So, when do you think Mike Ashley

[Happy Face 29]

No need anymore, any decent laptop has an HDMI out

 

Genuine questions rather than argument for why it can't happen.....

 

Why's it only going to be run through the internet? Why wouldn't Sky just have all the games available on TV?

 

If anything won't income go down rather than up? What was a single package of all PL football on Sky, got split between Sky/ESPN/etc to increase income. If you wrap all that back up into a single package aren't you reducing the income.....or making the cost prohibitive to a single payer?

 

You'd also lose the lucrative highlights package being sold to the BBC which is dependent on them being first to show non-televised goals.

 

If making it internet only means you get round the tv exclusivity deal, how do you stop it devaluing that deal...given that we all use an HDMI out of the laptop?

[manc-mag 1]

Not even sure what you're talking about with your last sentence. Uproarious stuff all the same.

 

what ? Its fairly straightforward. When do you think Mike Ashley will sell up and go ? And do you happen to know anyone in your esteemed circles with an ear to the ground, so to speak ? I thought you were a smart lad etc etc

 

 

 

That wasn't your last sentence. Smart lad.

[Christmas Tree 4672]

No need anymore, any decent laptop has an HDMI out

 

 

Try watching a crappy pc picture blown up to big screen.....Horrible

 

You have the commercial vision of a decrepit mole.

 

 

Dear me your not half fast becoming a condescending tit

 

We were talking about what may happen when the current deal is up in just over two years. Technology on the web may not have developed in that short space of time to be able to supersize a currently crappy unstable stream. Even if it does, you then need to assume that the vast majority is going to run out and upgrade their current pc / tv packages just too watch Newcastle.

[LeazesMag 0]

Not even sure what you're talking about with your last sentence. Uproarious stuff all the same.

 

what ? Its fairly straightforward. When do you think Mike Ashley will sell up and go ? And do you happen to know anyone in your esteemed circles with an ear to the ground, so to speak ? I thought you were a smart lad etc etc

 

 

 

That wasn't your last sentence. Smart lad.

 

it's the title of the thread though, which you chose to ignore and make daft comments instead.

 

So. What's your opinion, what do you think, do you know anybody in your esteemed circles who may have their ear to the ground or something ? Or do you just know sweet fuck all ? and deliberately acting like an arse.

[LeazesMag 0]

No need anymore, any decent laptop has an HDMI out

 

Genuine questions rather than argument for why it can't happen.....

 

Why's it only going to be run through the internet? Why wouldn't Sky just have all the games available on TV?

 

If anything won't income go down rather than up? What was a single package of all PL football on Sky, got split between Sky/ESPN/etc to increase income. If you wrap all that back up into a single package aren't you reducing the income.....or making the cost prohibitive to a single payer?

 

You'd also lose the lucrative highlights package being sold to the BBC which is dependent on them being first to show non-televised goals.

 

If making it internet only means you get round the tv exclusivity deal, how do you stop it devaluing that deal...given that we all use an HDMI out of the laptop?

 

fair comment. The internet may well end being the medium of the future but sky TV won't give it up easily.

[Christmas Tree 4672]

The problem is we expect it all to blow up at some point soon or down the line when he makes either another fuckup or sells a player/players the manager wants to keep etc.

 

This is not unique to Ashley though...

 

expand ?

 

Ashley is hardly the only owner who's fucked around with his manager and sold players/brought in players the manager wanted/didn't want. Lerner at Villa and the Icelanders at West Ham are two good examples. I think we could still be rid of Ashley and in the same situation with someone else. Obviously I want Ashley gone as soon as possible, but not if it means bringing in someone just as bad or worse.

 

Portsmouth were desperate to be rid of the crook Gaydamak, then they brought in another crook in al-Fahim, then they brought in another crook in Al Faraj...point is, there's worse than Ashley, and as long as he keeps his head down and his mouth shut and supports Hughton in the transfer window, it's time to get over him. Nobody wants him except for loons like the Tree, but we can't go on with him being the focus of our lives as fans.

 

 

Ashley gets a lot of stick, some of it deserved, but would you care to expand on how HE has fucked around managers and bought / sold players the manager didnt want.

 

My reccolection is that he was the detatched owner and until it all went Pete tong I dont really remember him be involved in any of the day to day sort of decisions. I dont recall Allardyce or Keegan blaming him personally for that sort of thing.

 

Not even sure since Keegan what actual decisions he's made that have been against the wishes of manager or players.

 

Seriouis question btw if your up to it.

