Pub vs Sky and Premier League

[Tats]

3pm games . Press the red button on your sky remote for your pick of every prem game being played . This will be a pay as you view service . Just a thought .

[revolver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tats

3pm games . Press the red button on your sky remote for your pick of every prem game being played . This will be a pay as you view service . Just a thought .

This has always been my problem with Sky. I don't want to watch the North-East derby. I want to watch every Man United game every week.

It is a service i would consider paying for.

[bill.glentoran]

one of the local pubs i drink in have a satellite system that screens all the games you get on sky although not in english,think it costs £2000 a year and its legal,(someone calls in to check up on them)they had another system that was £1000 but were told it wasnt legal so they replaced it with this one,still a lot of money but a lot less than sky rates which are 5 or 6000 a year.

[Begbie]

Quote:

Originally Posted by revolver

This has always been my problem with Sky. I don't want to watch the North-East derby. I want to watch every Man United game every week.

It is a service i would consider paying for.

I wouldn't. Imagine the prices they would eventually charge to watch a popular team. Start out reasonable and then go through the roof as has happened with all Sky packages. Each team would have to work out their television rights separately or else on a pay-per-view basis.

Even less folk would go to lower league games and the money available would all filter upwards towards the very top to an even greater extent than it does now.

If you look at the prices that Channel 67 and Rangers TV, are charging overseas subscribers to receive an internet stream of a game, remember that it is only SPL, then factor in the demand and willingness of people to pay to exclusively receive Man. Utd or Liverpool games live and you have a recipe for the continuation of the present bubble.

[mfc1876]

Isn't every Man U league game available for free on here anyway? Usually on sopcast links too, or would you pay because it would be in HD? I gladly settle for a inferior quality picture seeing as it's not costing me anything, not that I own a HD tele anyway

[goodison]

CNN have quite a good article about the ruling and its implications. Worth a read.

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/10/04/sp...html?hpt=hp_t2

[revolver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Begbie

I wouldn't. Imagine the prices they would eventually charge to watch a popular team. Start out reasonable and then go through the roof as has happened with all Sky packages. Each team would have to work out their television rights separately or else on a pay-per-view basis.

Even less folk would go to lower league games and the money available would all filter upwards towards the very top to an even greater extent than it does now.

If you look at the prices that Channel 67 and Rangers TV, are charging overseas subscribers to receive an internet stream of a game, remember that it is only SPL, then factor in the demand and willingness of people to pay to exclusively receive Man. Utd or Liverpool games live and you have a recipe for the continuation of the present bubble.

It was hypothetical - as in my hypothetical world everyone pays the same price and you choose every week which game you want to watch. Every single club in the football league is also available and the single, one off, yearly payment, is spread equally between all clubs.

People will still go to matches. And if it is such a huge issue I would also accept delayed coverage.

I would pay for the convenience of it. Sky is inconvenient as I have to pay a certain amount to receive a wealth of channels I would never watch and no choice of what game I want to watch. And Jamie Redknapp.