Southdownswolf
Just doesn't shut up
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2017
- Messages
- 2,247
- Reaction score
- 4,266
Would there be a Gold and Silver away subscription for those with the correct points ?
They're going to bring in a new Platinum level....
Would there be a Gold and Silver away subscription for those with the correct points ?
Most of the coppers I know actually have fire sticks with IPTV loaded on them.Hmmmm, how many coppers will go to their morning briefing and laugh at this.
“Right lads, priority for today we need you to go around these addresses and confiscate a few Firesticks, oh and whilst you at it no watching dodgy streams at home for a couple of weeks.”
These stories come out from time to time to scare a few people into switching off.
Some VPN's keep track of websites,isp's etc. If they do, then the police can get that info.How do police "track" illegal" iptv users? Only your isp can see your Internet usage and a vpn renders that useless and seeing how they are pushing use of a vpn for every day use on TV adverts now .
I understand that but records will or should be only given out with a court order but the better vpn services have a no record guarantee.Some VPN's keep track of websites,isp's etc. If they do, then the police can get that info.
In some countries they insist VPN's keep this info if they are based in that country.
Doesn’t it sound like they’ve raided a provider, one users have subscribed to, and got details that way?How do police "track" illegal" iptv users? Only your isp can see your Internet usage and a vpn renders that useless and seeing how they are pushing use of a vpn for every day use on TV adverts now.
Smells like bs to me .
Doesn’t it sound like they’ve raided a provider, one users have subscribed to, and got details that way?
Just tell them you’re watching Southampton vs Palace on an illegal stream, you’ll get a whole riot squad there in no time!I'll tell you what, if my house is getting broken into when my wife and daughter are there by themselves and they call the police but are told they are out busting people who stream illegally and can't send help, I'll say, "Oh well......if that's the case, it's ok then. I mean, afterall, law enforcement should have their priorities straight!"
My girls will have to fend for themselves, no problem!
Just tell them you’re watching Southampton vs Palace on an illegal stream, you’ll get a whole riot squad there in no time!
straight to the looney bin!No, you'll get a psychiatrist visit
Perfectly putIt's all just propaganda to scare people straight. It might work with some but most will just carry on. They can keep taking down sites but a replacement is often up within hours.
The only way to truly solve this is to give people what they want, the ability to legally stream the games they want at a reasonable price. Look how TV and Music piracy dropped off a cliff once Netflix/Spotify showed up.
Yeah because they wanted to charge £15 a game to people who likely already pay sky / bt / Amazon circa £50 a month for the privilege of watching some of the games and still a good half of them aren’t available after paying all that money.Short memories.
During the pandemic lockdown the premier league was available on a pay per view basis. I seem to remember there was complaints about the pricing from the beginning.
People still reverted to illegal streams.
£20 per month is only £200 per year to the provider, or more realistically £167 per ten months. I don't think there's a business model there at that price.Yeah because they wanted to charge £15 a game to people who likely already pay sky / bt / Amazon circa £50 a month for the privilege of watching some of the games and still a good half of them aren’t available after paying all that money.
I think £10 a month is lower than they’d go but £20 a month for all PL games would sell easily. It’s more than people pay for IPTV but it’d still sell easily.
There will always be a few that find ways to watch and won’t pay a penny if they can help it, which is their choice if they want to take that chance but I imagine a good majority would pay a decent wedge for full access.
Has always been said that the main argument of not showing games at Saturday at 3:00pm was the impact on attendances. This was also from a time of the single black and white TV and three channels.
That argument is hardly relevant anymore, in less than 20 years there's become very little need for TV schedules and blackouts, the way in which the next generation is watching their sports and entertainment has changed dramatically. There will still be a desire for attending a live game.
They seem to think that by persisting to make streaming illegal they will win the day, but they are one step and more behind. I've no doubt there are discussions at PL and amongst broadcasters on how to embrace this and they know the only way to win is to be better than the streamers, remember in the modern world the consumer will decide.
On a footnote, about 15 years ago I went to an ESPN bar in Baltimore, they had a big room at the back, where they had a NASA style wall of TV screens showing each of the NFL games going on that day, I was blown away t'was a great experience. The UK has the ability to do this, just needs a change of mindset.
They should charge per match, or an all you can eat monthly subscription. They can still charge for advertising as obviously a lot more people will watch Wolves than Albion and they could charge the advertisers accordingly.Yeah because they wanted to charge £15 a game to people who likely already pay sky / bt / Amazon circa £50 a month for the privilege of watching some of the games and still a good half of them aren’t available after paying all that money.
I think £10 a month is lower than they’d go but £20 a month for all PL games would sell easily. It’s more than people pay for IPTV but it’d still sell easily.
