Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: paulcomben on February 18, 2013, 07:06:57 PM
-
Interesting thoughts about the future of TV fees versus streaming:
http://www.mob76outlook.com/digital-is-bringing-football-to-the-point-of-collapse/
"If I want to watch the 5-10 games that my club play on Sky Sports each season I have to pay £150 on a TV licence, £250 on a regular Sky Subscription plus hundreds more on the Sports upgrade. Surely it’s a matter of time before this inaccessibly awful system collapses?
Major League Baseball in the US has clocked the wider cultural shift and adapted accordingly. You can subscribe to just your team’s games for under £100 a year, accessible from pretty much any device. They also show one random game for free each day, for the more casual viewers.
I’d say I’m a fairly typical British citizen. I’m a twenty-something bloke with some disposable income and an interest in football. I go to a small handful of live games a year, but have little interest in TV in general.
To get my weekend football fix, I point my browser at the litany of streaming sites available, and suffer the pixelated blow rather than fork out the exorbitant alternatives. It looks stupid on a 104” projector, let me assure you.
If there was any sort of reasonable alternative, either through the Premier League clubs directly or through a third party, I’d snap it up. I don’t want to be a pirate, but I feel my hands are tied. Yep; it’s entitled, but I’m one of millions across the country in a similar position – potentially millions of pounds that clubs are missing out on.
I gave up the piracy as soon as convenient and affordable options were made available for music and film, and I’m willing to do so for football too. The clubs and businesses cannot compare this widespread piracy to any other era, as these days, almost no-one has any qualms about illegal streams. It’s a totally different ball game (sorry).
Something’s got to give. One day, and sooner rather than later, technology, consumer behaviour and politics will align, and football will be forced to follow the other entertainment industries. Someone’s going to make a lot of money, and it may be just enough to give the sport the kick it needs to sort its tattered wallet out while we’re at it."
-
spending a lot of time abroad, I'd probably pay what it costs to buy a season ticket if I could watch all the games live on the net
-
The NFL do the same thing where you can buy a season pass to watch all your team's games. I would like the same in football but the argument has always been that it would adversely effect attendances. Having seen both perspectives, my guess would be that the people who go to games enjoy the atmosphere, the routine and being able to the whole game and not just what's on screen. As such, it would be interesting to see just how much effect it would have.
-
Personally I think that losing income due to streaming is no more than the greedy bastards at SKY deserve. They charge an absolutely astronomical fee to show you, at most, 50% of your teams games for the season and even less if you support a team from the lower divisions. They then kick up a stink when people resort to other means to watch their team play!
The current situation is their own damn fault for buying the rights to games they refuse to screen. Long live streaming!
-
Interesting thoughts about the future of TV fees versus streaming:
http://www.mob76outlook.com/digital-is-bringing-football-to-the-point-of-collapse/
"If I want to watch the 5-10 games that my club play on Sky Sports each season I have to pay £150 on a TV licence, £250 on a regular Sky Subscription plus hundreds more on the Sports upgrade. Surely it’s a matter of time before this inaccessibly awful system collapses?
Major League Baseball in the US has clocked the wider cultural shift and adapted accordingly. You can subscribe to just your team’s games for under £100 a year, accessible from pretty much any device. They also show one random game for free each day, for the more casual viewers.
Its actually a better deal than that. My subscription to "MLB.tv Premium" costs $130 per season and that gets me all the games, not just those of one team.
-
The current situation is their own damn fault for buying the rights to games they refuse to screen. Long live streaming!
Err, which games that Sky have bought the rights to do you think they aren't screening? They show every game that their deal with the Premier League allows them to.
I see the problem with selling rights to a team's entire season being that ManU, Chelsea et al. Will demand much more for their rights than they currently get under the collective bargaining agreement currently in place. As such the lesser teams will get far less TV revenue, and so the gap between haves and have nots gets wider still.
Whatever the rights and wrongs off it, I think it will get even worse. Sky whacked their latest bid up in anticipation of Al Jazeera bidding big. They were totally surprised by BT coming in big for the lesser package.
BT have now made no secret that they plan to rival Sky when the next contract comes up so goodness only knows what utterly hatstand money will be offered (it will be eye-poppingly big). And that will mean subscriptions won't be coming down, and rights will be protected even more fiercely.
-
Sorry to veer slightly off topic but its a point to consider, you can only watch the NFL & NHL games locally if the tickets in the stadiums are sold out. It's their way of getting bums on seats.
I agree with you though. Something has to give as the prices are reaching tipping point
-
For the football, rugby league and (particularly) cricket coverage me and my family get to watch I do think my Sky Sports subscription is decent value.
By comparison my Villa season ticket is not good value and I'd be saying that even if we were playing well.
I really do feel that a decent percentage of the TV money clubs get should have to go towards rewarding/subsidising the people who make the effort to go along to live games. When Villa are on live I'm effectively paying for the same game twice.
On a cold wet winter's night or Saturday evening I do question my sanity when I drive 20 odd miles and pay a fiver to park the car, maybe pay £3fucking40 for a tin of John Smith's if I'm flush, then sit and shiver watching a game I've already paid a tv subscription to watch. Then pop in the pub on the way home and listen to people who've been watching it there, in the warm, telling me it should never have been a penalty, or it was offside or whatever because they've also had a better view than me. And for what I've just paid out on petrol, parking and expensive second rate refreshments they've had a few nice draught pints and possibly a decent steak and chips too!
We are being taken for mugs, paying over the odds to be extras in a tv show.
It's not the one's watching in pubs or in their homes or by online subscriptions who are being overcharged - it's the ones who are there at the game week in week out, rain or shine. Match ticket prices should be a fixed low cost for live tv games, and season ticket holders who have paid up front should get credits on the following season's season ticket when they attend a live game.
If it carries on like this I shall be invoicing the club for image rights payments every time my miserable face appears in the background on some tv screen in Bangkok or wherever. Double price for piss-taking close-ups of me picking my nose or tripping up the steps!
-
The NFL do the same thing where you can buy a season pass to watch all your team's games. I would like the same in football but the argument has always been that it would adversely effect attendances. Having seen both perspectives, my guess would be that the people who go to games enjoy the atmosphere, the routine and being able to the whole game and not just what's on screen. As such, it would be interesting to see just how much effect it would have.
it works in the NFL because firstly there are so few teams compared to our football, so scarcity drives demand. Add to that there are only 8 guaranteed home games a season, as opposed to 19 PL games. The best NFL teams might see those home games increase to 10 at most, whereas the best teams in the PL could play many more games with the various cups thrown in. An aggressively priced TV package would have a highly detrimental affect on all but the most popular sides, and even they might see a sharp decline, especially in the "lesser" cups.
-
For the football, rugby league and (particularly) cricket coverage me and my family get to watch I do think my Sky Sports subscription is decent value.
By comparison my Villa season ticket is not good value and I'd be saying that even if we were playing well.
I really do feel that a decent percentage of the TV money clubs get should have to go towards rewarding/subsidising the people who make the effort to go along to live games. When Villa are on live I'm effectively paying for the same game twice.
