Disney-backed ESPN line up against Rupert Murdoch

[muppetman11]

To be honest if ESPN could get 3 packages I may well jack my Sky sports sub in especially if ESPN UK capture more NFL.

[alwaysabear]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

To be honest if ESPN could get 3 packages I may well jack my Sky sports sub in especially if ESPN UK capture more NFL.

That is what I imagine will happen a nice 50/50 split. I would also cancel my Sky sports sub if ESPN UK got 3 packages and the NFL.
ESPN US are very close to agreeing a renewal of multi year contract with the NFL for MNF the figure mentioned was $2 billion a season.http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shu...urn=nfl-304314

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by alwaysabear

That is what I imagine will happen a nice 50/50 split. I would also cancel my Sky sports sub if ESPN got 3 packages and the NFL.

Just imagine ESPNA HD and ESPN HD with 3 packages , it would be a big bye bye to Sky sports from me.

[pauldavies83]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Just imagine ESPNA HD and ESPN HD with 3 packages , it would be a big bye bye to Sky sports from me.

But if you support a team (as I'd guess most who subscribe to the pay-sports channels for football do) and want to watch their games, there is no guarantee which broadcaster would pick up your team's games - which kind of flaws the whole package system.

You would need to cover all the packages the way they currently stand to ensure you get all your teams games. So if a 3rd broadcaster picked up packages, you could find yourself needing to pay even more to ensure you see all your teams games.

I think the whole package system needs to be scrapped, and a better solution found.

[alwaysabear]

Originally Posted by pauldavies83

But if you support a team (as I'd guess most who subscribe to the pay-sports channels for football do) and want to watch their games, there is no guarantee which broadcaster would pick up your team's games - which kind of flaws the whole package system.

You would need to cover all the packages the way they currently stand to ensure you get all your teams games. So if a 3rd broadcaster picked up packages, you could find yourself needing to pay even more to ensure you see all your teams games.

I think the whole package system needs to be scrapped, and a better solution found.

I can understand what you saying ,but unless you support one of the big 5 its a bit of a lottery any way.

---------- Post added at 16:46 ---------- Previous post was at 16:44 ----------

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Just imagine ESPNA HD and ESPN HD with 3 packages , it would be a big bye bye to Sky sports from me.

Lets not get to carried away now, but that would be great.

[The Yank]

Originally Posted by alwaysabear

That is what I imagine will happen a nice 50/50 split. I would also cancel my Sky sports sub if ESPN UK got 3 packages and the NFL.
ESPN US are very close to agreeing a renewal of multi year contract with the NFL for MNF the figure mentioned was $2 billion a season.http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shu...urn=nfl-304314

sadly it doesn't mention Sunday night NFL though I think they don't have the rights in the states do they?

[alwaysabear]

Originally Posted by The Yank

sadly it doesn't mention Sunday night NFL though I think they don't have the rights in the states do they?

NBC hold the rights in America. I do hope channel 4 continue showing it here if the CBA is sorted in the next few months.

[mersey70]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

To be honest if ESPN could get 3 packages I may well jack my Sky sports sub in especially if ESPN UK capture more NFL.

But you don't think ESPN would be included in XL or bundled with BT if they did get three packages do you? No chance, that's why I mentioned it.

Let's also be clear here, no laws have suddenly changed as of yesterdays announcement, it was only a recommendation albeit a very important one and the precedent is that it may well indeed be enforced.

Also this case was fought from a public broadcasting point of view to circumvent Sky's/ESPN's ridiculously high charges for pubs, not for a domestic set up like we have. Have you seen the price of these European subscriptions? They may well be cheaper than a Sky/ESPN pub subscription but they are far from cheap compared to a domestic subscription although they may be far cheaper if you can directy susbscribe rather than through a third party but consider this, what if operators subsequenty have to pay for EU wide rights to content rather than the domestic arrangements they have now?, those prices will hugely increase. And there are plans afoot to use targetted spotbeams on satellites in the future like the BBC do now with Astra 2D that will require a huge dish for reliable reception, in some cases these require planning permission too.

I think we may be jumping the gun a bit here. I have a feeling as ever we won't see any huge benefit ourselves.

