Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Post Reply
ClaretTony
Posts: 43437
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 20149 times
Has Liked: 3629 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by ClaretTony » Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:06 pm

This from Martyn Ziegler following today's Premier League meeting.




The Premier League has earned more than £5 million from the first two weekends of pay-per-view (PPV) matches but clubs have agreed to review the cost to fans after accepting that the initial £14.95 price per game has been a public relations disaster.

A meeting of the 20 clubs today decided to stick with £14.95 for the next two rounds of matches but agreed to review the PPV price for games after the international break, with a decision to be taken on November 5.

The most likely course of action is to reduce the price to £9.95 to fall in line with that charged by clubs in the EFL in the hope that will persuade fans’ groups who have boycotted the games to drop their protests.

The clubs were told that there were an average of 39,000 paid subscriptions over the first nine PPV matches, totalling £5.247 million, though some of that will go to broadcasters. Some matches attracted fewer than 10,000 subscriptions, and none more than 100,000.

The average was calculated before the Brighton & Hove Albion v West Bromwich Albion game on Monday evening, which is likely to have attracted fewer than 10,000 paid subscriptions.

The Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley has urged for the price to be cut to £4.95 per match but, according to sources in the meeting, the clubs were told that would mean very little profit.

Some club chairmen also raised eyebrows at Ashley’s stance on the issue given that Newcastle were the only club to vote against a rescue package for clubs in League One and League Two.

The Premier League review will aim to find a price tag that will satisfy disenchanted fans, raise viewer numbers considerably and therefore increase income. Liverpool’s fans group Spirit of Shankly raised £81,000 from fans donating the £14.95 fee they would have paid to Sky Sports Box Office for Saturday’s game against Sheffield United. Other groups have organised similar boycotts.

Premier League executives will also consider the fact that some clubs will be on PPV more often than others because the Big Six teams appear on Sky and BT Sport live games more regularly, meaning that some fans have to pay more to watch their team. However, there appears to be little room for manoeuvre over that issue.

Some clubs proposed that the review considers making the matches available only via their websites, but that seems unlikely to be pursued.
The Premier League clubs will also hold further talks with the FA over the governing body’s ultimatum regarding signing overseas players from January when post-Brexit laws come into force.

The FA has told top-flight clubs that it will not agree to their demands to be able to sign young, unproven talent from across the globe and that it will instead recommend to the government that the existing rules for non-EU players — where permits are awarded based on international appearances — are extended to cover all EU players too.
These 2 users liked this post: NewClaret KateR

Chester Perry
Posts: 12360
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 1739 times
Has Liked: 447 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:11 pm

from the MMT thread earlier
Chester Perry wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:18 pm
If you haven't done the PPV maths yet

- an average of £587k per match
- or £5.2m so far
- minus around £875k in VAT for HMRC

Murger
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:55 pm
Been Liked: 581 times
Has Liked: 555 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by Murger » Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:17 pm

How come they've decided to stick with it for the next couple of rounds? Could they not have cut the price straight away?

Jakubclaret
Posts: 3993
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 487 times
Has Liked: 395 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by Jakubclaret » Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:21 pm

If the costs are cut & it ends up generating less revenue which it could do even with encouraging more subscribers it'll revert back to the original pricing point, I won't go into whether it's too expensive or not that's been done to death on another thread, another poster came out with a good idea of buying a bundle with a reduction breakdown game for game basis, trouble with that idea it'll only appeal to the more avid sports viewer, unless you forecast in advance what teams were featuring on PPV & sold team by team.

Chester Perry
Posts: 12360
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 1739 times
Has Liked: 447 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:21 pm

Murger wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:17 pm
How come they've decided to stick with it for the next couple of rounds? Could they not have cut the price straight away?
Big clubs want to use the Burnley match viewing figures to justify why they should get a larger share
Last edited by Chester Perry on Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

clarethomer
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:24 am
Been Liked: 469 times
Has Liked: 233 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by clarethomer » Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:21 pm

Murger wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:17 pm
How come they've decided to stick with it for the next couple of rounds? Could they not have cut the price straight away?
They want to ensure foodbanks are sorted first.... :D
These 3 users liked this post: NewClaret ClaretTony BOYSIE31

NewClaret
Posts: 3243
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 644 times
Has Liked: 755 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by NewClaret » Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:26 pm

Murger wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:17 pm
How come they've decided to stick with it for the next couple of rounds? Could they not have cut the price straight away?
Can only assume they want more data on viewing figures from different fixtures, timings, etc.