On a cold wet winter's night or Saturday evening I do question my sanity when I drive 20 odd miles and pay a fiver to park the car, maybe pay £3fucking40 for a tin of John Smith's if I'm flush, then sit and shiver watching a game I've already paid a tv subscription to watch. Then pop in the pub on the way home and listen to people who've been watching it there, in the warm, telling me it should never have been a penalty, or it was offside or whatever because they've also had a better view than me. And for what I've just paid out on petrol, parking and expensive second rate refreshments they've had a few nice draught pints and possibly a decent steak and chips too!
We are being taken for mugs, paying over the odds to be extras in a tv show.
It's not the one's watching in pubs or in their homes or by online subscriptions who are being overcharged - it's the ones who are there at the game week in week out, rain or shine. Match ticket prices should be a fixed low cost for live tv games, and season ticket holders who have paid up front should get credits on the following season's season ticket when they attend a live game.
If it carries on like this I shall be invoicing the club for image rights payments every time my miserable face appears in the background on some tv screen in Bangkok or wherever. Double price for piss-taking close-ups of me picking my nose or tripping up the steps!
Well-argued.
I've never subscribed to SKY or ESPN, or their antecedents. I've taken this decision partly as a stand against the death of live events and also because I know that I will just become more and more couch-potato if I do!
However, I resent not being able to watch live England Rugby, Football and (to a lesser extent) Cricket. I think the latter two have limited their appeal by going across to the £££ side. And I increasingly resent the cost of a TV licence for the dross now served up on terrestrial, generally.
I like the idea of sport being made more accessible through some sort of media season ticket (I liked the Villa Streams model for example), but - as argued by RR#62 above - the competitive tendering process is likely to encourage larger firewalls rather than greater accessibility. I wonder whether BT / Sky have done the maths to show whether a more open approach (internet-streamed season ticket tariffs for club fans) would in fact garner more revenue than the current closed system.
-
Great thread title.
-
A season ticket for watching your clubs games on sky would be an interesting idea - how much would you think they would charge if they could do it?
-
A season ticket for watching your clubs games on sky would be an interesting idea - how much would you think they would charge if they could do it?
I don't think that would go down very well with the clubs themselves.
-
A season ticket for watching your clubs games on sky would be an interesting idea - how much would you think they would charge if they could do it?
I don't think that would go down very well with the clubs themselves.
Depends what money they get i suppose legion.
I think a lot would still go to games but those living far away would maybe be attracted by the idea - some people love the atmosphere but i must admit i find the atmosphers pretty bland these days at games and on a cold wet night the idea of switching on to watch a villa game could be an attraction.
Not sure it would affect gates as much as some would imagine.
-
As you - quite rightly - can't show Saturday 3pm kick-offs live, the idea's a non-starter anyway.
-
As you - quite rightly - can't show Saturday 3pm kick-offs live, the idea's a non-starter anyway.
For now maybe , but sometime in the future i wouldnt rule it out .
It is not difficult to find villa live at 3 pm on saturdays on an internet stream.
-
As you - quite rightly - can't show Saturday 3pm kick-offs live, the idea's a non-starter anyway.
For now maybe , but sometime in the future i wouldnt rule it out .
It is not difficult to find villa live at 3 pm on saturdays on an internet stream.
That's because the restriction only applies in the UK. Internationally they can show whatever they like. Over here I can find 3-4 matches every Saturday afternoon, but Villa are rarely among them so I use streams more often than not.
As with most forms of digital piracy there will always be a portion of society who won't pay but there are also a fair number who would happily pay if they had the option to. Downloading TV shows and movies is similar, lovefilm and netflix are slowly catching up but prior to that what options did you have if you, for whatever reason, couldn't get a dvd copy of a film?
-
As you - quite rightly - can't show Saturday 3pm kick-offs live, the idea's a non-starter anyway.
For now maybe , but sometime in the future i wouldnt rule it out .
It is not difficult to find villa live at 3 pm on saturdays on an internet stream.
The day that happens every non-league club may as well pack up.
-
For those who want to watch the Villa on a Saturday afternoon without going to the game, they already can. They would'nt need to pay Sky any extra. Like Legion said, the clubs would'nt be in favour of it anyway.
-
For those who want to watch the Villa on a Saturday afternoon without going to the game, they already can. They would'nt need to pay Sky any extra. Like Legion said, the clubs would'nt be in favour of it anyway.
Not everyone has access to the internet and live streaming - a lot of older people especially would maybe not know how or where to access games, i am often asked by people how to find games .
Some people as paul stated would be happy to pay for such a service legally and i dont think gates would be affected that much .
-
For those who want to watch the Villa on a Saturday afternoon without going to the game, they already can. They would'nt need to pay Sky any extra. Like Legion said, the clubs would'nt be in favour of it anyway.
Not everyone has access to the internet and live streaming - a lot of older people especially would maybe not know how or where to access games, i am often asked by people how to find games .
It's not just through the internet at home though. You can walk into a number of local pubs and watch a midland team playing live on a Saturday afternoon.
-
For those who want to watch the Villa on a Saturday afternoon without going to the game, they already can. They would'nt need to pay Sky any extra. Like Legion said, the clubs would'nt be in favour of it anyway.
Not everyone has access to the internet and live streaming - a lot of older people especially would maybe not know how or where to access games, i am often asked by people how to find games .
Some people as paul stated would be happy to pay for such a service legally and i dont think gates would be affected that much .
And as I said earlier, it would destroy other leagues.
-
For those who want to watch the Villa on a Saturday afternoon without going to the game, they already can. They would'nt need to pay Sky any extra. Like Legion said, the clubs would'nt be in favour of it anyway.
Not everyone has access to the internet and live streaming - a lot of older people especially would maybe not know how or where to access games, i am often asked by people how to find games .
Some people as paul stated would be happy to pay for such a service legally and i dont think gates would be affected that much .
And as I said earlier, it would destroy other leagues.
What percentage of non league fans would stay away to watch other games on tv do you think dave ?
-
Juging by the drop in numbers when there's a Champions League game midweek, quite a few. Maybe not in numbers, but percentage-wise definitely.
-
Juging by the drop in numbers when there's a Champions League game midweek, quite a few. Maybe not in numbers, but percentage-wise definitely.
Thanks for your input dave.
-
You can't even listen to local match commentaries on the internet.
-
You can't even listen to local match commentaries on the internet.
You can via clubs websites as the clubs hold the rights, although i think this is something that should be available on radio websites- its ok to listen if you are local to the area but people living far away cannot access local commentary.
-
Can't help but feel that anybody complaining about Skys subscription charges is missing the point, and failing to see the bigger picture.
TV broadcasters are subject to the same practices as any business, including the world's oldest market force, supply and demand. That is, if a lot of people want something - it's expensive. You could, therefore, be pointing the finger of blame equally at greedy players, leeching agents, covetous clubs or the piggish Premier league.
Or...you could just begrudgingly accept the sour and unpleasant face of capitalism in all its glory.
For what it's worth, I believe there will be a point when somebody realises empty stadiums don't look so great on TV and ticket prices will eventually come into line. After all, it's been often said, the gate receipts are merely the icing on the cake in a premier league clubs quota.
