View Single Post
Old 19-12-2017, 12:20   #7666
OLD BOY
Rise above the players
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Wokingham
Services: 2 V6 boxes with 360 software, Now, ITVX, Amazon, Netflix, Lionsgate+, Apple+, Disney+, Paramount +,
Posts: 14,568
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
Re: ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raider999 View Post
Will streaming be profitable though?

For instance, if a company gets a premier league package it won't be one of the all games in one round package, because they simply won't have the infrastructure to be able to film all of them in a 2-3 day period.

Whatever package they bid for the cost of filming and distribution will be enormous compared with the benefits.

Just how much will people pay for access to the stream?

NRL (Australian rugby league) is moving to streaming of all games in 2018 - no indication of cost as yet (apart from saying an equivalent for a different sport was approx. £20pm) - NRL was on Premier Sports (£10pm) so as far as I can see there will be few people willing to pay much more than £5pm for access to the streaming.

I i agine the feed will be from Australian broadcasters so apart from cost for the rights and streaming costs there can be little extra costs, but will they be able to make it pay?
Some good points being made about this, but in my view, none of these are unresolvable problems.

As far as the cost and resources required for infrastructure is concerned, I think someone has already made the point that they could rely on the filming that is organised by the Premier League itself. Until I read that, and I assume it was true, I had no idea that filming was taking place separately to that provided by Sky and BT. If true, I don't know whether the technical and professional quality is the same, but if so, it would appear that this problem is solved. If not, then clearly, the costs would be high, but if BT could do it, I'm sure that the big players, with their wads of money, can as well. If either Sky or BT lose out completely, the opportunity is already there for the incoming company to take over the infrastructure and employees (under TUPE).

The biggest problem, in my view, is accessing the same number or more viewers than BT and Sky manage to now, to make this pay. Given the current position with the roll out of broadband in this country, and the slow speeds many people have to put up with, my guess is that the new player(s) will go for a combination of streaming, existing channel outlets and new ones as well.

---------- Post added at 11:20 ---------- Previous post was at 11:02 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetman11 View Post
According to Rupert Murdoch in a recent interview on TV he sees Facebook as the biggest threat.
Maybe they are, although Facebook does not currently have subscribers to a TV service like Amazon or Netflix. YouTube would be a more likely contender in my view, but I'm sure that Rupert, with his knowledge of and contacts in the industry must have his reasons for believing that to be the case.

Last edited by OLD BOY; 19-12-2017 at 12:16.
OLD BOY is offline   Reply With Quote