NewClaret
Posts: 3243
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 644 times
Has Liked: 755 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by NewClaret » Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:28 pm

Tony - what would be the supporters association view on £9.95? A welcome reduction, obviously, but would it then be supportive of PPV?

wilks_bfc
Posts: 6797
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 2016 times
Has Liked: 1017 times
Contact:

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by wilks_bfc » Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:47 pm

The clubs were told that there were an average of 39,000 paid subscriptions over the first nine PPV matches, totalling £5.247 million, though some of that will go to broadcasters. Some matches attracted fewer than 10,000 subscriptions, and none more than 100,000.
But the Aston Villa v Leeds game was pretty close with 99,999

Leisure
Posts: 10339
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 9:47 pm
Been Liked: 1797 times
Has Liked: 5712 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by Leisure » Tue Oct 27, 2020 7:07 pm

wilks_bfc wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:47 pm
But the Aston Villa v Leeds game was pretty close with 99,999
With at least 95,000 of those being Leeds fans! ;)
These 2 users liked this post: Juan Tanamera wilks_bfc

joey13
Posts: 5346
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
Been Liked: 1239 times
Has Liked: 965 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by joey13 » Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:07 pm

£9.95 still too much

claret wizard
Posts: 646
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2016 11:20 am
Been Liked: 150 times
Has Liked: 67 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by claret wizard » Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:34 pm

Cats out of the bag now. 1000’s of people will have resorted to streams now, seen how easy they are, and free. Why pay for SKY at all?

NewClaret
Posts: 3243
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 644 times
Has Liked: 755 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by NewClaret » Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:44 pm

claret wizard wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:34 pm
Cats out of the bag now. 1000’s of people will have resorted to streams now, seen how easy they are, and free. Why pay for SKY at all?
Was the cat ever in the bag?

Question: between Sky & BT they must control a fair % of the UK’s home broadband users. Why don’t they just block hesgoal.com and all the others? Presumably they do similar thing with other illegal content? The PL don’t seem to make much effort to stop the piracy, do they?

jrgbfc
Posts: 5370
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 10:30 pm
Been Liked: 1334 times
Has Liked: 167 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by jrgbfc » Tue Oct 27, 2020 9:48 pm

The viewing figures have obviously been pitifully low. Shows the power fans have when they get organised and put their minds to it. We don't have to accept being treated like dirt.

Spike
Posts: 1909
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:07 pm
Been Liked: 408 times
Has Liked: 836 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by Spike » Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:22 pm

There should be a campaign to get PPV prices reduced and for there to be no VAT added

Sheedyclaret
Posts: 482
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:44 am
Been Liked: 76 times
Has Liked: 21 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by Sheedyclaret » Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:27 pm

9.95 still to much hope the protesting and boycotting continues..

ClaretTony
Posts: 43437
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 20149 times
Has Liked: 3629 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by ClaretTony » Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:54 pm

joey13 wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:07 pm
£9.95 still too much
If they had gone with £9.95 initially it would have been accepted by a number of football fans. If they reduced it now to £9.95 then the numbers would be smaller because of trying it on with the ridiculous £14.95.

joey13
Posts: 5346
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
Been Liked: 1239 times
Has Liked: 965 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by joey13 » Wed Oct 28, 2020 11:29 am

ClaretTony wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:54 pm
If they had gone with £9.95 initially it would have been accepted by a number of football fans. If they reduced it now to £9.95 then the numbers would be smaller because of trying it on with the ridiculous £14.95.
I should have said too much for me , paying enough monthly for Sky and get it through a stream anyway .

clarethomer
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:24 am
Been Liked: 469 times
Has Liked: 233 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by clarethomer » Wed Oct 28, 2020 11:36 am

joey13 wrote:
Wed Oct 28, 2020 11:29 am
I should have said too much for me , paying enough monthly for Sky and get it through a stream anyway .
So would you pay anything to watch legally?

