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

[Raider999]

Hate to disagree with OB, but the telegraph reported (in the last 2-3 days) that Amazon have no interest in bidding fir the main EPL contracts held by Sky & BT

[Phunkenstein]

Originally Posted by Raider999

Hate to disagree with OB, but the telegraph reported (in the last 2-3 days) that Amazon have no interest in bidding fir the main EPL contracts held by Sky & BT

I saw that article earlier...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football...mp-tv-revenue/


“Experts say valuations peaked in 2016, and, while Sky and BT still consider the league their most valuable offering, Covid-19 has accelerated a gradual fall. Amazon, which bought up matches for the first time last season, is not expected to compete with the big two bidders.

...there is no suggestion that the likes of Netflix or Facebook are interested in tabling a bid due to the limits over syndication worldwide.”

Probably far too early to tell but some of the Telegraph’s media speculation is usually bang on the money (they were the first to report on the Sky/Disney Plus deal) so I’m not inclined to completely disbelieve it.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Raider999

Hate to disagree with OB, but the telegraph reported (in the last 2-3 days) that Amazon have no interest in bidding fir the main EPL contracts held by Sky & BT

This was always going to be the case and nothing OB opined was going to change it.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Raider999

Hate to disagree with OB, but the telegraph reported (in the last 2-3 days) that Amazon have no interest in bidding fir the main EPL contracts held by Sky & BT

The article said Amazon ‘is not expected to bid’, which isn’t quite the same as saying they have no interest.

However,I accept that the impact of COVID-19 has changed everything and so anything can happen now.

[telegramsam]

Originally Posted by Raider999

Hate to disagree with OB, but the telegraph reported (in the last 2-3 days) that Amazon have no interest in bidding fir the main EPL contracts held by Sky & BT

Of course they're hardly likely to show their hand,are they? With fans still not being allowed into grounds,and who knows how long this will go on for,TV matches have become essential for all football fans who normally attend matches. I still think Sky and BT will be the main bidders though.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by telegramsam

Of course they're hardly likely to show their hand,are they? With fans still not being allowed into grounds,and who knows how long this will go on for,TV matches have become essential for all football fans who normally attend matches. I still think Sky and BT will be the main bidders though.

True enough. With Sky and BT reducing the amounts they are prepared to pay, Amazon and others may be quite happy for reports to be circulating that they are not expected to bid -they could make a killing with a surprise bid.

However, the uncertainty that has been created by this pandemic might force Amazon to take a more cautious approach.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The article said Amazon ‘is not expected to bid’, which isn’t quite the same as saying they have no interest.

However,I accept that the impact of COVID-19 has changed everything and so anything can happen now.

Not expected to bid isn’t the same as “no interest”?

I suppose if they can get more at the bargain basement they’d happily take them.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

True enough. With Sky and BT reducing the amounts they are prepared to pay, Amazon and others may be quite happy for reports to be circulating that they are not expected to bid -they could make a killing with a surprise bid.

However, the uncertainty that has been created by this pandemic might force Amazon to take a more cautious approach.

As always your ifs , buts and maybes OB....

[telegramsam]

Originally Posted by denphone

As always your ifs , buts and maybes OB....

Aren't we all just surmising though? None of us are privy to what BT, Sky, Amazon or anyone else are going to bid. It's fun guessing though, isn't it?

[denphone]

Originally Posted by telegramsam

Aren't we all just surmising though? None of us are privy to what BT, Sky, Amazon or anyone else are going to bid. It's fun guessing though, isn't it?

Indeed none of us are proper experts apart from being armchair experts.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Not expected to bid isn’t the same as “no interest”?

I suppose if they can get more at the bargain basement they’d happily take them.

‘Not expected to bid’ is a presumption by reporters. ‘No interest’ indicates the way the organisation itself is thinking.

Your whole assumption seems to be based on what Amazon bid last time. Do you actually think that proves anything?

---------- Post added at 23:36 ---------- Previous post was at 23:29 ----------

Originally Posted by denphone

As always your ifs , buts and maybes OB....

