Author Topic: EPL  (Read 7671 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline manc_don

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 17517
  • Rating: 78
  • Not a Jafa
EPL
« on: February 10, 2015, 06:34:35 PM »
Sky and BT have agreed to pay £5.1 BILLION for tv rights to show the EPL for three season as of 2016/2017 season.  That's absolutely mental!?!

Also, says it all that they premier league are only investing £57 million into grass roots football.  No wonder it's on the decline in England.

Sky got 5/7 packages.



Offline Kowalski

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 14633
  • Rating: -14
Re: EPL
« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2015, 08:31:27 PM »
Fucking horrendous amount of money. Nearly £11m a game!!! WTF.

Sky have really chucked some money about here, presumably on the back of losing the Chumps League highlights.

Offline bearsdenred

  • Star Striker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1077
  • Rating: 12
Re: EPL
« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2015, 09:12:26 PM »
Defo going to cancel our subscription  :thumbsup:

Offline Superstar Tradesman

  • Club Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 6637
  • Rating: 15
Re: EPL
« Reply #3 on: February 11, 2015, 01:14:43 AM »
Just goes to show how much they are making.

Offline manc_don

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 17517
  • Rating: 78
  • Not a Jafa
Re: EPL
« Reply #4 on: February 11, 2015, 09:02:44 AM »
Just goes to show how much they are making.

Indeed! Absolutely disgusting amounts.  Surely to fuck they will now start reducing ticket prices?!?  It's the only way to even make it remotely understandable.  Though I doubt anything of the sort will happen.

Offline Tyrant

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 9609
  • Rating: 118
Re: EPL
« Reply #5 on: February 11, 2015, 09:22:33 AM »
I'll be cancelling mine after getting 8 months half price. Looks like I timed that well.  ;D

Offline BobbyBiscuit

  • Manager
  • ******
  • Posts: 11624
  • Rating: 51
Re: EPL
« Reply #6 on: February 11, 2015, 10:46:32 PM »
Just goes to show how much they are making.

Not even sure that's the case.  I think it was more a case of they couldn't, absolutely could not, afford to not get the PL after losing the CL. Supposedly their average for the Sunday 4pm game is 2m viewers. They have 10m subscribers, at £30 a month.... something doesn't quite add up even chucking in advertising revenue there's still a bit to go.

The thing that gets me - and don't get me wrong, I like watching the EPL as I do with most football - is that at no point in its recent history has the English top flight signed the greatest player in the world at that moment.  It could be argued that they have created them - C Ronaldo being an example - but the very top players at the top of their game have not moved there.  Zidane - Italy then Spain. Messi - Spain. Rivaldo, Figo, Raul, Iniesta, Xavi - Spain. Maldini, Zanetti, Baggio - Italy.

Look at Gullit and Vialli... signed for English sides when their careers were on their last legs and both knew they could stroll it in England despite the "speed" of the game.

That doesn't mean that the PL is not a good league etc, but it should surely click to everyone down there that they are paying way over the odds for everything - transfer fees, wages, TV rights.  When Sky have paid this amount of money, they're going to hype their (apologies) "product" to the ends of the earth. 

It's still just a game of football, no matter what they say or pay.
It's not about escaping. It's about getting out with a bit of dignity.
If you're in it, don't fucking moan about it, make it yours and leave a mark

Offline Superstar Tradesman

  • Club Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 6637
  • Rating: 15
Re: EPL
« Reply #7 on: February 12, 2015, 02:10:32 AM »
Not even sure that's the case.  I think it was more a case of they couldn't, absolutely could not, afford to not get the PL after losing the CL. Supposedly their average for the Sunday 4pm game is 2m viewers. They have 10m subscribers, at £30 a month.... something doesn't quite add up even chucking in advertising revenue there's still a bit to go.

Of those 2m viewers you'll probably find a few million more subscribers sitting round their mate's house watching the same tv, and a few million more down the pub nursing a hangover over a full english.  10m adds up if that's the case.

Great points made on the rest of your post btw.

Offline Tyrant

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 9609
  • Rating: 118
Re: EPL
« Reply #8 on: February 12, 2015, 08:27:23 AM »
That doesn't mean that the PL is not a good league etc, but it should surely click to everyone down there that they are paying way over the odds for everything - transfer fees, wages, TV rights.  When Sky have paid this amount of money, they're going to hype their (apologies) "product" to the ends of the earth. 

It's still just a game of football, no matter what they say or pay.


Agree completely.

