£14:95 pay-per-view.
- Thread starter Chippy_Tea
- Start date
Help Support The Homebrew Forum:
Not that I like the sport but it happened with boxing in the early days of satellite TV and boxing fans are still paying many years on.
Falco
Regular.
Ditched $ky a couple of years ago and went down the Nowtv (yes also owned by them I know) route and now get a season pass for the footy which works out a hell of a lot cheaper over the length of the season. Be interesting how this PPV works alongside this. Don’t think I’ll be paying any more to watch the games though, it’s a poor TV viewing experience as it is without the crowds and can’t stand the simulated crowd noise 
I pay for sky, bt and 3 season tickets for Palace for which the club have taken the cash - it will be refunded in time. Seems nuts that I would want to shell out 15 to watch Palace v Fulham in a couple of weeks time.
You would have thought season ticket holders would get the games FOC as a gesture of loyalty.
MmmBeer
Brew Pub Brewer
I've long heard it discussed that the premier league should take matters into their own hands and broadcast the matches themselves, cutting out the parasites like sky and amazon completely. This would allow you to buy a season ticket for your own clubs games and that money goes, largely, to that club.
Until then, I'll stick to the radio and the dodgybox.
Until then, I'll stick to the radio and the dodgybox.
This must have been discussed at length there must be a reason why they haven't done this by now.
Every child today wants to be rich or famous. I wanted to be a policeman, fireman or doctor. We used to look up to people who served others and gained massive respect from the community. Footballers are rich because TV generates massive revenues for broadcasters and advertisers. Hard to blame the players really. I just can't be interested in a club that doesn't have only local players. In the Guardian and Times, sport and football are separate. Why? Football is just a business and the fans are exploited shamelessly. I'd watch a match between Brummies and Scousers! And I is one. (sic)
When I did a finance course a few years back, as a case study we did a full analysis on the books of one of the major clubs. What was immediately obvious was that the club in question made virtually no money from the football: almost all of their revenue came from merchandising deals. Basically a branded sports apparel business with football as a promotional activity.
One thing for sure, is that the only way that Sky will ever listen is when a considerable number of fans go beyond griping and just vote with their feet. The position would change overnight.
One thing for sure, is that the only way that Sky will ever listen is when a considerable number of fans go beyond griping and just vote with their feet. The position would change overnight.
Last edited:
When i was a nipper we all wanted to be Astronauts
As a lazy, drunken, waster I can at least hold my head up high in achieving my childhood (teenage) ambitions.
My Dad used to say, after yet another disappointing Mariners performance, that at least GTFC was a football club that happened to have a club shop, where as Man U were a club shop that happened to have a football team.
Although, given Towns recent performances, I use the term 'football' loosely.
As it happens, Man U was the club whose books we analysed - so sounds like your Dad was spot on ;-)Man U were a club shop that happened to have a football team.
For the post lockdown games for the completion of last season we got a code to watch the relevant games on BT free of charge. Now its every man for themselves. To be honest even in a non Covid scenario I find it hard to take that the only way to watch my teams away games if they are not on sky or bt is illegally. I'm not exactly freeloading if I try and find a stream.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2015
- Messages
- 10,330
- Reaction score
- 9,458
I haven't read the full details of this new deal but I note a lot of people blaming sky sports here. But aren't BT also charging the same price. I am not sure how much the premier league is charging the broadcasters but at £5 perhaps it isn't viable
Braufather
Landlord.
As a Leeds fan I've forgotten what it's like to watch lower league football.
short memory then?
Selective.
Binkei Huckaback
Regular.
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2019
- Messages
- 460
- Reaction score
- 332
I'm no fan of Sky or Amazon, but they're no more parasitic than the players or the clubs. You might as well blame Jimmy Hill. Haven't many top clubs given 'loans' to players, never expecting to be replayed?
The Premier Leauge are a trade association and governing body. I can hardly see them doing much for fans. As I seem to remember, when set up it was a way to make more money for the bigger clubs.
And as for more money going to your club, that may be true, but would any more money go into football or lowering ticket prices for fans? I sincerely doubt it.
GhostShip
Junior Member
To be fair, I don't think the finger can be pointed at Sky or BT here. This has come from the Premier League and the money is going to the clubs - the TV companies are merely the platform for broadcast.
I wouldn't pay it personally, but there are no doubt thousands who will - and the Premier League is well aware of that.
I wouldn't pay it personally, but there are no doubt thousands who will - and the Premier League is well aware of that.
There is clearly a financial benefit here to me having absolutely no interest in or much understanding tbh of football at all ... so that's an easy way to avoid the extra cost 
.
Anna
.Anna
