Premier LeagueTV Rights 2016to 2019

Kristopherus

New TV rights deals for EPL just out. Sky have 5 packages and will be showing 126 games per season.They will be showing games on Friday nights, Saturday afternoons,Sunday afternoons, and Monday evenings.

BT Sports have 42 games per season. They will be showing Saturday evening games. No word from Setanta yet.


Breaking News on SS News and BT Sport 1.

Kirby

Setanta have the middle game on Saturday currently. I'd say they would be eager to hang onto it but I'm not sure they can afford it.

irishfeen

83% increase in the cost of the rights from sky :eek:

CSF

Will the Sky afternoon game be shown in England? Terrible idea If so.

namloc1980

£5.136bn for 3 seasons. 70% increase on the current deal. Phenomenol money.

KingdomYid

CSF wrote: »

Will the Sky afternoon game be shown in England? Terrible idea If so.

Is this just not the 12.45 slot that BT currently have on a Saturday?

Utopia Parkway

To be honest the money is kinda obscene. No doubt subscriptions will go up on the back of it.

Bottom club in PL receives almost £100M in prize money. Great money for being awful.

GavRedKing

Absolutely mental money.

Clubs will have more money to spend as a result, didnt the relegated clubs last year get more than Utd for winning the league in 2013 on the back of the increased TV deal?

Oat23

The team that finishes bottom when this new deal kicks in is going to get over 4 times more than the German champions, twice more than the French champions, more than the Italian champions and not be far behind what Real/Barca get either.

Madness.

namloc1980

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

To be honest the money is kinda obscene. No doubt subscriptions will go up on the back of it.

Bottom club in PL receives almost £100M in prize money. Great money for being awful.

Yeah. Expect your sky sports sub to rocket up in the coming years.

Lucas Hood

GavRedKing wrote: »

Absolutely mental money.

Clubs will have more money to spend as a result, didnt the relegated clubs last year get more than Utd for winning the league in 2013 on the back of the increased TV deal?

Not sure about that but the relegated teams got more than then bayern.

IvySlayer

So what do you think of Friday night games?

Skylinehead

Kirby wrote: »

Setanta have the middle game on Saturday currently. I'd say they would be eager to hang onto it but I'm not sure they can afford it.

No other competition in Ireland to take it off them though - the big British ones aren't allowed to show them by law.

irishfeen

Recap -

Package A: 28 at Sat 12.30pm - SKY
- 6 1st picks
- 14 2nd picks
- 8 5th picks

Package B: 28 at Sat 5.30pm - BT
- 9 1st picks
- 12 3rd picks
- 7 5th picks

Package C: 28 at Sun 1.30pm/2.15pm - SKY
- 15 2nd picks
- 6 4th picks
- 7 5th picks

Package 28 at Sun 4pm/4.30pm - SKY
- 18 1st picks
- 10 4th picks

Package E: 28 at Mon 8pm (min 18) or Fri 7.30pm/8pm (max 10) - SKY
- 15 3rd picks
- 13 4th picks

Package F: 6 midweek; 8 at Sat 12.30pm or Sat 5.30pm or Sun 12pm - BT
- 3 1st picks
- 7 2nd picks
- 4 4th picks

Package G: 8 Bank Hols; 6 at Sun 1.30pm/2.15pm or Sun 4pm/4.30pm - SKY
- 2 1st picks
- 2 2nd picks
- 8 3rd picks
- 2 4th picks

3 year total:
Sky - £4,176m
BT - £960m

Per year:
Sky - £1,392m
BT - £320m

Sky up 83%
BT up 30%



Exceptional numbers in any language!

Beefy78

IvySlayer wrote: »

So what do you think of Friday night games?

I like it. Friday nights are a good evening to have some sport on. I enjoyed having the Six Nations on last friday and I grew up on Friday Night Football under the floodlights at Roots Hall every other weekend.

jester77

IvySlayer wrote: »

So what do you think of Friday night games?

Work great here in Germany. Nice way to start the weekend. Might be awkward for away fans if they have a long distance to travel.

8-10

The money around this now means that somebody should seriously invest in tackling illegal streams and paid sites for streaming services.

klose

Wonder how much sky sports and bt subscriptions will increase in line with it?

Mad money in any case, apparently it breaks down to just over £10 million per game to air it.

