£5.1 Billion !!!

Paid by Sky and BT for live PL rights, obscene.

Out of control. It's a disgrace, sickening. It's all that's gone wrong with the beautiful game.

I'll stick to watching Saltash, Torpoint or Liskeard, thank you.

stupid beyond words. You could feed the world better than bob geldof on that money so no man,woman or children went hungry for a week at least.

Shit. When I saw the title I thought it was about the money 'arry and his mates were going to put into Argyle. Another gut wrenching disappointment.

Don't give Sky your money.....I never have and never will.

So much for competition making things cheaper, eh!

This strikes me as a high stakes poker game being played out between Sky and BT. How can either afford it? Chances are that one of them can't and they'll go bust leaving a monopoly for the other.

Mind-boggling.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

So much for competition making things cheaper, eh!

This strikes me as a high stakes poker game being played out between Sky and BT. How can either afford it? Chances are that one of them can't and they'll go bust leaving a monopoly for the other.

Mind-boggling.

BT Sport is still not attracting the viewer numbers it needs to warrant all its high profile and higher price paid for things like the exclusive rights too champions and europa leagues and if they dont start to increase that number then they will go the way of itv sport, setanta and espnuk which will have a massive effect.

I'm sure like many on here I can't quite believe, even comprehend these figures. And yet I've sat and watched the ever expanding tv largesse thinking one day football will eat itself and yet it never does.

They say the sport is not like any other business, and I begin to wonder if it is so. Where is the boom-and-bust cycle that has hit every other market sector. Where is the hint of a recession, when was the last one within football, the grim years of the mid-80's possibly.

It feels like some sort of South Sea Bubble or quantitive easing scam; £11 million per game, what really... for Chelsea-Arsenal, for Burnley-West Brom. Some games are easier sells than others.

I see posts commenting on the ageing demographic at Home Park, I would suggest this process is further advanced at clubs higher up the leagues, and even worse at clubs with ticket waiting lists.

Young men getting paid huge sums of money for kicking a ball - good luck to them. People get paid stupid salaries in the music, film and tv sphere too. I would like to think clubs will spend some of it on facilities and making the game more affordable, but I doubt it. I read a Chelsea fan on Mourinho's whinging about the lack of atmosphere at Stamford Bridge and suggesting that if he wanted a 12th man the club could pay then all a tenner and they'd give him his desired noise and colour. Now that may be facetious, but at roughly £400k that is one, maybe two players weekly salaries a game.

Little of the loot will come back to make the game more affordable - it's shame on the game. The day the business of football became a topic and a back page staple the sport died a little and every season it dies just a little bit more.

Greenlander wrote:

I'm sure like many on here I can't quite believe, even comprehend these figures. And yet I've sat and watched the ever expanding tv largesse thinking one day football will eat itself and yet it never does.

They say the sport is not like any other business, and I begin to wonder if it is so. Where is the boom-and-bust cycle that has hit every other market sector. Where is the hint of a recession, when was the last one within football, the grim years of the mid-80's possibly.

It feels like some sort of South Sea Bubble or quantitive easing scam; £11 million per game, what really... for Chelsea-Arsenal, for Burnley-West Brom. Some games are easier sells than others.

I see posts commenting on the ageing demographic at Home Park, I would suggest this process is further advanced at clubs higher up the leagues, and even worse at clubs with ticket waiting lists.

Young men getting paid huge sums of money for kicking a ball - good luck to them. People get paid stupid salaries in the music, film and tv sphere too. I would like to think clubs will spend some of it on facilities and making the game more affordable, but I doubt it. I read a Chelsea fan on Mourinho's whinging about the lack of atmosphere at Stamford Bridge and suggesting that if he wanted a 12th man the club could pay then all a tenner and they'd give him his desired noise and colour. Now that may be facetious, but at roughly £400k that is one, maybe two players weekly salaries a game.  

Little of the loot will come back to make the game more affordable - it's shame on the game. The day the business of football became a topic and a back page staple the sport died a little and every season it dies just a little bit more.



 

which is why i am convinced the top leagues in europe will become stand alone leagues with relegation/promotions removed and only the richest and well known cubs competing in it.

We are now at a point where TV pays more money into football than matchday fans do so, if the trend continues, it will soon reach a point where TV companies will insist on full stadia because they can hardly sell their product if the grounds are empty.

