The First Financial Nail In The Football Coffin

[Gemmel]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15162241

 

Trying to work out if this is potentially a good thing for Saints.

 

Ultimately it will reduce club revenue, but if it does (And I think it almost certainly will) and clubs have to be more fiscally restrained, the young players and academy set up, will put us years ahead of some clubs.

[Noodles34]

Cant really balme her can you, obviously need some decent football on a saturday afternoon in Portsmouth

[eurosaint]

Quite smart for a Skatesse !

I wish her well, as I consider Sky are abusing what is not far short of a monopoly !

All IMHO of course !

[scotty]

This is good news. I hate murdoch more than I hate pompey, and thats not something I'd say lightly.

[pedg]

If its just about the sale of cards from abroad why did the ECJ go on about copyright?

 

However, the ECJ did add that while live matches were not protected by copyright, any surrounding media, such as any opening video sequence, the Premier League anthem, pre-recorded films showing highlights of recent Premier League matches and various graphics, were "works" protected by copyright.

 

To use any of these parts of a broadcast, a pub would need the permission of the Premier League.

 

Surely if the foreign company have licenced the video why would the pub need permission?

Edited 4 October, 2011 by pedg

[Son of Bob]

I think it's great. The less 'Murdoch money' there is the game the better. The stupid amounts of cash that are injected into the Premier League by the TV companies are the root of what's ruining the modern game. The downside is that with reduced cash flow, clubs are going to have to make serious cuts in their spending and the area that will be impacted most is wage structure. Wage bills are going to have to be cut and in the long term this means player salaries will have to come down (in itself this is no bad thing!). Trouble is, how do you completely overhaul the pay structure of the biggest sport on the planet?

[Saint_John]

There is a good writeup and what may happen here

http://www.sportingintelligence.com/2011/10/03/murphys-law-why-the-sky-isnt-about-to-fall-in-on-the-premier-league-031004/

[once_bitterne]

It won't make any difference. The PL only gets a relitively small amount of revenue from the European braodcasters compared to what the Far East, Asia, etc pay. So all that will happen is that Sky will pay a bit more than they do for the UK rights and buy the rights for the whole of Europe. They will then sell the Euro rights to the various national braodcasters. No doubt part of that deal will be that they do not sell their services to people in the UK. So we will be back to square one, anyone watching the PL in the UK via a foreign broadcaster will be doing it illegally.

[SaintRobbie]

It won't make a great deal of difference, but it may mean that if you're in a pub watching a game you'll pay a few pence less for a pint to go with it.

 

Good news IMHO, provided Sky don't use it as an excuse to hump up home subscription charges next year.

[Thedelldays]

this is just an inconvenience for sky.....just a blip really

 

there is much about this case that is still in the favour of sky

[Belgiansaint]

Read paragraphs 208, 209 & 210 here (the rest is legalese and I can't be bothered right now): http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=EN&Submit=rechercher&numaff=C-403/08

[saint si]

Surely effectively sets precedent for home subscribers also?

 

Imagine EPL will start to negotiate its rights in EU as one block, perhaps with TV companies bidding as consortiums, and the TV companies will then move to somehow region-locking the decoder cards etc...

[Thedelldays]

there are elements of the the programme being broadcast that Sky own the rights too in the UK...the premier league anthem, logos, certain graphics etc.....these are not allowed to be shown by foreign broadcasters...

 

it was just on the news that sky will simply show these copy righted imagines/sounds more and more till it becomes impossible for foreign companies to broadcast in the UK.

 

then there will be the new TV deal in 2013 where sky will change the deal to suit them in the UK

[stevegrant]

I don't think this ruling will actually make much difference in the long term. Sure, for the duration of the remainder of the current TV deal (i.e. until summer 2013), you'll be able to watch Greek coverage of the Premier League for much less than the cost of Sky Sports, but from the 2013-16 deal, the Premier League will almost certainly sell the rights on a pan-European (or at least pan-EU) basis.

