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

[tvtimes]

Originally Posted by cityfan247

whether i subscribe to the new BT sports pack (assuming it comes to VM) is going to come down to cost and whether i think it represents value to me.

Premier League footy? it wont have as many games as Sky so if its a choice of one or the other for people Sky (whilst more expensive) may be better value to some.

Bundesliga/serie A/Ligue 1- i like my footy but i have asked myself how many of these games do i actually watch ? to be honest i dont watch that many- i probably watch more La Liga games (on Sky Sports of course)

US Sports- assuming there is some type of ESPN America equivalent. I have subscribed since NASN first started up. But ESPN Americas rights have been diluted since they lost the NHL and and NFL programming. NFL is on Sky and i am not that overly bothered about NBA.

I like College sports and baseball but i have subscribed to MLB.TV for a few years so that sorts my baseball fix and last year i could watch all Notre Dame football games(my favs) perfectly legally on the NBC website.

i ask myself could i live without ESPN America right now - yeh i can and in fact if it wasnt part of the ESPN pack in XL i probably would pay for it these days tbh.

i question how many punters will be a) able and b) willing to fork out the potential £40+ pm for both Sky Sports and BT Sports. Whilst they have tried to increase their portfolio BT Sports is pretty much the same as Setanta & ESPN before it - and look at whats happened to them. BT may be a bigger beast but if they think some premier league games and other stuff is going to make jump from Sky or VM to their platform or choose BT sports over Sky Sports or in addition to it i wonder if they have over estimated their likely revenue from the UK market just as it seems Setanta and ESPN did (you could even include the ill fated ITV Sport deal in English Football a decade or so ago). If BT Sports doesnt make money (or enough of it) how long before they also pull the plug?

You're not seeing the bigger picture. Bt sports subs aren't the most important thing to BT. It's basically a sweetener to get people to take Infinity and phone and then bundle in vision with it. They can then offer BT vision at a small or no cost for say 12 months etc and then they may have that customer hooked, then they could start charging say after 12/18 months.
Infinity uptake is strong and is growing. BT are invested vastly in their vision service by signing deals with a rang of channels. BT vision over Infinity delivery won't simply be a freeview platform. In fact some of the new channels have already launched.

If uptake of infinity increases then this will be seen as a success.

---------- Post added at 18:31 ---------- Previous post was at 18:28 ----------

Originally Posted by coulsontom

I understand they have 19 first picks. (City v Utd, Utd v City, Che v Ars, Liv v Utd etc...)

And then 19 last picks.

I just assumed that the first picks meant in the 4pm sunday slots.

Even if sat lunch, they still have first picks for half the season.

18 first picks.

[alwaysabear]

BT are going to have to price their product well or they will just make people choose between them and Sky. So guess who wins Sky as they have vastly superior range of sports.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Chad

I'm just saying it as I see it.

And this forum is all about different opinions and yours are welcomed just as much as anybody elses.

[passingbat]

When Sky said that they were going to invest in British drama, I didn't realise that this was what they meant.

Rumours are that this particular drama doesn't have a very happy ending.

[BexTech]

Originally Posted by johnasimmons

That is not correct - as I live in a block of flats and not allowed to install a dish I have cable and subscribe to all the sports channels

That's a shame, tower blocks here in Brum have communal dishes. Blocks wired for satellite, freeview and cable.

---------- Post added at 19:53 ---------- Previous post was at 19:52 ----------

Originally Posted by coulsontom

Correct. This isn't true. We used to be with Sky but went to Virgin (with sports) because Sky wanted £250 for a new box.

Now thinking of going back to Sky though due to current situation and likely higher cost with virgin

I never had to pay for boxes from Sky when I was with them, told them I was a long time customer (from day one) I'll just cancel the lot and go elsewhere, suddenly you get free repairs/box.