NUTZZ

TV Rights 2016-19

Super Sunday
Or Super Mega Triple Double Extra Bacon Awesome Sunday, as Sky once considered branding it for Aston Villa thrillers. The big news is that Sky have kept the two Sunday afternoon games, including Super Sunday.

Sky Sports will have the game at 4pm or so – this package has a lip-smacking 18 first-choice matches, so expect the biggest games to continue in this slot.
They will also show the earlier game at lunchtime. Nothing doing for BT on Sundays.

Friday
Sky have paid 5.136 billion for all their packages and will now show live top-flight football on Friday nights. There will be at least 18 games on a Friday night. This package was bundled with Monday nights

Monday Night Football
...which will still be shown on Sky Sports 1. The programme that introduced the Hairy Handed Richard Keys to the nation and is now so expertly pundited by Gary Neville and Jamie Redknapp stays on Sky Sports 1.

Saturday
Sky Sports and BT Sports have done a Saturday Switcheroo. Sky Sports show the game that kicks off the weekend by kicking off at 12.30.
And then once everyone has come back from the ground/from the shops/from the hypnotic trance of watching Souey too early in the morning, then it’s over to BT Sport for the 5.30pm kick off

The much less good days of the week, aka weekdays
There was a small package (stop it) of six weekday matches and then eight Saturday matches, but there were only two ‘first picks’ up for scrumps in this section.

Bank Holidays
Last and sorta kinda least, the package for eight Bank Holiday matches and six Saturday matches has gone to BT.
So what does it all mean? Well, it means that Sky have won packages A, C, D, E and G below and they paid an astonishing 5.136 billion to do so. Talk of a new player in town by, and about, BT may have been exaggerated...

Kristopherus

Crazy, crazy, crazy money. Capitalism at its most vulgar. If Sky hike up the Sports Package to rake in a lot of that money, then, certainly in UK, guys will go for the alternate ways of watching their footie, which are pretty rampant at the moment.

klose

jester77 wrote: »

Work great here in Germany. Nice way to start the weekend. Might be awkward for away fans if they have a long distance to travel.

Usually the "biggest" game of the weekend too isint it?

jester77

What do the picks mean, e.g. Fri 8 5th picks?

jester77

klose wrote: »

Usually the "biggest" game of the weekend too isint it?

Actually yeah, thinking about it, it mostly is.

What is also nice here is that the opening game of the season and I think the first game after the winter break are free to air.

niallo27

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

To be honest the money is kinda obscene. No doubt subscriptions will go up on the back of it.

Bottom club in PL receives almost £100M in prize money. Great money for being awful.

They will still be the 20th best team in a country full of thousands of teams which ain't bad.

irishfeen

jester77 wrote: »

What do the picks mean, e.g. Fri 8 5th picks?

A first pick means they can pick whatever match they want eg. United v Chelsea

niallo27

Kristopherus wrote: »

Crazy, crazy, crazy money. Capitalism at its most vulgar. If Sky hike up the Sports Package to rake in a lot of that money, then, certainly in UK, guys will go for the alternate ways of watching their footie, which are pretty rampant at the moment.

Won't they make most of their money selling their rights in Asia.

LuckyLloyd

From a societal perspective one has to say "wow" at the scale of resource invested. The increase in subscription price will be equally awesome.

J. Marston

8-10 wrote: »

The money around this now means that somebody should seriously invest in tackling illegal streams and paid sites for streaming services.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mpqiq-FHDV4

Internet always wins. God bless it.

LuckyLloyd

Kristopherus wrote: »

Crazy, crazy, crazy money. Capitalism at its most vulgar. If Sky hike up the Sports Package to rake in a lot of that money, then, certainly in UK, guys will go for the alternate ways of watching their footie, which are pretty rampant at the moment.

There's an ever clearer financial motive and ROI for attempting to shut down illegal streaming of games. I'll be expecting a pretty devastating clampdown on same.

jester77

irishfeen wrote: »

A first pick means they can pick whatever match they want eg. United v Chelsea

Ah right, so with Sky having so many packages, they could make their 5th pick Friday a bigger game by shuffling around games?

Paleface

All the extra money that the weaker clubs get does nothing to improve their standard of football from what I can see. It just means inflated transfer prices and wages.

If they got less money they'd still be able to buy the vast majority of the players they aim to buy.

