Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Changes to Sky Sports

  • 27-06-2017 4:57pm
    #1
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,331 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭


    This is interesting: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jun/27/sky-sports-channels-prices-football-golf-cricket

    Basically Sky are getting rid of SS1, 2, 3 and 4 and replacing them with channels specific to a sport. Sky Sports Football, Sky Sports F1 etc that you will be able to subscribe to individually.

    Rugby will be on "Sky Sports Arena", which seems to be the mop-up channel for sports that don't deserve their own dedicated one.

    Good news if you only care about certain sports.

    I don't get how they are going to make the rugby channel attractive though. They don't have the AP so it isn't going to appeal to English fans, they have only some euro games (I guess they'll get them all back) and only partial pro12 rights. They have some AIs too and SH rugby (which can't bring in much dosh anyway).


«13

Comments

  • #2
    connemara man
    Moderators, Sports Moderators, Regional West Moderators Posts: 6,773 Mod ✭✭✭✭connemara man


    Will Barnes be gone?????.....


  • #3
    thomond2006
    Registered Users Posts: 45,433 ✭✭✭✭thomond2006


    It makes sense. Currently if you are just interested in rugby then you have a massive cost where 99% of your subscription is going to football.


  • #4
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,331 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    thomond2006 wrote: »
    It makes sense. Currently if you are just interested in rugby then you have a massive cost where 99% of your subscription is going to football.

    Yep, but at the same time how much of sky's rugby coverage is currently funded by people who subscribe purely for football?


  • #5
    ongarite
    Registered Users Posts: 8,198 ✭✭✭ongarite


    Wasn't there a rumour recently too that BT will have exclusive rights to the HC in 2018/19?
    With no no AP and HC for Sky I could see them seriously wind back on their rugby coverage.


  • #6
    budhabob
    Registered Users Posts: 4,811 ✭✭✭budhabob


    This kind of arrangement is ideal for me. Only really interested in Rugby, and would happily pay a smaller fee to access that soley - the issue now will be what provider will have the majority of games.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    razorblunt
    Registered Users Posts: 17,300 ✭✭✭✭razorblunt


    I think Sky will lose rugby altogether in another few seasons, no harm either.


  • #8
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,331 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    razorblunt wrote: »
    I think Sky will lose rugby altogether in another few seasons, no harm either.

    I think if BT becomes the main rugby provider it'll be a disaster.


  • #9
    vienne86
    Registered Users Posts: 17,073 ✭✭✭✭vienne86


    awec wrote: »
    I think if BT becomes the main rugby provider it'll be a disaster.

    Agree completely. I hate the BT folksy presentations. Some of the commentary on Sky is pretty awful, but I find their analysis very good.


  • #10
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,331 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    vienne86 wrote: »
    Agree completely. I hate the BT folksy presentations. Some of the commentary on Sky is pretty awful, but I find their analysis very good.

    Not only that but BT is not as accessible as Sky Sports.

    I doubt BT would have any interest in showing the Pro12 too.


  • #11
    icdg
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 11,499 Mod ✭✭✭✭icdg


    Rumours of this have been floating about for a few months at least, so it seems it will come to fruition.

    This isn't just a rebrand or a reallocation of content between channels. It signals a fundamental change in how Sky Sports is marketed and priced. For football, cricket, golf, and F1 fans, you'll now have the opportunity to take a (cheaper) subscription to only your favoured sport or sports.

    To me the flip side is for the non-favourered sports - like both rugby codes, but also tennis, GAA, boxing, and NFL among others- this sends a major signal that they won't be as valued or won't be targeted for rights, in the new environment where they'll be sharing Sky Sports Arena and (basic tier) Sky Sports Mix. There have been already rumours that Sky won't be chasing the Pro12 again when this four year contract expires. The European Cup, we are told, is as good as gone to BT.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,331 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    Without the AP, without the HEC and without the Pro12 Sky basically only have the summer tests, the autumn internationals and the super rugby games.

    So why would anyone bother subscribing to that?

