Epl tv rights sky vs BT
Discussion
So the bbc has retained their right for the highlights after a no contest from itv
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-...
But that still leaves the live match bidding- can sky afford to loose any of coverage they currently have to BT without pricing themselves out of customers?
With BT's expansion in sports coverage and possible acquisition of EE the chance to show more top epl games must have a huge attraction not to mention the chance of poaching a huge swathe of customers if they get it right.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-...
But that still leaves the live match bidding- can sky afford to loose any of coverage they currently have to BT without pricing themselves out of customers?
With BT's expansion in sports coverage and possible acquisition of EE the chance to show more top epl games must have a huge attraction not to mention the chance of poaching a huge swathe of customers if they get it right.
I understand that the BT bid will blow Sky out of the water. If this is the case can Sky continue to charge such a premium for Sky Sports?
I'm not sure of my preferred bidder. If Sky win then the subscription costs will need to increase. If BT wins then I'd need to get BT package to view. Not great either way.
I'm not sure of my preferred bidder. If Sky win then the subscription costs will need to increase. If BT wins then I'd need to get BT package to view. Not great either way.
pattyg said:
I understand that the BT bid will blow Sky out of the water. If this is the case can Sky continue to charge such a premium for Sky Sports?
I'm not sure of my preferred bidder. If Sky win then the subscription costs will need to increase. If BT wins then I'd need to get BT package to view. Not great either way.
Watch the subscriber charges get weighted more towards movies and less towards the sport channels if sky lose the football deal. I'm not sure of my preferred bidder. If Sky win then the subscription costs will need to increase. If BT wins then I'd need to get BT package to view. Not great either way.
I preferred it when one company could buy all the EPL rights. The European Commission put a stop to that forcing the EPL to split the rights and sell them to 2 or more broadcasters and as a result the consumer is forced to pay for additional subscriptions. All in the name of 'fairness'.
Is this a financially viable model for BT to follow? They already blew other bidders out of the water for Champions League and potentially well over the market value. Can they afford to do the same to Sky?
Are they gambling on the fact many people will defect from Sky and take up the BT Sports package?
Im wondering if this will end up like the other opposition to Sky when bidding for football.
Are they gambling on the fact many people will defect from Sky and take up the BT Sports package?
Im wondering if this will end up like the other opposition to Sky when bidding for football.
It's interesting isn't it, because BT have just bought EE haven't they? They obviously have money from somewhere as they're not just spending money on the one thing. I think BT are potentially in a better position than Sky as they still have a monopoly on the provision of land-lines which are a much more relaible source of income at the moment as anywhere without cable pretty much needs one for internet access. Sky have the momentum, but that could be changed if enough money was 'invested'.
As said above, this is one area where competition doesn't work for the consumer thoguh. What people want is to be able to watch exactly what they want, not be at the whim of which games are on which package. Last time I had Sky I ended up ditching it because Liverpool kept being shown on ESPN. I now have BT Vision (In theory, I still can't get it authorised on my account but I don't need it and it isn't costing me anything extra) and the Liverpool games have tended to be on Sky.
For proper competition the packages should be made available to all broadcasters on a price-per game basis. So that games could be on all platforms.
But it's in the incumbent broadcasters interest to have it this way as it's a strong disinsentive to switch provider.
As said above, this is one area where competition doesn't work for the consumer thoguh. What people want is to be able to watch exactly what they want, not be at the whim of which games are on which package. Last time I had Sky I ended up ditching it because Liverpool kept being shown on ESPN. I now have BT Vision (In theory, I still can't get it authorised on my account but I don't need it and it isn't costing me anything extra) and the Liverpool games have tended to be on Sky.
For proper competition the packages should be made available to all broadcasters on a price-per game basis. So that games could be on all platforms.
But it's in the incumbent broadcasters interest to have it this way as it's a strong disinsentive to switch provider.
BlackLabel said:
I preferred it when one company could buy all the EPL rights. The European Commission put a stop to that forcing the EPL to split the rights and sell them to 2 or more broadcasters and as a result the consumer is forced to pay for additional subscriptions. All in the name of 'fairness'.
