Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Sky/BT to lose PL coverage to Amazon/Facebook/Twitter??

Think this is something that's been building for a while...

Amazon and Twitter have already bought NFL rights over the past two seasons, it won't be long until the Premier League heads down a similar path.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42164708
«13

Comments

  • A big part of the reason why Sky and BT will be sharing certain platform channels from 2019.
  • More subscriptions to pay for if you want to watch all football yay!
  • I’ve been banging on about this for a while, it’s something I really want to see happen but I fear the UK rights are going to be prohibitively expensive for the international companies. It means the world to Sky to have these rights, but are they really worth 6bn to Facebook?

    Probably not - but if FB take one package, and Amazon take another, that’ll be a huge dent in Sky’s hugely important blanket coverage. They require the majority of games to get people to spend so much. They’re on 5 packages now, if they go down to 3 I think they’re in deep, deep trouble. Especially as FB will almost certainly run the games on an advertising model and not charge a subscription. They’re struggling to get to the under 30 demographic and this really won’t help.
  • I don't think it'll happen this time round, and it's probably just the Premier League drumming up a bidding war. Will definitely happen in the future though.
  • I would be surprised to see one of them get the rights this time round. I dont think the penetration over here is big enough for amazon or Netflix at the moment but in a couple of years it will be and that's when I imagine they will enter the race. The demographic take up of them are still quite vast and I think they will look into it but decide to wait until there is broader take up.

    If any platform would of gone for it I thought it would of been google with YouTube

    Martin Sorrel has his own angle on this that he will be trying to push.
  • Jimmy is right, these businesses are all about signed up subscribers. Sky have taken too long to take this seriously in my opinion. Amazon Prime and Netflix are showing the way and whilst sky keep on trying to convince me I'm getting astonishing value for money I'm finding more and more reasons why not to renew with them.

    BT are an interesting one as they are cash rich and need to stay aggressive as far as going after premier league packages and things like the cricket and boxing.

    Losing the Ashes Australian tests has hurt sky and Tyson Fury could have a huge say in what happens in regards boxing. If Warren and BT get him things will rattle
  • I honestly don’t understand any of this.....blissful in my ignorance!
  • Carter said:

    Jimmy is right, these businesses are all about signed up subscribers. Sky have taken too long to take this seriously in my opinion. Amazon Prime and Netflix are showing the way and whilst sky keep on trying to convince me I'm getting astonishing value for money I'm finding more and more reasons why not to renew with them.

    BT are an interesting one as they are cash rich and need to stay aggressive as far as going after premier league packages and things like the cricket and boxing.

    Losing the Ashes Australian tests has hurt sky and Tyson Fury could have a huge say in what happens in regards boxing. If Warren and BT get him things will rattle

    not as much as if it were a close series!, England have done Sky a favour by being so shit.

    believe I'm right in thinking Sky still have the home Ashes series for now.
  • I would be surprised to see one of them get the rights this time round. I dont think the penetration over here is big enough for amazon or Netflix at the moment but in a couple of years it will be and that's when I imagine they will enter the race. The demographic take up of them are still quite vast and I think they will look into it but decide to wait until there is broader take up.

    If any platform would of gone for it I thought it would of been google with YouTube

    Martin Sorrel has his own angle on this that he will be trying to push.

    I think you might be right, although getting football rights is a surefire way to boost subscriber bases. That’s what Murdoch used it for. And that’s why I think Amazon will go for one of the seven packages.

    And Facebook are desperate to be taken seriously as a video provider. More than just Lad Bible shorts. Showing live sport is again a major way to change perception.

    For most of us, we’ve been living in a world where having one subscription should provide us with all we need. BT changed that with the PL (for the worse, price-wise) and now that kids are growing up on a variety of media providers, the idea that you have to pay Sky or BT for a set top box seems alien to them. Sky is priced as a ‘premium’ product, and they don’t care for it.