    If they don't take the Pro12 I wonder will we see more free to air stations come back on board. The coverage of teams other than Ulster is pretty rubbish, to be blunt. Ulster are probably the best covered team in European rugby.


  • #13
    aloooof
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    I wonder would we ever see a purely subscription-based streaming service like UFC Fight Pass or the like where you can subscribe per competition, say? I'd certainly pay for it, but I think it's not likely in the near future.


  • #14
    bmwguy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,006 ✭✭✭bmwguy


    How much would 1 channel be? I presume there will be a cost increase to subscribe to them all compared to the current subscription.

    That said I would subscribe to a rugby channel for a tenner a month or so.


  • #15
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 14,951 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    bmwguy wrote: »
    How much would 1 channel be? I presume there will be a cost increase to subscribe to them all compared to the current subscription.

    That said I would subscribe to a rugby channel for a tenner a month or so.

    Article says
    Broadcaster to launch themed channels for football, golf and cricket, with cheapest package costing £18 a month

    I'd assume that that's the price for "Sky Sports Arena" , so we're probably looking at ~€25+ for a single channel here.

    So , still FAR too much if you're a single sport person.

    What might be interesting though is if they change the pricing model for NowTV as that might make more sense to dip in and out of for games that are of interest..

    Currently they charge €10 for a day pass for Sky Sports or €15 for a week, but if a single channel cost say €7/€8 for a week(end) it might be worth a look.


  • #16
    razorblunt
    Registered Users Posts: 17,300 ✭✭✭✭razorblunt


    awec wrote: »
    I think if BT becomes the main rugby provider it'll be a disaster.

    I agree to an extent, I hate the faux banter between Healey and Kay in particular especially during games, but I do like the rugby show.
    But Sky have Barnes and Morris and co.

    I'd love proper Pro 12 coverage in particular.


  • #17
    johnnyryan89
    Registered Users Posts: 8,714 ✭✭✭johnnyryan89


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    Currently they charge €10 for a day pass for Sky Sports or €15 for a week, but if a single channel cost say €7/€8 for a week(end) it might be worth a look.

    For them prices let's hope BT gets overall rights for Champions Cup games. Think it's 25 quid (I've it free with Eir broadband) a month and you get football, rugby, boxing, MMA, GAA league games, motor racing and American sports over 7 channels.


  • #18
    JJ59
    Registered Users Posts: 34 ✭JJ59


    Sky greatly overpaid for the last Premier League rights and have been in trouble ever since. Their future now depends on retaining their position as the main home for the P.L. Without that they have no future. The question now is will BT move in for the kill and try and win that battle.


  • #19
    Erik Shin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,721 ✭✭✭Erik Shin


    razorblunt wrote: »
    I think Sky will lose rugby altogether in another few seasons, no harm either.

    Be careful what you wish for


  • #20
    johnnyryan89
    Registered Users Posts: 8,714 ✭✭✭johnnyryan89


    JJ59 wrote: »
    Sky greatly overpaid for the last Premier League rights and have been in trouble ever since. Their future now depends on retaining their position as the main home for the P.L. Without that they have no future. The question now is will BT move in for the kill and try and win that battle.

    Can't see BT trying to out bid Sky for Premier League rights, they've already got better football coverage than Sky imo with Champions League, some Premier League games, FA Cup and the other top leagues around Europe like Serie A, Bundesliga and French League. BT will bid alright to jack the price up but if they were smart they'd target La Liga for the El Classico games.


  • #21
    aloooof
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    razorblunt wrote: »
    I agree to an extent, I hate the faux banter between Healey and Kay in particular especially during games, but I do like the rugby show.
    But Sky have Barnes and Morris and co.

    I'd love proper Pro 12 coverage in particular.

    Proper Pro 12 coverage, and I think they're crying out for a proper highlights show on a Sunday evening, say.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Former Former
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,728 ✭✭✭Former Former


    "Proper Pro12 coverage" = no more games on free to air channels.

