It appears you have not yet registered with our community. To register please click here...

est1892

Go Back   est1892 > Football > General Football

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 17-08-14, 04:05 PM   #41
smphotog
Hodgsoned
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,510
We have great coverage in the US now that NBC are involved.

Every match live , good pre game and analysis and a plastic version of MOTD.

All for basically fuck all via NBC
smphotog is offline   Reply With Quote
Advertisement.
Don't Like Adverts? (Register or Donate)
Liver Bird
Old 18-08-14, 03:35 AM   #42
slaine
Benitez
 
slaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nigey View Post
Yes, in the form of Now TV. It's an Internet based service and costs 6.99 currently for 24 hours. It's in good quality almost HD.
6.99 for 24 hours? for a sport that just happens? They charge about 8.99 to watch movies, both current and in their library per month!!

Think I'll stick with streams... Fuck the quality... even on the blockiest stream, I can see if it's the redmen or the other team scoring the goal...

I had/have a skybox f5 that I paid 50 for the year to get all the sky channels.. but the fucker went offline If anyone knows a place to get a different cline... pm me
__________________
What would Vic Mackey Duncan Jenkins Ronnie Pickering do?
slaine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 06:12 AM   #43
MrMichael
The Pun Police
 
MrMichael's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,430
I've never paid for football on tv!

Well actually that's not completely true, when I was a student around the year 2000 we got the ill-fated ITV Digital for our house for a one off payment, which came with ITV Sport before it promptly went bust. Other than that however I've never had Sky anywhere I've ever lived, I just won't give Murdoch money and consider it too much to pay for TV, let alone just factoring in the football. Neither will I consider getting BT Sport, the whole thing is just bloated and excessive and much though I love this sport I hate what gross amounts of money have done to it.

If I couldn't stream games on the net for free I'd rather just listen to the radio and watch free highlights shows & broadcasts when I could, with occasional popping to the pub for big games like I always used to. I guess if there were a netflix for football, priced at a truly affordable level, convenient and technologically sound, then I would happily go for that, but where the movie & music industries eventually caught on to the only real way to combat piracy, ie providing a superior legit service for a minimal fee, football is still miles behind.
__________________
I could not dig, I dared not rob:
Therefore I lied to please the mob.
Now all my lies are proved untrue
And I must face the men I slew.
What tale shall serve me here among
Mine angry and defrauded young?
MrMichael is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 06:31 AM   #44
EwarWoo
Paisley
 
EwarWoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,236
I've always done free streaming, but its hit and miss. I deal with it. However after missing the first half of last nights match trying to find a stream that was actually watchable I've finally caved and got Foxtel (Oz version of sky).

I begrudge that murdoch cunt every penny (and yes, he fully deserves that name) but he's done too good a job of tying it down.

Hating myself for caving, but really looking forward to enjoying some football next weekend without the fath around.

$50 a month aint too bad though. It's just the money going to him, and being forced into also grabbing crap channels I don't want (sports itself is $25) that annoys me.
__________________
Stop wallowing ya gret sook.
EwarWoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 07:45 AM   #45
Darkon
Football Expert
 
Darkon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMichael View Post
I've never paid for football on tv!

Well actually that's not completely true, when I was a student around the year 2000 we got the ill-fated ITV Digital for our house for a one off payment, which came with ITV Sport before it promptly went bust. Other than that however I've never had Sky anywhere I've ever lived, I just won't give Murdoch money and consider it too much to pay for TV, let alone just factoring in the football. Neither will I consider getting BT Sport, the whole thing is just bloated and excessive and much though I love this sport I hate what gross amounts of money have done to it.

If I couldn't stream games on the net for free I'd rather just listen to the radio and watch free highlights shows & broadcasts when I could, with occasional popping to the pub for big games like I always used to. I guess if there were a netflix for football, priced at a truly affordable level, convenient and technologically sound, then I would happily go for that, but where the movie & music industries eventually caught on to the only real way to combat piracy, ie providing a superior legit service for a minimal fee, football is still miles behind.
But listening to it for free on the radio is a bit of a myth, as you've already paid for the radio...

