PPV YES or NO

[Deleted member 1486]

My Sky bill last month was £112.

On top of that I had BT Sport with my mobile contract for an extra £15

That was £1524 per year, and now they want an extra £400-500 extra? They can fuck right off. I've cancelled everything I can cancel, and will cancel the rest when I'm out of contract at the start of next year.

I might put the money I save into watching non-league football.

 

[Broomhall Blade]

Yes for the moment.
But that could change due to being made redundant.

 

[O Fletch]

Radio for me

 

[robbiez666]

no, would pay £5-8 if it were going directly to the clubs, but no chance on top of a subscription.

 

[Upton_Blade]

As I mentioned on Shoutbox yesterday, I've recently gone 'legit' paying for both Sky Sports (Now TV) and BT Sport (via Plusnet) but will be cancelling both now and going back to my previous methods of viewing the Blades until a better PPV method (similar to iFollow?) is available!

This is no different to iFollow though. They pay £10 per game with all the profits split between the 2 clubs. Sky and BT will not make a penny out of this and it has been a Premier League decision ie by the clubs. It's just that Sky and BT have the platform to be able to deliver.

Why do the clubs need to involve sky at all? Surely they could organise this themselves.

See above.

No while ever Sky and BT are involved. They have too much influence over television rights at the moment and intend to take a cut of up to £100k per game a fact conveniently missing from yesterdays public announcements about money going direct to teams.

Is there a source for this as the press releases are quite clear on how the revenue for this will be distributed?

The £15....apparently that’s only going to affect those just with BT, not those with the full sky sport package. They’ve had lots of calls today from folk to cancel and it seems the press regarding the charge isn’t being portrayed as it should.

Each game will be £14.95 if it's on Sky or BT regardless of your package with either. These are extra games on top of the current contractual games which are all still included.

I don’t think it’ll be too long before the PL decide to run the whole shebang themselves and cut out both Sky and BT.

IMHO this will happen eventually but it's not just as simple as cutting out Sky and BT. They are the domestic suppliers but the overseas picture is far more complicated and will take some time to find a way that works as the direct to market approach would have to be worldwide, not just this country. I think at some point we'll see a "netflix" style Premier League streaming service where users pay probably between £10-£20 per month for access to every game live, repeats, documentary type shows etc but the logistics around launching a service like that are huge.

My Sky bill last month was £112.

On top of that I had BT Sport with my mobile contract for an extra £15

That was £1524 per year, and now they want an extra £400-500 extra? They can fuck right off. I've cancelled everything I can cancel, and will cancel the rest when I'm out of contract at the start of next year.

I might put the money I save into watching non-league football.

This was a Premier League decision. Sky and BT are just the platform as all the logistics are in place already and won't make any money off the PPV's.

 

[Deleted member 1486]

This was a Premier League decision. Sky and BT are just the platform as all the logistics are in place already and won't make any money off the PPV's.

I don't care. I won't pay it anymore.

As I said, I've been saying I'll quit paying for Sky for years. I think I've even created a thread on here about it in the dim and distant past. I just don't think it's value for money. I'm happy to pay to attend matches, but I'd rather keep my £1.5K and put it towards a holiday with my family.

This was just the straw the broke the camel's back.

 

[Upton_Blade]

I don't care. I won't pay it anymore.

As I said, I've been saying I'll quit paying for Sky for years. I think I've even created a thread on here about it in the dim and distant past. I just don't think it's value for money. I'm happy to pay to attend matches, but I'd rather keep my £1.5K and put it towards a holiday with my family.

This was just the straw the broke the camel's back.

Can't disagree with that mate and personally don't think it's right but Sky and BT are getting all the hammer when it's not really their fault for once.

 

[jt64]

Not at that price. They'd easily get more than three times the purchases at a third of the price but they just won't get that

 

[Wardyblade]

I
Plan
Total
Viewing

Costs less than a tenner a month as well.

 

[Karaoke Blade]

No. And I've cancelled my NOW TV monthly subscription. I'm done until I can walk down the steps of the kop again.

 

[Bladesman]

 

[LudlamBlade]

This is no different to iFollow though. They pay £10 per game with all the profits split between the 2 clubs. Sky and BT will not make a penny out of this and it has been a Premier League decision ie by the clubs. It's just that Sky and BT have the platform to be able to deliver.



See above.



Is there a source for this as the press releases are quite clear on how the revenue for this will be distributed?



Each game will be £14.95 if it's on Sky or BT regardless of your package with either. These are extra games on top of the current contractual games which are all still included.



IMHO this will happen eventually but it's not just as simple as cutting out Sky and BT. They are the domestic suppliers but the overseas picture is far more complicated and will take some time to find a way that works as the direct to market approach would have to be worldwide, not just this country. I think at some point we'll see a "netflix" style Premier League streaming service where users pay probably between £10-£20 per month for access to every game live, repeats, documentary type shows etc but the logistics around launching a service like that are huge.



This was a Premier League decision. Sky and BT are just the platform as all the logistics are in place already and won't make any money off the PPV's.

Telling me we can host streams in pre-season games against Hearts, Preston and Derby but we're incapable of doing it for the Prem games?

 

[essexblade73]

Will never pay it. Its about time clubs start telling players they need to take a pay cut or fck off instead of making low paid staff redundant and expecting they can fleece the fans time after time. There are always ways and means to watch the matches.

 

[Kozzy_is_my_Dad]

No.

Unless, the club got 100% of the fee.

Otherwise, it's a ridiculous idea.

 

[TimofeeVee]

NOPE, the Premier League's been built up into highly popular, skilled, world leading league....but I hate what it's become!.....if I could choose, I'd much rather have pre PL times, old school stadiums with atmosphere, and affordable football!

