[Albion] £14.95 to watch Albion

[drew]

Yep I do especially as we’ve paid £11m for two players we won’t see for a year. A fraction of that would make up the amount were likely to make from PPV.

I'm not sure it's fair to pick out just those transfers. If you look at the whole window, I think our net spend is only £3m.

 

[Weststander]

If you go with Virgin you can get both Sky and BT football matches, more than enough for most.

That’s what I do.

 

[BadFish]

I'm guessing you are or already have made your stand by not having a season ticket or going to games. That is of course your choice. Do you apply the same measures against people in other walks of life. For example, I'm guessing you don't go to watch the latest blockbuster movie because of the obscene salary the leading actors earn. Or maybe you don't buy/download (or subscribe to a music service) because of the obscene amounts the top artists earn?

Not a fair comparison. Apples and oranges. The salaries of movie stars and musicians are not putting clubs that are central to many communities in debt.

Sent from my Redmi Note 7 using Tapatalk

 

[dazzer6666]

If you go with Virgin you can get both Sky and BT football matches, more than enough for most.

BT also available through Sky....

 

[dazzer6666]

So tomorrow Barber says unfortunately as much as the league would like, it's not sustainable to go lower than £14.95, and that fans who can't afford their ST money to be kept as a credit can apply for a refund.

That will be that then won't it? Job done.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Almost certainly........simple really....reiterating that the 14.95 is for games that wouldn’t have been available to view otherwise (other than illegally).

 

[Barham's tash]

I'm not sure it's fair to pick out just those transfers. If you look at the whole window, I think our net spend is only £3m.

Possibly if you're including banking the money from Fulham for AK otherwise not. The point remains valid to me but I can see how it maybe doesn't to others

 

[drew]

Not a fair comparison. Apples and oranges. The salaries of movie stars and musicians are not putting clubs that are central to many communities in debt.

Sent from my Redmi Note 7 using Tapatalk

The impression I got was that the Beach Hut was just making the usual envy noises about 'obscene' wages. No reference to the effect on the balance books just the that no one is worth the pay they get. I might be wrong.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Almost certainly........simple really....reiterating that the 14.95 is for games that wouldn’t have been available to view otherwise (other than illegally).

Really? I never knew that. I'm now regretting I set fire to my Sky dish and burned my season ticket.

Do you think if I ask Paul nicely they'd print me a new one?

 

[Easy 10]

So many have made the point on my behalf here now its barely worth revisiting. But I took no d/d payment holiday, cracked on with the payments from March - September, have already paid out of my bank account to go to BHA v WBA - and I can't go. Another game gone. They currently have my money for this game, which is ok for now I guess. But asking me to cough up another £15 to see it live on TV is a little bit of a liberty, even if "the refund is in the post" - who knows when. I know I don't HAVE to buy the game, and being honest, I haven't decided yet. I can affford it, but IF I do, it'll only be if I can split it with a mate, my goodwill only extends so far.

But having said that, we probably won't be allowed to share households by then anyway. So I'll end up looking for a moody stream, and closing endless tabs offering me asian sluts in Chichester who are up with it with middle aged men.

Football in 2020 eh.

 

[Easy 10]

Not a fair comparison. Apples and oranges. The salaries of movie stars and musicians are not putting clubs that are central to many communities in debt.

Sent from my Redmi Note 7 using Tapatalk

Its still relevant though. If a movie or album generates $800m worldwide, thanks primarily to the actor/artist, then where should that profit go ? It stands to reason that a humungous chunk of it goes to the very person(s) who deliver that box office success, because without them, there's no show.

It might be unpalletable, but the EPL is selling a product to the masses, and they are getting paid BILLIONS for it. More should filter down the leagues, that goes without saying. But basic economics dictate that the stars of the product at the top will hoover up a sizeable chunk. Its obscene the levels its got to now, but as glib as it sounds, it is what it is. A multi-billion pound industry will see the "stars" rewarded accordingly.