It's only one shop but have a look at some of the prices, Sky Italia is nearly 1100 euros a year with this one. Maybe that's cheap for a pub compared to Sky/ESPN but not for us.

http://www.3pmfooty.com/index.html

[pauldavies83]

Originally Posted by mersey70

It's only one shop but have a look at some of the prices, Sky Italia is nearly 1100 euros a year with this one. Maybe that's cheap for a pub compared to Sky/ESPN but not for us.

http://www.3pmfooty.com/index.html

But they can be had for a lot less than that, and you get virtually every premier league & champions league game included live for that price (all with English commentary). Not the 100-odd Sky/ESPN pick.

I'd quite happily pay for one of those cards/dishes rather than pay for Sky Sports with Sky, as I don't watch anything but football and you don't have to buy all the entertainment channels just to get access to the Sports like you do with Sky.

A full year of Sky Sports (with Sky) costs minimum £477 + installation. For someone who just wants the football, not Sky1, not any of the other guff they make you buy just to get the sports channels, and not any of the other sport they show on their sports channels, it's a pretty big rip off compared to the shady alternatives.

[The Yank]

Originally Posted by alwaysabear

NBC hold the rights in America. I do hope channel 4 continue showing it here if the CBA is sorted in the next few months.

It is usually the earlier games that I watch which are usually on Fox (Murdoch). I do have a slingbox connection in my brothers house in US so could easily go with a ESPN only option. I'd lose alot of Rugby though

ESPN has a very long way unfortunately to compete against SKY Sports, no UK based sport today only Italian league football on

[alwaysabear]

Originally Posted by mlayzell

ESPN has a very long way unfortunately to compete against SKY Sports, no UK based sport today only Italian league football on

Its all about the next EPL rights bidding, that will tell us if ESPN are trying to compete with Sky or they are going to cosy up to each other and split the rights.

Reading the Guardian media article in its entirety suggests ESPN will not go directly head to head with sky in the uk for premiership rights or any other a key piece from the guardian media article is this.



Wolff says ESPN is happy for Sky to be the senior partner in the UK. "There will be markets where we bid against each other; there are other territories where we will not. You could have a very good second position in a market if that's the best business model you can build at that time." He adds: "We have a complex, multifaceted relationship with Sky [but] complex relationships aren't new to us. We just have to manage that."

and this.

Senior executives at ESPN emphasise that relations with News Corp and Sky are cordial, pointing out that Sky market ESPN to their subscribers in the UK and that the US network piggy-backs on the Sky platform. ESPN's biggest audience was 917,000, when Manchester United played Tottenham in October last year, but they will not reveal how many customers they have. Syfret estimates the number at 1.2 million, about the same as Setanta. Sky have more than 10 million customers, though not all of them subscribe to their sports channels.




The words senior executives at ESPN emphasise they have cordial relationships with sky as well as the paragraphs i have highlighted above leads me to conclude here at least ESPN will not be trying to outbid sky for anything,but would be prepared to say have a couple of packages of premiership football to keep regulators happy. The current court case though with the pub landlady taking the premiership to the European court for "restrictive practices" ie not being allowed to buy football coverage from anywhere else in europe could change all that in the future .

---------- Post added at 14:45 ---------- Previous post was at 14:29 ----------

Originally Posted by pauldavies83

But they can be had for a lot less than that, and you get virtually every premier league & champions league game included live for that price (all with English commentary). Not the 100-odd Sky/ESPN pick.

I'd quite happily pay for one of those cards/dishes rather than pay for Sky Sports with Sky, as I don't watch anything but football and you don't have to buy all the entertainment channels just to get access to the Sports like you do with Sky.

A full year of Sky Sports (with Sky) costs minimum £477 + installation. For someone who just wants the football, not Sky1, not any of the other guff they make you buy just to get the sports channels, and not any of the other sport they show on their sports channels, it's a pretty big rip off compared to the shady alternatives.

It works both ways you know i only watch the cricket on sky sports but have to pay for hours and hours of football to get it.!

[Rattus]

Recent court rulings do suggest skys domination of the UK market is coming to an end.

It does make a farce of the common market if you are forced to pay for sky, rather than any of their european competitors.

The best thing that can happen is that the price of the premiership deals drops all round, the clubs get less money, the over inflated egos who run about get less money, and the punters pay less.

[devilincarnate]

Looks like this could be a sign of things to come?

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/broadcas...ue-rights.html