Premium television is a luxury good. I dont feel sorry for those fans whining on tv that it's too expensive. It's people like you who have driven the market to this point. If you really care, vote with your wallet .
It will no doubt affect non-football fans - BT will likely increase broadband charges as well as line rental. You could vote with your feet but as providers have shown already, they will adjust their product & prices to be inline with each other as to make no difference.
I hope sky sports will address their monthly subscription by ensuring what they charge a customer for sports around £47-£50 per month is halved to £25 or even £20 per month, as Sky cannot justify the current price charge !
Sky Sports need to take into account for football rights they do not have currently !
No Live England qualifying games or international Friendlies!
No live FA Cup football!
No Live Charity -Community Football!
No German, Italian, French, Dutch, Portuguese Live football!
And from 2015
NO LIVE CHAMPIONS LEAGUE FOOTBALL!
NO LIVE EUROPA LEAGUE FOOTBALL!
Sky need to take this into account big time
& ensure sports monthly packaged charge price is reduced to ensure they retain their loyal sports subscription subscribers & I would strongly advise sky to start reducing the price ASAP, the sooner the better!!!!
This is great news. I'm glad someone has broken Sky's monopoly on football. They've been charging extortionate prices for years and cornering the market. Look at the 'fans' happily paying £50 a month for Sky. They've accepted the status quo for years.
The status quo was much better than splitting major rights between different subscription companies, resulting in people having to pay more.
So what if Sky had a monopoly on football, it's cheaper than what we have now.
Similar situation for me is MotoGP going to BT. I will continue to pay the same for the BBC (who didn't bother to bid enough although curiously they can always afford Wimbledon no matter what).
Please tell me you didn't just say MotoGP rights are going to BT.
The status quo was much better than splitting major rights between different subscription companies, resulting in people having to pay more.
So what if Sky had a monopoly on football, it's cheaper than what we have now.
Ha! Look at the big picture. Sky created the premium pay monthly for sports model , taking it away from terrestrial tv. Was that a good thing ? Yes for footballer's salaries and shareholders, but not for consumers. But people were willing to pay and it flourished. This step is merely those same authorities (uefa , fifa) further monetising the sport. They're greedy and don't care about fans. It's purely business. Sky lost at their own game effectively. The only power consumers have is to not pay for such services and bring the demand down. Other companies want a slice of the pie and if all these fans are willing to pay, so be it split it up. Sky wasn't doing anyone any favours and have had extortionate prices anyway.
The cost of watching sport will never come down. The higher the number of subscribers, the more they charge which is quite the opposite of what you expect. This is what is happening. They'll bid and bid and pass the cost on to you. It's a luxury service. Their ethos (sky, uefa etc) has never been to get the most coverage in terms of viewers-- they could easily make it more affordable AND profitable -- but it's merely about fleecing the sport fanatics/maximising profit who'll pay a very high premium.
At the end of the day it's the fans and the players largely responsible for these incredible subscriber fees and ticket prices. Stop complaining!! You're the ones fuelling it.
This is great news. I'm glad someone has broken Sky's monopoly on football. They've been charging extortionate prices for years and cornering the market. Look at the 'fans' happily paying £50 a month for Sky. They've accepted the status quo for years.
Premium television is a luxury good. I dont feel sorry for those fans whining on tv that it's too expensive. It's people like you who have driven the market to this point. If you really care, vote with your wallet . Football isn't a necessity so stop whining like you're on the breadline. Incidentally I'm shocked how many can afford Sky's full packages whilst struggling to pay their monthly living costs. Get your priorities straight for god's sakes!
Anyway, if Sky don't drop their prices, despite losing 50% of the top pick games and the entire champions league, because they think few will jump ship , it's only a reflection of their subscribership. You are the ones keeping them in business after all. They clearly will not represent as good value for money and should drop their prices.
I am a long time Sky subscriber who has Sky Broadband, Sky phone line and Sky TV.............£90-100 a month for as long as i can remember.:o
Anyone who's tried cancelling part or all of their Sky package will tell you Sky will offer you lots of deals to keep you signed up .
I wouldn't normally kick someone when they are down but this BT Sport thing could be a great opportunity to negotiate a better deal with SKY.
You're willing to pay more and more for your subscription. Why wouldn't companies like Sky bid more and more each deal knowing their base is willing to absorb the cost. Sport is a premium service now. Be prepared to pay or quit watching it. The truth is only the latter will bring the cost down long term.
BT are a massive company with a line of credit that is long and deep enough not to do a ESPN/Setanta, both of whom were interlopers taking an ambitious punt which showed frankly (esp Setanta).
ESPN are owned by Disney. Hardly makes them an interloper.
It shocks me that people would prefer to have one supplier (Sky) and continue paying over the odds.
I am glad Sky have got some serious competition. The disappointment is that there is less FTA sport, although Sky did plenty of damage to FTA long before BT entered the market. Unfortunately FTA cannot compete with Sky, BT is one of the few British companies that can. If Sky cared they would offer better value to customers and lower their prices, instead they continue with their annual price rises.