 

Currently, they get around £1.7bn over three years for UK rights, and £375m over three years for European rights (which accounts for only 10% of the foreign revenue). Also worth bearing in mind that the current UK deal covers only 138 live games per season, whereas the foreign rights currently allow all 380 games per season to be broadcast live if the local broadcaster chooses to do so. Any new pan-European deal, which would obviously include the UK, would remove all of the Saturday 3pm kickoffs from the European deals, but as a trade-off, would probably up the number of games shown in the UK, perhaps to 150/160. Not entirely sure how they'll fit all of those in, but I'm sure they'll find a way. As these are now combined rights for the whole of the EU, including the biggest market in the UK, the local broadcasters won't get a sniff and it'll be left to the big guns, i.e. Sky, ESPN and Canal+, to fight it out for the rights. As there would be genuine competition between them, that could see the price rise rather than fall.

 

Worth bearing in mind that the situation remains unchanged outside of the EU, so a broadcaster in the Middle East will probably still be able to show all 380 games live. However, the likes of Karen Murphy won't be protected by EU freedom of trade legislation as the decoder and content would be arriving from outside the EU, so could be pursued by the Premier League for copyright infringement.

[Jones91]

If we end up with the situation where we can see all games on TV somehow, they'll have to reduce ticket prices to keep attendances up...

[stevegrant]

If we end up with the situation where we can see all games on TV somehow, they'll have to reduce ticket prices to keep attendances up...

We have that situation at the moment, as you can acquire a decoder for a European satellite broadcaster and watch their coverage of games that fit into the UK "blackout" period (i.e. Saturday 3pm kickoffs), but when the rights go pan-European, it's almost certain that those games will be removed from the rights packages for live games. Of course, you could still get the content from non-European broadcasters, but you're then in danger of copyright infringement prosecution.

[eurosaint]

It won't make any difference. The PL only gets a relitively small amount of revenue from the European braodcasters compared to what the Far East, Asia, etc pay. So all that will happen is that Sky will pay a bit more than they do for the UK rights and buy the rights for the whole of Europe. They will then sell the Euro rights to the various national braodcasters. No doubt part of that deal will be that they do not sell their services to people in the UK. So we will be back to square one, anyone watching the PL in the UK via a foreign broadcaster will be doing it illegally.

 

Surely that is the whole point here, restrictions on free trade within the EU is what they are arguing about !

[Brussels Saint]

It will be good for us European based expats as we will be able to buy the football direct from sky, without having to go through huge complicated procedures to make it appear we are actually not based in Europe.

 

Apart from that, I agree, there will not be much change.

[suewhistle]

No doubt part of that deal will be that they do not sell their services to people in the UK. So we will be back to square one, anyone watching the PL in the UK via a foreign broadcaster will be doing it illegally.

 

That's the whole point of the judgement: within the EU they can't restrict customer choice like that. The reason a pub still can't is that they come under different copyright rules: like I can't copy an English book for a student but I can lend it to them.

[Charlie Wayman]

This case must pivot on very fine points of law and most of us should just take note of the outcome and comment no further on the specifics.

 

In most cases laws are there to help protect society whether it be an individual or a group such as a corporation. Everyone has the right to try and protect their own fair interests including Sky.

[Flyer]

What will happen is sky will bid for the EU wide rights and then charge an extra tenner a month for Uk viewers to recover the cost.

 

Short term, the PL can have a permanent logo on screen which is copyrighted which means the games cant be sold like they are now.

 

Nothing will change apart from a logo on foreign broadcasts and more expensive subscriptions after the next bid process.

[dronskisaint]

If we end up with the situation where we can see all games on TV somehow, they'll have to reduce ticket prices to keep attendances up...

 

Why?

 

Watching on telly is a very second best but (from 200 odd miles away) appreciated experience but if I lived locally I'd be at every game...regardless of TV coverage.

[Legod Third Coming]

In truth, surely what they get from the EU countries is almost irrelevant by comparison to the international rights they will receive in China and beyond...

[aintforever]

Would be great if the Sky bubble bursts but I doubt it will.

 

It will be interesting to see how going pan European will change things. I doubt many boozers in Greece will be wiling to stump up what the UK pubs have to, I expect all that will happen is that coverage outside the UK will practically vanish.