There will always be a few that find ways to watch and won’t pay a penny if they can help it, which is their choice if they want to take that chance but I imagine a good majority would pay a decent wedge for full access.
They bring in circa £1.7bn a year from domestic rights, 14m people watched sky sports in a single day back in October 2020. Not all of those would be football but I’d say a decent chunk would.£20 per month is only £200 per year to the provider, or more realistically £167 per ten months. I don't think there's a business model there at that price.
As I’ve just said in another reply, offer a range of packages to suit and they’d clean up.They should charge per match, or an all you can eat monthly subscription. They can still charge for advertising as obviously a lot more people will watch Wolves than Albion and they could charge the advertisers accordingly.
The thing that puts me off with the current TV packages is that you pay all that money, but you still can't watch all your teams games. I only want to watch Wolves TBH.
It's just incredible in this day and age, like tonight for instance, unless you're one of the 3000 with a ticket (which only to be in that position, you'd have to spent 1000's before hand on other tickets, to even get that chance). So the only way of legally following the match is via radio, which is terrible, it's alright if your in the car, but its a visual entertainment at the end of the day.
Imagine if some episodes of strictly were radio only, to protect the live audience ticket sales.
A business i'm involved with are charged about £650/monthHow much do sky charge a pub these days to show games ? In the hundreds pm I bet .
Ratings peak was 3.3M viewers at 4:55pm which at that time we can reasonably say had one football game and the Vitality Blast finals day plus the IPL.They bring in circa £1.7bn a year from domestic rights, 14m people watched sky sports in a single day back in October 2020. Not all of those would be football but I’d say a decent chunk would.
If 75% of those would be interested in a subscription that’s 10.5m at £200 a year so circa £2.1bn. That’s without conserving people who don’t have sky but have BT sports instead.
Then if you consider that a subscription making every game available to watch might drag in a few million more than don’t currently I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think you could get 15m subscribers in the UK alone. That’s £3bn so as long as they can cover their broadcasting costs for circa £1.3bn (a lot of which is already in place and just needs to be maintained and paid for) they break even as it stands.
They’d then be able to sell that same package direct to subscribers worldwide with their overheads already paid for pretty much meaning any international subscription are mostly profit.
If they offered:
£25 rolling 30 day contract
£20 a month 12 month contract
£15 per game week
£8 per match
They’d rake in a good chunk of annual subscriptions and then top that up with people who want to pay adhoc.
The reason they don’t do it isn’t because it’s not cost effective, it’s because they’re happy with what they currently get. They could get some more but don’t really need to at the moment as they’re clear of the other leagues. They’d gain but the big winners would be us fans, but who really cares about us as long as they bring in enough as it is, why bother being more inclusive if it takes more effort even if they could ultimately get more money overall.
Being an overseas fan I can’t even watch something like BBC iplayer; there’s not even a subscription available - I’d happily pay the equivalent of a UK tv licence to access this which is around £13 a month.£20 per month is only £200 per year to the provider, or more realistically £167 per ten months. I don't think there's a business model there at that price.
Police to visit 1,000 homes in a bid to crack down on illegal streaming
Police will visit 1,000 homes this week as part of a bid to crackdown on streaming illegal Premier League games as well as other sports.www.joe.co.uk
That's roughly what MLB and NFL charge and it seems to work for them.£20 per month is only £200 per year to the provider, or more realistically £167 per ten months. I don't think there's a business model there at that price.
Yeah but you’re assuming that 3.3m was every person who’d like to watch some football at some point over a weekend all watching at that very moment.Ratings peak was 3.3M viewers at 4:55pm which at that time we can reasonably say had one football game and the Vitality Blast finals day plus the IPL.
Let's be generous and say 100% of the viewers were watching football and 100% of them want to pay for a Premier League streaming service then again I say it doesn't work as a business model. That's before considering people who will be present at all of their clubs games home & away etc. DAZN is in trouble, for example.
Sky Sports viewing: More than 14m people watch on network's best ever day
Sky Sports has announced its best ever day of viewing thanks to a bumper day of live sport on Sunday October 4.www.skysports.com
Throughout January, FACT and police are visiting homes across the UK, serving notices to individuals to cease illegal streaming activities with immediate effect and informing users of the associated risks, which include criminal prosecution.
Over 1,000 individuals have been identified following raids by West Mercia Police against a UK-based illegal streaming service that was supplying entertainment and sports content via modified boxes, firesticks, and subscriptions.
While criminal prosecution is pending against the operator of the illegal service, police are also reminding consumers that using illegal streaming services is not just a crime but one that is treated extremely seriously by the courts. In 2021, two individuals, Paul Faulkner and Stephen Millington were sentenced to a total of 16 months in prison for watching unauthorised streams.