General : ESPN may lose EPL Football(Update)

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Our content will probably be far superior to Sky's, who will continue to promote the sheer number of linear channels it has to disguise the poor quality of its content.

Errrr what content is that ? VM is now just a reseller of content , a high percentage of which is BSKYB's

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

BT will be bouyed up by their success at getting football rights. Don't be surprised if you find that they get more into content in the future and start giving Sky a run for its money

Hopefully competition is good and it's nice to see another British company investing in content.

[Superblade7]

Originally Posted by Telly Bear

Depending how BT market their new football channel I see VM becoming a sorry 3rd by the time this rights deal is over in 2016. You have to feel for VM they're getting it from all angles. BT Infinity equal or better, Sky TV better, I do wonder where Virgins future is going.

VM will without doubt need to up their game in light of this deal as BT could become a serious alternative in the pay TV market. However this could also work out pretty well for VM as there is no doubt that BT will want VM to carry their channel so will have access to this.

Sky won't really want a third major player in the pay TV market and may actually do another of their sneaky tricks by allowing VM access to Sky Atlantic, Sky Sports 3, 4, F1 & News in HD, etc. Thus in effect increaing Sky's advertising revenue and at the same time making VM the second most attractive option after themselves in terms of content in the hope that they can wipe out the potential competition from BT Vision.

It'll be an interesting time ahead following today's deal.

[batchain]

Originally Posted by Telly Bear

What with VM dragging BT to offcom trying to force the price down for access to the poles and ducts, An BT trying to get offcom to give BT access to VM's network?

The smartest companies collaborate with enemies when it makes financial sense to do so - http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/59...ntrol-vms.html

[andy_m]

I can't help thinking that ofcom have decided that the packages have to be split, meaning that the cost of the rights have been inflated and subscription prices will, inevitably, rise. When will the authorities learn that competition is supposed to be a good thing for the consumer, not the already fat Premier League. I await a statement from Virgin with interest, as well as further details from BT as to their plans, but f1 had been edging me towards subscribing to Sky Sports, and today's news might just be the final nudge. We'll see.

[HDFootyMan]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blog...-bt?CMP=twt_gu

BT, the newcomer, said it would take a £100m hit in profits when the new deal kicks in during the 2013–14 season – but with the company generating telephone-number cash returns of about £2.5bn a year, it can easily pay its way.

There is no doubt that the risks for BT are greater. The company will have to sign up presenters, chase customers, and set up a channel. BT promises its service will be available on Freeview, Virgin and Sky, and although no pricing has been outlined, costs are likely to start at about £10 a month – with fans having to fork out for both.

[Emel]

Hey folks BT have bought a better package than I thought. They have got 18 of the 38 top pick matches. Previously Sky have had all the really big games.

This makes BT's bargaining position much stronger if they have nearly half the games people really want to see.

[toby53]

Originally Posted by Superblade7

However this could also work out pretty well for VM as there is no doubt that BT will want VM to carry their channel so will have access to this.

Can't see 38 games a season making a sports channel for BT

[bubblegun]

Originally Posted by HDFootyMan

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blog...-bt?CMP=twt_gu

"Setanta Sports, which had a similar model, struggled to sign up 1.2m, about 700,000 short of the number it needed to break even – and the Irish broadcaster was paying only £2.8m a game, far below BT's £6.5m. ESPN, incidentally, paid £2.3m a game."

From the same page.
Looks like £20 per month is more likely if they've paid double.

A deal like with ESPN and Setanta looks very unlikely for Virgin.

Originally Posted by muppetman11

VM and Sky will have access to BT's matches however terms will be more favourable on BT Vision in my opinion , they've stumped up big money so surely they'll hope to increase their subscriber base , I wouldn't be shocked if the games are available PPV on Sky/VM/Freeview unless BT plan to snap up more content to warrant a 24/7 sports channel.

These weren't PPV rights so that won't be happening.
It's the EPL who would decide if they were to be sold as PPV not the broadcaster.

Originally Posted by Emel

So BT's new sports channel will have one live football match a week during the football season. I think they need a bit more content than that to launch a sports channel.

Its the same scenario with Formula 1 and Sky managed to justify a channel of it's own.

