posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by It’s time for some Lancashire hotPote, R... (U17054)
posted 32 minutes ago
“Seems very harsh to me. The government are releasing people who have been sentenced in prison for violent offences and then we’re putting people like this guy in prison for 3 years for illegally streaming football matches.”
That’s because the criminal justice system is designed to protect capital interests above the safety and wellbeing of the proletariat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well actually they're not putting people in prison for streaming illegal football matches. That's just the headlines that people dive into without looking into things, which is how the world has gone. People will believe anything nowadays with no knowledge on the subject and no attempt to gain any.
The guy is getting prison for receiving and sharing multiple services from around the world from paid networks, being part of a global network himself whereby these criminals are sharing their particular countries services with others from around the world which is then uploaded to servers and offered to others for a knockdown price, costing companies untold amounts of money. In otherworld they're stealing something and selling it for a knockdown price as it's stolen.
Some people try to justify this by saying these companies already have a lot of money and their prices are too high. Well you wouldn't walk into the high street and pick up a Louis Vuitton bag worth £2000 and then go sell it to somebody for £40 and once caught say but it was too expensive and Louis Vuitton is minted.
Stealing is stealing whether it's done physically or digitally.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fact remains.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Peter O'Hanraha-hanrahan (U1217)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by LIW 100 Points, champions, Lose two games only (U8453)
posted 1 minute ago
No matter what anyone says, the quality of IPTV, isnt that good. Rather pay, to get the quality, and not be worried about looking at Phone, because your two minutes behind.
Its not a a good experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I subscribe to Sky Sports through Now TV and even that is about 45 seconds or so behind. Ruins it when I'm following threads on here at the same time
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but Sky's latest offering is internet TV rather than Satellite so all TV is streamed. So that is behind as well.
Matches "live" on Amazon are not live either. There is no live option when matches are on Amazon. All streamed. Don't know why people are ok with this when we have had live TV since the 60s.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Keiran Keane (U1734)
posted 5 minutes ago
Someone tell me where to get IPTV
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come to London and I’ll show you
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by HenryKamp (U21315)
posted 20 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 14 minutes ago
£74 with Virgin for 1gb broadband, all the channels and free calls on a weekend, although we don't have a phone connected.
IPTV subscription for £40 for the year for 3pm kickoffs and boxing PPV. There's no such thing as a dodgy Firestick by the way, you pay for a subscription so that your account gets access to the IPTV server and you access this through an app. Firestick is just one of the methods use to install the app but this can be on anything really. I did it for a couple of years myself but then people kept getting cheaper and cheaper when I was charging £100 for the year, I heard of people doing it for £20 and £30. Not only that but the hassle from people who don't have a clue what their doing. Regularly I'd get calls saying my Firestick isn't working. I'd say contact Amazon then, why are you contacting me? They'd say but I didn't pay Amazon I paid you. I provided you a subscription not a device. Have you tried a different cable? But it's on. You told me it wasn't working? It's working but no football showing. So you mean the app isn't working? Yes. Did you click refresh like I've told you 20m times? No. OK try that. Oh its working now. Great. Bye.
£10 a month for a Peacock subscription for access to every PL game and around £8 for a VPN to enable me to access it. You can get a free one but I already use it for other things. Just wanted to test this out as want to drop the IPTV altogether. I only use it for football so if I can get that for £10 a month I'm fine with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why pay for VPN/peacock if you have IPTV?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have stopped using the IPTV. I'm happy to pay £10 per month for a faultless service for the games as that's all I use the IPTV for.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Keiran Keane (U1734)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Peter O'Hanraha-hanrahan (U1217)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by LIW 100 Points, champions, Lose two games only (U8453)
posted 1 minute ago
No matter what anyone says, the quality of IPTV, isnt that good. Rather pay, to get the quality, and not be worried about looking at Phone, because your two minutes behind.
Its not a a good experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I subscribe to Sky Sports through Now TV and even that is about 45 seconds or so behind. Ruins it when I'm following threads on here at the same time
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but Sky's latest offering is internet TV rather than Satellite so all TV is streamed. So that is behind as well.
Matches "live" on Amazon are not live either. There is no live option when matches are on Amazon. All streamed. Don't know why people are ok with this when we have had live TV since the 60s.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats why I wont move to Sky stream, even though got offered a cheaper deal than Satellite.
