King of Otters
Well-Known Member
- Jun 11, 2012
- 10,751
- 36,094
If we are actually going to be good this season you can come back. We won't hold it against you.
Premier League announces pay-per-view fixtures in October
- Thread starter mawspurs
- Start date
If we are actually going to be good this season you can come back. We won't hold it against you.
andy00900
Probably Joking
- Aug 18, 2017
- 518
- 1,113
Sky Sports and BT Sport to unveil Premier League pay-per-view service
EXCLUSIVE BY MIKE KEEGAN, MATT HUGHES AND SAMI MOKBEL: The Premier League have grown agitated at essentially giving away their product for free since lockdown.
So the broadcasters aren't entirely to blame but will be the ones taking it.
Sky Sports and BT Sport to unveil Premier League pay-per-view service
EXCLUSIVE BY MIKE KEEGAN, MATT HUGHES AND SAMI MOKBEL: The Premier League have grown agitated at essentially giving away their product for free since lockdown.www.dailymail.co.uk
So the broadcasters aren't entirely to blame but will be the ones taking it.
Broadcasters are taking none of the blame well certainly shouldn't be.
This is the Premier League Clubs at sole fault.
Personally I hope this fails spectacularly for them, and it turns people off their product.
stonecolddeanaustin
Well-Known Member
- Aug 27, 2011
- 1,634
- 2,609
So £15 a match to watch what would almost certainly be a Cat C game on TV. Not much less than half of what it'd cost to attend in person. Fuck right off!
NickHSpurs
Well-Known Member
- Mar 14, 2004
- 13,644
- 11,953
£15 a game? No thanks! That's almost double the montly cost of Netflix for ONE game!
Once again encouraging people to illegally stream! Why don't they get it? We'd rather pay direct to our clubs than into Sky's pocket and certainly not at that price to either.
"Luckily" for us our October games are on Sky Sports.
Once again encouraging people to illegally stream! Why don't they get it? We'd rather pay direct to our clubs than into Sky's pocket and certainly not at that price to either.
"Luckily" for us our October games are on Sky Sports.
SirHarryHotspur
Well-Known Member
- Aug 9, 2017
- 5,189
- 7,760
I can can understand things from the PL perspective , games were being shown on Sky/BT that were not part of the original package so in effect subscribers were getting extra games for no extra outlay.
For games that were not scheduled for TV in the future they could not have been watched by fans in the UK anyway , it would only have been those in actual attendance that would have seen the game.
Everyone who attends a game at Spurs is paying far more than £14.95 , watching on TV is not the same as being there for a start you have to put up with the likes of G Neville etc but £14.95 to watch a game as opposed to £50 upwards for a ticket plus travel costs , is it so bad. And for many fans who do not use illegal streams for non UK televised games they now get the chance to see Spurs games that they would have missed, if they wish to part with £14.95. Of course the longer this goes on clubs will also have to refund or credit ST holders who have paid towards this seasons ST, biggest losers in all this are club members who have paid out the full fee and this season looks like they get nothing.
Going through the games looks like 31st October home against Brighton and 7th November away against W Brom are the most likely candidates for the £14.95 charge , most other the games up to Xmas are against the likes of Woolwich , Man city , Chelsea etc which will probably be picked for normal coverage plus the need to sign up with Amazon again to get a couple of games.
For games that were not scheduled for TV in the future they could not have been watched by fans in the UK anyway , it would only have been those in actual attendance that would have seen the game.
Everyone who attends a game at Spurs is paying far more than £14.95 , watching on TV is not the same as being there for a start you have to put up with the likes of G Neville etc but £14.95 to watch a game as opposed to £50 upwards for a ticket plus travel costs , is it so bad. And for many fans who do not use illegal streams for non UK televised games they now get the chance to see Spurs games that they would have missed, if they wish to part with £14.95. Of course the longer this goes on clubs will also have to refund or credit ST holders who have paid towards this seasons ST, biggest losers in all this are club members who have paid out the full fee and this season looks like they get nothing.
