Football TV Rights.

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying though. Sky would be cheaper without the PL. But wherever the PL goes will be more expensive, significantly so if it's a PL-only package that isn't spreading the cost among additional subscribers.

There's no way an all-PL package would be 9 quid a month. It would probably be closer to 100.

That would price out a ton of fans, even worse than currently. That's why they don't want to do it.
There absolutely is. The logical decision for both the customers and the resellers is to make the Premier League package cost around 100/120£ per year. And trust me, there would be an increase in revenue (not that is needed for the Premier League) because so many people would be so interested in only watching the Premier League. The only problem an all-PL package would cause is the decrease in revenue for every other League in the World, and that would be especially noticeable for the Championship.
 
Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying though. Sky would be cheaper without the PL. But wherever the PL goes will be more expensive, significantly so if it's a PL-only package that isn't spreading the cost among additional subscribers.

There's no way an all-PL package would be 9 quid a month. It would probably be closer to 100.

I'm not arguing the second point, the PL will charge as much as the market will bear.

But the other I think you have cause and effect the wrong way around, you can get sky without the football, I can't find the numbers but I bet its a fraction. Without sports sky will sell a only a few subs.
 
you can get sky without the football

They've started experimenting with a la carte stuff like this in the US as well.

The only problem an all-PL package would cause is the decrease in revenue for every other League in the World, and that would be especially noticeable for the Championship.

The idea being that it would bleed pay TV revenue away from everyone that gets packaged with the PL? That's probably true.

The lack of a counterweight to stand against this constant centralization of everything remains glaring here. It's so sad to see the beautiful game slide down the slippery slope toward anti-competitive fan-abusing American style cartelization.
 
Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying though. Sky would be cheaper without the PL. But wherever the PL goes will be more expensive, significantly so if it's a PL-only package that isn't spreading the cost among additional subscribers.

There's no way an all-PL package would be 9 quid a month. It would probably be closer to 100.

That would price out a ton of fans, even worse than currently. That's why they don't want to do it.
I expect to see something like they do with the NBA. I can buy the League Pass for £179.99 for the season, which means I can watch every single game live, highlights or full games on demand whenever I want, and other stuff; or I can pay £99.99 for all that but just for my team. There's also the option to pay monthly at £24.99/£14.99

There's way more games in the NBA, but I could see the costs being pretty similar for the Premier League anyway.
 
The lack of a counterweight to stand against this constant centralization of everything remains glaring here. It's so sad to see the beautiful game slide down the slippery slope toward anti-competitive fan-abusing American style cartelization.
You can accuse American sport of many things, but anti-competitive isn't one of them.

Their whole system, regardless of which sport, is geared towards making their leagues as competitive as possible. Kit/uniform deals that cover the entire league (not individual teams getting paid millions more than others by different kit manufacturers, like we have in football), draft systems, salary caps...just a few things that immediately spring to mind, but I'm sure there are loads of others
 
You can see that Amazon have tried to help teams out this week, they even put Woolwich on a Thursday.
:mourhandlaugh:
 
I expect to see something like they do with the NBA. I can buy the League Pass for £179.99 for the season, which means I can watch every single game live, highlights or full games on demand whenever I want, and other stuff; or I can pay £99.99 for all that but just for my team. There's also the option to pay monthly at £24.99/£14.99

There's way more games in the NBA, but I could see the costs being pretty similar for the Premier League anyway.
I know I am hammering a point but in the US the revenue is split up between the clubs equally (I assume?) as the league itself has the power. If we were to do this it would be the first step to clubs keeping the majority of the funds for the games that are watched, it will mean an even more unequal league.

I am a hypocrite as I watch every game on a paid for stream and would hate it if I couldn't but going down this route will mean more money to the clubs with the big world wide fanbase imo.
 
You can accuse American sport of many things, but anti-competitive isn't one of them.

Their whole system, regardless of which sport, is geared towards making their leagues as competitive as possible. Kit/uniform deals that cover the entire league (not individual teams getting paid millions more than others by different kit manufacturers, like we have in football), draft systems, salary caps...just a few things that immediately spring to mind, but I'm sure there are loads of others
Its anti-competitive in that its a monopoly and they abuse the fan with adverts / price hikes / moving clubs & getting tax payers to pay for it.

Its competitive on the pitch.
 
I know I am hammering a point but in the US the revenue is split up between the clubs equally (I assume?) as the league itself has the power. If we were to do this it would be the first step to clubs keeping the majority of the funds for the games that are watched, it will mean an even more unequal league.

I am a hypocrite as I watch every game on a paid for stream and would hate it if I couldn't but going down this route will mean more money to the clubs with the big world wide fanbase imo.
So first you talk about revenue being split equally, then say clubs with a bigger fanbase would make more?
 
So first you talk about revenue being split equally, then say clubs with a bigger fanbase would make more?
Yes, I was comparing what happens in the US and what I think would happen here.