 

Keegan said nowt because of the non-disclosure agreement. I think the tribunal made it pretty obvious who was responsible for that.

 

How about forcing Given out of the club? How about bringing in Xisco and Nacho and selling Milner? The '08-'09 season was pretty awful, but surely you haven't forgotten it?

 

There's obvious examples of Ashley responsible for fucking about our manager (one he himself appointed) and bringing in players not wanted/selling players that were wanted. I know what your stock response is going to be - "oh Llambias did those things not wor Mike, he's lily-white" - but the buck stops with the owner. He appointed the cronies, he's responsible for what they do, and as the tribunal said, he made promises to KK that weren't kept and that he never had any intention of keeping.

 

 

Keegan didnt slag Ashley off prior either.

 

And the stock response is quite correct. Ashley thought he was putting a very good set up in place to run the club on his behalf. I dont think for one minute that he wanted to have any dealings with the day to day running of the club.

 

I'll happily give him a hard time for the decisions he's got wrong, but lets not re-write history.

[Christmas Tree 4672]

No need anymore, any decent laptop has an HDMI out

 

Genuine questions rather than argument for why it can't happen.....

 

Why's it only going to be run through the internet? Why wouldn't Sky just have all the games available on TV?

 

If anything won't income go down rather than up? What was a single package of all PL football on Sky, got split between Sky/ESPN/etc to increase income. If you wrap all that back up into a single package aren't you reducing the income.....or making the cost prohibitive to a single payer?

 

You'd also lose the lucrative highlights package being sold to the BBC which is dependent on them being first to show non-televised goals.

 

If making it internet only means you get round the tv exclusivity deal, how do you stop it devaluing that deal...given that we all use an HDMI out of the laptop?

 

 

Add to this that we all already watch re-routed streams? Wouldnt most just continue to watch re-routed streams for free?

[manc-mag 1]

Not even sure what you're talking about with your last sentence. Uproarious stuff all the same.

 

what ? Its fairly straightforward. When do you think Mike Ashley will sell up and go ? And do you happen to know anyone in your esteemed circles with an ear to the ground, so to speak ? I thought you were a smart lad etc etc

 

 

 

That wasn't your last sentence. Smart lad.

 

it's the title of the thread though, which you chose to ignore and make daft comments instead.

 

So. What's your opinion, what do you think, do you know anybody in your esteemed circles who may have their ear to the ground or something ? Or do you just know sweet fuck all ? and deliberately acting like an arse.

 

 

 

Sorry I should have known to revert to the thread title when your basic comprehension skills had deserted you. I'll try and remember that for the future, it's actually quite useful advice.

 

I haven't got a clue when Mike Ashley will go. Nobody has. How tall's a Chinaman ffs?

 

The bit about me claiming to 'move in esteemed circles' or have an ITK is just something you've made up. Do carry on though.

[Happy Face 29]

No need anymore, any decent laptop has an HDMI out

 

Genuine questions rather than argument for why it can't happen.....

 

Why's it only going to be run through the internet? Why wouldn't Sky just have all the games available on TV?

 

If anything won't income go down rather than up? What was a single package of all PL football on Sky, got split between Sky/ESPN/etc to increase income. If you wrap all that back up into a single package aren't you reducing the income.....or making the cost prohibitive to a single payer?

 

You'd also lose the lucrative highlights package being sold to the BBC which is dependent on them being first to show non-televised goals.

 

If making it internet only means you get round the tv exclusivity deal, how do you stop it devaluing that deal...given that we all use an HDMI out of the laptop?

 

 

Add to this that we all already watch re-routed streams? Wouldnt most just continue to watch re-routed streams for free?

 

Every game live has been technologically possible for decades, The internet hasn't changed that, but it's not something the clubs, the FA or the TV companies see as cost effective (showing every game) irrespective of medium, and it's not something the genuine (matchgoing)fans want to see, otherwise the will would have been there to provide the service in 1995.

Edited November 19, 2010 by Happy Face

[Kid Dynamite 6968]

Football on the internet will never take off tbh, not when you can watch it on this shizzle!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Fan_Fest

 

If anyone can manage this, the Japs can!

 

Edited November 19, 2010 by Kid Dynamite

[ChezGiven 0]

No need anymore, any decent laptop has an HDMI out

 

 

Try watching a crappy pc picture blown up to big screen.....Horrible

 

You have the commercial vision of a decrepit mole.

