Premier League trying to fight streaming, can the war be won?

JamboMac

Deleted User wrote: »

1975 v Bayern Munich. You really need to do your homework better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bov7NckEIFo

No somebody who is claiming that somebody is a big needs to prove that and that still doesn't. Sorry.

eagle eye

How did a thread about the Premier league trying to fight streaming turn into an argument about whether teams are big or not?

Riesen_Meal

Saw a match being streamed on Twitch the other day and gave me a giggle...

The way I see it is if my team gave me an online option to see all their games for a yearly fee I would be all over it, until that day I will stick to my means...

the whole year inn

Theres a big market for this, people won't always go the illegal way, if there was a high quality and reliable streaming service then I'd buy it. Why doesn't someone fill this gap?

Riesen_Meal

the whole year inn wrote: »

Why doesn't someone fill this gap?

Sky and BT pay the EU rights, that's why....

irishman86

chopperbyrne wrote: »

Leeds are on course to securing a playoff spot, and it will be great for the EPL if both Leeds and Newcastle get promoted.

None of that has anything to do with illegal streaming though.

That war will never be won, until an affordable, legal alternative is offered.

Similar to Spotify and Netflix. I hold my hands up and honestly say I torrented, but not really anymore with my Amazon/Spotify/Netflix it covers most of my tv needs. I would love for something like this for football

Jan_de_Bakker

Pity they don´t have a pay per view system - but per game, no minimum subscription - and reasonable prices, like €5 for an EPL match ...

I'd pay that.

This €30/ month for a basic Sky Sports package is horse**** ..

Jayop

Jan_de_Bakker wrote: »

Pity they don´t have a pay per view system - but per game, no minimum subscription - and reasonable prices, like €5 for an EPL match ...

I'd pay that.

This €30/ month for a basic Sky Sports package is horse**** ..

Fiver for a league match on telly? Not a bloody hope would I pay that much. There's weekends I might watch 7 or 8 games.

the whole year inn

Jayop wrote: »

Fiver for a league match on telly? Not a bloody hope would I pay that much. There's weekends I might watch 7 or 8 games.

Well 6 for me and wouldn't pay that either.

citytillidie

Now TV is sort of getting there for sky £10 a week for access to all Sky Sports channels live, so you could time it to just when your team is on and get the pass. It is £6.99 for 24 hour access

Beasty

Jayop wrote: »

Fiver for a league match on telly? Not a bloody hope would I pay that much. There's weekends I might watch 7 or 8 games.

Not much more than 20 years ago I was paying per match that for the top priced season ticket at OT. It's gone up 10 fold since then.

They will charge what they think they can get away with and even if a few drop out they will do the maths and continue increasing the price as long as it helps them grow overall revenues. They may be getting near to saturation in the UK&I but there are also other markets out there to exploit, as well as pricing in the foreign coverage they provide

theoneeyedman

Jan_de_Bakker wrote: »

Pity they don´t have a pay per view system - but per game, no minimum subscription - and reasonable prices, like €5 for an EPL match ...

I'd pay that.

This €30/ month for a basic Sky Sports package is horse**** ..

Plus 30 for basic channels like RTE BBC etc, most of which are free anyway

Fr Tod Umptious

theoneeyedman wrote: »

Plus 30 for basic channels like RTE BBC etc, most of which are free anyway

The way I look at it now is that I'm not paying sky for the channels but more for the service, the pause and rewind, the on demand etc.

Nothing else matches it for functionality

Jan_de_Bakker

There is 24 hour access ?
is available internationally ?

edit just checked not available outside the UK ... pity ..

Oat23

Not football related but Sky price gouging related. Joshua v Klitschko is €24.95 on sky box office on the 29th. If you turned your dish 9 degrees you'd get it free on RTL Germany...

€25 for a PPV is ridiculous money..

Liam O

Oat23 wrote: »

Not football related but Sky price gouging related. Joshua v Klitschko is €24.95 on sky box office on the 29th. If you turned your dish 9 degrees you'd get it free on RTL Germany...

€25 for a PPV is ridiculous money..

Don't go to America so

Oat23

Liam O wrote: »

Don't go to America so

I was about to rant about the US prices in that post but I'm on my phone and can't be bothered!

JamboMac

Isn't Australia considerably cheaper for sky packages?

noodler

Jan_de_Bakker wrote: »

There is 24 hour access ?
is available internationally ?

edit just checked not available outside the UK ... pity ..

