General : ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news

[harry_hitch]

Originally Posted by denphone

Well that's a personal choice we will have to make Harry but lets just say its going to get a whole lot harder but remember there are many who spend a lot on alcohol and tobacco and that again is their own personal choice and nobody elses at the end of the day.

I do not smoke but I drink alcohol - not much admittedly, but it still my only vice. If the government make me pay for any medical bills that arise from any illness that comes from alcohol (however unlikely), then I will pay it. I certainly won't moan about it frequently considering I make a choice to carry on with my actions. It is my choice to drink sensible amounts alcohol and if need be, pay for the consequences. I will say say the same about smokers and the morbidly obese. They should pay their way to, if the government takes that route. Currently I am happy to shoulder my burden of the cost of the NHS. If that changes, so be it.

It is no different to the sports. If you want to continue with your actions please do so. Just stop making yourseslves (that is aimed at everyone moaning about prices) victims for something you can attempt to change.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Chad

Exactly my thoughts.

I'm also surprised by the lack of BT bashing. If SKY had snapped up these exclusive rights they'd be getting torn to shreds today.

I'm all for a shake up in the market but all I'm seeing is more and more sport disappearing behind a pay-wall.

Until people stop subscribing to the likes of SKY Sports and BT Sports this trend will forever continue.

Rightly or wrongly I preferred when pretty much everything was on SKY Sports. 1 subscription to access everything I wanted. Now I've got to pay for SKY Sports, BT Sports and Boxnation to access what I was able to watch as little as 8 years ago.

Well Chad l have made my views perfectly clear many times but alas l suspect others in time and especially in 2015 l am sure will air their views as the buck starts to bite.

[colin25]

Originally Posted by harry_hitch

I do not smoke but I drink alcohol - not much admittedly, but it still my only vice. If the government make me pay for any medical bills that arise from any illness that comes from alcohol (however unlikely), then I will pay it. I certainly won't moan about it frequently considering I make a choice to carry on with my actions. It is my choice to drink sensible amounts alcohol and if need be, pay for the consequences. I will say say the same about smokers and the morbidly obese. They should pay their way to, if the government takes that route. Currently I am happy to shoulder my burden of the cost of the NHS. If that changes, so be it.

It is no different to the sports. If you want to continue with your actions please do so. Just stop making yourseslves (that is aimed at everyone moaning about prices) victims for something you can attempt to change.

Don't be silly. If i decided to protest, and not pay, i would not change a thing.

And if our actions were possible, would we not focus on power companies etc, and not tv sports?

[thenry]

Originally Posted by alwaysabear

Who would be your choice?

I'm not entirely sure. I am though sure BT use the same broadcast team that do it for ITV ? Does that mean they will have first picks of those commentators on ITV ?

Originally Posted by Bananaman_007

To be fair at least Jake Humphrey can get the players names right. Michael Owen can't even mange that. The few times i have watchec a match on BT i have had to turn off the sound as i could not bare the awful comments of Owen which 9/10 had nothing to do with what was happening it but some personal grudge he had against a player or team.

That actually brings up a good suggestion for BT to ponder if they want to continue with their crap punditry team, presenter, commentators. Could they not have an audio option for just stadium audio, mute the commentators.

Humphrey sucks.

[martin201002]

I'd much prefer for sky to keep the rights.

[harry_hitch]

Originally Posted by andy_m

So each British team at least once and both finals free to air. So four Champions League matches and three Europa League matches and then the final four each competition. Or ten matches. The rest of the matches behind a pay wall, and for at least the first season of this rights cycle separated from those who choose to pay Sky for the bulk, and best, of the Premier League. Leaving consumers with a choice between competitions or paying two subscriptions to get what they currently get for one.

Hard to see how the consumer wins here.

We don't know BT's prices yet. they may only charge £5-£10 for the whole lot of CL football. They have not said they will put the whole price of BT Sports up or stop making it available for free to many consumers.

It is up to Sky to cut their prices now. They are saving hundreds of millions of pounds that they would have paid to show the tournament. If they don't pass that saving on, and the consumer continues to pay, more fool them.

---------- Post added at 14:41 ---------- Previous post was at 14:29 ----------

Originally Posted by colin25

Don't be silly. If i decided to protest, and not pay, i would not change a thing.