Could not agree more. Same with Directory Enquiries - more 'choice' equals vastly higher costs for the end user (us).OllieC said:
BT coverage is awful compared with Sky
Potentially this may improve with time as they tweak and change their coverage and also add in new presenters and pundits. Sky have it down to an art and can attract the best people. But I agree at the moment the pundits are shocking.
I wonder if Linekar would make the jump from BBC if BT made him an offer?
hornetrider said:
BlackLabel said:
I preferred it when one company could buy all the EPL rights. The European Commission put a stop to that forcing the EPL to split the rights and sell them to 2 or more broadcasters and as a result the consumer is forced to pay for additional subscriptions. All in the name of 'fairness'.
Could not agree more. Same with Directory Enquiries - more 'choice' equals vastly higher costs for the end user (us).I had ESPN for a while, but when it went to BT I didn't bother to subscribe.
I just watch streams for the matches on BT... with ever faster internet and the increase in smart TV's with built in wifi I think this will become increasingly common.
I've just bought a place in Spain, but I haven't bothered with SKY there. I have 40mb fiber optic wifi and a wifi enabled TV... streams HD content perfectly and every game I want to watch is available on-line.
Challo said:
Is this a financially viable model for BT to follow? They already blew other bidders out of the water for Champions League and potentially well over the market value. Can they afford to do the same to Sky?
Are they gambling on the fact many people will defect from Sky and take up the BT Sports package?
Im wondering if this will end up like the other opposition to Sky when bidding for football.
BT are a much bigger company than SKY. It's actually more of a surprise about why it took them so long to take them on. Are they gambling on the fact many people will defect from Sky and take up the BT Sports package?
Im wondering if this will end up like the other opposition to Sky when bidding for football.
London424 said:
Challo said:
Is this a financially viable model for BT to follow? They already blew other bidders out of the water for Champions League and potentially well over the market value. Can they afford to do the same to Sky?
Are they gambling on the fact many people will defect from Sky and take up the BT Sports package?
Im wondering if this will end up like the other opposition to Sky when bidding for football.
BT are a much bigger company than SKY. It's actually more of a surprise about why it took them so long to take them on. Are they gambling on the fact many people will defect from Sky and take up the BT Sports package?
Im wondering if this will end up like the other opposition to Sky when bidding for football.
Im already thinking of dropping SKY Sports to reduce my costs, im sure other people will be the same.
BT and SKY cant keep adding in money everytime there is a new bid. The money in the premier league from tv is already crazy.
Challo said:
London424 said:
Challo said:
Is this a financially viable model for BT to follow? They already blew other bidders out of the water for Champions League and potentially well over the market value. Can they afford to do the same to Sky?
Are they gambling on the fact many people will defect from Sky and take up the BT Sports package?
Im wondering if this will end up like the other opposition to Sky when bidding for football.
BT are a much bigger company than SKY. It's actually more of a surprise about why it took them so long to take them on. Are they gambling on the fact many people will defect from Sky and take up the BT Sports package?
Im wondering if this will end up like the other opposition to Sky when bidding for football.
Im already thinking of dropping SKY Sports to reduce my costs, im sure other people will be the same.
BT and SKY cant keep adding in money everytime there is a new bid. The money in the premier league from tv is already crazy.
Sky just got The Open golf by doubling the BBC offer...I'm assuming the advertising space they can sell more than covers the cost.
Challo said:
How far do you think we are from the tipping between the amount of money being thrown at football and other sports compared to the revenue it will generate and also will this impact the others services they offer or will it just be added to subscriptions and the end user.
Im already thinking of dropping SKY Sports to reduce my costs, im sure other people will be the same.
BT and SKY cant keep adding in money everytime there is a new bid. The money in the premier league from tv is already crazy.
This is a war between sky and bt rather than how much the premier league will actually receive at the moment IMHO, looking at the way sky implements tv packages forcing people to subscribe to a much larger package in order to get the sports channels for football has always irritated somewhat, BT has the chance to offer sport in a more focused way with regards to the pricing as an add on of bt sports to current or new customers or perhaps as a standalone service for those who don't use bt for other services at an increased cost. Im already thinking of dropping SKY Sports to reduce my costs, im sure other people will be the same.
