Premier League urge Crackdown on IIlegal Websites

[Stretts]

Premier League urge Crackdown on IIlegal Websites (taken from Bulls News)

The Premier League is urging the government to crackdown on websites illegally showing live matches and pub landlords who broadcast foreign feeds according to the FSF, Football Supporters Federation. While the league has concerns around the impact on live attendance most of its worries stem from the loss of TV revenue, both domestically and internationally.

So called “peer-to-peer” sites allow users to watch live streams from Premier League games, free of charge. While the picture quality has often been slow and jerky in the past it is expected to improve vastly in the coming years as the technology improves. There are obvious concerns that when this happens, and word spreads, more and more people will use this technology which would hit TV viewing figures – and the money the Premier League can charge for rights on the next deal, due in 2010.

Chief executive Richard Scudamore wants culture secretary, Andy Burnham, and business secretary, Lord Mandleson, to stamp down on copyright infringement by making internet service providers (ISPs) responsible for their customers behaviour. However, news emerged last week that none of the government’s proposals on how to address infringement had won support from both rights holders and ISPs.

Scudamore also revealed, to an all-party committee, that the league had sent over 700 cease and desist letters. Most of these were in China with the league claiming an 87 per cent success rate, although many sites just pop up under another domain name.

The struggle mirrors that of the music industry, record sales have collapsed as illegal downloads spiralled out of all control in the past five years. The music industry’s response? While they’ve attempted to stop illegal downloads with pressure on ISPs and prosecutions, there’s tacit acknowledgement that it’s a battle that might never be won. So they’ve increased focus on what people want from the live experience and heftily discounted CDs, compared with only a few years ago.

Will the Premier League respond in similar fashion and encourage clubs to cut prices? The average Premier League crowd is now in its mid-40’s and the next generation of fan doesn’t seem to need the live fix. Young supporters have been priced out and think football is something you watch on TV anyway.

There’s no doubting Scudamore’s negotiating skills but if all these supporters turn to free streaming sites instead of pubs and Sky subscriptions, revenue will collapse, and football may start to realise just how important its ‘customers’ at the matches actually are.

[TBM]

If the Premier League wised up and realised people CANT get to games at 3pm on a Saturday but would still like to watch - then they could start showing (and charging) for games on a Saturday afternoon, bit like Football First but live and you pay for your game!!? - cos people are just gonna log on and watch it on internet, but if they knew they could pay a few quid for a HD-quality picture on their TV they're more than likely choose that.

[Stretts]

Long may it continue. It can only help get Sky subscription prices down and therefore the amount of money in football.

[papereyes]

If the Premier League wised up and realised people CANT get to games at 3pm on a Saturday but would still like to watch - then they could start showing (and charging) for games on a Saturday afternoon, bit like Football First but live and you pay for your game!!? -

They do that in Italy.

Now, which league often punches under its weight in terms of attendences?

[Dirk Gently]

If the Premier League wised up and realised people CANT get to games at 3pm on a Saturday but would still like to watch - then they could start showing (and charging) for games on a Saturday afternoon, bit like Football First but live and you pay for your game!!? - cos people are just gonna log on and watch it on internet, but if they knew they could pay a few quid for a HD-quality picture on their TV they're more than likely choose that.

What price the rest of the football pyramid if that happened?

[Toon Toon Blue army]

If the Premier League wised up and realised people CANT get to games at 3pm on a Saturday but would still like to watch - then they could start showing (and charging) for games on a Saturday afternoon, bit like Football First but live and you pay for your game!!? - cos people are just gonna log on and watch it on internet, but if they knew they could pay a few quid for a HD-quality picture on their TV they're more than likely choose that.

I read an article a while back explaining why 3pm games are not shown live on TV. It’s something to do with it having a dramatic effect on attendances in lower leagues.

For example all the glory hunting Man Utd supporters who live in Plymouth who might go to quite a few Plymouth games, would rather watch Utd live at 3pm therefore effecting Plymouths attendances.

The article gave a much better explanation but Im pretty sure I read it in 442 magazine 2 years ago or so, so have no way of linking it sorry.

[TBM]

If the Premier League wised up and realised people CANT get to games at 3pm on a Saturday but would still like to watch - then they could start showing (and charging) for games on a Saturday afternoon, bit like Football First but live and you pay for your game!!? - cos people are just gonna log on and watch it on internet, but if they knew they could pay a few quid for a HD-quality picture on their TV they're more than likely choose that.

I read an article a while back explaining why 3pm games are not shown live on TV. It’s something to do with it having a dramatic effect on attendances in lower leagues.

For example all the glory hunting Man Utd supporters who live in Plymouth who might go to quite a few Plymouth games, would rather watch Utd live at 3pm therefore effecting Plymouths attendances.

The article gave a much better explanation but Im pretty sure I read it in 442 magazine 2 years ago or so, so have no way of linking it sorry.

Makes sense but if the money generated was split across ALL leagues then im sure it would cover Fred not going to see Plymouth!!?

[TheMaraudingDog]

Great opportunity for the big clubs to flex their muscle here and sell their own TV rights. They could sell two types of ticket, the match going one or the arm chair one. I'd love to see this happen to be fair as it would mean I'd be able to watch United away games that I can't get tickets for.

[Dirk Gently]

Trouble is that's only good for the big clubs themselves, and not for all the others.

End the collective selling and the inevitable consequence is that within 10 years or so the only clubs with any money would be the big 4 themselves, so although you'd be able to watch their away matches only the 3 against the other big teams would be worth watching - all the others would be completely one-sided, so much so that the Big 4 teams would probably be able to put out second-string teams most of the time, keeping their big players for European competitions.