 

 

Dear me your not half fast becoming a condescending tit

 

We were talking about what may happen when the current deal is up in just over two years. Technology on the web may not have developed in that short space of time to be able to supersize a currently crappy unstable stream. Even if it does, you then need to assume that the vast majority is going to run out and upgrade their current pc / tv packages just too watch Newcastle.

 

You deserved ridicule nevermind condescension for your comments on science last night. I just wanted to use the phrase decrepit mole anyway.

 

You're half right basically. You're first sentence is spot on seeing as i find your next 3 idiotic to say the least. Have a wink

 

HD streams already exist, neither the technology not the infrastructure needs to be developed. You also have forgotten from your early career in FMCG that marketing plans are built around 'segments'. Sky will still purchase TV rights for people with TVs. Someone else may buy internet rights to sell to the millions of 'early adopters' of HDTV (in fact cant you connect a laptop via VGA to a non-HDTV?). The question of when this happens will be based around answers to the challenge of re-streaming digital content for free.

 

Whats important is what drives revenue in this market, advertising. What drives advertising prices? Viewers.

 

Bottom line commercially is therefore the total number of viewers. If 10 million people watch only one channel, Sky, then this monopoly of supply allows Sky to charge higher advertising prices. By fragmenting the market, you introduce competition amongst suppliers of advertising space, reducing per minute prices through competition. However, if the internet supplier can broadcast their own adverts then this increases the supply of 'space' counteracting the reduced per minute price, maintaining overall advertising revenues. NUFC can benefit if it can leverage the willingness to pay for Sky Sports with a targeted offer around NUFC. At present, if lots of NUFC fans buy Sky to watch Newcastle, we are cross-subsidising other teams with fewer fans but similar TV revenues.

 

Basic economics says its a good thing as it increases consumer choice, opens up new revenue streams, subject to the same issues and concerns faced by all digital markets. If they solve the 'free rider' problem then internet HD match streams will be good for the club.

 

Your point about the pub is relevant but pubs already pay 6000 a year for Sky and face huge penalties if they use a domestic account. Same price for internet streams in the pub.

[Christmas Tree 4672]

No need anymore, any decent laptop has an HDMI out

 

 

Try watching a crappy pc picture blown up to big screen.....Horrible

 

You have the commercial vision of a decrepit mole.

 

 

Dear me your not half fast becoming a condescending tit

 

We were talking about what may happen when the current deal is up in just over two years. Technology on the web may not have developed in that short space of time to be able to supersize a currently crappy unstable stream. Even if it does, you then need to assume that the vast majority is going to run out and upgrade their current pc / tv packages just too watch Newcastle.

 

You deserved ridicule nevermind condescension for your comments on science last night. I just wanted to use the phrase decrepit mole anyway.

 

You're half right basically. You're first sentence is spot on seeing as i find your next 3 idiotic to say the least. Have a wink

 

HD streams already exist, neither the technology not the infrastructure needs to be developed. You also have forgotten from your early career in FMCG that marketing plans are built around 'segments'. Sky will still purchase TV rights for people with TVs. Someone else may buy internet rights to sell to the millions of 'early adopters' of HDTV (in fact cant you connect a laptop via VGA to a non-HDTV?). The question of when this happens will be based around answers to the challenge of re-streaming digital content for free.

 

Whats important is what drives revenue in this market, advertising. What drives advertising prices? Viewers.

 

Bottom line commercially is therefore the total number of viewers. If 10 million people watch only one channel, Sky, then this monopoly of supply allows Sky to charge higher advertising prices. By fragmenting the market, you introduce competition amongst suppliers of advertising space, reducing per minute prices through competition. However, if the internet supplier can broadcast their own adverts then this increases the supply of 'space' counteracting the reduced per minute price, maintaining overall advertising revenues. NUFC can benefit if it can leverage the willingness to pay for Sky Sports with a targeted offer around NUFC. At present, if lots of NUFC fans buy Sky to watch Newcastle, we are cross-subsidising other teams with fewer fans but similar TV revenues.

 

Basic economics says its a good thing as it increases consumer choice, opens up new revenue streams, subject to the same issues and concerns faced by all digital markets. If they solve the 'free rider' problem then internet HD match streams will be good for the club.

 

Your point about the pub is relevant but pubs already pay 6000 a year for Sky and face huge penalties if they use a domestic account. Same price for internet streams in the pub.

 

 

Surely the bottom line is no one is going to pay to watch "nufc internet" when they can have it for free.