BT and SKY cant keep adding in money everytime there is a new bid. The money in the premier league from tv is already crazy.
Bt currently offer sport for "free" ok the cost is paid for in the base cost of BT service but as it is spread across many more customers the cost hasn't yet seen sky like increases, or at least haven't whilst bt are trying to build this side of the business, wether high bidding cost will change that to a designated subscription or a rise in the cost of phone and broadband
Brite spark said:
Challo said:
How far do you think we are from the tipping between the amount of money being thrown at football and other sports compared to the revenue it will generate and also will this impact the others services they offer or will it just be added to subscriptions and the end user.
Im already thinking of dropping SKY Sports to reduce my costs, im sure other people will be the same.
BT and SKY cant keep adding in money everytime there is a new bid. The money in the premier league from tv is already crazy.
This is a war between sky and bt rather than how much the premier league will actually receive at the moment IMHO, looking at the way sky implements tv packages forcing people to subscribe to a much larger package in order to get the sports channels for football has always irritated somewhat, BT has the chance to offer sport in a more focused way with regards to the pricing as an add on of bt sports to current or new customers or perhaps as a standalone service for those who don't use bt for other services at an increased cost. Im already thinking of dropping SKY Sports to reduce my costs, im sure other people will be the same.
BT and SKY cant keep adding in money everytime there is a new bid. The money in the premier league from tv is already crazy.
Bt currently offer sport for "free" ok the cost is paid for in the base cost of BT service but as it is spread across many more customers the cost hasn't yet seen sky like increases, or at least haven't whilst bt are trying to build this side of the business, wether high bidding cost will change that to a designated subscription or a rise in the cost of phone and broadband
It is totally about content. Sky is a media content company that makes you subscribe to it's Satellite TV services to watch it's content.
The future is IPTV (Sky satellite service is very much yesterday's tech) and BT want to drive people through their platform. They happen to own that platform so have a pricing advantage regardles of what Ofcom makes them do.
It'll be an unmitigated disaster for Sky if they lose a lot of the matches. The demographic of football supporters also happens to be the demographic that is most likely to subscribe to Sky...that's why football rather than Cricket or Rugby is the winner.
Discovery channel may have entered the bidding! gone to second round of bids as prices are close.
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/feb/06/pr...
Not sure how discovery channel would show the matches in the uk if they won the bidding process- n sky/bt,internet, sub sale of rights?
Or is discovery channel bidding an attempt by sky to squeeze bt from the market and get full market share (or vice versa)
Sky with little or no coverage would be interesting to see if its current business model could survive the loss of premier league football, but then if the cost of the rights has increased that much will sky customers keep the subscription if it becomes even more expensive?
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/feb/06/pr...
Not sure how discovery channel would show the matches in the uk if they won the bidding process- n sky/bt,internet, sub sale of rights?
Or is discovery channel bidding an attempt by sky to squeeze bt from the market and get full market share (or vice versa)
Sky with little or no coverage would be interesting to see if its current business model could survive the loss of premier league football, but then if the cost of the rights has increased that much will sky customers keep the subscription if it becomes even more expensive?
Brite spark said:
Discovery channel may have entered the bidding! gone to second round of bids as prices are close.
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/feb/06/pr...
Not sure how discovery channel would show the matches in the uk if they won the bidding process- n sky/bt,internet, sub sale of rights?
Or is discovery channel bidding an attempt by sky to squeeze bt from the market and get full market share (or vice versa)
Sky with little or no coverage would be interesting to see if its current business model could survive the loss of premier league football, but then if the cost of the rights has increased that much will sky customers keep the subscription if it becomes even more expensive?
They own Eurosport don't they? Probably mean cost to watch Eurosport will rocket and that's annoying as a cycling fan :-(http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/feb/06/pr...
Not sure how discovery channel would show the matches in the uk if they won the bidding process- n sky/bt,internet, sub sale of rights?
Or is discovery channel bidding an attempt by sky to squeeze bt from the market and get full market share (or vice versa)
Sky with little or no coverage would be interesting to see if its current business model could survive the loss of premier league football, but then if the cost of the rights has increased that much will sky customers keep the subscription if it becomes even more expensive?
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff