General Premier League Thread 2020-21 - Mod Notes in 1st post. [Updated 17/12/20]

Harry Palmr

The Prem could form a broadcasting company for it's own use and who knows maybe hire out gear and expertise during the summer.

15 quid is madness

Mushy

noodler wrote: »

I hope not.

Would mean a horrible reallocation of TV money to the big few clubs and kill the competitive nature of the EPL

Maybe in the long term, but I think if streaming and could pick your teams games, its be done through sky/amazon and the collective would still be distributed evenly. Otherwise majority of teams wouldnt pass it through

bennyl10

TitianGerm wrote: »

€9.99 and I would pay for every Liverpool league game in a season.

If they were €4.99 I'd probably get another 20-30 games in the year on top of that.

you'd pay the bones of 400€ to just watch liverpool games?

no-one in their right mind would do that

this is an utterly insane idea

ArmaniJeanss

Harry Palmr wrote: »

The Prem could form a broadcasting company for it's own use and who knows maybe hire out gear and expertise during the summer.

At the moment presumably the person/team who does say the sound and lighting engineering at an EPL game for Sky on Sunday also does it for them at Tuesdays rugby league game, Wednesdays cricket and Thursdays darts. The internal cost is apportioned out (I think that's the right phrase?).

So running a broadcasting company with just one product would surely be exponentially much more expensive.

Quazzie

bennyl10 wrote: »

you'd pay the bones of 400€ to just watch liverpool games?

no-one in their right mind would do that

this is an utterly insane idea

If someone currently signs up to Sky Sports, BT Sports, and Virgin Sports, they would be paying far in excess of that a year, and still not get to see all their teams games.

ArmaniJeanss

First 3 Sky PPV games in the new world order.

Newcastle v Man U Sat 20.00
LCFC v AVFC Sun 19.15
WBA v Burnley Mon 17.30

17th, 18th and 19th Oct

TitianGerm

bennyl10 wrote: »

you'd pay the bones of 400€ to just watch liverpool games?

no-one in their right mind would do that

this is an utterly insane idea

Don't watch anything else on Sky Sports so it'd save me money over the year.

rob316

That's a ridiculous price and shows how out of touch the league is with the fans.

Lucas Hood

That price is mad. I remember prem plus channel on sky think it was 80 for the year and showed like 50 games.

Fitz*

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

First 3 Sky PPV games in the new world order.

Newcastle v Man U Sat 20.00
LCFC v AVFC Sun 19.15
WBA v Burnley Mon 17.30

17th, 18th and 19th Oct

And those of those games are the type of games you would expect to be shown during the 'normal' TV schedule.

Gbear

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

At the moment presumably the person/team who does say the sound and lighting engineering at an EPL game for Sky on Sunday also does it for them at Tuesdays rugby league game, Wednesdays cricket and Thursdays darts. The internal cost is apportioned out (I think that's the right phrase?).

So running a broadcasting company with just one product would surely be exponentially much more expensive.

If there's 10 games a week, they could shift kickoffs to be right through the week, carting the equipment around from ground to ground, rather than having to double up (or 19-up).
Even without doing that, you could have slots Friday 6.30, 8.30, Saturday 12.30, 2.30, 4.30, 6.30, 8.30, Sunday the same, Monday for overflow/rescheduled games. Pair kickoff times by location where possible to reduce distance travelled (eg have a game in Liverpool at 12.30 and Manchester at 6.30).

The profitability on almost any PL game will be higher than any match of any other Sport in the UK, barring maybe the odd final or derby, so it would surely be less expensive to have the gear just being used for football matches.

Mitch Connor

Fitz* wrote: »

And those of those games are the type of games you would expect to be shown during the 'normal' TV schedule.

Over:
Everton vs Liverpool
Man City vs Arsenal
Palace vs Brighton
Tottenham vs West Ham
Leeds vs Wolves.

I don't think the selection of games made for TV a while ago indicate something sneaky going on.

Harry Palmr

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

At the moment presumably the person/team who does say the sound and lighting engineering at an EPL game for Sky on Sunday also does it for them at Tuesdays rugby league game, Wednesdays cricket and Thursdays darts. The internal cost is apportioned out (I think that's the right phrase?).

So running a broadcasting company with just one product would surely be exponentially much more expensive.

I'm not in the biz obviously but I expect SKY have built up layers of overheads down the years and we've seen how the presentation has got ever more flashy and elaborate and long winded. If all that pre-post crap were whittled down to something akin to LFCtv or even just MOTD level plenty of ballast could be turfed overboard.

The other thing that would have to be taken care of is VAR/Stockley Park, they could have to watch half the league games at a time possibly some days.