-
Doug often used to say that it has been proved that dropping prices doesnt affect the gate as much as people believe it would.
-
As you - quite rightly - can't show Saturday 3pm kick-offs live, the idea's a non-starter anyway.
For now maybe , but sometime in the future i wouldnt rule it out .
It is not difficult to find villa live at 3 pm on saturdays on an internet stream.
The day that happens every non-league club may as well pack up.
I suppose the counter argument, and I'm not saying I agree with it, is that it's market forces, such as supply and demand. In the same way supermarkets saw a rapid decline in the corner greengrocer, the Premier League are trying to kill off non-league clubs. Not because of any evil master plan, but they want to take an ever increasing percentage of the football fans disposable income. And if that ses the likes of Tamworth die out, they'll lament it without feeling guilty, just like the supermarkets.
-
For what it's worth, I believe there will be a point when somebody realises empty stadiums don't look so great on TV and ticket prices will eventually come into line. After all, it's been often said, the gate receipts are merely the icing on the cake in a premier league clubs quota.
True, Mr Woo, but some of the live games now are from rather forlorn-looking stadia - Huddersfield on Sunday being a case in point. I think people have got over this issue.
As I said earlier, I wonder whether BT / Sky have done the maths to show whether a more open approach (internet-streamed season ticket tariffs for club fans) would in fact garner more revenue than the current closed system.
-
The major difference here is that MLB.tv is owned by Major League Baseball meaning all the money made goes directly in to their books.
There is a lot of money to be made here by watching live football, and I think this idea (although I personally approve of it massively) scares the FA and the clubs as the money they'd lose from the BSkyB deal would scare them.
This would allow all clubs to get an EQUAL SHARE of the money made, meaning they wouldn't have to raise ticket prices, meaning more people would go watch. I, personally, do not go to games personally because it'll cost me £50 for a good day out. £35-£45 for the ticket, £6 for food, £5 parking...
Look at the bigger picture: MLB is the best baseball league in the world - people pay to see it from all over the world.
The EPL is the best football league in the world - people will pay to see it from anywhere.
Fuck BSkyB, they're the most annoying company I know of, I really believe the FA are missing a trick here.
Charge £150 a year for all games. There are MILLIONS of football fans in the UK, Europe, Asia, Americas, who would be happy to pay this low price to get all their games streamed in HD right to their TV, computer, laptop, tablet...
Absolutely stupid.
Money money money money money money.
-
The major difference here is that MLB.tv is owned by Major League Baseball meaning all the money made goes directly in to their books.
There is a lot of
tmoney to be made here by watching live football, and I think this idea (although I personally approve of it massively) scares the FA and the clubs as the money they'd lose from the BSkyB deal would scare them.
This would allow all clubs to get an EQUAL SHARE of the money made, meaning they wouldn't have to raise ticket prices, meaning more people would go watch. I, personally, do not go to games personally because it'll cost me £50 for a good day out. £35-£45 for the ticket, £6 for food, £5 parking...
Look at the bigger picture: MLB is the best baseball league in the world - people pay to see it from all over the world.
The EPL is the best football league in the world - people will pay to see it from anywhere.
Fuck BSkyB, they're the most annoying company I know of, I really believe the FA are missing a trick here.
Charge £150 a year for all games. There are MILLIONS of football fans in the UK, Europe, Asia, Americas, who would be happy to pay this low price to get all their games streamed in HD right to their TV, computer, laptop, tablet...
Absolutely stupid.
Money money money money money money.
£150 a year seems excessive when i can watch the games for free via streaming - i might be prepared to pay £10 a month max .
The other thing to note is many would cancel their sky sports subscription if this service were available.
-
The major difference here is that MLB.tv is owned by Major League Baseball meaning all the money made goes directly in to their books.
There is a lot of
tmoney to be made here by watching live football, and I think this idea (although I personally approve of it massively) scares the FA and the clubs as the money they'd lose from the BSkyB deal would scare them.
This would allow all clubs to get an EQUAL SHARE of the money made, meaning they wouldn't have to raise ticket prices, meaning more people would go watch. I, personally, do not go to games personally because it'll cost me £50 for a good day out. £35-£45 for the ticket, £6 for food, £5 parking...
Look at the bigger picture: MLB is the best baseball league in the world - people pay to see it from all over the world.
The EPL is the best football league in the world - people will pay to see it from anywhere.
Fuck BSkyB, they're the most annoying company I know of, I really believe the FA are missing a trick here.
Charge £150 a year for all games. There are MILLIONS of football fans in the UK, Europe, Asia, Americas, who would be happy to pay this low price to get all their games streamed in HD right to their TV, computer, laptop, tablet...
Absolutely stupid.
Money money money money money money.
£150 a year seems excessive when i can watch the games for free via streaming - i might be prepared to pay £10 a month max .
The other thing to note is many would cancel their sky sports subscription if this service were available.
£150 for EVERY game in the EPL with full HD with statistics, in game features, and the ability to watch on a multitude of devices? I'd pay that.
-
The major difference here is that MLB.tv is owned by Major League Baseball meaning all the money made goes directly in to their books.
There is a lot of
tmoney to be made here by watching live football, and I think this idea (although I personally approve of it massively) scares the FA and the clubs as the money they'd lose from the BSkyB deal would scare them.
This would allow all clubs to get an EQUAL SHARE of the money made, meaning they wouldn't have to raise ticket prices, meaning more people would go watch. I, personally, do not go to games personally because it'll cost me £50 for a good day out. £35-£45 for the ticket, £6 for food, £5 parking...
Look at the bigger picture: MLB is the best baseball league in the world - people pay to see it from all over the world.
The EPL is the best football league in the world - people will pay to see it from anywhere.
Fuck BSkyB, they're the most annoying company I know of, I really believe the FA are missing a trick here.
Charge £150 a year for all games. There are MILLIONS of football fans in the UK, Europe, Asia, Americas, who would be happy to pay this low price to get all their games streamed in HD right to their TV, computer, laptop, tablet...
Absolutely stupid.
Money money money money money money.
£150 a year seems excessive when i can watch the games for free via streaming - i might be prepared to pay £10 a month max .
The other thing to note is many would cancel their sky sports subscription if this service were available.
£150 for EVERY game in the EPL with full HD with statistics, in game features, and the ability to watch on a multitude of devices? I'd pay that.
Yes , i thought you were talking about £150 just to watch your teams games , if included all premier games i would pay it too.
-
Great thread title.
Much obliged. One tries.
-
Can't help but feel that anybody complaining about Skys subscription charges is missing the point, and failing to see the bigger picture.
TV broadcasters are subject to the same practices as any business, including the world's oldest market force, supply and demand. That is, if a lot of people want something - it's expensive. You could, therefore, be pointing the finger of blame equally at greedy players, leeching agents, covetous clubs or the piggish Premier league.
Or...you could just begrudgingly accept the sour and unpleasant face of capitalism in all its glory.
For what it's worth, I believe there will be a point when somebody realises empty stadiums don't look so great on TV and ticket prices will eventually come into line. After all, it's been often said, the gate receipts are merely the icing on the cake in a premier league clubs quota.
Actually you're missing the point more.