    It may be the next set of rights that sees the biggest shift, and if so, it means Sky and BT are about to spend a great deal of money. I know, (to my own cost in one sense) that Sky have been saving up the cash for this for three years now. They may get their maximum packages, but there’s still a good chance they’ll lose one, and the damage will be immense!
  • More Subscription Fees are going to result in more people turning to Streaming Services

    If we have FaceBook | Amazon | SKY | BT all winning some of the rights then there needs to be something enforced which says you pay a Subscription to simply watch the Football on all channels rather than just per brand!!
  • Sponsored links:


  • Am I the only one who couldn't care less?
  • I was told by an insider that Facebook is working on/is close to a deal with the Premier League.

    That's all football needs, more money swishing around at the top.
  • Am I the only one who couldn't care less?

    I don't know, but I care, because shutting the door and sitting down to watch football on tv with a point of beer and huge pack of crisps is one of life's greatest pleasures. Paying Sky for the privilege was worth it when they had a monopoly, but in the last few years they have charged more and provided less. I'm sure monopolies are supposed to be bad for the consumer, but all competition has done is push up prices and reduce quality and now it's going to get worse.
  • JiMMy 85 said:

    I honestly don’t understand any of this.....blissful in my ignorance!

    I’m stuck on a train so here’s a brief explanation:

    Every few years the Premier League sell the rights to football on tv in the UK (2019-2022 is now up for sale).

    There are seven packages of games:
    Package 1 = Man U v Man City, Man U v Arsenal and so on.
    Package 7 = Palace v Stoke, Palace v West Brom, Palace v anyone really

    Currently, BT own package 2 and package 6, so they get some pretty good games (Man City v Spurs) and some Stoke games. It cost them a billion quid or something.

    Sky spent £3-4bn on the other five packages. They’re no longer allowed to own all the games like they used to (back then it was five packages until the competition commission intervened).

    In January, anyone who wants to show the football can bid for any of those packages. For the first time, Sky are facing competition from far richer companies and the possibility of the packages being shared among more than two providers. And this screw their business model massively, because they CANNOT lower their prices, and need to show growth.

    As @ForeverAddickted says, this means you will need multiple subscriptions if you want all games and it could get expensive or tricky

    BUT... this is the way TV is going (we are old school with our viewing habits). And it also means that the days of paying £100+ to one company may come to an end. You could pay Netflix, Amazon and BT around £10 quid a month each and get 50% of games. That would be a fraction of the cost of Sky's complete set approach. Especially if Facebook get involved and show games for free on their platform.
    Package's are the times slot for when football is shown. I think the cost varies per package, I.e Package D (4:00PM Sunday) is the most expensive.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/new-premier-league-broadcaster-deal-11658258
  • It would be wonderful if the audience dipped massively next time they increase prices.
  • JiMMy 85 said:

    I honestly don’t understand any of this.....blissful in my ignorance!

    I’m stuck on a train so here’s a brief explanation:

    Every few years the Premier League sell the rights to football on tv in the UK (2019-2022 is now up for sale).

    There are seven packages of games:
    Package 1 = Man U v Man City, Man U v Arsenal and so on.
    Package 7 = Palace v Stoke, Palace v West Brom, Palace v anyone really

    Currently, BT own package 2 and package 6, so they get some pretty good games (Man City v Spurs) and some Stoke games. It cost them a billion quid or something.

    Sky spent £3-4bn on the other five packages. They’re no longer allowed to own all the games like they used to (back then it was five packages until the competition commission intervened).

    In January, anyone who wants to show the football can bid for any of those packages. For the first time, Sky are facing competition from far richer companies and the possibility of the packages being shared among more than two providers. And this screw their business model massively, because they CANNOT lower their prices, and need to show growth.