You won't have to worry about broadband or line rental prices because that market is hugely competitive. BT is also growing into a lot of other markets so BT revenues will continue to grow.
The clout that bt has will surely make them exempt from setantas fate. Setanta went bust cos they bid for games etc with money they didnt have (or couldn't recoup) .
Bt have 2 million subscribers at the minute, and that isnt including the virgin xl customers.
.
How many of their subscribers paid to get it though? A lot less than 2m.
This is great news. I'm glad someone has broken Sky's monopoly on football. They've been charging extortionate prices for years and cornering the market. Look at the 'fans' happily paying £50 a month for Sky. They've accepted the status quo for years.
Premium television is a luxury good. I dont feel sorry for those fans whining on tv that it's too expensive. It's people like you who have driven the market to this point. If you really care, vote with your wallet . Football isn't a necessity so stop whining like you're on the breadline. Incidentally I'm shocked how many can afford Sky's full packages whilst struggling to pay their monthly living costs. Get your priorities straight for god's sakes!
Anyway, if Sky don't drop their prices, despite losing 50% of the top pick games and the entire champions league, because they think few will jump ship , it's only a reflection of their subscribership. You are the ones keeping them in business after all. They clearly will not represent as good value for money and should drop their prices.
It's awful news, how can it be good news? Now if you want to watch all the football then unless you happen to have Virgin or BT Broadband you have to pay even more money. Explain again how that is good?
It shocks me that people would prefer to have one supplier (Sky) and continue paying over the odds.
I am glad Sky have got some serious competition. The disappointment is that there is less FTA sport, although Sky did plenty of damage to FTA long before BT entered the market. Unfortunately FTA cannot compete with Sky, BT is one of the few British companies that can. If Sky cared they would offer better value to customers and lower their prices, instead they continue with their annual price rises.
You won't have to worry about broadband or line rental prices because that market is hugely competitive. BT is also growing into a lot of other markets so BT revenues will continue to grow.
Explain to me how BT paying more than double what the last lot of CL games went for is going to make watching football on tv cheaper?
It's awful news, how can it be good news? Now if you want to watch all the football then unless you happen to have Virgin or BT Broadband you have to pay even more money. Explain again how that is good?
We don't know the prices yet.
It'll probably be more expensive to watch all football but now there is choice there. For a long time if you didn't have Sky you got zip. I imagine bt will have their sports channels on sky and virgin as an extra premium. Some football will be available on all service providers making it more affordable and accessible so that's a good thing.
If you want all football you'll need to pay for it. It was always going this way. The powers that be are selling these rights and ultimately it's the consumers that have shown they have an appetite for football (no matter the cost it would seem).
It's awful news, how can it be good news? Now if you want to watch all the football then unless you happen to have Virgin or BT Broadband you have to pay even more money. Explain again how that is good?
Why can't it be good news ? Some people don't like the smug, gloating attitude that SKY sometime portray. They now have serious competition which they can't bully around. Let them see for once what losing big TV. sports rights is like.
Similar situation for me is MotoGP going to BT. I will continue to pay the same for the BBC (who didn't bother to bid enough although curiously they can always afford Wimbledon no matter what).
Apologies as this is off-topic, but that's a bit strong to say that the BBC didn't bother to bid enough; there is only so much money in the BBC sport budget, especially following the licence fee freeze (which reduced the BBC Sport budget by 15%), so if another broadcaster comes in with a mind-blowing bid (I read somewhere that BT bid FOUR times what the Beeb put on the table regarding MotoGP), then naturally, the rights holder will take the biggest bid.
In a way, this is similar to BBC losing all horse racing to C4 (although there were other forces at work regarding the move of all racing - including the Grand National, Derby and Royal Ascot - to C4).
Why can't it be good news ? Some people don't like the smug, gloating attitude that SKY sometime portray. They now have serious competition which they can't bully around. Let them see for once what losing big TV. sports rights is like.
While we all pay even more to watch our football. Great.
I hope sky sports will address their monthly subscription by ensuring what they charge a customer for sports around £47-£50 per month is halved to £25 or even £20 per month, as Sky cannot justify the current price charge !
Sky Sports need to take into account for football rights they do not have currently !
No Live England qualifying games or international Friendlies!
No live FA Cup football!
No Live Charity -Community Football!
No German, Italian, French, Dutch, Portuguese Live football!
And from 2015
NO LIVE CHAMPIONS LEAGUE FOOTBALL!
NO LIVE EUROPA LEAGUE FOOTBALL!
Sky need to take this into account big time
& ensure sports monthly packaged charge price is reduced to ensure they retain their loyal sports subscription subscribers & I would strongly advise sky to start reducing the price ASAP, the sooner the better!!!!
Comments
It will no doubt affect non-football fans - BT will likely increase broadband charges as well as line rental. You could vote with your feet but as providers have shown already, they will adjust their product & prices to be inline with each other as to make no difference.