Works for me.

Just downloaded the APP using a UK account on PS3/4.

Minderbinder

Deleted User wrote: »

RoboKlopp wrote: »

That's everyone told.

Cancel those subscriptions and set fire to those android boxes folks! MOTD is plenty.

Well im only giving my own personal opinion to be honest but at the same time i kinda struggle to understand how the Premier League still holds the appeal.

Well imo if you're only watching motd as your source for PL football then I can totally understand why you find it unappealing.

KevIRL

A bunch more channels gone dark on cs this morning including Sky sports 2,4 and 5.

Jayop

Ah well, we had a good run with it

KevIRL

KevIRL wrote: »

A bunch more channels gone dark on cs this morning including Sky sports 2,4 and 5.

Jayop wrote: »

Ah well, we had a good run with it

More time in the pub so

rob316

Oat23 wrote: »

Not football related but Sky price gouging related. Joshua v Klitschko is €24.95 on sky box office on the 29th. If you turned your dish 9 degrees you'd get it free on RTL Germany...

€25 for a PPV is ridiculous money..

$60 the buddy has to pay out for the UFC PPV in the states.

KevIRL

KevIRL wrote: »

A bunch more channels gone dark on cs this morning including Sky sports 2,4 and 5.

Still work on android

Augeo

Augeo wrote: »

Still work on android

Mobdro?

M!Ck^

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Mobdro?

yup

grand yoke

I can't have a satellite dish so I tried an android box as an experiment as it would boil me p1ss to pay for free to air stuff

Best €50 experiment ever tbh.

to be fair, it's better on the mobile than through the android box. But still credible viewing IMO, when you factor in the cost.

The Golden Miller

JamboMac wrote: »

Leeds aren't really a big club and its been 13 years since they have seen the premier league. Leeds are in their with the sheffield wednesday of the past, where big teams and where built off large investment which was the downfall in the end.

Leeds are one of the biggest clubs in England you mug

Augeo

Augeo wrote: »

yup

grand yoke

I can't have a satellite dish so I tried an android box as an experiment as it would boil me p1ss to pay for free to air stuff

Best €50 experiment ever tbh.

to be fair, it's better on the mobile than through the android box. But still credible viewing IMO, when you factor in the cost.

I find it ok, was having trouble with El Classico at the weekend. Bit choppy

Lucas Hood

IPTV the way forward.

Both legally and illegally.

TV networks haven't caught up yet.

JaMarcusHustle

Augeo wrote:

Still work on android

Your Android streaming provider is probably getting the channels from a genuine Sky subscription then, or from a Virgin Media account.

If your provider was getting his channels from a CS setup, then they'd be gone too.

JaMarcusHustle

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

Your Android streaming provider.............

How bad :pac:

Fr Tod Umptious

Lucas Hood wrote: »

IPTV the way forward.

Both legally and illegally.

TV networks haven't caught up yet.

IPTV is only a means to carry a signal, just as satellite is.

Sky already have a mix of satellite (for live) and IP (for on demand)

Right now the EPL don't sell IP only rights.

JamboMac

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Leeds are one of the biggest clubs in England you mug

Yeah bring up something from a month ago and no many clubs are bigger. Mug:D

Riesen_Meal

Lucas Hood wrote: »

IPTV the way forward.

Both legally and illegally.

TV networks haven't caught up yet.

I agree

I moved to IPTV about a year ago and have multiroom on 2 x TVs in the house...

If there was a similar offer that was legit I would be all over it....

Fr Tod Umptious

Fieldog wrote: »

I agree

I moved to IPTV about a year ago and have multiroom on 2 x TVs in the house...

If there was a similar offer that was legit I would be all over it....

Vodafone offer a legit IP TV service, as do Eir.

But price wise there is not a huge difference between it and Sky.

If anyone is looking for all sports etc at a cheap price legally they are not going to get it.

The Golden Miller

JamboMac wrote: »

Yeah bring up something from a month ago and no many clubs are bigger. Mug:D

Outside the big 3 of Liverpool, Arsenal and United, who is bigger? There's a few teams who would be a level down including the two money teams of Man City and Chelsea, while you also have Spurs, Newcastle, Villa, Everton and Leeds. It's give or take who would be the biggest in this second bracket when you factor in all metrics, but Leeds are certainly one of the biggest. Unless what you mean by big is teams who won all their titles before 1910 and have been minnows since? And yes, I personally lost interest in the Premier League over the years seeing as over half of it is filled with small teams that no one has any interest in, a slide that begun with Leeds United's relegation.

