Games Moved for TV

[kippaxvilla2]

I’m still not getting the fundamental point of the objections.  These games would not ordinarily be shown as live games as part of the usual tv package. 

Neither sky or BT are benefiting from the Ppv service.  The clubs have a horrendous income shortfall from no fans. 

They’re trying to recoup probably about a third of that through this scheme which is optional.  The only point I can get is ones who’ve already paid for their season ticket that’s fair enough.  The clubs will need to find a way of ensuring part of that expense is repaid to watch these games.

[kippaxvilla2]

By the way I won’t be paying extra to watch us but then I haven’t gone regularly to games since the kids were born.

[Ad@m]

Put it this way, let's assume each game gets 40,000 (I'd say that's generous).  At £15 a pop that's £600k revenue. Split between two clubs, that's £300k each less whatever Sky get paid in broadcast costs.

So I'd be surprised if clubs make more than £150k a game out of this which is absolute peanuts to them.

On the other hand, we're heading into a period of relatively mass unemployment and paying £15 to watch your team when you've already paid for Sky is going to be a stretch for people. Yes, people have saved money on not going to the ground but you're comparing apples with pears there.

It's just a massively unnecessary own goal from the Premier League - they're almost doing it to make a point rather than it actually making a financial difference to them.

My greater worry is whether this is the largest clubs testing the water for individual TV deals in the future. Then we are fucked.

[pauliewalnuts]

There doesn't seem to be any point at which this disgusting money grabbing ends.

Whatever the question, the motive is money with top flight football.

[danno]

I’m still not getting the fundamental point of the objections.  These games would not ordinarily be shown as live games as part of the usual tv package. 

Value, or lack thereof.

Sat 17th October.  Now TV day pass £9.99 = Two premier league games and everything on Sky sports ( F1 boxing cricket the lot) for 24 hours.

Or £14.50. One premier league game and three (possibly four) hours of content.

[kippaxvilla2]

They’re losing £5m a month though. Money those attending and buying merchandise were happy to pay before? 

Fast forward to the last home game of the season and crowds are allowed back on in their droves.  Are you going to all pile on here and go on about what a rip off the price was against Chelsea? A Match not televised ‘LIVE’ because we will have won the title three games before.

[Ad@m]

They’re losing £5m a month though. Money those attending and buying merchandise were happy to pay before? 

Again, you're comparing apples with pears. Going down the match is a completely different experience and for most is about sharing the experience with friends add it is the football itself.

On the other hand, charging £15 to watch a game alone in your front room, which makes sod all difference to the clubs in reality is just stupid.

[kippaxvilla2]

By the way £150k might be chicken feed as has been described but it keeps some of the support staff like the ticket office employees in a job.  Maybe.

[danno]

Now TV is already a PPV service.  I’d have probably done it so you buy a game for £14.50 but also get access Sky sports main event And Sky Sports Football (and nothing else) for the day.

It would still be a rip off, but it would be closer to what some people pay already.

[pauliewalnuts]

Yeah, they've been struggling for money, but that doesn't seem to have stopped them signing players for tens of millions on hundreds of thousands of pounds a week.

And whilst the clubs have struggled, vast swathes of their support are struggling much more, watching their jobs and livelihoods disappear.

I'd have much more sympathy for this move if there was some evidence clubs were really fucked, but looking at the transfer market, that doesn't appear to be the case.

[kippaxvilla2]

But once again I come back to the point.  There’s a choice.  That ground would be full without this pandemic.  They want to recoup some money of the millions they’ve lost.  I won’t be paying for it.  I would therefore never have seen that game anyway.

So there is a choice.  You pay and give a little bit of that lost revenue back to the club or you continue to expect the game free of charge - which as we all know is simply not sustainable in this day and age.

[kippaxvilla2]

And on the players front.  That unfortunately continues to be the price of the raw materials to generate revenue ie results and more success.  Very sad but very true.  We were moaning the other week about not signing people quick enough me included.

[PeterWithesShin]

Not counting dodgy streams, where are the games free of charge? Which Villa games have been free to watch this season?

[kippaxvilla2]

Sorry sir.  I meant that all games available option after lockdown and in September.  Games all available to view.  Including a BBC game.  Part of the usual subscription I meant.  If you pay a sky subscription it’s for 128 games over the season live or whatever the number is.  Not all of the games.

[PeterWithesShin]

Apology accepted for your error.