Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Bert

PPV Games

By Bert, in Leicester City Forum

PPV Games   

400 members have voted

  1. 1. Will you be paying to watch?

    • Yep
      16
    • No, I’ll find a stream
      340
    • Listen on Radio
      44

Recommended Posts

davieG

davieG

Posted
Posted

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/premier-league-pay-per-view-22908860

 

Premier League pay-per-view figures labelled "disastrous" as clubs prepare likely U-turn
EXCLUSIVE: While figures for some games have been good, figures for others have been awful, and amid fan backlash and boycotts, neither the Premier League nor broadcasters are happy


ByJohn CrossChief Football Writer
17:01, 26 OCT 2020

Premier League chiefs will discuss making a U-turn over the pay-per-view row after “disastrous” viewing figures.

Sky and BT Sport have faced a huge public backlash after demanding £14.95 from fans to watch extra games with supporters organising widespread boycotts while using the cash to raise money for charity.

It has caused acute embarrassment for Premier League clubs while the broadcasters are fuming because they have been painted as the bad boys when ultimately they feel they are not to blame and were not responsible for setting the price.

Mirror Sport has been told Burnley's clash with West Brom last Monday tea time had the worst viewing figures to date and has been described as “exceptionally low”.

That has caused embarrassment and raised question marks about the whole concept.

Premier League shareholders will meet on Tuesday when the 20 clubs will discuss the issue and whether to change it, scrap it or potentially reduce the price.


 

Premier League clubs to vote on controversial pay-per-view arrangements


Some of the figures are understood to have been good which do make it commercially viable.

But the clubs are also frustrated because the revenues make very little difference to them and also they saw it as an extra service for fans to see games they would not otherwise be able to watch.

Other games have had a good take up with Newcastle's clash with Manchester United drawing in what was believed to be a good audience as well as Arsenal's game with Leicester getting high figures on Sunday night despite it being on pay-per-view.

0_Arsenal-v-Leicester-City-Premier-League-Emirates-Stadium.jpg
Vardy's Leicester winner was shown on Sky Sports Box Office (Image: PA)
Supporters have organised boycotts and campaigns with Liverpool fans collecting over £100,000 for local food banks after fans’ group Spirit of Shankly organised the protest and a boycott of their home clash with Sheffield United on Saturday evening.

Arsenal fans also raised over £34,000 after urging supporters not to buy their home game with Leicester and the boycott has been embarrassing for the broadcasters.

There is frustration at Sky and BT Sport because ultimately fans have to pay them more, although the money is supposed to be going to the clubs with the broadcasters not getting any profit but merely covering their costs.

BT Sport have publicly insisted the Premier League set the price while Prem chief executive Richard Masters claimed the broadcasters had to set the price from a legal point of view.

 

However, both Sky and BT Sport were told the parameters of what the clubs wanted to make from the pay-per-view games, they had to both budget their overheads and they both agreed on £14.95.

The issue will be discussed on Tuesday but there is a feeling that it has become so toxic they may have to look again and Premier League chiefs will point to the fact that it was always being done on an experimental basis up until the end of October.

One television source suggested the clubs may opt to do one more round of pay-per-view games and then review it again after the international break.

But it has now become a source of huge embarrassment even though some of the more popular games would suggest it has been worth doing it for the clubs and the Premier League.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
davieG

davieG

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, FoxesWalk said:

Cashley is the hero we all deserve 

 

Newcastle United owner, Mike Ashley, has issued the following statement in relation to the Premier League's current pay-per-view arrangements:

"I am calling on the Premier League to immediately act and review its current pay-per-view arrangements for live matches in the UK.

"Charging £14.95 for single televised matches in the current climate it is not acceptable to any football fan.

"Supporters have overwhelmingly rejected this offer and the Premier League must now act.

"Why not make it much more accessible at £4.95 per match until Christmas?

"The Government should waive VAT on the above pay-per-view matches so that as many of those who are unable to attend matches in person can at least watch their team.

"The profit from the above reduced-price pay-per-view option, I would suggest that 50% would be retained by Premier League and 50% would go to the football pyramid below.

"As a club, Newcastle United did vote in favour of the pay-per-view proposal, but to be clear, this was because there were no realistic or any viable alternatives put forward to enable supporters to watch matches."

 

 

He's a successful business man why didn't he offer a viable alternative?

Did the yes vote include the £14.95 if so why vote for it?

If it didn't why vote yes on a blind proposal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Arkie Bennett

Arkie Bennett

Posted
Posted

I'm not sure what else Sky and BT expected. Even if the clubs set the price and the broadcasters had no input at all, it still appears to be a stitch up by the broadcasters. Their reputations go before them, and the publicity that comes with fans donating to charities only emphasises the broadcasters' profiteering motives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mozartfox

mozartfox

Posted
Posted
On 26/10/2020 at 05:37, Corky said:

Five Live's coverage was really good. Clear commentary, you knew what was happening, no banal chat like Stringer.

 

 

I always listen to Stringer with the volume turned down. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scotch

Scotch

Posted
Posted

I held off on getting sky sports for a while because I was worried about how many Leicester games I would actually get to see but I got it knowing I would still have to stream some games. 

 

I don't understand though. If SS had a red button option of watching any PL/ Championship/ SPFL game that you wished despite what game they where showing, surely the majority of fans from those 3 leagues would buy it knowing they can see every game. There are cameras there anyway. I would actually pay a bit more than I do now for that. 

 

I can see a day in the near future when the PL just cut SS out and run a streaming site where fans can do just that. Similarl to what WWE did with its network. Fans could watch any game they wanted and paid £40 or whatever to do so. Surely with added advertising revenue, it would be far more lucrative to the league. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...