We can't be far off a point where TV companies will actually pay "fans" to go to matches to create the atmosphere for those watching at home.

It could, in fact, develop into a full-time career where all you have to do is watch football. A football fan will be a bit like an extra in a film scene: he/she needs to be there or it all looks a bit fake.

Angry wrote:

Greenlander wrote:

I'm sure like many on here I can't quite believe, even comprehend these figures. And yet I've sat and watched the ever expanding tv largesse thinking one day football will eat itself and yet it never does.

They say the sport is not like any other business, and I begin to wonder if it is so. Where is the boom-and-bust cycle that has hit every other market sector. Where is the hint of a recession, when was the last one within football, the grim years of the mid-80's possibly.

It feels like some sort of South Sea Bubble or quantitive easing scam; £11 million per game, what really... for Chelsea-Arsenal, for Burnley-West Brom. Some games are easier sells than others.

I see posts commenting on the ageing demographic at Home Park, I would suggest this process is further advanced at clubs higher up the leagues, and even worse at clubs with ticket waiting lists.

Young men getting paid huge sums of money for kicking a ball - good luck to them. People get paid stupid salaries in the music, film and tv sphere too. I would like to think clubs will spend some of it on facilities and making the game more affordable, but I doubt it. I read a Chelsea fan on Mourinho's whinging about the lack of atmosphere at Stamford Bridge and suggesting that if he wanted a 12th man the club could pay then all a tenner and they'd give him his desired noise and colour. Now that may be facetious, but at roughly £400k that is one, maybe two players weekly salaries a game.  

Little of the loot will come back to make the game more affordable - it's shame on the game. The day the business of football became a topic and a back page staple the sport died a little and every season it dies just a little bit more.



 

which is why i am convinced the top leagues in europe will become stand alone leagues with relegation/promotions removed and only the richest and well known cubs competing in it.

Why would the PL allow anybody else in?

One stat I saw earlier was that finishing bottom of the league will pay £150m in prize money. This is more than the current combined annual income of Bayern Munich, Borussia Dortmund and Athletico Madrid.

The PL will now pay far more than the Champions league.

Why bother with European football at all anymore?

Angry - I fear you may be right.

Elsewhere - apparently Burnley are now a richer club than Ajax. When I read that my first thought is, in the bank balance maybe, but not in history and silver cups and I realise that many out there will see that as proof that "the premier league is the best league in the world"™.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

We are now at a point where TV pays more money into football than matchday fans do so, if the trend continues, it will soon reach a point where TV companies will insist on full stadia because they can hardly sell their product if the grounds are empty.

None of that matters one iota.

The only thing that matters is how much the TV companies receive in advertising revenue. That figure determines how much they are willing to pay for the rights.

Rickler wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

We are now at a point where TV pays more money into football than matchday fans do so, if the trend continues, it will soon reach a point where TV companies will insist on full stadia because they can hardly sell their product if the grounds are empty.

None of that matters one iota.

The only thing that matters is how much the TV companies receive in advertising revenue.  That figure determines how much they are willing to pay for the rights.

Which just makes it one big scam - tv companies pay huge whack for rights to show games so advertisers pay huge whack for advert slots to reach their target demographics.

And everyone else loses by having to pay more for all this crap.

£5,100 million ÷ 92 = £55,434,782,60..... what a difference that could make to English football if it was divided equally between all 92 league clubs with the proviso that it could only be spent on the team, the stadium, the training infrastructure etc etc etc and not siphoned into the pension pots of unscrupulous owners

World has gone mad, football really only reflects society in general - there is no level playing field anymore, the rich are pishing on all of us in every walk of life!!

Greenlander wrote:

I'm sure like many on here I can't quite believe, even comprehend these figures. And yet I've sat and watched the ever expanding tv largesse thinking one day football will eat itself and yet it never does.

They say the sport is not like any other business, and I begin to wonder if it is so. Where is the boom-and-bust cycle that has hit every other market sector. Where is the hint of a recession, when was the last one within football, the grim years of the mid-80's possibly.

It feels like some sort of South Sea Bubble or quantitive easing scam; £11 million per game, what really... for Chelsea-Arsenal, for Burnley-West Brom. Some games are easier sells than others.