 

[drew]

So many have made the point on my behalf here now its barely worth revisiting. But I took no d/d payment holiday, cracked on with the payments from March - September, have already paid out of my bank account to go to BHA v WBA - and I can't go. Another game gone. They currently have my money for this game, which is ok for now I guess. But asking me to cough up another £15 to see it live on TV is a little bit of a liberty, even if "the refund is in the post" - who knows when. I know I don't HAVE to buy the game, and being honest, I haven't decided yet. I can affford it, but IF I do, it'll only be if I can split it with a mate, my goodwill only extends so far.

But having said that, we probably won't be allowed to share households by then anyway. So I'll end up looking for a moody stream, and closing endless tabs offering me asian sluts in Chichester who are up with it with middle aged men.

Football in 2020 eh.

But the point made by me, Bozza and loads of others is that you aren't being asked to pay twice for the WBA game. The club do not have your money for this particular game. If, like me, you have made 6 payments, you have credit for the next 9 home games that we are allowed to attend. The club were hoping for fans to get to the game but this isn't the case. So, if you pay £14.95 for the WBA game, you will still have the same credit for your season ticket. It's not like you're going to be charged £14.95 (by the broadcaster by the way) and then the club are also deducting from the season ticket payments the equivent of 1/19th of the annual cost.

Really don't understand why some can't get their head around this concept.

ST payments and PPV are two separate things. Perhaps if it's accepted that we aren't going to get back in the ground this side of xmas then the club could refund what people have paid then it might be easier for some to understand!!! Of course if we get the go ahead to go back to the Amex, you'll then need to pay for your season ticket again!!

 

[BadFish]

Its still relevant though. If a movie or album generates $800m worldwide, thanks primarily to the actor/artist, then where should that profit go ? It stands to reason that a humungous chunk of it goes to the very person(s) who deliver that box office success, because without them, there's no show.

It might be unpalletable, but the EPL is selling a product to the masses, and they are getting paid BILLIONS for it. More should filter down the leagues, that goes without saying. But basic economics dictate that the stars of the product at the top will hoover up a sizeable chunk. Its obscene the levels its got to now, but as glib as it sounds, it is what it is. A multi-billion pound industry will see the "stars" rewarded accordingly.

Ah i get you, totally agree.

The problem is that it appears to not be a chuck of the money generated that is being used to pay players. Clubs are actually over spending and going into debt in order to pay the over inflated sums demanded as the going rate increases because of the mega rich at the top of the game.

I have no problem with the playing stars hoovering up the lion's share of the cash generated, just as i have no problem with musicians and film stars doing the same. where else should it go? My problem is that paying people such huge sums at the top means that smaller clubs are forced to over extend to pay the going rate further down the pyramid. Hence the need for parachute payments when clubs leave the Premier League. The fact that these are necessary says everything about the imbalance in football. I seem to remember it being accepted understanding that it was nigh on impossible to battle for promotion to the premier league without going into serious debt or having a very rich owner.

Even when clubs are in the premier league they are still spending millions each season over and above the 100 million from TV rights just to stay in the division. This to me is madness. I cannot see how this is sustainable or defendable.

Now when things have gone to shit the premier league are coming cap in hand to the 'customer' for more cash to pay the overinflated wages that got us here in the first place.

 

[drew]

Its still relevant though. If a movie or album generates $800m worldwide, thanks primarily to the actor/artist, then where should that profit go ? It stands to reason that a humungous chunk of it goes to the very person(s) who deliver that box office success, because without them, there's no show.

It might be unpalletable, but the EPL is selling a product to the masses, and they are getting paid BILLIONS for it. More should filter down the leagues, that goes without saying. But basic economics dictate that the stars of the product at the top will hoover up a sizeable chunk. Its obscene the levels its got to now, but as glib as it sounds, it is what it is. A multi-billion pound industry will see the "stars" rewarded accordingly.

Some common ground!

Whilst we may look on in envy at what the players earn, the money should go to them and not the shareholders/agents etc. If they don't perform, market forces suggest their next contract won't be so good, just like if a film star flops at the box office they can't command high fees.

