On The TV 20/21

[goody2028 1,220]

4 minutes ago, Blueman1967 said:

Seen in the paper today Sky plan to put fifteen matches on paid for view for £14.95 each, there was a vote on this and Leicester City was the only club to vote against, are fans being taken for cash cows?

Always have been and always will be by the likes of Sky and Bt unfortunately. 

[jammie82uk 1,469]

9 minutes ago, MonmoreStef said:

Going forward, am I being a bit cynical thinking games that will be on the standard sky channels will be the Burnley, Brighton, Palace etc type games, whereas the real interesting fixtures like local Derbies and the top teams vs each other will be on PPV.  Surely they’ll want Liverpool and Manchester Utd fans paying the extra given there’s probs over a million of them out there. 

I was thinking the exact same earlier, take the next game week for example would the games be swapped if given a chance 

 

Saturday 17 October

Everton v Liverpool - BT Sport (12:30 BST)

Chelsea v Southampton - PPV on BT Sport Box Office (15:00 BST)

Manchester City v Arsenal - Sky Sports (17:30 BST)

Newcastle v Manchester United - PPV on Sky Sports Box Office (20:00 BST)

 

 

[Manwell Pablo 5,452]

1 hour ago, Foxes_Trust said:

Discussions between the Premier League Fans Groups are currently underway to decide the next steps, an initial statement was issued by the Football Supporters Association and a couple of individual Trusts have already published their reaction, we are currently working on a statement

Reactive instead of proactive yet again I see, some things never change.

[UniFox21 7,322]

4 minutes ago, Manwell Pablo said:

Reactive instead of proactive yet again I see, some things never change.

Genuinely curious as to what steps you'd have had them take prior to this to be proactive?

[Manwell Pablo 5,452]

1 minute ago, UniFox21 said:

Genuinely curious as to what steps you'd have had them take prior to this to be proactive?

Honestly?

 

You’ve got a vote about putting football games behind a pay wall, you are the trust of a well established club, and you don’t think to air your opinion before it instead of complain about it after?

[UniFox21 7,322]

2 minutes ago, Manwell Pablo said:

Honestly?

 

You’ve got a vote about putting football games behind a pay wall, you are the trust of a well established club, and you don’t think to air your opinion before it instead of complain about it after?

Didn't realise they actually had a vote on all this, maybe they were unable to air an opinion before hand? I'm unsure, just playing devil's advocate there.

 

But for sure with this being released over a day ago, you'd have expected a response by now, even some pre-prepared.

 

Only reason I ask was having seen people/posters in the past complain about issues, without actually having an improvement in mind.

[davieG 17,074]

38 minutes ago, Blueman1967 said:

Seen in the paper today Sky plan to put fifteen matches on paid for view for £14.95 each, there was a vote on this and Leicester City was the only club to vote against, are fans being taken for cash cows?

Been discussed in here

 

 

 

[Manwell Pablo 5,452]

45 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

Didn't realise they actually had a vote on all this, maybe they were unable to air an opinion before hand? I'm unsure, just playing devil's advocate there.

 

But for sure with this being released over a day ago, you'd have expected a response by now, even some pre-prepared.

 

Only reason I ask was having seen people/posters in the past complain about issues, without actually having an improvement in mind.

They don’t have a vote, they, and the rest of the fans organisations with any sort a clout as all, should of released a statement before the vote to try have some influence over it. Instead we will get the usual after time complaining that well more than likely serve no purpose at all. Like most of their actions.

Edited 10 October 2020 by Manwell Pablo

[Fox92 11,483]

56 minutes ago, Blueman1967 said:

Seen in the paper today Sky plan to put fifteen matches on paid for view for £14.95 each, there was a vote on this and Leicester City was the only club to vote against, are fans being taken for cash cows?

Yes but fans continue to pay into these systems so they will continue to do it. If people stopped moaning and actually acted then maybe we'd see a change.