Lucas Hood

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

There's an ever clearer financial motive and ROI for attempting to shut down illegal streaming of games. I'll be expecting a pretty devastating clampdown on same.

People probably said the same last time around.

thebaz

with all that money sloshing about how comes most teams seem to be haemorghing money - I know my own club, Everton, never seams have the spons to compete at the top end.
Our Chairman , tries to come across as Mr. nice guy , one of us , all waffle talk about how he is seeking extra investment , new stadium , and nothing ever happens.
Perhaps this money expains why he so slow to sell - so much for the Peoples game

SantryRed

This was always going to happen on the back of Sky losing the CL rights to BT. There's no way they were gonna even think of losing the Premier League. Hence the OTT price rises

namloc1980

Kristopherus wrote: »

Crazy, crazy, crazy money. Capitalism at its most vulgar. If Sky hike up the Sports Package to rake in a lot of that money, then, certainly in UK, guys will go for the alternate ways of watching their footie, which are pretty rampant at the moment.

They'll have to ramp up the subs to make a return on this investment. Also expect sky to increase the amount of advertising.

jester77

Lucas Hood wrote: »

People probably said the same last time around.

I would imagine this time they will clamp down harder, they will probably have to increase sub's to recoup some of this. This will mean some people looking for alternative methods so they can cancel sky.

Hulk Hands

Seems to be more outrage than delight at this which is strange. It's the league the majority of us watch the most. Often scoffed at with the sarcastic phrase 'best league in the world'. Well it's already the most competitive top league, and hammering it's rivals like this, has a great chance to top the quality stakes too. Fair fcuks to the organisation as a whole for what it's done since the 90s. It even has organisations like the NFL and NBA with sole directives to make money looking on longingly

MisterAnarchy

Paleface wrote: »

All the extra money that the weaker clubs get does nothing to improve their standard of football from what I can see. It just means inflated transfer prices and wages.

If they got less money they'd still be able to buy the vast majority of the players they aim to buy.

True,all that happens, with all this new wealth in the Premier League, is an ever-accelerating inflationary spiral. The same clubs buy the same players, but for more money.
The cost of everything is soaring. Its value is not.

For example Hull City now record higher revenues than Valencia.
Given that, in 2001, Valencia were in the Champions League final and Hull were in the fourth tier of English football, that is pretty remarkable.
Hull, might have higher revenues than Valencia, but they still cannot buy the same quality of players. They cannot do that partly because of their history, their reputation, and their location, but they mainly cannot do that because they are not going to get into the Champions League any time soon.

The Premier League is getting richer, but it does not seem to be getting better, certainly if we go by the only real gauge we have (beyond bias, prejudice and mere opinion): the Champions League.

Kerrydude1981

Will Friday night football be suited for teams in the CL? Have them playing on a Friday night to give them more time to recover for CL games the following week. isnt this something that is done in Spain? Games played on Thursday and Friday nights.

A new transfer deadline for Fantasy Football players as well

corny

Only interested in the rugby so was hoping Sky would clean out BT and leave them with the rugby. Wishful thinking.

Having to pay the prima donna, middle distance runners of the Premier League doesn't sit well with me. Won't be long before clearing half a million, or god forbid a million, a week is not unusual. Should be reprehensible in anyones book.

thebaz

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

For example Hull City now record higher revenues than Valencia.
Given that, in 2001, Valencia were in the Champions League final and Hull were in the fourth tier of English football, that is pretty remarkable.
Hull, might have higher revenues than Valencia, but they still cannot buy the same quality of players. They cannot do that partly because of their history, their reputation, and their location, but they mainly cannot do that because they are not going to get into the Champions League any time soon.

The Premier League is getting richer, but it does not seem to be getting better, certainly if we go by the only real gauge we have (beyond bias, prejudice and mere opinion): the Champions League.

The competitiveness of the Championship and crowds they get is unparalleled anywhere - Derby , Forest, Leeds , Wednesday regularly get crowds over 30,000.
From top to bottom there is very little between the teams, the quality may not be great, but I'm nearly enjoying it more than the tier above. I don't sneer so much, **** sake he's earning more than me a week than me a year , and that would go for nearly all players in the EPL, including those at lowly Burnley.

jester77

Wonder will sky come up with new packages like here in Germany. They have 2 sports packages here, one solely for Bundesliga and the other for everything else (Premier league, French league, Champions league, F1, golf, etc). If you don't have the Bundedliga package, you can buy Sat games for €10 or the whole weekend games for €15.

