Hopefully all of Rupert Murdochs empire crashes before his eyes completely before he dies.

Couldn't happen to a nicer person if it does.

 

Sky Sports just keep taking the piss with their subscription increases even though they lost the Champions League rights a few years ago, so where's the value? They can hype up the EPL all they like but there's an awful lot of mediocrity (West Brom -v- Watford on a Sunday afternoon or Monday night just doesn't do anything for me, I'd rather watch park football!) and I'm obviously not alone in seeing through the hype several years ago.

 

I'm much happier sticking with just BT Sport with their variety of leagues (including a number of 1st picks of the EPL), Bundesliga, Serie A etc along with the aforementioned Champions League.

 

 

I switched to a dodgy box a few years ago and it works a treat. There's rarely an issue with streaming but when it happens, I switch to a foreign language station and usually no bother there. No monthly fee and lots of hardcore porn on tap too. 

 

 

Each year Sky/BT outbid each other, pushing the amount they pay higher. This allows the players to be paid even more money and results in subscribers having to pay more. Eventually we'll hit a tipping point (probably now), where viewers reduce, Sky/BT give up bidding and pay less, and clubs will have to reduce wages over time.

The wages people are paid in Germany/Spain for top leagues are much more reasonable, as are the subscriptions to those channels.

People don't want to pay for the full package. They just want to pay for what they need.

The younger generation certainly won't pay for SKY when you can stream it free.

I had sky but switched to BT sports a few years ago for the Champ league. They kept raising their prices so I went for a "special" box and that worked fine until this summer.

But will definitely go down the "special" box route again.... which reminds me I need to get onto that asap.

ESPN in America laid off a load of on-screen talent last month. Definitely feeling the pinch. 

As for the English game hitting the wall as a result of these changes, I am not sure about the game itself, in fact I think it would be good for the game as a whole here. It will be terrible for teams who are paying 60k a week of tv money to second and third rate footballers. You could have a few mid-table clubs go the Leeds and Portsmouth route if they aren't thinking beyond today and tomorrow.

 

The Rest of the World forum would spontaneously ejaculate itself to death, as we all dream of a world were we can all watch the Bundesliga for free on ITV4, where fans get a season ticket for £27.50, working out at just 69 pence per game.

The title of the thread is a bit misleading as someone else said, Sky won't go bust, but a reduction in the price they pay, possibly with losing the PL rights for a season or two is possible

Heard of it but never really knew how it worked. Can you get it on a sky digi-box with no sky sports package?

You buy a NowTV set top box for £9.99 or most digital television's have NowTV integrated into it or all next-gen consoles - Xbox 1 and PS4 have working apps.

You basically have the basic catchup channels - iPlayer, Itvplayer, 40d etc etc.

Then you can pay either; 

£7 a day for 24 hours of Sky Sports

£5 a month for Kids TV channels

£5 a month for Sky Movies

or £5 a month for your generic popular TV channels - MTV, Sky 1, Dave, E4 etc.

It's a freeview box with a subscription basically, no contracts or anything. This model is probably the future of English football and British TV if you can't afford Virgin, Sky etc.

It is foreign interest that has kept the EPL in the financial luxury it enjoys, much more than local and how it sells itself recognises that. It is really the international streaming market that would effect the EPL clubs more.

And half of it goes straight into the pockets of agents who are already thinking about the next deal they can engineer with 'fake news'. Absolute shysters!

Anyhow, SKY made a strategic decision a few years back to "sweat" the pubs as much as they could by hugely inflating the price they charge the pubs. (They actually demand to see the books to make sure they're not underselling themselves).

This was on the basis that if the pubs will/can pay the huge fees, then great. But if they can't, then that will protect/boost home subscriptions. (Think about it, the pubs which pay SKY invariably have to put up their beer prices, so will end up serving those who can afford a few pints while watching the game of a Sunday. Meanwhile, those who can't/won't will just watch at home and have a few tins from the Offie - win/win all round for SKY)

(That said, they might have to re-think this strategy if BT provide stiffer competiution than previous rivals to SKY.)

pre Madonna wrote: Add in the fact that around 1 million people who went to EPL games last year were 'football tourists' from abroad, which helps keep the ticket prices up. Anyone who has ever been anywhere like the '12 Pins' on a Saturday afternoon will have seen that.It is foreign interest that has kept the EPL in the financial luxury it enjoys, much more than local and how it sells itself recognises that. It is really the international streaming market that would effect the EPL clubs more.