I see posts commenting on the ageing demographic at Home Park, I would suggest this process is further advanced at clubs higher up the leagues, and even worse at clubs with ticket waiting lists.

Young men getting paid huge sums of money for kicking a ball - good luck to them. People get paid stupid salaries in the music, film and tv sphere too. I would like to think clubs will spend some of it on facilities and making the game more affordable, but I doubt it. I read a Chelsea fan on Mourinho's whinging about the lack of atmosphere at Stamford Bridge and suggesting that if he wanted a 12th man the club could pay then all a tenner and they'd give him his desired noise and colour. Now that may be facetious, but at roughly £400k that is one, maybe two players weekly salaries a game.  

Little of the loot will come back to make the game more affordable - it's shame on the game. The day the business of football became a topic and a back page staple the sport died a little and every season it dies just a little bit more.



 

The Premiership fans are only a tiny amount of cash that each club receives when compared with TV income.

The lower league clubs hope for just one jackpot tie away in the FA Cup.....and it helps them through the season.

A level playing field......not quite there yet...... .

A perfect example of unrestricted capitalism in action. What grips my shite is that even though I heartily disagree with the model BBC will take some of my £125 pa licence fee and I have feck all say in it, good use of public money my arse.
Couch potatoes will rule the world.
I wonder when the FA will build our national academy?

Man Utd, Arsenal, Spurs and Chelsea can sell out their grounds to daytrippers from Cornwall no matter what they charge for tickets. Demand exceeds supply, so they can all say that their ticket prices are fair. It's ridiculous that us mugs have to pay £22 to watch a game of fourth-division football to stay within touching distance of solvency.

Cornish Chris wrote:

Man Utd, Arsenal, Spurs and Chelsea can sell out their grounds to daytrippers from Cornwall no matter what they charge for tickets. Demand exceeds supply, so they can all say that their ticket prices are fair. It's ridiculous that us mugs have to pay £22 to watch a game of fourth-division football to stay within touching distance of solvency.

To be fair though, Chris. You do have a choice whether to pay £22 to watch the shite served up at HP.

I pick and choose my games very carefully these days. To be honest, as I said earlier, at the moment, I'm getting far more enjoyment watching either Saltash, Torpoint or Liskeard - or watching Albion.

Earlier BT shares were up up 3.6%, Sky's down 4%.

I can't believe MOTD would bother paying £200m+ for highlights of football, when already over half games per weekend have probably been shown live elsewhere.

This is the sort of sum which could rescue a dying sport like cricket (for instance) from the abyss of pay TV.

(Not that the ECB want anything other than the short term boost in the arm that the SKY money brings...they were the first to be up in arms over a consultation that it should become 'listed' as a free-to-air sport.)

Scudamore today in the Guardian, players earning 'half a million pounds a week while other staff are not paid the living wage - doesn't make me feel uncomfortable' - well it feckin well should....................

Who to "blame"? It's like a fire and the principles taught on how to extinguish one. A fire needs three things to happen:

Combustible material
Oxygen
Source of ignition

Remove any one of those and the fire goes out. Same with TV rights. What funds the whole shaky house?...

Players (i.e. agents) wages & club fees which is in turn funded by Sky and BT by...
Advertising revenue
Subscription charges

A rise in one will drive rises in the other two to keep the "fire" burning. Remove (or substantially reduce) any one of the three and the system will collapse.

Will players/agents/clubs accept reduced wages/fees? Will they bogroll.
Will advertisers pull out? Very unlikely. Advertisers will respond like Pavlov's Dog anywhere where there's likely to be a lot of exposure.
Will subscribers pay increased fees. Probably, yes they will. For the same reason we will still pay - though we don't like it - for pertrol at £1.50+ per litre.

Given that the first two will be unwilling to break the cycle, it is only subscribers that have the collective capability to do anything which will extinguish the fire.

I'm sorry folks, but as far as I can see it, neither ludicrous wages nor completely unjustifiable club fees would be possible without a willing army of armchair morons.

PatDunne wrote:

Scudamore today in the Guardian, players earning 'half a million pounds a week while other staff are not paid the living wage - doesn't make me feel uncomfortable' - well it feckin well should....................

I completely agree with your sentiment but it's not Scudamore's responsibility to pay Arsenal's cleaning staff.