Plus why would I buy a big fook off LG OLED, where the picture and sound, is incredible, to stream where the picture is nowhere near has good, can buffer (regularly does, no matter what anyone says), to worry about it maybe going down.
The experience is pretty terrible, I had it for awhile, but went back to sky, and for a £10 a week, its just miles and miles better.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
£17.50 per month for EVERY game in Europe/ Sky movies/ VOD and TV series....compared to the £100+ i would have to give to Sky...i'm sticking with my IPTV, even if it f's up now and then.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Keiran Keane (U1734)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Peter O'Hanraha-hanrahan (U1217)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by LIW 100 Points, champions, Lose two games only (U8453)
posted 1 minute ago
No matter what anyone says, the quality of IPTV, isnt that good. Rather pay, to get the quality, and not be worried about looking at Phone, because your two minutes behind.
Its not a a good experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I subscribe to Sky Sports through Now TV and even that is about 45 seconds or so behind. Ruins it when I'm following threads on here at the same time
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but Sky's latest offering is internet TV rather than Satellite so all TV is streamed. So that is behind as well.
Matches "live" on Amazon are not live either. There is no live option when matches are on Amazon. All streamed. Don't know why people are ok with this when we have had live TV since the 60s.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah. I look forward to the day when everyone is watching over the internet so there are no satellite users who can spoil live threads!
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by It’s time for some Lancashire hotPote, R... (U17054)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by It’s time for some Lancashire hotPote, R... (U17054)
posted 32 minutes ago
“Seems very harsh to me. The government are releasing people who have been sentenced in prison for violent offences and then we’re putting people like this guy in prison for 3 years for illegally streaming football matches.”
That’s because the criminal justice system is designed to protect capital interests above the safety and wellbeing of the proletariat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well actually they're not putting people in prison for streaming illegal football matches. That's just the headlines that people dive into without looking into things, which is how the world has gone. People will believe anything nowadays with no knowledge on the subject and no attempt to gain any.
The guy is getting prison for receiving and sharing multiple services from around the world from paid networks, being part of a global network himself whereby these criminals are sharing their particular countries services with others from around the world which is then uploaded to servers and offered to others for a knockdown price, costing companies untold amounts of money. In otherworld they're stealing something and selling it for a knockdown price as it's stolen.
Some people try to justify this by saying these companies already have a lot of money and their prices are too high. Well you wouldn't walk into the high street and pick up a Louis Vuitton bag worth £2000 and then go sell it to somebody for £40 and once caught say but it was too expensive and Louis Vuitton is minted.
Stealing is stealing whether it's done physically or digitally.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fact remains.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't disagreeing with your statement, I was disagreeing that people are being put in prison for steaming football matches and the hyperbole comparison with dangerous criminals being released.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
Stream is trialling a low latency channel which cuts the delay on live matches - 921 iirc? No idea if it is SD, HD or UHD? Scunnered with dodgy streams since I lost my Virginity and will be signing up for Sky
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
Actually, the whole Sky / EPL (& TNT tbf) exercise is an object lesson in economics - charging more and more and glitzing the offering more and more until saturation, cancellation & rebellion despite the buffering! If Sky hadn't kept ramping the bid price to manufacture the league as the most glamorous they risked another league doing so and stealing the self-proclaimed crown so they constrain competition until the consumer can take it no more. Technology did for them in the end.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
The season before Covid I went to 16 Arsensl games at an average of £80 (minus travel, food, drink etc). I paid for Sky and BT (and amazon if they had football back then?)
And still couldn't watch every game!!!
Madness restricting just 3k fans to watching away games not televised, everybody should have the opportunity to watch their team home and away in these times.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
It's quite funny how watching football on TV has become too an expensive of an activity. Not just actually going to the real life games themselves. What will be next, paying to find out the score?
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Keiran Keane (U1734)
posted 4 minutes ago
It's quite funny how watching football on TV has become too an expensive of an activity. Not just actually going to the real life games themselves. What will be next, paying to find out the score?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don’t joke about that, could very much see it happening!