Winstonswhite
Posts: 1769
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:04 am
Been Liked: 443 times
Has Liked: 157 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by Winstonswhite » Wed Oct 28, 2020 11:43 am

£9.95 is a fair price in my opinion

Dyched
Posts: 5352
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 12:34 am
Been Liked: 1718 times
Has Liked: 432 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by Dyched » Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:03 pm

ClaretTony wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:54 pm
If they had gone with £9.95 initially it would have been accepted by a number of football fans. If they reduced it now to £9.95 then the numbers would be smaller because of trying it on with the ridiculous £14.95.
I think most football fans (ones that don’t read forums or articles more on the financial side of things) expected it to be the same when last season restarted.

clarethomer
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:24 am
Been Liked: 469 times
Has Liked: 233 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by clarethomer » Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:23 pm

It will be interesting to see viewing figure comparisons with the next price change.

By my basic calculations and using rounding for ease;

1 Customer pays £15.
1 Customer pays £10
1 Customer pays £5

Let's work on the basis of 5000 paying fans

£15 package = £75k
£10 package = £50k
£5 package = £25k

So for this to commercially standstill

£15 reduced to £10 requires 50% more uptake (i.e. we would need 7500 people to pay)
£15 reduced to £5 requires 300% more uptake (i.e. we would need 15000 people to pay)

If you have someone who is currently happy to stream and pay nothing, I struggle to see how you would convince them to pay £5 a game.

If you ignore those that are regular streamers - then is it realising to get 3 times as many people paying for this for the club to commercially stand still This may be a good survey for JDRobbo to put on his twitter as he got a decent sample last time. Clearly a lot of this depends on how the commercials are set up with the broadcasters - i.e. all revenue is split equally across all the clubs then this may be a bit more realistic but if the commercials are set up that the clubs share the revenue for the games that they feature - this may be a little harder to achieve

Chester Perry
Posts: 12360
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 1739 times
Has Liked: 447 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:37 pm

clarethomer wrote:
Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:23 pm
It will be interesting to see viewing figure comparisons with the next price change.

By my basic calculations and using rounding for ease;

1 Customer pays £15.
1 Customer pays £10
1 Customer pays £5

Let's work on the basis of 5000 paying fans

£15 package = £75k
£10 package = £50k
£5 package = £25k

So for this to commercially standstill

£15 reduced to £10 requires 50% more uptake (i.e. we would need 7500 people to pay)
£15 reduced to £5 requires 300% more uptake (i.e. we would need 15000 people to pay)

If you have someone who is currently happy to stream and pay nothing, I struggle to see how you would convince them to pay £5 a game.

If you ignore those that are regular streamers - then is it realising to get 3 times as many people paying for this for the club to commercially stand still This may be a good survey for JDRobbo to put on his twitter as he got a decent sample last time. Clearly a lot of this depends on how the commercials are set up with the broadcasters - i.e. all revenue is split equally across all the clubs then this may be a bit more realistic but if the commercials are set up that the clubs share the revenue for the games that they feature - this may be a little harder to achieve
That is the difficulty in reforming the pricing having come out so high - if they had started at a lower level they may have got a higher take-up though not guaranteed to be enough) and probably a better lever of good will. All of this of course is impacted by Project restart and those free to air games, that set a benchmark expectation for many (not all) and was done because the Government told clubs they could have fans back for the new season - that has not happened. It is not coincidental that another government condition of restart - EFL Bailout - has not happened as a result (at least in part) of the prevention of fans at matches
Last edited by Chester Perry on Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Jakubclaret
Posts: 3993
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 487 times
Has Liked: 395 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by Jakubclaret » Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:49 pm

clarethomer wrote:
Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:23 pm
It will be interesting to see viewing figure comparisons with the next price change.

By my basic calculations and using rounding for ease;

1 Customer pays £15.
1 Customer pays £10
1 Customer pays £5

Let's work on the basis of 5000 paying fans

£15 package = £75k
£10 package = £50k
£5 package = £25k

So for this to commercially standstill

£15 reduced to £10 requires 50% more uptake (i.e. we would need 7500 people to pay)
£15 reduced to £5 requires 300% more uptake (i.e. we would need 15000 people to pay)

If you have someone who is currently happy to stream and pay nothing, I struggle to see how you would convince them to pay £5 a game.