There is a demand and the premier league are failing to supply to that demand so consumers are using free sites of dubious legality ( I refuse to call them entirely illegal due to the fact that many people question the legality of the existing copyright laws anyway) to consume content that they have no option to pay for.
For example, I live in Norway so I can't go to the games at the ground, the local TV stations have good coverage but with Norwegian commentary that I can't follow. I can't get english commentary via the radio on the internet due to restrictions so the only way I have to watch live football with english commentary requires me to use a dubious stream. I'd happily pay a monthly fee to be able to log on to a website and view the games.
Even more ridiculous is that, if you can't get on iplayer, even viewing the highlights a week or 2 later is very difficult because everything gets locked down.
Compare with the rugby (http://www.premiershiprugby.tv/MatchCentreLive?WT.mc_id=pr_video).
I do understand that it will have an effect on attendances at the ground, particularly for smaller sides, but in that case those clubs need to investigate ways to reduce that impact.
-
You just need a free uk vpn connection so that the servers think you are in the uk. Go and google :)
-
I probably phrased the point badly rather than missed it. What I was getting at is that Sky buy a wholesale product at a vastly inflated price to start with, and as with any business, they then pass that cost on to their consumer. So for people to complain about their subscription charges may be justified but a little misdirected.
You do raise valid points over internet streaming though.
Once you convert something into a digital format it becomes almost impossible to prevent it being replicated and distributed. That goes for films, music, books, software, broadcasts or whatever. Like many industries, football needs to find a way of living in a changing world because like those other media highlighted, the days of the secure easy dollar are long gone.
-
You just need a free uk vpn connection so that the servers think you are in the uk. Go and google :)
I have one, it's not legal to view iplayer through that though.
-
I probably phrased the point badly rather than missed it. What I was getting at is that Sky buy a wholesale product at a vastly inflated price to start with, and as with any business, they then pass that cost on to their consumer. So for people to complain about their subscription charges may be justified but a little misdirected.
You do raise valid points over internet streaming though.
Once you convert something into a digital format it becomes almost impossible to prevent it being replicated and distributed. That goes for films, music, books, software, broadcasts or whatever. Like many industries, football needs to find a way of living in a changing world because like those other media highlighted, the days of the secure easy dollar are long gone.
I agree with the top part, focusing on the cost of what they do provide is wrong, the focus should be on the inability to pay for what they don't provide.
This is why copyright laws as they are are pretty much unenforceable. How can someone be in breach of a copyright when there is no way for them to get a 'legal' version of the content? It's a grey area in the current laws that torrent sites have been edging around for years, for so many of them to still exist whilst being so openly accessible shows just how difficult it is for corporations to protect their IPs in the current climate.
The music industry reaction is telling. Since they embraced online music sales piracy has dropped significantly (down to similar levels of pirated CDs and cassettes in the 80s and 90s), the total amount of spending in the industry has increased and the breakthrough opportunities for smaller artists have increased massively. The only downside has been the fall of high street stores but that's in no small part due to their own inability to react to a changing market. HMV needed to reposition itself sensibly but instead moved to selling cut price books, dvds and games and made music a bit-part of their market.
-
As you - quite rightly - can't show Saturday 3pm kick-offs live, the idea's a non-starter anyway.
For now maybe , but sometime in the future i wouldnt rule it out .
It is not difficult to find villa live at 3 pm on saturdays on an internet stream.
The day that happens every non-league club may as well pack up.
Why?
If people are going to non league games now, then why would they stop going if subscriptions at £100+ were available to watch a team they dont want to watch anyway?
I've never had a Villa season ticket but I'd be willing to pay £250+ if i could watch every game live through high quality streaming.
-
As you - quite rightly - can't show Saturday 3pm kick-offs live, the idea's a non-starter anyway.
For now maybe , but sometime in the future i wouldnt rule it out .
It is not difficult to find villa live at 3 pm on saturdays on an internet stream.
The day that happens every non-league club may as well pack up.
Why?
If people are going to non league games now, then why would they stop going if subscriptions at £100+ were available to watch a team they dont want to watch anyway?
I've never had a Villa season ticket but I'd be willing to pay £250+ if i could watch every game live through high quality streaming.
Because if football was available on TV, on Saturday afternoon, people would be less inclined to watch live non-league games.
-
Because if football was available on TV, on Saturday afternoon, people would be less inclined to watch live non-league games.
I don't think that would be a big enough factor to worry about. Out of our 7,000 or so missing fans at Villa Park each week, how many of those are regularly going to non league games instead? I don't think the average non-league fan is going to be too swayed by watching Premier League teams live. Could be wrong though.
-
As you - quite rightly - can't show Saturday 3pm kick-offs live, the idea's a non-starter anyway.
For now maybe , but sometime in the future i wouldnt rule it out .
It is not difficult to find villa live at 3 pm on saturdays on an internet stream.
In my local we can watch any Prem game on Al Jaz or Ab Dab. Infact on Most Saturday's we can watch 6 different games on 6 different screens.
Is this not available in the UK ? 3pm kick off times, all of them by the way.
-
Because if football was available on TV, on Saturday afternoon, people would be less inclined to watch live non-league games.
I don't think that would be a big enough factor to worry about. Out of our 7,000 or so missing fans at Villa Park each week, how many of those are regularly going to non league games instead? I don't think the average non-league fan is going to be too swayed by watching Premier League teams live. Could be wrong though.
Many small clubs (Midland Alliance and below) can't survive on just their loyal fanbase, they need the extra footfall through the turnstiles provided by those with bugger all else to do on a Saturday afternoon, give those people an extra choice of watching live PL football in the pub or at home and clubs will go under. This is fact, many clubs walk such a tight line between survival and going broke that losing ten or fifteen supporters buying a pie, pint and a programme on a Saturday will force them out of business.
-
Sureley it will happen. Many owners, including more likely as not our own, have bought into football on the basis that at some point in the future licensed/paid streaming will happen. The amount of money to be had dwarfs whatever SKY are able to cough up. It's hard to believe that at it will not happen, sooner or later.
Whether that actually gives us a better game is a different matter. Then again, nobody other than fans wants a better game. If the last 20 years are anything to go by, it's a more lucrative game that matters.
The decision makers in the PL couldn't give a monkeys about teams in the championship. They certainly couldn't give a fuck about what it does to lower level football. You can always buy foreign players when the time comes, or rather has already arrived, that our own grass roots fottball can't produce enough quality to sustain a watchable top flight.
It probably will impact on gates. Then again, off the top of my head, Spurs, Chelsea, West Ham, Liverpool, Everton and ourselves have all been looking at ways of increasing capacity in recent years and have experienced all kinds of difficulties. If you can get a big step increase in revenues without this massive capital expenditure where is the bad news from the club owners' point of view?
Maybe we'll get to Berlusconi's prediction. There will come a time when attending a game will be free. The live audience is only there to provide atmosphere and spectacle for the electronic viewers.
The internet as a means of distributing entertainment has so many things in its favour when compared to subscription TV, not the least of which is that much of the setup cost is borne by the viewer and the infrastructure to make money making material available is either already in place or will be paid for by someone else (e.g. fibre to cabinet).