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
He'd have only got a suspend sentence if he was a pea dough
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Taki Minamino (U20650)
posted 17 minutes ago
He'd have only got a suspend sentence if he was a pea dough
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or an immigrant
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
Some people try to justify this by saying these companies already have a lot of money and their prices are too high. Well you wouldn't walk into the high street and pick up a Louis Vuitton bag worth £2000 and then go sell it to somebody for £40 and once caught say but it was too expensive and Louis Vuitton is minted.
====
If you can't afford the Louis Vuitton then you go for a cheaper bag. There will be a bag you can afford that will serve whatever purpose you need a bag for. Also, a bag is a necessity.
However, there's no cheaper subscriptions that one can afford. In this economic climate, it is difficult to justify such high expenditure on a luxury like football.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Disband the PGMOL (U1282)
posted 3 minutes ago
Some people try to justify this by saying these companies already have a lot of money and their prices are too high. Well you wouldn't walk into the high street and pick up a Louis Vuitton bag worth £2000 and then go sell it to somebody for £40 and once caught say but it was too expensive and Louis Vuitton is minted.
====
If you can't afford the Louis Vuitton then you go for a cheaper bag. There will be a bag you can afford that will serve whatever purpose you need a bag for. Also, a bag is a necessity.
However, there's no cheaper subscriptions that one can afford. In this economic climate, it is difficult to justify such high expenditure on a luxury like football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet crowds havent been this big for 80 years, people want to watch live entertainment, and people are paying.
Is the climate that bad really 🤷🏻♂️
Is a tenner a week really a luxury expenditure ?
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by LIW 100 Points, champions, Lose two games only (U8453)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Disband the PGMOL (U1282)
posted 3 minutes ago
Some people try to justify this by saying these companies already have a lot of money and their prices are too high. Well you wouldn't walk into the high street and pick up a Louis Vuitton bag worth £2000 and then go sell it to somebody for £40 and once caught say but it was too expensive and Louis Vuitton is minted.
====
If you can't afford the Louis Vuitton then you go for a cheaper bag. There will be a bag you can afford that will serve whatever purpose you need a bag for. Also, a bag is a necessity.
However, there's no cheaper subscriptions that one can afford. In this economic climate, it is difficult to justify such high expenditure on a luxury like football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet crowds havent been this big for 80 years, people want to watch live entertainment, and people are paying.
Is the climate that bad really 🤷🏻♂️
Is a tenner a week really a luxury expenditure ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not the same people that go to very game. Costs of going to games is shared as most people average a handful of game per season.
Also, the capacity of stadiums is limited and they must charge entry fees to make a profit based on number of seats.
With TV you have limitless capacity and millions of people viewing. If it wasn't for the crazy profit margins these business must record, watching games would be much more affordable.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
The cheapest deals are now in Africa. A friend of mine bought a subscription on a visit to South Africa where he pays £2 a month for ALL premier league games. Uses a VPN but it's all legit.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
If I didn't pay my Sky prescription then clubs like Man Utd wouldn't be able to afford to pay big money for players like Antony, and therefore we would miss out on seeing players like Antony on our TVs. What we see and want to see on our TVs is a result of us paying big money for the privilege. We do not want to lose Antony from our screens, so we should accept the cost to ourselves that comes with having him there.
If more people switch to illegal streams, the less Antonys clubs can afford and the game will decline hugely.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
It is a vicious spiral as well because people are then not going to want to watch an Antonyless PL so more people would unprescribe. We pay the big bucks FOR Antony, and BECAUSE of Antony. If you want to watch an Antonyless product for 20% cheaper then fair enough but they would not be getting my prescription and that would then mean that Liverpool would not be able to spend big bucks on someone like Nunez. Then more people would cancel their prescription. Then we'd move on to having a Mudrykless product on our screen. Which I don't think anyone would pay for.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Disband the PGMOL (U1282)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by LIW 100 Points, champions, Lose two games only (U8453)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Disband the PGMOL (U1282)
posted 3 minutes ago
Some people try to justify this by saying these companies already have a lot of money and their prices are too high. Well you wouldn't walk into the high street and pick up a Louis Vuitton bag worth £2000 and then go sell it to somebody for £40 and once caught say but it was too expensive and Louis Vuitton is minted.
====
If you can't afford the Louis Vuitton then you go for a cheaper bag. There will be a bag you can afford that will serve whatever purpose you need a bag for. Also, a bag is a necessity.
However, there's no cheaper subscriptions that one can afford. In this economic climate, it is difficult to justify such high expenditure on a luxury like football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet crowds havent been this big for 80 years, people want to watch live entertainment, and people are paying.
