Jump to content

Wednesday 29th May 2024

Scottish League Cup Group Stage Draw - 1pm

🔴⚪️ Come on you Reds! ⚪🔴

EPL


manc_don

Recommended Posts

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...
  • 6 months later...

EPL over before December.

 

The European Champions are the best football team I've ever seen in England. Not many will agree with that just now. By May, more will agree with it. No weaknesses. All attack. Beautiful rhythm and balance. Plus heart, the ability to grind. Gorgeous to watch.

 

Don't get much time to watch non Dons / Nix football these days, but as much as it pains me to say it, Liverpool do play great football (from what i've managed to see).  Even the most bitter manc would find it hard to disagree that they won't win it this year. And deservedly so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there's one team that could still fuck it up from here it's Liverpool. I wouldn't have bet on Leicester being the best of the rest at this stage. Liverpool have a lot of irons in the fire so it'll all come down to Klopp's management. They only have one fit senior central defender too so the depth of the squad will come under scrutiny too. The depth of City's squad hasn't helped them. They lost Laporte earlier in the season and the fact is that John Stones is in fact utterly dreadful and barely looks like a £5M player nevermind a £50M player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...