And if our actions were possible, would we not focus on power companies etc, and not tv sports?

People need heat, electricity and water. People simply cannot give up basic utilities.

No-one "needs" sports. You are correct, one person would change much, but lots of cancellations given for the same reason would. I.E. No price decreases from Sky despite losing premium sporting content on Sky sports.

I can see I am making ripples with my comments, so I will drop this now. before it descends to another level. I have tried to make my views on the matter clear, but I would appear to be in a situation I can take no further.

For any replies that are posted on previous comments, I thank you for responding to them and I shall read them interest, but I will try not to answer them in case the mods deem me to be doing something wrong and/or taking the thread in the wrong direction. I apoloigize if I have.

[johnathome]

Having read the newspaper story i gota agree with Sky that BT massively overpaid, more than double the previous deal.

A comment on the Guardian website sums it up nicely, BT were forced to react by getting deeper into the pay tv market

Ultimately, Sky can only blame itself for this. They should have stayed clear of Telecommunications business. They tried to get greedy and they have now provoked BT into taking desperate measures.

[Taf]

So Man Utd fans will now cancel their subscriptions and will opt for the History Channel instead?

[spankysmagicpian]

Interesting comment picked up on my travels. All in all, it may bring prices down

As a small bar owner I couldn't be more happy!! Sky has continually priced us out of the market in the hope it drives people to their armchairs. Last year Sky wanted us to fork out £700 a month to show their sports coverage and given that consumers only want to see the top matches/events, the numbers just didn't stack up. BT, £75 a month!!

[andy_m]

Originally Posted by harry_hitch

We don't know BT's prices yet. they may only charge £5-£10 for the whole lot of CL football. They have not said they will put the whole price of BT Sports up or stop making it available for free to many consumers.

It is up to Sky to cut their prices now. They are saving hundreds of millions of pounds that they would have paid to show the tournament. If they don't pass that saving on, and the consumer continues to pay, more fool them.

My point is that currently you can watch one Champions League match from every match week, and every single Europa League match featuring two of the three English (or Welsh representatives of the English league!) teams competing in it, as well as both finals free to air. Whether you think BT are an anti Sky force for good or a corporate giant flexing it's financial muscles, the fact remains that you're going to get a lot less for free now they've got involved than you used to unless you want to pay for their broadband product, which is amongst the most expensive available, and if you want to watch every single Premier League and Champions League match then you'll have to pay for two subscriptions whereas you currently only need one.

[muppetman11]

Sky's response

"We bid with a clear view of what the rights are worth to us. It seems BT chose to pay far in excess of our valuation," read a statement from Sky.
"There are many ways in which we can invest in our service for customers. We take a disciplined approach and there is always a level at which we will choose to focus on something else. If we thought it was worth more, we'd have paid more.
"Nothing changes until 2015 and we look forward to 18 more months of live Champions League on Sky Sports. We will now re-deploy resources and continue to bring customers the best choice of TV across our offering."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/24882293

[johnathome]

I'd love to know what the Sky/ITV bid was

[spankysmagicpian]

Originally Posted by harry_hitch

It is up to Sky to cut their prices now. They are saving hundreds of millions of pounds that they would have paid to show the tournament. If they don't pass that saving on, and the consumer continues to pay, more fool them.

Nooooooooo chance. They are going to stick their many millions of pounds they have saved and keep it for a rainy day which will be when the PL packages come around again. They simply can't afford to not have the bulk of PL games. I wouldn't be surprised if Sky lost the bulk of the PL league games next round and BT grabbed them, all three (Sky, VM* and BT) would be pretty much level on subscriber numbers once it had all settled down.

*assuming that BT was still free on XL

[nstokes]

Originally Posted by Taf

So Man Utd fans will now cancel their subscriptions and will opt for the History Channel instead?

Nope, i will not be doing that

Originally Posted by johnathome

I'd love to know what the Sky/ITV bid was

Same here.

What about this for an after thought. What rights are due to expire on Sky in 2018? Thats correct F1. I see BT putting in a bid to get hold of the F1 rights as well.

Also what do you think Sky will use to fill in the gaps on the channels that CL will have left?

[denphone]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Sky's response


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/24882293

Well what else could they say apart from Sky's giving its side of the inconvenient truth for them.