back to article Arsenal are red, pundits have 'insights', BT and Sky splurge £4.5bn on footie rights

BT and Sky have splurged £4.464bn to show 160 Premier League games a season from 2019/20 until 2021/22. However, the Brit giants are splashing out less than last time, when they handed over £5.136bn for 168 games in 2015. BT has previously been criticised for prioritising content over other areas of its business such as …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    That's for 6 of the 8 packages - there are two more packages left which will presumably push the total value to over the 5.136bn figure.

    The remaining packages are the bank holiday games and the two midweek rounds.

    ( I looked this up last night in the unlikely hope that I could cancel either BT or Sky sports )

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Bunch of millionaires lumping a ball around a field. Interesting value proposition.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        A spectator sport enjoyed by *billions* of people worldwide, tens of millions in this country alone.

        17.14 million people in Britain watched England get knocked out of Euro 2016 at the hands of Iceland on free to air TV.

        3.6 million people watched Liverpool v Man City in Feb 2016 on pay TV.

        But you don't like it, so everybody else is an idiot.

        1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

          17.14 million people in Britain watched England get knocked out of Euro 2016 at the hands of Iceland on free to air TV.

          And 29 million watched the last Morecambe & Wise Christmas Special on TV in the days when it was all free to air.. I love football but the money has ruined it.


          1. The Nazz

            tbf, back in the "glory" days, with 29m watching Morecambe and Wise, there was virtually fuck all else to do of an evening, than watch tele with the nuclear family.

            And in all probability, nowhere 29m did watch it.*

            *ex gf's dad was one of the thousand (yeah, singular) who completed the forms to detail everything they watched. In return they got free tickets to many BBC shows and productions. Funnily enough they got more tickets the more they "watched" the BBC programs. Or vice versa.

  2. Pen-y-gors Silver badge

    BT return?

    a strong position to make a return on this investment through subscription, wholesale, commercial and advertising revenues

    Let's do some sums.

    £4.5 billion over 3 years. -> £1.5 billion a year.

    For arguments sake, split it 50/50

    So BT are in for £750M

    And what are they charging? Their top-wack package is £22/month, but they also have a £10 and a free option.

    With the two subscription packages they charge an extra £FREE for Sport.

    So how many free subscribers do you need to earn an extra £750 million a year. Answers on a postcard...

    Or they could just reduce line rentals by a few quid a month.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: BT return?

      Don't forget the price they charge home and business is very different, from memory I think it's something like £200 a month.

      1. Dominion

        Re: BT return?

        You're forgetting advertising income?

    2. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: BT return?

      So how many free subscribers do you need to earn an extra £750 million a year.

      Looks like about 3 million which doesn't look that illusory. But there is also advertising and sponsorship money.

      The economics look like the domestic revenues have topped out here. But there's still plenty of money to be made, especially in Asia which is inevitably going to lead to more games be scheduled for their time zones (Saturday morning anyone?) or even over there.

      I'm not a fan of these developments but you can see the way things are going.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: BT return?

        But there's still plenty of money to be made, especially in Asia

        From the point of view of economics for BT & Sky, this deal does not include the overseas rights. That sale is still to be concluded. So BT & Sky need to make their money on the domestic customers.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    I was hoping they would offer a derisory amount confident that nobody else is stupid enough to bid billions but you get the impression its all some sort of cartel to extract the maximum from the gormless sports fans.

  4. peasant

    That's less than I get paid in a year


  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    BT, spend the £1bn on something useful like upgrading your clapped out network to FTTP and improving your crap customer service.

    1. maffski

      I'm not sure £1bn would FTTP Bradford let alone Britain.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Actually it would. Last year, BT reckoned FTTP for 10m homes would cost £3-6bn. Taking a median of 450 per property, apply to the circa 224,000 homes in Bradford, and that's near as buggery a billion quid.

        But hell, Bradford? What an utter dump. Why would you want to give them FTTP?

        1. The Nazz

          re Ledswinger

          Upvoted you. If only for the massive understatement and sheer restraint you exercised in "What an utter dump."

          Had a recent acquaintance, from rural Romania, who had also worked in Serbia immediately after the Balkan war. He also worked in Bradford. Verbatim quote re Bradford "It's the shittiest place i've ever seen."

          Trivia fact. c1900 at the turn of the century Bradford was said to be the second wealthiest city in Britain. There is still lots of fabulous architecture to be found, though much of it sadly decaying.

        2. maffski

          It's just a massive hole. No, my mistake, it's Bradford

          Except those 10m homes will be chosen, in part, for install costs. Feeding fibre through a recent posh apartment block might get you 100 homes for the same cost as 10 houses down a residential street.

          And Bradford? Well, we could always half the costs by just digging it up and not filling in the holes, it's not like you could tell the difference.

  6. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Teams are plural in the UK. (mainly)

      Villa wear blue and claret,

      West ham wear claret and blue,

      I can totally understand

      Why Cameron forgot who he supported.

      ( Yes I rhymed supported with blue, rhyming is like totally a cliche, dude )

  7. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Tim #3

      Don't worry, Sport England pours loads of our money into soccer too. So no.

      1. Korev Silver badge

        They probably pour it into football :)

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Sport England pours loads of our money into soccer too.

        About £20-30m a year, funded from the stupidity tax. So utterly insignificant against the rights income the League takes in, and chances are that it isn't your money (or you've chosen to have it thus gifted).

  8. Mr Nobody 1

    Another lost opportunity to increase the absolutely pitiful amount of money that filters down from the premier league to grassroots football.

  9. The Nazz


    In the current social climate i trust that Parliament will force both Sky and BT to pay the same amount for the "rights" to broadcast womens football.

    Yeah, i'm patient, i can wait until you've got back up off the floor and stopped laughing.

    I'm always amazed when people ask (quite naturally) why more money can't find it's way into grassroots football. Ever thought as to how little your own council care? and how much of a cash cow, in return for very little service, they treat it?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021