I do completely agree about the bloated moneyhungering shit football have become, and there is a natuarl breaking point to what you want to pay. I'm happy to pay 20 a month for my service, as it gives me movies, tv series and just about all the football I can possible swallow in HD streaming quality available at laptop, phone, tablet, PS and supports chromecast now. I think that is very good value for money, and I'm happy to support the entertainment I'm getting that way around. Before that I had to pay around 40 a month for cable tv to get about 50 channels I have no interest in just to watch footy and a bit to old movies. That was shit value for money, and cable tv will soon kill itself that way.
Darkon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 08:03 AM   #46
Alex
Administrator
 
Alex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,307
I get Sky Sports, at whatever cost that is. But I watch the channels all the time. Cricket over the summer gets it the most use. But a few other sports interest me too. So its not all Football I use it for.

I dont pay for BT sport now as I think its terrible value for money. 12 a month for a few games on a Saturday early afternoon when I could be out doing something better.

If Liverpool were on Id listen on the radio or something or try and find a stream.

All of Liverpool's games are on LFC TV 24 hours later for free anyway. So I rarely actually miss a game.
__________________
*Except Michael, who died.
Alex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 08:12 AM   #47
EwarWoo
Paisley
 
EwarWoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,236
Yeah, I'll get other usage out of it. Test series vs India is on foxtel, and snooker when it comes around which I miss watching.

Not massive on sports but other bits and bobs take my interest (love xgames, but its always on at some ungodly hour if I happen to be up)
__________________
Stop wallowing ya gret sook.
EwarWoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 08:22 AM   #48
Fredo
Not to be taken seriously
 
Fredo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 31,036
Justifying for all sky channels is difficult especially that I don't get to watch them bar Liverpool games. So paying for the service just when we play is a tad more justifiable.

I've run out of patience with streams, too hit and miss and having to change them in the middle of a match is incredibly annoying.
__________________
Are we winning?
Fredo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 08:28 AM   #49
Alex
Administrator
 
Alex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,307
I would certainly go the same way with just paying for our games if I didnt watch the rest of the channels.

Most you will spend in a month is 28 at a guess.

Might get a bit more pricey given we are in the Champions League now though.
__________________
*Except Michael, who died.
Alex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 08:34 AM   #50
Darkon
Football Expert
 
Darkon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,260
Unless the PL holders don't have the CL rights. That's been a problem for years where I live, so if I quit cable I would have to pay for 2-3 streaming services
Darkon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 08:40 AM   #51
Darkon
Football Expert
 
Darkon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,260
I still don't understand why PL can't do what the NBA and other american sports do. NBA this season costs me 12 for a season with live feeds for 90% of the games.

I know that's exceptionally cheap, but if it cost 5 a month or something for PL, that would be awesome!
Darkon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 08:43 AM   #52
dom9
Ant Pisser
 
dom9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 61,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMichael View Post
I've never paid for football on tv!

Well actually that's not completely true, when I was a student around the year 2000 we got the ill-fated ITV Digital for our house for a one off payment, which came with ITV Sport before it promptly went bust. Other than that however I've never had Sky anywhere I've ever lived, I just won't give Murdoch money and consider it too much to pay for TV, let alone just factoring in the football. Neither will I consider getting BT Sport, the whole thing is just bloated and excessive and much though I love this sport I hate what gross amounts of money have done to it.

If I couldn't stream games on the net for free I'd rather just listen to the radio and watch free highlights shows & broadcasts when I could, with occasional popping to the pub for big games like I always used to. I guess if there were a netflix for football, priced at a truly affordable level, convenient and technologically sound, then I would happily go for that, but where the movie & music industries eventually caught on to the only real way to combat piracy, ie providing a superior legit service for a minimal fee, football is still miles behind.
I like the Footflix / Netball idea.

I think that the TV companies are still making such a margin that there's no incentive for them to go that way to combat piracy. Too many people are willing to pay the premium still.