[Livid 1,037]

I honestly can’t see there being a u-turn on this. 
 

I don’t think much of the Premier League hierarchy but even they must have known what the response would be to this. 
 

I know we were the one to take a stand but the more they continue to shoot themselves in the foot the more I’m losing interest in the game at this level. 
 

It’s like we always knew they didn’t care about the fans now they’re just admitting it. Continue as it is, with the empty grounds and soulless fake noise, just as long as they get the £15 each week. 
 

I won’t be paying it, I won’t be going to the effort of finding a dodgy stream, I’ve got tickets to Coalville’s next two home games and I’m going to stick with that. 

[Cardiff_Fox 6,060]

43 minutes ago, Livid said:

I honestly can’t see there being a u-turn on this. 
 

I don’t think much of the Premier League hierarchy but even they must have known what the response would be to this. 
 

I know we were the one to take a stand but the more they continue to shoot themselves in the foot the more I’m losing interest in the game at this level. 
 

It’s like we always knew they didn’t care about the fans now they’re just admitting it. Continue as it is, with the empty grounds and soulless fake noise, just as long as they get the £15 each week. 
 

I won’t be paying it, I won’t be going to the effort of finding a dodgy stream, I’ve got tickets to Coalville’s next two home games and I’m going to stick with that. 

Don’t think you are far wrong. I’ve read today that EPL are charging £10 a game. 

They aren’t getting huge numbers but it doesn’t bother them 

[Blue Fox 72 2,187]

2 hours ago, Blueman1967 said:

Seen in the paper today Sky plan to put fifteen matches on paid for view for £14.95 each, there was a vote on this and Leicester City was the only club to vote against, are fans being taken for cash cows?

If you've 'paid' per view then that is money already gone.

 

With regard to the new 'pay' per view initiative, my advice FWIW is don't pay it. 

[yorkie1999 4,475]

2 hours ago, jammie82uk said:

I was thinking the exact same earlier, take the next game week for example would the games be swapped if given a chance 

 

Saturday 17 October

Everton v Liverpool - BT Sport (12:30 BST)

Chelsea v Southampton - PPV on BT Sport Box Office (15:00 BST)

Manchester City v Arsenal - Sky Sports (17:30 BST)

Newcastle v Manchester United - PPV on Sky Sports Box Office (20:00 BST)

 

 

Bit of a dangerous game they’re playing as it could end up everyone cancelling sky sports and picking the half dozen big games per season

[Bert 6,325]

2 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Bit of a dangerous game they’re playing as it could end up everyone cancelling sky sports and picking the half dozen big games per season

Not a chance 

[st albans fox 8,300]

Sky prem  classics on 512 is about to start .... the 5-3 .....and it’s not fifteen quid ......

[Trav Le Bleu 8,537]

Can someone clarify this for me.

 

PPV games. Do you need to be subscribing to Sky Sports PLUS you have to pay £15

 

Or do you just have to have Sky/Virgin and then pay £15 for any particular game on PPV?

 

I usually use NOW TV to watch City's games recently... would these games not be available on them?

[StanSP 26,310]

13 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Can someone clarify this for me.

 

PPV games. Do you need to be subscribing to Sky Sports PLUS you have to pay £15

 

Or do you just have to have Sky/Virgin and then pay £15 for any particular game on PPV?

 

I usually use NOW TV to watch City's games recently... would these games not be available on them?

Don't need existing subscription. Think of the ads /promo you see for PPV boxing. Will work like that. 

 

I don't know if the 'box office' channels are on Now TV though so not sure if it's on there! 

[Crashtoasted 133]

4 hours ago, hackneyfox said:

I very much doubt they've picked our next two games to get back at the club via the fans.

I don’t think it’s really about whether they’ve done it on purpose or not, more that those two facts correlated to piss me off 😂

[Stuntman_Mike 1,224]

22 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Can someone clarify this for me.