Going through the games looks like 31st October home against Brighton and 7th November away against W Brom are the most likely candidates for the £14.95 charge , most other the games up to Xmas are against the likes of Woolwich , Man city , Chelsea etc which will probably be picked for normal coverage plus the need to sign up with Amazon again to get a couple of games.
Last edited:
Maxtremist
Well-Known Member
- Jun 11, 2014
- 1,531
- 3,300
It feels like a very very bad headline.
Question for people... if they didn't do this and October just went back to the normal broadcasting schedule where the 3pm games aren't shown and not every game is shown on TV, would people prefer that?
Personally, I think £15 a game is too high and stupid. BUT... this is for games that otherwise wouldn't be on TV. So it's a step in the right direction for me.
I imagine them just showing every game on TV was costing them too much broadcasting wise and all that so they couldn't keep that up.
Question for people... if they didn't do this and October just went back to the normal broadcasting schedule where the 3pm games aren't shown and not every game is shown on TV, would people prefer that?
Personally, I think £15 a game is too high and stupid. BUT... this is for games that otherwise wouldn't be on TV. So it's a step in the right direction for me.
I imagine them just showing every game on TV was costing them too much broadcasting wise and all that so they couldn't keep that up.
Maxtremist
Well-Known Member
- Jun 11, 2014
- 1,531
- 3,300
I'd imagine Broadcasting costs etc... would have been too much to consistently keep on doing this (broadcasting costs differently to just filming it for other networks and highlights packages).
So it had to end at some point.
Would also imagine this now puts pressure on the government to let fans in as it was the government who were pressuring the prem to put games on TV in the first place.
Tucker
Shitehawk
- Jul 15, 2013
- 31,468
- 147,353
Not sure I understand this? The premier league already broadcasts all of its content live, it’s just not available in the U.K. because of an archaic law. Surely Sky and BT are loving all the extra content they are able to put out?
Maxtremist
Well-Known Member
- Jun 11, 2014
- 1,531
- 3,300
To some extent they're enjoying it cause its more audiences numbers where they normally wouldn't, but it literally does cost Sky and BT to actually broadcast live. Least that's what I'm aware of from studying media. Not to mention paying for the pundits and the full coverage etc...
Other broadcasters have different level of pundits/their own in house team doing stuff. When Sky or BT are they, it costs to have your Jenas' or Souness' and what not there as well for every game for longer hours.
Shadydan
Well-Known Member
- Jul 7, 2012
- 38,247
- 104,143
Looks like the clubs are the one's responsible for the pay hike, not the broadcasters, that's how I'm reading it.
Tucker
Shitehawk
- Jul 15, 2013
- 31,468
- 147,353
I suppose the solution is to make use of pundits already in place as BT have been doing for the Saturday 3pm kick offs where they’ve used the people on their version of Soccer Saturday, or just to use the commentator/ co commentator for the most basic of analysis. I get that there are other production costs, but it’s not like they aren’t already charging the consumer a fair whack for their product.
Tucker
Shitehawk
- Jul 15, 2013
- 31,468
- 147,353
Yeah, I imagine they have been pushing for this. I genuinely hope it doesn’t succeed financially, or this could be a future model they pursue.
Maxtremist
Well-Known Member
- Jun 11, 2014
- 1,531
- 3,300
Oh for sure there are other ways of doing it and most of us can agree that the pundits are outdated 9 times out of 10... but reality of the situation is that the PL clubs seemingly want some more money coming in and if they're not gonna be able to get fans back in, this is their next option.
SirHarryHotspur
Well-Known Member
- Aug 9, 2017
- 5,189
- 7,760
If you want to watch a live Championship game on ifollow it costs £10 per match that's for watching clubs like Derby, Bournemouth etc , the PL is hardly likely to be below that figure for clubs that have to pay players enormous amounts of money in wages . If anybody wants free football virtually every Spurs Women's game is available live on The FA Player completely free..
Similar threads