There’s no certainty, Den.

---------- Post added at 23:37 ---------- Previous post was at 23:36 ----------

Originally Posted by telegramsam

Aren't we all just surmising though? None of us are privy to what BT, Sky, Amazon or anyone else are going to bid. It's fun guessing though, isn't it?

Exactly. Some contributors seem to think everything is black or white.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

‘Not expected to bid’ is a presumption by reporters. ‘No interest’ indicates the way the organisation itself is thinking.

Your whole assumption seems to be based on what Amazon bid last time. Do you actually think that proves anything?

Well, yes. That’s an evidence based assumption. Some bean counter for Amazon decided £5bn wasn’t a price worth paying in that climate. It’s the same question I always ask. What changes?

More superfast broadband? I’m sorry I don’t accept that Amazon would be shelling out £5bn on the difference between 95% and 100% coverage. They could also offer a satellite or cable broadcast - as DAZN do in Germany for pubs and other venues. These aren’t cost prohibitive steps for a £5bn investment - they are firmly in the ‘loose change’ category - if you have a business model.

It’s all a presumption by reporters regardless of terminology used. None of these companies, on recognised stock exchanges, would engage in tittle tattle though the Telegraph.

Old Boy the only person on this thread that sees the world in black and white is you with your streaming vs linear future rather than recognise they are complementary, not competing, technologies.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Well, yes. That’s an evidence based assumption. Some bean counter for Amazon decided £5bn wasn’t a price worth paying in that climate. It’s the same question I always ask. What changes?

More superfast broadband? I’m sorry I don’t accept that Amazon would be shelling out £5bn on the difference between 95% and 100% coverage. They could also offer a satellite or cable broadcast - as DAZN do in Germany for pubs and other venues. These aren’t cost prohibitive steps for a £5bn investment - they are firmly in the ‘loose change’ category - if you have a business model.

It’s all a presumption by reporters regardless of terminology used. None of these companies, on recognised stock exchanges, would engage in tittle tattle though the Telegraph.

Old Boy the only person on this thread that sees the world in black and white is you with your streaming vs linear future rather than recognise they are complementary, not competing, technologies.

Clearly, you don’t buy the alternative view that Amazon’s last bid was a ‘toe in the water’ move. You have discounted that without explanation.

You want an evidence based argument? Well let’s hear yours then, jfman.

I am not seeing anything in black or white, jfman,that’s how you seem to view everything. I fully accept I could be wrong. Nobody, but nobody can be 100% certain about the future. But you and some others seem determined to try to paint everything I say as being ‘predictions’ that I would die in a ditch to defend. I don’t. I’m just giving my opinion on how I see things developing.

This is a discussion forum, after all.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Clearly, you don’t buy the alternative view that Amazon’s last bid was a ‘toe in the water’ move. You have discounted that without explanation.

Well, no.

If that was the case they’d have won on the first round of bidding, possibly guaranteeing one game per week or at least one per month. Instead Scudamore went out in round 2 with the begging bowl for rights of no value to Sky or BT.

You want an evidence based argument? Well let’s hear yours then, jfman.

I am not seeing anything in black or white, jfman,that’s how you seem to view everything. I fully accept I could be wrong. Nobody, but nobody can be 100% certain about the future. But you and some others seem determined to try to paint everything I say as being ‘predictions’ that I would die in a ditch to defend. I don’t. I’m just giving my opinion on how I see things developing.

This is a discussion forum, after all.

It is a discussion forum however it’s helpful if discussions are steered around actual events in actual reality, and not some fantasy that you envisage for the future.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Well, no.

If that was the case they’d have won on the first round of bidding, possibly guaranteeing one game per week or at least one per month. Instead Scudamore went out in round 2 with the begging bowl for rights of no value to Sky or BT.



It is a discussion forum however it’s helpful if discussions are steered around actual events in actual reality, and not some fantasy that you envisage for the future.

Your view that Amazon or another global streaming service would not make a serious bid for the football premiership league is not based on actual events. It is merely based on your opinion.

And that is also what my views on this are - an opinion.