[Chad]

Originally Posted by toby53

Can't see 38 games a season making a sports channel for BT

It's not even going to be a sports channel. From BT's own press release:

"We will launch a new football-focused channel"

So what other football rights could they land as I can't see football fans being excitied about having to subscribe to a channel offering 1 live game per week. As far as I'm aware most competitions such as the FA Cup, League Cup, The Championship, SPL, Champions League and Europa League are locked down for the next 3 to 5 years. I'm not sure what the current contract positions are for home national internationals.

I noticed ESPN suggested today they will continue on, which is exactly what a company in their position should say. They've still got subscriptions to sell over the next 12 months. I suspect they might reconsider their position nearer to losing the Premier League rights. Maybe they'll either pull out of the UK and sell their rights to BT or split some of their rights with BT.

[HDFootyMan]

Originally Posted by bubblegun

"Setanta Sports, which had a similar model, struggled to sign up 1.2m, about 700,000 short of the number it needed to break even – and the Irish broadcaster was paying only £2.8m a game, far below BT's £6.5m. ESPN, incidentally, paid £2.3m a game."
.

BT are loaded compared to Setanta, and I'm sure BT (and ESPN) have learned from the numerous mistakes Setanta made.

No way will they charge £20 per month, not when SS1 (by itself) is a lot cheaper from VM and offers a lot more sport.

[Chad]

Originally Posted by bubblegun

Its the same scenario with Formula 1 and Sky managed to justify a channel of it's own.

Yeah but SKY aren't trying to charge extra for it as a stand alone channel. SKY don't just show the race, they also broadcast the qualifying and have various shows during the week building up to each race. To pad their football channel out, BT would need to show both teams training through the week live and have coverage of the away teams bus journey to the home teams ground etc...

[Dave42]

well one thing for sure we be paying lot more to get all the games and bet the extra money will go on players wages as usual instead of lowering ticket prices

[HDFootyMan]

Originally Posted by Chad

It's not even going to be a sports channel. From BT's own press release:

"We will launch a new football-focused channel"

So what other football rights could they land as I can't see football fans being excitied about having to subscribe to a channel offering 1 live game per week. As far as I'm aware most competitions such as the FA Cup, League Cup, The Championship, SPL, Champions League and Europa League are locked down for the next 3 to 5 years. I'm not sure what the current contract positions are for home national internationals.

I noticed ESPN suggested today they will continue on, which is exactly what a company in their position should say. They've still got subscriptions to sell over the next 12 months. I suspect they might reconsider their position nearer to losing the Premier League rights. Maybe they'll either pull out of the UK and sell their rights to BT or split some of their rights with BT.

ESPN still have FA Cup and I think Europa League. Plus German football which (tonight included ) is actually very watchable and on par with the EPL for entertainment value.

They also have, for better or worse, some SPL. ....I suspect VM will have a chat with them and say "well......you've lost like, ALL of your EPL games after this upcoming season so we'll like to reduce the money we give you. Ta."

---------- Post added at 23:00 ---------- Previous post was at 22:57 ----------

Originally Posted by Chad

Yeah but SKY aren't trying to charge extra for it as a stand alone channel. SKY don't just show the race, they also broadcast the qualifying and have various shows during the week building up to each race. To pad their football channel out, BT would need to show both teams training through the week live and have coverage of the away teams bus journey to the home teams ground etc...

....and feature what music each player listened to their iPod on the way to the game and what they like to eat and what video games they like to play after the game and what their high score was in Call of Duty.

That would pad things out nicely. Until the Monday after the game.

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by bubblegun

Its the same scenario with Formula 1 and Sky managed to justify a channel of it's own.

It's not the same , Sky Sports F1 is an additional channel on VM for Sky Sports subscribers as on Sky , it's also available on Sky for customers taking the HD pack , I will not be paying the £10 a month the Guardian is speculating for just those 38 games unless they add more content at least now with ESPN you get ESPN , ESPN classic , ESPN America inclusive on XL with VM or £9.00 through Sky.

[Emel]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

It's not the same , Sky Sports F1 is an additional channel on VM for Sky Sports subscribers as on Sky , it's also available on Sky for customers taking the HD pack , I will not be paying the £10 a month the Guardian is speculating for just those 38 games unless they add more content at least now with ESPN you get ESPN , ESPN classic , ESPN America inclusive on XL with VM or £9.00 through Sky.

I agree entirely, but, if they are getting half the big games i.e. one of the City v United one of the Arsenal v Chelsea one of the Everton v Liverpool etc. etc. it could be interesting especially if they could get some other decent content which, as has been pointed out, may not be just sport.