TINA1984

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

For example Hull City now record higher revenues than Valencia.
Given that, in 2001, Valencia were in the Champions League final and Hull were in the fourth tier of English football, that is pretty remarkable.
Hull, might have higher revenues than Valencia, but they still cannot buy the same quality of players. They cannot do that partly because of their history, their reputation, and their location, but they mainly cannot do that because they are not going to get into the Champions League any time soon.

Presumably Valencia are part of the coterie of elite Spanish clubs who prefer to sell their TV rights individually rather then collectively like the EPL, as such their inability to match Hull's financial might is a situation entirely of their own making. You reap what you sow etc...

Paully D

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

There's an ever clearer financial motive and ROI for attempting to shut down illegal streaming of games. I'll be expecting a pretty devastating clampdown on same.

They can try, but they'll fail once again.

The sooner they realise it's in their best interests to offer their own streaming service, the better.

Oat23

Paully D wrote: »

They can try, but they'll fail once again.

The sooner they realise it's in their best interests to offer their own streaming service, the better.

Still won't be as good as mystreams :cool:

Paully D

Oat23 wrote: »

Still won't be as good as mystreams :cool:

I'll never be able to thank you enough for introducing me to that mate.

Andersonisgod

Hulk Hands wrote: »

Seems to be more outrage than delight at this which is strange. It's the league the majority of us watch the most. Often scoffed at with the sarcastic phrase 'best league in the world'. Well it's already the most competitive top league, and hammering it's rivals like this, has a great chance to top the quality stakes too. Fair fcuks to the organisation as a whole for what it's done since the 90s. It even has organisations like the NFL and NBA with sole directives to make money looking on longingly

It isn't the most competitive league......

It already brings in vastly more than any other league and yet the quality of football from a sizable portion of teams in the league is dire. As posted already here by another poster, the increase in tv money has just led to massive inflation in transfer fees, agent fees and wages, generally the quality of player at clubs like Crystal Palace, Burnley, Aston Villa ect. hasn't changed all that much over the last 10 years.

The league is marketed very well here and further abroad, the games can be exciting (usually games involving the top teams) but in terms of competitiveness, attracting the very cream of the crop, and quality of football on display I think the casual football fan has ever right to cast a skeptical eye in the direction of anyone who comes out with the "best league in the world" line.

Kirby

Andersonisgod wrote: »

It isn't the most competitive league.......

Yes it is.

You are confusing competitiveness with "quality" or "attractiveness". The EPL certainly isn't the prettiest league but English football is more competitive. The guys at the bottom cause upsets every season, not just once in a blue moon. Anybody can beat anybody and it happens frequently. That's what competitive means.

Kristopherus

Its an awful pity the F.A. would'nt force the EPL to distribute a far higher percentage of TV money to the lower leagues. Championship teams are way below Prem Lge standard in the main. And because they are so strapped for cash, even the winners of the C'ship will generally struggle in the Prem Lge. Its the classic case of the rich get richer & f**k everyone else.

Andersonisgod

Kirby wrote: »

Yes it is.

You are confusing competitiveness with "quality" or "attractiveness". The EPL certainly isn't the prettiest league but English football is more competitive. The guys at the bottom cause upsets every season, not just once in a blue moon. Anybody can beat anybody and it happens frequently. That's what competitive means.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2011/oct/19/the-question-how-competitive-premier-league

It's from 2011, though I suspect it's still a fairly relevant article. The idea that only in England do the small teams beat the big teams is ridiculous. I'd also argue that if the big teams slip up so often it is perhaps more because those big teams are not as good as their Spanish/German counterparts.

Fr Tod Umptious

Paully D wrote: »

They can try, but they'll fail once again.

The sooner they realise it's in their best interests to offer their own streaming service, the better.

Is it in their best interest though ?

Their bread and butter is TV, and that's where they make their money.

Any official online service would have to come from the FA and be sold as an auction just like the TV ones.
And that will now not happen till 2019

Plus I'm not convinced about unofficial online services.
The best free one has recently been shut and there's no guarantee that a paid service would be online the next time you try to login.