    We are absolutely spoiled by the coverage of the Pro12, I can't believe anyone would want it to change.

    Maybe if it meant a massive cash injection for the league, but otherwise, as fans we are infinitely better off with what we have.


  • #23
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,745 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    I know people really don't like Barnes, but I don't have that much of an issue with him personally. Sure you don't get much insight from him, but then not everyone who watches the game does so with the same level of knowledge of the game as a lot of people here. There are a lot of more casual fans that need to be accommodated as well. I'd take Barnes over Healey any day of the week. #BTBants

    The thought that all European games will be on BT really upsets me. I hate them. I find their coverage cringey in the extreme. If Sky are all but pulling the plug on their rugby coverage then that's probably bad news. Ulster are okay as they basically have a dedicated channel for Pro12. But unless another broadcaster gets involved then the other 3 provinces are going to lose out.


  • #24
    ThisRegard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,834 ✭✭✭✭ThisRegard


    thomond2006 wrote: »
    It makes sense. Currently if you are just interested in rugby then you have a massive cost where 99% of your subscription is going to football.

    I guess we'll just have to wait and see that they'll have. I don't subscribe due to having no interest in any other sport across the Sky Sports platform, so no point in paying for what's relatively a short amount of hours over the span of the year.


  • #25
    Skyfloater
    Registered Users Posts: 398 ✭✭Skyfloater


    Former Former wrote: »
    "Proper Pro12 coverage" = no more games on free to air channels.

    We are absolutely spoiled by the coverage of the Pro12, I can't believe anyone would want it to change.

    Maybe if it meant a massive cash injection for the league, but otherwise, as fans we are infinitely better off with what we have.

    Proper Pro12 coverage for me would simply be speaking in a language that I can understand!


  • #26
    The real mccoy 91
    Registered Users Posts: 2,126 ✭✭✭The real mccoy 91


    Will it work out more expensive if for example you wanted football rugby and golf channels?


  • #27
    Interested Observer
    Registered Users Posts: 12,999 ✭✭✭✭Interested Observer


    molloyjh wrote: »
    I know people really don't like Barnes, but I don't have that much of an issue with him personally. Sure you don't get much insight from him, but then not everyone who watches the game does so with the same level of knowledge of the game as a lot of people here. There are a lot of more casual fans that need to be accommodated as well. I'd take Barnes over Healey any day of the week. #BTBants

    Same here, never had any huge issue with him.

    The TV3 commentators for the RWC were absolutely objectionable, and I'm guessing will be for their 6N coverage. Healy is dreadful, or any BT commentators when an English team is playing (and I accept they are catering to their market). Barnes is harmless white noise.


  • #28
    CoDy1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,637 ✭✭✭CoDy1


    After losing the 6n, i'm guessing RTE will outbid TG4 for the terrestrial rights next year (2018/19).


  • #29
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    Am I the only one who only listens to commentators to catch names I'm unfamiliar with?

    Such as that Yann Madigan chap a couple of seasons ago.


  • #30
    dregin
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 6,524 Mod ✭✭✭✭dregin


    I know the Irish language is a big issue for a lot of people, but I really like the TG4 pundits. It would be excellent if RTE were to keep them on, were they to win the rights.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    razorblunt
    Registered Users Posts: 17,300 ✭✭✭✭razorblunt


    Skyfloater wrote: »
    Proper Pro12 coverage for me would simply be speaking in a language that I can understand!
    Former Former wrote: »
    "Proper Pro12 coverage" = no more games on free to air channels.

    We are absolutely spoiled by the coverage of the Pro12, I can't believe anyone would want it to change.

    Maybe if it meant a massive cash injection for the league, but otherwise, as fans we are infinitely better off with what we have.

    I'd actually hope it's just given wider access to the stations that already cover it. I'd much rather watch an Irish province play in Wales and Scotland with decent coverage. Not just the drearily partisan commentator Alba use and anyone they can grab off the injured Edinburgh player list who can barely string two words together.

    I'd also just like to see any game played in Italy!


Advertisement