Is the climate that bad really 🤷🏻♂️
Is a tenner a week really a luxury expenditure ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not the same people that go to very game. Costs of going to games is shared as most people average a handful of game per season.
Also, the capacity of stadiums is limited and they must charge entry fees to make a profit based on number of seats.
With TV you have limitless capacity and millions of people viewing. If it wasn't for the crazy profit margins these business must record, watching games would be much more affordable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not just in the prem, football has never seen such high attendances since the war, across all leagues.
My point, your saying the current financial climate, is it really that bad.
I can only go on my own experience in the North of England, in not a particularly “wealthy area”
Anyone who wants to work, can easily get a job.
Wages are fairly high
Dont know anyone who is really struggling.
Events are packed at weekend
Pubs are busy
Never been as many restaurants, with plenty in.
Roads packed everywhere
Houses near peak prices and selling.
Package holidays abroad, well sold.
Yes there are outliers, there always will be.
But is £40 a month an luxury expenditure 🤷🏻♂️ Really, you kids are dropping that on one round on Saturday night.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
It's not the same people that go to very game. Costs of going to games is shared as most people average a handful of game per season.
————————————————————
That simply isnt true is it, majority of fans, are season ticket holders in the prem
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
Yeah I don't imagine any of the traditional football going class in this country are struggling at all in the current financial climate.
if anything football should be more expensive or these fans would just end up having more money than sense!
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Fred: Blame Gwen Stefani (U3979)
posted 4 hours, 53 minutes ago
comment by Pranky 23/24 LFC Draft Champ (U22336)
posted 6 minutes ago
We pay 160 a month. Sky and BT sports, fastest broadband and have 4 boxes in different rooms. Also Netflix ect, and sky cinema.
Me and the wife pretty much work at home so need the high speed internet.
Tbf we never have any issues with the Sky service.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re getting ripped off Pranks. We pay £100 for the same package through Virgin, and 500mbs internet.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Virgin doesn't have stuff like Sky Atlantic does it...
Sign in if you want to comment
Dodgy firesticks
Page 2 of 3
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by It’s time for some Lancashire hotPote, R... (U17054)
posted 32 minutes ago
“Seems very harsh to me. The government are releasing people who have been sentenced in prison for violent offences and then we’re putting people like this guy in prison for 3 years for illegally streaming football matches.”
That’s because the criminal justice system is designed to protect capital interests above the safety and wellbeing of the proletariat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well actually they're not putting people in prison for streaming illegal football matches. That's just the headlines that people dive into without looking into things, which is how the world has gone. People will believe anything nowadays with no knowledge on the subject and no attempt to gain any.
The guy is getting prison for receiving and sharing multiple services from around the world from paid networks, being part of a global network himself whereby these criminals are sharing their particular countries services with others from around the world which is then uploaded to servers and offered to others for a knockdown price, costing companies untold amounts of money. In otherworld they're stealing something and selling it for a knockdown price as it's stolen.
Some people try to justify this by saying these companies already have a lot of money and their prices are too high. Well you wouldn't walk into the high street and pick up a Louis Vuitton bag worth £2000 and then go sell it to somebody for £40 and once caught say but it was too expensive and Louis Vuitton is minted.
Stealing is stealing whether it's done physically or digitally.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fact remains.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Peter O'Hanraha-hanrahan (U1217)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by LIW 100 Points, champions, Lose two games only (U8453)
posted 1 minute ago
No matter what anyone says, the quality of IPTV, isnt that good. Rather pay, to get the quality, and not be worried about looking at Phone, because your two minutes behind.
Its not a a good experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I subscribe to Sky Sports through Now TV and even that is about 45 seconds or so behind. Ruins it when I'm following threads on here at the same time
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but Sky's latest offering is internet TV rather than Satellite so all TV is streamed. So that is behind as well.
Matches "live" on Amazon are not live either. There is no live option when matches are on Amazon. All streamed. Don't know why people are ok with this when we have had live TV since the 60s.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Keiran Keane (U1734)
posted 5 minutes ago
Someone tell me where to get IPTV
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come to London and I’ll show you
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by HenryKamp (U21315)
posted 20 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 14 minutes ago
£74 with Virgin for 1gb broadband, all the channels and free calls on a weekend, although we don't have a phone connected.