If you ignore those that are regular streamers - then is it realising to get 3 times as many people paying for this for the club to commercially stand still This may be a good survey for JDRobbo to put on his twitter as he got a decent sample last time. Clearly a lot of this depends on how the commercials are set up with the broadcasters - i.e. all revenue is split equally across all the clubs then this may be a bit more realistic but if the commercials are set up that the clubs share the revenue for the games that they feature - this may be a little harder to achieve
Decent sample but from what age group, if you are asking people on Twitter it's logical to assume the participants will be more youthful & well adept at streaming so any £15 question asked will more & likely receive short shrift, as you correctly say you would convince them to part with £5 when the IPTV route is far cheaper, the older generation retired or semi retired or 50+ probably wouldn't bat an eyelid or less likely to baulk at the £15 will be exceptions of course as in life that's inevitable, what possible price point realistically strives towards matching the IPTV & remains financially attractive for the club's.

claret2018
Posts: 652
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 4:49 pm
Been Liked: 254 times
Has Liked: 6 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by claret2018 » Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:03 pm

Spike wrote:
Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:22 pm
There should be a campaign to get PPV prices reduced and for there to be no VAT added
Campaign all you like, the VAT exemption or zero rating can’t be changed at least until 1 jan 2021 when the EU transition period ends.

Even after this date it won’t happen. When vat is charged on medicine, it’s not a great look for the government to begin any post-Brexit vat reforms with tax cuts to premier league football streams.

clarethomer
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:24 am
Been Liked: 469 times
Has Liked: 233 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by clarethomer » Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:16 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:37 pm
That is the difficulty in reforming the pricing having come out so high - if they had started at a lower level they may have got a higher take-up though not guaranteed to be enough) and probably a better lever of good will. All of this of course is impacted by Project restart and those free to air games, that set a benchmark expectation for many (not all) and was done because the Government told clubs they could have fans back for the new season - that has not happened. It is not coincidental that another government condition of restart - EFL Bailout - has not happened as a result (at least in part) of the prevention of fans at matches
Decent sample but from what age group, if you are asking people on Twitter it's logical to assume the participants will be more youthful & well adept at streaming so any £15 question asked will more & likely receive short shrift, as you correctly say you would convince them to part with £5 when the IPTV route is far cheaper, the older generation retired or semi-retired or 50+ probably wouldn't bat an eyelid or less likely to baulk at the £15 will be exceptions of course as in life that's inevitable, what possible price point realistically strives towards matching the IPTV & remains financially attractive for the club's.
Without doubt, there seems to be a view being taken that it should be free, or as close to free as possible. Whilst it's well-intentioned that we should be making this accessible to all, it simply will not work to make it free from what I can see. Yes, you may convince people to come away from their streaming services (if they pay) or move away from the websites which offer for free - however, this hurts the game in the long term as they are not getting any income from those who are prepared to pay.

The age thing on Twitter may be a consideration but been at the gym today and whilst getting changed, there was a discussion going on about how their son had been around with a firestick and set him up for the games now.

I think to sum up what is going on at the moment is everyone wants their cake and to eat it.

For me the simplest solution would be to launch the premier league channel as they do abroad and let you subscribe to that so you can pay a monthly fee to watch it all.

However, trying to implement this is far more difficult than saying it given the complexities of existing contracts and business/growth plans based on the back of projecttions of the model that currently exist.

Woodleyclaret
Posts: 3992
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:25 pm
Been Liked: 799 times
Has Liked: 1037 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by Woodleyclaret » Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:19 pm

I own a Smart TV a Polaroid Asdas finest but Castify app cant stream from my A10 phone as it's not a recognised TV model any advice much appreciated

clarethomer
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:24 am
Been Liked: 469 times
Has Liked: 233 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by clarethomer » Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:21 pm

Woodleyclaret wrote:
Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:19 pm
I own a Smart TV a Polaroid Asdas finest but Castify app cant stream from my A10 phone as it's not a recognised TV model any advice much appreciated
get a chromecast

wilks_bfc
Posts: 6797
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 2016 times
Has Liked: 1017 times
Contact:

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by wilks_bfc » Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:27 pm

Because of the daft ko time last week (getting home from work then having training sessions for kids team) I didn't pay to watch the WBA game.
Even if I wasn't busy, I wouldn't have paid £15 for it as I have a reliable subscription, and like a lot of others, didn't think the "product" was worth £15.

Despite having the subscription, I may consider £5 worthwhile, if the money went to the clubs involved in that game and not split across all 20.