[Legod Third Coming]

Would be great if the Sky bubble bursts but I doubt it will.

 

It will be interesting to see how going pan European will change things. I doubt many boozers in Greece will be wiling to stump up what the UK pubs have to, I expect all that will happen is that coverage outside the UK will practically vanish.

 

I'm not sure it would help for the SKY bubble to burst. Who will it help exactly?

 

Next time you take your seat at SMS imagine how it would feel to be sat on a delapidated bench at the Dell, riddled with under-investment in the second division,

 

Because without SKY there would be NO SMS and NO Cortese either...

[Thedelldays]

Would be great if the Sky bubble bursts but I doubt it will.

 

It will be interesting to see how going pan European will change things. I doubt many boozers in Greece will be wiling to stump up what the UK pubs have to, I expect all that will happen is that coverage outside the UK will practically vanish.

 

all sky have to do is show more logos, play more anthems etc that they they the copyrights in the UK and it will be very hard for greek channels to be broadcast legally here

[aintforever]

I'm not sure it would help for the SKY bubble to burst. Who will it help exactly?

 

Next time you take your seat at SMS imagine how it would feel to be sat on a delapidated bench at the Dell, riddled with under-investment in the second division,

 

Because without SKY there would be NO SMS and NO Cortese either...

 

SMS is built, I have my seat so don't give a sh!te.

 

Anyway, I preferred watching football at the Dell.

[aintforever]

all sky have to do is show more logos, play more anthems etc that they they the copyrights in the UK and it will be very hard for greek channels to be broadcast legally here

 

I dunno how you figure that out, it's up to the TV companies what logos they show and music they play.

[Fan The Flames]

Would be great if the Sky bubble bursts but I doubt it will.

 

It will be interesting to see how going pan European will change things. I doubt many boozers in Greece will be wiling to stump up what the UK pubs have to, I expect all that will happen is that coverage outside the UK will practically vanish.

 

The sky man will find a way and what you say will happen, so bang goes slipping away from the wife and kids to watch the football on the summer hols.

[Thedelldays]

I dunno how you figure that out, it's up to the TV companies what logos they show and music they play.

I figured it out by listening to 5live earlier...SKY own many copyrights in the UKsuch as various logos, premier league anthems and they will now push these down our throats so that the greek broadcasters will be in breach of copyright when they are showing said logos in the UK.this case is not new to sky, they are a massively powerful company and already have their bases coveredthis is a just a little victory for some lady in pompey...nothing more really

 

so, basically...its not up to TV companies what logos they show and what music they play WHAT SO EVER

Edited 4 October, 2011 by Thedelldays

[Fan The Flames]

In truth, surely what they get from the EU countries is almost irrelevant by comparison to the international rights they will receive in China and beyond...

 

That is the whole point; the EU rights are cheap so it enables a EU provider, allowed under EU law, to undercut the domestic provider Sky.

[Miffy]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/oct/04/premier-league-ruling-football?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+theguardian%2Ffootball%2Frss+%28Football%29&utm_content=Google+UK

 

Another interesting article, doesn't sound like much will change.

[Fan The Flames]

I'm not sure it would help for the SKY bubble to burst. Who will it help exactly?

 

Next time you take your seat at SMS imagine how it would feel to be sat on a delapidated bench at the Dell, riddled with under-investment in the second division,

 

Because without SKY there would be NO SMS and NO Cortese either...

 

Whilst the extra income has enabled top flight clubs to borrow large sums for new grounds, this I beleive would have happened anyway as part of the modernisation of football that was happening anyway. Plenty of clubs outside of the top flight have changed or rebuilt their ground whilst the trickle down money from the Sky deal is pretty small.

 

The Sky money has gone on wages, transfer and agent fees only. Admission prices have continued to rise whilst the PL Blueprint reckoned they would fall.

 

I would prefer a football world with out Sky, but the demand it there so its here to stay.

[stevegrant]

In truth, surely what they get from the EU countries is almost irrelevant by comparison to the international rights they will receive in China and beyond...

