Just breaking now, BSkyB have only got three of six live packages for premiership football (23 or so matches each I think). They wern't allowed to have all six, but were expected to bid for all anyway and then sell on the least valuable package to another broadcaster, but to only get half of all the games is a slight shock.
No details yet on who has won the other three as yet.
EDIT - News 24 jumped the gun a bit by saying Sky had only got 3 of 6. They have won 3, but could still win the rest as they have gone to a second round as they are quite close.
EDIT - News 24 jumped the gun a bit by saying Sky had only got 3 of 6. They have won 3, but could still win the rest as they have gone to a second round as they are quite close.
I am still somewhat dubious about this whole thing of Sky not being allowed all of the packages as it is anti-competitive. Surely, if more than one broadcaster holds the rights, it will cost the viewers more as more than one sports subscription will be needed to see all the matches? I don't see what is wrong with the current arrangement... it is very fair to say that Sky have revolutionised football coverage on TV, they have invested considerably in their output and in comparison, any other broadcasters' coverage looks like a pale imitation.
I'll be extremely disappointed if Setanta win any rights, their coverage always seems shoddy.
I am still somewhat dubious about this whole thing of Sky not being allowed all of the packages as it is anti-competitive. Surely, if more than one broadcaster holds the rights, it will cost the viewers more as more than one sports subscription will be needed to see all the matches? I don't see what is wrong with the current arrangement... it is very fair to say that Sky have revolutionised football coverage on TV, they have invested considerably in their output and in comparison, any other broadcasters' coverage looks like a pale imitation.
I'll be extremely disappointed if Setanta win any rights, their coverage always seems shoddy.
Because it was assumed that a terrestrial broadcaster such as ITV or Channel 4 would bid for the rights for at least one package for non-subscription football, and IIRC, much like cricket, ths was because the respective boards felt that it was unfair that all live Premiership matches are contracted to one, pay-TV service.
I think the FA wanted to have a "Gold", "Silver" and "Bronze" package - but the EC felt this would mean Sky getting the top games and rivals getting the leftovers, so instead it's six packages which are supposed to be pretty equal.
Though Sky do have a monopoly on the Premiership and pay way over the odds, pricing the others out of the rights, I've always felt they won it pretty fairly.
The only way to get the price down would be to have a "Second price auction", in which the winning bid pays the amount the second placed bid offered.
I am still somewhat dubious about this whole thing of Sky not being allowed all of the packages as it is anti-competitive. Surely, if more than one broadcaster holds the rights, it will cost the viewers more as more than one sports subscription will be needed to see all the matches? I don't see what is wrong with the current arrangement... it is very fair to say that Sky have revolutionised football coverage on TV, they have invested considerably in their output and in comparison, any other broadcasters' coverage looks like a pale imitation.
I'll be extremely disappointed if Setanta win any rights, their coverage always seems shoddy.
I quite agree, this was only going to work if a free to air provider got in on the action. We now have Sky and Setanta with a share of the spoils. The Setanta games aren't even during their Freeview window (unless they get another slot).
So two pay TV operators, two subscriptions required if you want full access and once again the viewers lose out. I think it unlikely that Sky will reduce their subscription for what is now a reduced service. Another EU success.