IPTV subscription for £40 for the year for 3pm kickoffs and boxing PPV. There's no such thing as a dodgy Firestick by the way, you pay for a subscription so that your account gets access to the IPTV server and you access this through an app. Firestick is just one of the methods use to install the app but this can be on anything really. I did it for a couple of years myself but then people kept getting cheaper and cheaper when I was charging £100 for the year, I heard of people doing it for £20 and £30. Not only that but the hassle from people who don't have a clue what their doing. Regularly I'd get calls saying my Firestick isn't working. I'd say contact Amazon then, why are you contacting me? They'd say but I didn't pay Amazon I paid you. I provided you a subscription not a device. Have you tried a different cable? But it's on. You told me it wasn't working? It's working but no football showing. So you mean the app isn't working? Yes. Did you click refresh like I've told you 20m times? No. OK try that. Oh its working now. Great. Bye.
£10 a month for a Peacock subscription for access to every PL game and around £8 for a VPN to enable me to access it. You can get a free one but I already use it for other things. Just wanted to test this out as want to drop the IPTV altogether. I only use it for football so if I can get that for £10 a month I'm fine with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why pay for VPN/peacock if you have IPTV?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have stopped using the IPTV. I'm happy to pay £10 per month for a faultless service for the games as that's all I use the IPTV for.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Keiran Keane (U1734)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Peter O'Hanraha-hanrahan (U1217)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by LIW 100 Points, champions, Lose two games only (U8453)
posted 1 minute ago
No matter what anyone says, the quality of IPTV, isnt that good. Rather pay, to get the quality, and not be worried about looking at Phone, because your two minutes behind.
Its not a a good experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I subscribe to Sky Sports through Now TV and even that is about 45 seconds or so behind. Ruins it when I'm following threads on here at the same time
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but Sky's latest offering is internet TV rather than Satellite so all TV is streamed. So that is behind as well.
Matches "live" on Amazon are not live either. There is no live option when matches are on Amazon. All streamed. Don't know why people are ok with this when we have had live TV since the 60s.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats why I wont move to Sky stream, even though got offered a cheaper deal than Satellite.
Plus why would I buy a big fook off LG OLED, where the picture and sound, is incredible, to stream where the picture is nowhere near has good, can buffer (regularly does, no matter what anyone says), to worry about it maybe going down.
The experience is pretty terrible, I had it for awhile, but went back to sky, and for a £10 a week, its just miles and miles better.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
£17.50 per month for EVERY game in Europe/ Sky movies/ VOD and TV series....compared to the £100+ i would have to give to Sky...i'm sticking with my IPTV, even if it f's up now and then.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Keiran Keane (U1734)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Peter O'Hanraha-hanrahan (U1217)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by LIW 100 Points, champions, Lose two games only (U8453)
posted 1 minute ago
No matter what anyone says, the quality of IPTV, isnt that good. Rather pay, to get the quality, and not be worried about looking at Phone, because your two minutes behind.
Its not a a good experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I subscribe to Sky Sports through Now TV and even that is about 45 seconds or so behind. Ruins it when I'm following threads on here at the same time
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but Sky's latest offering is internet TV rather than Satellite so all TV is streamed. So that is behind as well.
Matches "live" on Amazon are not live either. There is no live option when matches are on Amazon. All streamed. Don't know why people are ok with this when we have had live TV since the 60s.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah. I look forward to the day when everyone is watching over the internet so there are no satellite users who can spoil live threads!
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by It’s time for some Lancashire hotPote, R... (U17054)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by It’s time for some Lancashire hotPote, R... (U17054)
posted 32 minutes ago
“Seems very harsh to me. The government are releasing people who have been sentenced in prison for violent offences and then we’re putting people like this guy in prison for 3 years for illegally streaming football matches.”
That’s because the criminal justice system is designed to protect capital interests above the safety and wellbeing of the proletariat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well actually they're not putting people in prison for streaming illegal football matches. That's just the headlines that people dive into without looking into things, which is how the world has gone. People will believe anything nowadays with no knowledge on the subject and no attempt to gain any.
