GeordieT Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Sky will get atleast 1 package in my opinion. I just hope we don't have 3 or more broadcasters as the fans will be shafted over with subscription bills. Given there is seven packages, it would be pretty unfathomable if they were to get less than four. To be honest, I like Sky's coverage and I am pretty happy with the service. If a third or fourth broadcaster gets packages the price to watch everything will go through the roof. Consumer can't really win. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Uh-oh. Surely there's no grounding for it? You can't realistically moderate every single comment. Tell that to RAWK Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 How do we help them? They can't control a forum ffs. Fucking thought police. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leffe186 Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Sky will get atleast 1 package in my opinion. I just hope we don't have 3 or more broadcasters as the fans will be shafted over with subscription bills. Given there is seven packages, it would be pretty unfathomable if they were to get less than four. To be honest, I like Sky's coverage and I am pretty happy with the service. If a third or fourth broadcaster gets packages the price to watch everything will go through the roof. Consumer can't really win. Whoever wins the majority of the rights will have a monopoly on it. Sky's broadcasting is hit and miss, some good people on there, some that shouldn't be on at all. To be honest I like older formats with minimal build up and less analysis (especially when they focus on the big clubs). The highlights package is the one that needs to be dealt with. No more should certain clubs get 20 minutes of footage and 20 minutes of analysis where as others get goals only. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Isn't that forum being sued because some of it's members said Oystons dad is a rapist? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinkeye Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Sky will get atleast 1 package in my opinion. I just hope we don't have 3 or more broadcasters as the fans will be shafted over with subscription bills. Given there is seven packages, it would be pretty unfathomable if they were to get less than four. To be honest, I like Sky's coverage and I am pretty happy with the service. If a third or fourth broadcaster gets packages the price to watch everything will go through the roof. Consumer can't really win. The only way it can work in the favour of the consumer, or viewer, is to have a pay per view service where you pay a reasonable amount for the games you want to see, regardless of which channel they are broadcast. It is pretty straightforward to watch every game of your chosen club live via the interweb already - sometimes the quality is not great of course. If there was a way to watch the games I wanted to watch in HD quality for a sensible price I would be interested.. Not the 10 Pound per day option you can currently get, I can have the channel for a month for that amount with the rest of my Sky package. The cost per game should be 2- 3 Quids max!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeordieT Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Sky will get atleast 1 package in my opinion. I just hope we don't have 3 or more broadcasters as the fans will be shafted over with subscription bills. Given there is seven packages, it would be pretty unfathomable if they were to get less than four. To be honest, I like Sky's coverage and I am pretty happy with the service. If a third or fourth broadcaster gets packages the price to watch everything will go through the roof. Consumer can't really win. The only way it can work in the favour of the consumer, or viewer, is to have a pay per view service where you pay a reasonable amount for the games you want to see, regardless of which channel they are broadcast. It is pretty straightforward to watch every game of your chosen club live via the interweb already - sometimes the quality is not great of course. If there was a way to watch the games I wanted to watch in HD quality for a sensible price I would be interested.. Not the 10 Pound per day option you can currently get, I can have the channel for a month for that amount with the rest of my Sky package. The cost per game should be 2- 3 Quids max!! I worry a bit about any, particularly internet based subscription / season ticket like passes. I know its not really what you are referring to, but you can bet if something like that was introduced the top clubs would be wanting major changes do how the money is distributed. Internet broadcasting, particularly if they can negotiate it individually is the holy grail for top clubs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 It will never work out cheap on pay per view. Does anyone else remember Prem+, it was something like £6 for a single match. We used to get a season ticket, but that was still expensive. The only thing that is garunteed is that prices will go up and tickets won't get cheaper. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEMTEX Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Sky will get atleast 1 package in my opinion. I just hope we don't have 3 or more broadcasters as the fans will be shafted over with subscription bills. Given there is seven packages, it would be pretty unfathomable if they were to get less than four. To be honest, I like Sky's coverage and I am pretty happy with the service. If a third or fourth broadcaster gets packages the price to watch everything will go through the roof. Consumer can't really win. The only way it can work in the favour of the consumer, or viewer, is to have a pay per view service where you pay a reasonable amount for the games you want to see, regardless of which channel they are broadcast. It is pretty straightforward to watch every game of your chosen club live via the interweb already - sometimes the quality is not great of course. If there was a way to watch the games I wanted to watch in HD quality for a sensible price I would be interested.. Not the 10 Pound per day option you can currently get, I can have the channel for a month for that amount with the rest of my Sky package. The cost per game should be 2- 3 Quids max!! If you were able to individually subscribe to each channel/reasonable set of channels (ie all sky sports channels), this would probably work out for the consumer just fine. I'd probably survive on BBCetc + Sky Sports + BT Sports, I'd pay less money because none of my money is going towards the other random filler shite, and Sky etc would mark up the price of those channels. Win-win. Get er done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeordieT Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 It will never work out cheap on pay per view. Does anyone else remember Prem+, it was something like £6 for a single match. We used to get a season ticket, but that was still expensive. The only thing that is garunteed is that prices will go up and tickets won't get cheaper. And that was donkeys years ago now. Would probably charge close to double that today. