PPV Brighton Poll - Did you pay £15

[theShiznit]

Does that mean they will revert to showing every game between sky/BT/Amazon and BBC of does it mean that the games not selected will just not be broadcast?

Now I know it's being cancelled I might actually pay for Sunday's game

 

[nailsy]

Does that mean they will revert to showing every game between sky/BT/Amazon and BBC of does it mean that the games not selected will just not be broadcast?

Now I know it's being cancelled I might actually pay for Sunday's game

They should all be on TV now. You just won't have to pay extra.

I still wouldn't pay for it as they'll bring it back at the same price after lockdown if people keep buying it.

 

[theShiznit]

They should all be on TV now. You just won't have to pay extra.

I still wouldn't pay for it as they'll bring it back at the same price after lockdown if people keep buying it.

Might try peacock but need a new VPN as mine is detected.

 

[Pauleta01]

I paid for the PPV despite thinking £15 is too high for the game. My understanding is that the price had to be £15 otherwise it would jeopardise the £10 EFL clubs are charging for streaming their games. How could the EPL charge lower for a superior product without knowingly potentially damaging the teams in the EFL who mostly need the cash?

In the end market forces will dictate whether this method will stick, the person before that mentioned the UFC and Boxing with high PPV prices is the most astute comparison, in the US people pay £99 for an event and think it represents decent value and their mates come round and they make an evening of it, this is where UK PPV rates want to get to, so maybe the prediction the headline games will go this way is a great observation, we could all be paying £50 to watch Spurs v Liverpool away in a title run in!!! ?

There have been noises that the EPL want to use this to test an EPL direct subscription model as they figure out how to grow revenues which dropped for the 1st time in the last deal. However;

-Sky have 29 million customers (>85% pay for sports)
- Sky pay 1.2bn a season and BT circa £300m a season for the rights
- That would mean EPL would have to find 29 million people to pay more than £50 a year on EPL subscriptions or PPV events just to break even from its current deal. I am not sure that is plausible?

Anyway, football is our no.1 content product and people have to pay for it, boycotting is futile!

 

[Saoirse]

I paid for the PPV despite thinking £15 is too high for the game. My understanding is that the price had to be £15 otherwise it would jeopardise the £10 EFL clubs are charging for streaming their games. How could the EPL charge lower for a superior product without knowingly potentially damaging the teams in the EFL who mostly need the cash?

In the end market forces will dictate whether this method will stick, the person before that mentioned the UFC and Boxing with high PPV prices is the most astute comparison, in the US people pay £99 for an event and think it represents decent value and their mates come round and they make an evening of it, this is where UK PPV rates want to get to, so maybe the prediction the headline games will go this way is a great observation, we could all be paying £50 to watch Spurs v Liverpool away in a title run in!!! ?

There have been noises that the EPL want to use this to test an EPL direct subscription model as they figure out how to grow revenues which dropped for the 1st time in the last deal. However;

-Sky have 29 million customers (>85% pay for sports)
- Sky pay 1.2bn a season and BT circa £300m a season for the rights
- That would mean EPL would have to find 29 million people to pay more than £50 a year on EPL subscriptions or PPV events just to break even from its current deal. I am not sure that is plausible?

Anyway, football is our no.1 content product and people have to pay for it, boycotting is futile!

It would surely be fewer people at a much higher price? If you went £350 per year (just under £30 per month), that would be significantly cheaper than the Sky+BT rates and you'd need just over 4m subscribers to match the revenue which seems completely realistic.

 

[theShiznit]

Does that mean they will revert to showing every game between sky/BT/Amazon and BBC of does it mean that the games not selected will just not be broadcast?

Now I know it's being cancelled I might actually pay for Sunday's game

@kernowspurscoach1977 sorry I offended you by jokingly suggesting I may pay for the last game now is cancelled...

I'm sure you disliked every post in this thread of those that said they actually paid for the last game...

 

[Swalien]

I didn't pay. If they want to make us a pay what about a £1 fee per match and make it £1 a match worldwide so we in England are treated the same as everyone else around the world, where currently a lot of countries get to watch for free.

 

[nailsy]

This game will be West broms 4th game on PPV. Imagine being in their position.

 

[scat1620]

Anyway, football is our no.1 content product and people have to pay for it, boycotting is futile!

Quite demonstrably not.

 

[ILS]

Do you think Dele has to pay for it?

 

[cabinfever]

Quite demonstrably not.

...........indeed, just ask Charles C Boycott........

 

[Yid121]

I paid for the PPV despite thinking £15 is too high for the game. My understanding is that the price had to be £15 otherwise it would jeopardise the £10 EFL clubs are charging for streaming their games. How could the EPL charge lower for a superior product without knowingly potentially damaging the teams in the EFL who mostly need the cash?

In the end market forces will dictate whether this method will stick, the person before that mentioned the UFC and Boxing with high PPV prices is the most astute comparison, in the US people pay £99 for an event and think it represents decent value and their mates come round and they make an evening of it, this is where UK PPV rates want to get to, so maybe the prediction the headline games will go this way is a great observation, we could all be paying £50 to watch Spurs v Liverpool away in a title run in!!! ?

There have been noises that the EPL want to use this to test an EPL direct subscription model as they figure out how to grow revenues which dropped for the 1st time in the last deal. However;

-Sky have 29 million customers (>85% pay for sports)
- Sky pay 1.2bn a season and BT circa £300m a season for the rights
- That would mean EPL would have to find 29 million people to pay more than £50 a year on EPL subscriptions or PPV events just to break even from its current deal. I am not sure that is plausible?

Anyway, football is our no.1 content product and people have to pay for it, boycotting is futile!

Aren't the £99 PPV one off events? I can see that maybe working for a champions league final as getting non spurs Liverpool mates excited for Spurs Liverpool doesn't really work.

The problem with the current system is every match matters so the big matches aren't so much of a glamor one off tie. Even a champions league semi final is 2 legs and there's always next year if you're a club big enough to bring all the glamour.

Either way, if the Premier league are looking at squeezing more out, it puts a very bad taste in my mouth as I'm spurs obsessed but I'd have to walk away from it if its costing that much so the picture you've painted is a dark one.

Glad we've got a 63k stadium as hopefully we have the numbers of seats to keep ticket prices fairly reasonable at least!

I'm looking for a stream having paid for last weekend's game (in my defence I was a bit pissed making the most of our last few days of freedom to be looking for streams)

 

[kernowspurscoach1977]

@kernowspurscoach1977 sorry I offended you by jokingly suggesting I may pay for the last game now is cancelled...

I'm sure you disliked every post in this thread of those that said they actually paid for the last game...

I think you are wrong. I have not disliked a single Post in this thread!