PL 2020/21 Season.

[Fivex]

Thats 15 quid for some of the crappier fixtures? Bit pricey.

Id be happy paying 300-400 quid a year for all games including Europe and cups on a single platform. But for one off games that can be seen for free on the interweb. I dunno... Especially if I have to get BT or Sky on top.

Not sure why they didnt trial it with a lower price point. A fiver a game might have brought in bigger audiences.

Because they can offer discounted prices for **** matches way easier than doubling it for better ones

[red g]

Who’s that with?

Not sure who Slinks is with but i Recommended Kingmedia, few on here have signed up. All football and Boxing including PPV. Not sure price now but its probably about £7.00 a month.

[rodo]

Anyone after a good IPTV source give me a shout

[Liverpool]

Sheffield United game now moved from 3pm to 8pm ffs

[rodo]

Sheffield United game now moved from 3pm to 8pm ffs

On ppv

[Exiled_red]

who pockets the cash? I hope its not in their interests to put clubs with large fanbases behind this paywall.

Yeah that's an interesting point, normally most of our games would be selected for Sky/BT Sport probably ~75% of our fixtures will be on one or the other.

But there is a huge conflict of interest if the TV companies are making money out of this new format.

[Mark79]

Not sure who Slinks is with but i Recommended Kingmedia, few on here have signed up. All football and Boxing including PPV. Not sure price now but its probably about £7.00 a month.

Thanks

[Slinky Skills]

Who’s that with?

The Race Network. Used to be invite only but I think they've hit it on the head as it was being abused by some members.

[Fosterbloke]

****ing hell, I get every PL, Europa, CL and Internationals as part of my broadband sub.

[SB]

Optus sport FTW

[RedReet]

Yeah that's an interesting point, normally most of our games would be selected for Sky/BT Sport probably ~75% of our fixtures will be on one or the other.

But there is a huge conflict of interest if the TV companies are making money out of this new format.

I mentioned above that Sky and BT just get broadcasting costs back and the rest goes to clubs. I assumed each club kept what they earned per match, but according to the Athletic below, it hasn't been decided how to distribute the money, although again, BT and Sky shouldn't profit.

Good for us as the majority of our matches will still be on BT and Sky but a bit **** for lesser teams who'll have to shell out most weeks, West Brom for example getting the worst slot, 5.30 Monday every week in October.

(Other contributor: David Ornstein)

For the first time since 2007, when Sky Sports’ PremPlus channel was disbanded, football fans in the UK will have to use a pay-per-view service to be able to watch certain Premier League games on TV from next weekend.

On Friday, the Premier League announced that matches in October which have not already been selected for live coverage will be available to watch via the BT Sport Box Office or Sky Sports Box Office platforms. The price? £14.95 per game.

A solution for screening the matches had to be found after the planned return of fans from October 1 was scrapped by the British government due to a rise in COVID-19 cases across the country. However, what the Premier League said were “interim” arrangements were roundly criticised by supporters. And while the Football Supporters’ Association (FSA) welcomed the decision to broadcast the matches, it also urged BT Sport and Sky Sports to “reconsider their pricing”.

The decision to make matches available on PPV was not a unanimous one, with Leicester City voting against the proposal. The Athletic understands that other clubs also voiced their objections, only to vote in support of the plan anyway.

But why were so many Premier League clubs in favour of turning to PPV? How much additional revenue can clubs expect to make, and how do they plan to spend it? And are hard-up supporters being ripped off?

The Athletic answers the key questions…

Who approved the plan?

The result was an emphatic 19-1 when votes were cast by the 20 Premier League clubs, with Susan Whelan, the Leicester City chief executive said to have spoken “passionately” against the proposals.

Manchester United chief executive Ed Woodward also argued against the plan and others declared their own reservations, particularly around the logistics of how to deal with season-ticket holders, but ultimately only Leicester formally objected in the vote.

The absence of supporters, due to COVID-19 restrictions, continues to leave clubs with a shortfall in revenue and there is a collective desire to start clawing some of that money back as the uncertainty spreads in the closing months of 2020.

Although the Premier League and its 20 clubs were willing to make some fixtures free-to-air as a bargaining chip in Project Restart, with the BBC among the beneficiaries, it was done so with the hope supporters would be allowed back into grounds from October.

The government’s change in policy for public events has forced professional games to stay behind closed doors for the foreseeable future and Premier League clubs were unwilling to keep on giving away additional games “for free” via Sky Sports and BT Sport.