And at the end of the day, the money is there to pay them because people subscribe to the services.

 

[drew]

Ah i get you, totally agree.

The problem is that it appears to not be a chuck of the money generated that is being used to pay players. Clubs are actually over spending and going into debt in order to pay the over inflated sums demanded as the going rate increases because of the mega rich at the top of the game.

I have no problem with the playing stars hoovering up the lion's share of the cash generated, just as i have no problem with musicians and film stars doing the same. where else should it go? My problem is that paying people such huge sums at the top means that smaller clubs are forced to over extend to pay the going rate further down the pyramid. Hence the need for parachute payments when clubs leave the Premier League. The fact that these are necessary says everything about the imbalance in football. I seem to remember it being accepted understanding that it was nigh on impossible to battle for promotion to the premier league without going into serious debt or having a very rich owner.

Even when clubs are in the premier league they are still spending millions each season over and above the 100 million from TV rights just to stay in the division. This to me is madness. I cannot see how this is sustainable or defendable.

Now when things have gone to shit the premier league are coming cap in hand to the 'customer' for more cash to pay the overinflated wages that got us here in the first place.

Which is why there should be better FFP regulations in place. Also, EPL and EFL should dovetail with punishments so that if you breach FFP rules the penalty applies whether you get promoted or relegated from one to other.

 

[Easy 10]

But the point made by me, Bozza and loads of others is that you aren't being asked to pay twice for the WBA game. The club do not have your money for this particular game. If, like me, you have made 6 payments, you have credit for the next 9 home games that we are allowed to attend. The club were hoping for fans to get to the game but this isn't the case. So, if you pay £14.95 for the WBA game, you will still have the same credit for your season ticket. It's not like you're going to be charged £14.95 (by the broadcaster by the way) and then the club are also deducting from the season ticket payments the equivent of 1/19th of the annual cost.

Really don't understand why some can't get their head around this concept.

ST payments and PPV are two separate things. Perhaps if it's accepted that we aren't going to get back in the ground this side of xmas then the club could refund what people have paid then it might be easier for some to understand!!! Of course if we get the go ahead to go back to the Amex, you'll then need to pay for your season ticket again!!

I'm starting to think I'm being thick about something here.

Having continued all d/d payments this year, I'm "in credit" for the next 9 games at the Amex, but will in all likelihood be unable to attend them - I've paid, but I will have to wait to get a refund at some undefined point in the future. In the meantime, if I want to watch the game(s) that I've paid to go and see, that aren't being covered by Sky or whoever, then I'd have to cough up another £15 each time.

Unless I've arsed this up completely, and that is indeed the case, then I'm sorry but thats not on.

If I paid £45 for tickets to the cinema in advance and it unfortunately burns down the next day, I don't want a "credit" for when it reopens, whenever that may be. And if that cinema then asked me to pay a further £15 to watch it at home instead as an alternative, with a refund "tba", then frankly my reaction would not get through the swear filter on here.

 

[Easy 10]

Ah i get you, totally agree.

The problem is that it appears to not be a chuck of the money generated that is being used to pay players. Clubs are actually over spending and going into debt in order to pay the over inflated sums demanded as the going rate increases because of the mega rich at the top of the game.

I have no problem with the playing stars hoovering up the lion's share of the cash generated, just as i have no problem with musicians and film stars doing the same. where else should it go? My problem is that paying people such huge sums at the top means that smaller clubs are forced to over extend to pay the going rate further down the pyramid. Hence the need for parachute payments when clubs leave the Premier League. The fact that these are necessary says everything about the imbalance in football. I seem to remember it being accepted understanding that it was nigh on impossible to battle for promotion to the premier league without going into serious debt or having a very rich owner.

Even when clubs are in the premier league they are still spending millions each season over and above the 100 million from TV rights just to stay in the division. This to me is madness. I cannot see how this is sustainable or defendable.

Now when things have gone to shit the premier league are coming cap in hand to the 'customer' for more cash to pay the overinflated wages that got us here in the first place.