The film and music industries' revenues were massively under threat from piracy and so they were forced to confront the situation, kicking and screaming by start ups who found a middle way.

I still can't get my head around the fact that people who are willing to pay the premium to watch football in their own home are often the same who download films and music illegally. Why is football different? Maybe it's because we know that by paying it, our clubs can spend more on players, which gives them a chance of being more competitive? It's interesting. To me at least.
__________________
Oh I don't know.
dom9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 08:57 AM   #53
paulg
Dalglish
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,550
I have a Virgin Media package, without Sky Sports but with BT Sport bundled. I don't really watch non LFC games, unless my brothers in law are round as they are mancs and gooners.
BT has some Italian, French, German footie which I occasionally watch, but does have other sports too so I've got into College American Football and stuff a bit.

The only other way I'd consider spending money on football would be to go upto Anfield for the tour and a match. Have never been able to comfortably afford that, so it hasn't happened.
paulg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 08:59 AM   #54
Darkon
Football Expert
 
Darkon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,260
Or it's simply becuase there are no good / equal quality service with live football?

You either pay the service and get live matches in 1080p and guarenteed commentators in a language you can understand + all the before and after crap if you are in to that, or you get a free stream that at best is at an acceptable quality and added bonus is some version of Latin based language.

With movies and music you can dl the exact same quality you would get on tv/cd/mp3 anyways, so there isn't any loss that way around.
Darkon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:00 AM   #55
dom9
Ant Pisser
 
dom9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 61,116
Do you watch streams Paul?
__________________
Oh I don't know.
dom9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:02 AM   #56
dom9
Ant Pisser
 
dom9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 61,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkon View Post
I still don't understand why PL can't do what the NBA and other american sports do. NBA this season costs me 12 for a season with live feeds for 90% of the games.

I know that's exceptionally cheap, but if it cost 5 a month or something for PL, that would be awesome!
Simply supply and demand, it would seem.

The broadcasters have their costs, their margin, then the rest goes to the club's (players / agents).
__________________
Oh I don't know.
dom9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:08 AM   #57
Darkon
Football Expert
 
Darkon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by dom9 View Post
Simply supply and demand, it would seem.

The broadcasters have their costs, their margin, then the rest goes to the club's (players / agents).
Sure, it's a lack of incentive really, but since Americans can do it directly from the rights owners (NBA for example) and make good money on it, I don't see why the FA/PL don't have an interest in cutting out the middle man. I mean American media is dominated by cable companies and they've managed to give quality access outside them.
Darkon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:10 AM   #58
EwarWoo
Paisley
 
EwarWoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nigey View Post
Justifying for all sky channels is difficult especially that I don't get to watch them bar Liverpool games. So paying for the service just when we play is a tad more justifiable.

I've run out of patience with streams, too hit and miss and having to change them in the middle of a match is incredibly annoying.
That's where it shits me. We have a game the wee hours of a work morning over here I have bugger all chance of watching it live, and it's like a weeks subs wasted. It's a real rip off really buying it just for PL.

But the frustration has just overwhelmed sense.
__________________
Stop wallowing ya gret sook.
EwarWoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:12 AM   #59
EwarWoo
Paisley
 
EwarWoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkon View Post
Sure, it's a lack of incentive really, but since Americans can do it directly from the rights owners (NBA for example) and make good money on it, I don't see why the FA/PL don't have an interest in cutting out the middle man. I mean American media is dominated by cable companies and they've managed to give quality access outside them.
Potentially population effects it.

> population = spreading the cost if they can aim for saturation.
__________________
Stop wallowing ya gret sook.
EwarWoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:13 AM   #60
dom9
Ant Pisser
 
dom9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 61,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkon View Post
Sure, it's a lack of incentive really, but since Americans can do it directly from the rights owners (NBA for example) and make good money on it, I don't see why the FA/PL don't have an interest in cutting out the middle man. I mean American media is dominated by cable companies and they've managed to give quality access outside them.
It's greed. Capitalism in its purest form.