The EU accounts for around 10% of the total non-UK broadcasting revenue (and about 5% including the UK), so not a massive amount in the grand scheme of things.

 

However, the UK alone accounts for nearly £600m a year, which is around 55-60%. If the rights are to be sold as one across Europe, it seems plausible that the value of UK rights will be diminished as BSkyB will no longer have "exclusive" rights to sell to customers in the UK. While Sky as a whole (including its Sky Deutschland and Sky Italia operations which are also massive - albeit not quite on the same scale as BSkyB) may acquire the majority of the pan-European rights, because someone in the UK could buy a decoder and subscription from Greece or Romania for a fraction of the price as BSkyB charge, that potentially has an effect on the price Sky will be willing to pay.

 

Anyone thinking that it'll drive down the price of a Sky Sports subscription is, sadly, very much mistaken.

[Legod Third Coming]

The EU accounts for around 10% of the total non-UK broadcasting revenue (and about 5% including the UK), so not a massive amount in the grand scheme of things.

 

However, the UK alone accounts for nearly £600m a year, which is around 55-60%. If the rights are to be sold as one across Europe, it seems plausible that the value of UK rights will be diminished as BSkyB will no longer have "exclusive" rights to sell to customers in the UK. While Sky as a whole (including its Sky Deutschland and Sky Italia operations which are also massive - albeit not quite on the same scale as BSkyB) may acquire the majority of the pan-European rights, because someone in the UK could buy a decoder and subscription from Greece or Romania for a fraction of the price as BSkyB charge, that potentially has an effect on the price Sky will be willing to pay.

 

Anyone thinking that it'll drive down the price of a Sky Sports subscription is, sadly, very much mistaken.

 

You're right, but surely all that will happen is that the price for public re-broadcast will middle somewhere between what is being charged in the UK (£480 per month) and in the EU (£118 per month)?

 

This shouldn't need to have any impact on what we pay as consumers - although if there is an impact it will be upwards, we know that!!!

[Legod Third Coming]

Whilst the extra income has enabled top flight clubs to borrow large sums for new grounds, this I beleive would have happened anyway as part of the modernisation of football that was happening anyway. Plenty of clubs outside of the top flight have changed or rebuilt their ground whilst the trickle down money from the Sky deal is pretty small.

 

The Sky money has gone on wages, transfer and agent fees only. Admission prices have continued to rise whilst the PL Blueprint reckoned they would fall.

 

I would prefer a football world with out Sky, but the demand it there so its here to stay.

 

If there were no EPL, there would be no reason to modernise football grounds and increase their capacity, because there would be no real incentive for promotion - so most likely you would just have a lot of poor stadiums but with seats where the terraces once were - The Dell!

 

Don't imagine the football you see today or the Champion's League would have been possible without a broadcaster willing to pay ridiculous sums of money for the rights.

 

How do you think the ECB finally funded winning back the Ashes?

[stu0x]

...it seems plausible that the value of UK rights will be diminished as BSkyB will no longer have "exclusive" rights to sell to customers in the UK...

 

...someone in the UK could buy a decoder and subscription from Greece or Romania for a fraction of the price as BSkyB charge, that potentially has an effect on the price Sky will be willing to pay.

But that is extremely unlikely to actually happen. At present the League sells broadcasting rights individually to European countries. All that will happen is they will sell exclusive broadcasting rights, European-wide as one package, to Sky for the additional 10% premium than they currently pay. In European countries that have no Sky presence, Sky will re-sell those rights to local broadcasters. Sky could then simply enforce a no-compete element to the foreign broadcasting rights, on the basis that they own them.

[Jimmy_D]

But that is extremely unlikely to actually happen. At present the League sells broadcasting rights individually to European countries. All that will happen is they will sell exclusive broadcasting rights, European-wide as one package, to Sky for the additional 10% premium than they currently pay. In European countries that have no Sky presence, Sky will re-sell those rights to local broadcasters. Sky could then simply enforce a no-compete element to the foreign broadcasting rights, on the basis that they own them.

 

That would break European competition law, there'll have to be more than one broadcaster that they sell rights to.

[hasper57saint]

I think this clearly illustrates that 'Free - Market' capitalism is a complete con. Monopoly Uber Alles and to hell with the 'Little man'. Murdoch and his ilk have had it too easy for too long. Not only do they dictate to Clubs' when they will play but also at what TIME they will play as it's their choice which matches are aired. Next they will be organising the 'fixture' lists. Unfortunately the decision to allow a 'foreign encoder' will mean little as 'copyrights and jingles' will be increased to eliminate any UK competition.

[hypochondriac]

That would break European competition law, there'll have to be more than one broadcaster that they sell rights to.

 

And am I right in thinking that many will not pay if it is significantly more than many people in Europe pay.

[stevegrant]

But that is extremely unlikely to actually happen. At present the League sells broadcasting rights individually to European countries. All that will happen is they will sell exclusive broadcasting rights, European-wide as one package, to Sky for the additional 10% premium than they currently pay. In European countries that have no Sky presence, Sky will re-sell those rights to local broadcasters. Sky could then simply enforce a no-compete element to the foreign broadcasting rights, on the basis that they own them.

But that returns us to exactly the same situation as we have now. Sky cannot enforce such a clause, it's the very definition of anti-competition.

 

They probably will buy up the pan-European rights and sublet them to local broadcasters where they see no business sense in entering themselves, but they won't get an even spread of revenue across the EU as countries like Greece simply don't have the money. At the moment, Greek broadcasters pay less than £10m a year for PL coverage (and that gets them all 380 games), Sky would be lucky to get the same again in the next deal, assuming a pan-European deal would cut it down to around 150/160 games (380 wouldn't be viable as most of the games would be unavailable to the UK market because of the blackout). The same problems would still exist, it would still be cheaper for you or I to buy a Greek decoder and subscription and install it at home (perfectly legal) than to get a subscription to Sky Sports.

 

Of course, there's also the problem that Sky wouldn't own all of the rights anyway, due to the last legal case they were involved in in Europe, which resulted in a ruling that no one broadcaster could own the rights to all of the games, hence ESPN have a token gesture of 23 live PL games a season.

[scotty]

If we end up with the situation where we can see all games on TV somehow, they'll have to reduce ticket prices to keep attendances up...

 

Why?

 

Watching on telly is a very second best but (from 200 odd miles away) appreciated experience but if I lived locally I'd be at every game...regardless of TV coverage.

 

I dont suppose the matches would be as marketable abroad if they were played in front of half-empty stadiums. The point has already been made on this thread that the bloodsucking reptile that calls itself sky is making shedloads more from broadcasting the PL abroad than it is here, which I suppose is obvious when you consider population densities.

[stevegrant]

I dont suppose the matches would be as marketable abroad if they were played in front of half-empty stadiums. The point has already been made on this thread that the bloodsucking reptile that calls itself sky is making shedloads more from broadcasting the PL abroad than it is here, which I suppose is obvious when you consider population densities.

Point of order: BSkyB makes absolutely nothing from Premier League games being broadcast overseas. The Premier League makes in the region of £500m a year from doing so. It's important to distinguish between the Premier League and Sky, even though the two have been intrinsically linked since the PL began in 1992.

[scotty]

Point of order: BSkyB makes absolutely nothing from Premier League games being broadcast overseas. The Premier League makes in the region of £500m a year from doing so. It's important to distinguish between the Premier League and Sky, even though the two have been intrinsically linked since the PL began in 1992.

 

So we have, basically, a situation where news international/murdoch/sky are running our national sport in the interests of their own profits.

 

 

Nice.

[Legod Third Coming]

I think this clearly illustrates that 'Free - Market' capitalism is a complete con. Monopoly Uber Alles and to hell with the 'Little man'. Murdoch and his ilk have had it too easy for too long. Not only do they dictate to Clubs' when they will play but also at what TIME they will play as it's their choice which matches are aired. Next they will be organising the 'fixture' lists. Unfortunately the decision to allow a 'foreign encoder' will mean little as 'copyrights and jingles' will be increased to eliminate any UK competition.

