• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

#CharityNotPPV - Spurs v Brighton and West Brom

Are you?

  • Donating to charity, fudge Sky/BT and the PL

    Votes: 4 12.9%

  • Paying Sky/BT begrudgingly

    Votes: 5 16.1%

  • Dodgy stream / Follow on social media / don't care

    Votes: 22 71.0%
  • Total voters
    31
  • Poll closed .
Diamond Lights

Diamond Lights

Alan Hutton
So, what are people doing? As seen a Spurs campaign brewing.

Not intending this to be a political statement (that's what we argue on Randomination about) but interested to know where people land?
 
Quite surprised people going to pay for it. I'll definitely watch, but i pay enough to Sky as it is, think i'll find an eastern european stream that's delayed after my FlashScore app updates anyway.
 
Diamond Lights said:
Quite surprised people going to pay for it. I'll definitely watch, but i pay enough to Sky as it is, think i'll find an eastern european stream that's delayed after my FlashScore app updates anyway.
Click to expand...
In different circumstances I can see there being more resistance but this is an extra game that wouldn’t usually be covered at a time when people are spending less on other forms of entertainment such as the cinema, going out for meals, going to the pub or even the matches. The average river watcher probably uses it as the only means of catching a game that isn’t otherwise available and may choose the quality and ease of Sky, especially if they don’t have any service hooked up to their tv. Conversely if people good river quality why would they pay for Sky at all?
If this was in usual circumstances it would probably make me head to the pub to watch it.
Ultimately a football fan and their money are soon parted.
 
MKSpur said:
Ha yes we need an option to pay to watch it and again for some virtue signalling without actually missing the game :)
Click to expand...
Needs to be done
I’m going through real states of euphoria with us as a club and dismay at the way we are as a country at points
So it’s a balance
The good and the bad kinda
 
Ah for fudge sake. I wasn't too happy about paying the money for the game which I object to on principle but I know as a fan I'll just do anyway. Now I'm going to end up donating to the foodbank too. Screw you Tottenham.

And we all know Spurs will fudge us over anyway and lose more spectacularly than at Brighton last year.
 
I'm disappointed that some fans are paying the £15. We should all have agreed not to pay that much, it is WAY too much money for the product. Now, SKY know that £15 is fine and will probably charge more than that every year until people stop paying it. It should be more like £5.
 
Bullet said:
I'm disappointed that I think that I am a better football fan than the rest of you are paying the £15. We should all have agreed not to pay that much, it is WAY too much money for the product. Now, SKY know that £15 is fine and will probably charge more than that every year until people stop paying it. It should be more like £5.
Click to expand...
Part of the problem is that championship clubs are charging £10 - which is probably driven by the fact they’re a lot worse off than us and need every penny they can get - and this in turn gives the Premier League the (misplaced) belief it can charge more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back