Originally Posted by fodg09:
“It is an interesting point. Presumably Sky would have liked, and still do like, the idea of being the exclusive home of the Champions League and presumably they did bid for every package in the last rights process - of course it is perfectly possible that ITV simply out bid Sky for the Tuesday night first picks.
But equally if Sky bid the most for every package and UEFA still gave one to ITV, it obviously indicates a desire on their part to keep some coverage FTA. One would imagine that the only way they would back away from this desire is if Sky or BT paid a hefty premium.”
arius has previously posted that ITV was not the highest bidder for CL Tues 1st picks last time.
If that's correct then Sky must have been as there were no other serious bidders - yet UEFA awarded Tues 1st picks to ITV.
My own view is that it all depends on the scale of the Pay only premium.
Originally Posted by fodg09:
“Sky would rather have one FTA match on ITV than any matches to be shown on BT Sport.”
I wouldn't agree with that.
If the other games are on BT Sport they are available to far fewer people than if they are on ITV.
Nobody will cancel a Sky sub because something is on BTS when they wouldn't cancel a Sky sub because the same content was on ITV.
Think about the PL - Sky would far rather the non-Sky games are on Setanta / ESPN / BTS than if they were FTA.
The more top sports content that is FTA the more people who won't pay for
any Pay TV sports channel.
As long as Sky Sports is clearly the number 1 Pay TV sports channel then Sky want as little top sport FTA as possible - to get people to go Pay.
CL Tues 1st picks going from ITV to BTS would mean more people sign up to BTS but also more would sign up to Sky Sports as well - ie some people who have held out
completely against Pay up to now would fold and go Pay and most will go Sky - very few will go BTS only (unless getting it for free).