And until I feel the system is fairer for all teams and fans, it'll give me great pleasure to support Sky, BT, the FA, EPL etc as little as possible

 

[1889]

Will there be a designated commentator and multiple camera positions and if so, who is providing and paying for the the staff and equipment required to pull all that together? If it comes out of the £14.95 I don’t see them covering their costs never mind giving any to the clubs involved.

Or will it be like IFollow, one camera and a choice of home or away radio commentary? If it is, people will wonder why they’re paying £14.95 for what the EFL pay £10 for?

TBH I can’t see this taking off, too many other ways to watch and I don’t think the actual product is that appealing without the atmosphere the supporters create. I’ll give it 2 month, tops

 

[Alf Tuppers Shorts]

Radio for me

And me . I think we have the best radio coverage in the country. No preaching just straight talking football. It’s a breath of fresh air from Sky and Talksports preaching and bum licking. So no PPV for me.

 

[Billyblade]

I don't think I would
Pay fifteen quid
To watch the game, no. In fact, I think I would
Veto it.

 

[Ranmoorblade]

I’ve already got a stream sorted that I used for away games last season, £15 is too much imo.

 

[Blade56]

I dont see the issue honestly with the concept?

The issue with the concept is the PL see the opportunity to cut out the middle men (sky, bt etc) and earn 10 times more than they do screwing the fans over with their own streaming service. It will all go in the pockets of owners, players and agents while grass roots football starves.
At least you’ll all get to see how they and their WAGs squander your money on social media while jobs disappear and relatives die.

I am 100% ashamed of Sheffield United voting in favour of this.

 

[RecordBreakers]

No I will be watching them but I wont be paying £14.99 no chance

 

[Moosie]

I was probably in a minority of thinking yes, this is a decent idea to start with. At the end of the day we (as in SUFC fans) haven’t paid anything in terms of season ticket prices and the £14.95 would be far less than the price of a game at home, and certainly away for sure.

But the more I’ve thought about it and read others comments on it, I don’t think I’ll be buying any of the games as you’re essentially paying to watch a friendly/training game. It’s soulless, and this FIFA fake noise is really getting on my nerves now. Plus there is no breakdown of where the money is going. If it was split 80/20 in favour of the home club, I might consider it as at least you know some of the money is going to the club. And if you were to get any of the big 6 on PPV at home there would be some financial reward to it.

Usually as others say you’re excited to see us play, and it’s not the same now. I find myself doing other things, sat on my phone, pretty much anything other than watching the matches. I wouldn’t dream of doing that sat in the ground or watching us normally on TV.

 

[bypassblade]

PPV is the thin end of the wedge it will signal the end of football as we used to know it, let's just see how many lower league clubs go tits up as well. I've said it for ages I hate the PL but we are in it so have to go with flow, what pissed me off is Arsenal made 27 redundant blaming no money, day after signed someone on a mega fucking contract DISGUSTING.

 

[1987]

The issue with the concept is the PL see the opportunity to cut out the middle men (sky, bt etc) and earn 10 times more than they do screwing the fans over with their own streaming service. It will all go in the pockets of owners, players and agents while grass roots football starves.
At least you’ll all get to see how they and their WAGs squander your money on social media while jobs disappear and relatives die.

I am 100% ashamed of Sheffield United voting in favour of this.

But its additional games that wouldnt have been shown. Meaning you now have the option, or you can carry on with your life exactly as it was before right?

Its steep for sure and i wouldnt pay it, but as a concept im not sure its that outrageous tbh.

Also, not sure how its affecting the grassroots. I agree something needs to be done in that regard, dont see how this shafts it further?

What am i missing about it?

 

[Ainsley Harriott]

No. No I won't.

 

[kevreedy]

None of that £15 quid goes to the clubs.it,s just filling the bank's accounts of sky and bt and now tv-greedy bastards.

 

[BladeInIreland]

But its additional games that wouldnt have been shown. Meaning you now have the option, or you can carry on with your life exactly as it was before right?

Its steep for sure and i wouldnt pay it, but as a concept im not sure its that outrageous tbh.

Also, not sure how its affecting the grassroots. I agree something needs to be done in that regard, dont see how this shafts it further?

What am i missing about it?

This is my initial thought. If this is just whilst fans are away what's the big deal?

 

[Cassius Kray]

But its additional games that wouldnt have been shown. Meaning you now have the option, or you can carry on with your life exactly as it was before right?

Its steep for sure and i wouldnt pay it, but as a concept im not sure its that outrageous tbh.

Also, not sure how its affecting the grassroots. I agree something needs to be done in that regard, dont see how this shafts it further?

What am i missing about it?

It's not "exactly as before" because before people would have been able to go to the matches. Also, for the games being shown on TV people could easily go to the pub and watch them, which is something many feel very uncomfortable doing right now.

Instead, in order to be sure of being able to watch United in a given month you may have to pay for a) Sky Sports, b) BT Sports c) Amazon Prime and even then pay additional for PPV games.

They're taking advantage of the pandemic to extort as much money from fans as possible. That is what's unreasonable.

 

[Houston_Blade]

As a result of this the subscriptions to IPTV will go through the roof, after that the TV companies will spend a lot of resources on closing down the IPTV providers. Then the choice will be 'pay it or don't watch'.

 

[WAFFLAR]

Just done a quick tot up of all the games scheduled between now and the first weekend in November....

3 games each during that period....Non-PPV based on BT or Sky coverage, PPV based on BT & Sky Box Office

3 PPV games:
West Brom / Villa / Fulham

2 PPV games:
Burnley / Leicester / Brighton / Palace / Sheff U / Southampton / Chelsea

1 PPV game:
Leeds / Wolves / Spurs / Man U / Newcastle / Arsenal / Liverpool

0 PPV games:
West Ham / Man City / Everton