I've always found it ironic that American sports have adopted a socialist approach, with their collective bargaining agreements, wage caps and draft systems. Everyone there truly is more equal.
__________________
Oh I don't know.
dom9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Advertisement.
Don't Like Adverts? (Register or Donate)
Liver Bird
Old 18-08-14, 09:15 AM   #61
Alex
Administrator
 
Alex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,307
Id also add that Sky have decent NFL coverage, which is something Ive gotten into recently. So its more value added.
__________________
*Except Michael, who died.
Alex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:15 AM   #62
Vermilion
Shooterista
 
Vermilion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 31,796
You would think Sky or whoever, would trial a low priced package for a year, just to see what the take up is, i suspect many more would get sky in their homes if it was say..15 a month for everything.

I'm guessing here, but i would think they would make just as much cash with the extra amount of customers they would then have ?
Vermilion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:22 AM   #63
Darkon
Football Expert
 
Darkon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by EwarWoo View Post
Potentially population effects it.

> population = spreading the cost if they can aim for saturation.
Population is really irrelevant in today's society, you can just offer the service world wide like American sports do. I live in Denmark and can buy a season pass for no money, as can you or Americans or Argentinains or whatever. Can't see why the same couldn't apply with PL in the internet?
Darkon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:23 AM   #64
Pablo
Anti-Antipodeanite
 
Pablo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,487
I just pay as little as is possible to be able to see what I want. That happens to be a paid for streaming service at about 3.50 a month. I can see all the games I like on there and it's excellent value for money.

I have no morals, if Sky or Virgin were 3.49 I'd do that instead, but they're not. I just won't get ripped off.

I'd watch the free streams but they are more hassle than they are worth most times.
Pablo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:25 AM   #65
Alex
Administrator
 
Alex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,307
I think offering a season pass for each team, but splitting the revenue evenly is a good model.

I would pay 10-15 a month for absolutely all Liverpool games. Friendlies, CL, Cup and League. Thats 180 a year tops.

It would mean abolishing the 3pm Kick off rule that all leagues have in place for saturdays though.
__________________
*Except Michael, who died.
Alex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:26 AM   #66
Alex
Administrator
 
Alex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pablo1981 View Post
I just pay as little as is possible to be able to see what I want. That happens to be a paid for streaming service at about 3.50 a month. I can see all the games I like on there and it's excellent value for money.

I have no morals, if Sky or Virgin were 3.49 I'd do that instead, but they're not. I just won't get ripped off.

I'd watch the free streams but they are more hassle than they are worth most times.
I pretty much flat out refuse to pay for an illegal stream. No idea where the money is going.

At least with Sky its a more educated guess.
__________________
*Except Michael, who died.
Alex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:29 AM   #67
dom9
Ant Pisser
 
dom9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 61,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pablo1981 View Post
I just pay as little as is possible to be able to see what I want. That happens to be a paid for streaming service at about 3.50 a month. I can see all the games I like on there and it's excellent value for money.

I have no morals, if Sky or Virgin were 3.49 I'd do that instead, but they're not. I just won't get ripped off.

I'd watch the free streams but they are more hassle than they are worth most times.
Piracy is not a victimless crime.
__________________
Oh I don't know.
dom9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:32 AM   #68
Pablo
Anti-Antipodeanite
 
Pablo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,487
Quote:
Originally Posted by dom9 View Post
Piracy is not a victimless crime.
Are you winding me up?

Who is the victim here? Some guy based in Manchester streams them from his house and I chuck him a few quick a month for the privelge of streaming it. Who have I wronged?
Pablo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:32 AM   #69
Darkon
Football Expert
 
Darkon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,260
I'm surprised you are willing to pay 10-15 just for LFC games, that is a massive outlay just for that. Imagine the price of all the PL

Looking at american sports, or the service I'm using, it should be possible to aquire all of PL and more for about 10-15 a month and you cut away all the other crap channels and stuff you don't watch.