Anyway, I'm off the buy a Kindle EPL. A nice big screen, 20 buttons and a volume control. A snip at £250.
It is almost a blessing that many things that I once held dear about the game have long since been well and truly trampled on.
Maybe it would be better if the EPL (yes, I know) was relocated closer to its core markets in the far east with maybe a 39th game in this country just for old times sake.
-
Because if football was available on TV, on Saturday afternoon, people would be less inclined to watch live non-league games.
I don't think that would be a big enough factor to worry about. Out of our 7,000 or so missing fans at Villa Park each week, how many of those are regularly going to non league games instead? I don't think the average non-league fan is going to be too swayed by watching Premier League teams live. Could be wrong though.
Many small clubs (Midland Alliance and below) can't survive on just their loyal fanbase, they need the extra footfall through the turnstiles provided by those with bugger all else to do on a Saturday afternoon, give those people an extra choice of watching live PL football in the pub or at home and clubs will go under. This is fact, many clubs walk such a tight line between survival and going broke that losing ten or fifteen supporters buying a pie, pint and a programme on a Saturday will force them out of business.
To me, that is not a valid reason why should people who want to pay to watch top level football on TV/Online on a Saturday afternoon are prevented from doing so ?
People should not be prevented from watching the type of sport they want in the hope that they'll attend games lower down the pyramid.
-
Because if football was available on TV, on Saturday afternoon, people would be less inclined to watch live non-league games.
I don't think that would be a big enough factor to worry about. Out of our 7,000 or so missing fans at Villa Park each week, how many of those are regularly going to non league games instead? I don't think the average non-league fan is going to be too swayed by watching Premier League teams live. Could be wrong though.
Many small clubs (Midland Alliance and below) can't survive on just their loyal fanbase, they need the extra footfall through the turnstiles provided by those with bugger all else to do on a Saturday afternoon, give those people an extra choice of watching live PL football in the pub or at home and clubs will go under. This is fact, many clubs walk such a tight line between survival and going broke that losing ten or fifteen supporters buying a pie, pint and a programme on a Saturday will force them out of business.
To me, that is not a valid reason why should people who want to pay to watch top level football on TV/Online on a Saturday afternoon are prevented from doing so ?
People should not be prevented from watching the type of sport they want in the hope that they'll attend games lower down the pyramid.
Its sad for he lower league teams , but i agree, people who want to watch live streams will eventually get the chance to do so legally through a subscription service i think- it is just a question of when .
-
Because if football was available on TV, on Saturday afternoon, people would be less inclined to watch live non-league games.
I don't think that would be a big enough factor to worry about. Out of our 7,000 or so missing fans at Villa Park each week, how many of those are regularly going to non league games instead? I don't think the average non-league fan is going to be too swayed by watching Premier League teams live. Could be wrong though.
Many small clubs (Midland Alliance and below) can't survive on just their loyal fanbase, they need the extra footfall through the turnstiles provided by those with bugger all else to do on a Saturday afternoon, give those people an extra choice of watching live PL football in the pub or at home and clubs will go under. This is fact, many clubs walk such a tight line between survival and going broke that losing ten or fifteen supporters buying a pie, pint and a programme on a Saturday will force them out of business.
To me, that is not a valid reason why should people who want to pay to watch top level football on TV/Online on a Saturday afternoon are prevented from doing so ?
People should not be prevented from watching the type of sport they want in the hope that they'll attend games lower down the pyramid.
For the good of the game as a whole rather than the selfish self-interest of a few clubs.
-
Because if football was available on TV, on Saturday afternoon, people would be less inclined to watch live non-league games.
I don't think that would be a big enough factor to worry about. Out of our 7,000 or so missing fans at Villa Park each week, how many of those are regularly going to non league games instead? I don't think the average non-league fan is going to be too swayed by watching Premier League teams live. Could be wrong though.
Many small clubs (Midland Alliance and below) can't survive on just their loyal fanbase, they need the extra footfall through the turnstiles provided by those with bugger all else to do on a Saturday afternoon, give those people an extra choice of watching live PL football in the pub or at home and clubs will go under. This is fact, many clubs walk such a tight line between survival and going broke that losing ten or fifteen supporters buying a pie, pint and a programme on a Saturday will force them out of business.
To me, that is not a valid reason why should people who want to pay to watch top level football on TV/Online on a Saturday afternoon are prevented from doing so ?
People should not be prevented from watching the type of sport they want in the hope that they'll attend games lower down the pyramid.
For the good of the game as a whole rather than the selfish self-interest of a few clubs.
I agree but sadly though dave , money seems to be the main incentive - clubs will go to the wall, its like the supermarkets killing the smaller shops - the rich will get richer and those who cant survive will go out of business.
-
Because if football was available on TV, on Saturday afternoon, people would be less inclined to watch live non-league games.
I don't think that would be a big enough factor to worry about. Out of our 7,000 or so missing fans at Villa Park each week, how many of those are regularly going to non league games instead? I don't think the average non-league fan is going to be too swayed by watching Premier League teams live. Could be wrong though.
Many small clubs (Midland Alliance and below) can't survive on just their loyal fanbase, they need the extra footfall through the turnstiles provided by those with bugger all else to do on a Saturday afternoon, give those people an extra choice of watching live PL football in the pub or at home and clubs will go under. This is fact, many clubs walk such a tight line between survival and going broke that losing ten or fifteen supporters buying a pie, pint and a programme on a Saturday will force them out of business.
To me, that is not a valid reason why should people who want to pay to watch top level football on TV/Online on a Saturday afternoon are prevented from doing so ?
People should not be prevented from watching the type of sport they want in the hope that they'll attend games lower down the pyramid.
For the good of the game as a whole rather than the selfish self-interest of a few clubs.
I agree but sadly though dave , money seems to be the main incentive - clubs will go to the wall, its like the supermarkets killing the smaller shops - the rich will get richer and those who cant survive will go out of business.
All the more reason why we should'nt let it happen.
-
Because if football was available on TV, on Saturday afternoon, people would be less inclined to watch live non-league games.
I don't think that would be a big enough factor to worry about. Out of our 7,000 or so missing fans at Villa Park each week, how many of those are regularly going to non league games instead? I don't think the average non-league fan is going to be too swayed by watching Premier League teams live. Could be wrong though.
Many small clubs (Midland Alliance and below) can't survive on just their loyal fanbase, they need the extra footfall through the turnstiles provided by those with bugger all else to do on a Saturday afternoon, give those people an extra choice of watching live PL football in the pub or at home and clubs will go under. This is fact, many clubs walk such a tight line between survival and going broke that losing ten or fifteen supporters buying a pie, pint and a programme on a Saturday will force them out of business.
To me, that is not a valid reason why should people who want to pay to watch top level football on TV/Online on a Saturday afternoon are prevented from doing so ?
People should not be prevented from watching the type of sport they want in the hope that they'll attend games lower down the pyramid.
For the good of the game as a whole rather than the selfish self-interest of a few clubs.
I agree but sadly though dave , money seems to be the main incentive - clubs will go to the wall, its like the supermarkets killing the smaller shops - the rich will get richer and those who cant survive will go out of business.
All the more reason why we should'nt let it happen.