JamboMac

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Outside the big 3 of Liverpool, Arsenal and United, who is bigger? There's a few teams who would be a level down including the two money teams of Man City and Chelsea, while you also have Spurs, Newcastle, Villa, Everton and Leeds. It'sbgive or take who would be the biggest in this second bracket when you factor in all metrics, but Leeds are certainly one of the biggest. And yes, I personally lost interest in the Premier League over the years seeing as over half of it is filled with small teams, a slide that begun with Leeds United's relegation.

They don't make the top 10 in any of those metrics, you can't stretch the definition of one of the biggest to get there. It's like old people the definition of young gets older each year.

The Golden Miller

JamboMac wrote: »

They don't make the top 10 in any of those metrics, you can't stretch the definition of one of the biggest to get there. It's like old people the definition of young gets older each year.

Considering I never stated any exact metrics,what one's do you have in mind that excludes Leeds from a top 10 position?

JamboMac

The Golden Miller wrote: »

What metrics do you have in mind out of curiosity?

Simply google biggest clubs in England its all been done countless times in one Huddersfield town is just 2 places behind them.

https://www.google.ie/search?q=biggest+football+clubs+in+england&rlz=1C9BKJA_enIE628IE628&oq=big&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i61j69i57j0l2j69i60.3026j0j7&hl=en-GB&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#spf=1

https://www.talksport.com/football/top-30-biggest-football-clubs-britain-30-number-one-ranked-161224221224

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_football_clubs_in_England_by_competitive_honours_won

www.101greatgoals.com/blog/50-biggest-clubs-england-man-united-1st-arsenal-2nd-daily-mail-graphic/

http://www.totalsportek.com/list/most-successful-clubs-in-english-football-history/

thelad95

I haven't read all of this thread so apologies if this has already been said but really I think the days of the Sky Sports package are coming to an end simply because it's a poor value product. It's €40 a month but if you're a west brom supporter why would you pay that much when your team will only be shown maybe ten times throughout the whole season (or whatever the minimum quota is).

Fans want to see THEIR team, your west brom supporter couldn't give a fiddlers about the merseyside derby and is unlikely to actually watch it.

I know some puritans will come in and say 'well he should go to the games' but that's not always financially possible especially with rising ticket prices every year.

I think the future of sports broadcasting including the premier league will be legitimate streaming services that will be available to watch via smart TVs or laptops/phones/tablets etc. with various different price discrimination options eg. Paying for just one game at a time, paying for just one team or all games etc.

This is a far better value product instead of paying close to €400 throughout a full season to simply watch what sky sports decides is the most 'attractive' fixture.

Strangely enough fans will still go to games and attendances won't fall over a cliff.

Sky sports and the premier league have had a long happy time ripping customers off for nearly thirty years but that will only go on for so long before people see sense.

The Golden Miller

JamboMac wrote: »

Simply google biggest clubs in England its all been done countless times in one Huddersfield town is just 2 places behind them.

https://www.google.ie/search?q=biggest+football+clubs+in+england&rlz=1C9BKJA_enIE628IE628&oq=big&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i61j69i57j0l2j69i60.3026j0j7&hl=en-GB&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#spf=1

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_football_clubs_in_England_by_competitive_honours_won

www.101greatgoals.com/blog/50-biggest-clubs-england-man-united-1st-arsenal-2nd-daily-mail-graphic/

http://www.totalsportek.com/list/most-successful-clubs-in-english-football-history/

Most of those lists are talking about honours, honours clubs were winning when Kilkenny were still winning football All-Irelands. If you go back far enough in any game there were all sorts of winners, before the big clubs grew and came to the forefront of the game. By the same reasoning, Torino are a bigger club than Roma these days? Leeds have been more successful and consistently better than all the teams you mention in the last few decades, outside the one's I previously listed myself. They have one of the biggest fanbases, they created a dynasty that is often considered one of the best teams England ever produced, they are arguably the most hated team in the country, and you don't get that "honour" lightly

JamboMac

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Most of those lists are talking about honours, honours clubs were winning when Kilkenny were still winning football All-Irelands. If you go back far enough in any game there were all sorts of winners, before the big clubs grew and came to the forefront of the game. By the same reasoning, Torino are a bigger club than Roma these days. Leeds have been more successful and consistently better than all the teams you mention in the last few decades, outside the one's I previously listed myself. They have one of the biggest fanbases, they created a dynasty that is often considered one of the best teams England ever produced, they are arguably the most hated team in the country. By the same reasoning, Torino are a "bigger" club than Roma

The 101 great goals takes fan base into account, I've looked at it from multiple angles and they don't make the top 10. This survey is from 2015 but it takes in a lot of variables including crowds and player quality. They had a good run nearly 20 years ago now.