Rob Webster, Sky Sports’ managing director, said: “The Premier League has come to this decision with its clubs to provide a service for supporters who are no longer able to attend and to generate match-day revenue. We are happy to support them with this interim solution — and we share their desire to get fans back into grounds as soon as it is safe to do so.”

Why did 19 clubs vote for it if more than one had concerns?

Clubs across the Premier League are known to have been “taken aback” by the ferocity of the reaction to the announcement. “It is a plague on all our houses except Leicester,” said one club source.

Leicester, though, were not the only club to raise issues at the meeting. There were concerns that it would constitute a PR own goal on the back of a transfer window in which the 20 clubs committed to spending more than £1 billion in transfer fees and there was also disagreement over the money to be charged.

One senior executive at a Premier League club said they would rather watch Match of the Day than pay £15 for a match. Another source told The Athletic after the meeting: “If you ask 20 millionaires to go into room and decide what £15 means, this is what happens. It has failed the Netflix test, one game is more than a monthly Netflix subscription.”

Woodward was said to have been a strong questioning voice, though rival club sources dispute the intensity of his opposition to the final proposal. Ultimately all bar Leicester voted in favour of the proposals in the spirit of collective responsibility.

A source said that it is not unusual for clubs to speak passionately against proposals in meetings between the 20 clubs, but then — once they know the numbers — vote with it, both so that the Premier League appears united and also because they know they might need the support of clubs leading the charge on the issue later on down the line. A source said: “Premier League votes are like being in the Prime Minister’s cabinet. It is seen as an act of betrayal and often futile to vote against the majority when you know you don’t have the numbers to win.”

For example, The Athletic understands that Manchester United were not the only club to speak against the plan only to vote for it in the end.

One other theory that has been floated is that the leading clubs are unlikely to object to an arrangement that would also test the appetite for a Premier League streaming service that could work in their favour. Smaller clubs have always been against the separate sale of rights as they would likely generate less money for them and more for big clubs. This PPV run could prove that.

How was the price decided upon and why make this announcement now?

Fans of EFL clubs have been paying £10 per game throughout this season, including ties in the Carabao Cup and EFL Trophy. That figure is set by the EFL and charged universally by all 72 clubs.

The £14.95 fee for Premier League games is almost 50 per cent up on that but they will argue the production’s quality of service, such as multiple camera angles and analysis, makes it a superior package to that offered in the EFL. The PPV price is also less than major boxing bouts, which typically cost between £20 and £25.

The timing of the announcement is nevertheless lousy. No sooner have clubs finished their spending in the transfer market, they are asking supporters to dig deep once more to continue watching their team.

The Football Supporters’ Association are among those asking for the pricing to be reconsidered. “Many Premier League clubs have already taken money from fans, particularly season ticket holders, for matches they can’t attend so we urge them to get refunds out to those supporters as soon as possible,” a spokesperson said.

“We’ve also already heard from many supporters and FSA members who are concerned about the £15 per game being charged and we’d urge BT Sport and Sky Sports to reconsider their pricing for these games.”

The Tottenham Hotspur Supporters’ Trust went further, saying the high pricing could be damaging to society not just fans’ finances.

“The price of £14.95 per game is too high. And because it is too high, it could have damaging effects – not just on an individual’s finances at a time when many are stretched,” it said. “It will encourage use of illegal streams, therefore diverting money from the game. And it will encourage people to gather in households and pubs to watch games together.”

What matches are likely to be selected for PPV?

Broadcasters have already picked their games up to the start of November, with five of the 10 games in each round going to either Sky Sports or BT Sport.

That leaves five other games to be broadcast every weekend on PPV. The first three games to be played on Sky Sports Box Office will be Newcastle United vs Manchester United on Saturday October 17 (8pm), with Leicester City vs Aston Villa on Sunday October 18 (7.15pm) and then the ugly duckling of West Brom vs Burnley on Monday October 19 (5.30pm).

Sky Sports and BT Sport are willing to facilitate these broadcasts but they also have their own product to protect. They will continue to keep picking the most attractive fixtures to satisfy their own customers in these financially challenging times, meaning the divisions less popular clubs are more likely to have to shell out more regularly to watch their team on TV.

How will the revenue be distributed among clubs?

Under the EFL model, Championship clubs sell streaming passes through their own websites and are entitled to keep the money they earn. That makes it a more profitable exercise for the division’s bigger clubs, such as Nottingham Forest and Derby County, who can bring in more money than their lesser counterparts.