Yes it is getting that way now, but end the sharing of TV money and it would get to there even quicker.

[Royal With Cheese]

Great opportunity for the big clubs to flex their muscle here and sell their own TV rights. They could sell two types of ticket, the match going one or the arm chair one. I'd love to see this happen to be fair as it would mean I'd be able to watch United away games that I can't get tickets for.

To be honest - you should be put down. I know I'm biting but that's the comment of a real twat.

[TheMaraudingDog]

Why is that the comment of a twat? On a Saturday if I can't get a ticket to an away game I'd like to do the next best thing which is watch the game at home. I'm happy to pay for this service so what is the problem?

[TBM]

Why is that the comment of a twat? On a Saturday if I can't get a ticket to an away game I'd like to do the next best thing which is watch the game at home. I'm happy to pay for this service so what is the problem?

I agree with you....BUT Sky etc should split the money across all league teams, not just the teams of the game you choose.

[TheMaraudingDog]

Why is that the comment of a twat? On a Saturday if I can't get a ticket to an away game I'd like to do the next best thing which is watch the game at home. I'm happy to pay for this service so what is the problem?

I agree with you....BUT Sky etc should split the money across all league teams, not just the teams of the game you choose.

Why should Sky split it across all the leagues?

Should Tesco pay the same amount of money to Coke as they do to Roller Cola?

[TBM]

Why is that the comment of a twat? On a Saturday if I can't get a ticket to an away game I'd like to do the next best thing which is watch the game at home. I'm happy to pay for this service so what is the problem?

I agree with you....BUT Sky etc should split the money across all league teams, not just the teams of the game you choose.

Why should Sky split it across all the leagues?

Should Tesco pay the same amount of money to Coke as they do to Roller Cola?

Cos you can tune in and watch any game from any league.....for a fee.

Its like tips in a pub, all gets put in 1 jar and split at the end of the night!

[TheMaraudingDog]

Cos you can tune in and watch any game from any league.....for a fee.

Yeah, but United will always be the bigger pull, it's United's 'product' that is being sold so they should get the money.

When you pay at the Cinema does all the money get split across all the different films that are on or does a slice go directly to the one that you paid to watch?

[Dirk Gently]

Cos you can tune in and watch any game from any league.....for a fee.

Yeah, but United will always be the bigger pull, it's United's 'product' that is being sold so they should get the money.

When you pay at the Cinema does all the money get split across all the different films that are on or does a slice go directly to the one that you paid to watch?

But whilst films or brands of soft drinks are all in perfect competition with each other, football clubs aren't. I'm sure film studios or drinks companies would be more than happy to see their competitors to go out of business, but it's not in the interest of football clubs to see others go bust.

Yes, football clubs are competing but they're not necessarily in perfect competition with each other. And, generally, the bigger the club and the more demand for them the bigger the share they get now - they just don't get all of the money they could generate, because they see themselves as part of a league, dependent on other clubs, and not just as an individual business trying to drive all others out of business.

In the domestic leagues, clubs need others to play, and if those other clubs are all of such poor quality that the games are all one-sided then the value of the "product" goes down. Plus, of course, there's the role of the other domestic clubs in running academies and finding and training players and coaches etc. There's even a much more minor role acting as a training ground for match officials, and also other, local, clubs do stimulate a certain amount of demand for the game in general that the big clubs take advantage of. The same applies with the England team, which relies on the development of English players through the whole pyramid.

So unless the premise is that the Big 4 are no longer part of the domestic leagues and are now only focused on a European or World market, then there is a definite reason why clubs need to support each other with some revenue sharing and no individual selling of TV rights.

[TBM]

^^^ what he said

[Royal With Cheese]

Cos you can tune in and watch any game from any league.....for a fee.

Yeah, but United will always be the bigger pull, it's United's 'product' that is being sold so they should get the money.

When you pay at the Cinema does all the money get split across all the different films that are on or does a slice go directly to the one that you paid to watch?

Well, using the Cinema analogy only the biggest star should get paid any money at all. Badly thought through - as usual.
Without the other team there is no game. But if you're happy United play with United reserves every game go ahead and fill your boots. Don't let me stop you. I hope you enjoy it.

[TheMaraudingDog]

Well, using the Cinema analogy only the biggest star should get paid any money at all. Badly thought through - as usual.

Right, so only one actor per film gets paid?

They all get paid different amounts, the biggest stars in the biggest films get paid the most, the extras in the shite films get enough to just about cover their expenses. So with that in mind the cinema analogy is bang on you tool

Weirdo

[Royal With Cheese]

Well, using the Cinema analogy only the biggest star should get paid any money at all. Badly thought through - as usual.

Right, so only one actor per film gets paid?

They all get paid different amounts, the biggest stars in the biggest films get paid the most, the extras in the shite films get enough to just about cover their expenses. So with that in mind the cinema analogy is bang on you tool

Weirdo

Yes, of course they get paid different amounts - you started the (completely incorrect) analogy and I was merely pointing out it was bollocks.

If, for example, Bruce Willis is offered 5 million for a particular film and he feels he's being underpaid he simply doesn't do it. Vin Deisel, on the other hand, will do it cheaper so the film gets made.

Manchester United cannot simply demand more money or get it all. They need the other team to participate otherwise you'll just have 11 blokes standing on one side of a field for 45 minutes and then swapping over for the other 45.

Like it or not Manchester United cannot do this on their own.

So, want to try again or is this getting to complicated for your little red brain to understand?