 

PPV games. Do you need to be subscribing to Sky Sports PLUS you have to pay £15

 

Or do you just have to have Sky/Virgin and then pay £15 for any particular game on PPV?

 

I usually use NOW TV to watch City's games recently... would these games not be available on them?

I'd imagine the games on the regular sky sports channel you'll watch as part of your now TV pass or sky subscription but to get the 'box office' sky games you'll need to pay the £15 on top of that. 

[Ashley 3,901]

2 hours ago, yorkie1999 said:

Bit of a dangerous game they’re playing as it could end up everyone cancelling sky sports and picking the half dozen big games per season

 

Maybe.... however... This is the first steps towards a Netflix style subscription. It'll probably earn the PL more pennies in the long run too 

[Sol thewall Bamba 7,717]

4 hours ago, Manwell Pablo said:

Reactive instead of proactive yet again I see, some things never change.

Nothing stopping you forming your own Supporters Group and doing things better than you feel the FT are...

[FoyleFox 781]

3 hours ago, yorkie1999 said:

Bit of a dangerous game they’re playing as it could end up everyone cancelling sky sports and picking the half dozen big games per season

Reading an article today which suggested the opposite. Sky and BT have agreed to facilitate the ppv but want to keep the prime games on their subscription channels. They're the matches they sell to a world audience. Or they don't believe they'll be a great uptake in ppv either...

[Webbo 16,621]

9 hours ago, FoyleFox said:

Reading an article today which suggested the opposite. Sky and BT have agreed to facilitate the ppv but want to keep the prime games on their subscription channels. They're the matches they sell to a world audience. Or they don't believe they'll be a great uptake in ppv either...

Every match is sold world wide, this won't change anything abroad. 

 

I can see why Sky would want to keep the top matches though, it just depends what their cut of the ppv is. 

[Matt 4,735]

15 hours ago, Manwell Pablo said:

They don’t have a vote, they, and the rest of the fans organisations with any sort a clout as all, should of released a statement before the vote to try have some influence over it. Instead we will get the usual after time complaining that well more than likely serve no purpose at all. Like most of their actions.

 

In Foxes Trust and other fans organisations defence this all seemed to come out of the blue, obviously there had been prior discussions between the PL, the TV companies and clubs which then went to a vote but it seemed to be kept very quiet up until the announcement.

 

Whether fans organisations and/or others were privy to this information I don't know and admitedly i'm being abit neive in that thinking but i'm just playing devils advocate that normally we hear rumblings of things like this before it's actually announced of which I saw nothing of.

 

 

14 hours ago, Livid said:

I honestly can’t see there being a u-turn on this. 
 

I don’t think much of the Premier League hierarchy but even they must have known what the response would be to this. 
 

I know we were the one to take a stand but the more they continue to shoot themselves in the foot the more I’m losing interest in the game at this level. 
 

It’s like we always knew they didn’t care about the fans now they’re just admitting it. Continue as it is, with the empty grounds and soulless fake noise, just as long as they get the £15 each week. 
 

I won’t be paying it, I won’t be going to the effort of finding a dodgy stream, I’ve got tickets to Coalville’s next two home games and I’m going to stick with that. 

I can't see there being a U-Turn because of the outrage or even poor viewing figures, not instantly anyway, that'd mean admitting they got it wrong and they wouldn't do that, for them to cut the idea based on poor viewing figures it'd be phased out.

 

However I do have some hope in there being a U-Turn based on criticism that it will create broken guidelines and rules during a pandemic, meaning it'll cause people getting together in houses, splitting the bill e.t.c, crowding in pubs e.t.c.

 

 

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/10/10/premier-league-urged-scrap-ppv-planas-fans-piling-pubs-could/

 

Ironically the article is behind a paywall.

[Blue Fox 72 2,187]

2 minutes ago, Matt said:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/10/10/premier-league-urged-scrap-ppv-planas-fans-piling-pubs-could/

 

Ironically the article is behind a paywall.