Rileybobs
Posts: 9503
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 3906 times
Has Liked: 882 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by Rileybobs » Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:11 pm

clarethomer wrote:
Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:23 pm
It will be interesting to see viewing figure comparisons with the next price change.

By my basic calculations and using rounding for ease;

1 Customer pays £15.
1 Customer pays £10
1 Customer pays £5

Let's work on the basis of 5000 paying fans

£15 package = £75k
£10 package = £50k
£5 package = £25k

So for this to commercially standstill

£15 reduced to £10 requires 50% more uptake (i.e. we would need 7500 people to pay)
£15 reduced to £5 requires 300% more uptake (i.e. we would need 15000 people to pay)

If you have someone who is currently happy to stream and pay nothing, I struggle to see how you would convince them to pay £5 a game.

If you ignore those that are regular streamers - then is it realising to get 3 times as many people paying for this for the club to commercially stand still This may be a good survey for JDRobbo to put on his twitter as he got a decent sample last time. Clearly a lot of this depends on how the commercials are set up with the broadcasters - i.e. all revenue is split equally across all the clubs then this may be a bit more realistic but if the commercials are set up that the clubs share the revenue for the games that they feature - this may be a little harder to achieve
I can only speak for myself, but I would have paid up to £7.50 to save the hassle of watching on an IPTV stream, with reduced picture quality and a time lag. Any more than that and I just don't see it as value for money.

Cirrus_Minor
Posts: 2643
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 8:20 pm
Been Liked: 637 times
Has Liked: 631 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by Cirrus_Minor » Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:42 pm

"The Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley has urged for the price to be cut to £4.95 per match but, according to sources in the meeting, the clubs were told that would mean very little profit."

Why do they have to make a profit?

Chester Perry
Posts: 12360
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 1739 times
Has Liked: 447 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:49 pm

Cirrus_Minor wrote:
Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:42 pm

Why do they have to make a profit?
seriously?
This user liked this post: Leisure

aggi
Posts: 6393
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 1515 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by aggi » Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:02 pm

clarethomer wrote:
Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:23 pm
It will be interesting to see viewing figure comparisons with the next price change.

By my basic calculations and using rounding for ease;

1 Customer pays £15.
1 Customer pays £10
1 Customer pays £5

Let's work on the basis of 5000 paying fans

£15 package = £75k
£10 package = £50k
£5 package = £25k

So for this to commercially standstill

£15 reduced to £10 requires 50% more uptake (i.e. we would need 7500 people to pay)
£15 reduced to £5 requires 300% more uptake (i.e. we would need 15000 people to pay)

If you have someone who is currently happy to stream and pay nothing, I struggle to see how you would convince them to pay £5 a game.

If you ignore those that are regular streamers - then is it realising to get 3 times as many people paying for this for the club to commercially stand still This may be a good survey for JDRobbo to put on his twitter as he got a decent sample last time. Clearly a lot of this depends on how the commercials are set up with the broadcasters - i.e. all revenue is split equally across all the clubs then this may be a bit more realistic but if the commercials are set up that the clubs share the revenue for the games that they feature - this may be a little harder to achieve
Personally I'd be happy to pay a fiver, and maybe a tenner, rather than use a stream. On the whole streams tend to be poor picture quality, inconsistent, a few minutes behind the game, and awkawrd to find consistently. I use Optus which mitigates those things but still is more hassle than just turning on the TV.

aggi
Posts: 6393
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 1515 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by aggi » Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:03 pm

Cirrus_Minor wrote:
Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:42 pm
"The Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley has urged for the price to be cut to £4.95 per match but, according to sources in the meeting, the clubs were told that would mean very little profit."

Why do they have to make a profit?
Well in the past clubs were making anything up to and beyond £1m in a home game. You can see why they may want to replace a small element of that.
This user liked this post: Leisure

joey13
Posts: 5346
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
Been Liked: 1239 times
Has Liked: 965 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by joey13 » Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:53 pm

clarethomer wrote:
Wed Oct 28, 2020 11:36 am
So would you pay anything to watch legally?
Not while I’m paying for Sky monthly and the reason why I don’t pay for anything on box office ie boxing

clarethomer
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:24 am
Been Liked: 469 times
Has Liked: 233 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by clarethomer » Wed Oct 28, 2020 5:57 pm

joey13 wrote:
Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:53 pm
Not while I’m paying for Sky monthly and the reason why I don’t pay for anything on box office ie boxing
So you would want it including as part of your sky sports package?