The guy is getting prison for receiving and sharing multiple services from around the world from paid networks, being part of a global network himself whereby these criminals are sharing their particular countries services with others from around the world which is then uploaded to servers and offered to others for a knockdown price, costing companies untold amounts of money. In otherworld they're stealing something and selling it for a knockdown price as it's stolen.
Some people try to justify this by saying these companies already have a lot of money and their prices are too high. Well you wouldn't walk into the high street and pick up a Louis Vuitton bag worth £2000 and then go sell it to somebody for £40 and once caught say but it was too expensive and Louis Vuitton is minted.
Stealing is stealing whether it's done physically or digitally.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fact remains.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't disagreeing with your statement, I was disagreeing that people are being put in prison for steaming football matches and the hyperbole comparison with dangerous criminals being released.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
Stream is trialling a low latency channel which cuts the delay on live matches - 921 iirc? No idea if it is SD, HD or UHD? Scunnered with dodgy streams since I lost my Virginity and will be signing up for Sky
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
Actually, the whole Sky / EPL (& TNT tbf) exercise is an object lesson in economics - charging more and more and glitzing the offering more and more until saturation, cancellation & rebellion despite the buffering! If Sky hadn't kept ramping the bid price to manufacture the league as the most glamorous they risked another league doing so and stealing the self-proclaimed crown so they constrain competition until the consumer can take it no more. Technology did for them in the end.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
The season before Covid I went to 16 Arsensl games at an average of £80 (minus travel, food, drink etc). I paid for Sky and BT (and amazon if they had football back then?)
And still couldn't watch every game!!!
Madness restricting just 3k fans to watching away games not televised, everybody should have the opportunity to watch their team home and away in these times.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
It's quite funny how watching football on TV has become too an expensive of an activity. Not just actually going to the real life games themselves. What will be next, paying to find out the score?
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Keiran Keane (U1734)
posted 4 minutes ago
It's quite funny how watching football on TV has become too an expensive of an activity. Not just actually going to the real life games themselves. What will be next, paying to find out the score?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don’t joke about that, could very much see it happening!
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
He'd have only got a suspend sentence if he was a pea dough
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Taki Minamino (U20650)
posted 17 minutes ago
He'd have only got a suspend sentence if he was a pea dough
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or an immigrant
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
Some people try to justify this by saying these companies already have a lot of money and their prices are too high. Well you wouldn't walk into the high street and pick up a Louis Vuitton bag worth £2000 and then go sell it to somebody for £40 and once caught say but it was too expensive and Louis Vuitton is minted.
====
If you can't afford the Louis Vuitton then you go for a cheaper bag. There will be a bag you can afford that will serve whatever purpose you need a bag for. Also, a bag is a necessity.
However, there's no cheaper subscriptions that one can afford. In this economic climate, it is difficult to justify such high expenditure on a luxury like football.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Disband the PGMOL (U1282)
posted 3 minutes ago
Some people try to justify this by saying these companies already have a lot of money and their prices are too high. Well you wouldn't walk into the high street and pick up a Louis Vuitton bag worth £2000 and then go sell it to somebody for £40 and once caught say but it was too expensive and Louis Vuitton is minted.
====
If you can't afford the Louis Vuitton then you go for a cheaper bag. There will be a bag you can afford that will serve whatever purpose you need a bag for. Also, a bag is a necessity.
However, there's no cheaper subscriptions that one can afford. In this economic climate, it is difficult to justify such high expenditure on a luxury like football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet crowds havent been this big for 80 years, people want to watch live entertainment, and people are paying.
Is the climate that bad really 🤷🏻♂️
Is a tenner a week really a luxury expenditure ?
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by LIW 100 Points, champions, Lose two games only (U8453)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Disband the PGMOL (U1282)
posted 3 minutes ago
Some people try to justify this by saying these companies already have a lot of money and their prices are too high. Well you wouldn't walk into the high street and pick up a Louis Vuitton bag worth £2000 and then go sell it to somebody for £40 and once caught say but it was too expensive and Louis Vuitton is minted.
====
If you can't afford the Louis Vuitton then you go for a cheaper bag. There will be a bag you can afford that will serve whatever purpose you need a bag for. Also, a bag is a necessity.
However, there's no cheaper subscriptions that one can afford. In this economic climate, it is difficult to justify such high expenditure on a luxury like football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet crowds havent been this big for 80 years, people want to watch live entertainment, and people are paying.