"in the US the revenue is split up between... If we were to do this it would be"

The league is more powerful than the clubs in the US, that's not the case here.
 
Yes, I was comparing what happens in the US and what I think would happen here.

"in the US the revenue is split up between... If we were to do this it would be"

The league is more powerful than the clubs in the US, that's not the case here.
I disagree. I think the US model is what they should follow. There's a handful of clubs who would be better off, but every club has an equal vote. They're not going to fuck themselves over.

We'd be a bit better off than we are now, but we'd be allowing Liverpool, Man Utd, even Woolwich to make even more than us by voting for this model, which would be mental, and that's why Levy and 70% of the other chairmen would never back this
 
I disagree. I think the US model is what they should follow. There's a handful of clubs who would be better off, but every club has an equal vote. They're not going to fuck themselves over.

We'd be a bit better off than we are now, but we'd be allowing Liverpool, Man Utd, even Woolwich to make even more than us by voting for this model, which would be mental, and that's why Levy and 70% of the other chairmen would never back this
You see that the big few clubs have managed to stop the Foreign rights being equally split? They are already starting to fuck themselves over. Its only a little now but I think it shows a direction of travel.

Every negotiating period they will spread rumour of a breakaway league and get a bit more of the pie. Owners will see a bit of a huge pie will be better than none if they leave.

I am by no means saying its a certainty but its what I think will happen eventually, making TV go this way only speeds it up.
 
Every negotiating period they will spread rumour of a breakaway league and get a bit more of the pie. Owners will see a bit of a huge pie will be better than none if they leave.
A breakaway league will never happen. By doing so, any club joining a european super league fucks over their every match going fanbase, i.e. their most loyal supporters. Nobody is that stupid.
 
A breakaway league will never happen. By doing so, any club joining a european super league fucks over their every match going fanbase, i.e. their most loyal supporters. Nobody is that stupid.
Why do you think the PL clubs voted to change from equal distribution of foreign rights? I think the threat of a break away was the reason, I cant see any other why they would fuck themselves over.

(*it may not be a breakaway but a closed CL like Juventus were proposing in addition to the EPL).
 
Why do you think the PL clubs voted to change from equal distribution of foreign rights? I think the threat of a break away was the reason, I cant see any other why they would fuck themselves over.

(*it may not be a breakaway but a closed CL like Juventus were proposing in addition to the EPL).
Yes, but you're talking about distribution based on final league position, rather than distributed based on size of fanbase. Teams like Leicester and Wolves will believe they have what it takes to finish high and get a larger slice of the pie than if the money was split equally. That's very different to saying "we're happy to take less money because we don't have as many worldwide fans".
 
The price would be considerably higher than that.

Non-football watching Sky subscribers subsidize the cost for the football-watchers. Live sports rights are the biggest cost on the balance sheet.
<smugteachermode>No such thing as a cost on a balance sheet. Assets and liabilities live on a balance sheet. Costs are to be found on a profit and loss.</stm>
 
I expect to see something like they do with the NBA. I can buy the League Pass for £179.99 for the season, which means I can watch every single game live, highlights or full games on demand whenever I want, and other stuff; or I can pay £99.99 for all that but just for my team.

Huh, I didn't realize there was a cheaper single-team League Pass. Interesting.

You can accuse American sport of many things, but anti-competitive isn't one of them.

Their whole system, regardless of which sport, is geared towards making their leagues as competitive as possible. Kit/uniform deals that cover the entire league (not individual teams getting paid millions more than others by different kit manufacturers, like we have in football), draft systems, salary caps...just a few things that immediately spring to mind, but I'm sure there are loads of others

We're using the term in different ways. I meant competitive AS BUSINESSES. They're a collusive cartel as businesses, and seek to produce parity as sports teams. In a competitive environment, the best-run most successful franchises wouldn't have to share their resources with the weaklings. A competitive environment also wouldn't be a closed system.

A breakaway league will never happen. By doing so, any club joining a european super league fucks over their every match going fanbase, i.e. their most loyal supporters.

Can I come live under that rock with you?

What all of these maneuvers are aiming at is eliminating the risk of financial losses for the massive clubs with the power to shape the system when they bargain collectively. That's what American leagues have, and that's what football owners look at jealously.

A closed European Super League that takes the shiniest, most globally relevant brands in football that have been built up over decades and decades of context and history and cultural importance and just strips away anything that won't sell in China and harvests every ounce of that tradition and passion for short-term profit leaving nothing but an empty husk.

It's fucking Bond villain stuff. It's the intentional destruction of the game. And fans should fight it with everything they've got.
 



PLTV already exists - they produce ready made programmes to sell around the world.

Absolutely makes no sense to have Sky, BT, Amazon, etc adding in an extra layer of profit margin.

Just rent a channel on Sky and sell subscriptions direct, would be cheaper and the clubs would make more money.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom