers would cancel their existing subs in favour of that season ticket. The TV companies would need to balance out how many normal subscribers they lose versus how many non-subscribers they might gain.

It will all be governed by profitability for the TV companies at the end of the day, but that doesn't necessarily mean everything gets more expensive for fans. If they see that a lower price will gain more customers and yield a higher profit you assume they would go down that route.

 

[MR_BEN]

I have one ?

it’s called Optus Sport here in Aus, every game live and on demand.

and it costs me..... nothing. Free with my mobile plan.

 

[MR_BEN]

Also the infrastructure is already there because there's a television crew present at most matches anyway, they just aren't broadcasted. Which means that the increase in cost of production is minimal for the additional matches. But profit goes to clubs, so I'm ultimately fine with the price if the matches are online.

The premier league themselves actually provide broadcasting and commentary on everysingle game already ... it’s used for international broadcasts - but I bet Sky & BT would never allow them to broadcast in the UK

 

[nailsy]

@nailsy
Which part do you disagree with? I thought my post was stating the obvious / common sense, but perhaps I'm missing something?!?!? ?

Sorry, I meant to post the reason earlier. I currently pay for Sky Sports, BT and Amazon. I don't use illegal streaming. I would probably pay £5 to watch the odd PPV game, but there's no way I'm paying £15 for a game. I know a few people feel the same way. At this stage I feel like the TV companies are taking the piss and I'm considering other means to watch the PPV games and if I go that route for those games I might as well cancel my subscriptions and watch all matches that way in future.

 

[nailsy]

Don Felipe what you say is correct but that Now tv thing is just that its for now . If it happened that everybody became aware of now tv and started using Now tv it is my opinion that they would soon put a stop to it or vastly increase the fee . Only my cynical opinion of course .

Now TV is owned by Sky. Why would they cancel a service that makes them money? It's basically just Sky without the dish and box so less costs for them.

 

[Neon_Knight_]

Sorry, I meant to post the reason earlier. I currently pay for Sky Sports, BT and Amazon. I don't use illegal streaming. I would probably pay £5 to watch the odd PPV game, but there's no way I'm paying £15 for a game. I know a few people feel the same way. At this stage I feel like the TV companies are taking the piss and I'm considering other means to watch the PPV games and if I go that route for those games I might as well cancel my subscriptions and watch all matches that way in future.

I hadn't thought of it that way...potentially driving people to cancel their subscriptions. £15 is definitely too steep!

 

[Dougal]

Admirable stuff. Would you have a link @wizgell incase Spurs fans would consider doing the same?

 

[vegassd]

At this stage I feel like the TV companies are taking the piss and I'm considering other means to watch the PPV games and if I go that route for those games I might as well cancel my subscriptions and watch all matches that way in future.

But that is exactly the scenario without PPV games and you haven't done it yet. Without PPV your only options to watch those games would be to attend in person or find a stream. If you don't mind watching streams then you may as well cancel your subscriptions right now.

It really feels like a lot of people have read the PPV situation in the wrong way somehow and the missed the part where these games were not scheduled for broadcast.

 

[BringBack_leGin]

But that is exactly the scenario without PPV games and you haven't done it yet. Without PPV your only options to watch those games would be to attend in person or find a stream. If you don't mind watching streams then you may as well cancel your subscriptions right now.

It really feels like a lot of people have read the PPV situation in the wrong way somehow and the missed the part where these games were not scheduled for broadcast.

What do you reckon would cause more furore, this ppv situation or the games not being shown at all?

Way I see it is, I’m unable to attend due to the matches being behind closed does, my Sky and BT subscriptions pay for me to watch most games, I now have the option of paying a premium rate to watch a few more should I choose and if I choose not to (unlikely) that’s fine. If I see something to suggest that all the main games are suddenly going to PPV then my mindset will change, but that seems like it’s not even a thought given how much money Sky would lose from advertisers if they weren’t suddenly showing Liverpool v Man Utd on their subscription service.

 

[southlondonyiddo]