[Albion] £14.95 to watch Albion

[mwrpoole]

Have the clubs missed a trick here?

Could they have said, we’ll show the non-selected games live (via SKY or BT) for £14.95. If you’re a STH and opt in to watch it we’ll deduct the cost from the balance we’re holding for you.

Bit more admin no doubt but feeling you’re dealing with the club rather than BT/SKY might have helped.

 

[DarrenFreemansPerm]

‘Spose we’ve got to pay for that striker one way or another...

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Have the clubs missed a trick here?

Could they have said, we’ll show the non-selected games live (via SKY or BT) for £14.95. If you’re a STH and opt in to watch it we’ll deduct the cost from the balance we’re holding for you.

Bit more admin no doubt but feeling you’re dealing with the club rather than BT/SKY might have helped.

I read on Twitter that the clubs/broadcasters rejected that model as they didn't want the extra admin.

 

[Justice]

ST holders are currently giving the club a £12m interest free loan or there about. With some families struggling to make ends meet is BHA really a community club or a business it can’t be both.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

I know some feel 'it's the principle' that's at stake, but I have already arranged a small group of 5 for the West Brom game to watch together (£3 each) and have a few beers whilst enjoying the match. I accept some won't want to do this, but for such a tiny outlay it's a social way of watching the game with like minded fans (whilst following the rule of 6).

I'm already looking forward to a lads afternoon whilst the wife is out meeting a friend for a coffee. Win win and only £3. And our first home win of the season!

That is already not possible in many areas of the country and who knows what further restrictions may be introduced countrywide or down her in the coming months? This measure will encourage illegal and dangerous gatherings due to the high cost, and for that reason I am dead set against this foolish error.

 

[Seasider78]

I am struggling enough for enthusiasm towards this soulless inferior crap that is being dished up this season without fans so the idea I would pay another £15 per match to watch it is just another signpost of how far the PL has disappeared up its own arse.

 

[drew]

I don’t have Sky Sport or Bt so I am unaffected. If I could afford Sky Sport there is no way that I would pay a premium fee on top of my sub. To watch a game ,race ,fight etc. I am against it in principle... money grabbing b@st@rds.
I get that the £14.95 is apparently ( most of it) going to the clubs. But still it is a terrible deal for the fans.
There is no comparison between attending a live game with all the crowd and atmosphere against seeing it on tv, especially now with empty stadiums.
If Covid rules allow I would rather spend the £15 watching a non league team occasionally.
So it is Radio Sussex and Warren Aspinall still for me...

We all know there is no comparison between attending a match and watching on the box. If you don't subscribe to Sky and don't go to away games then I'm guessing you miss half the matches anyway so you're not really missing out especially if you consider your season ticket money as in deposit either for this season or for next!

 

[Tory Boy]

To legally watch every game in India it costs about £50 for the year.

Yet I’m being asked to pay in the UK £15 a game for something that I’ve already paid for, via a platform that I already pay for.

It stinks.

TB

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

ST holders are currently giving the club a £12m interest free loan or there about. With some families struggling to make ends meet is BHA really a community club or a business it can’t be both.

Well it can and IS both shirley? Club supports a helluva lot of local jobs and does a huge amount of good in the community. I think you slightly misspoke on that one mate, as I'm sure you're aware in hindsight. Fully take the spirit of your point tho. Cheers

 

[Justice]

Well it CAN be both shirley? Club supports a helluva lot of local jobs and does a huge amount of good in the community

All clubs do don’t they? Holding on to ST money is a piss take in my book.

 

[drew]

I might pay it for a particularly important game. As everyone knows, there are free streaming options for those who can't or won't pay £15, even if they're unreliable.

It probably has to be priced on the high side, else for some people PPV could work out cheaper than the Sky or BT subscription they currently pay.

And anyway, as others have said, it's an extra option, nothing is being taken away from existing subscribers.

I can't be angry at the club over this, it's a bad situation for fans, clubs, TV companies and everyone else involved.

A pragmatic view.

 

[pocketseagull]

In pretty much every other country you can watch every single Premier League match often at a yearly price less than we'd pay for a month of Sky.

The Premier League is a global product and the home fans have had a raw deal for a long time.

I don't really understand why Drew is so enthusiastic to be ripped off.

 

[Rinkmaster]

Aside from the here and now another concern I have is that if this is even moderately successful is it the start of having all football on box office with the providers paying the clubs a bit of money for the service whilst making an absolute fortune themselves?

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

All clubs do don’t they? Holding on to ST money is a piss take in my book.