    As @ForeverAddickted says, this means you will need multiple subscriptions if you want all games and it could get expensive or tricky

    BUT... this is the way TV is going (we are old school with our viewing habits). And it also means that the days of paying £100+ to one company may come to an end. You could pay Netflix, Amazon and BT around £10 quid a month each and get 50% of games. That would be a fraction of the cost of Sky's complete set approach. Especially if Facebook get involved and show games for free on their platform.
    Package's are the times slot for when football is shown. I think the cost varies per package, I.e Package D (4:00PM Sunday) is the most expensive.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/new-premier-league-broadcaster-deal-11658258
    Yes you're right - but I'm sure there's something in there about who plays in which slot.
  • Uboat said:

    Am I the only one who couldn't care less?

    I don't know, but I care, because shutting the door and sitting down to watch football on tv with a point of beer and huge pack of crisps is one of life's greatest pleasures. Paying Sky for the privilege was worth it when they had a monopoly, but in the last few years they have charged more and provided less. I'm sure monopolies are supposed to be bad for the consumer, but all competition has done is push up prices and reduce quality and now it's going to get worse.
    Depends on how you look at it. There are more games on now than when Sky had a monopoly, so technically they are not providing (much) less, although the price is still stupidly high.

    You could potentially get that same volume of games from multiple providers for far less in this deal.
  • Sponsored links:


  • It would be great to have control of those perimeter advertisements if FB got the the football. The first player to dive and I'd have. "You alright Hun, text me if you want to talk about it" whizzing around the pitch in 2' high letters ;)
  • The increase in broadband speeds has made a big difference in recent years. Whereas previously unless you had fibre, you needed a dish and set top box to watch extra channels, now with most people having decent broadband, it can all be streamed from the internet and watched using a Smart TV, Chromecast etc

  • The increase in broadband speeds has made a big difference in recent years. Whereas previously unless you had fibre, you needed a dish and set top box to watch extra channels, now with most people having decent broadband, it can all be streamed from the internet and watched using a Smart TV, Chromecast etc

    Aren’t Sky also going the streaming route soon?
  • I can’t remember where, but I’m sure I read that they were talking about making an extra 60 games available including Saturday at 7.45pm, but the condition was that the additional packages that went out for bidding had to be split between 3 platforms.

    I guess that opens a significant window for the streaming services of the world.
  • The increase in broadband speeds has made a big difference in recent years. Whereas previously unless you had fibre, you needed a dish and set top box to watch extra channels, now with most people having decent broadband, it can all be streamed from the internet and watched using a Smart TV, Chromecast etc

    Aren’t Sky also going the streaming route soon?
    Hope not, sky go is absolutely awful
  • edited December 2017
    So if Facebook win the rights to one or more of the packages does that mean we can only watch the game on the Facebook page ?
    I hope not.
  • The increase in broadband speeds has made a big difference in recent years. Whereas previously unless you had fibre, you needed a dish and set top box to watch extra channels, now with most people having decent broadband, it can all be streamed from the internet and watched using a Smart TV, Chromecast etc

    Aren’t Sky also going the streaming route soon?
    It's clearly the future. After all Netflix and Amazon Prime have become enormous just using streaming
  • So if Facebook win the rights to one or more of the packages does that mean we can only watch the game on the Facebook page ?
    I hope not.

    Why do you hope not? Do you like expensive Sky TV packages?
  • PopIcon said:

    So if Facebook win the rights to one or more of the packages does that mean we can only watch the game on the Facebook page ?
    I hope not.

    Why do you hope not? Do you like expensive Sky TV packages?
    Yes. I'd rather pay to watch it on SKY than watch it for free on Facebook .
    Each to their own I suppose.
  • The increase in broadband speeds has made a big difference in recent years. Whereas previously unless you had fibre, you needed a dish and set top box to watch extra channels, now with most people having decent broadband, it can all be streamed from the internet and watched using a Smart TV, Chromecast etc

    Aren’t Sky also going the streaming route soon?
    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/technology-38756577

    I knew I’d seen it somewhere.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!