Sky Sports need to take into account for football rights they do not have currently !
No Live England qualifying games or international Friendlies!
No live FA Cup football!
No Live Charity -Community Football!
No German, Italian, French, Dutch, Portuguese Live football!
And from 2015
NO LIVE CHAMPIONS LEAGUE FOOTBALL!
NO LIVE EUROPA LEAGUE FOOTBALL!
Sky need to take this into account big time
& ensure sports monthly packaged charge price is reduced to ensure they retain their loyal sports subscription subscribers & I would strongly advise sky to start reducing the price ASAP, the sooner the better!!!!
The status quo was much better than splitting major rights between different subscription companies, resulting in people having to pay more.
So what if Sky had a monopoly on football, it's cheaper than what we have now.
Please tell me you didn't just say MotoGP rights are going to BT.
:mad:
Really? :eek: IMO there should be some kind of co broadcasting deal with ITV, I'm not subscribing just for that.
The BBC get a share in the FA Cup next season.
Ha! Look at the big picture. Sky created the premium pay monthly for sports model , taking it away from terrestrial tv. Was that a good thing ? Yes for footballer's salaries and shareholders, but not for consumers. But people were willing to pay and it flourished. This step is merely those same authorities (uefa , fifa) further monetising the sport. They're greedy and don't care about fans. It's purely business. Sky lost at their own game effectively. The only power consumers have is to not pay for such services and bring the demand down. Other companies want a slice of the pie and if all these fans are willing to pay, so be it split it up. Sky wasn't doing anyone any favours and have had extortionate prices anyway.
The cost of watching sport will never come down. The higher the number of subscribers, the more they charge which is quite the opposite of what you expect. This is what is happening. They'll bid and bid and pass the cost on to you. It's a luxury service. Their ethos (sky, uefa etc) has never been to get the most coverage in terms of viewers-- they could easily make it more affordable AND profitable -- but it's merely about fleecing the sport fanatics/maximising profit who'll pay a very high premium.
At the end of the day it's the fans and the players largely responsible for these incredible subscriber fees and ticket prices. Stop complaining!! You're the ones fuelling it.
How have i driven them to this ?
Anyone who's tried cancelling part or all of their Sky package will tell you Sky will offer you lots of deals to keep you signed up .
I wouldn't normally kick someone when they are down but this BT Sport thing could be a great opportunity to negotiate a better deal with SKY.
You're willing to pay more and more for your subscription. Why wouldn't companies like Sky bid more and more each deal knowing their base is willing to absorb the cost. Sport is a premium service now. Be prepared to pay or quit watching it. The truth is only the latter will bring the cost down long term.
ESPN are owned by Disney. Hardly makes them an interloper.
I am glad Sky have got some serious competition. The disappointment is that there is less FTA sport, although Sky did plenty of damage to FTA long before BT entered the market. Unfortunately FTA cannot compete with Sky, BT is one of the few British companies that can. If Sky cared they would offer better value to customers and lower their prices, instead they continue with their annual price rises.
You won't have to worry about broadband or line rental prices because that market is hugely competitive. BT is also growing into a lot of other markets so BT revenues will continue to grow.
How many of their subscribers paid to get it though? A lot less than 2m.
It's awful news, how can it be good news? Now if you want to watch all the football then unless you happen to have Virgin or BT Broadband you have to pay even more money. Explain again how that is good?
Explain to me how BT paying more than double what the last lot of CL games went for is going to make watching football on tv cheaper?
We don't know the prices yet.
It'll probably be more expensive to watch all football but now there is choice there. For a long time if you didn't have Sky you got zip. I imagine bt will have their sports channels on sky and virgin as an extra premium. Some football will be available on all service providers making it more affordable and accessible so that's a good thing.
If you want all football you'll need to pay for it. It was always going this way. The powers that be are selling these rights and ultimately it's the consumers that have shown they have an appetite for football (no matter the cost it would seem).
Why can't it be good news ? Some people don't like the smug, gloating attitude that SKY sometime portray. They now have serious competition which they can't bully around. Let them see for once what losing big TV. sports rights is like.
Apologies as this is off-topic, but that's a bit strong to say that the BBC didn't bother to bid enough; there is only so much money in the BBC sport budget, especially following the licence fee freeze (which reduced the BBC Sport budget by 15%), so if another broadcaster comes in with a mind-blowing bid (I read somewhere that BT bid FOUR times what the Beeb put on the table regarding MotoGP), then naturally, the rights holder will take the biggest bid.
In a way, this is similar to BBC losing all horse racing to C4 (although there were other forces at work regarding the move of all racing - including the Grand National, Derby and Royal Ascot - to C4).
i have bt,i like bt
but for big games? i want skys polished coverage, not stupid laid back david james crap
While we all pay even more to watch our football. Great.
It's called Sky SPORTS not FOOTBALL.
There is virtually zero chance of a price reduction as well as they know no-one will leave while they still have most of the PL games.