 

As a (hopeless) former economics student, the free market tends to monopoly. However, in this case, it's not about a monopoly. ANYONE in the world can bid for the rights to show EPL games and the highest bidder will win. Hell, they've even STOPPED SKY from buying all the games. So now I can't see those on ESPN without paying more (thanks EU).

SKY bid a large sum of money which helped (along with the outcome of Hillsborough) to build the Premiership as we know it.

The reason the clubs will happily play at midnight if asked, is they are PAID a ludicrous sum to do so.

It is also worth bearing in mind that, thanks to SKY buying the rights to the league, clubs such as ours earn a disproportionately HIGH amount of money from the deal. No one in the world wants to watch Southampton, but we benefit because the EPL packages the rights of all clubs and sells them as one.

 

I despair of SKY being painted as a demon in the world. Rupert Murdoch creates a product. Don't like it? Don't buy it.

 

But I'm old enough to remember when the only football game I could see live was the FA and World Cup Finals. I'm happy to pay £40 a month for the privelege of watching football whenever I choose, analysed by people whose opinion I often respect and would not swap Soccer Saturday on non-match days for the absolute dross turfed out by the BBC a this time which I have to BUY regardless of the quality...

[Somewhere In Northam]

football without sky. .

what a farcical idea that would be.

[stevegrant]

So we have, basically, a situation where news international/murdoch/sky are running our national sport in the interests of their own profits.

 

 

Nice.

And you've only just noticed this?

[Minty]

I despair of SKY being painted as a demon in the world. Rupert Murdoch creates a product. Don't like it? Don't buy it.

 

But I'm old enough to remember when the only football game I could see live was the FA and World Cup Finals. I'm happy to pay £40 a month for the privelege of watching football whenever I choose, analysed by people whose opinion I often respect and would not swap Soccer Saturday on non-match days for the absolute dross turfed out by the BBC a this time which I have to BUY regardless of the quality...

That's all well and good... I don't have Sky because I am one of those who don't agree with the amount of money in football and I'm not a hypocrite... but the bigger issue here is that of the £40 a month, only a relatively small fraction goes towards the production costs of what are, I agree, good quality football programs. The vast majority is going directly to players as part of wages. I don't mind paying for a quality product, but the money in football is obscene, there is ZERO justification for it, in world where that money could be put to far better use, and THAT is why so many people 'demonise' Sky, for their contribution.

[saint si]

It is also worth bearing in mind that, thanks to SKY buying the rights to the league, clubs such as ours earn a disproportionately HIGH amount of money from the deal. No one in the world wants to watch Southampton, but we benefit because the EPL packages the rights of all clubs and sells them as one.

 

That is not so much thanks to Sky, as thanks to the constitution (?) of the EPL - i.e. they act as one entity for the purposes of selling broadcasting rights to matches. Wouldn't matter if it was Sky or anybody else buying those rights.

[Legod Third Coming]

That's all well and good... I don't have Sky because I am one of those who don't agree with the amount of money in football and I'm not a hypocrite... but the bigger issue here is that of the £40 a month, only a relatively small fraction goes towards the production costs of what are, I agree, good quality football programs. The vast majority is going directly to players as part of wages. I don't mind paying for a quality product, but the money in football is obscene, there is ZERO justification for it, in world where that money could be put to far better use, and THAT is why so many people 'demonise' Sky, for their contribution.

 

Then I trust that you also:

 

1. Refuse to pay your BBC licence on the basis that its top stars earn equivalent salaries to footballers (£18m paid to Jonathan Ross pre Sachs-gate...)

2. Refuse to watch the Grand Prix, because the drivers can earn upwards of £20m per annum for driving a car.

3. Marched against the banks to protest at the average investment bankers' wages (£6bn paid out by Goldman Sachs on annual bonuses).

4. Do not shop in BHS or any of the other outlets owned by Philip Green...

 

SKY do not pay footballers. Football clubs pay footballers.

 

So rather than demonise SKY, why don't you demonise Nicola Cortese???

 

You cannot pick SKY from a capitalist world order and isolate them as being responsible for establishing the economic imbalances that exist globally. That is just a bit daft in all honesty.