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Sky will get atleast 1 package in my opinion. I just hope we don't have 3 or more broadcasters as the fans will be shafted over with subscription bills. Given there is seven packages, it would be pretty unfathomable if they were to get less than four. To be honest, I like Sky's coverage and I am pretty happy with the service. If a third or fourth broadcaster gets packages the price to watch everything will go through the roof. Consumer can't really win. The only way it can work in the favour of the consumer, or viewer, is to have a pay per view service where you pay a reasonable amount for the games you want to see, regardless of which channel they are broadcast. It is pretty straightforward to watch every game of your chosen club live via the interweb already - sometimes the quality is not great of course. If there was a way to watch the games I wanted to watch in HD quality for a sensible price I would be interested.. Not the 10 Pound per day option you can currently get, I can have the channel for a month for that amount with the rest of my Sky package. The cost per game should be 2- 3 Quids max!! If you were able to individually subscribe to each channel/reasonable set of channels (ie all sky sports channels), this would probably work out for the consumer just fine. I'd probably survive on BBCetc + Sky Sports + BT Sports, I'd pay less money because none of my money is going towards the other random filler shite, and Sky etc would mark up the price of those channels. Win-win. Get er done. Sky's other TV services are loss makers. It's their Sky sports and movies subscription that makes them money. They will never do that. Apple have been trying to get companies to do that for a few years with no results, hence why Apple and Google are starting to invest in content of their own and why they are interested in the rights for the Premier League. Netflix have started doing this recently. Cable companies won't let you subscribe to individual channels unless it comes with an excessive fee. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geordie Ahmed Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Premier League to announce live TV rights deal at 5pm this afternoon. Google and Al Jazeera. I know it's unlikely, but I hope Sky have been outbid, and even better if it was someone like Google that beat them. Games streamed live on YouTube Streaming games is not really ideal since there is still a lot of people with rubbish Internet speeds Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Premier League to announce live TV rights deal at 5pm this afternoon. Google and Al Jazeera. I know it's unlikely, but I hope Sky have been outbid, and even better if it was someone like Google that beat them. Games streamed live on YouTube Streaming games is not really ideal since there is still a lot of people with rubbish Internet speeds Not if BT have won the rights. They can sell you a subscription service and then sell you mobile internet through EE who they are buying so you can stream it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/31331496 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinkeye Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Premier League to announce live TV rights deal at 5pm this afternoon. Google and Al Jazeera. I know it's unlikely, but I hope Sky have been outbid, and even better if it was someone like Google that beat them. Games streamed live on YouTube Streaming games is not really ideal since there is still a lot of people with rubbish Internet speeds How fast does your connection need to be to get a decent stream though? I have around 10meg and I thought that was good, I still have poor picture quality and occasional buffering while streaming a match... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketsbaia Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 I hope Sky keep the rights - they're the best around. I don't want the next Setanta/ESPN/Premier Plus to get a significant amount. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Premier League to announce live TV rights deal at 5pm this afternoon. Google and Al Jazeera. I know it's unlikely, but I hope Sky have been outbid, and even better if it was someone like Google that beat them. Games streamed live on YouTube Streaming games is not really ideal since there is still a lot of people with rubbish Internet speeds How fast does your connection need to be to get a decent stream though? I have around 10meg and I thought that was good, I still have poor picture quality and occasional buffering while streaming a match... 10mb is usually enough, I've played online games with that and you shouldn't have much buffering. It all depends though, the buffering may come from the servers at the other end. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geordie Ahmed Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 I think BT will end up with more matches, which will be huge for them to go along with the Champions League As long as it remains with just 2 broadcasters I'll be happy, spreading it amongst 3 will be worse for us Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinkeye Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Premier League to announce live TV rights deal at 5pm this afternoon. Google and Al Jazeera. I know it's unlikely, but I hope Sky have been outbid, and even better if it was someone like Google that beat them. Games streamed live on YouTube Streaming games is not really ideal since there is still a lot of people with rubbish Internet speeds How fast does your connection need to be to get a decent stream though? I have around 10meg and I thought that was good, I still have poor picture quality and occasional buffering while streaming a match... 10mb is usually enough, I've played online games with that and you shouldn't have much buffering. It all depends though, the buffering may come from the servers at the other end. Ah, I get you, the person who is uploading the match may have poor internet? I am trying to get fibre here but, only Virgin offer it in my area so far and there is no way I am having them come and dig up my drive to put a cable in! Edit - not to upload football streaming I need to add (wouldn't have a clue how to do that), I just want fibre because of the amount of things in my house that are connected to my router! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Coventry City sued a forum years ago after one post said the club was run by "rogues". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fugazi Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Same split between Sky and BT Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeordieT Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 £5.136 billion with Sky broadcasting the lions share, including Friday, Sunday 4PM and Monday KO's. More than some of the top estimates predicted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Five billion fucking quid Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geordie Ahmed Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 126 games for Sky, the rest for BT £5.136 Billion Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts