[Archived] Pubs can show live TV feeds from EU

[jodrell]

The main problem is what Sky charge the pubs and clubs, it depends on the size of the pub. I got told that they charge £300-£400 P/M But you can get others for about £50 P/M. I am not a landlord but I know which one I would go for.

[PAFELL]

does this affect pubs who stream games over the internet??

Or is that still a bit of a grey area?

Where does it say that it is illegal to live stream games to a PC at home. I can understand why it is so in a public place such as a pub. But at home.

[Radagast]

Good news for the pub trade

Very true, everyone's looking at this from the point of view of the arse falling out of Sky or the PL, but it can't be underestimated how important this could be for a struggling industry. Saving several hundred pounds a month and having more games to show would no doubt save many a boozer from closing down.

[broadsword]

Good news for the pub trade and anything that damages the appalling Sky network and hopefully the wretched Champions League has to be welcomed.

Very well said that man.

[BuckyRover]

Very well said that man.

Can't argue with that. It's been all bad news for pubs in recent years so it's nice for them to have some good news at last.

[Glenn]

Good news for the pubs ..... very bad news for Rovers.

I can't see any of the bids (not just Sky's) from the EPL broadcast rights being close to their current values next time around.

[BangkokRover]

As was said on the first page this was not the ruling. So anyone streaming over the internet ir watching with a non sky card is breaking the law. Currently all rights are sold by country. That goes for films as well as sport. There is no way way the landlady will win. But the law might be changed so the rights are sold for all Europe. Of course that is skys wet dream as they have more money than anyone else.

[BuckyRover]

Good news for the pubs ..... very bad news for Rovers.

I can't see any of the bids (not just Sky's) from the EPL broadcast rights being close to their current values next time around.

I was thinking this this today. Do you think any clubs will have been prudent enough to base player wages on TV money?

Therefore if TV money reduces by 50%, player salaries are automatically reduced by 50%.

It's all relative anyway if everyones gets reduced we should be ok. The worrying thing would be if clubs decided to negotiate their own tv rights. (games on MUTV for example)

[cn174]

I was thinking this this today. Do you think any clubs will have been prudent enough to base player wages on TV money?

Therefore if TV money reduces by 50%, player salaries are automatically reduced by 50%.

It's all relative anyway if everyones gets reduced we should be ok. The worrying thing would be if clubs decided to negotiate their own tv rights. (games on MUTV for example)

Maybe Roberto is around to clarify, but I'm sure they ended up in a bad situation in Italy last season, becasuse the clubs negotiate their own TV rights. Obviously the likes of Milan, Juve were fine (I have read that such is Juve's income from TV it matters very little if 50 or 50,000 people turn up), but not all the smaller clubs were able to negotiate deals. So the league ended up being delayed because it was a requirement to have one, and they ended up settling for a worse deal.

That is a situation that I hope we don't end up facing because I think we'd find it difficult to get a decent deal!

[Glenn]

I seem to remember that one of the biggest advocates and campaigners amongst the Premier League clubs for collective TV rights (rather than individually negotiated rights) was a certain Mr John Williams. That's another reason I expect the income from TV to plummet next time bids are placed.

I really hope we haven't bet the farm on that money only ever going up not down (like Leeds did with the Champions League money).

[BangkokRover]

People need to seriously relax.

Yes the Premier League sell their rights as one. So Sky can't just buy the Man U games and then leave Rovers being shown on QVC. This is the same as most countries with the notable exception of La Liga where the clubs do their own thing. Italy has just switch back to the Premier League way of selling TV rights as it's the only way of distributing the money evenally between the league teams.

As was said on page one this was just guidance from an EU body who do not get it right every time. I am 100% the landlady will not win as its the job of the court not to up hold the law of the land and not to make it. Of course the TV companies could win this round as it's not just Sky who are affected and the judge could also as for the law to be up dated. Only once the law has been changed can the judge do anything.

So people will still being paying for the Sky or Virgin for a while yet. Of course there is nothing to stop the EPL setting up their own channel and selling the games themselves, which has been muted several times when it looked like the Sky money was to go down.

[American]

Good news for the pub trade and anything that damages the appalling Sky network and hopefully the wretched Champions League has to be welcomed.

One of your dumbest statements to date. How does this damage the Champions League? Matches are already broadcast live on multiple channels. The league is far from dependent on Sky to survive. If anything, it strengthens those clubs that get Champions League monies and hurts clubs like us when the next rights package comes up for bid.

[philipl]

I was thinking this this today. Do you think any clubs will have been prudent enough to base player wages on TV money?

Therefore if TV money reduces by 50%, player salaries are automatically reduced by 50%.

It's all relative anyway if everyones gets reduced we should be ok. The worrying thing would be if clubs decided to negotiate their own tv rights. (games on MUTV for example)

You haven't looked at the proportions of club revenues that are Sky-related.

Rovers are far more dependent on media revenues than other PL clubs except for Wigan and Blackpool. We don't have significant other sources of income to fall back onto.

[BuckyRover]

WBA, Blackpool, Wigan, Bolton, Stoke, Wolves, Birmingham are all dependent on Sky money I would guess.

I would think those with the largest debts would also be affected most.

It's a good job we are looking at overseas.

[philipl]

So you haven't looked at the numbers then.

[Glenn]

Yes the Premier League sell their rights as one. So Sky can't just buy the Man U games and then leave Rovers being shown on QVC. This is the same as most countries with the notable exception of La Liga where the clubs do their own thing. Italy has just switch back to the Premier League way of selling TV rights as it's the only way of distributing the money evenally between the league teams.

The "big clubs" in the EPL have been trying to get the right for individual bargaining for years, as I mentioned JW was at the forefront of the battle against it. Given the BBC's love of us and then Radio Lancashire suddenly were only prepared to pay a fraction for the radio right that they had done over previous years (resulting in no radio coverage), I'd imagine the revenue from broadcast rights could fall significantly.

[BuckyRover]

So you haven't looked at the numbers then.

I trust my judgement more than your interpretation.

[PAFELL]

The "big clubs" in the EPL have been trying to get the right for individual bargaining for years, as I mentioned JW was at the forefront of the battle against it. Given the BBC's love of us and then Radio Lancashire suddenly were only prepared to pay a fraction for the radio right that they had done over previous years (resulting in no radio coverage), I'd imagine the revenue from broadcast rights could fall significantly.

Maybe what also influenced Radio Lancashire only wanting to pay a fraction for covering Rovers matches, was roversworld. After all every game is covered by radio rovers. It is not expensive to join Roversworld, which is something radio lancahire would know about - hence they only wanted to pay a fraction, because of the competition.

[92er]

Maybe what also influenced Radio Lancashire only wanting to pay a fraction for covering Rovers matches, was roversworld.

You could be right, but what I have noticed is that the BBC Radio also seem to be covering fewer live matches. I seem to remember they covered the 1:30 pm Sunday match which they don't now cover. I figured it was all part of their cut backs.

[PAFELL]

You could be right, but what I have noticed is that the BBC Radio also seem to be covering fewer live matches. I seem to remember they covered the 1:30 pm Sunday match which they don't now cover. I figured it was all part of their cut backs.

Due to the distance and costs involved, I cannot get to a lot of games, so I listen to all Rovers games on roversworld. No need to search anywhere else. 30 odd quid a year. I think most clubs have a simular system to rovers.