I also have enjoyed watching the EPL for many years but the numbers these days are just obscene. Add to that the "product" this season has been the poorest it's been in a long fucking time. Even the "good" teams have been brutal to watch. Man City have been shite. Chelsea have been parking the bus despite having a team brimming with quality attacking players. Van Gaal is still finding his feet at Man Utd (and Big Sam's destroying him with mind games ffs sake!) and Arsenal have been dull for years too. It's fucking bad news when Liverpool of all teams are playing hands down the best football (as a spectacle) in the league.

Mourinho's "anti-football" is boring to watch but I can't be overly critical of it as it seems to be effective. He won the CL League with Inter playing the same way. As Benitez did with Liverpool arguably.

Offline Graeme_S

  • Bench Warmer
  • ***
  • Posts: 220
  • Rating: 14
Re: EPL
« Reply #9 on: February 12, 2015, 09:26:07 AM »
It's more than £30 a month tho, is it not?
Sports is around £25 a month but you need a basic package first to add the sports to.

They admit the sports itself is a loss maker, but it's used to sell the complete Sky brand.
Itll be the minority that take a bare minimum package, with just sports.
HD + entertainment channels plus broadband will supplement a fair amount of sports subscriber's overall fees.

BT Sport probably has a fair bit to do with Sky's panic. I think over the piece, they've had a lot of the better games this season
Sky couldn't afford to lose more coverage to them.
and I also much prefer their build up and overall experience on there to Sky. Which is a damning indictment on Sky when you consider Both Robbie Savage and Michael Owen are on BT! Carragher & Neville on MNF are the exception.
The Football meets Top Gear abomination that is Saturday night football with Jamie Redknapp's never ending stream of cliched fucking nonsense has put me off watching any of those late games.
As much as Mourinho can be a prick, I'm loving his constant calling out of JR.



Offline Tyrant

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 9609
  • Rating: 118
Re: EPL
« Reply #10 on: February 12, 2015, 10:50:21 AM »
I have my broadband, phone line, phone calls and TV all through Sky. I'd be lying if I said I remember the individual costs but my monthly cost at the moment is £70-£80 and that's with £12-£15 off my Sports. I don't have the movie channels. Not sure how much that saves. I think £20-£30 of that is for the phone line, phone calls and fibre optic so that's around £50 just for the TV! Once my contract is up it's all getting binned. Although I do like the service. I watch the Sport a lot and I love being able to download TV shows directly via the box. It's easy and they don't have adverts. The internet is fast and I've never had issues with it. It's just that Sky is really not a likeable company.

Anyone use Virgin? That Branson guy is a lot less offensive on the surface at least.

Offline bearsdenred

  • Star Striker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1077
  • Rating: 12
Re: EPL
« Reply #11 on: February 12, 2015, 11:21:36 AM »
I have my broadband, phone line, phone calls and TV all through Sky. I'd be lying if I said I remember the individual costs but my monthly cost at the moment is £70-£80 and that's with £12-£15 off my Sports. I don't have the movie channels. Not sure how much that saves. I think £20-£30 of that is for the phone line, phone calls and fibre optic so that's around £50 just for the TV! Once my contract is up it's all getting binned. Although I do like the service. I watch the Sport a lot and I love being able to download TV shows directly via the box. It's easy and they don't have adverts. The internet is fast and I've never had issues with it. It's just that Sky is really not a likeable company.

Anyone use Virgin? That Branson guy is a lot less offensive on the surface at least.

if you can get virgin i would defo give them thumbs up for the broadband. we are now using the 150mb service, think its the max currently but they do give free upgrades whenever they are doing that. we have reset the system(router) about 10 times in over 9 years. so defo say go for the BB there we don't use the TV deal tho.

We went and got the full package, sister watches her stuff, mum dad use the drama channels and sports. i use sky one, Atlantic for game thrones, 24, etc.. but will be ditching the sky sports.

If sky actually gave Scottish football a better stake (if they can spend 5 billion on the epl to pay foreigners to play in it) in our game as well maybe we might get other teams richer to spend and increase competition.

Offline Andrew

  • Star Striker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1665
  • Rating: 10
Re: EPL
« Reply #12 on: February 12, 2015, 11:31:54 AM »
Not even sure that's the case.  I think it was more a case of they couldn't, absolutely could not, afford to not get the PL after losing the CL. Supposedly their average for the Sunday 4pm game is 2m viewers. They have 10m subscribers, at £30 a month.... something doesn't quite add up even chucking in advertising revenue there's still a bit to go.

Do pubs not have to pay thousands a month, that can vary depending in the size, to be able to have sky sports? I always that was there main income with home subscribers just being a bonus?

Offline Graeme_S

  • Bench Warmer
  • ***
  • Posts: 220
  • Rating: 14
Re: EPL
« Reply #13 on: February 12, 2015, 12:16:00 PM »
Anyone use Virgin? That Branson guy is a lot less offensive on the surface at least.