The Premier League has made the decision to hand over the broadcast of PPV games to Sky Sports and BT Sport and while that could mean the money raised will be placed in a central pot and distributed among the 20 clubs, a decision has not yet been reached.

Sky Sports and BT Sport, who plan to use their own pool of commentators and pundits, will only cover their broadcast costs and not make any profit from the PPV games.

Will non-subscribers be able to watch matches shown on PPV?

They will. You do not need to be a subscriber to either Sky Sports or BT Sport to access PPV games. But you will need to register with the provider ahead of the fixture.

Sky Sports Box Office is already a designated PPV channel predominantly used for boxing events, while BT Sport Box Office was also set up in 2018 to broadcast boxing, UFC and WWE events.

Those are the channels lined up to host the Premier League’s PPV games.

Do clubs plan to refund existing season-ticket holders?

Not as things stand. Each club has taken a different approach to selling season tickets for 2020-21 and will have their own decisions to make.

It is understood that the issue of how this would affect season-ticket holders was discussed and that the idea of giving passes to season-ticket holders was explored but the differing circumstances at every club made this too complex.

Liverpool and Aston Villa, for example, have shelved season-ticket sales for this campaign so have nothing to refund supporters. Leicester are another to have held back on the collection of season-ticket money until it becomes clear when supporters are allowed to attend games again.

Southampton and Crystal Palace are issuing refunds to season-ticket holders on a pro-rata basis for every game played behind closed doors, but the absence of a blanket approach across the division has only muddied the waters.

The EFL, which announced every game could be streamed after lockdown, gave every season-ticket holder free access codes as a means of compensation, but the Premier League are not expected to follow that lead.

How long is this “interim solution” likely to last?

The hope — albeit faint — is that this can be a measure for October only.

The Premier League joined voices with the EFL, The FA, Women’s Super League and Women’s Championship this week to call on supporters to be safely allowed back into grounds “as soon as possible”. Richard Masters, chief executive of the Premier League, was among those to add his signature to a letter to supporters, with the return of testing programmes top of the agenda.

The decision over when fans will be allowed back into grounds ultimately rests with the government but the rising COVID-19 infection rate is not helping the cause. That would point to this becoming a long-term solution.

Why does the Premier League not use this opportunity to set up its own streaming service?

That would be a logistical headache the Premier League is not ready for. As things stand it has domestic broadcast deals worth £4.5 billion with Sky Sports and BT Sport and the appetite to set up a streaming service is not currently there.

The EFL’s platform, iFollow, has encountered regular problems when streaming live games and the Premier League would need to be sure its product was not diminished during its live coverage.

Amazon Prime, the American giant and newcomers to the Premier League scene, was broadcasting with a delay last season and picture quality on platforms such as Netflix also suffered during lockdown.

That is not to say the Premier League will not go down that road in the future once technological advances are made.

Will international broadcasters replicate this model?

This is a very British problem that needed to be addressed.

Broadcast packages sold overseas are not limited to the same restrictions, with all games made available to supporters based outside of the UK, so the lucrative agreements struck with overseas broadcasters will be unaffected.

Will the additional income be put towards an EFL rescue package?

That’s an impossible question to answer at present but let’s be clear: this is a step designed to fill the financial void of Premier League clubs. They are out of pocket as the wait goes on to bring fans back into stadiums and this will help claw back some of that shortfall. They are looking after No 1.

How much money is raised from these PPV broadcasts will be fascinating. A club like Leeds United, who won promotion out of the Championship in July, were selling as many as 25,000 streaming passes to their supporters, albeit at home and overseas.

If the average Premier League PPV fixture, say, shifts 40,000 passes at £14.95 then it will be a return of £600,000 minus the broadcast fees. Although all income will be gratefully received, these are hardly life-changing sums for a Premier League club.

Does that change the financial landscape when it comes to an EFL bail-out? Given the reluctance to help out clubs in the Championship to this point, it would seem unlikely. In a recent Premier League meeting Woodward suggested that the Premier League borrow £1 billion and give £300 million to the EFL. This did not receive backing.

(Photo: Tony McArdle via Getty Images)

[rodo]

someone after a job at sky

[ame]https://twitter.com/EniAlu/status/1314920498761883649[/ame]

[Irishnev]

[ame="https://twitter.com/jacksear/status/1321882597295902721"]https://twitter.com/jacksear/status/1321882597295902721[/ame]

[RedReet]

****ing Everton. Robbed us of 2 points and still ****ing us over.

This will easily be the highlight of their season when they inevitably drop back down the table.

[greenturnip]

I hope we go back to 4-3-3