The fact that so many foreign tourists come to England to watch the EPL is a strength, not a weakness.

But ultimately, this whole foreign interest, whether tourists, TV subscribers or club owners, all comes on the back of a healthy domestic game, involving full stadia and competitive games etc

In other words, it's easier to hype the sh*t out of eg Leicester vs Everton to gullible overseas subscribers than an equivalent game in Germany, Spain or Italy.

And I personally see little sign of that changing.

How is this win-win  The pub industry is dying a slow death in the UK.

The only person who 'wins' from this is Sky, pubs cant afford Sky subscriptions these days, if they resort to foreign TV channels they get sued by the Premier League posing as Mystery shoppers fining them £20,000 putting them out of business.

It would pay itself just after 2 live matches even with just an extra 1-2 people in.

There are more people, per capita, interested in English football in Ireland than in England, for example. Nations with a higher interest in football than England are numerous,  you do have a point in relation to money, but that is because what the tv deal and clubs charge, as opposed to the other way around.

Anyway, f**k the EPL, I have Cork City to watch.

Oh I agree, but that comes form the acceptance of English fans for being ridden rock solid, partly buying the 'best league mate' bollocks and the fact that even when they doresist the foreign market will replace them , one way or another.

Also, that Wenger quote was about football in general, not finances.

Man Utd vs Man City doesn't interest me anymore.

Liverpool and Chelsea play a nice brand of football so I'll watch them from time to time.

I've kept more tabs on what's happened in League 1 than the EPL. And even when the LOI started I've kept more tabs on Galway Utd than I have on my hometown club of Sunderland !

Would that have anything to do with the fact Sunderland got relegated? 

I was waiting for this, because I knew it was coming 

But I think it was the Chinese League which started it all off for me, and Sunderland did help fuel it I'm not gonna lie 

Common theme developing on YBIG.

 

I'm off to join a Eredivisie fans forum here. Catch you guys later!

 

 

 

It's common because everyone's sick of it! No one cares anymore if Man City signs Raul Bloggs from Valencia for £45 million and on £200,000 p/w 

Congratulations you've guaranteed yourself top 4, big wow.

Atleast the top Eredivisie teams generally don't go on shopping sprees but rather develop their highly talented youth academies which is more interesting to me so if you need another poster in that thread I'll join you!

Spot on. 

I think you are confusing interest in the actual football and an interest in the financial impact the English Premier League has both on the game here and abroad. I have an interest in English football, especially outside the top-flight and the EPL is having a detrimental effect on the game as a whole here. It should also be having a bigger impact internationally but, thankfully, from a football point of view most teams are being badly managed, hence the disparity between wages and success.

In fairness, his Championship Manager stats are through the roof. 

Family in Kilkerrin! They have a bar there called Coyne's too.

If I was interested in the EPL to that degree, I would be doing the same as I did years ago, watching as many games as possible, this doesn't happen any more. I'm still half interested, people on here are football fans after all, but I couldn't really give a sh*te about the soap opera element of it, with the breaking news, the yellow bar, transfer fcuking deadline day and all the other bollix that goes with it.  I dunno if that means I shouldn't be commenting on here or whatever but I'm not overly bothered about upsetting a few children in adult's bodies by doing so either. 

The money involved is more or less meaningless to anyone who isn't the CEO of a top stockmarket company, I don't grudge any of them a penny of it, and unusually for the financial world, the bubble seems permanent. From my basic understanding of econmomics, that can't be right. 

An example of a conversation with a Liverpool fan recently about Mr Van Dijk of Southampton. By the way, not singling out Liverpool fans, it could be any club, any player at this stage. Yer man reckoned he was a good player, but not worth 60 million. I was inclined to agree, but then started thinking about the whole notion of 'worth' in the EPL.

