Watching LIVE Sports - SO expensive.

[ZyloKai]

---

@DorsetJon wrote:

In this day and age,its become so expensive(and for some,terribly confusing)to be able to watch live sport,on the telly box.We first subscribed to Sky over thirty years ago for its sports channels,predominantly for the footy and the wwf wrestling.

But fast forward thirty years,you have a right mish mash of channels and platforms,who have either lost the rights for a certain sport,or indeed won the rights for another,and you have to go out and cough up yet another monthly sub,just to enable you to watch your favourite sport.

Off the top of my head youve got :-

Sky sports,Eurosport,TNT Sports(BT Sport,that was)Premium 1 & 2,Amazon Prime.

All of whom lose/gain or rotate content on a regular basis,which makes it so potentially expensive and difficult(especially for older viewers)to keep a grasp on things

And thats before you get into the realms of the RIP OFF that is box office events.

"Anyone else agree with me,that viewing sport at home nowadays has become a bit of a headache,withe whole ethos of watching live sport,needing to streamlined or at the very least simplified for us ALL?"

---

"The average wage of a Premier League footballer is just over £60,000 [≈ €70,000] a week, which equates to more than 3 million [≈ €3.5 mil] a year.  Premier League footballers are the highest paid; lower divisions receive much less. Championship wages are just over £4,000 [≈ €4,700] a week, which is around £200,000 [≈ €233,000] a year."
[Source: https://thepfsa.co.uk/football-wages-how-much-do-footballers-get-paid/]

An estimated wage bill for the 2020/2021 Premier League season would be £3.5 billion to £4.5 billion [≈ €4.1 billion to €5.2 billion]. 

Maybe this is the reason? And that's simply just for the wages only. This excludes the likes of providing broadcasting (cameras, hosts, studio, etc.) and broadcasting rights. Maybe a lot of the wages money comes from sponsorships and external factors, but it still has to come from somewhere.

I think this money would be better off in education or for universal health care, for fairly paying doctors, nurses and medical staff, or for the likes of homelessness, but that's just want I think.

[TimmyBGood]

---

@DorsetJon wrote:

@TimmyBGood I feel sorry for people who are actually PAYING to watch formula one,right now.

---

I stopped watching when Nigel Mansell retired; )

[Oddie2004]

There will be a cap on players wages from 2025 if the FA and Premier League get their way but they will still earn a fortune through other means.

[MarkGoldsmith]

---

@Oddie2004 wrote:

There will be a cap on players wages from 2025 if the FA and Premier League get their way but they will still earn a fortune through other means.

---

The only issue with a wage cap is that it will be detrimental to the PL in the long run if the top players decide not to play here if they can get better wages in other leagues.

im not against the idea of a wage cap per se but it really needs to be something implemented on a wider scale by UEFA or FIFA for it to actually work.

[DorsetJon]

@TimmyBGood Honestly,you're not the only one.

As said in a previous post,bring back the days of Senna,Mansell at Prost.

Back when it was DRIVER TALENT that won grand prix's,and NOT pit strategies and DRS.

As a veteran of multiple Le Mans and WRC's in Wales,Formula One has hit a brick wall,both as a sport and a spectacle.

Strip out the electronics,and give everyone on the grid the same car,chassis and rubber.

Perhaps then perish the thought,we'll see some overtaking and FIGHTING to get onto the podium.

My mums got the right idea,she reckons to make it interesting they ought to have half the grid go one way round the track,whilst the other half go in the right direction - LOL 

[TimmyBGood]

---

@Oddie2004 wrote:

There will be a cap on players wages from 2025 if the FA and Premier League get their way 

---

"Starting in 2025, teams will be limited to spend 85% of their total revenue on wages, transfer payments and agents' fees."

So not a cap on what any individual can be paid.

[ozsat]

The only way that Sky, Discovery etc. will reduce their subscriptions to sports etc - is for the majoriry of current subscribers to say "that's too much we're not paying that" and cancel the subs.

The broadcaster in turn will offer less for the package and the sport themselves will have to accept a lower offer as they will be no other alternative offer.

As long as people are willing to pay then the subs will continue to go up.

But that is never going to happen.

[japitts]

Amazon Prime aren't a serious sports broadcaster, they've taken some low-hanging fruit (they have some Tuesday European football games from next season) but very much treat this as a taster for their loss-leading marketing to encourage use of their online shop.

Having a subscription to Sky & TNT covers the vast majority of premium sport, with Eurosport mopping up most of what's left. To cite one example of a sport moving towards consolidation - rugby union. Currently you have Sky for the SH-internationals, TNT for the English domestic & European club game, Premier Sports/Viaplay for the URC and until now, online-only Amazon for NH-internationals.

