Sky Wins Rights To Show Premier Ship Matches

occyoccy Posts: 64,627
Forum Member
✭✭
Sky has won the rights to show 126 live Premier League matches per season for three years from 2016-17 after winning the rights to five packages of games.

http://news.sky.com/story/1425026/sky-wins-majority-of-premier-league-matches

_-___

What rights have the BBC and ITV got to show matches? It shows people need to switch to Sky or BT IF they want to watch footie.
«13

Comments

  • celesticelesti Posts: 25,897
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Enough of the football, where are these ship matches?
  • ParthenonParthenon Posts: 7,499
    Forum Member
    Eye-watering sums. According to that article, the value of the PL rights increased 71% between 2001 and 2012, from £1.75bn to £3bn in 2012. This new increase is a 70% one, from £3bn to £5.1bn and that's just between 2012 and 2015. When will the bubble burst?
  • CLL DodgeCLL Dodge Posts: 115,630
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    celesti wrote: »
    Enough of the football, where are these ship matches?

    http://www.hardwarewholesale.co.uk/user/products/large/R45970.jpg
  • Tusk0312Tusk0312 Posts: 4,918
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    expect subscriptions to be going up then.

    and I bet ticket prices still don't come down.
  • celesticelesti Posts: 25,897
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I'd pay £4bn tops for that pack.
  • NightHawk123NightHawk123 Posts: 7,015
    Forum Member
    Typical how the media are focusing on how it's good for the game and will aid the clubs and their academies but forgetting about the subscription and ticket prices.
  • mgvsmithmgvsmith Posts: 16,452
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Typical how the media are focusing on how it's good for the game and will aid the clubs and their academies but forgetting about the subscription and ticket prices.

    It works out at £10.2m on average per game. Why don't clubs reduce ticket prices when they are guaranteed that sort of money?
  • mgvsmithmgvsmith Posts: 16,452
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    occy wrote: »
    http://news.sky.com/story/1425026/sky-wins-majority-of-premier-league-matches

    _-___

    What rights have the BBC and ITV got to show matches? It shows people need to switch to Sky or BT IF they want to watch footie.

    Or go and watch their local non-League team?
  • homer2012homer2012 Posts: 5,216
    Forum Member
    mgvsmith wrote: »
    Or go and watch their local non-League team?

    Or subscribe to another service for all 380 games;-) simples
  • croftercrofter Posts: 2,976
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    mgvsmith wrote: »
    It works out at £10.2m on average per game. Why don't clubs reduce ticket prices when they are guaranteed that sort of money?

    Probably because most of them are up to their necks in debt ...
  • darkjedimasterdarkjedimaster Posts: 18,620
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    occy wrote: »
    http://news.sky.com/story/1425026/sky-wins-majority-of-premier-league-matches

    _-___

    What rights have the BBC and ITV got to show matches? It shows people need to switch to Sky or BT IF they want to watch footie.

    Not really, I watch my team either by a lucky chance of a ticket, or by streams for 3pm games. If I didn't have Sky or BT sport, I would find a stream for those matches as well.
  • misawa97misawa97 Posts: 11,579
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Absolute mental the amounts involved.
  • JimothyDJimothyD Posts: 8,868
    Forum Member
    The money involved is obscene because the balance of where it comes from and where it goes is so unbalanced. There are so many average players who are earning millions a year, many of them foreign. All while average joes are paying huge ticket and subscription prices.

    I used to be a die hard football fan, but the games obsession with money (including the hysteria over transfer windows) has turned me right off and I very rarely watch games any more.

    Also, it hasn't been 'the Premiership' for years.
  • degsyhufcdegsyhufc Posts: 59,251
    Forum Member
    Amazed at the stat that in 92 they gave 20m to grassroots football and in 2015 it's only 12m
  • SnrDevSnrDev Posts: 6,094
    Forum Member
    occy wrote: »
    http://news.sky.com/story/1425026/sky-wins-majority-of-premier-league-matches

    _-___

    What rights have the BBC and ITV got to show matches? It shows people need to switch to Sky or BT IF they want to watch footie.
    Fail. How anyone can claim to have the vaguest interest in football and refer to it as the Premier Ship is beyond me.

    What rights have the BBC and ITV got to show matches? Money. The beeb stumped up a small part of the licence fee to retain the highlights deal, and ITV syphon off a bit of their advertising income to show whatever they show these days. They paid a lot less, and got a lot less. Where's the issue with that?
  • DavonatorDavonator Posts: 4,406
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    JimothyD wrote: »
    I used to be a die hard football fan, but the games obsession with money (including the hysteria over transfer windows) has turned me right off and I very rarely watch games any more.

    Yes! There's two football worlds that exist now

    The Game- what happens on the pitch and who is playing, who is injured and what formations are going to be used.

    The 'soap opera'- Transfer gossip with bombastic Countdown timers, what this player controversially said on twitter, the fake shock over a managers comments. How many million it will take to prize this player from their club (and how much his contract will be).

    I love the Game of football but this hype filled, money obsessed soap opera narrative is so nauseating, and becoming ever more prevalent.
  • Bingo_Bingo_ Posts: 1,077
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    occy wrote: »
    It shows people need to switch to Sky or BT IF they want to watch footie.

    That'll be one heck of an adjustment. I'm surprised Thatcher hasn't done anything about it yet.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 672
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    So a single televised game costs £10.2 million. For 126 games a season, every single Sky subscriber (includes NOW TV and all subscribers without sport as well) is going to pay £126 a year just for football.
  • onecitizenonecitizen Posts: 5,042
    Forum Member
    People moan about the cost of subscriptions to Sky, but if they are willing to pay Sky are going to keep charging.
    It isn't complicated, they are providing a service people want and who are willing to pay premium rates.
  • misawa97misawa97 Posts: 11,579
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    No doubt sky overpaid again. Premiership football is so pivotal to the overall business that sky will not run the risk of losing their hold on EPL rights.
  • daicolldaicoll Posts: 434
    Forum Member
    There is no way Sky or BT can justify spending this sort of money. The banks win and the Premier League wins but there is no way the average supporter will benefit from either of these latter organizations. ..
  • SnrDevSnrDev Posts: 6,094
    Forum Member
    daicoll wrote: »
    There is no way Sky or BT can justify spending this sort of money. The banks win and the Premier League wins but there is no way the average supporter will benefit from either of these latter organizations. ..
    Sky can easily justify it - without PL football they risk losing a massive number of customers, customers who wouldn't have Sky at all if Sky Sports didn't include the majority of top level football. They've done the sums and concluded that the bid is justifiable in their opinion.

    BT can justify it as a means of pulling in more customers for their broadband. They too will have done the sums and concluded that their bid is worth it.
  • misawa97misawa97 Posts: 11,579
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    SnrDev wrote: »
    Sky can easily justify it - without PL football they risk losing a massive number of customers, customers who wouldn't have Sky at all if Sky Sports didn't include the majority of top level football. They've done the sums and concluded that the bid is justifiable in their opinion.

    BT can justify it as a means of pulling in more customers for their broadband. They too will have done the sums and concluded that their bid is worth it.

    Well it's not just about retaining subscribers for sky. Shareholders will want to see subs growing.
  • The_don1The_don1 Posts: 17,353
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    They would also lose the massive amount of money pubs etc give them every month.

    My local pays a fortune to Sky has they charge pubs on the rateable value.

    If they lost football I doubt any pub would pay the massive amounts they charge
  • Wallasey SaintWallasey Saint Posts: 7,596
    Forum Member
    Good breakdown what clubs in the various European Leagues got last season. http://s17.postimg.org/gmc0t20fj/tv_deals.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.