Whitgord
Posts: 514
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 120 times
Has Liked: 374 times
Location: Clitheroe

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by Whitgord » Wed Oct 28, 2020 7:24 pm

I don’t understand all these complaints from people who pay for sky or BT that they are being shortchanged. When I pay my sky or BT subscription I understand that I am only paying for some premier league games as chosen by those broadcasters to broadcast. We were well catered for at the end of last season by all the other games being shown as well (and I understand that the quality of the games has not been anything like watching them with a crowd). We are now back to the situation where we are paying Sky/BT/Amazon for the games they choose to show as part of their package. Anything else is a bonus and I would expect to have to pay extra for those games. I know Burnley don’t get picked to be shown very often but I knew this when I entered into my Sky contract.
This user liked this post: DAVETHEVICAR

joey13
Posts: 5346
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
Been Liked: 1239 times
Has Liked: 965 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by joey13 » Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:06 pm

clarethomer wrote:
Wed Oct 28, 2020 5:57 pm
So you would want it including as part of your sky sports package?
Yep

clarethomer
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:24 am
Been Liked: 469 times
Has Liked: 233 times

Re: Premier League clubs get £5m ppv boost but cost set to be cut

Post by clarethomer » Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:20 pm

Whitgord wrote:
Wed Oct 28, 2020 7:24 pm
I don’t understand all these complaints from people who pay for sky or BT that they are being shortchanged. When I pay my sky or BT subscription I understand that I am only paying for some premier league games as chosen by those broadcasters to broadcast. We were well catered for at the end of last season by all the other games being shown as well (and I understand that the quality of the games has not been anything like watching them with a crowd). We are now back to the situation where we are paying Sky/BT/Amazon for the games they choose to show as part of their package. Anything else is a bonus and I would expect to have to pay extra for those games. I know Burnley don’t get picked to be shown very often but I knew this when I entered into my Sky contract.
Me neither. I think that the whole situation has been poorly communicated.

- The matches contained within your sky/bt/amazon subscriptions are paid for. All the other matches are not.

- Project restart was agreed to be free to air because of trying to keep spirits up in lockdown and was seen as a short term solution with the expectation of fans returning to stadiums in the not too distant future.

- It became apparent that the October review date would unlikely see the return of fans to stadiums so there was further dialogue on how to allow those fans who could not get back to see their team.

- PPV was the solution.


Where there appears to be different expectations

- I don't think the link to this solution being aimed at fans who were paying to see their team rather than all fans like project restart has been communicated well.

- I don't think the communication around why games cannot be simply added into someones sky/bt package either has been clear.

- i don't think the communication around how that price was agreed has been particularly well explained and how this money will benefit your club.


If you take the whole of the premier league and say that the average price of a season ticket is £500 (accepting that in some grounds this will pay for better seats than others). This gives you an average game cost of £26 a game. If you buy an adhoc ticket, this is likely to be higher.

You cannot compare the cost of going live to watching on tv clearly but given that carabao cup games had been streamed at £10 weeks before then £14.95 doesn't sit too badly in that context. A reflection on that you are not getting the full product but you are getting something that is clearly a better product than our league cup.

Given the calls that this was too much, the more I have read comments on here and more widely, I have concluded that those calling for the reduction in prices are people that want these games accessible to all fans, or are people who are regular streamers and are measuring the price against what they can get illegally to this.

Not saying any view is wrong but the reason we have access is that it was to help those people who were prepared to pay to go and watch the game not to move people away from streaming. I think on the MMT Chester has posted something about the clubs considering just pulling the coverage and pushing the government to allowing fans as it won't work. I am sure Man U would happily take 23000 supporters paying them £30-40 a ticket than having to share a cut of £9.95 or whatever is being considered.

My fear in all of this has been the withdrawal of legitimate access to see these games in a way that aren't behind time and you are at risk of poor internet connections or blocks being put in place. I don't want to go to Turf moor with 5000 on and having to wear a mask and having to be in the ground at an allocated time and all the 'covid secure' processes that will undoubtedly come. I just want the ability to pay fairly to watch the game live as I would in the ground. Accepting that its not the same as being there but at least I get to watch something rather than nothing.
These 2 users liked this post: Whitgord DAVETHEVICAR

Post Reply