Quote:
Originally Posted by harry_hitch
Readers of the ESPN BT Sports etc thread will know my views on this. I will state them again, in a slightly different way on here due to the nature of a possible third bidder. If a third provider offers PL football at a cheaper price than BT Sport (which people can get for "free" via VM or previously BT BB) or SS. It is not their fault if prices go up. The price only goes up for consumers if they choose to pay three separate providers for EPL football. If Sky lose packages, it is up to them to pass on the savings to customers - pure and simple, there is no grey area in the mater. If Sky syphon money saved from SS to fund other programming, that is simply wrong. If people know Sky are doing this and still continue to pay over the top for a (theoretically) decreasing sporting portfolio of events, whilst producing (imo) poor programming elsewhere, long may they continue to rip people off.
|
I'm not sure it's that black and white. At the time Sky were no longer able to purchase all the packs, the number of matches in those packs, along with the price, went up. Sky have fewer packs, but more matches and at a higher cost, than before. So even though other broadcasters have popped up there aren't actually any savings for Sky to pass on and their customers are getting more matches for their money.