Say they signed him for 60 million. Say he turned out average, or didn't fit or whatever. Could happen any player at any club. Say in 2 years time, after 2 years of bad/average performances, they sell him for 30 million. So they have 'lost' 30 million plus wages in that time. Who loses ?? 

The club is still worth whatever tis worth, they have other assets that determine this value, not just one player. So they aren't going to be too badly off. Maybe a financial 'loss' gets posted for that year or something, but it will have a negligible effect on the value of the club itself. The player himself- he's grand too. The fans- might be a small rise in ticket prices, but that would likely be more to do with inflation rather than paying for a manager's misjudgement of a player, if it did happen, it wouldn't be inextricably linked to the loss of value of an individual player. Likewise, the TV subscribers, still in more or less the same place. 

As said before I've spent more time talking about League 1 it's that uninteresting! And it's not bitterness either I think League 1 is a very equal playing field, even so much that Jordanian Bankers have failed to succeed in. Would you not agree if the EPL was equal it would be far more entertaining? It's not even statistically the most entertaining either - Despite all the negatives Serie A gets for being "tactical" it actually averaged the most goals per game out of the top 10 leagues in the world last season.

I suppose Spanish League was a poor example to give as it's far from equal due to how they distribute TV money but teams like Las Palmas who have insanely low budgets do play a better brand of football than most EPL teams despite the massive differences in quality.

 

On the other hand never have had Sky and never will even if I do lose my streams at home  .

 

2 days ago talking about Everton signing Michael Keane for £30m

You were also talking about Delle Alli in the Man United thread, and discussing Southamptons new manager as well in that thread in the past few days

 

 

Way too many of them on this forum

Or even when was the last time I spoke about the EPL in general other than give an opinion on a player? At the end of the day I'm entitled to an opinion whether you like it or not. No one else gives a f**k what the other persons interests are aside from you because you made a joke in the other thread which totally backfired.

It's as simple as that really. Stop acting like a petulant child 

I always like his writing, even if the site itself is pretty awful and part of the problem! His book on football was great, can't say I am too tempted by his crime novels set in his hometown though.

Anyway, football certainly isn't the 'same as it ever was', as it is far, far more predictable. I love football, but the last EPL game I watched was the Watford- Palace game I attended last season. I am not the only one to feel this way. As his figures suggest, the interest in the EPL, I mean outside of clubs people support, but as a whole, is quite low in England. For people living in Ireland, this is probably quite hard to understand. The league is bigger there than here and has, I assume, stayed constantly popular. 

Match of the Day figures were in and around 5 million a decade ago, now they are below 4 million. The last available figures are for September 15th, 3.65 million. I think the highest figure in recent years, although I am open to correction, was 4.1 million for Lineker in his jokes. 

The same can be said of FA Cup figures on BBC, including the final. These are all on terrestrial television. I understand there is more ways to get highlights now, but a lot of people are connected to one team and not the game or the league.

It doesn't matter what we want though, does it? It isn't the people's game any more. In fact, it isn't a game anymore. It is a business. Go on the message boards of any EPL  team, fans are as interested in balance sheets and finances as they are the game itself. The top six this year will be the same next year, and the year after, and the only way it will change is if some other dodgy git, or sports businessman, or whatever else they are, comes in and decides Newcastle/Norwich/Accrington have the potential to make him/her/them look less of a ****. Or you have a 'miracle' like Leicester, a club with a questionable financial record were taken over by a billionaire who made his money questionably. That is deemed a fairytale because, despite all the possible faults, it is the best the fans of most teams can dream of.

The owners of most of the top franchises don't care about the sport, don't give a f**k about the fans and certainly don't care about making football less attractive, certainly not to UK audiences at least, because for every person who used to go regularly to watch Arsenal/Chelsea/Tottenham and fell out of love with it, they have thousands across the globe to replace them and make even more money. One lad's season ticket, a dozen pies and a jersey is a lot less than a few thousand jerseys, bedsheets and the rest. It feels inevitable, at some stage, that the largest teams will have the rights to their own matches and broadcast them worldwide. They won't give a f**k if the stadium is empty or nobody in England is that bothered anymore.