Is the climate that bad really 🤷🏻♂️
Is a tenner a week really a luxury expenditure ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not the same people that go to very game. Costs of going to games is shared as most people average a handful of game per season.
Also, the capacity of stadiums is limited and they must charge entry fees to make a profit based on number of seats.
With TV you have limitless capacity and millions of people viewing. If it wasn't for the crazy profit margins these business must record, watching games would be much more affordable.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
The cheapest deals are now in Africa. A friend of mine bought a subscription on a visit to South Africa where he pays £2 a month for ALL premier league games. Uses a VPN but it's all legit.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
If I didn't pay my Sky prescription then clubs like Man Utd wouldn't be able to afford to pay big money for players like Antony, and therefore we would miss out on seeing players like Antony on our TVs. What we see and want to see on our TVs is a result of us paying big money for the privilege. We do not want to lose Antony from our screens, so we should accept the cost to ourselves that comes with having him there.
If more people switch to illegal streams, the less Antonys clubs can afford and the game will decline hugely.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
It is a vicious spiral as well because people are then not going to want to watch an Antonyless PL so more people would unprescribe. We pay the big bucks FOR Antony, and BECAUSE of Antony. If you want to watch an Antonyless product for 20% cheaper then fair enough but they would not be getting my prescription and that would then mean that Liverpool would not be able to spend big bucks on someone like Nunez. Then more people would cancel their prescription. Then we'd move on to having a Mudrykless product on our screen. Which I don't think anyone would pay for.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Disband the PGMOL (U1282)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by LIW 100 Points, champions, Lose two games only (U8453)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Disband the PGMOL (U1282)
posted 3 minutes ago
Some people try to justify this by saying these companies already have a lot of money and their prices are too high. Well you wouldn't walk into the high street and pick up a Louis Vuitton bag worth £2000 and then go sell it to somebody for £40 and once caught say but it was too expensive and Louis Vuitton is minted.
====
If you can't afford the Louis Vuitton then you go for a cheaper bag. There will be a bag you can afford that will serve whatever purpose you need a bag for. Also, a bag is a necessity.
However, there's no cheaper subscriptions that one can afford. In this economic climate, it is difficult to justify such high expenditure on a luxury like football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet crowds havent been this big for 80 years, people want to watch live entertainment, and people are paying.
Is the climate that bad really 🤷🏻♂️
Is a tenner a week really a luxury expenditure ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not the same people that go to very game. Costs of going to games is shared as most people average a handful of game per season.
Also, the capacity of stadiums is limited and they must charge entry fees to make a profit based on number of seats.
With TV you have limitless capacity and millions of people viewing. If it wasn't for the crazy profit margins these business must record, watching games would be much more affordable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not just in the prem, football has never seen such high attendances since the war, across all leagues.
My point, your saying the current financial climate, is it really that bad.
I can only go on my own experience in the North of England, in not a particularly “wealthy area”
Anyone who wants to work, can easily get a job.
Wages are fairly high
Dont know anyone who is really struggling.
Events are packed at weekend
Pubs are busy
Never been as many restaurants, with plenty in.
Roads packed everywhere
Houses near peak prices and selling.
Package holidays abroad, well sold.
Yes there are outliers, there always will be.
But is £40 a month an luxury expenditure 🤷🏻♂️ Really, you kids are dropping that on one round on Saturday night.
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
It's not the same people that go to very game. Costs of going to games is shared as most people average a handful of game per season.
————————————————————
That simply isnt true is it, majority of fans, are season ticket holders in the prem
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
Yeah I don't imagine any of the traditional football going class in this country are struggling at all in the current financial climate.
if anything football should be more expensive or these fans would just end up having more money than sense!
posted 1 week, 4 days ago
comment by Fred: Blame Gwen Stefani (U3979)
posted 4 hours, 53 minutes ago
comment by Pranky 23/24 LFC Draft Champ (U22336)
posted 6 minutes ago
We pay 160 a month. Sky and BT sports, fastest broadband and have 4 boxes in different rooms. Also Netflix ect, and sky cinema.
Me and the wife pretty much work at home so need the high speed internet.
Tbf we never have any issues with the Sky service.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re getting ripped off Pranks. We pay £100 for the same package through Virgin, and 500mbs internet.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Virgin doesn't have stuff like Sky Atlantic does it...
Page 2 of 3