Fair enough, and I've never been any kind of fan of taking ST money in March. But doesn't detract in any way from BHAFC being a community club IMHO. Pretty sure you'd agree on that one

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

In pretty much every other country you can watch every single Premier League match often at a yearly price less than we'd pay for a month of Sky.

The Premier League is a global product and the home fans have had a raw deal for a long time.

I don't really understand why Drew is so enthusiastic to be ripped off.

Because whilst what you have said is true.

It’s all completely optional, there are plenty of ways around it if you don’t want to pay.

I’ll pay for 1 game - because there is a group of us wanting to watch it

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Aside from the here and now another concern I have is that if this is even moderately successful is it the start of having all football on box office with the providers paying the clubs a bit of money for the service whilst making an absolute fortune themselves?

Is PPV for games not included a bad thing?

 

[drew]

ST holders are currently giving the club a £12m interest free loan or there about. With some families struggling to make ends meet is BHA really a community club or a business it can’t be both.

I'm guessing you weren't complaining when the club gave you an interest free loan over the last 10 years of paying for season tickets? There will be families struggling at all times, which is unfortunate but also the way of the world. As with anything, everyone needs to make judgements for their own needs.

You really need to ask whether it's a business or a community club? We stopped being a community club as soon as we started building the Amex. If you want a community club then you'll have to settle for something less than Premier league football, probably even lower than the championship. That said, the club still do a lot for the community.

 

[drew]

As a non STH living up north and unable to get to games seeing them on TV is a bonus for me , with all games shown live it has been a footy festival and kept me occupied. As you would expect I would prefer this to continue as is even with fans returning but I know thats not going to happen so yes I have an IPTV sub as a personal choice.

Now IMHO if this was truly about helping the clubs and not about profiteering then the times and days these 'non broadcast games' would not be change and most of the 5 PPV games would actually be played @3pm on a Saturday but the fact they are 'separating' the games kick off times means they are aiming to generate as much income as possible. The addition that they dont guarantee to 'even' out the choice of tv games so every club gets an equal amount of tv picks & PPV clearly is going to hit the pockets of fans smaller unfashionable clubs harder meaning Albion fans.

I'm sure the EPL would go PPV streams all the time if they could but I suspect that at the moment Sky , BT & Amazon generates higher revenue than selling legal streams would directly to fans in the UK. While I understand the need for rebates to TV companies this , as far as I understand it, is for overseas broadcasters because of the inconvenience of the change in game times & days so in theory if the PPV remained as originally timed (eg 3pm Saturdays) then that would mean no more rebate and the clubs would be better off instantly but no they will shift kick off times to exploit the income from UK fans which is at odds with the concept of generating more income for the EPL clubs as its common sense they wont get as much from PPV as they will have to pay in rebates.

Its a slippery slope of greed before community and alienating the fans which rebuilt & held together the club in its darkest days and in my opinion is a big mistake at this time and if they truly wanted to do it for fans & to support the clubs the PPV games would be taken away from the TV companies and put as a streaming service at a reasonable price (under £10 per game free for STH home team) and show more support back to the fans who are in more financial trouble than the clubs are based of transfer , agent fees & wage spends.

All just IMHO of course whether you agree or not lets keep it civil.

In principle I'm against the EPL going down the PPV route unless there were cast in stone guarantees that all clubs get an equal share but I doubt that would happen when the big six see their viewing figures being greater than everyone else. If this was purely about greed then we would start to see the bigger more attractive matches being PPV as the broadcasters would be getting far more in addition to their normal subscriptions. That could of course still happen.

 

[Dick Swiveller]

Presumably if Sky passed on the Manchester Derby then BT would snap it up. The top matches won't be PPV

Don't think I made myself clear. Of course Sky/BT want to show the big games. But the clubs will want them to be the ones that are PPV if that would bring in more money for them. I have no idea how much the Manchester derby would bring in PPV but it would likely be more than the money the clubs would get for it being on Sky. I can see the big clubs wanting games against us, Burnley, WBA, Fulham etc to be on Sky so they still get the TV money top up for more than 10 games but save the big games for PPV. Sky/BT will want the opposite. If that goes badly, we may see even more pressure from the usual suspects to be able to sell their own rights.

 

[Taybha]

TV companies know they will get millions of takers around the world because there is no real alternative other than illegal streams which are at best behind the real time action , buffer , and infest devices with multitudes of unwanted guff .

I'd pay it simply because my team were playing but certainly not to watch other football , no matter what the game .

Get used to it because they have football fans by the short and curlies, morally they should cut 20% straight to the lower leagues structure but when have any of these streaming companies ever been moral, apart from a few adverts telling us to stop lobbing plastic into the sea .