[muppetman11]

Who needs to watch drama when they can read this thread

People seem to be getting a wee bit carried away

My personal opinion for what its worth is that this fiasco will get resolved before the start of the new football season I believe both sides are just using their financial muscle to make a statement , BT need Sky Sports and the Sky Entertainment channels for people to see its Vision platform as real competition to Sky and VM likewise Sky would like to wholesale the BT Sports channel on its own platform to ensure that Sport on Sky doesn't work out more expensive than on the Vision and VM platform.

[tvtimes]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Who needs to watch drama when they can read this thread

People seem to be getting a wee bit carried away

My personal opinion for what its worth is that this fiasco will get resolved before the start of the new football season I believe both sides are just using their financial muscle to make a statement , BT need Sky Sports and the Sky Entertainment channels for people to see its Vision platform as real competition to Sky and VM likewise Sky would like to wholesale the BT Sports channel on its own platform to ensure that Sport on Sky doesn't work out more expensive than on the Vision and VM platform.

Problem is both companies have HUUUUGE ego's. I think the only this is going to get resolved is by a regulation/resolution through ofcom mediation.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by tvtimes

Problem is both companies have HUUUUGE ego's. I think the only this is going to get resolved is by a regulation/resolution through ofcom mediation.

Hmmm Ofcom the regulator who are as toothless as they come.

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Who needs to watch drama when they can read this thread

People seem to be getting a wee bit carried away

My personal opinion for what its worth is that this fiasco will get resolved before the start of the new football season I believe both sides are just using their financial muscle to make a statement , BT need Sky Sports and the Sky Entertainment channels for people to see its Vision platform as real competition to Sky and VM likewise Sky would like to wholesale the BT Sports channel on its own platform to ensure that Sport on Sky doesn't work out more expensive than on the Vision and VM platform.

Wouldn't surprise me if Sky and VM improved their relationship. Eg reduce price of Sports to VM with the caveat that they don't carry BT sports. That would be interesting.

[colin25]

Originally Posted by Top banana

Wouldn't surprise me if Sky and VM improved their relationship. Eg reduce price of Sports to VM with the caveat that they don't carry BT sports. That would be interesting.

Can't see that happening, but happy to be proved wrong

[batchain]

Originally Posted by Top banana

Wouldn't surprise me if Sky and VM improved their relationship. Eg reduce price of Sports to VM with the caveat that they don't carry BT sports. That would be interesting.

Hardly an improved relationship. Virgin would never accept and I'm pretty sure UK competition law prohibits such agreements. In any case Sky tried this before with Telewest & Nynex, like before this too would fall foul of the OFT.

[tvtimes]

Originally Posted by denphone

Hmmm Ofcom the regulator who are as toothless as they come.

They're toothless to a point.

---------- Post added at 21:29 ---------- Previous post was at 21:25 ----------

Originally Posted by batchain

Hardly an improved relationship. Virgin would never accept and I'm pretty sure UK competition law prohibits such agreements. In any case Sky tried this before with Telewest & Nynex, like before this too would fall foul of the OFT.

Correct, Sky would not be allowed to show favouritism to one provider and not another. It would be against competition laws for a start They would be come down on so hard.
Sky are not above the law and can't just do as they please, contrary to what some on here may think.

[Chad]

Originally Posted by denphone

And this forum is all about different opinions and yours are welcomed just as much as anybody elses.

As are yours bud

[denphone]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Who needs to watch drama when they can read this thread

People seem to be getting a wee bit carried away

My personal opinion for what its worth is that this fiasco will get resolved before the start of the new football season I believe both sides are just using their financial muscle to make a statement , BT need Sky Sports and the Sky Entertainment channels for people to see its Vision platform as real competition to Sky and VM likewise Sky would like to wholesale the BT Sports channel on its own platform to ensure that Sport on Sky doesn't work out more expensive than on the Vision and VM platform.

Yes there are a few Drama Queens on here and they know who they are.

[johnasimmons]

Originally Posted by denphone

Yes there are a few Drama Queens on here and they know who they are.

I am a dancing queen