I use Virgin. Got TV & Broadband. As some else said their broadband is top notch. Been upgraded twice for free and it's faster than anything else I've used.
I've got full TV bundle which includes BT not as an added billable extra. Although I only got this when threatening to move to Sky and they upgraded me for cheap.
However my monthly cost has increased by a few quid at least 4 or 5 times. The letter they send usually blames this on Sky charging more for their channels.
They have Netflix as a channel, so if you subscribe it makes it a lot easier to watch on your telly which is handy.
Oh, and you can't get sky Atlantic which is a bit annoying.

Offline manc_don

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 17517
  • Rating: 78
  • Not a Jafa
Re: EPL
« Reply #14 on: February 13, 2015, 09:40:39 AM »
Not even sure that's the case.  I think it was more a case of they couldn't, absolutely could not, afford to not get the PL after losing the CL. Supposedly their average for the Sunday 4pm game is 2m viewers. They have 10m subscribers, at £30 a month.... something doesn't quite add up even chucking in advertising revenue there's still a bit to go.

The thing that gets me - and don't get me wrong, I like watching the EPL as I do with most football - is that at no point in its recent history has the English top flight signed the greatest player in the world at that moment.  It could be argued that they have created them - C Ronaldo being an example - but the very top players at the top of their game have not moved there.  Zidane - Italy then Spain. Messi - Spain. Rivaldo, Figo, Raul, Iniesta, Xavi - Spain. Maldini, Zanetti, Baggio - Italy.

Look at Gullit and Vialli... signed for English sides when their careers were on their last legs and both knew they could stroll it in England despite the "speed" of the game.

That doesn't mean that the PL is not a good league etc, but it should surely click to everyone down there that they are paying way over the odds for everything - transfer fees, wages, TV rights.  When Sky have paid this amount of money, they're going to hype their (apologies) "product" to the ends of the earth. 

It's still just a game of football, no matter what they say or pay.

I see this morning that the Spanish La Liga president is worried about losing the stars to the EPL in the very near future due to the financial muscle the teams will have over the Spanish.  I think you make a very good point and something i've spoken to a few people about.  Truly world class players very rarely go to or stay in the EPL. I mean, most recently you can look at Suarez (who I love to hate), arguably a world class striker and manufactured his move away to Spain.  I'd probably only put, Aguero, Silva, Sanchez, De Gea and possibly Yaya Toure in the world class bracket.  And yet none of them would compare to those who graced the list you made.  How Sky / BT can justify paying so much is beyond me, because the product is not always going to be like your Liverpool - Spurs game which they so love to quote.   

Will seriously consider dropping my SS package, primarily because I get BT sport free anyway and their Scottish football coverage and even EPL coverage is vastly superior to the "theatre" of SS.

Annoyingly, I can't get Virgin in my area.

Offline Kowalski

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 14633
  • Rating: -14
Re: EPL
« Reply #15 on: February 13, 2015, 09:59:43 AM »
Speaking of La Liga, I think the UK rights are up at the end of this season, so it'll be interesting to see if BT wrench it away from Sky.

I wonder if BT came out of the EPL deal better than Sky.  Clearly they don't have the lion's share of the matches, but they have forced Sky to pay a helluva lot of money which can only be paid for by cost cutting and an increase in subscription prices.

I also prefer BT's coverage, particularly for Scottish football.

Offline bearsdenred

  • Star Striker
  • ****
  • Posts: 1077
  • Rating: 12
Re: EPL
« Reply #16 on: February 13, 2015, 10:30:22 AM »
Speaking of La Liga, I think the UK rights are up at the end of this season, so it'll be interesting to see if BT wrench it away from Sky.

I wonder if BT came out of the EPL deal better than Sky.  Clearly they don't have the lion's share of the matches, but they have forced Sky to pay a helluva lot of money which can only be paid for by cost cutting and an increase in subscription prices.

I also prefer BT's coverage, particularly for Scottish football.

just wish we could purchase BT sport through their website away from SKY.

Offline manc_don

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 17517
  • Rating: 78
  • Not a Jafa
Re: EPL
« Reply #17 on: February 17, 2015, 02:03:29 PM »
Not the EPL but obviously a team that up until recently was in it:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-31504347

Hope it works out for the fans.

Offline Kowalski

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 14633
  • Rating: -14
Re: EPL
« Reply #18 on: February 18, 2015, 08:42:44 AM »

Offline Tyrant

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 9609
  • Rating: 118
Re: EPL
« Reply #19 on: February 18, 2015, 08:44:30 AM »
Hope the pricks get hammered.