Quote:
Originally Posted by andy_m
I don't disagree, Sky got in to a dominant market position by spending money to the detriment of the consumer, financially at least. I'm just not sure i can join you in rejoicing in the rise of BT to take them on because i can't see how allowing a company to repeat the anti competitive practices of another benefits anybody other than that company.
The industry requires a shake up-streaming options are beginning to provide genuine competition to entertainment tv subscriptions, where a range of companies offer broadly the same content, meaning they have to compete in other ways, but when it comes to sport there are too many vested interests reliant on huge exclusive deals with big companies. If those companies are making a profit, and they are, it stands to reason that it must be the consumer bearing the cost of these deals. Dressing it up as "free" by bundling it with other devices doesn't mean that's not true.
|
Bob on AndyM.
I've always said the packages, especially the PL should be split 50/50 with a set cost for each. None of this bidding for X number of packages. It makes a mockery of the justification of the bidding in the first place in order to drive costs down.
Failing that, the Premier League should manage, produce and televise all the packages and sell them on to whoever for re-showing. That way, as you said, all channels who paid for the rights to re-show the games would have to compete in other ways. Even something like this would actually bring prices down if the only unique selling point was the price of the subs each month.