Rinkmaster
Active member
I won't be paying it. We are also sorting things out to cancel sky subscription. Not worth it for how many times the albion are shown.
[Albion] Sky TV picks (no Albion games)
- Thread starter Driver8
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Iggle Piggle
Well-known member
- Sep 3, 2010
- 5,952
I get it that we can pay 15 quid on the tellybox and it would normally be 30 quid, plus train, plus beer, plus overnight stay - like we had a choice at Newcastle away last year - and then breakfast and an earbashing from the other half on Sunday. In that context it's reasonable.
The counter argument is games like tonight. Villa v Leeds with the wife out I could easily watch it. I have a morbid fascination with Leeds and Villa are going well with Grealish always being worth a watch for one reason or another. For £14.95 though, I'm not going to even consider that as a neutral or even a casual fan of either club. For a fiver I'd pay it. For a fiver I'd buy every bhafc game and so would a load of others in betting. For 15 quid they can forget West Brom at half 5 on a Monday.
Let's remember Netflix is 8 or 9 quid a month . Sell it cheap and pile it high. The PL are missing the point here. The market is anyone with a telly. Not the 2000 or so West Brom fans that could be arsed to make the journey.
Perfidious Albion
Well-known member
Someone said
"currently spending nothing on the Albion. If the only way to see them is to pay £14.95 why is that daft?",
With respect, there is no comparison between a live event and watching it on tv. We may pay 2 or 3 times that to go to the Amex, but you are there,! You are a part of it . Being there in person creates memories that no tv set can do. I would not pay £14.95 on top of a subscription.
Like rock music , football is best enjoyed live ....(ideally standing up)
"currently spending nothing on the Albion. If the only way to see them is to pay £14.95 why is that daft?",
With respect, there is no comparison between a live event and watching it on tv. We may pay 2 or 3 times that to go to the Amex, but you are there,! You are a part of it . Being there in person creates memories that no tv set can do. I would not pay £14.95 on top of a subscription.
Like rock music , football is best enjoyed live ....(ideally standing up)
redoubtable seagull
Well-known member
- Oct 27, 2004
- 2,611
We’re not on until the Liverpool match (BT are showing that one). So that’s 4 games that I assume will be PPV, including Monday night’s match against West Brom.
£60 to watch my team on TV during Nov seems a lot of money to fork out in the current climate particularly alongside my Sky subscription.
Sky, BT and the PL have got this strategy so wrong. For example, I was quite keen to watch last night’s Villa Leeds game and would have paid a bit, probably a fiver, but I’m not going to pay £15. PPV pricing is only going to attract fans of the clubs shown but if they priced it right they’d get far more football fans watching.
I still enjoyed watching last night’s game though.....
Birdie Boy
Well-known member
- Jun 17, 2011
- 4,387
Not sure if it has been mentioned in other threads but Greene King are showing all ppv games. Go to the pub, send the £15 to a food bank or spend that £15 on beer. You will be helping out your local economy as well. Win win and hopefully a win for the Albion.
Live by the sea
Well-known member
- Oct 21, 2016
- 4,718
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
Great news. NowTv have an offer of £20 per month for 3 months, at the moment. I know I won’t be able to avoid the score though.
Perhaps I’ll watch the repeat if we win.
yxee
Well-known member
I don't get the outrage really at £15. These are games that sky aren't showing otherwise and that nobody would be able to see. But it costs money to show and the club is taking a cut as well.
It's simple economics but it means we can all watch the football
Of course it's not the same as live but if that's not an option why not at least have this as an option instead?
It's simple economics but it means we can all watch the football
Of course it's not the same as live but if that's not an option why not at least have this as an option instead?
S'hampton Seagull
Well-known member
It's interesting that the other games have not yet been confirmed as PPV. Is a break in the premier league position in this possible?
Yep - I can wear paying £15 for our games if that's the best way of seeing it, but I'm not doing that as a neutral. If it was a fiver I would..................probably at least 3 times a week.
I thought when it was announced it was always going to be an initial trial (end November I thought ?). Hopefully the rubbish viewing figures will prompt a rethink.
"Seagulls f ..."
Jimmy Grimble
Well-known member
More time in the pub then.
pocketseagull
Well-known member
- Dec 29, 2014
- 1,360
This might be what the people in charge want you to think, meanwhile in the real world anyone with at the very least an internet connection and smartphone can watch any Premier League game free of charge.
They've set the price at a totally unrealistic level.
bluenitsuj
Listen to me!!!
Streams are free
....ail to beat lowly West Brom in a desperately disappointing performance?
3pm kick-offs on TV today:
Fulham v Crystal Palace - £14.95
Barcelona v Real Madrid - £5.99
Fulham v Crystal Palace - £14.95
Barcelona v Real Madrid - £5.99
If you want to watch all Albion games each month by paying for Sky Sports and BT Sports subscriptions, plus Amazon Prime, and, say, £45 for 3 x PPV matches, that's your choice.
It's not 'outrage' from most people - it's "No thanks, you're taking the p1ss".
banjo
GOSBTS
Free is the magic number......
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
The model football finances follow isn't simple economics. It is sailing close to the wind, saddling debt, disproportionate distribution of funds, far too high transfer and salary deals. It is an economic model setup to fail at some point.
What you call 'simple economics' is what many of us will call football trying to prop up a financial model that should in all honesty radically change.
I'm not outraged as it is a simple commercial gambit. However I'm not paying it as the last thing the relationship between the broadcasters and football needs, is giving broadcasters new avenues to charge fans to bankroll their operations and the money flowing to just a select few clubs. It's a no for me Jeff on principle.