How exactly do you propose stopping it clampy - it is just a matter of time , that is the society we live in .
If villa are not playing do you go and watch your local team?
-
From a personal point of view, i can't think of anything worse than sitting in the house every weekend watching our games home and away.
-
From a personal point of view, i can't think of anything worse than sitting in the house every weekend watching our games home and away.
What about people who live far away, cant afford the ticket prices, are too old or ill to get to games?
If the option is there, you can subscribe , or go to games or go to local games - the choice will be yours.
-
Yes it will happen which will be a shame. Hopefully not for a long time yet.
My local team is Villa. If you mean local non league team, then no. Maybe i should though and i was invited along to a game by someone on here a while back. I used to go to Walsall when we was'nt playing but i've not done that for a while.From a personal point of view, i can't think of anything worse than sitting in the house every weekend watching our games home and away.
What about people who live far away, cant afford the ticket prices, are too old or ill to get to games?
If the option is there, you can subscribe , or go to games or go to local games - the choice will be yours.
Like i said Eastie, from a personal point of view.
-
On occasions even with a season ticket i have chosen to watch the game on sky when villa were at home rather than travel to villa park and watch - i loved the atmosphere and traveling home and away in the 80s and 90s but to be honest the atmosphere to me now doesnt seem the same.( from a personal point of view)
-
I don't believe the death of lower league football will be the outcome of this, not at all.
If I were to pay £150 per season to have access to all 38 Aston Villa matches, this does not mean I will sit at home and watch them every Saturday or Sunday. I will still go out and about, do things with my other half, friends, family, etc. However knowing that when I return on that evening I can sit down and watch full games at my own accord is the key selling point. If you WANT to watch your local team then you'll go regardless.
As I mentioned in my other post, I am an MLB.tv subscriber, which means I have full access to every MLB game that is played. Do you think I stay up until 2, 3, 4 am watching the games? Fuck no. I'll wait until the morning and watch the full match then (as long as I stay away from social media so I don't know the score!).
The other thing to consider would be subscription levels. Again, this is taken from the MLB.tv model as they have three levels:
1) Audio commentary of every game your team play;
2) Full SD games;
3) Full HD games.
Priced accordingly this would allow those with slower connections to still listen and/or watch games.
The world is now run by the internet. How many times have you walked down a street and seen every bugger and his dog on their smart phone?
I think the hardest thing about this entire situation is the investment. Why would the FA cut the money from BSkyB and risk doing this? The initial costs would be huge!
Let's do a whip-round!
-
I agree but sadly though dave , money seems to be the main incentive - clubs will go to the wall, its like the supermarkets killing the smaller shops - the rich will get richer and those who cant survive will go out of business.
But why make it easier for the 'Supermarket clubs' to force the 'local shop clubs' out of business? We should be trying to even things up a little not widening the gap further surely?
And do you think this will be good for the likes of Villa? The big clubs will negotiate deals far in excess of anything we will manage, further adding to the gap between ourselves and Man Utd and Chelsea.
-
I agree but sadly though dave , money seems to be the main incentive - clubs will go to the wall, its like the supermarkets killing the smaller shops - the rich will get richer and those who cant survive will go out of business.
But why make it easier for the 'Supermarket clubs' to force the 'local shop clubs' out of business? We should be trying to even things up a little not widening the gap further surely?
And do you think this will be good for the likes of Villa? The big clubs will negotiate deals far in excess of anything we will manage, further adding to the gap between ourselves and Man Utd and Chelsea.
Quite right. There needs to be as level playing field as possible. The gap's already wide enough as it is.
-
I agree but sadly though dave , money seems to be the main incentive - clubs will go to the wall, its like the supermarkets killing the smaller shops - the rich will get richer and those who cant survive will go out of business.
But why make it easier for the 'Supermarket clubs' to force the 'local shop clubs' out of business? We should be trying to even things up a little not widening the gap further surely?
And do you think this will be good for the likes of Villa? The big clubs will negotiate deals far in excess of anything we will manage, further adding to the gap between ourselves and Man Utd and Chelsea.
Quite right. There needs to be as level playing field as possible. The gap's already wide enough as it is.
If only life were that simple.
Unfortunately we do not live in an ideal world , we live in a world dominated by greed and money.
-
I agree but sadly though dave , money seems to be the main incentive - clubs will go to the wall, its like the supermarkets killing the smaller shops - the rich will get richer and those who cant survive will go out of business.
But why make it easier for the 'Supermarket clubs' to force the 'local shop clubs' out of business? We should be trying to even things up a little not widening the gap further surely?
And do you think this will be good for the likes of Villa? The big clubs will negotiate deals far in excess of anything we will manage, further adding to the gap between ourselves and Man Utd and Chelsea.
Quite right. There needs to be as level playing field as possible. The gap's already wide enough as it is.
If only life were that simple.
Unfortunately we do not live in an ideal world , we live in a world dominated by greed and money.
So let's not make it any worse.
-
Unfortunately we were part of the greed and money brigade when the PRemier League was formed.
-
I don't agree with this "supermarket" clubs killing off "cornershop" clubs argumnet.
Youre either a fan of lower league or youre not.
If I was a regular at Sutton Coldfield Towns games, I don't see why I would tune in to Stoke v WBA on a Saturday afternoon at 3pm rather than cross the road to watch my local non league team play if that was the norm for me.
Like others have said you can go to a pub NOW on a saturday afternoon at 3pm to watch a live premier league game if you want to. People go to supermarkets because they get better value for money on the same product, fans of football go to support their teams, not to watch a game of football no matter who is playing ( especially if their supported team is playing at the same time).
Its like saying Villa fans wouldnt go to watch the game if Manure v Chelski was on telly at the same time.
-
I don't agree with this "supermarket" clubs killing off "cornershop" clubs argumnet.
Youre either a fan of lower league or youre not.
If I was a regular at Sutton Coldfield Towns games, I don't see why I would tune in to Stoke v WBA on a Saturday afternoon at 3pm rather than cross the road to watch my local non league team play if that was the norm for me.
Like others have said you can go to a pub NOW on a saturday afternoon at 3pm to watch a live premier league game if you want to. People go to supermarkets because they get better value for money on the same product, fans of football go to support their teams, not to watch a game of football no matter who is playing ( especially if their supported team is playing at the same time).
Its like saying Villa fans wouldnt go to watch the game if Manure v Chelski was on telly at the same time.
It's nothing like saying supporters of one team wouldn't attend if a game from their own league was on TV. There are many people who attend non-league games either because their own team are away or not playing. Make it easier for them to watch these games, and they would be less inclined to attend non-league ones.
"fans of football go to support their teams, not to watch a game of football no matter who is playing" You mean like a lot of us on here do, regularly?
-
fans of football go to support their teams, not to watch a game of football no matter who is playing ( especially if their supported team is playing at the same time).
So I, and many like me, don't actually exist then?
-
...
Its like saying Villa fans wouldnt go to watch the game if Manure v Chelski was on telly at the same time.
There are probably any number of people who would be active Villa fans but instead have grown up supporting their local team - the one that appears in the corner of their living room almost every week.