I also don't pay for piracy, one thing is obtaining it for free, but for me it's wrong that someone makes money of it. Just like with movie/music piracy. And the money is most likely going down criminal networks pockets no matter if they sell you the idea it's a guy sitting at home. He wouldn't have the network required to do so.
Darkon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:32 AM   #70
Pablo
Anti-Antipodeanite
 
Pablo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,487
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex View Post
I pretty much flat out refuse to pay for an illegal stream. No idea where the money is going.

At least with Sky its a more educated guess.
With Sky you know it's going somewhere wrong? Oh that's much better

I have no morals about this. I did warn you.
Pablo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:35 AM   #71
Alex
Administrator
 
Alex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkon View Post
I'm surprised you are willing to pay 10-15 just for LFC games, that is a massive outlay just for that. Imagine the price of all the PL

Looking at american sports, or the service I'm using, it should be possible to aquire all of PL and more for about 10-15 a month and you cut away all the other crap channels and stuff you don't watch.
At a guess there is 60 games a season, which would average out at around 3 per game. Not great money then.

I guess it does need to be adjusted to be inline with a fuller package. But it sits about right for me.
__________________
*Except Michael, who died.
Alex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:36 AM   #72
Alex
Administrator
 
Alex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pablo1981 View Post
With Sky you know it's going somewhere wrong? Oh that's much better

I have no morals about this. I did warn you.
Its not going to something that is potentially illegal. They are morally bankrupt. But at least I know that.

As you say though, it could be going to some lad in a flat in Manchester. Its probably not, but it could be
__________________
*Except Michael, who died.
Alex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:43 AM   #73
dom9
Ant Pisser
 
dom9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 61,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pablo1981 View Post
Are you winding me up?

Who is the victim here? Some guy based in Manchester streams them from his house and I chuck him a few quick a month for the privelge of streaming it. Who have I wronged?
Haha, I was being more than a little sarcastic.
__________________
Oh I don't know.
dom9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:44 AM   #74
dom9
Ant Pisser
 
dom9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 61,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex View Post
Its not going to something that is potentially illegal.
Are you on the est Dropbox?
__________________
Oh I don't know.
dom9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:44 AM   #75
Pablo
Anti-Antipodeanite
 
Pablo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,487
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex View Post
Its not going to something that is potentially illegal. They are morally bankrupt. But at least I know that.

As you say though, it could be going to some lad in a flat in Manchester. Its probably not, but it could be
That's where he's based and he has an English sounding name. I suspect it's some spotty teenager running it from his basement and probably making more money a month than I am
Pablo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:46 AM   #76
Alex
Administrator
 
Alex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by dom9 View Post
Are you on the est Dropbox?
No not anymore, whys that?
__________________
*Except Michael, who died.
Alex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:50 AM   #77
EwarWoo
Paisley
 
EwarWoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pablo1981 View Post
and he has an English sounding name.
deffo legit then
__________________
Stop wallowing ya gret sook.
EwarWoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:50 AM   #78
dom9
Ant Pisser
 
dom9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 61,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex View Post
No not anymore, whys that?
Because it's, er (is this bit of the forum public?), therefore it's not er (is this bit of the forum public?).
__________________
Oh I don't know.
dom9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 09:55 AM   #79
EwarWoo
Paisley
 
EwarWoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 13,236
Yep, general is public.
__________________
Stop wallowing ya gret sook.
EwarWoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-14, 10:00 AM   #80
Pablo
Anti-Antipodeanite
 
Pablo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,487
Quote:
Originally Posted by EwarWoo View Post
deffo legit then
Flawless logic
Pablo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  est1892 > Football > General Football

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:57 AM.


Our Current Balance versus Target. Please help us: (Donate)

Kindly Hosted By DigitalWales
Any posts remain the responsibility of the poster. Neither est1892, its Owners nor any company affiliated will be held responsible from any disputes arising from these posts. The views raised are not necessarily those held by the website or its owners.

 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.