It is very well put and it is hard to disagree with any of it. The one problem remains though and that is the people who run the 'clubs'. These are football clubs second, businesses first and, by and large, they don't really give a f**k about the local fan because there is more money to be made elsewhere.

His third point is the most salient. One of the major factors in making English football so fascinating to those outside of England is the large away followings, the natural  regional rivalries which are based on tradition and history,  the depth in support outside the top sides and biggest cities and the intensity and hostility this brought. I am not in any way suggesting hooliganism helped market the game, but there is no question that the needle and atmosphere is a massive part of the attraction.

Attendances are still healthy, I don't believe there has been much change in home figures, but there had been a slight drop in away fans, which is why there was a reaction from the league regarding ticket prices.

I think this realisation should be exploited by the fans. It is the one way to make the league listen, the pathway to rectifying all of the other problems he mentioned. If all fans started boycotting away games the EPL would start treating them with respect and is something that should unite all fans for the good of the game. Unfortunately, that isn't likely.

Neither can I, but I think it is the one thing that can save the game. It might be the only way. You are correct about the cap, I mentioned it above. The fact that they did that shows how scared they are of losing away fans, they know how important they are in selling the game. They certainly didn't do it out of empathy for lads who like to spend their Saturdays drinking lukewarm lager on trains.

https://www.football365.com/news/the-future-of-premier-league-football-on-tv-the-blueprint" rel="nofollow - https://www.football365.com/news/the-future-of-premier-league-football-on-tv-the-blueprint

It is well written, so I’ll take it as a compliment, but why could I have written it? 

There’s nothing actually wrong with what he said, but domestic television revenue is only half the battle. There is no point boycotting television without boycotting the actual games. Damage the atmosphere, which has happened anyway, and you damage the product abroad. Home fans tickets will often be taken by tourists and day trippers, it is away fans that are key.

It might even be too late with that, as it is deeply ingrained in a lot of the world already.

And I have to say, there is so much wrong with it that I genuinely don't know where to start.

And even if I did, I'm not sure even I have the energy to give it the good kicking it deserves (that's if I had the time, which I don't, at least presently)

I mean, when someone starts quoting John Lennon lyrics to reinforce his case - "Imagine there's no satellite TV" - then you know he's hit rock bottom...  

Ah well, I might get back to it sometime, after I've stopped going "Sheeesh"

P.S. It's a very long sheesh 

That's not a John Lennon lyric, certainly not from any song I am aware of, but I was never the biggest fan so I am open to correction. I don't think satellite t.v had really taken off by the time of his death, though he was seen by many as ahead of the curve. Maybe they were right.

P.S. The thought of a Nordie going 'sheesh' has given me a headache.

So I was merely extending the writer's theme with my own parody, rather than suggesting JL predicted the advent of satellite TV.

Which I'm sure you knew - unless you genuinely did take me literally, in which case that's another sheesh. 

pre Madonna wrote: P.S. The thought of a Nordie going 'sheesh' has given me a headache.

Hmmm. 

For someone who so frequently rails against stereotypes and generalisations elsewhere, especially when used to denigrate an entire group/race/religion/minority etc, you're inordinately fond of having a pop at "Nordies", as if we're all exactly the same. 

In which sense you're not so different from the more rabid posters on here who, when they see I'm from NI, automatically think Hun/Orange/Prod/Bigot etc.

Maybe you Mexicans are all the same, too? 

P.S. No need to roll out the old "touchy Nordie" meme, either, since I am not bothered by it, merely amused. That's if we Nordies are allowed a sense of humour in your world... 

Well the way it was written implied you were taking him literally, which is why I poked a little fun.

As for the last part! Well, to literally quote yourself:"sheesh".

You took my jibe that all accents north of Cavan are sharp and harsh as  equating to religious or cultural background. The fact that is your immediate thought, well, I'll leave you fill in the blanks...

You are of course allowed a sense of humour,hopefully one day you will be able to express it. (For clarity; that is you the individual, not any social, ethnic, religious or geographical grouping you may consider yourself  belonging to)

Don't you say it! You probably have an accent I find harsh, which makes me racist. Actually, I like the accent on women, Terri;  does that make me sexist too?