-
"fans of football go to support their teams, not to watch a game of football no matter who is playing" You mean like a lot of us on here do, regularly?
You and others go and pay to watch teams you have no emotional attachment to on a regular basis?
Fair play to you if you do, I couldn't do.
-
fans of football go to support their teams, not to watch a game of football no matter who is playing ( especially if their supported team is playing at the same time).
So I, and many like me, don't actually exist then?
..and you go and pay to watch other teams while Villa are playing?
-
As you - quite rightly - can't show Saturday 3pm kick-offs live, the idea's a non-starter anyway.
For now maybe , but sometime in the future i wouldnt rule it out .
It is not difficult to find villa live at 3 pm on saturdays on an internet stream.
The day that happens every non-league club may as well pack up.
Well maybe the non league clubs could go the same route as college football in the US. Over there the college game is played and televised (to a massive audience) on Saturdays with the pro game being played on Sundays. No reason why that couldn't happen over here Dave.
-
Can't help but feel that anybody complaining about Skys subscription charges is missing the point, and failing to see the bigger picture.
TV broadcasters are subject to the same practices as any business, including the world's oldest market force, supply and demand. That is, if a lot of people want something - it's expensive. You could, therefore, be pointing the finger of blame equally at greedy players, leeching agents, covetous clubs or the piggish Premier league.
Or...you could just begrudgingly accept the sour and unpleasant face of capitalism in all its glory.
For what it's worth, I believe there will be a point when somebody realises empty stadiums don't look so great on TV and ticket prices will eventually come into line. After all, it's been often said, the gate receipts are merely the icing on the cake in a premier league clubs quota.
Actually you're missing the point more.
There is a demand and the premier league are failing to supply to that demand so consumers are using free sites of dubious legality ( I refuse to call them entirely illegal due to the fact that many people question the legality of the existing copyright laws anyway) to consume content that they have no option to pay for.
For example, I live in Norway so I can't go to the games at the ground, the local TV stations have good coverage but with Norwegian commentary that I can't follow. I can't get english commentary via the radio on the internet due to restrictions so the only way I have to watch live football with english commentary requires me to use a dubious stream. I'd happily pay a monthly fee to be able to log on to a website and view the games.
Even more ridiculous is that, if you can't get on iplayer, even viewing the highlights a week or 2 later is very difficult because everything gets locked down.
Compare with the rugby (http://www.premiershiprugby.tv/MatchCentreLive?WT.mc_id=pr_video).
I do understand that it will have an effect on attendances at the ground, particularly for smaller sides, but in that case those clubs need to investigate ways to reduce that impact.
Paul_e I was under the impression that Talksport offer commentary of every premier league game to online listeners in Europe?
-
As you - quite rightly - can't show Saturday 3pm kick-offs live, the idea's a non-starter anyway.
For now maybe , but sometime in the future i wouldnt rule it out .
It is not difficult to find villa live at 3 pm on saturdays on an internet stream.
The day that happens every non-league club may as well pack up.
Well maybe the non league clubs could go the same route as college football in the US. Over there the college game is played and televised (to a massive audience) on Saturdays with the pro game being played on Sundays. No reason why that couldn't happen over here Dave.
Cant imagine non league footie getting a massive tv audience on a saturday in england.
-
I agree but sadly though dave , money seems to be the main incentive - clubs will go to the wall, its like the supermarkets killing the smaller shops - the rich will get richer and those who cant survive will go out of business.
But why make it easier for the 'Supermarket clubs' to force the 'local shop clubs' out of business? We should be trying to even things up a little not widening the gap further surely?
And do you think this will be good for the likes of Villa? The big clubs will negotiate deals far in excess of anything we will manage, further adding to the gap between ourselves and Man Utd and Chelsea.
Quite right. There needs to be as level playing field as possible. The gap's already wide enough as it is.
And the only way you will get that is if Platini and his lazy chums at UEFA get off there arses and introduce a max salary cap per player per week across all UEFA affiliated clubs. I'll go first and propose £50k per week maximum for any player. 2.5 million per year is plenty to live comfortably on.
-
I agree but sadly though dave , money seems to be the main incentive - clubs will go to the wall, its like the supermarkets killing the smaller shops - the rich will get richer and those who cant survive will go out of business.
But why make it easier for the 'Supermarket clubs' to force the 'local shop clubs' out of business? We should be trying to even things up a little not widening the gap further surely?
And do you think this will be good for the likes of Villa? The big clubs will negotiate deals far in excess of anything we will manage, further adding to the gap between ourselves and Man Utd and Chelsea.
Quite right. There needs to be as level playing field as possible. The gap's already wide enough as it is.
And the only way you will get that is if Platini and his lazy chums at UEFA get off there arses and introduce a max salary cap per player per week across all UEFA affiliated clubs. I'll go first and propose £50k per week maximum for any player. 2.5 million per year is plenty to live comfortably on.
Would that not get thrown out by the law courts under some restriction of trade law?
It would not happen in any case .
-
As you - quite rightly - can't show Saturday 3pm kick-offs live, the idea's a non-starter anyway.
For now maybe , but sometime in the future i wouldnt rule it out .
It is not difficult to find villa live at 3 pm on saturdays on an internet stream.
The day that happens every non-league club may as well pack up.
Well maybe the non league clubs could go the same route as college football in the US. Over there the college game is played and televised (to a massive audience) on Saturdays with the pro game being played on Sundays. No reason why that couldn't happen over here Dave.
Cant imagine non league footie getting a massive tv audience on a saturday in england.
Well no the principle I was alluding to was that the non league game has an entirely separate game day to that of the pro game.
-
I agree but sadly though dave , money seems to be the main incentive - clubs will go to the wall, its like the supermarkets killing the smaller shops - the rich will get richer and those who cant survive will go out of business.
But why make it easier for the 'Supermarket clubs' to force the 'local shop clubs' out of business? We should be trying to even things up a little not widening the gap further surely?
And do you think this will be good for the likes of Villa? The big clubs will negotiate deals far in excess of anything we will manage, further adding to the gap between ourselves and Man Utd and Chelsea.
Quite right. There needs to be as level playing field as possible. The gap's already wide enough as it is.
And the only way you will get that is if Platini and his lazy chums at UEFA get off there arses and introduce a max salary cap per player per week across all UEFA affiliated clubs. I'll go first and propose £50k per week maximum for any player. 2.5 million per year is plenty to live comfortably on.
Not in my fantasy football world!!
-
As you - quite rightly - can't show Saturday 3pm kick-offs live, the idea's a non-starter anyway.
For now maybe , but sometime in the future i wouldnt rule it out .
It is not difficult to find villa live at 3 pm on saturdays on an internet stream.
The day that happens every non-league club may as well pack up.
Well maybe the non league clubs could go the same route as college football in the US. Over there the college game is played and televised (to a massive audience) on Saturdays with the pro game being played on Sundays. No reason why that couldn't happen over here Dave.
Cant imagine non league footie getting a massive tv audience on a saturday in england.
Well no the principle I was alluding to was that the non league game has an entirely separate game day to that of the pro game.
I dont think there is any need to go down that route, if people want to watch non league or premier football it is their choice , the idea of only non league teams playing on a saturday would not work .