[Guest]

I still fully expect him to fuck us though

 

This and Asprillia's take are how I think. And to answer the original question about when he will sell, I think never is closer to the mark that the other options.

Ashley sees the club as one big billboard/tvc for shite direct.

 

I agree with that, a billboard and a revenue stream. T'internet is the next great income provider for football, with the advantage for the big clubs being the more fans willing to pay, the bigger the rewards. There will be no collective agreement sharing revenue around the premiership or through the leagues when this finally takes off. I know for sure I will be signing up for the NUFC internet tv channel, and without wanting to get too Stevie about it, apart from ManU and Liverpool who in this country would have more subscribers than us. More of us actually are more committed and loyal than the rest, all clubs have their die hards, but I actually do believe that for whatever reason supporting Newcastle stays with you, and is transmitted through the generations to a greater extent than other clubs.

 

I have been exiled for 30 years, I recently went to a wedding where the extended family descended from round the globe, and without exception everybody was bloody obsessed with Newcastle. Kids whose great grandparents had left generations ago where as keen as those(very few to be honest) who still lived there. Henry Winter loves to say "Newcastle on a a thursday looks like any other city on a matchday"

 

I think whats what Ashley is banking on

 

I just cant see this big income that you think is out there coming.

 

First of all, I think it would be pretty hard for the premier league to survive if they all went their own way.

 

Secondly, I dont think that many would sign up for it. If its £60 per year now, what would it cost with live games???£150?? Wouldnt most just watch a stream or go the pub as we do now.

 

If anything I think TV revenue will start to fall when the next deal is done in 2013

 

Are you talking about NUTV at £60 per year, if so I have no interest in subscribing to that whatsoever. I am talking about when your internet subscription gets you live coverage of every game, That I would buy without hesitation, I would buy that before my SkySports subscribtion without a doubt. The main reason I get Skysports is football, if I could see every Newcastle match without Skysports that is what I would get. I don't think I am alone.

 

This will be the next revolution in football funding, and I beleive Newcastle will be one of the biggest benificiaries. I have long thought this is what has driven Ashley

Agreed but I dont think Ashley had any concept of this before buying the land for a super casino football club. Live streaming of every game via a dedicated NUFC channel would easily sell for the £150 CT is quoting. Whats more tempting? buy SKY at £39 a month (£468 pa) in order to get a handful of live NUFC games plus the rest on delayed viewing or £150pa to get them all streamed legally to your computer.Tie that in with an official matchday forum, competitions etc and you're laughing all the way to the bank.

 

 

Who would pay £150 when for 90 minutes per week, when you can just get it illegally? Add that to the fact that most football fans probably like watching other clubs in action, and the vast majority of people like watching regular tv too, and on that basis, sky is probably much better value.

[Kid Dynamite 6968]

Have you ever watched a stream? I cant remember the last one that was truly watchable. I would pay to see 38 league games in decent quality like

[Kid Dynamite 6968]

Football on the internet will never take off tbh, not when you can watch it on this shizzle!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Fan_Fest

 

If anyone can manage this, the Japs can!

 

 

 

Watch the vid btw. Its not made up, its Japans actual bid for the world cup

[Guest]

Have you ever watched a stream? I cant remember the last one that was truly watchable. I would pay to see 38 league games in decent quality like

 

Yes I have. I've had many watchable ones. It's probably your broadband connection, probably getting it from sky because they bend you over and you accept any extra package with extra charges they offer you. Like anytime plus. So you probably would pay, you'd be their ideal customer. Most people wouldn't pay for it though. It's cheaper to sit in the pub and buy a couple of pints and watch it on a perfect quality foreign channel, which would be better quality than a legal stream.

[Happy Face 29]

HD streams already exist, neither the technology not the infrastructure needs to be developed. You also have forgotten from your early career in FMCG that marketing plans are built around 'segments'. Sky will still purchase TV rights for people with TVs. Someone else may buy internet rights to sell to the millions of 'early adopters' of HDTV (in fact cant you connect a laptop via VGA to a non-HDTV?). The question of when this happens will be based around answers to the challenge of re-streaming digital content for free.

 

Whats important is what drives revenue in this market, advertising. What drives advertising prices? Viewers.