Tigerandahalf

I wonder will the Premier League offer IPTV contract offers soon?

The mobile networks would be attracted to these. With Chromecast compatability the game could be cast to the tv.

As said above offering club packages may appeal to a lot of fans but I think people still want to see the big games between the title contenders. So the TV packages will still appeal unless offerings are made for IPTV as well that would cover all games. However that would weaken the value of the tv package being sold to Sky and BT.

The Golden Miller

JamboMac wrote: »

The 101 great goals takes fan base into account, I've looked at it from multiple angles and they don't make the top 10. This survey is from 2015 but it takes in a lot of variables including crowds and player quality. They had a good run nearly 20 years ago now.

Outside the clubs I mentioned, name one that would be considered bigger than Leeds today? The list you gave, still gives weighting to honours won over 100 years ago, with no real relevance to what is considered a big club today

JamboMac

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Outside the clubs I mentioned, name one that would be considered bigger than Leeds today?

Southampton, if they could have have kept those players they created they'd be one of the biggest. Constantly a team big clubs fear. Wolves was once considered a big club, so was forest and many more. Times pass things change.

The Golden Miller

JamboMac wrote: »

Southampton, if they could have have kept those players they created they'd be one of the biggest. Constantly a team big clubs fear. Wolves was once considered a big club, so was forest and many more. Times pass things change.

If's and but's with Soton. Is that your best argument? Yet, TODAY, none of them are bigger draws than Leeds. Forest are a regional team, with one great dynasty thanks to Brian Clough and disappeared back to mediocrity afterwards. Leeds have created about 3 different big teams that won the league and/or were consistent challengers since Wolves or Southampton last done anything of note. Nor do Soton or Wolves have anything in the way of a fanbase comparable to Leeds. You are clutching at straws here. Yes, the teams you mentioned have impressive histories, but none are even close to being the footballing institutions or draw that Leeds United is.

JamboMac

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Yet, TODAY, none of them are bigger draws than Leeds. Forest are a regional team, with one great dynasty thanks to Brian Clough and disappeared back to mediocrity afterwards. Leeds have created about 3 different big teams that won the league and/or were consistent challengers since Wolves or Southampton last done anything of note. Nor to Soton or Wolves have anything in the way of a fanbase comparable to Leeds. You are clutching at straws here. Yes, the teams you mentioned have impressive histories, but none are even close to being the footballing institutions or draw that Leeds United is.

Both wolves and Southampton got promoted, they got back to the big time. Did you look at any of the surveys I showed, the fan base is equal or greater. You haven't a straw to clutch.

But hey I give you evidence, you give me anecdotes.

The Golden Miller

JamboMac wrote: »

Both wolves and Southampton got promoted, they got back to the big time. Did you look at any of the surveys I showed, the fan base is equal or greater. You haven't a straw to clutch.

But hey I give you evidence, you give me anecdotes.

Any real links showing how two teams from small cities with no real recent history of note, have a bigger fanbase than the sole team who comes from the 3rd biggest city in England, who have drawn fans from all ages and locations due to their success in several different era's over the last few decades? Yes, they got promoted, so did Burnley. Burnley still aren't bigger than Leeds. When was the last Soton or Wolves jersey you seen around Ireland? Where is this mythical support coming from?

https://www.footballgroundmap.com/stats/teams

Would you suppose you link carries more weight than mine? Or that they are both vague? Unless we see how these links are broken down in their findings, they mean little. You don't need a link to know Man United have more fans than Burnley, by a lesser extent you don't need a link to know that Leeds have a fanbase far in excess of Soton and Wolves.

Jayop

Honestly start a thread about whether leeds are a big club or not because this thread isn't about them.

I'd say if you started a thread and found it struggled to get more than three people posting in it you would get your answer.