Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

Why the rising price of TV football is bad for all of us







Rugrat

Rugrat

Well-known member
Mar 13, 2011
10,215
Seaford
Good article. I can't see an end to it any time soon but totally subscribe to the growing gulf between the haves and have nots. Anyone not in the Prem is going to find things increasingly tough I think and unless improved distribution of TV money can be agreed (highly unlikely) then I'd expect a pretty massive restructuring before too long
 






Arthur

Arthur

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2003
8,550
Buxted Harbour
Vegas Seagull said:
Bad article, BT have promised that the cost of Champions League games will be lower than Sky charge
Click to expand...

How can they claim that based on their subscription model? If you like sport and you can afford it Sky Sport is absolutely fantastic. It doesn't matter what time of year, what day of the week there is always some live sport to watch of an evening. BT have got a massive long way to go catch up to even getting close to what Sky offer which I can't see them doing in the next 18 months. Therefore comparing the cost of the two will be like comparing apples to oranges.
 




Wozza

Wozza

Shite Supporter
Jul 6, 2003
23,613
Online
Vast majority want/pay for football and consider other sports a bonus.

(Obvious exceptions around occasional events such as Ashes and Ryder Cup)
 


Arthur

Arthur

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2003
8,550
Buxted Harbour
Wozza said:
Vast majority want/pay for football and consider other sports a bonus.

(Obvious exceptions around occasional events such as Ashes and Ryder Cup)
Click to expand...

Whilst I don't disagree with you on the whole I find myself watching an awful lot of sport simply because there is feck all else on telly (I have everything apart from the movies and still can't find anything to watch!). Last night for example I flicked between the darts, greyhounds and 8 ball pool. The cricket throughout the summer is great and the golf every weekend is brilliant (European Tour during the day and US PGA in the evening). So yes I do primarily subscribe for the football but if Sky were to lose it I would still probably keep my subscription.
 


father_and_son

father_and_son

Well-known member
Jan 23, 2012
4,646
Under the Police Box
The last two paragraphs are the most interesting... at the point at which the pay-TV model doesn't need football to grow, the TV value of football will crash and PL (and FL) and the other bodies governing the game will start to look pretty stupid that they sold all ours souls for short term gain.
 




El Presidente

El Presidente

The ONLY Gay in Brighton
Helpful Moderator
Jul 5, 2003
39,701
Pattknull med Haksprut
father_and_son said:
The last two paragraphs are the most interesting... at the point at which the pay-TV model doesn't need football to grow, the TV value of football will crash and PL (and FL) and the other bodies governing the game will start to look pretty stupid that they sold all ours souls for short term gain.
Click to expand...

I'm not convinced.

There is always an alternative to pay TV, which is to not pay for it, and listen to matches on the radio. This is why there is such hostility towards the BBC from the Murdoch empire, who see the Beeb as a restrictor to its ability to squeeze cash from consumers. BSkyB have an average spend per subscriber of £539 a year, which is expensive compared to the licence fee of £145.50.
 


Easy 10

Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
61,747
Location Location
Vegas Seagull said:
Bad article, BT have promised that the cost of Champions League games will be lower than Sky charge
Click to expand...

Perhaps so, but if you want to watch Champions League AND Premier / Football League, you would have to take out 2 separate subscriptions - and that CERTAINLY won't work out cheaper. Most people will have to make a choice between the two.

Personally I'd stick with my Sky subscription for the Football League and Premier League stuff. If theres a Champions League game I particularly want to see, I'll go down the pub.
 


El Presidente

El Presidente

The ONLY Gay in Brighton
Helpful Moderator
Jul 5, 2003
39,701
Pattknull med Haksprut
Arthur said:
How can they claim that based on their subscription model? If you like sport and you can afford it Sky Sport is absolutely fantastic. It doesn't matter what time of year, what day of the week there is always some live sport to watch of an evening. BT have got a massive long way to go catch up to even getting close to what Sky offer which I can't see them doing in the next 18 months. Therefore comparing the cost of the two will be like comparing apples to oranges.
Click to expand...

Agreed, if you get £539 of enjoyment from Sky, which as sports fans, many viewers do, then it makes sense to go for it.
 




El Presidente

El Presidente

The ONLY Gay in Brighton
Helpful Moderator
Jul 5, 2003
39,701
Pattknull med Haksprut
Easy 10 said:
Perhaps so, but if you want to watch Champions League AND Premier / Football League, you would have to take out 2 separate subscriptions - and that CERTAINLY won't work out cheaper. Most people will have to make a choice between the two.

Personally I'd stick with my Sky subscription for the Football League and Premier League stuff. If theres a Champions League game I particularly want to see, I'll go down the pub.
Click to expand...

What BT are trying is to test the market. There are plenty of people who don't want to shell out £40-50 a month for Sky Sports, but may be prepared to pay £12 a month (which is BT's current subscriber price).

Personally if it involves Michael Owen, who makes Alan Shearer look like the most charismatic person on TV, I'm out of it.
 


D

Deleted member 22389

Guest
Changing subject, it would be great if you could get Pay Per Match for Brighton away matches only. Think that would be an excellent idea for people who can't go.
 


Pretty pink fairy

Pretty pink fairy

Banned
Jan 30, 2008
31,981
Arthur said:
Whilst I don't disagree with you on the whole I find myself watching an awful lot of sport simply because there is feck all else on telly (I have everything apart from the movies and still can't find anything to watch!). Last night for example I flicked between the darts, greyhounds and 8 ball pool. The cricket throughout the summer is great and the golf every weekend is brilliant (European Tour during the day and US PGA in the evening). So yes I do primarily subscribe for the football but if Sky were to lose it I would still probably keep my subscription.
Click to expand...
Arthur you need an out door hobby ???
regards
DR
 






G

gordonchas

New member
Jul 1, 2012
230
It would have been a better article if the writer understood what a monopoly and market competition actually are. Hardly surprising that he doesn't seeing as he's writing for the New Statesman.

In the case of English football the Premier League holds a monopoly on the product, the rights of which they can then licence to the highest bidder. In the case of the Champions League, UEFA hold the monopoly.

Once a broadcaster has a licence, they are then the ones in a monopolistic position.

The only way there can be competition in the market, and to the benefit of the consumer, is if the rights-holder is unable to offer exclusivity on live games.
 








Easy 10

Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
61,747
Location Location
El Presidente said:
What BT are trying is to test the market. There are plenty of people who don't want to shell out £40-50 a month for Sky Sports, but may be prepared to pay £12 a month (which is BT's current subscriber price).

Personally if it involves Michael Owen, who makes Alan Shearer look like the most charismatic person on TV, I'm out of it.
Click to expand...

True, but for me its not just the soccerball. Ryder Cup, the Ashes and the NFL are also big draws for me, so as long as Sky hold those, its still the platform I'll stick with. If in time BT starts acquiring the rights to some of those then I might have a decision to make, but not until.

It'll be interesting to see what price BT come up with to tempt people in though. £897m over three years is not a crippling amount of money to a company that made a profit of nearly £2.5 BILLION in 2012. They're that big, so they're not having to try to recoup this outlay any time soon. So they're in a position to offer eye-opening, bargain basement subscription costs to hook consumers onto their platform for the long term.
 


Mackenzie

Mackenzie

Old Brightonian
Nov 7, 2003
33,532
East Wales
People might be forced to actually get of their arses and support their local teams......oh no!!!!!!
 


You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here