Football and money

[Baleforce]

In their opinion they are but not in those who either choose not to and those who can not afford it. I am not sure people are calling in drove either, I know lots of people who have cancelled their contracts over the last 12 months.

that's all fine, they don't have to please everyone, just enough people to make them profitable, bearing in mind how much they have spent of live football rights in the last 18 months I'm sure they both feel it is

 

[parklane1]

that's all fine, they don't have to please everyone, just enough people to make them profitable, bearing in mind how much they have spent of live football rights in the last 18 months I'm sure they both feel it is

And in the meantime they are starving the fans of tomorrow to be able to see the game that they would love, hence the rise in streaming. Its even worse for those who used to watch Test cricket on the free channels.

 

[Baleforce]

And in the meantime they are starving the fans of tomorrow to be able to see the game that they would love, hence the rise in streaming. Its even worse for those who used to watch Test cricket on the free channels.

is there any evidence of that happening though, they took the darts over 20 years ago, cricket not long after, the youth interest is still there, my office isn't far from Lords, whenever a test is on there are still plenty of kids around in badly fitted suits and clip on ties

also, does the current trend not suggest that the fans of tomorrow are those from distant shores in front of a screen rather than local kids?

I can see this from another angle as I'm a fan of a team in U.S. sport, I've never been to the stadium, I've never even been to the country, but I still buy the merchandise and watch the adverts around the broadcasts I pay for, I'm still a financial win for them and I don't have any less affection for them knowing the hard facts of it, I care just as much about Tony Romo's throwing arm as I do about Harry Kane's right foot, hell, I care way more, I have a full on man crush on Romo

the entire system is changing, things are not going to turn back

 

[parklane1]

is there any evidence of that happening though, they took the darts over 20 years ago, cricket not long after, the youth interest is still there, my office isn't far from Lords, whenever a test is on there are still plenty of kids around in badly fitted suits and clip on ties

also, does the current trend not suggest that the fans of tomorrow are those from distant shores in front of a screen rather than local kids?

I can see this from another angle as I'm a fan of a team in U.S. sport, I've never been to the stadium, I've never even been to the country, but I still buy the merchandise and watch the adverts around the broadcasts I pay for, I'm still a financial win for them and I don't have any less affection for them knowing the hard facts of it, I care just as much about Tony Romo's throwing arm as I do about Harry Kane's right foot, hell, I care way more, I have a full on man crush on Romo

the entire system is changing, things are not going to turn back

Well I can not speak about darts as to me its a pub game not a sport, but I among many others grew up watching test cricket on the BBC and it turned a lot of youngsters into cricket fans. Now you only have to see all the empty seats around in the Lge games and there is a lost generation of supporters who have not been enticed into watching cricket live.

 

[Baleforce]

Well I can not speak about darts as to me its a pub game not a sport, but I among many others grew up watching test cricket on the BBC and it turned a lot of youngsters into cricket fans. Now you only have to see all the empty seats around in the Lge games and there is a lost generation of supporters who have not been enticed into watching cricket live.

it could be that, I honestly don't know, my feeling has always been that with the increase in international cricket and the way central contracts limited the top players availability for county matches that the quality of that format nosedived, that's just my theory though

20/20 seems to be doing ok crowd wise I suppose, always a lot of kids there from what I've seen

 

[parklane1]

it could be that, I honestly don't know, my feeling has always been that with the increase in international cricket and the way central contracts limited the top players availability for county matches that the quality of that format nosedived, that's just my theory though

20/20 seems to be doing ok crowd wise I suppose, always a lot of kids there from what I've seen

20/20 cricket is the modern game and ( imo) is not proper cricket and is the way they have gone because proper cricket is losing money hand over fist, one reason for this is that since the BBC lost rights to the likes of Sky the new generation was lost.

Its also a day out with bands and gimmicks, as I say Stop! Hammer time and it really does not effect me seeing my team , but Sky are one of the reasons that has turned our great game into
the money game it has become and ( imo) that is a great pity.

 

[Baleforce]

20/20 cricket is the modern game and ( imo) is not proper cricket and is the way they have gone because proper cricket is losing money hand over fist, one reason for this is that since the BBC lost rights to the likes of Sky the new generation was lost.