One way to defray costs would be selling turn key packages to overseas markets, they just have their own host, pundits in a remote studio with a data feed of everything and they decide how much/little they want to do with it.

Gbear

Another thing that I can't believe still isn't a thing, is VR in-stadium experience. You could sell a premium ticket that you could watch on your VR headset, that's more immersive and makes you feel like you're in the stadium. It might actually justify paying something like 15 quid a game. It might be a bit gimmicky and be fairly niche, but it'd be cheaper to produce, because you'd just have the one feed (or an optional feed of the normal coverage if you liked), and would at least see some uptake early on for the novelty.

ArmaniJeanss

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

First 3 Sky PPV games in the new world order.

Newcastle v Man U Sat 20.00
LCFC v AVFC Sun 19.15
WBA v Burnley Mon 17.30

17th, 18th and 19th Oct

Fitz* wrote: »

And those are the type of games you would expect to be shown during the 'normal' TV schedule.

Nah, to me the only one where's it slightly surprising that it wasn't picked in the 'normal' packages is Newcastle v MUFC.
But Sky/BT have to work within the limitations of the max quotas, and that means skipping some decent pre-xmas Pool/MUFC games so that they have flexibility later in the season when they expect these teams to be 'in the hunt' for the title or CL places.

Shanotheslayer

In terms of Packages I just have NowTV.

So I get BT and Sky I think it's like 38 a month? You're allowed be logged in on 2 devices at the one time so I split it with a mate.

10/10 recommend.

marklazarcovic

its simple, if pool/utd/arsenal/leeds get say 2 million subscribers per game (just a figure) if its a home game they get 80% of the pot,away team gets 20% , if one of the big clubs plays say..burnley/brighton and their 2 million subscribers pay to watch that when its a away fixture,then burnley/brighton get 80% and 20% to the away team.. could help the smaller clubs alot..

and the lower leagues a fiver a game or whatever,its money coming in ..

rob316

If its was a fiver and streamed in 4k I'd pay it, but £15 is an absolute rip off.

Tom Mann Centuria

Money hungry Premier League looking to make even more money? Well who'd have thunk it.


They'll launch a PR offensive about how "they're listening" and now it's just a bargain price of 9.99 instead. Morons will lap it up. Guaranteed goals these days too with sh*tty penalties given every game, and that sweet fake crowd sound on your Dolby Atmos mmmmmmmm, feel like signing up myself.

Fitz*

Leicester City were the only club that opposed it.

By the sounds of things, the money is going directly to the clubs minus production costs for the broadcasters. It's more greed on the clubs end. 'To make up for the shortfall with no fans in attendance'.

Agent Coulson

I can't really see a big take up on this, A lot of people struggling financially in these times.

gimli2112

Fitz* wrote: »

Leicester City were the only club that opposed it.

By the sounds of things, the money is going directly to the clubs minus production costs for the broadcasters. It's more greed on the clubs end. 'To make up for the shortfall with no fans in attendance'.

I imagine the expenses will be padded a little. I don't know how the broadcasters are doing it but they'll have crunched the numbers and know there's profit for them somewhere.

Fitz*

A short story from PR FC

https://twitter.com/sistoney67/status/1314592191092842496?s=19

https://twitter.com/martynziegler/status/1314585749417844741?s=19

Saying that Man Utd were opposing the idea.

But as we know, it was actually Leicester that opposed it.

https://twitter.com/martynziegler/status/1314590680673640448?s=19

Agent Coulson

Ed did hire that reporter from the Rag to be his PR guy.

ERG89

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Ed did hire that reporter from the Rag to be his PR guy.

Tbf every single club will publicly try to distance themselves from this and try say they didn't want to do it.

DeanAustin

Okay, I'll declare my obvious bias first. I'm a Spurs fan.

The Athletic are reporting that Ozil is on an £8m loyalty bonus to see out his contract at Arsenal. He's on £350k a week which is £18m a year. That'll give him £26m to sit on his hole for the year. Arsenal must have been desperate not to lose him after Sanchez to have agreed to that. It's obscene.

It did make me laugh I have to say. Madness.

Agent Coulson

£55m over the course of his 3.5 year contract that he signed in January 2018.

Since he signed that contract he has played in 72 games and I would say it's highly doubtful he will play again for Arsenal.

Fair play to him that was some deal they gave him to stay.

8-10

I still don't get why they don't play him though?

I don't think he even made the bench for the league cup team....whats going on?

Harry Palmr

Ozil is now the biggest piss taker since "Chelsea's" Winston Lloyd Bogarde