Amazon have walked away from this loss-leading contract and TNT have won the auction for the next 2year deal. Meaning an existing broadcaster is strengthening their hand, and removing the need for an additional subscription.

Cricket is also a Sky/TNT setup - Sky have exclusivity on the English-hosted game, while TNT tend to specialise in the foreign tours.

[MarkGoldsmith]

---

@japitts wrote:

Cricket is also a Sky/TNT setup - Sky have exclusivity on the English-hosted game, while TNT tend to specialise in the foreign tours.

---

Well Skys strategy for Cricket at the moment is to concentrate on the short form games (T20s/The Hundred). There have snapped up most of the bigger short form cricket tournaments. Whilst they do show Home based test matches they seem less interested in trying to obtain the rights for the various away test matches/tours at the moment which is providing TNT the perfect opportunity to get in some cricket fans.

---

@japitts wrote:

Having a subscription to Sky & TNT covers the vast majority of premium sport, with Eurosport mopping up most of what's left. 

---

For anyone unaware Eurosport and TNT Sports are essentially one of the same, both owned by WBD.

I believe next year they are planning on rebranding Eurosport with some sort of TNT Sports related branding next year to provide a branding continuity. This would have likely happened earlier but they wanted to wait until after the Olympics this summer before rebranding Eurosport to avoid potential confusion over where the Olympics can be watched.

[DorsetJon]

Congatulations to Lando Norris for winning the Miami GP last night,and by doing so,becoming the latest entry into the history books,joining other british drivers who've won a grand prix.

And by doing so,providing the sport with a much needed shot in the arm.

Alas I thought one of the McLaren technicians on the pit wall summed this moment up perfectly,when he said"It was a shame that thousands of youngsters back at home who look up to Lando as a role model were unable to join Lando for the ride,due to the time difference and unaffordable subscription charges"

And that was on the radio,so hopefully Sky included that interview as part of their post race package. 

[japitts]

---

@MarkGoldsmith wrote:

---

@japitts wrote:

Having a subscription to Sky & TNT covers the vast majority of premium sport, with Eurosport mopping up most of what's left. 

---

For anyone unaware Eurosport and TNT Sports are essentially one of the same, both owned by WBD.

I believe next year they are planning on rebranding Eurosport with some sort of TNT Sports related branding next year to provide a branding continuity. This would have likely happened earlier but they wanted to wait until after the Olympics this summer before rebranding Eurosport to avoid potential confusion over where the Olympics can be watche

---

Indeed so - although WBD have strongly hinted that the premium rights will remain with TNT, with (what is now) Eurosport handling other sports.

[nolte]

---

@japitts wrote:

---

@MarkGoldsmith wrote:

---

@japitts wrote:

Having a subscription to Sky & TNT covers the vast majority of premium sport, with Eurosport mopping up most of what's left. 

---

For anyone unaware Eurosport and TNT Sports are essentially one of the same, both owned by WBD.

I believe next year they are planning on rebranding Eurosport with some sort of TNT Sports related branding next year to provide a branding continuity. This would have likely happened earlier but they wanted to wait until after the Olympics this summer before rebranding Eurosport to avoid potential confusion over where the Olympics can be watche

---

Indeed so - although WBD have strongly hinted that the premium rights will remain with TNT, with (what is now) Eurosport handling other sports.

---

Sky and Discovery made a "long term" carraige deal in June 2020 covering the discovery UK operations at the time.

I guess it depends on what WBD want to do with Eurosport when such deal ends (haven't seen an end date but long term for a business is 5 years so end of June 2025 at the earliest) 

So until the carriage deal is finished, my thinking is WBD is restricted in what they can do with the discovery,  eurosport, quest etc stations and content to meet any obligations placed on them for minimum content level in the carriage deal. 

I think when various pre existing agreements of wb and discovery end (both in sport and other content), there will be some changes in what they provide, how, cost etc to provide it all together (like in the US, Max are streaming sport/cycling on their platform at a much higher cost than the eurosport sub on discovery plus)

[Oddie2004]

Well it is  Rome which is an ATP/WTA 1000 tournament and then a few 250/500 tournaments followed by Roland Garros which is on Eurosport and then the grass season and then the Olympics which is covered on BBC so not sure what Sky Tennis channel will be covering for nearly 2 months while we are still paying a subscription.Probably a lot of repeats.

[japitts]

---

@Oddie2004 wrote:

not sure what Sky Tennis channel will be covering for nearly 2 months while we are still paying a subscription.Probably a lot of repeats.

---

I suspect very similar to what Sky F1 does out-of-season.

Damned if they do too much, damned if they don't do anything - Sky Sports are in a no-win situation here.

[Joebear]

Totally agree...Sky would have far more subscribers if they lowered the price of the sports channel. It's become ridiculously expensive.