Its also a day out with bands and gimmicks, as I say Stop! Hammer time and it really does not effect me seeing my team , but Sky are one of the reasons that has turned our great game into
the money game it has become and ( imo) that is a great pity.

maybe, my feeling is sky skated to where the puck was going to be rather than hitting it there themselves, change was due, the appetite for live sport wasn't being sated

 

[parklane1]

maybe, my feeling is sky skated to where the puck was going to be rather than hitting it there themselves

Fair enough I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[jts1882]

Sky and BT only charge what the market will be bear, they are not holding a knife to anyone's throat, in fact people are calling them in droves to hand over money for the service

not being a TV viewer doesn't protect you from it either, even in the new stadium gate receipts alone will not pay the clubs bills, TV money is huge, sponsorship money for the shirt, stadium hoardings and any other flat surface is all based on expected TV exposure

if everyone was paying, the cost would come down

But it is a market where they hold exclusive rights. If Sky and BT both held the rights to the same games and competed on who had the best coverage and price, then that would be a market price.

The packages introduced after the EU ruling just makes things worse as it doesn't introduce competition and creates a cartel.

 

[Baleforce]

But it is a market where they hold exclusive rights. If Sky and BT both held the rights to the same games and competed on who had the best coverage and price, then that would be a market price.

The packages introduced after the EU ruling just makes things worse as it doesn't introduce competition and creates a cartel.

yep, but why does it happen like that? because the holders only sell in packages to a single broadcaster to maximise the money, i'm sure Sky would be just as happy to pay a third of the price and have a game shown on BT as well

 

[jts1882]

I don't think so. Sky's whole business model was built on exclusive rights to sports and especially the PL. They might not mind so much about BT now they are established, but they would have strongly objected to sharing with the BBC or ITV. They needed it to be on Sky only to get people to buy their service.

It is a general problem with exclusive or monopoly positions. One could make a similar argument about the prices clubs charge. There is only one place a Spurs supporter can watch Spurs in the flesh. There is the option of going to watch other clubs - Arsenal or Barnet or Orient or even West Ham - but clearly the tribal nature of football makes this unpalatable. With Sky there was not even this alternative. I suppose now with BT there is the possibility of watching alternative games but the trouble is they have cross-licensing deals which makes it more of a cartel than true competition.

Anyway, we are stuck with it. Something else to thank Alan Sugar for.

 

[parklane1]

I remember the days ( old fart that I am) when I used to pay just under 2 pound a month and could just have the football. Now I have no idea what it is now as I cancelled it many years ago because it was rip off and I hated what Sky have turned football into.

 

[Gilzeantoscore]

Football and money. One kills the other.

 

[glasgowspur]

I have sky, I only watch the Spurs games and a little golf. That's bloody expensive, why can't I just get sky sports? Why do need to pay for 200 other channels of rubbish and then the same rubbish an hour later!!
I can really see me ditching the whole thing. Rhetorical question by the.
There's other ways of watching Spurs.

 

[scaramanga]

I still pay for a streaming service. Not because of the price, but the service.

I get to watch any match, any time on any device I choose - in SD or HD depending on my connection.

If there was an above board service that allowed me to do that then I'd pay for it. I'm not paying for any service that blacks out 3pm matches because some bricky northern clubs can't sell their seats.

 

[Jordinho]

Wolves have been put up for sale by their owner, same as Aston Villa and West Brom. I think the bubble is starting to burst in that these second and third tier clubs aren't interesting any more. Nobody wants to put up the amount of money it will take to challenge and the fans are ungrateful bastards always moaning about lack of ambition.

For the foreseeable future it will be the same six clubs in the top six places I think. Nobody else has the finances to stay up there for more than a couple of seasons.

Being able to dream of better times is an essential part of keeping supporters coming to games.

 

[Jordinho]

https://twitter.com/x/status/693061186300936192

 

[braineclipse]

All that money and a transfer embargo so no way to spend it.

Should put Florentino Perez on a suicide watch this summer with the combination of frustration and sheer pain from all that money burning a hole in his pocket and well into his thigh...

 

[Baleforce]

Wolves have been put up for sale by their owner, same as Aston Villa and West Brom. I think the bubble is starting to burst in that these second and third tier clubs aren't interesting any more. Nobody wants to put up the amount of money it will take to challenge and the fans are ungrateful bastards always moaning about lack of ambition.

For the foreseeable future it will be the same six clubs in the top six places I think. Nobody else has the finances to stay up there for more than a couple of seasons.

Being able to dream of better times is an essential part of keeping supporters coming to games.

massive opportunity, buy all three clubs and merge them, could make a lot of money off of that, would be even better if they could get Birmingham as well

franchises and mergers are inevitable imo, might as well get in on the ground floor

 

[Jordinho]

massive opportunity, buy all three clubs and merge them, could make a lot of money off of that, would be even better if they could get Birmingham as well

franchises and mergers are inevitable imo, might as well get in on the ground floor

North London FC?