Originally Posted by ariusuk:
“Neither will want to share the competition with another pay broadcaster.
One package of first picks wouldn't hold any value for either, if all the other games were on the other: it's simply not a big enough offering to drive subscriptions.”
“Neither will want to share the competition with another pay broadcaster.
One package of first picks wouldn't hold any value for either, if all the other games were on the other: it's simply not a big enough offering to drive subscriptions.”
I really don't agree with the above.
For BT: 38 PL games + one CL 1st pick package is a very much more attractive proposition than 38 PL games + no CL. It would mean the possibility of absolute mega marquee games - which they get very few of in the PL.
For Sky: One CL 1st pick package remains an important property, whether or not they still have one or both 2nd pick packages.
Approx 85% of the value in the CL is in the 1st picks - I know there's quite a lot of interest on here in the other picks but commercially it's really all about the 1st picks. 2nd picks are worth peanuts as soon as you get to the last 16 as you won't get a single British game (unless 5 teams reach last 16 or 3 teams reach QFs and are kept apart - ie very, very unlikely).
Outside of the PL, the 1st pick CL packages are in the very top tier of UK TV sports rights - one 1st pick package is of importance and major value to Sky / BT, whoever has the other.
Re your final point - key point is that it is the overall channel content offering which drive subs - not individual pieces of content. A CL 1st pick package makes any Pay channel more attractive overall.
Of course individual pieces of content improve overall attractiveness but decision faced by consumer is "Do I get the channel or not?" - and that decision is based on overall attractiveness.





....lord help me..