Football finances are utter madness, I completely agree. But contrary to what you say, none of the smaller clubs are FORCED to over-extend. Bury bought a promotion they couldn't afford, and went bust as a direct result - thats inept management from the boardroom. They bought in players they patently could not afford before and after they went up, put them on ridiculous long term contracts, and climbed over better run clubs in L2 to get into L1. The revenues between L2 and L1 are clearly not the epic stretch that see Championship clubs chasing the EPL dragon, yet the owner still bankrupted them to do it. Madness. Bonkers.

Nobody wants to see clubs go to the wall, but I think football has been LONG overdue the preverbrial complete factory reset, and it looks like Covid will provide it, one way or the other.

 

[BadFish]

Football finances are utter madness, I completely agree. But contrary to what you say, none of the smaller clubs are FORCED to over-extend. Bury bought a promotion they couldn't afford, and went bust as a direct result - thats inept management from the boardroom. They bought players they patently could not afford, put them on ridiculous long term contracts, and climbed over better run clubs in L2 to get into L1. The revenues between L2 and L1 are clearly not the epic stretch that see Championship clubs chasing the EPL dragon, yet the owner still bankrupted them to do it. Madness. Bonkers.

Nobody wants to see clubs go to the wall, but I think football has been LONG overdue the preverbrial complete factory reset, and it looks like Covid will provide it, one way or the other.

Yes perhaps forced isn't the right word but enough pressure is there to overspend. As soon as any kind of ambition shown there must be some kind of over spend or gamble. We are currently seen as a bit of a beacon of developing slowly and within our means, but we are still over spending by 10 or 20 million pounds a season. given the vast riches from TV money this is insane.

Anyway i think we broadly agree on the need for a factory reset. The other option seems to be things getting more insane. There will be a point where I jump off and get my football fix elsewhere. this will be done with a heavy heart but in all honesty even at the moment i have to look the other way in order to enjoy the premier league. Issue like this tend to bring it back into focus for me, it can't go on.

 

[Easy 10]

I'll add here that my company placed a director at Bury FC in 2018 for a fairly sizeable fee, that of course they subsequently could not afford. It ended up getting paid in instalments over 6 months. And they DID pay it up, in fairness.

But it just goes to show the abject BUFFOONERY that goes on in some of these lower league boardrooms. Not that we need reminding.

 

[Easy 10]

Yes perhaps forced isn't the right word but enough pressure is there to overspend. As soon as any kind of ambition shown there must be some kind of over spend or gamble. We are currently seen as a bit of a beacon of developing slowly and within our means, but we are still over spending by 10 or 20 million pounds a season. given the vast riches from TV money this is insane.

Anyway i think we broadly agree on the need for a factory reset. The other option seems to be things getting more insane. There will be a point where I jump off and get my football fix elsewhere. this will be done with a heavy heart but in all honesty even at the moment i have to look the other way in order to enjoy the premier league. Issue like this tend to bring it back into focus for me, it can't go on.

Yeah, I can't help but agree chap. The fact that we're now in the PL and still making huge losses, despite it being our 4th season and the fact that you get £100m for finishing bottom. Somethings very, very wrong with this picture.

 

[dazzer6666]

Yes perhaps forced isn't the right word but enough pressure is there to overspend. As soon as any kind of ambition shown there must be some kind of over spend or gamble. We are currently seen as a bit of a beacon of developing slowly and within our means, but we are still over spending by 10 or 20 million pounds a season. given the vast riches from TV money this is insane.

Anyway i think we broadly agree on the need for a factory reset. The other option seems to be things getting more insane. There will be a point where I jump off and get my football fix elsewhere. this will be done with a heavy heart but in all honesty even at the moment i have to look the other way in order to enjoy the premier league. Issue like this tend to bring it back into focus for me, it can't go on.

.....and trying to be that beacon leads to a % of our fan base publicly wailing about how the club’s recruitment policy is ‘shocking’ and ‘taking us down’ because we won’t spunk 30m (and probably North of 70k a week) on a striker