Are Clubs Royally Ripping Off Fans?

[blue lewj]

New season, same old shit.

Blue Lew in complaining about the club shocker.

And you're still popping up in threads talking shit and adding nothing of substance.

Not much changes round here.

[blue lewj]

This debate is about whether £10 is a fair price for the product, non?

It’s nothing to do with blindly stumping up cash to “support the club”.

The product being served up by the EFL (when it works) isn’t even comparable with the Sky product in terms of quality, so on balance, it doesn’t strike me as very good value for money.

The EFL need to pull their finger out and stop taking the mick.

Exactly this.

[blue lewj]

It has also come to light that Sky have negotiated the £10 fee with the EFL. They would only have done this if they were taking some form of cut themselves surely? If not why the interest as long as they didn't tread on the toes of their package prices.

So a season ticket holder buys a season ticket they think is going to the club, they watch the stream and the club take £10 off the price of the season ticket then give some of it to Sky for granting permission to show the game.

If Sky are taking a cut of season ticket money up and down the land it would make a little more sense as to why it costs so much. It's not right that they take a cut of season ticket money your average fan paid thinking it was going directly to the club in tough times though surely?

[dembethewarrior]

No. I think the EFL could have pushed for a lower price with Sky.

As I've already said if you pay a tenner today then you get three games plus NFL and whatever else is thrown in.

Yes, there was the chance they'd have said the EFL could not have had rights to show it but if there is money in it for Sky then I'm not surprised they agreed. They still have their schedule and it is money they wouldn't have expected to get.

Some feel it's great value. Others don't.
I'm very much in the latter camp but am still paying it so what do I know.

Less money means less money for the clubs though.

[The Hooded Claw]

It has also come to light that Sky have negotiated the £10 fee with the EFL. They would only have done this if they were taking some form of cut themselves surely? If not why the interest as long as they didn't tread on the toes of their package prices.

So a season ticket holder buys a season ticket they think is going to the club, they watch the stream and the club take £10 off the price of the season ticket then give some of it to Sky for granting permission to show the game.

If Sky are taking a cut of season ticket money up and down the land it would make a little more sense as to why it costs so much. It's not right that they take a cut of season ticket money your average fan paid thinking it was going directly to the club in tough times though surely?

Sky aren’t taking a cut of the season ticket money - the clubs have elected to offset the £10 against the season ticket. That’s the decision of the clubs.

Basically, Sky are being compensated for loss of subscription IMO one due to the streams. The streams themselves are presumably not put together by Sky, though, hence the poor quality.

[dml1954]

It has also come to light that Sky have negotiated the £10 fee with the EFL. They would only have done this if they were taking some form of cut themselves surely? If not why the interest as long as they didn't tread on the toes of their package prices.

So a season ticket holder buys a season ticket they think is going to the club, they watch the stream and the club take £10 off the price of the season ticket then give some of it to Sky for granting permission to show the game.

If Sky are taking a cut of season ticket money up and down the land it would make a little more sense as to why it costs so much. It's not right that they take a cut of season ticket money your average fan paid thinking it was going directly to the club in tough times though surely?

You are making all this up as you go along surely ?

[blue lewj]

You are making all this up as you go along surely ?

Made what up?

Do you think Sky would give rights to show games for free? If you do then they aren't getting anything for it. Fair enough.

I don't think Sky would give away rights to broadcast games for free. They paid a pretty penny for them and would likely look to recoup something.

City are letting fans watch the game via ifollow and taking £10 off the price that has been paid for a season ticket.
Now if Sky are taking a percentage of the tenner then the amount that people have paid for a season ticket is not going into the club as Sky are taking a percentage of this.

I don't know if Sky are taking a cut but you get very little for nothing in this world and I doubt that Sky are giving the EFL rights for nothing.

I'm not making anything up. It's just a theory.
I find it hard to believe that Sky would allot time to negotiating a fee with the EFL if they had nothing to make from those negotiations. Maybe they just wanted to keep the price high enough not to effect take up of their packages. I don't know.

[The Hooded Claw]

You need to separate Sky taking a cut of the stream revenue from the club using season ticket revenue to cover their costs.
The first one is contractual: the club/EFL compensate Sky for loss of earnings.
The second one is a choice made by each club. Sky aren’t demanding that they use season ticket revenue to cover it.

This debate is about the quality and therefore the value for money.

The product is vastly inferior to a Sky offering, but unless I’ve misunderstood, Sky don’t offer a live broadcast with full commentary on a club by club basis, so fans are left with little choice if they want to watch the games