 

Bottom line commercially is therefore the total number of viewers. If 10 million people watch only one channel, Sky, then this monopoly of supply allows Sky to charge higher advertising prices. By fragmenting the market, you introduce competition amongst suppliers of advertising space, reducing per minute prices through competition. However, if the internet supplier can broadcast their own adverts then this increases the supply of 'space' counteracting the reduced per minute price, maintaining overall advertising revenues. NUFC can benefit if it can leverage the willingness to pay for Sky Sports with a targeted offer around NUFC. At present, if lots of NUFC fans buy Sky to watch Newcastle, we are cross-subsidising other teams with fewer fans but similar TV revenues.

 

Basic economics says its a good thing as it increases consumer choice, opens up new revenue streams, subject to the same issues and concerns faced by all digital markets. If they solve the 'free rider' problem then internet HD match streams will be good for the club.

 

Your point about the pub is relevant but pubs already pay 6000 a year for Sky and face huge penalties if they use a domestic account. Same price for internet streams in the pub.

 

 

Doesn't that suppose that internet streaming is a different and valuable market that generates profit on top of tv rights rather than taking revenue from tv. It's not is it?

 

What is the value to the clubs, the FA, The Premier League, the broadcasters or fans in shifting viewers from tv (where we could already watch all of the games if it was of value) to the internet?

 

Clubs - lower ticket sales being on tv every week, all but the top 4 or 5 lose media revenue.

The FA - concede further control to clubs than they lost to the Premier league

Premier League - concede further control to the clubs.

Broadcasters - lose viewers, advertising and subscriptions

Fans - Those that go to games - no difference, those that don't can see the same games already available in better quality, but is there the will amongst everyone else to provide that at a reasonable cost?

 

You've based your post on advertising, but half time advertising on Sky Sports is still far less lucrative than it is on ITV...because they don't have the viewing numbers and they generate most of their income via subscription. Subscriptions and advertising would generate even less to 92 separate websites each catering to comparatively tiny audiences.

[LeazesMag 0]

So. What's your opinion, what do you think, do you know anybody in your esteemed circles who may have their ear to the ground or something ? Or do you just know sweet fuck all ? and deliberately acting like an arse.

 

Sorry I should have known to revert to the thread title when your basic comprehension skills had deserted you. I'll try and remember that for the future, it's actually quite useful advice.

 

aye. Look at the title of the post, and do try and answer it as best you can with your "comprehension skills".

 

 

 

I haven't got a clue when Mike Ashley will go.

 

in that case, what the fuck are you rabbiting on about, as this is the title of the post.

 

The bit about me claiming to 'move in esteemed circles' or have an ITK is just something you've made up. Do carry on though.

 

Well. You appear to think you have superior connections to my "men in the pub", without knowing who my "men in the pub may be".

 

Quite ironic, accusing others of knowing nowt, or whatever you want to call it.

[Guest]

God he's thick

[LeazesMag 0]

God he's thick

 

[manc-mag 1]

It's gone to "men in the pub" now. Starting to sound gay as well as horrifically stupid.

[The Fish 10674]

My problem would be that I enjoy watching Scunthorpe v Portsmouth, but there'd be no way I'd want to pay for their tv package as well.

 

My suggestion would be that Sky have exlcusive live rights, the Beeb retain their rights to show the highlights first, but NUFC tv attain the rights to show the full match with their own poxy commentators.

 

If I were Sky I'd approach the large clubs and offer their "anytime" facility to subscribers of the clubs tv packages, after the highlights have been made available to the Beeb. That way punters get to watch 90 minutes of every one of their teams' games, Sky retain their customers, the Beeb maintain their viewers, the Prem maintain their power and the clubs gets extra revenue.

 

You could also show NUFC reserve/academy games through their "anytime" area?

 

link up with Xbox Live, or Playstation or iTunes.

[LeazesMag 0]

It's gone to "men in the pub" now. Starting to sound gay as well as horrifically stupid.

 

how many posts have you made in this thread ?

 

How many of those are directly concerned with the title of the thread ?

 

Use your "comprehension skills" man

[manc-mag 1]

Leazes you're tragic, man.

[Kid Dynamite 6968]

Have you ever watched a stream? I cant remember the last one that was truly watchable. I would pay to see 38 league games in decent quality like

 

Yes I have. I've had many watchable ones. It's probably your broadband connection, probably getting it from sky because they bend you over and you accept any extra package with extra charges they offer you. Like anytime plus. So you probably would pay, you'd be their ideal customer. Most people wouldn't pay for it though. It's cheaper to sit in the pub and buy a couple of pints and watch it on a perfect quality foreign channel, which would be better quality than a legal stream.

 

 

Would that be the free Anytime +, the one I watch with my years free HD subscription Not my fault your'e shit at getting a good deal!