-
I agree but sadly though dave , money seems to be the main incentive - clubs will go to the wall, its like the supermarkets killing the smaller shops - the rich will get richer and those who cant survive will go out of business.
But why make it easier for the 'Supermarket clubs' to force the 'local shop clubs' out of business? We should be trying to even things up a little not widening the gap further surely?
And do you think this will be good for the likes of Villa? The big clubs will negotiate deals far in excess of anything we will manage, further adding to the gap between ourselves and Man Utd and Chelsea.
Quite right. There needs to be as level playing field as possible. The gap's already wide enough as it is.
And the only way you will get that is if Platini and his lazy chums at UEFA get off there arses and introduce a max salary cap per player per week across all UEFA affiliated clubs. I'll go first and propose £50k per week maximum for any player. 2.5 million per year is plenty to live comfortably on.
Would that not get thrown out by the law courts under some restriction of trade law?
It would not happen in any case .
Not in my fantasy football world!!
-
I agree but sadly though dave , money seems to be the main incentive - clubs will go to the wall, its like the supermarkets killing the smaller shops - the rich will get richer and those who cant survive will go out of business.
But why make it easier for the 'Supermarket clubs' to force the 'local shop clubs' out of business? We should be trying to even things up a little not widening the gap further surely?
And do you think this will be good for the likes of Villa? The big clubs will negotiate deals far in excess of anything we will manage, further adding to the gap between ourselves and Man Utd and Chelsea.
Quite right. There needs to be as level playing field as possible. The gap's already wide enough as it is.
And the only way you will get that is if Platini and his lazy chums at UEFA get off there arses and introduce a max salary cap per player per week across all UEFA affiliated clubs. I'll go first and propose £50k per week maximum for any player. 2.5 million per year is plenty to live comfortably on.
Sorry duplicate post
-
How about zoning TV football subscriptions. For example, here in the Midlands, you could only get access to Midlands teams or even further down to here in Birmingham only being able to access Villa/Blues.
Half joking post really.
-
I agree but sadly though dave , money seems to be the main incentive - clubs will go to the wall, its like the supermarkets killing the smaller shops - the rich will get richer and those who cant survive will go out of business.
But why make it easier for the 'Supermarket clubs' to force the 'local shop clubs' out of business? We should be trying to even things up a little not widening the gap further surely?
And do you think this will be good for the likes of Villa? The big clubs will negotiate deals far in excess of anything we will manage, further adding to the gap between ourselves and Man Utd and Chelsea.
Quite right. There needs to be as level playing field as possible. The gap's already wide enough as it is.
And the only way you will get that is if Platini and his lazy chums at UEFA get off there arses and introduce a max salary cap per player per week across all UEFA affiliated clubs. I'll go first and propose £50k per week maximum for any player. 2.5 million per year is plenty to live comfortably on.
Why would they want to do that though?
As far as they're concerned everything is working perfectly. Worldwide interest and revenues are at an all-time high.
Why would they see anything needing to be changed?
-
fans of football go to support their teams, not to watch a game of football no matter who is playing ( especially if their supported team is playing at the same time).
So I, and many like me, don't actually exist then?
..and you go and pay to watch other teams while Villa are playing?
Yep, most weeks, why?
-
fans of football go to support their teams, not to watch a game of football no matter who is playing ( especially if their supported team is playing at the same time).
So I, and many like me, don't actually exist then?
..and you go and pay to watch other teams while Villa are playing?
Yep, most weeks, why?
Can't see anything wrong with it myself... apart from it must be really expensive, unless you go and watch Halesowen Town
-
fans of football go to support their teams, not to watch a game of football no matter who is playing ( especially if their supported team is playing at the same time).
So I, and many like me, don't actually exist then?
..and you go and pay to watch other teams while Villa are playing?
Yep, most weeks, why?
Why don't you go and watch Villa playing?
-
How about zoning TV football subscriptions. For example, here in the Midlands, you could only get access to Midlands teams or even further down to here in Birmingham only being able to access Villa/Blues.
Half joking post really.
You know what you can do with your zoning idea (clue: see my location).
Only half-joking, like.
-
fans of football go to support their teams, not to watch a game of football no matter who is playing ( especially if their supported team is playing at the same time).
So I, and many like me, don't actually exist then?
..and you go and pay to watch other teams while Villa are playing?
Yep, most weeks, why?
Why don't you go and watch Villa playing?
Is it compulsory?
I'm not alone in this you know, on my travels around the non-league grounds of the Midlands and beyond I meet plenty of fans of other clubs, at Gornal a couple of weeks back there were Wolves, Olbiyun and Villa fans a-plenty.
There are many reasons why people may want to watch other clubs, groundhopping, finances, unable to get to where Villa are playing, unable to make the strange kick-off time that Sky have set, a chance of a good pub crawl or even just a preference, that week at least, for something a bit different to the usual Premier League fare.
Not every football fan is as set in their ways as some of you seem to be, I'm happy to watch a bit of Villa, a bit of Tamworth and then whatever takes my fancy on other days, if that doesn't fit in with your blinkered view of watching the game then tough really!
-
Come on now coops , theres only one non league team worth watching - nuneaton ( up the boro) ;)
-
I'm not sure i could go and watch another team while Villa are playing but it's something Dave seems to enjoy doing so fair play. I'd probably be checking my phone every 5 minutes to see how we were getting on.
-
I agree but sadly though dave , money seems to be the main incentive - clubs will go to the wall, its like the supermarkets killing the smaller shops - the rich will get richer and those who cant survive will go out of business.
But why make it easier for the 'Supermarket clubs' to force the 'local shop clubs' out of business? We should be trying to even things up a little not widening the gap further surely?
And do you think this will be good for the likes of Villa? The big clubs will negotiate deals far in excess of anything we will manage, further adding to the gap between ourselves and Man Utd and Chelsea.
Quite right. There needs to be as level playing field as possible. The gap's already wide enough as it is.
And the only way you will get that is if Platini and his lazy chums at UEFA get off there arses and introduce a max salary cap per player per week across all UEFA affiliated clubs. I'll go first and propose £50k per week maximum for any player. 2.5 million per year is plenty to live comfortably on.
Would that not get thrown out by the law courts under some restriction of trade law?
It would not happen in any case .
As far as I'm aware no, so long as it was implemented correctly. There are plenty of examples where jobs are given upper salary caps by a parent organisation. Image rights would be the bit that caused problems but that could be handled without too many issues as well.
-
I'm not sure i could go and watch another team while Villa are playing but it's something Dave seems to enjoy doing so fair play. I'd probably be checking my phone every 5 minutes to see how we were getting on.
Twitter is your friend, constant updates at a glance.
-
I'm not sure i could go and watch another team while Villa are playing but it's something Dave seems to enjoy doing so fair play. I'd probably be checking my phone every 5 minutes to see how we were getting on.
Twitter is your friend, constant updates at a glance.
You got your mobile phone out down the Lamb! Do you like being the centre of attention?
-
How did you cope b4 de internetz?
-
How did you cope b4 de internetz?
Was a season ticket holder at Villa back then, or abroad in The Army.
-
Is that what Da Armeez usd 2 b.?